The Great Barrier Reef is ‘in danger’: Australia pushes back

In response, the Australian government immediately released a statement highlighting its commitment to GBR’s conservation, while skirting around the recommendations of the report.

MP Tanya Pilbersek’s statement said, “We understand that the people who live and work on the Reef might find the report alarming. It’s important to note this is not a UNESCO proposal for listing the Reef as ‘in danger’. This is a technical report and the World Heritage Centre is yet to make a recommendation, which would be considered by the World Heritage Committee.”

We take a look at the state of the GBR, its importance, and the politics around its conservation.

What is the Great Barrier Reef?

Located off the coast of Queensland, Australia, the GBR is the world’s largest coral reef system with over 2,900 individual reefs, 900 islands and an area covering approximately 344,400 square kilometres. An irreplaceable part of the global ecosystem, the GBR is one of the biggest biodiversity hotspots in the world as well as one of its largest carbon sinks. For Australia, the GBR is a crucial contributor to the economy, supporting over 64,000 jobs and bringing in billions of annual revenue.

As much as 99 per cent of the property lies within the GBR Marine Park in order to protect it from wanton exploitation. It is managed as a “multiple use area”, with a range of commercial and tourism activities permitted. A zoning plan is at the cornerstone of GBR’s management, determining what is permitted and where. Development and land use activities in coastal and water catchments adjacent to the property also have a critical influence on the property and are managed by the Queensland Government.

Aboriginal populations undertake traditional use of marine resource activities to provide traditional food, practise their living maritime culture, and educate younger generations about traditional and cultural rules and protocols. They are one of GBR’s most important custodians.

What does the IUCN-WHC report say?

The report paints a rather bleak picture of the GBR’s current state. Despite Australia’s sustained and scientific efforts to manage the property, currently, the GBR is adversely and significantly impacted by climate change factors, affecting its resilience to sustain and regenerate itself. Frequent bleaching events have made many reefs sterile. Degraded water quality poses a particular threat.

The report says that currently, the management of the property lacks clear climate change goals.

Further, the implementation of existing plans to conserve the GBR has been falling short, specifically in relation to the management of water quality and fishing activities, it says. Inshore land-based activities, often outside the protected area, are particularly responsible for the degraded water quality in GBR. Pollutants from agricultural and construction activities have been damaging and other proposed developments around the Queensland coast are matters of concern.

Keeping in mind the dangers that the reef faces, the report has multiple suggestions.

The foremost is adding the GBR to the List of World Heritage in Danger. Among other things, recommendations also include monitoring and evolving farming practices, greater commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, addressing land erosion on the coast, and adopting sustainable fishing practices.

What does putting GBR on the List of World Heritage in Danger entail?

According to UNESCO, “the List of World Heritage in Danger is designed to inform the international community of conditions which threaten the very characteristics for which a property was inscribed on the World Heritage List, and to encourage corrective action.”

Under the 1972 World Heritage Convention, inscribing a site on the List allows the WHC to allocate immediate assistance from the World Heritage Fund to the endangered property, while simultaneously gathering international support and attention to the site.

While some countries do welcome the extra support that accompanies inscription into this list, many have often protested and made attempts to avoid this from happening, seeing it as a great embarrassment for the country. Furthermore, while it is difficult for UNESCO to enforce any of its recommendations, being put on the list does invite greater scrutiny for the site. This is especially true when talking about ecological heritage sites– often, the interests of conservation and economic development are opposed. Inclusion in such a list can have a tangible impact on all kinds of developmental projects, which may be politically significant for governments.

Understanding Australia’s response

It is in this context that Australia’s response must be seen. While on one hand, it is in Australia’s own economic and political interests to conserve the GBR, there are multiple other interests at play that muddy the waters.

For instance, if it were to adopt the recommendation of the panel to phase out “gill net fishing” which indiscriminately harms marine life (not just the intended catch), it would have to make a substantial investments to compensate fisheries which rely on such a method. It may also lose political goodwill amongst fishermen who form a voting block in Queensland.

MP Pilbersek’s statement highlights the labour government’s achievements, her claim basically being that much of what is recommended by the report is already taken care of, and that “Australians understand more than anyone the importance of protecting the Reef.”

In 2021 too, when this issue arose, the Scott Morrison government had rejected the possibility of adding the GBR to this list and intensely lobbied with UNESCO to prevent that from happening. Plibersek told reporters on Tuesday that she is going to be lobbying UNESCO again.