26/07/2021

(AU The Conversation) Not Declaring The Great Barrier Reef As ‘In Danger’ Only Postpones The Inevitable

The Conversation -  |  | 

Shutterstock

Authors
  • , PSM, Adjunct Senior Research Fellow, ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies, James Cook University
  • , Associate Professor, James Cook University
  • , Distinguished Professor, James Cook University
After much anticipation, the World Heritage Committee on Friday decided against listing the Great Barrier Reef as “in danger”.

The decision ignored the recommendation of the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and the UNESCO World Heritage Centre — a recommendation based on analyses by Australian scientific experts of the reef’s declining condition.

In many ways, the outcome from the committee was expected. The Australian government fought very hard against this decision, including lobbying all the committee members, as it has done in previous years.

There was consensus among most of the 21 committee members to not apply the in-danger listing at this time. Instead, Australia has been requested to host a joint UNESCO/IUCN monitoring mission to the reef and provide an updated report by February, 2022.

This decision has only postponed the inevitable. It does not change the irrefutable evidence that dangerous impacts are already occurring on the Great Barrier Reef. Some, such as coral bleaching and death from marine heatwaves, will continue to accelerate.

The reef currently meets the criteria for in-danger listing. That’s unlikely to improve within the next 12 months.

Political distractions

Last month, the World Heritage Committee released its draft decision to list the reef as in-danger, noting the values for which the reef was internationally recognised had declined due to a wide range of factors. This includes water pollution and coral bleaching.

The draft decision had expressed concerns that Australia’s progress:
has been largely insufficient in meeting key targets of the Reef 2050 Plan [and the] deterioration of the ecological processes underpinning the [Reef has] been more rapid and widespread than was previously evident.
A photo depicting two threats to the Great Barrier Reef: coal ships anchored near Abbot Point and a flood plume from the Burdekin River (February 2019); such plumes can carry pollutants and debris to the Great Barrier Reef. Matt Curnock

In response, the government claimed it was “blindsided”, and said the UNESCO Secretariat hadn’t followed due process in recommending the decision. It also suggested there had been undue interference from China in making the draft recommendation.

These were political distractions from the real issues. During last night’s debate, one committee member strongly refuted the claims about interference from China and expressed concerns the dialogue had become unnecessarily politicised.

Following the draft decision, the intense campaign to reverse the decision began, with environment minister Sussan Ley undertaking a whirlwind visit to numerous countries to meet with ambassadors.

The government even hosted international ambassadors from 13 countries and the EU, taking them on a snorkelling trip. And it reported an increase in coral cover over the past two years as good news, ignoring the fact the assessment had cautioned the recovery was driven by weedy coral species most vulnerable to future climate impacts.

This wasn’t the first time Australia has undertaken significant levels of diplomatic lobbying of World Heritage Committee members to gain support for its position.

In 1999, Australia also strongly opposed the recommended in-danger listing of Kakadu National Park, following the Jabiluka mine proposal. This led to an extraordinary meeting of the committee being convened in Paris, specifically to discuss this matter.

Australia is expected to hand in an updated report on the reef in February 2022. Shutterstock
More focus on climate change
During its current meeting, the World Heritage Committee approved the draft UNESCO Climate Action Policy, which will guide the protection and conservation of World Heritage sites.

This policy will be ratified at the UN General Assembly later this year, but the fact it’s still a draft was one of several excuses the Australian government made as to why the reef should not be “singled out”.

The reef is one of the most iconic marine protected areas on the planet. Given Australia continues to have one of the highest per capita emission rates in the world, and has more capacity to address climate change than most other countries, it makes sense for the spotlight to be on Australia’s actions.

Marine heatwaves and water pollution are major threats to the Great Barrier Reef. Shutterstock

Not surprisingly, climate change was the central issue during the committee’s debate last night. UNESCO is now more focused on climate change than ever before, recognising the “window of opportunity to act” is now.The delegates broadly agreed climate change remains the most serious threat, not just to the Great Barrier Reef but also to many other iconic World Heritage properties. Venice, for example, also dodged a potential in-danger listing at this meeting.

Rather than making challenging decisions now, it’s clear the committee is simply kicking the can down the road. Some committee members remarked during the meeting about the need to “maintain the credibility of the Convention” and acknowledged that the world is watching. The spotlight on the reef, and on Australia, will only intensify in coming years.

The government’s own report from 2019 shows many of the values for which the reef was inscribed on the World Heritage list in 1981 have declined in recent decades. Yet every delay weakens Australia’s claim it is doing all it can to protect the reef.

Later this year, the next major international climate summit will be held in Glasgow, Scotland, where even more attention will be placed on Australia’s inadequate actions.

An in-danger listing is not a punishment

It’s important to remember that throughout the meeting, UNESCO and the committee made it clear an in-danger listing is not a sanction or punishment. Rather, it’s a call to the international community that a World Heritage property is under threat, thereby triggering actions to protect it for future generations.

Now, more than ever, it is important to expand efforts to reduce the locally manageable impacts, such as poor water quality, while rapidly accelerating action on climate change.

These efforts must occur locally, nationally and globally. Reducing greenhouse gas emissions is critical to stop the worst of the impacts now unfolding, not just on the reef, but on all the world’s natural and cultural heritage.

Links
at No comments:

(AU SBS) Australia Accused Of ‘Censoring Science’ After Great Barrier Reef Avoids World Heritage ‘In Danger’ Listing

SBS - Rashida Yosufzai | Biwa Kwan

Federal Environment Minister Sussan Ley says lobbying almost 20 nations led to the outcome as parties were convinced by the "merits of our argument". But scientists say they are concerned politics has eclipsed the science.

An undated photo of the Great Barrier Reef near the Whitsunday, Australia. Source: Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority

The Australian government has praised the United Nations World Heritage Committee for its decision to avoid adding the Great Barrier Reef to the World Heritage list of 'in danger' sites. 

But scientists have voiced concerns over the decision, saying assessments conducted on the ground painted a clear picture of the threats it faced.

After hold a series of face-to-face meetings in Europe with committee members, Environment Minister Sussan Ley presented Australia's case on Friday evening, winning support from 19 of the 21 members on the committee.


Read More

Great Barrier Reef avoids UNESCO 'in danger' listing after Australian lobbying effort
The committee, meeting online in China's Fuzhou city, voted to delay any decision on the reef's status until 2023. 

Australia has been asked to provide an updated report on the state of reef by February 2022 and the committee said it is interested in a monitoring mission to visit Australia to study the reef's current condition.

Ms Ley said the decision "was a good one" and a recognition of the strength of the federal government's argument. 

"In meeting almost 20 countries virtually or in-person, the merits of our argument won the day," she told SBS News.

"I can honestly say that. Because we said that this 'in danger' listing makes no sense without a site visit, without consultation and without the latest science. Those points were well understood."

'Stop censoring science'

Scientists who have been monitoring the Great Barrier Reef said they are concerned that politics has eclipsed the scientific analysis. 

ANU Emeritus Professor Will Steffen said the scientific assessments conducted on the ground paint a clear picture of the threat facing the Great Barrier Reef.

“Australia must stop censoring science, and start taking the steps to help protect the Reef. This is history repeating itself," said Prof Steffen, who is also a Climate Council spokesman.

 An undated photo of Hardy Reef, part of the Great Barrier Reef. Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority
"In 2015, I reviewed a UNESCO report on climate change and World Heritage sites, which included the Great Barrier Reef. In the final report, all mention of the Reef was cut completely, after the Australian government successfully pressured UNESCO to remove any reference to it.

"This censorship of science is wrong, but sadly a common tactic used by this government. It’s wasting time and effort that we can’t afford to waste."

Dr Dean Miller, Director of the Great Barrier Reef Legacy, spent the last month surveying and documenting the climate change impacts on the reef.

"It seems politics has won the day, not the Great Barrier Reef," he said.

"You can improve the water quality, kill many crown-of-thorns starfish, and replant as many corals as you like, but when the heat stress events driven by a changing climate hit the corals have nowhere to hide. You can't address one without the other. It's coral or coal. It could not be any simpler."

Government defends management of Great Barrier Reef

The Great Barrier Reef has come very close to being added to the 'in danger' list over the years, including in 2015.

Last month, the federal government said it was dissatisfied with the recommendation from the World Heritage Centre and the International Union for the Conservation of Nature to add the Great Barrier Reef to the 'in danger' list.

The groups said the reef's recovery plan needed to include "clear commitments to address threats from climate change" to match the obligations of the Paris climate agreement.

Environment Minister Sussan Ley says the World Heritage Committee decision "was a good one". AAP 
A series of mass coral bleaching events in 2016, 2017 and 2020 destroyed half of the shallow-water corals, depleting the rate of coral reproduction. 

Ms Ley said Australia's management of the reef is at a high level and that the main reason the Reef was even being considered for an 'in danger' listing was the impact of climate change. 

"There was really good recognition around the World Heritage Committable table that Australia is doing an incredible amount to manage our Reef with $3 billion of investment - that Australia should not be singled out for a climate change reason when the whole world is dealing with the climate change effect on World Heritage properties," she said.

She said committee members were receptive to the argument that Australia did not belong in the same category of countries on the World Heritage 'in danger' list for being "recalcitrant" in its obligations to protect a World Heritage site. 

"An 'in danger' listing would have made no sense. And that is why overwhelmingly the consensus of the meeting was that 'in danger' should not appear anyway on the decision that came out of that meeting. 

"Because the issue that confronts the World Heritage Committee - the reason why we had that recommendation in the first place - is global climate change. 

"Now, we are a Paris signatory. We are meeting and beating our targets. We are 1.3 per cent of global emissions. But we are also working with technology internationally to hasten the take-up of low emissions technology, of carbon capture. We are well and truly playing our part."

Read More

Government 'blindsided' after UNESCO recommends listing Great Barrier Reef as 'in danger'
Ms Ley said the federal government had invested $3 billion in recovery projects and the Reef 2050 plan.

"An in-danger listing is about how the country manages its site. And the way we manage our site is outstanding - as was recognised. 

"So the issue is we are continuing to spend record amounts managing, looking after and caring for our Barrier Reef."

Queensland Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk said she would like to see increased funding to match the state government's spending of $2 billion on renewable energy, $270 million on water quality, and $500 million on land restoration.

"Today sets a clear timeline now the for the federal government to show that it’s acting to protect the Great Barrier Reef.

"The eyes of the world are watching – especially with the 2032 Olympic Games. More has to be done."
Australia has committed to a target to reduce emissions by between 26 and 28 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030.

Climate change scientists have calculated that to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, Australia would need to almost triple its 2030 pledge to a 74 per cent emissions reduction on 2005 levels.

Under a scenario of 1.5 degrees Celsius of global warming, up to 90 per cent of the world's corals will perish, according to a 2019 UN report.

Links
at No comments:

(Surviving C21) Our Existential Crisis: What Is To Be Done?

Surviving C21 - Julian Cribb

 
Author
Julian Cribb is an Australian author and science communicator.
He is a fellow of the Royal Society for the Arts, the Australian Academy of Technological Science (ATSE) and the Australian National University Emeritus Faculty.
He is a Member (AM) of the Order of Australia (General Division).
The accompanying article is the text of a speech given by him to Australia21, July 2021.
Quarter of a century ago, as a science writer, I began encountering a lot of rather depressed scientists.

Every day they went to work and grappled with data showing that the Earth was falling apart.

Species were vanishing at accelerating rates, poisons were spreading unchecked, the climate becoming more violent, oceans fouled and lifeless and vital resources like soil, water, fish, large animals and forests were disappearing.

The scientists were soon joined by concerned grandparents. Then the grandparents were joined by a multitude of millennials and young people and finally by many educated people of all ages and backgrounds,

Many of these fear that we are in the endgame of human history.

As a journalist, I didn’t know for a fact whether this was true or not. But I knew I could find out, by studying the world’s best science, from the finest institutions and leading minds.

The result was a book, ‘Surviving the 21st Century’ which concluded humanity faces an existential crisis consisting of ten, interconnected, mega-threats all bearing down on us at the same time.

These threats cannot be solved one by one, as solving one threat generally makes others worse. They must all be solved together, at the same time, using cross-cutting solutions that make none of them worse.

These findings have informed the establishment of the Council for the Human Future.

Here is a brief review of what the latest science is saying about each of the megathreats:

EXTINCTION: the current mass extinction rate is 1,000-10,000 times higher than natural background rates. It is currently proceeding three times faster than the event that took out the dinosaurs. It is entirely due to humans. It may be the second worst such event in Earth history. The loss of species at such a rate is predicted to cause the collapse of ecosystems that sustain human life.

CLIMATE: Despite moves to limit carbon emissions in Europe and the US, the rest of the world is increasing them. They rose even during the covid lockdown. Currently they total 37 billion tonnes and will soar as economic activity picks up.  CO2 concentrations are the highest in human history at 419ppm, and NASA has just warned that the Earth is now trapping twice as much heat as it did in 2005. The icecaps are melting and sea levels rising much faster than predicted. 1.5 degrees is now seen by many scientists as a politically unattainable target. We are on track for +4 degrees by 2100. At this level the world will lose about a third of its agriculture, creating famines, mass migration and wars. Heatwaves will kill millions. There are 3-5 trillion tonnes of frozen methane in the Earth’s crust, vastly more powerful as a climate driver than CO2: if this gets loose we are, quite literally, cooked.

POLLUTION: The world produces <220 billion tonnes of chemical emissions yearly – five times more than our climate emissions. They will double by 2030. There are 350,000 manufactured chemicals, most never tested for human safety. These toxins are in our air, our food, our water, our homes and workplaces. Deaths from chemical poisoning and disease are between 9 and 12 million a year, making this the worst case of mass homicide in human history. It is damaging human IQ and causing pandemics of brain disease and cancers. Very little is presently being done to prevent it.

RESOURCES: The world is entering a freshwater crisis, with over half the human population facing acute scarcity by 2050. Losses of topsoil now amount to 48-75 billion tonnes a year and will halve the food growing area by mid-century. The world has lost over a third of its forests and they continue to shrink at 10 million hectares per year. 90 per cent of the world’s fish stocks are now overfished. The number of ocean dead zones has tripled since the 1950s. Humanity now uses a full year’s resources in just 8 months.

NUCLEAR WEAPONS: The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists has set the Doomsday Clock at 100 seconds to midnight – the highest threat level since the H-bomb fell on Japan. “Modernisation of nuclear programs in multiple countries have moved the world into less stable and manageable territory. Development of hypersonic glide vehicles, ballistic missile defences, and flexible weapons-delivery systems may raise the probability of miscalculation. Governments in the United States, Russia, and other countries appear to consider nuclear weapons more-and-more usable, increasing the risks of their actual use.” The Bulletin rates the nuclear threat as far worse than Covid-19.

PANDEMIC DISEASE: There have been six pandemics since 2000 (Flu H1N1, MERS, SARS, Ebola, and Covid. HIV continues to rage). On average a new pandemic arises every 2-3 years. Primary drivers are environmental destruction, overpopulation, air travel and scientific error. The resumption of travel will increase their spread. New plagues are unavoidable so long as populations remains high and densely packed. Some will be more deadly than Covid.

POPULATION: World population is just shy of 8 billion and growing at a net rate of 85m or 1% a year. Urban population is 4.4 billion and megacities are at increasing risk of collapse due to water scarcity, fragile food chains and failing infrastructure. Global fertility rates are still 2.4, about 0.2 above ‘replacement’. The UNPD’s median forecast has the population peaking in the 2060s and starting to decline naturally towards 2100 from around 10 billion – five times what the Earth can support sustainably. However, most governments, afraid of an ageing population, continue to bribe their people to have more children. 

FOOD INSECURITY: The world food supply is on a knife-edge. Loss of access to fresh water, loss of topsoil and a more hostile climate mean that agriculture will be unable to supply humanity’s needs from the mid-century on. There will be an increase in droughts, famines, pests, refugee crises and wars. Despite this, the world clings to an outdated model for food production when other, far safer, healthier and more effective means to produce food exist. The modern industrial diet is now implicated in 2 out of every 3 deaths.

UNCONTROLLED TECHNOLOGIES: Dangerous new technologies such as artificial intelligence, robotic killing machines, synthetic biology and quantum computers are proliferating without public oversight or government control.  

MASS DELUSION: The most deadly aspect of these combined threats is mass ignorance, disinformation and the rise in false beliefs. The four greatest belief systems – money, politics, religion and the human narrative – are all founded on delusion.

Together, these ten megathreats add up to the greatest existential challenge humans have ever faced.

However, it is a challenge than can be solved. We have the brains and the technology to solve it. But we do not yet have the institutions, the awareness or the collective will.

Here, for example, are some of the most urgent solutions:
  1. Outlaw all nuclear weapons, eliminate their stockpiles and safely recycle or bury their materials.
  2. End all extraction and use of fossil fuels and their byproducts, pesticides, plastics and petrochemicals by 2030. Replace with renewable energy. Rewild half the Earth’s land area.
  3. Create a circular global economy in which every resource is recycled and nothing is lost, wasted or allowed to pollute.
  4. Develop a renewable world food system consisting of:
  5. Regenerative agriculture
  6. Urban food systems that recycle water and nutrients
  7. Deep ocean farming of plants, fish and marine animals. (See Food or War)
  8. Return half of the world’s current farmlands to forest or wilderness to end the 6th Extinction. Create a Stewards of the Earth program to implement it.
  9. Create a new Human Right Not to Be Poisoned and a Clean Up the Earth Alliance (see Earth Detox), to eliminate all forms of toxic pollution. Introduce a global inventory and universal safety testing of all manufactured chemicals.
  10. Introduce a world plan to progressively and voluntarily reduce the human population by 75 per cent by 2120.
  11. Prevent future pandemics by ending environmental destruction (5), banning dangerous scientific experiments, discouraging global travel, creating early warning systems and reducing world population (7).
  12. Put Women in Charge. Unlike men, women do not start wars, wreck oceans, fell forests, ruin landscapes, pollute and poison. They do care about the needs of future generations.
  13. Introduce a global megarisk awareness and education platform, as proposed by the Council.
The challenge facing humanity is vast – but solutions are both feasible and available.

The question is whether humans have the intelligence to adopt them.

At present no government on Earth has a policy for human survival.

The mission of the Council for the Human Future is to spread these facts and solutions as fast and far as we possibly can.

Our purpose is to help save literally billions of lives that will otherwise be needlessly sacrificed.

Links
at No comments: