CEON: The Circum-Arctic Environmental Observatories Network:

1. CEON CEON: The Circum-Arctic Environmental Observatories Network: • Craig E. Tweedie, Patrick J. Webber & • Arctic Ecology Laboratory, Department of Plant Biology, Michigan State University.

2. CEON Overview Objective: Provide background to the development of CEON to date and begin to outline the charge to this meeting. • How and where the concept of CEON arose. • The rationale behind CEON. • How the CEON concept has been scoped & explored to date. • Ideas on how CEON might function. • The challenge and proposed outcomes from this meeting.

3. CEON 1. How the Concept of CEON Arose.

4. CEON The CEON Concept • The concept of a terrestrial CEON was introduced at a FARO meeting at ASSW 2000. • Promote sustained high quality environmental observations in the Arctic. • Promote dissemination of environmental observations to Arctic researchers. • Encompass & build on the strengths of existing stations & environmental observatory networks within the Arctic.

5. CEON FARO: Forum of Arctic Research Operators • Purpose: Provide information & a forum for discussion, review & exchange of operational information & experience to the Arctic science community to seek solutions to common operational problems. • Mission: FARO aims to encourage, facilitate & optimize logistics & operational support for scientific research in the Arctic, through international collaboration for all those involved in Arctic research. • For more information:http://www.faro-arctic.org

6. CEON 2. The Rationale Behind CEON.

7. CEON Atmospheric Change IPCC Observed Air temperature trend 1949-97. Global Change Models predict that differential warming of the Arctic will continue throughout the next century. CGCM2 Modeled Air temperature trend 1990- 2100. Change in temperature greatest at northern high latitudes (IPCC). Arctic is connected to the global system & cannot be studied in isolation.

8. CEON Geocryologic Change • Increased permafrost temperature (Romanovski et al. 2002). 2001 1950

9. CEON Land Cover Change • Regional: NDVI (Greenness) of vegetation increased in northern hemisphere (Myneni et al. 1997). • Local: Shrub increases in northern Alaska (Sturm et al. 2001). • Feedbacks to ecosystem function. Shrub expansion Alaska 1949 – 2001. Spring temp. trend 1982-90 NDVI ~ Greening trend 1982-91

10. CEON Change in Environ. Quality AMAP has shown: • Heavy metals accumulate with age of fauna & through the food chain. • Rates of accumulation vary regionally. • “…Suggest mercury & cadmium pose threat to fauna & people …& some subtle effects noted in native populations consuming traditional food stuffs”.

11. CEON Industrial Expansion UNEP GLOBIO: “… scenario revealed that at even stable growth rates of industrial development, 50-80% of the Arctic may reach critical levels of anthropogenic disturbance by 2050 …. Reversibility unlikely”. Relative importance of understanding cumulative impacts is increasing.

12. CEON Can We Forecast Change? • Time series analysis limited by incomplete or fragmented observation networks & datasets, as well as instrumental changes or differences. • Limitations to models include parameterization, calibration, validation & spatial & temporal sensitivity. • Remote sensing challenged by poor ground control for georectification & spectral balancing, observations for accuracy assessment, scale of landscape features & processes relative to image resolution, cloud & snow cover, & satellite positioning at northern latitudes. • i.e. Answer is probably YES but poor relative to other parts of the world. At present there is limited integration of potential feedbacks from arctic regions to global change scenarios. • Problems with observations are key to limitations.

13. CEON Loss of Observation Platforms In the last 15 years… • Canada - 1/3 arctic climate stations closed or become automated with reduced observation record. • Russia - good infrastructural design, many discontinued observation time series. • US - terrestrial effort largely been campaign driven & lacks continuity of time series. • Europe – site specialization and lack of long term security/continuity. • Differences in methods, instrumentation & potential for integration & cross correlation of measurements.

14. CEON Existing Arctic Observatories

15. CEON Rationale of CEON • Dramatic changesare occurring in terrestrial systems of the Arctic. Drivers of change include processes originating within & outside of the Arctic system. • Change assessment & predictive power is low & limited/threatened by loss of sustained observational time series. • To improve these – need observation platforms that provide adequate, diverse & sustained time series observations that cross international boundaries. • There is an established infrastructure & a tremendous amount of research & monitoring ongoing in the Arctic. The broader impacts of this research are not fully tapped.

16. CEON Large Scale Networks Networks take on many forms: • Monitoring • Experimentation • Collaboration • Synthesis • Assessment International arctic buoy program • Combinations of the above. • Starting point for CEON.

17. CEON 3. How the CEON Concept has Been Scoped & Explored.

18. CEON CEON Activities Since ASSW 2002 • Numerous exchanges between FARO, IASC, established arctic networks, research specialists, funding agencies & ongoing & developing collaborations. • Web site: www.cevl.msu.edu/ael/projects/ceon.html • Article in most recent issue of International Permafrost Association’s ‘Frozen Ground’. • Thirteen presentations & stimulating questions & discussions at national/ international meetings. • Alaska NEON workshop, Fairbanks (USA), August 26, 2002. • ENVINET meeting, Abisko (Sweden), September 11-15, 2002. • IASC/ITEX/FATE - CATB workshop, Finse (Norway), October 3-4, 2002. • ITEX Finse (Norway), October 5-7, 2002. • SCANNET meeting, Reykjavik (Iceland), October 16-20, 2002. • CALM workshop, Lewes, (USA), November 11-15, 2002. • US Polar Research Board meeting, Washington (USA), November 25, 2002. • ARCSS Meeting AGU, San Francisco (USA), December 5, 2002. • US Arctic LTER Meeting, Woods Hole (USA), March 1-4, 2003. • Arctic Science Summit Week, Kiruna (Sweden), April 19-26, 2003. • SpecNet, Santa Barbara (USA), June 1-4, 2003 • IASC/FATE workshop, Skogur (Iceland), June 17-24, 2003. • 8th International Conference on Permafrost, Zurich (Switzerland), July 21-25, 2003

19. CEON We’ve asked two questions….. based on the strong case made for CEON. • How do we implement CEON? • What would you do if you had the opportunity to make standardized long-term, integrated measurements at all the research stations in the Arctic?

20. CEON Feedback… • Base CEON activities on a concept of facilitation incorporating top-down & bottom-up directives. • Many ideas from CEON stakeholder & user groups spanning existing research stations, site & disciplinary networks, indigenous and educational organizations, funding agencies, & data archives have been collected. • Specific examples: • Common meetings of interest groups. • Development of a methods manual (education potential). • Dispersion of standardized instrumentation (with near-real time availability of data if possible). • Re-occupation of former research sites/ data rescue/ reinforcement of long time series. • Involvement of indigenous communities (observations, transfer of traditional knowledge). • Support for cross disciplinary/network/site education & knowledge exchange. • Young people are ready!!!

21. CEON CEON Aims to be Value Adding • CEON should aim to: • Form partnerships with existing networks. • Encourage & facilitate continuation of monitoring. • Provide baselines for assessment (e.g. ACIA), time series analysis, modeling & remote sensing. • Linkages policy & management. • CEON should aim to maintain autonomy of partners whilst embellishing: • Transfer of knowledge. • Integration between & across disciplines. • International collaboration & standardization of measurements. • Temporal stability of research platforms. • A large scale Circum-Arctic network that builds on existing observation platforms with the mindset of facilitation and cooperation is the answer.

22. CEON 4. Ideas on how CEON Might Function.

23. CEON …… A few conceptual ideas..

24. CEON SCANNET SCANNET Scandinavian/North European Network of Terrestrial Field Bases

25. CEON SCANNET ENVINET ENVINET European Network for Arctic-Alpine Environmental Research

26. CEON EMAN SCANNET ENVINET EMAN Environmental Monitoring & Assessment Network (Canada)

27. CEON EMAN ISIRA SCANNET ENVINET ISIRA Interim Scientific Initiation in the Russian Arctic

28. CEON EMAN ISIRA SCANNET NEON ENVINET NEON National (US) Ecological Observatory Network

29. CEON EMAN AEON ISIRA SCANNET NEON ENVINET AEON Alaskan Environmental Observatory Network

30. CEON CEON CEON EMAN AEON ISIRA SCANNET NEON ENVINET CEON Circum-arctic Environmental Observatories Network

31. CEON CEON EMAN AEON ISIRA SCANNET NEON ENVINET ILTER (GTOS/GCOS) International Long-Term Ecological Research Network

32. CEON The ‘Ideal’ Network Design • Broad range of environmental measurements. • Standardized methodology & instrumentation. • Integrated data archive. • Frequent synthesis efforts. • Refinement of monitoring over time. • e.g. SEARCH, CALM, ITEX. • BUT!!!! • $ #, ###, ###.##

33. CEON The Realistic Network Design • Partners are autonomous, some overlap of questions/measurements. • Large potential for integration & standardization.

34. CEON With Time….. n+1 • Increased collaboration.

35. CEON With Time….. n+2 • Increased Integration

36. CEON With Time….. n+3 • Increased broader impacts. • Focus on Win-Win scenarios.

37. CEON 5. The Next Step for CEON?

38. CEON A Conceptual Road Map • Endorsement from FARO & IASC, April 2003. • Convention of planning workshop, October 2003. • Publication of CEON terms of reference & Draft Implementation Strategy/ Science Plan, February 2004. • Report back to FARO for endorsement of the Implementation Strategy ASSW 2004. • Convention of a large international workshop of stakeholder and user groups, November 2004. • Publication of Science Plan, February 2005. • FARO endorse Science Plan ASSW 2005. • Working Group meet at ICARP II conference proposed for Autumn 2005. • IPY 2007 synthesis effort & delineation of future directions? • Sequester support funds throughout to support development of the network. • Form partnerships with autonomous stakeholders to embrace & promote sustained Long-term environmental monitoring aimed at improving our understanding of change & variability within the Arctic system.

39. CEON Questions for this Meeting… • What should the disciplinary scope of CEON encompass? • Stakeholder interests, gap filling etc, education and outreach etc. • Who are the potential partners to CEON? • Disciplinary and regional networks, international connectivity etc. • What is the best way to structure and organize CEON? • Network of networks, joint secretariat, steering committee, data and information flow etc. • What are the priorities in the development of CEON? • Novel technologies, transfer of knowledge, common meeting times, methods/standards manual etc.

40. CEON Products of this Meeting… • Delineation of short, mid and long term goals. • Terms of reference document. • Memorandum of understanding for formal acknowledgement of partnerships. • Science plan/ implementation strategy. • Formation of steering committee and working groups. • Identification of gaps in representation. • Journal article? • Funding proposal…

41. CEON In Conclusion • CEON is poised to be an international, pan-arctic and multidisciplinary initiative developed within FARO, which has received endorsement from FARO and IASC. • The future for international multi & interdisciplinary arctic research looks bright and the timing of CEON is right!! • Importantly, CEON should not be seen as duplication of prior or ongoing research effort. CEON is an initiative aimed at forming a logistic & research framework within which ongoing & future research can be embraced to cumulatively form & facilitate long-term research endeavors. • Development of CEON requires the continued & cooperative support of FARO, IASC, & all scientists actively involved in arctic science. ….Money is important but so are people!!!

42. CEON Thank you…. Acknowledgements:The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences’ Abisko Scientific Research Station and The Scandinavian-North European Network of Terrestrial Field Bases (SCANNET), and financial support from a grant to Abisko Scientific Research Station from the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency for its participation in the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment (ACIA), and US National Science Foundation. • www.cevl.msu.edu/ael/projects/ceon.html