Arctic sea ice declined rapidly to unprecedented low extents in the summer of 2007, raising concern that the Arctic may be on the verge of a fundamental transition toward a seasonal ice cover. Arctic sea ice extent typically attains a seasonal maximum in March and minimum in September. Over the course of the modern satellite record (1979 to present), sea ice extent has declined significantly in all months, with the decline being most pronounced in September. By mid‐July 2007, it was clear that a new record low would be set during the summer of 2007.

ABSTRACT. Community-based monitoring (CBM) in the Arctic is gaining increasing support from a wide range of interested parties, including community members, scientists, government agencies, and funders. Through CBM initiatives, Arctic residents conduct or are involved in ongoing observing and monitoring activities. Arctic Indigenous peoples have been observing the environment for millennia, and CBM often incorporates traditional knowledge, which may be used independently from or in partnership with conventional scientific monitoring methods. Drawing on insights from the first Arctic Observing Summit, we provide an overview of the state of CBM in the Arctic. The CBM approach to monitoring is centered on community needs and interests. It offers fine-grained, local-scale data that are readily accessible to community and municipal decision makers. In spite of these advantages, CBM initiatives remain little documented and are often unconnected to wider networks, with the result that many practitioners lack a clear sense of the field and how best to support its growth and development. CBM initiatives are implemented within legal and governance frameworks that vary significantly both within and among different national contexts. Further documentation of differences and similarities among Arctic communities in relation to observing needs, interests, and legal and institutional capacities will help assess how CBM can contribute to Arctic observing networks. While CBM holds significant potential to meet observing needs of communities, more investment and experimentation are needed to determine how observations and data generated through CBM approaches might effectively inform decision making beyond the community level.Key words: community-based monitoring; traditional knowledge; observing networks; environmental change; sustainability; knowledge management; natural resource management RÉSUMÉ. Dans l'Arctique, la surveillance communautaire (SC) reçoit un appui de plus en plus grand de la part de nombreuses parties intéressées, dont les membres de la communauté, les scientifiques, les organismes gouvernementaux et les bailleurs de fonds. Dans le cadre des initiatives de SC, des habitants de l'Arctique effectuent des tâches permanentes d'observation et de surveillance ou participent à de telles tâches. Les peuples indigènes de l'Arctique observent l'environnement depuis des millénaires. Souvent, la SC fait appel aux connaissances traditionnelles, connaissances qui peuvent être employées seules ou conjointement avec les méthodes classiques de surveillance scientifique. Nous nous sommes appuyés sur les connaissances dérivées du premier sommet d'observation de l'Arctique pour donner un aperçu de l'état de la SC dans l'Arctique. La méthode de SC est centrée sur les besoins et les intérêts de la communauté. Elle permet d'obtenir des données à grain fin à l'échelle locale, données qui sont facilement accessibles par la communauté et les preneurs de décisions municipaux. Malgré ces avantages, il existe peu de documentation au sujet...

Connecting indigenous and scientific observations and knowledge has received much attention in the Arctic, not least in the area of climate change. On some levels, this connection can be established relatively easily, linking observations of similar phenomena or of various effects stemming from the same cause. Closer examinations of specific environmental parameters, however, can lead to far more complex and difficult attempts to make those connections. In this paper we examine observations of wind at Clyde River, Nunavut, Canada. For Inuit, many activities are governed by environmental conditions. Wind, in particular, is identified by Inuit as one of the most important environmental variables, playing a key role in driving sea ice, ocean, and weather conditions that can either enable or constrain hunting, travel, or other important activities. Inuit observe wind patterns closely, and through many means, as a result of their close connection to the land and sea. Inuit in many parts of Nunavut are reporting changes in wind patterns in recent years. At Clyde

No abstract

ABSTRACT. The context and conduct of Arctic research are changing. In Nunavut, funding agencies, licensing bodies, and new regulatory agencies established under the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement require researchers to engage and consult with Inuit communities during all phases of research, to provide local training and other benefits, and to communicate project results effectively. Researchers are also increasingly expected to incorporate traditional knowledge into their work and to design studies that are relevant to local interests and needs. In this paper, we explore the challenges that researchers and communities experience in meeting these requirements by reviewing case studies of three natural science projects in Nunavut. Together, these projects exemplify both success and failure in negotiating research relationships. The case studies highlight three principal sources of researcher-community conflict: 1) debate surrounding acceptable impacts of research and the nature and extent of local benefits that research projects can and should provide; 2) uncertainty over who has the power and authority to dictate terms and conditions under which projects should be licensed; and 3) the appropriate research methodology and design to balance local expectations and research needs. The Nunavut research licensing process under the Scientists Act is an important opportunity for communities, scientists, and regulatory agencies to negotiate power relationships. However, the standards and procedures used to evaluate research impact remain unclear, as does the role of communities in the decision-making process for research licensing. The case studies also demonstrate the critical role of trust and rapport, forged through early and frequent communication, efforts to provide local training, and opportunities for community members to observe, participate in, and derive employment from project activities. Clarifying research policies in Nunavut is one step to improving relations between scientists and communities. In addition, steps need to be taken at both policy and project levels to train researchers, educate funding programs, mobilize institutions, and empower communities, thus strengthening the capacity of all stakeholders in northern research.Key words: research methods, participatory research, science, Nunavut, Inuit, communities, traditional knowledge RÉSUMÉ. Le contexte et la réalisation des travaux de recherche dans l'Arctique sont en pleine évolution. Au Nunavut, les organismes de financement, les organismes de délivrance de permis et de nouveaux organismes réglementaires mis sur pied en vertu de l'Entente sur la revendication territoriale du Nunavut exigent des chercheurs qu'ils recourent aux services des collectivités inuites et les consultent à toutes les étapes des travaux de recherche, qu'ils assurent la formation des personnes auxquelles ils font affaire et leurs fournissent d'autres avantages, puis qu'ils communiquent bien les résultats des projets réalisés. Par ailleurs, on s'attend de plus en plus à ce que le...