This Web page has been archived on the Web.

1999 Report of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development

Main Points

6.2 Notwithstanding the positive efforts we observed, we heard consistently that the overall picture reflects a piecemeal approach to meeting Canada's international commitments in the North. There is no overall Northern strategy or policy to guide federal departments and agencies in carrying out their science, monitoring and other responsibilities effectively and efficiently. This leaves these activities vulnerable to program or funding decisions by individual departments that can have detrimental effects in other areas.

Background and other observations

6.4 There has been a growing realization internationally that human activities, both in the Arctic and elsewhere in the world, affect the future sustainability of Arctic ecosystems. In turn, changes in the Arctic environment and ecosystems have an effect on other parts of the world. This awareness is reflected in an increasing number of environmental agreements and other arrangements to protect the Arctic, which Canada has signed or endorsed. It has also led Canada and the other circumpolar nations to collaborate in programs of extensive scientific research and monitoring in the North.

6.5 Our study examined three aspects of making international agreements work: building a solid information base, dealing with multiple jurisdictions and developing appropriate domestic regimes. The agreements and programs we reviewed provide lessons for overcoming some of the implementation challenges Canada faces in meeting its international commitments.

Introduction

Global regulator and sink for global pollutants

6.7 This region also has global importance. Certain species, especially birds and some marine mammals, migrate long distances and link the Arctic with temperate, tropical and even Antarctic regions. It is a breeding ground for millions of migratory birds.

6.8 Environmental and ecological systems in the Arctic are major contributors to global processes and the balance of life on Earth. Acting as a global climate regulator, they cool the air and absorb the heat transported north from the tropics by air and ocean currents. They also play a role in ensuring the circulation of warm and cold waters between northern and southern regions of the globe. The integrated nature of these global processes means that the Earth's climate and living systems would change if the Arctic's existing capacity to regulate temperature were altered.

6.9 At the same time, the polar regions appear to be particularly vulnerable to global environmental change. Extensive ozone losses have been documented in the Arctic in recent years. It is predicted that temperature increases as a result of global warming will be most pronounced in high northern latitudes, particularly during the winter months. Effects of global warming are already evident in the Canadian North. The average air temperature in the Mackenzie Basin is warmer (a 1.55 C rise since 1860) and the ice canopy covering the Arctic Ocean is thinner than in previous years.

6.10 The interconnectedness of global environmental systems that makes the Arctic so vital to the well-being of the planet also exposes it to environmental contaminants carried by air and water currents from industrialized and agricultural regions of the world. These pollutants - pesticides, industrial chemicals and heavy metals - are one of the main threats to the environmental quality of Canada's North.

6.11 The Arctic and its inhabitants are particularly vulnerable to the effects of these contaminants. The region's cold temperatures make it a "sink" for these pollutants and contribute to the conditions that enable them to persist longer in the Arctic environment. Some of the pollutants accumulate in the fatty tissues of fish and wildlife, particularly marine mammals, thereby attacking a fundamental aspect of Aboriginal culture in the North - its reliance on traditional or "country" foods.

Arctic environmental diplomacy

6.13 Canada has signed or endorsed over 30 international agreements and instruments (see Appendix A) that affect the quality of the Arctic environment. Some of the agreements are global in scope but have particular relevance to the Arctic (for example, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change ); others are specific to the Arctic region. Exhibit 6.2 sets out some key milestones in Canada's domestic and international efforts to protect the Arctic. Some of the early international agreements specifically dedicated to the Arctic focussed on wildlife management. More recently, northern countries have turned their attention to pollutants.

6.14 In 1991, the eight circumpolar nations endorsed a ministerial Declaration on the Protection of the Arctic Environment and an Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy. The Strategy focussed on four program areas: monitoring and assessment of pollutants; conservation of plants and wildlife; protection of the marine environment; and emergency prevention, preparedness and response.

6.15 One of the Strategy's key components - the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP) - involved over 300 Canadian and international scientists. They studied and documented the nature and extent of pollutants in the North as well as their transboundary sources and pathways into the Arctic. This research provided most of the scientific justification of the need for international controls on sources of Arctic pollution. It led to the successful negotiation of international protocols on heavy metals and persistent organic pollutants under the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution .

6.16 There are ongoing efforts on several fronts to protect and preserve the Arctic's sensitive environment. The eight circumpolar nations that endorsed the Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy formalized their collaboration with the creation of the Arctic Council in 1996; Canada served as its first Chair. Protection of the Arctic environment is also promoted internationally by scientific organizations, Aboriginal groups, Arctic parliamentarians, and subnational governments. In addition to formal agreements among nation states, there are international programs and arrangements among provinces/territories, states and user groups to address environmental issues that cross jurisdictions.

6.17 At home, the Canadian Polar Commission was created in 1991 and the position of Ambassador for Circumpolar Affairs was established in 1994. Three years later, the House of Commons Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade released its report, Canada and the Circumpolar World: Meeting the Challenges of Co-operation into the Twenty-First Century . The federal government has discussed establishing a Northern science and technology strategy. It is currently developing a Northern foreign policy with key themes of human security and sustainable development, including environmental protection.

Domestic transition

6.19 The political geography of the North changed on 1 April 1999, when the Northwest Territories (NWT) was divided to create the new territory of Nunavut - "our land" in Inuktitut, the Inuit language. Together with the Yukon and NWT, the new territory faces challenges such as high unemployment and a young and rapidly growing population. Outside influences are accelerating change in the North, with its integration into the broader world through new communications technology and the development of its oil, gas and mineral resources for external markets.

Focus of the study

6.21 In this chapter we focus on Canada's efforts under four international agreements and programs of particular relevance to the Arctic. Two deal with wildlife resource management and conservation - the Agreement on the Conservation of Polar Bears and the Canada/US Agreement on the Conservation of the Porcupine Caribou Herd . The other two deal with transboundary contaminants - the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme and the 1998 Protocol on Persistent Organic Pollutants under the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution .

6.22 Our objective was to identify lessons learned in implementing these agreements and programs that could be applied to other areas. To that end, we examined how Canada has dealt with three challenges:

• Building a solid information base. Scientific information is a basis for building the international consensus needed to develop agreements or action plans, to decide what actions are required and put them into place, and to monitor their effectiveness. The agreements and programs in this study provide examples of the important role of science in building the information base and how scientists and program managers are responding to resource constraints on research and monitoring.
• Managing jurisdictional complexity. In Canada, implementing international environmental commitments can involve federal, provincial and territorial governments. In addition, land claims settlements in the North provide for numerous co-management boards to manage renewable resources and land use. The study looked at Canada's approach to managing jurisdictional complexity from three perspectives - obtaining the commitment of several players to a common goal, communication, and mechanisms for co-ordination.
• Developing a strong domestic regime. Nations need a strong domestic regime governing activities under the agreements to enable them to meet their international commitments. In the Canadian North, land claims agreements have made it particularly important to have local involvement in this governance regime.

Observations

Key Features of the Agreements and Programs

Agreement on the Conservation of Polar Bears

6.25 Norway and Russia have completely banned polar bear hunting. Canada, Greenland, and the United States allow an Aboriginal polar bear hunt in recognition of the high value that Inuit hunters place on it. In addition to the cash value of polar bear hides, the hunt is important to Aboriginal communities for other reasons, including the social prestige and respect accorded successful polar bear hunters in Inuit society.

6.26 Canada is home to most of the world's polar bears and has a special stewardship role to play. The range of these bears covers three territories and four provinces. It crosses international boundaries into Greenland in the east and Alaska in the west, and extends to the Arctic Ocean beyond the limit of the territorial sea. Exhibit 6.3 gives background information on this northern species.

6.27 Key commitments. Canada has made two key commitments under the Polar Bear Agreement:

• to manage polar bear populations in accordance with sound conservation practices based on the best available scientific data; and
• to protect the ecosystems of which polar bears are a part, in particular denning and feeding sites.

6.29 Canada has had the most extensive polar bear research program in the world. A research and data collection effort that began over 30 years ago has identified and generated data on 14 distinct sub-populations of polar bears in Canada. It has provided the basis for establishing management zones and harvest quotas for each sub-population. ( Exhibit 6.4 shows the geographic range of the polar bear sub-populations in Canada.)

6.30 Since the majority of polar bears are found in Nunavut and the NWT, the territorial governments, the Wildlife Management Advisory Council (NWT), the Nunavut Wildlife Management Board and community hunters' and trappers' organizations are the dominant players in polar bear population research and management. Territorial biologists conduct population inventories in the field and co-operate with local hunters, who are responsible for generating harvest statistics. These statistics are essential to ongoing monitoring of the status of polar bear sub-populations.

6.31 The Canadian Wildlife Service (CWS) of Environment Canada was the largest single contributor to polar bear population research in the 1970s and into the 1980s. While CWS scientists continue to do some research on shared populations, their work now focusses on studying the bears and their ecosystems and the effects of human-induced environmental change and disturbance. For example, a 20-year research effort on bears and their habitat in the Churchill area of West Hudson Bay has generated important baseline information. This information is proving to be crucial, now that the bear population in the region is declining. Research to date signals a possible link between this decline and climate change.

6.32 Polar bears are an important species for indicating the effects of long-range contaminants in the North. The presence in the Canadian Arctic of contaminants from distant sources first came to light in the late 1960s, when scientists found pesticides in polar bear fat tissue. In 1988, federal wildlife toxicologists spearheaded a circumpolar study on contaminants in polar bears, and they maintain a tissue bank to track changes over time.

6.33 In Canada, two consultative committees have helped in the co-ordination of polar bear management and research. The Polar Bear Administrative Committee comprises senior managers from the provincial and territorial governments, federal government scientists and representatives of wildlife co-management bodies created under land claims agreements. The Polar Bear Technical Committee (PBTC) includes federal scientists, provincial and territorial biologists, university specialists and U.S. researchers based in Alaska. The PBTC reviews research results, co-ordinates joint research projects and makes recommendations to the Polar Bear Administrative Committee. It is currently chaired by a senior Canadian Wildlife Service polar bear scientist.

6.34 Habitat protection. The second important commitment under the Polar Bear Agreement - to protect habitat - also requires solid scientific information to identify important maternity denning and marine feeding sites.

6.35 In Canada, some maternity denning areas are protected from development in provincial wilderness parks or wildlife management areas, national parks, national park reserves and national wildlife areas. Other important maternity denning areas have been identified, but currently they do not benefit from any permanent protection. Although recent federal legislative changes provide for the creation of protected marine areas, no significant offshore feeding sites have been so designated.

6.36 Although federal, territorial and provincial scientists have identified areas that are important for polar bears, Canada has not made a systematic or sustained effort to compile habitat information from field work or local knowledge. It is not in a position to say whether current knowledge about maternity denning or feeding habitat is sufficient or whether the present habitat protection regime is adequate. Development pressures are making habitat protection more critical now; population management alone may not be sufficient to protect the species.

Canada/US Agreement on the Conservation of the Porcupine Caribou Herd

6.38 In 1987, The Agreement between Canada and the United States of America on the Conservation of the Porcupine Caribou Herd (the "International Porcupine Caribou Agreement") was signed. Its purpose is to facilitate co-operation and co-ordination among wildlife management agencies, users of the herd, and other land users and landowners in the herd's range.

6.39 Canada's commitments. Within the co-operative framework of the Agreement, Canada has committed to conserving the herd and its habitat. Implementing this international commitment requires the federal government to ensure that adequate information is collected for herd management and that a domestic regime encompassing multiple jurisdictions and players is created and maintained.

6.40 Information base. Scientific research and information gathering, with the co-operation of local hunters, underlies much of what is done to manage the Porcupine Caribou herd. In Canada, research responsibilities are generally shared between the federal and territorial governments. With new land claims agreements, Aboriginal groups may become more directly involved in information gathering.

6.41 Science has also contributed to protecting the herd's habitat. Canadian researchers participated in a 1993 study of sensitive habitats to identify areas of particular significance to caribou during their seasonal migration. That study helped confirm the importance of the herd's prime calving grounds in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, located in Alaska along a narrow strip of coastal plain on the Beaufort Sea known as the "1002 Lands" ( see Exhibit 6.6 ). The study provides baseline data against which to evaluate the impact of proposals for development in the herd's range. It has been used to support ongoing efforts in Canada and the United States to protect the calving area in Alaska from disturbance by oil and gas development. The study has also been used for environmental reviews of the herd's winter range in Canada. Canadians involved in the management of the Porcupine Caribou herd see the continuing uncertainty over protection of the calving grounds in Alaska as one of the major conservation issues facing the herd.

6.42 Many jurisdictions. The Porcupine Caribou herd migrates through a complex array of regimes governing its management. Its range includes two countries with federal lawmaking powers, three state and territorial governments with jurisdiction over wildlife, and several land claims groups, some of which have the power to enact bylaws on caribou hunting and to screen development proposals that could affect caribou. In addition, Canada's federal government must recognize the guaranteed rights of Aboriginal communities to participate in the management of wildlife resources. This complex interplay of affected parties has led to the creation of the management regimes discussed here.

6.43 International management. The International Porcupine Caribou Board (the "International Board") is the administrative body created to oversee implementation of the International Porcupine Caribou Agreement and the associated International Conservation Plan. Canada and the U.S. have four members each on the International Board, representing the federal and state/territorial governments and user communities. A Technical Committee of biologists and agency representatives from both countries advises the International Board. The Board has the power to make recommendations only; commitments under the Agreement are implemented through each country's domestic regime.

6.44 Canadian management. In Canada, the management of the herd is overseen by the Porcupine Caribou Management Board (PCMB), set up in 1985. It includes representatives from the governments of Canada, the Yukon and the Northwest Territories, and from Aboriginal groups who use the herd (the Council of Yukon First Nations, the Inuvialuit Game Council and the Dene Nation and the Metis Association of the Northwest Territories). The PCMB provides the domestic framework for managing the herd across several jurisdictions and enabling Canada to fulfil its commitments under the International Porcupine Caribou Agreement.

6.45 The PCMB is one example of a regime known as co-management, which has come into widespread use in Canada, Alaska and elsewhere during the past decade. Although co-management structures vary, generally they are commissions or boards of government and community representatives who share responsibility for activities such as resource management and environmental assessment. In the Canadian North, co-management institutions have been formed largely as a result of land claims settlements. Co-management attempts to bridge the cultural differences between agency managers and local resource users by committing to consensus decision making and by considering local or traditional knowledge alongside conventional scientific research.

Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme

6.47 AMAP commitments. Under the Declaration, Canada and the other circumpolar nations committed to implementing the components of the Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy, including the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP). Under this program, the circumpolar nations have undertaken to "monitor the levels of, and assess the effects of, anthropogenic [human-made] pollutants in all components of the Arctic environment".

6.48 AMAP is a science-driven initiative. Initially it focussed on key pollutants identified for priority treatment, such as persistent organic pollutants (POPs) and heavy metals. In co-operation with other programs under the Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy, the scope of the monitoring and assessment program has covered the entire Arctic ecosystem: the atmospheric, marine, freshwater and terrestrial environments, including interaction with humans. AMAP was built as much as possible on existing national and international programs in order to allow for comparative analysis, to be more cost-effective, and to tie it to domestic legislation and scientific work.

6.49 The results of the initial AMAP assessment have been published in two reports. Issued in 1997, Arctic Pollution Issues: A State of the Arctic Environment Report is a comprehensive summary of the AMAP assessment work to date. It is based on the AMAP Assessment Report: Arctic Pollution Issues, a fully referenced scientific report . These reports have attracted wide attention in Canada and internationally. They identify transboundary sources and pathways of pollutants to the Arctic and confirm that the accumulation of contaminants is widespread in Arctic ecosystems and food chains. These reports identify POPs as one of the contaminants of particular concern for the Arctic. Exhibit 6.8 gives further details on these pollutants.

6.50 Canada's actions. Much of Canada's commitment to AMAP was carried out through its domestic Northern Contaminants Program. As Canada had begun to address the issue of northern contaminants prior to AMAP, it was one of the countries better prepared to contribute to the international program.

6.51 Building an information base . As early as the late 1960s, Canadian scientific studies began to find contaminants in the air, water, animals, plants and peoples of the North at higher levels than would be expected in a non-industrial region. Of particular concern was the presence of contaminants in traditional foods that form a major part of the diet of many northerners, particularly Aboriginal peoples. There are no viable alternatives to these food sources - food from the south is costly, often unobtainable and does not always meet the nutritional needs of northerners. Research has shown that a change in diet to less nutritious purchased foods has a negative impact on health and lifestyle.

6.52 Action was clearly needed. In 1985, faced with the problem of advising communities about the risks of consuming even moderately contaminated "country" food, the federal government created the interagency Technical Committee on Contaminants in Northern Ecosystems and Native Diets. The activities developed to deal with contaminant issues in the Canadian North became known as the Northern Contaminants Program (NCP), an interdepartmental initiative led by Indian and Northern Affairs Canada.

6.53 The Northern Contaminants Program. The goals of the interdepartmental and multi-disciplinary NCP were to reduce and, where possible, eliminate contaminants in traditionally harvested foods and to provide information that communities and individuals need to decide on their use of the foods. From 1991 to 1997, the NCP funded approximately $30 million for research on northern contaminant issues and support to the McGill Centre for Indigenous Peoples Nutrition and Environment, and for participation of Aboriginal organizations in the Northern Contaminants Program.

6.54 Management structure. From 1991 to 1997, the NCP was managed by two main committees: the Science Managers' Committee and the Technical Committee on Contaminants in Northern Ecosystems and Native Diets. Both were chaired by Indian and Northern Affairs Canada and included representatives of other participating federal departments (Health Canada, Environment Canada, Fisheries and Oceans) and five northern Aboriginal organizations (Council for Yukon First Nations, Dene Nation, Inuit Circumpolar Conference, Inuit Tapirisat of Canada and the Metis Nation-NWT), as well as health and wildlife officials of the territorial governments.

6.55 The Technical Committee's role was to annually review all research proposals, establish priorities and make recommendations on funding. The Science Managers' Committee had responsibility for overall policy direction, priority setting and program delivery. It reviewed the recommendations of the Technical Committee and made the final decisions on resource allocation. The five Aboriginal groups participated as equal partners in the consensual decision-making process. The NCP recently modified its procedures for scientific and technical review of proposals, while maintaining partnership with northern Aboriginal organizations in this aspect and on the management committee.

6.56 In 1997, the federal government released the Canadian Arctic Contaminants Assessment Report . It summarizes the results of six years of Canadian research on the North, and provides a picture of pollution pathways into the Canadian Arctic and levels of contaminants in northern wildlife and humans (see Exhibit 6.9 for selected highlights on persistent organic pollutants). This Canadian research was also reflected in the AMAP report released the same year, and was Canada's primary contribution to that report. The findings in these reports resolved some of the scientific uncertainties about sources and pathways of pollutants to the Arctic, and provided much of the scientific evidence to underpin Canada's push for international controls on certain pollutants.

6.57 Future work. Scientific uncertainty remains, especially about effects on human health and the combined effects of multiple stressors. In 1997 the circumpolar nations extended the AMAP mandate, endorsing the continuation of monitoring, data collection and assessment of contaminants. In Canada, the federal government has committed to a second phase of the NCP that will continue to contribute to the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme.

6.58 This new phase will emphasize assessing risks, providing advice to communities and reducing contaminants at their sources through international efforts. The international component of the next phase of the NCP provides for scientific research and environmental monitoring in support of international agreements to control the entry of contaminants into the Arctic environment. Maintenance of Canadian scientific and monitoring capability and credibility over the longer term is recognized as essential to determine the effectiveness of international controls and to identify and assess any new areas of concern.

United Nations Economic Commission for Europe 1998 Protocol on Persistent Organic Pollutants

6.60 With POPs identified as one of the main classes of contaminants that threaten human and ecosystem health in the Arctic, this first regional agreement to control them internationally is particularly significant to Canada. Canada was the first country to ratify the POPs Protocol on 18 December 1998. The Protocol will come into effect only when 16 countries have ratified it, which may happen by the year 2000.

6.61 Under the POPs Protocol, 16 substances are targeted for elimination, restricted use or reduced emissions. These substances fall into three groups: pesticides, commercial chemicals and by-products (see Appendix B) .

6.62 Building the information base. Canadian research has generated strong evidence that the majority of POPs in the Canadian Arctic come from sources outside the region. This has played a large role in convincing the international community to take action on these contaminants regionally and internationally.

6.63 Future work. The POPs Protocol is only the first step toward achieving global controls on these contaminants. Sources are not confined to the area covered by the regional POPs Protocol. They also include Latin America and Asia. As demonstrated in Exhibit 6.10 , Canada has been at the forefront of other initiatives to push for international controls on POPs, including a global treaty on POPs under the auspices of the United Nations Environment Programme.

6.64 Although POPs pose significant risks to human and ecosystem health in other parts of the world besides the Arctic, achieving consensus and establishing global controls will be problematic. To protect human health from insect-borne diseases such as malaria and to protect food from destruction by insects, many developing countries continue to rely on chemicals that give rise to persistent organic pollutants. These countries face serious constraints on human, technological, scientific and financial resources to control toxic chemicals. Less harmful alternatives, when available, are often too costly.

Lessons Learned

Building a solid information base

6.67 Scientific information is at the core of good management. Canada's research efforts for polar bear management provide a good example. The information gathered from sustained research has enabled territorial and provincial authorities, together with communities, to manage polar bears using sound conservation practices, through harvest quotas and other measures. Ongoing research and information gathering allow for any needed adjustments to these quotas to ensure the sustainability and health of the populations. Most polar bear populations in Canada are stable or increasing. In some cases where populations are in trouble, quotas have been reduced, generally with the agreement of local Inuit communities.

6.68 The Polar Bear Technical and Administrative committees have devoted much attention to assessing and reporting on the health of polar bear populations in order to monitor progress and identify gaps in knowledge. This commitment to ongoing reporting and assessing of results contributes to the strength of Canada's polar bear management program. One challenge will be to find ways to apply the same information-gathering effort and systems that have worked for population management to habitat protection, another of Canada's commitments under the Polar Bear Agreement.

6.69 Scientific knowledge as a springboard for international agreements. The Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP) was geared toward using international research to get the full picture on contaminant sources and exposure levels in Arctic wildlife and humans. The scientific information produced by Canada under the Northern Contaminants Program (NCP) and, on a circumpolar level, through AMAP has been a cornerstone of policy decisions and action both domestically and internationally. It has provided the scientific substantiation for Canada and others to take action internationally on contaminants, and it led to the conclusion of the 1998 regional POPs Protocol.

6.70 Monitoring is essential to ensure effectiveness. The NCP has identified air monitoring as one priority of its ongoing international science component in order to determine whether atmospheric deposits of pollutants are increasing, or are decreasing as a result of national and international control initiatives such as the POPs Protocol.

6.71 The air monitoring strategy under the first phase of the NCP provided for continuous air monitoring for POPs and heavy metals at Alert in Nunavut, and episodic sampling at stations in Tagish in the Yukon and Cape Dorset on Baffin Island. This monitoring has generated a database of global importance, unique in its scope and depth and central to understanding the global impact of long-range atmospheric transport of POPs. With this baseline work, Canada is able to monitor the effectiveness of the international controls it worked hard to put into place.

6.72 Resources for this atmospheric monitoring are a mixture of NCP funding and allocations from Environment Canada's departmental budget. However, cost-cutting measures by National Defence, which runs the Alert station, may mean increased costs to Environment Canada for its monitoring operations at Alert. Any resulting cutback in these monitoring activities could reduce Canada's capacity to collect and analyze Arctic atmospheric data, making it difficult to assess whether international controls on POPs are working. The monitoring programs at Alert show that such activities depend on adequate resourcing and that federal departments contributing to northern scientific research and monitoring need to collaborate in setting priorities for northern activities. (see photograph)

6.73 Responding to fiscal constraints. Departments are struggling within existing budgets to meet domestic legislative and policy requirements as well as international treaty obligations. With respect to the wildlife agreements in this study, fiscal restraints have caused caribou and polar bear scientists and researchers to seek outside funding, work with other national and international agencies and find other means to allow them to continue their research and monitoring.

6.74 Outside funding. Federal research on the Porcupine Caribou herd depends primarily on funding sources outside the federal government. Two major U.S. research projects are currently under way in the Porcupine Caribou herd's range. The United States National Science Foundation is conducting research on the sustainability of Arctic communities in Alaska and Canada. Another initiative, under the U.S. Man and the Biosphere Program, is examining the population dynamics of the Porcupine Caribou herd and the role of hunting. Both federal and territorial officials in Canada report a high level of co-operation among Canadian and U.S. agency scientists in these and other initiatives.

6.75 Federal research on polar bears presents a similar picture. Faced with a limited budget for research, polar bear scientists at the Canadian Wildlife Service must seek out and rely on funding from a variety of outside sources for about 80 percent of their project research costs.

6.76 Although outside funding allows federal scientists to carry out needed research, having to rely on it has other costs. Researchers have said they devote much time and effort to soliciting and administering funding grants, time they would otherwise spend on research. Some scientists are concerned that research priorities may be aligned to suit the funder and that reliance on piecemeal funding sources is not conducive to long-term environmental baseline research or to training and education for Arctic research.

6.77 Co-operation in research. By identifying common needs and priorities and sharing research findings, scientists from different agencies are able to undertake collaborative and integrated projects together with local participants. Canadian and U.S. government agencies co-ordinate their work on the Porcupine Caribou herd through the Porcupine Caribou Technical Committee and the International Porcupine Caribou Board. Close co-operation with their U.S. counterparts has allowed the Canadian managers to benefit from U.S. resources for such activities as herd population surveys. In Canada, government agencies and local Aboriginal communities co-operate through the Porcupine Caribou Management Board.

6.78 Seeking opportunities for co-operative and cost-effective polar bear research is a major emphasis of the Canadian Polar Bear Technical Committee. Obtaining tissue samples to study contaminants in polar bears across the North requires collaboration among federal and territorial scientists, wildlife officials and local hunters. Sharing the work on scientific research projects and the resulting information allows for combined expertise and more effective use of scarce resources.

6.79 Use of traditional environmental knowledge. Scarcity of research dollars also restricts the amount of time that federal scientists can spend in the field. New approaches to gathering data and a growing respect for local or traditional knowledge can help to fill gaps in information (see Exhibit 6.11) . Local hunters and residents have knowledge that can be a valuable supplement to scientific data.

6.80 Efforts to involve communities in caribou research have increased, especially in monitoring the condition of the animals, the amount of vegetation for forage, and weather, snow and ice conditions throughout the range. Through the Arctic Borderlands Ecological Knowledge Co-operative, for example, scientists, governments and community organizations collaborate to collect, interpret and communicate ecological information. Among other activities, they gather reports from observers in Canadian and U.S. communities on movements, timing of migration and body condition of the Porcupine Caribou herd.

6.81 Community involvement. Involving local communities in information gathering is another way to help build a solid information base. It is a key element in polar bear management, for example. The territorial government and local communities sign co-management agreements for each of the polar bear management zones north of 605 latitude. These agreements allocate quotas to individual communities in each zone and require local hunters to collect comprehensive harvest information (sex, age, and condition of bears hunted). These data supplement the information acquired through expensive field research by territorial/provincial authorities and are a means for ongoing monitoring of the health of polar bear populations.

6.82 In gathering harvest statistics for the Porcupine Caribou herd, the Yukon government operates a hunter check station on the Dempster Highway. It also incorporates information from harvest studies conducted by the Inuvialuit Joint Secretariat and the Gwich'in Renewable Resource Board, co-management bodies set up under land claims agreements. This involvement gives local communities and residents a sense of ownership of the process and increases their confidence in this information and its use in decisions on herd management.

Managing jurisdictional complexity

6.84 Commitment to a common goal. The NCP uses a partnership structure involving other federal departments, territorial governments and Aboriginal groups in working to achieve their common objectives - eliminating contaminants from traditionally harvested foods and providing information that communities need to decide on their use of the foods. Involving Aboriginal organizations in setting priorities for research, reviewing study proposals, allocating funds for research and reviewing the results is seen as a way to increase the credibility of the research and community trust and participation. It has made it much easier to get reliable and meaningful scientific data needed for research and to obtain a grass-roots perspective on the research needs of communities.

6.85 Notwithstanding the achievements of the Northern Contaminant Program, its partnership structure means that in spending program funds it has had to balance the partners' differing priorities. Federal science-based departments generally favour more scientific efforts, while Aboriginal organizations promote more community-based initiatives and communications programs. Given the NCP research showing contaminant exposure levels and the attendant human health concerns, Aboriginal groups have pushed for improved communication at the community level. Guidelines for Responsible Research were adopted in 1993 to ensure that communities participating in studies were appropriately consulted, involved, and informed about study results. By 1995, the NCP's focus had shifted to more emphasis on balanced information and communication with local communities, in order to ensure that past misunderstandings about contaminants in country foods would not be repeated.

6.86 Although a significant amount of funding has been available for the NCP, its increased emphasis on communications has left less money available for scientific research. There are still mixed views on the shifting of funds from science to communications. While the importance of linking scientists' work to the needs of communities is undeniable, it is a challenge within available funding to appropriately balance basic scientific research with communication and education about its results. This typifies one of the dilemmas for Northern programs faced with constrained or declining resources: the need to balance international obligations with local needs and priorities.

6.87 Good communication is essential for managing across jurisdictions. The Porcupine Caribou Management Board (PCMB) has recognized the importance of communication, and views it as a priority. Communication among board members with different backgrounds and across a large and isolated territory with complex and overlapping jurisdictions poses logistical and financial challenges. It requires that a co-management body invest considerable time to develop the necessary foundation of respect and trust and to keep open lines of communication with the user communities and government agencies it represents. The PCMB attempts to facilitate community involvement and communication by rotating its meetings among the eight user communities in the Canadian section of the herd's range. It supplements face-to-face meetings with other methods of communication, including radio bulletins, annual reports, newspaper articles, school programs, its own Web site and community information sheets. Communication not only keeps participants committed to a common goal but also serves to gain trust and acceptance for ongoing work.

6.88 Need for co-ordinating mechanisms. The agreements and programs canvassed in this study provide examples of different co-ordinating mechanisms: national bodies, an identified co-ordinator agency and agreement on roles and responsibilities.

6.89 National mechanisms for polar bear management. A wide-roaming species with 14 sub-populations throughout the Canadian North creates an interjurisdictional management puzzle (see Exhibit 6.4) . In Canada, the Polar Bear Administrative and Technical committees have taken a co-ordinated approach to polar bear management and research. They have devoted much attention to assessing and reporting on the health of polar bear populations in order to evaluate progress, identify gaps in knowledge and set research priorities. Key to the functioning of these committees is the cohesive role played by Canadian Wildlife Service polar bear researchers who perform committee secretariat duties. These scientists also maintain the National Polar Bear Database, with 35,000 records spanning 30 years. It serves as a central resource to support research, monitor harvesting and set quotas for hunting.

6.90 Lead agency as co-ordinator. In contrast to the compartmentalized research on toxics noted in Chapter 3 of this Report, the Northern Contaminants Program has been upheld as a model for scientific collaboration. Under the lead of Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, research efforts carried out by federal and other scientists were co-ordinated through the NCP. Those efforts resulted in the publication of a substantial report on contaminants in the Canadian Arctic. This type of collaboration is expected to continue in the next phase of the NCP, albeit with lower funding, and is supported by a memorandum of understanding signed by Environment Canada, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, Health Canada and Fisheries and Oceans.

6.91 Clear roles and responsibilities. The Porcupine Caribou Management Board publishes a detailed multi-year management plan that clearly assigns responsibility for management activities to each level of government as well as to the Board itself. The interagency work plan is organized in a clear and understandable way, and other northern resource management boards have copied its format. Accountability for assigned tasks is ensured through the Board's annual reports, which use the plan to show each party's accomplishments during that year.

6.92 These examples of co-ordinating mechanisms all draw on broad-based collaborative efforts rather than a "top down" management approach. What is notable is that each of the mechanisms we have mentioned has achieved results. Using appropriate mechanisms is a challenge for Canada in meeting its other international commitments, such as the United Nations Framework Convention for Climate Change and its Kyoto Protocol , both of which require several jurisdictions to work together.

6.93 The federal government has recognized that the integrated nature of social, health, environmental, resource and economic issues in the North requires multi-disciplinary knowledge, and co-ordinating mechanisms for gathering and exchanging that knowledge. In 1996, discussions began on a Northern Science and Technology Strategy to provide a framework for identifying common objectives, improving interdepartmental co-operation and involving Northern residents. At the time of our study, there were plans for renewed efforts on this initiative.

Developing a strong domestic regime

6.95 Shared management between government agencies and local communities. The creation of agreements to jointly manage shared wildlife populations can be a building block in a solid domestic regime. The agreement creating Canada's Porcupine Caribou Management Board (PCMB) provides for equal representation between government and user communities, as well as balanced representation among native user communities in both the Yukon and Northwest Territories. The PCMB is an evolving effort in co-operative management. A process ensuring that all concerned parties are involved in decisions on herd management takes more time than a top-down management system, and stretches limited resources. However, there is a consensus that it has generated more confidence in the PCMB than might otherwise have been the case.

6.96 Management agreements on shared populations between user groups and jurisdictions. The 1988 agreement between the Inuvialuit in Canada and the Inupiat in Alaska on the shared polar bear population in the southern Beaufort area is an early example of an agreement between user communities. In this case, the users on both sides of the border agreed to establish joint quotas based on scientifically sound population information in order to ensure a sustainable hunt. User groups in different jurisdictions are discussing similar agreements on other shared species, such as beluga whales.

6.97 Not all polar bear populations shared between jurisdictions benefit from this co-ordinated approach. In the absence of any controls agreed upon by all parties, the quota set by one jurisdiction provides no assurance against the other's over-harvesting of the shared bear population. Nunavut has a co-management agreement with Manitoba but is still negotiating with Ontario, Quebec and Greenland, with whom it also shares bear populations. The fact that negotiation efforts continue is a recognition of the utility of this approach to overall management of the species. (see photograph)

A piecemeal approach to implementation

6.99 The draft Northern Science and Technology Strategy, which has been under discussion since 1996, remains an unfulfilled possibility for co-ordinating Northern science efforts and realizing possible synergies among government programs and with university research activities. Recent efforts to revitalize the Canadian Polar Commission may enable that body to recommend policy direction on polar science to the federal government.

6.100 Government and university scientists have expressed concern that current funding may not be enough for the monitoring and the science research that are critical to Canada's leadership in research on contaminants in the North. The decline in spending on federal scientific investigation over the past few years (discussed in Chapter 3) extends to science in the North. For example, the Polar Continental Shelf Project that provides crucial logistics support for government and non-government research in the North and has been seen as a model by other countries, including the United States, now has only half of its previous resources. As a result, fewer research projects are receiving support from this program.

6.101 The framework used for management of Arctic research in the United States is a useful point of comparison. The 1984 Arctic Research and Policy Act established the Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee as the mechanism to develop and co-ordinate U.S. Arctic research activities. It assigned a clear leadership role to the National Science Foundation. The Committee prepares an Arctic Research Plan, updated biennially, which serves as a framework to develop multi-agency research programs and address logistical and operational support needs. The Foundation's budget for Arctic research is also being increased.

6.102 Other nations are signalling a sustained commitment to Arctic environmental research. In recent years, the Danish government and the Greenland Home Rule government unveiled the Zackenberg Ecological Research Operations (ZERO), featuring a new ecological research station in northeastern Greenland and comprehensive long-term environmental monitoring programs. A commitment to long-term financing of these research activities was obtained in 1997.

6.103 In our view, a strong science program is required in order to implement many of the international environmental agreements affecting Canada's Arctic. Aside from the subject areas canvassed in this study, Arctic research also contributes to the knowledge base on such issues as climate change, ozone-depleting substances, biodiversity and migratory birds, all subject to international conventions. This underlines the need for an interdisciplinary approach to combine the knowledge, expertise and resources of various federal departments and scientists. A national policy on Arctic research could be a significant step in ensuring that due consideration is given on a consistent basis to the science and other elements needed to implement all international environmental agreements.

Conclusion

6.105 Building a solid information base for managing wildlife resources or assessing contaminant sources and levels has required a considerable investment in scientific research and monitoring. This investment has shaped the approach to wildlife population management and conservation, although efforts to identify and protect polar bear habitat have been less systematic. For transboundary pollution agreements and programs, strong federal support for research on northern contaminants has led to success on several fronts: a major contribution to the science-based circumpolar Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme; a better understanding of the sources and pathways of foreign pollutants to the Canadian North; and the scientific evidence needed to push for international controls on POPs and heavy metals.

6.106 The demand for federal resources directed toward environmental assessment and monitoring in the North has increased at the same time as budgets for these activities have declined. Canadian scientists and researchers have responded to fiscal constraints by seeking outside funding, working with other agencies, and using local knowledge to supplement conventional science. However, the short-term nature of these solutions may not be conducive to the long-term research needed to build and maintain a solid information base.

6.107 The implementation of commitments under the wildlife resource agreements and transboundary pollutants programs provide successful examples of managing multiple jurisdictions and interests in a vast and remote territory, one with new types of governance systems that are different in many ways from those in southern Canada.

6.108 The integrated nature of social, environmental, resource and economic issues in the North requires scientific knowledge from several disciplines. Researchers from many departments and agencies contribute to this knowledge alongside Aboriginal peoples. The Northern Contaminants Program (NCP), for example, is a collaborative, multi-disciplinary, participatory research program dealing with sensitive health and social issues. It meets distinctive needs in Canada's North and contributes to fulfilling Canada's international commitments under the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme.

6.109 There are growing efforts to involve local communities in decisions on wildlife resource management as well as research on contaminants and their effects on health. Wildlife resource co-management bodies such as the Porcupine Caribou Management Board and the decision-making structure of the Northern Contaminants Program have given Aboriginal communities an equal voice with government authorities in how resources and research are to be managed. This inclusive participation provides for acceptance of the domestic regime and allows input from the people most affected by its decisions.

6.110 Despite the positive examples we observed in the course of this study, we consistently heard concerns about the piecemeal approach to meeting Canada's international commitments in the North. There is no overall Northern strategy to guide federal departments and agencies in carrying out their science, monitoring and other responsibilities effectively and efficiently. This creates a risk that decisions by individual departments can have detrimental effects on activities in other areas. A national policy on Arctic research could make a significant difference by providing for a consistent and co-ordinated approach to making international environmental agreements work.

6.111 Canada's recent efforts to develop a Northern foreign policy suggest a greater recognition of the role the Arctic plays domestically and internationally. The North's continued vulnerability to environmental change agents largely outside Canada's domestic control makes sustainable development a particular challenge for a rapidly growing human population that still depends in large measure on the region's wildlife resources for its economic, cultural and social well-being. How Canada meets this challenge will test its ability to learn from past experience and keep its commitments to protect this environment for future generations.

About the Study

Objectives

• provide an overview of certain international environmental issues affecting Canada's North; and
• identify lessons learned from the implementation of international environmental agreements and programs affecting the Canadian Arctic that could be applied to other areas.

Scope

We looked at Canada's efforts under four international agreements and programs that are directly relevant to the Canadian Arctic. These fit into two subject categories:

• protection of wildlife and their habitat
  • Agreement on the Conservation of Polar Bears
  • Agreement between Canada and the United States on the Conservation of the Porcupine Caribou Herd
• transboundary pollution
  • United Nations Economic Commission for Europe Protocol on Persistent Organic Pollutants (new agreement - not yet in force)
  • Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP).

We chose these four examples to illustrate the challenges of meeting various types of international commitments. We imply no judgment about their relative importance or merit. We did not cover major areas such as marine protection, for example, or look at international agreements, programs or arrangements established at the subnational level involving provinces, territories and user communities.

Our past reports have already examined issues such as biodiversity, climate change and ozone depletion, all of which have implications for the Arctic. As a result, those issues were not examined in this study.

Approach

Study Team

Adrienne Scott
Jean-François Tremblay

For information, please contact Richard Smith.