The Last Decade: The World Heritage Committee and the Great Barrier Reef - Australian Marine Conservation Society
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
The Last Decade:
The World Heritage
Committee and the
Great Barrier Reef
A review and recommendations for change
M
CO
SOC
A report for the Australian Marine
Conservation Society by Imogen Zethoven AO
M
CO
S O C
Preparation of this report was supported by The Oak Foundation.
Contents
Executive Summary 4
Recommendations 6
This report should be cited as:
Introduction 7
Zethoven, I. 2021. The Last Decade:
2011 8
The World Heritage Committee and
the Great Barrier Reef. Report prepared 2012 9
for the Australian Marine Conservation 2013 10
Society. Brisbane. 2014 11
2015 12
2016 15
The Australian Marine Conservation Society
2017 16
commissioned this report to provide expert advice
2018 18
to the World Heritage Committee on the protection
and management of the Great Barrier Reef (Australia). 2019 19
2020 21
The report author, Imogen Zethoven AO, has engaged
2021 23
extensively in the long-term conservation of the
Advice to Policy Makers:
Great Barrier Reef. She is a member of the
The Way Forward 27
Reef 2050 Plan Reef Advisory Committee.
Conclusion 31
Endnotes 32
Australian Marine Conservation Society
Phone: MARINE
+61 (07) 3846 6777
CONSERVATION
Freecall: 1800 066
299
SO C IET Y A U ST RA L IA
Email: amcs@amcs.org.au
Address: PO Box 5815 West End QLD 410
Coordinator: Darren Kindleysides
MARINE
CONSERVATION
S O C I E T Y A U S T R A L I A
IMOGEN ZETHOVEN AO
Blue Ocean Consulting
MARINE CONSERVATION
S O C I E T Y A U S T R A L I A
© Australian Marine Conservation Society, April 2021
CONSERVATION
S O C I E T Y A U S T R A L I A
Executive Summary Recommendations
The Great Barrier Reef is one of the seven severe heatwaves. These three events in five This report recommends that at its 44th session, the World Heritage Committee:
natural wonders of the world. Comprising 10 years affected the entire length of the Reef and
1. Requests Australia to revise the Reef 2050 Plan to commit to ambitious domestic
per cent of the world’s coral reefs, this vast caused mass coral mortality.
and beautiful region meets all four World emissions reduction compatible with a 1.5°C pathway, thereby helping to limit the
Much work has been done to implement the
Heritage natural criteria and was inscribed global average temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels in order to
Reef 2050 Plan. The Australian and Queensland
on the List of World Heritage in 1981. The Reef
Governments have provided additional protect the Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) of the Great Barrier Reef.
is part of Australia’s national identity and
investment, the Queensland Government
part of the cultural and spiritual identity of its 2. Requests Australia to develop a detailed plan to achieve the above, containing:
has passed new and stronger laws, and both
Traditional Owners.
governments have instituted new policies and
• Clearly defined criteria for success, i.e. time-bound greenhouse gas pollution
While some World Heritage values of the Great programs to reduce threats inside the property
reduction targets across the economy compatible with a 1.5°C pathway and
Barrier Reef are still in good condition, many and in the adjacent catchment. Despite this, the
are declining due to the cumulative impacts water quality targets have not been met and measurable targets to increase native vegetation sinks in the Reef catchment;
of climate change, agricultural pollution and a many actions are still in progress. • Concrete measures, e.g. actions and investments that deliver on the targets and
range of in-water threats. IUCN has classified
This report examines the events that led timelines.
the property’s outlook as critical.
to the development of the Reef 2050 Plan
The Committee’s work in the first half of the and whether Australia has been successful 3. Recalls its decision of 41 COM 7 in relation to Climate Change and reiterates the
last decade was highly influential. Part of in effectively protecting and managing the
importance of all other State Parties undertaking the most ambitious implementation
the reason was the Committee’s willingness property since the plan’s inception.
of the Paris Agreement of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
to consider In Danger listing for this iconic
It also urges the Committee to once again Change (UNFCCC) to protect World Heritage.
World Heritage site, if the requests made
consider inscribing the Great Barrier Reef on
by the Committee were not fulfilled by
the List of World Heritage In Danger if Australia
the State Party. A key request was for the 4. Urges Australia to allocate additional resources to fully meet the time-bound water
does not commit to a new round of protection
Australian Government to develop a long-
measures within the Reef 2050 Plan, including: quality targets in the Reef 2050 Water Quality Improvement Plan 2017-2022, including
term sustainability plan to address coastal adequate funding for education, extension and regulatory compliance.
development and poor water quality. • accelerated action and increased
investment in existing measures and
The resulting Reef 2050 Long-Term 5. Requests Australia to accelerate efforts in response to the poor or deteriorating
Sustainability Plan was a major policy • new actions to mitigate greenhouse gas
status of biodiversity and species considered vulnerable to fishing, as outlined in
achievement and demonstrated the power of pollution and put Australia on a 1.5°C
the GBRMPAi 2019 Outlook Report; in particular fully implementing and funding
the World Heritage Convention to effect positive pathway to protect the Outstanding
Universal Value of the property the Queensland Sustainable Fisheries Strategy 2017-2027, monitoring and reducing
change. In 2015 the Committee welcomed
the plan and urged Australia to implement all bycatch of endangered wildlife, reducing gillnet fishing effort and establishing more
A revised Reef 2050 Plan that includes actions
commitments. tackling all threats (climate change, water extensive commercial net-free zones along the Great Barrier Reef coastline.
A year later, a marine heatwave in the quality, coastal development and fisheries)
will ensure that, in a warming world, the Great 6. Requests Australia to submit to the World Heritage Centre an updated report by
Great Barrier Reef resulted in a severe coral
bleaching event that killed 29 per cent of Barrier Reef retains some of the values for 1 December 2022 on the state of conservation of the property, including on the
shallow water corals. The following year, and which it was inscribed forty years ago. implementation of the requests outlined above.
again in 2020, the property experienced further
7. Agrees that, without substantial progress to achieve the above requests, it would
consider the inscription of the property on the List of World Heritage in Danger at its
subsequent session.
i Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority (GBRMPA)
4 5
Introduction
In 2011, the World Heritage Committee
expressed extreme concern about industrial
development along the Great Barrier Reef
coastline. For the following four years, the
Committee kept Australia’s management of the
Great Barrier Reef under close scrutiny.
In response, the Australian Government
developed a plan to protect the property
through to 2050. The plan addressed coastal
development, poor water quality and a range
of other issues.
In 2015, the Committee welcomed the plan and
requested Australia to rigorously implement all
commitments. The Committee also decided to
revisit Australia’s management of the property
in 2020. The global pandemic, however, led to
the deferral of the meeting to 2021.
This report looks back over the last decade to
examine what the World Heritage Committee
requested of Australia and what the Australian
and Queensland Governments have done in
response.
The questions asked by this report are:
• Has Australia effectively protected and
managed the Great Barrier Reef since the
inception of the Reef 2050 Plan?
• Are many of the values and attributes
that comprise the property’s Outstanding
Universal Value continuing to deteriorate?
• Should the Committee consider the property
for inscription on the List of World Heritage In
Danger?
This report looks back over each year from
2011 to answer these questions. It also provides
advice on the way forward.
6 7
2011 2012
In October 2010, the Australian Government The Committee expressed “extreme concern” The mission arrived in Australia in March 2012. In early July, the World Heritage Committee
approved a Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) about the approval of the LNG processing plant Two senior officials from IUCN and the World considered the mission report and made a highly
Processing Plant on Curtis Island within the Great and port facilities (35 COM 7B.10) and requested Heritage Centre toured the Reef coastline, consequential decision (36 COM 7B.8). The
Barrier Reef World Heritage property, along with the Australia Government to invite the Centre meeting with government officials and non- Committee:
infrastructure associated with the plant. and IUCN to undertake a Reactive Monitoring government organisations and individuals.
• Requested Australia, “in collaboration with
mission to the Great Barrier Reef.i
Having been informed of the approval, They found a rapid and recent increase in the its partners, to maintain, and increase where
UNESCO’s World Heritage Centre and the The Committee also urged Australia to undertake number of proposals along the Reef coastline necessary financial investment” to address
International Union for the Conservation of a comprehensive strategic assessment of the for coal and gas development, industrial port poor water quality
Nature (IUCN) prepared a State of Conservation whole property and to develop a long-term plan expansion and dredging and dumping of
• Requested Australia “to address the mission
report on the matter to the 35th session of the to protect the property’s Outstanding Universal dredged material in the World Heritage property.
recommendations in its future protection
World Heritage Committee in 2011. Value (OUV).
The resulting report1 from the Centre and IUCN to and management of the property”
The report: The 2011 decision had profound implications for the World Heritage Committee called for:
• “Noted with great concern the potentially
the Reef. For the following four years, the World
• recalled “the World Heritage Committee’s • No new port development or associated significant impact on the property’s
Heritage Committee kept a close watch over
clear position in relation to oil and gas infrastructure outside existing major ports Outstanding Universal Value resulting
Australia’s management of this natural wonder.
exploration and exploitation, that these from the unprecedented scale of coastal
• An independent review of all environmental
activities are incompatible with World development”
concerns associated with the Gladstone
Heritage status”, and
Harbour and Curtis Island development • Requested Australia “to not permit any
• considered “that the Liquefied Natural Gas new port development or associated
• A fully integrated approach to the planning,
facility approved on Curtis Island within the infrastructure outside of the existing and
protection and management of ports
property could represent a clear potential long-established major port areas within or
and shipping affecting the property (via
danger to the property’s OUV and integrity, adjoining the property”
a shipping policy, a ports strategy and
as defined in paragraph 180(b)(ii) of the
individual port plans) • Requested Australia “to ensure that
Operational Guidelines” (WHC-11/35.
development is not permitted if it would
COM/7B.Add) • A comprehensive strategic assessment of the
impact individually or cumulatively on the
Great Barrier Reef
Outstanding Universal Value of the property”
• A long-term plan for the sustainable
• Requested Australia to “complete the
i According to the Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention, a Reactive Monitoring mission is foreseen in
development of the property
reference to a World Heritage site being inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger. Operational Guidelines, IV.A.169.
Strategic Assessment and resulting long-
• Sustained and increased investment in term plan for the sustainable development
improving Reef water quality of the property for consideration by the
© Greenpeace/Tom Jefferson. • Scientifically based targets for the World Heritage Committee at its 39th session
conservation of the Reef in 2015”
• An independent review of the overall • Requested Australia to submit an update
institutional and legal mechanisms that report on the property by 1 February 2013,
provide coordinated planning, protection “for consideration by the World Heritage
and management of the Great Barrier Reef, Committee at its 37th session in 2013,
and with a view to consider, in the absence
of substantial progress, the possible
• The Outstanding Universal Value of the
inscription of the property on the List of
property to be clearly defined and used as
World Heritage in Danger”.
the central element within the protection and
management system for the property
8 9
2013
The Australian Government was very concerned 3. Ensure that legislation protecting the
about the possibility of an In Danger listing for property remains strong and adequate to
the Reef. Yet, the measures taken in the next maintain and enhance its OUV
12 months by the Australian and Queensland
The Committee requested Australia to report
2014
Governments were not sufficient to allay the
again to the World Heritage Centre the following
concerns of the Committee.
year on the implementation of the all the
In 2013, the Committee (37 COM 7B.10) requests and recommendations.
welcomed the fact that the Australian and
It concluded that, in the absence of substantial
Queensland Governments had:
progress, the Committee would again consider
• Initiated a comprehensive strategic the Great Barrier Reef for inscription on the List
assessment of the Great Barrier Reef of World Heritage In Danger. The draft Strategic Assessment4 by the Great The Committee kept the pressure on the
• Established an independent review of the Two important documents were released in 2013: Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority (GBRMPA) Australian Government by requesting Australia to
management arrangements for Gladstone found the condition of the Reef had declined report the following year to the World Heritage
• The Scientific Consensus Statement on
Harbour seriously in recent years. Climate change was Centre, responding to all the recommendations
Reef water quality which found that: the most serious threat to the Reef’s future and requests since 2012.
• Made a renewed commitment to the Reef “key Great Barrier Reef ecosystems are and management was not keeping up with
Water Quality Protection Plan showing declining trends in condition due The report was to be examined by the World
the cumulative effect of multiple impacts. Its Heritage Committee in 2015, with a view to
to continuing poor water quality, cumulative conclusion: business as usual was not an option.
However, the Committee: considering, in the case of confirmation of
impacts of climate change and increasing
• Reiterated that the comprehensive strategic Importantly, the 2014 State of Conservation report the ascertained or potential danger to its
intensity of extreme events”2
assessment and the resulting long-term plan by the Centre and IUCN to the Committee advised Outstanding Universal Value, the possible
• The Reef Water Quality Protection Plan that the long-term plan for the Reef needs to inscription of the property on the List of World
for the property should be completed against
(Reef Plan)3 endorsed by the Australian and result in concrete and consistent management Heritage in Danger.
defined criteria for success, fully address
Queensland Governments. measures sufficiently robust to ensure the overall
direct, indirect and cumulative impacts on the Later in 2014, the Australian Government released
conservation of the property and its OUV, in
reef and lead to concrete measures to ensure The Reef Plan’s goal was that by 2020, the quality GBRMPA’s second Outlook Report5 and the North
particular addressing major drivers of reef decline
the conservation of the OUV of the property of water entering the Reef from broadscale land East Shipping Management Plan6 which covered
such as water quality and climate change.
use has no detrimental impact on the health the whole property.
• Found that the Australian Government had
and resilience of the Reef. The Plan contained The Committee:
made limited progress in implementing GBRMPA’s first Outlook Report7 was released in 2009
some highly consequential water quality targets • Expressed concern about recent approvals and found that “the overall outlook for the Great
the requests it had made in 2012 and the
to be met by 2020 for priority areas: for coastal development Barrier Reef is poor and catastrophic damage to
recommendations of the mission report.
• At least a 50 per cent reduction in the ecosystem may not be averted. Ultimately, if
• Expressed concern about ongoing coastal • Expressed “regret” at the approval of the
anthropogenic end-of-catchment changes in the world’s climate become too severe,
development. dumping of 3 million cubic metres of dredge
dissolved inorganic nitrogen loads no management actions will be able to climate-
spoil in the Great Barrier Reef for the future
The Committee urged Australia to strengthen its proof the Great Barrier Reef ecosystem.”
• At least a 20 per cent reduction in development of Adani’s Abbot Point coal port
efforts to: The 2014 report had an even more sombre
anthropogenic end-of-catchment loads of • Once again, called on Australia to ensure
1. Ensure that development is not permitted if conclusion: “Even with the recent management
sediment and particulate nutrients that no port developments or associated
it would impact individually or cumulatively initiatives to reduce threats and improve resilience,
port infrastructure are permitted outside
• At least a 60 per cent reduction in end-of- the overall outlook for the Great Barrier Reef is
on the OUV of the property, or compromise the existing and long-established major
catchment pesticide loads poor, has worsened since 2009 and is expected
the Strategic Assessment and resulting long- ports within or adjoining the World Heritage
term plan for the property to further deteriorate in the future.”
property. This request was to take effect
2. Ensure that no port developments or immediately and be permanent. Climate change, poor water quality, impacts
associated port infrastructure are permitted from coastal development and some remaining
• Called on Australia to ensure that any
impacts of fishing were found to be the major
outside the existing and long-established development within existing major ports did
threats to the property’s future health. The report
major port areas within or adjoining the not impact individually or cumulatively the
was submitted to the World Heritage Centre.
property OUV of the property
10 11
2015
2015 was a climactic year for the Great Barrier welcomed the Reef 2050 Plan as a major In their State of Conservation report to the The 2015 Committee meeting was a landmark for
Reef. technical and policy achievement. It meeting, the World Heritage Centre and the Great Barrier Reef and for the World Heritage
recognized that the Plan responded to many IUCN stated that “It is essential that the 2050 community. Comments from Committee
For years, the Australian Government had
of the recommendations and requests over the LTSP delivers its anticipated results in order members included:
claimed that the Great Barrier Reef was
last few years. Highlights were: to confirm that the property does not face
the best managed Reef in the world. The • “This shows that the World Heritage
ascertained or potential danger to its OUV.”
government was therefore determined 1. Pollution reduction targets to improve water Convention is powerful and we need to use
to avoid an In Danger listing, which it felt quality and an initial $200 million investment The Committee requested Australia to rigorously its power for the sake of the protection of our
would be an ignominious judgement to accelerate actions to meet targets implement all commitments and noted that: joint World Heritage.” (German delegation)
on its credentials and an international • many are the responsibility of the • “The symbolic importance of the Great
2. Restriction of port development and capital
embarrassment. The government undertook Queensland Government and are yet to be Barrier Reef as World Heritage is of utmost
dredging to four existing major ports along
an intensive global lobbying exercise with State implemented, for example, strengthening importance to the entire world. We must not
the Reef coastline
Parties to avert this outcome. Queensland’s native vegetation laws (to lose this heritage for our future generations
3. Reversal of the Australian Government’s
The intention of the List of World Heritage In restrict sediment runoff) and the restrictions and the global ecosystem.” (Korean
decision to permit the dumping of capital
Danger, however, is not to shame countries on port development delegation)
dredge material from Abbot Point Coal
whose properties are inscribed on the List, but • the Australian Government’s promise While the Reef 2050 Plan was a historic leap
Terminal inside the World Heritage property
to help them undertake corrective actions. to develop an investment framework forward for the conservation of the Great
4. A permanent ban on the dumping of capital
In March, the final Reef 2050 Long-Term was essential for the Plan’s effective Barrier Reef, it did not address the existential
dredge spoilii inside the property
Sustainability Plan8 was submitted to the World implementation. threat of climate change, which had yet to
Heritage Centre, containing 151 actions. 5. Protection of the Fitzroy Delta by ensuring no wreak havoc on this global icon.iii
The Committee requested Australia to report to
future port development
While noting with concern the findings of the the World Heritage Centre twice more in the next The Plan simply reiterated a highly
2014 GBR Outlook Report, the Committee 6. Establishment of three net-free fishing zones four years: inadequate emissions reduction target that
along the Reef coastline bore no relationship to the survival of the
• The first was a December 2016 update on
Reef for future generations and even for
ii While this was a major reduction in one of the pressures facing the GBR, both the Australian and Queensland Governments retained the ability to dump progress in implementing the Reef 2050 Plan
maintenance dredge spoil in the World Heritage property. This practice continues today – and comprises thousands of tonnes of fine dredged material generations alive today.
being dumped every year that also has major impacts on World Heritage values and attributes, especially seagrass and corals and their dependent
and investment framework. The Committee
wildlife species. made it clear that if the Centre and IUCN It is worth repeating that the 2014 State of
did not think sufficient progress was being Conservation report by the Centre and IUCN to
made, the Reef would again be on the the Committee advised that the long-term plan
agenda of the Committee in 2017. for the Reef needed to result in concrete and
consistent management measures sufficiently
• The second was a report in December 2019
robust to ensure the overall conservation of the
that demonstrated effective and sustained
property and its OUV, in particular addressing
protection of the Reef’s Outstanding Universal
major drivers of reef decline such as water
Value, and effective implementation of the
quality and climate change.
targets in the Reef 2050 Plan. The Committee
stated that it would examine Australia’s In September, the Australian and Queensland
performance at its 44th session due in 2020 Governments released a Great Barrier Reef
(now deferred to 2021). water quality report card.9 The sobering
document revealed the extent of the challenge
to halt and reverse the decline of the inshore
environment.
iii The first two widespread coral bleaching events occurred in 1998 and 2002, however, these were not as devastating as the events that subsequently
occurred in 2016, 2017 and 2020.
12 13
© THE OCEAN AGENCY / XL CATLIN SEAVIEW SURVEY
On 15th October, the federal Minister for from mining, transporting and burning the
Environment Greg gave final approval for coal overseas was not addressed. The mine
Adani’s Carmichael thermal coal mega-mine. was the first “cab off the rank” in a yet to be
He had originally done so in July 2014, but exploited massive new coal reserve, the Galilee
the approval was successfully challenged in Basin, covering an area roughly the same
court and set aside. The scale of the mine was size as the United Kingdom. It was and still is
unprecedented: 60 million tonnes per annum a highly controversial project. The mine is just
with an expected lifespan of 60 years. The one of many fossil fuel projects approved in
coal was destined for export through Adani’s Queensland and across Australia in the last
Abbot Point coal port on the Great Barrier Reef decade.
coastline, which would lead to a huge increase
The year concluded with the passage of the
in shipping through the World Heritage
Queensland Sustainable Ports Development
property.
Act 2015, which put into law the port restrictions
The new approval included 36 conditions promised to the Committee. It was a huge
addressing local issues. However, the issue achievement.
of the carbon emissions that would result
2016
Everything changed in 2016. Tourism operators, Reef scientists and
conservationists, the whole Australian
Less than a year after the Committee had
community were in shock. Media broadcast
welcomed Australia’s plan to protect the
scenes of bleached and dying corals around
Outstanding Universal Value of the Reef through
the world. Many people felt upset and
to 2050, a devastating marine heatwave fuelled
frightened that climate change could be
by global warming led to coral mortality over
happening so quickly, with such ferocity,
huge swathes of the property.
affecting such a beloved part of the planet.
GBRMPA reported that an estimated 29 per
The event did not result in any new climate
cent of shallow-water coral cover was lost.10
policy commitments from the Australian
Over 75 per cent of this mortality occurred in
Government.
the far north — stretching 600 kilometres south
from the northern boundary of the property. In December, the government submitted an
Previously, the northern third had been “update on progress”11 in implementing the
recognised by the World Heritage Committee Reef 2050 Plan and investment framework to
as the healthiest part of the Reef, giving the World Heritage Centre.
members confidence that the Outstanding
Universal Value of the property remained intact.
14 15
© Tracy Olive
© Australian Institute of Marine Science / LTMP © James Woodford April 206
2017
Incredibly, in early 2017 the Reef experienced This was not the only decision the Committee
a second severe coral bleaching event. The made that year about climate change and
back-to-back event was unprecedented. This coral reefs. During the 10-day meeting, the
time the central third was the most severely World Heritage Centre released the First
affected. Together both events resulted in Global Scientific Assessment of the impacts
extensive coral mortality in the upper two- of Climate Change on World Heritage Coral
thirds of the World Heritage property. Reefs.13 The projections were grim.
In response to the crisis, GBRMPA convened a The assessment found that “drastic reductions
Great Barrier Reef Summit called Managing in CO2 emissions are essential – and the only
for Resilience. The aim was “to help craft a real solution – to giving coral reefs on the World
blueprint to navigate a future characterised by Heritage List a chance to survive climate change.”
uncertainty and accelerating change.”
The Committee adopted a decision expressing
The result was a Reef Blueprint which radically
12
its “utmost concern” about the impacts of climate
changed GBRMPA’s management policy change on World Heritage coral reefs, calling on
framework. Reducing threats and allowing the all countries “to undertake the most ambitious
Reef to naturally recover from disturbance was implementation of the Paris Agreement” and
replaced with support for active intervention to “to undertake actions that address Climate
help restore ecosystem health. Change under the Paris Agreement … that are
fully consistent with their obligations within the
However, without an equally radical change
World Heritage Convention to protect the OUV
to Australia’s climate policy - and global
of all World Heritage properties”.
cooperation to act quickly - the efforts risked
being for nought. On 28 July 2017, the Great Barrier Reef
Ministerial Forum (comprised of Australian
Meanwhile, the World Heritage Centre and
and Queensland Environment Ministers)
IUCN were reviewing Australia’s progress
“recognised that in light of the impacts of global
report. Clearly, they did not think sufficient
coral bleaching and future climate projections”
progress was being made as they again
it “agreed to bring forward the immediate
placed the Great Barrier Reef on the agenda
commencement of the mid-term review” of the
of the Committee meeting in 2017.
Reef 2050 Plan, scheduled for 2018.14
While the Committee welcomed the initial
The review was not completed until 2018 and,
implementation of the Reef 2050 Plan, it strongly
whilst it resulted in several updated targets
encouraged Australia to “accelerate efforts to
relating to water quality, Australia failed to
ensure meeting the intermediate and long-term
strengthen its emission reduction target,
targets of the Plan, which are essential to the
leaving its grossly inadequate target (5 per
overall resilience of the property, in particular
cent reduction in emissions by 2020 based on
regarding water quality” (41 COM 7B.24).
2000 levels) untouched.
The Committee also noted “with serious
concern” the coral bleaching and mortality that
occurred in 2016 and 2017.
16 17
© Cam White
2018
Now, with a majority on the floor of Parliament, Though a very large single figure, the funding
the Queensland Government was able to pass was to be spread over six years and fell short
stronger laws to protect forests and woodlands of the scale of investment recommended by
in the Great Barrier Reef catchment (and scientists and experts.
throughout the state) to reduce sediment and $201 million was dedicated to improving Reef
nutrient pollution entering the Reef and curb water quality and $100 million was assigned
harmful coastal development. for research which would normally have been
Another promise to the World Heritage distributed directly to research institutions.vi
Committee delivered. Approximately $60 million was set aside for
The Australian and Queensland Governments Crown-of-Thorns Starfish control, given the Reef
released a five-year Reef 2050 Water Quality was experiencing yet another major outbreak
Improvement Plan (WQIP) 2017-202215 which of the coral-eating native animal whose plague
builds on previous Reef Water Quality Protection proportions were linked to poor water quality
Plans. and historic overfishing of its natural predators.
The WQIP includes scientifically based targets to While the increase in federal funding for the Reef,
2019
reduce agricultural runoff from each of the 35 and the earlier additional $100 million from the
sub-catchments that comprise the Great Barrier Queensland Government over five years, were
Reef catchment. The WQIP updated the 2015 welcome, the total funding for the Reef has not
Reef-wide targets welcomed by the Committee, been able to stem the deterioration of many of
using a bottom-up approach based on each of the values of the property.
catchment.
At the international level, the IPCC released its
In the second quarter of 2018, the Chair of the Special Report on 1.5°C which found that coral
Great Barrier Reef Foundation’siv Board was reefs, are projected to decline by a further Ahead of the third Outlook Report, GBRMPA • the integrity of the World Heritage property
called in by the Australian Prime Minister and 70–90% at 1.5°C (high confidence) with larger released a Climate Change position statement is being increasingly challenged; and
offered AU$443.3 million to deliver projects to losses (>99%) at 2°C (very high confidence).16 that called for urgent action. The statement said:
• the size of the property is becoming a
protect the Reef. No public tender was called. • “Climate change is the greatest threat to less effective buffer to broadscale and
Yet in the same month as the IPCC report was
The Foundation accepted the offer and the the Great Barrier Reef. cumulative impacts
released, the Queensland Government approved
Government rapidly prepared a funding
Adani’s plans to expand the capacity of the • Only the strongest and fastest possible The report found ten threats that were very high
agreement, the Reef Trust Partnership.v
Abbot Point coal port from 50 to 60 million actions to decrease global greenhouse gas risk to the Reef’s ecosystem and heritage values.
From a budgetary perspective, the intention tonnes per annum (mtpa). Adani announced emissions will reduce the risks and limit the Most of these relate to climate change or land-
was to expend funding as quickly as possible it was scaling back the size of its Carmichael impacts of climate change on the Reef. based run-off. Two relate to fishing (illegal fishing
before the end of the 2017/18 financial year. In thermal coal mine to 10 mtpa for the time being, and poaching, and incidental catch of species of
• For the Reef and coral reefs worldwide,
determining the size of the grant, the Australian but holding on to its federal approval of 60 mtpa. conservation concern).
there is growing recognition that limiting the
Government was mindful of the decision due
increase in global average temperature to The report stated that “Given the current state of
in 2020 by the World Heritage Committee
1.5°C and ideally less, is critical to minimise the Region’s values, actions to reduce the highest
concerning the government’s management of
significant environmental and societal costs risks have never been more time-critical.”
the Reef.
from the loss of reef habitats.”
By looking to the future, the Outlook Report is
The call to action was backed up by the key intended as a guide to where changes in policy
findings of the 2019 Outlook Report,17 namely: are needed. Yet the report elicited no change in
climate policy, despite the two recent back-to-
• the overall outlook for the Reef was now
iv The Great Barrier Reef Foundation is a small, private, not-for-profit charity whose Board comprises some of Australia’s most senior businessmen and back coral bleaching events, the 64,000 jobs that
women. “very poor”
v https://www.environment.gov.au/marine/gbr/publications/reef-trust-gbrf-partnership-grant-guidelines depend on a healthy Reef and the AU$6 billion it
vi $100 million was allocated to the Reef Restoration and Adaptation Program generates every year.
18 19© Matt Curnock
2020
In Australia, 2020 will be remembered for two The 2020 event was the most widespread ever
things: firstly COVID-19 and secondly the summer recorded and this time it impacted the southern
of bushfires and coral bleaching. third of the property. Twenty-five per cent of
coral reefs throughout the property were severely
The fires of 2020 were unprecedented in their
affected and another 35 per cent of reefs had
scale and ferocity. The extent of the area burnt
moderate levels of bleaching.
in two forested World Heritage properties is
shocking: The Great Barrier Reef is no longer too big to fail.
Since 2016, it has changed forever.
• Greater Blue Mountains: 82 per cent
In August, the Australian and Queensland emission reduction target that is so weak as to be
(approx. 853,977 hectares) The vision of the Reef 2050 Plan endorsed
governments released the latest Reef water compatible with a global temperature rise over
by the Committee in 2015 – To ensure the
quality report card covering two years up to mid- 2°C and up to 3°C.21 Such a rise would devastate • Gondwana Rainforests of Australia: 53
Great Barrier Reef continues to improve on
2018.18 World Heritage coral reefs. per cent (approx. 196,000 hectares) (initial
its Outstanding Universal Value every decade
assessment)
The water quality targets promised to the World An independent expert review22 of the Australian between now and 2050 to be a natural wonder
Heritage Committee in 2015 were not met and, Government’s report found that the continued Later in the year the Fraser Island (K’gari) World for each successive generation to come – is no
given the slow pace of improvement, the same deterioration of the overall health of the Great Heritage also suffered a major fire: 47 per cent, longer achievable.
fate lay ahead for the 2020 targets. Barrier Reef demonstrates that management approx. 87,000 hectares, of forest was burnt.
The Australian and State and Territory
measures currently in place are insufficient to While the early 2020 fires dominated national
As a result, in September 2019, the Queensland Governments steered Australia well through
“provide effective and sustained protection of and international headlines, the Great Barrier
Government passed a package of Reef water the pandemic of 2020. However, as European
the property’s Outstanding Universal Value” as Reef suffered another severe coral bleaching
quality regulations that drew considerable member states and other countries around
requested by the World Heritage Committee in event - the third in five years. Due to the bushfires
pushback from some sectors of the farming the world began to develop a green economic
2017. and global pandemic, the bleaching event did
community, but strong support from scientists, recovery, the Australian Prime Minister
conservation groups and some individual The review found that: not receive extensive media coverage. The fear is announced a “gas-fired recovery”.
farmers. that the frequency of bleaching events is starting
• The major flaw in Australia’s stewardship
to become normalized.
The regulations are to be implemented in a of the Great Barrier Reef is the Australian
staged fashion through to 2022. It is critical that government’s failure to adequately address
adequately funded and effective compliance climate change
and enforcement efforts are rolled out to ensure
• Australia must do its proportionate share,
the regulations achieve measurable reductions in
both nationally and globally, to limit the
pollution. At present, there is a major disconnect
extent of climate change
between funding for compliance and the
compliance task. • Of primary importance is for Australia
to align its climate change policies and
In December, the Australian Government
programs with the 1.5°C goal of the Paris
submitted a State Party report to the World
Agreement.
Heritage Centre, as requested by the World
Heritage Committee in 2015.19 The review also found that the Australian and
Queensland Governments have invested $826
The report claimed that Australia is taking strong
million over 10 years from 2014/15 to 2023/24 to
action on climate change. It says: “To meet the
improve Reef water quality.
goals of the Paris Agreement Australia, like all
other Parties to the Agreement, will put forward While this represents an increase in funding, the
new commitments every five years.” report concluded that is significantly less than
the estimated $4.5 billion investment needed to
Yet, in 2020 Australia submitted the same
meet the 2025 water quality targets in all Reef
Nationally Determined Contribution20 to the
catchments.23 The review was submitted to the
UNFCCC as it submitted in 2015, including an
World Heritage Centre and IUCN in February 2020.
© Tracy Olive. @tracyolive
20 212021
In February, the Australian and Queensland • Enforcement where there is non-compliance
Governments released the latest Great Barrier
• Fine scale monitoring and reporting
Reef water quality report card, showing results
up to June 2019.27 The Australian and Queensland Governments
are currently redrafting the Reef 2050 Plan. In
The report card assesses progress against
recognition that the Vision of the 2015 Planviii is
targets in the Water Quality Improvement
now unattainable, the Vision in the draft plan28
Plan (WQIP). While there is progress in some
is silent about the Outstanding Universal Value
catchments for some pollutants, there is a
of the Reef.
long way to go to meet the Reef-wide targets
promised the World Heritage Committee. For The draft plan released for public consultation
example: in 2020 states:
The fossil-fueled recovery involved setting new IUCN’s analysis made clear that while the Reef
• WQIP: 90 per cent of land in priority “Australia’s commitment under the Paris
gas supply targets, unlocking new gas basins 2050 Plan was a significant step, it was not
areas under sugarcane to adopt best Agreement is to reduce emissions by 26
and boosting the gas transport network. A recent sufficient to protect the Outstanding Universal
management practices by 2025 to 28 per cent on 2005 levels by 2030. This
UNEP report found that during 2020, Australia Value of one of the world’s most iconic World
represents a halving of emissions per person in
(along with the US, Canada and Mexico) Heritage sites. • Latest report card: cumulative adoption
Australia, or a two-thirds reduction in emissions
announced investments supporting oil and gas.24 12.7 per cent
The original Reef 2050 Plan included per unit of gross domestic product (GDP).
In November, IUCN released its third global World commitments to reform fisheries and reduce the • WQIP: 60 per cent reduction in end-of- Australia is on track to meet its 2030 target.”
Heritage Outlook Report.25 The Great Barrier Reef impact of fishing on threatened species. The 2018 catchment dissolved inorganic nitrogen by
However, per capita emissions and emissions per
was downgraded from Significant Concern in update specifically committed to implement the 2025
unit of GDP are irrelevant to the Great Barrier
2017 to Critical. Queensland Sustainable Fisheries Strategy 2017-
• Latest report card: cumulative reduction Reef. What matters is an urgent and substantial
2027.26
Of the 252 natural and mixed sites on the World of 25.5 per cent quantitative reduction.
Heritage list, IUCN considered 18 to be in Critical The strategy represented comprehensive Overall, the report card gave a D for the As UNESCO’s First Global Scientific Assessment
condition. Sixteen of these are on the List of World reform. Amongst other things, it responded to condition of the Reef’s inshore marine of the Impacts of Climate Change on World
Heritage in Danger. vii the very high risk posed by illegal fishing and environment, the same as the previous year. Heritage Coral Reefs stated: “this assessment
poaching and the incidental catch of species of
To many, the Reef’s Critical status was both finds that drastic reductions in CO2 emissions
conservation concern, as identified in successive There is no doubt that improvements in inshore
shocking and unsurprising. are essential – and the only real solution – to
GBRMPA Outlook Reports (2014, 2019). marine condition will take some time to become
giving coral reefs on the World Heritage List a
IUCN made this decision because many of the evident, but it is also the case that progress needs
Despite the Queensland Government approving chance to survive climate change”.
values for which the Reef had been inscribed on to be much faster if targets are to be met.
nearly $21 million over three years in 2017 for
the List of World Heritage had been declining, New fossil fuel projects are continuing to advance
the implementation of the fisheries strategy, The additional $100 million from the Queensland
but the result of the 2016, 2017 and 2020 coral in Queensland and Australia. For example,
implementation had stalled badly. Three years Government provided in 2015 has expired at the
bleaching events saw “a further dramatic the Queensland Government has moved a
later, the government announced a package time of writing, and the $443.3 million from the
decline”. proposed 10 million tonne per annum coal mine
of regulations that would implement some key Australian Government to the Great Barrier Reef
10 kilometres upstream of the Great Barrier Reef
IUCN also noted declining trends in: elements such as dividing fisheries into smaller Foundation does not extend to 2025, the target
coastal boundary to a more advanced stage of
management regions. date for the updated water quality targets.
• some of the Reef’s most iconic species - environmental impact assessment.ix
loggerhead, hawksbill and northern green Vital components of the strategy, however, are The importance of new funding to ensure the
This year, the World Heritage Committee
turtle populations, scalloped hammerhead still missing, including independent monitoring regulations work on-the-ground cannot be
will once again assess whether Australia has
sharks, many seabird populations and of fishing operations and measures to stop overstated. Areas of great need are:
delivered on its promises. Has the Australian
possible declines in some dolphin species threatened species such as dugong and sawfish • Adequate education and extension Government met the 2020 targets promised the
• some ecological processes critical for the being caught in gillnets.
• Compliance Committee?
Reef’s survival - reef building and coral
recruitment
viii The 2015 Vision was: To ensure the Great Barrier Reef continues to improve on its Outstanding Universal Value every decade between now and 2050 to
be a natural wonder for each successive generation to come.
vii Dja Faunal Reserve (Cameroon) is classified Critical by IUCN but is not on the List of World Heritage In Danger. ix https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/feb/27/clive-palmer-coalmine-near-great-barrier-reef-must-be-blocked-conservationists-say
22 23Table 1 is a snapshot of progress to achieve some of the targets in the Reef 2050 Plan, as presented to the
World Heritage Committee in 2015. The table focuses on very high risks identified in the GBRMPA 2019
Outlook Report.
Reef 2050 Plan: selected targets
Threat Target promised Updated Target Result 2019 GBR Threat Target promised Updated Target Result 2019 GBR
the WHC (in the Reef 2050 Outlook the WHC (in the Reef 2050 Outlook
(as of 2015) WQIP 2017-2022) Report (as of 2015) WQIP 2017-2022) Report
Climate By 2020, Australia’s Achieved, though likely Corals and coral reefs: Biodiversity By 2020, incidental No discernable trend Marine turtles:
Change emissions are 5% below assisted by COVID Grade: Very poor impacted catch of species of observed. In 2019 – Grade: Poor
2000 levelsx economic downturn in Trend: Deteriorated by fishing conservation concern is 173 marine turtles, Trend: No consistent
2020. declining. 3 dolphins and 3 trend
Sea surface
temperature: dugongs reported. (QLD Both dolphin species:
Australia’s emissions Grade: Very poor Government open data Grade: Good
were -5.7% below 2000 Trend: Deteriorated portal) Trend: Deteriorated
levels. Reef building: Impacts may be Dugong:
Grade: Poor underestimated even Grade: Poor
Trend: Deteriorated though mandatory Trend: Improved
reporting is in place.
Recruitment:
Grade: Poor GBRMPA Position
Trend: Deteriorated Statement on Fishing
Symbiosis: By 2020, populations of Dugong – Southern GBR Both dolphin species:
Grade: Poor Australian humpback population declining, Grade: Good
Trend: Deteriorated and snubfin dolphins, other QLD populations Trend: Deteriorated
dugong, and stable. (Commonwealth Dugong:
Invertebrates: loggerhead, green, SPRAT database)
Grade: Poor Grade: Poor
Trend: Deteriorated hawksbill and flatback Australian humpback Trend: Improved
turtles are stable or dolphin – No range
Water By 2018, at least a 50 By 2025, 60 per By June 2019, 25.5 per Nutrient cycling: Marine turtles:
increasing at Reef-wide wide abundance
Quality per cent reduction in cent reduction in cent Grade: Poor Grade: Poor
and regionally relevant estimate available Trend: No consistent
anthropogenic end-of- anthropogenic end-of- (GBR Water Quality Trend: Stable scales. (Commonwealth SPRAT trend
catchment dissolved catchment dissolved Report Card 2019) Sediment exposure: database)
inorganic nitrogen loads inorganic nitrogen loads Grade: Poor Australian snubfin
in priority areas, on the Trend: Stable
dolphin – No range wide
way to achieving up to
Seagrass meadows: abundance estimate
an 80 per cent reduction
Grade: Poor available. Decreasing
in nitrogen by 2025 Trend: No consistent population size is likely.
By 2018, at least a 20 By 2025, 25 per By June 2019, 14.6 per trend (Commonwealth SPRAT
per cent reduction in cent reduction in cent Invertebrates: database)
anthropogenic end- anthropogenic end-of- Grade: Poor Loggerhead turtle –
of-catchment loads of catchment fine sediment (GBR Water Quality Trend: Deteriorated Decreasing population,
sediment in priority areas, loads Report Card 2019) recently uplisted to
on the way to achieving Critically Endangered by
up to a 50 per cent IUCN (IUCN Red List)
reduction by 2025
Green turtle – Northern
By 2018, at least a 20 By 2025, 20 per By June 2019: GBR thought to be
per cent reduction in cent reduction in 13.4 % particulate decreasing. Southern
anthropogenic end- anthropogenic end-of- nitrogen GBR stable/increasing.29
of-catchment loads of catchment particulate 16.6 % particulate Hawksbill turtle –
particulate nutrients in nutrient loads phosphorus Decreasing population.30
priority areas (GBR Water Quality Flatback turtle – Data
Report Card 2019) deficient population but
By 2018, at least a 60 To protect at least 99 97.2 % of aquatic species thought to be stable
per cent reduction in per cent of aquatic protected at the end-of- (Hof, pers. comms)
end-of-catchment species at the end-of- catchments
Table 1: Reef 2050 (2015) progress to targets
pesticide loads in catchments (GBR Water Quality
priority areas Report Card 2019)
x This target is inconsistent with the protection of the Great Barrier Reef’s OUV.
24 25Advice to Policy Makers: The Way Forward
The values and attributes for which the Great Lessons from the Recent Past
Barrier Reef was inscribed are in far worse
In 2013 the Committee requested Australia to
condition now than the early part of the decade
develop a long-term sustainability plan for the
when the Committee considered the possible
Reef that:
inscription of the Great Barrier Reef on the List
of World Heritage In Danger. • Contained clearly defined criteria for success
At the time, the Committee was deeply • Addressed the direct, indirect and
concerned about industrial coastal cumulative impacts on the Reef
development and water quality on the • Contained concrete measures to ensure the
OUV of the property. Fortunately, due to the conservation of the OUV of the property
Committee’s engagement and the high-
The Committee also agreed that, in the absence of
profile Fight for the Reef campaign, industrial
substantial progress by Australia, it would consider
development was constrained.xi
listing the Great Barrier Reef on the List of World
IUCN now assesses the outlook for the property Heritage In Danger at the subsequent meeting.
to be “Critical” and GBRMPA “very poor”. The
Australia took the Committee’s concerns seriously
most significant threat is climate change. It would
and by 2015 produced the Reef 2050 Plan,
seem logical, even inevitable, that the Committee
which addressed cumulative impacts (except
should inscribe the Great Barrier Reef on the List
climate change) by setting clear actions, targets,
of World Heritage In Danger.
objectives and outcomes.
Traditionally, however, the Convention has
The Plan led to a further plan addressing one key
addressed only local threats that occur within the
threat: the Reef 2050 Water Quality Improvement
property or adjacent to it, rather than domestic
Plan. The latter contains:
greenhouse gas pollution over which a State
Party has control. Clearly defined criteria for success, e.g.
improved coral condition, improved seagrass
Despite the slow pace of improvement in water
condition, improved wetland condition
quality, IUCN found that Australia’s protection and
management of the Great Barrier Reef is “mostly Concrete measures to ensure the conservation of
effective” and gave it a “light green” traffic light the OUV of the Reef, e.g. time-bound ecologically
rating. This reflects Australia’s efforts within and relevant pollution reduction targets, time-bound
adjacent to the property to improve protection.xii best management practice adoption targets,
actions and investments
Every other site that IUCN deemed Critical had
a protection and management regime that In 2014 the Centre and IUCN advised the
scored either “significant concern/orange” or Committee that the long-term plan for the
“serious concern/red” because the threats they Reef “needs to result in concrete and consistent
face are local (for example, invasive species, management measures sufficiently robust to
poaching or logging). ensure the overall conservation of the property
and its OUV, in particular addressing major
This poses the question: What should the
drivers of reef decline such as water quality
World Heritage Committee do when the local
and climate change.”
protection and management measures are
mostly effective but values are declining and With the water quality measures in place and
the outlook is Critical? working, albeit slowly, the Committee now has
the opportunity to follow the same approach
with respect to climate change.
xi Some adverse activities such as the dumping of maintenance dredge spoil inside the property continue to occur.
© Cam White
xii For example, the North East Shipping Management Plan was developed and implemented and is continuing to meet the challenge of reducing the
risks of shipping to the property.
26 27Recommendations fully implementing and funding the However, if the Committee made such a a State of Climate Emergency until carbon
Queensland Sustainable Fisheries Strategy request and Australia complied, an In Danger neutrality is reached. It is crucial that the World
This report recommends that at its 44th session,
2017-2027, monitoring and reducing bycatch listing could be avoided. Heritage Committee, along with all other
the World Heritage Committee:
of endangered wildlife, reducing gillnet powerful international agencies, responds to
The aim is not to inscribe the Reef on the List,
1. Requests Australia to revise the Reef 2050 fishing effort and establishing more extensive the crisis within their own spheres of influence,
but to ensure that concrete measures are put
Plan to commit to ambitious domestic commercial net-free zones along the Great in the Committee’s case the protection of
in place that allow this priceless ecosystem to
emissions reduction compatible with a 1.5°C Barrier Reef coastline. the world’s outstanding natural and cultural
survive the ages.
pathway, thereby helping to limit the global treasures.
6. Requests Australia to submit to the World
average temperature increase to 1.5°C above Some may argue that it is not the World
Heritage Centre an updated report by 1
pre-industrial levels in order to protect the Heritage Committee’s role to deal with climate
December 2022 on the state of conservation of
Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) of the change mitigation at a national level, however, An Integrated Plan
the property, including on the implementation
Great Barrier Reef. the above arguments do not duplicate the A different approach for the Committee could
of the requests outlined above.
UNFCCC’s role. be to seek an integrated World Heritage
2. Requests Australia to develop a detailed plan
7. Agrees that, without substantial progress to
to achieve the above, containing: The suggested approach is consistent with the response from Australia. Climate change is
achieve the above requests, it would consider
Convention and Operational Guidelines and a current and very high threat not just to the
• Clearly defined criteria for success, i.e. the inscription of the property on the List of
State Party obligations to protect OUV. Below Great Barrier Reef, but to four other natural
time-bound greenhouse gas pollution World Heritage in Danger at its subsequent
are some further arguments to consolidate this World Heritage properties in Australia: the
reduction targets across the economy session.
suggested way forward. Greater Blue Mountains, Kakadu National Park,
compatible with a 1.5°C pathway and
Rationale Scope of domestic action: The Reef 2050 Plan
Heard and McDonald Islands and the Wet
measurable targets to increase native
Tropics of Queensland.
vegetation sinks in the Reef catchment; To protect the OUV of the Great Barrier made commitments that went beyond the
Reef as much as possible within our rapidly World Heritage property and Reef catchment, The Committee had earlier expressed concern
• Concrete measures, e.g. actions and
warming climate, the goal of the plan should such as strengthening Queensland’s native about Australia’s project by project assessment
investments that deliver on the targets and
be Australia doing its fair share to limit global vegetation laws and (in the 2018 update) of coastal developments along the Reef
timelines.
temperature rise to 1.5°C. endorsing the implementation of the coastline, and urged Australia to take a more
3. Recalls its decision of 41 COM 7 in relation Queensland Sustainable Fisheries Strategy strategic approach, developing a plan that
The IPCC identified this as a critical threshold
to Climate Change and reiterates the 2017-2027. If the OUV of the Great Barrier commits to the cumulative assessment of all
for the world’s coral reefs.
importance of all other State Parties Reef is to have any hope of being protected, coastal developments that could have an
undertaking the most ambitious At present, Australia’s Paris target of 26-28 per the scale of the corrective measures needs to impact on the OUV of the Reef.
implementation of the Paris Agreement of cent below 2005 levels by 2030 is insufficient match the scale of the threat. The Committee could request that Australia
the United Nations Framework Convention on to protect the Reef’s OUV, being compatible
with a 2-3°C rise in global temperature which Scope of international action: It is critical that develop a long-term plan that addresses the
Climate Change (UNFCCC) to protect World
all parties to the Convention undertake the cumulative impact of national greenhouse
Heritage. would destroy all World Heritage coral reefs.
most ambitious implementation of the Paris gas pollution on the OUV of all Australian
4. Urges Australia to allocate additional Australia is not even on track to meet the Agreement, through actions that are fully World Heritage properties. A national World
resources to fully meet the time-bound water target, with the latest data from December consistent with their obligations within the Heritage climate plan should contain concrete
quality targets in the Reef 2050 Water Quality 2020 showing Australia is on track to achieve World Heritage Convention to protect the OUV actions that specify how Australia will do its
Improvement Plan 2017-2022, including only a 22 per cent reduction.31 of all World Heritage properties, as agreed at fair share to limit global temperature rise to
adequate funding for education, extension The government has not even committed to the 41st session of the Committee. This must be 1.5°C to minimise future losses of Outstanding
and regulatory compliance. net zero emissions by 2050, despite more than reiterated at the next meeting of the parties, as Universal Value.
5. Requests Australia to accelerate efforts in 110 countries doing so.xiii the spirit of the Convention is one of all parties
response to the poor or deteriorating status having a common responsibility to protect the
The above recommendations are consistent
of biodiversity and species considered shared heritage of humankind.
with the Operational Guidelines under the
vulnerable to fishing, as outlined in the Convention that require Corrective Measures if Sphere of Influence: The UN Secretary-
GBRMPA 2019 Outlook Report; in particular a site is inscribed on the List of World Heritage. General has called on all countries to declare
xiii The latest science is advising that net zero emissions may be required by 2040 or sooner if the worst impacts of climate change are to be avoided.
28 29You can also read
