The Great Barrier Reef and Climate Change

Based on a report by Hans and Ove Hoegh-Guldberg,

with tentative notes on implications for Florida Keys study

This presentation

• GBR report: background and structure• Scientific analysis: general and GBR• Regional economic analysis• Social and environmental connotations• The future• Policy implications• General approach applicable to Florida?

Some initial thoughts

2002 Background: General

• Mounting agreement on climate change

• Coral reefs are the global canaries of the 21st Century

• IPCC reports 2000-01 unanimously backed by participating scientists

• ‘Townsville Declaration’ October 2002 relating to Great Barrier Reef• Suggested remedies ranging from global to

local.

The Vostok ice core CO2 dataand current CO2

levels

GBR specific concerns• Combined impact of:• Climate change• Overfishing• Coastal pollution• Tourism.• Marine Park Authority (GBRMPA) aware and

managing problems• Concerns successfully articulated by WWF

Queensland and backed by Queensland Tourism Industry Council.

Initial responses to proposal• GBRMPA and Queensland Government

favourable• Favourable response and backing from

Queensland Tourism Industry Council• Initial backing from commercial fisheries

interests subsequently withdrawn• (Coinciding with GBRMPA work towards

greatly increased no-catch area)• Funded by several Federal and Queensland

government departments

Selection of authors• Previous cooperation between Ove and Hans

on 2000 Pacific in Peril study for Greenpeace • Greenpeace wanted economic impact analysed

following a previous scientific report by Ove. Hans added scenario planning to the approach

• WWF GBR campaign manager Imogen Zethoven wanted similar approach, with due emphasis on socio-economic side.

• This provided an opportunity to refine the combined science/ economics/scenario-planning approach for the GBR study

GBR study objectives• Reasonably straightforward:• To present scientific evidence, socio-

economic evidence and future implications• Leading to policy implications and

recommendations ranging from global to local.

• Peer-reviewed 350-page report published in early 2004.

In summary, the GBR study was:• A cooperation between coral reef scientist Ove

Hoegh-Guldberg and cultural and ecological economist Hans Hoegh-Guldberg

• Main initiative from WWF Australia, which obtained government funding of project

• Ove and Hans previously cooperated on a Greenpeace study of Pacific Island nations

• Both studies combined scientific evidence and socio-economic analysis; scenario-planning analysis of possible futures was introduced in Pacific study and refined in GBR study.

Four parts of GBR Study

• Part 1: The scientific evidence (Ove)• Part 2: Regional analysis (economic, social,

ecological – Hans)• Part 3: The future (Hans with a healthy dash

of Ove, especially on GBR fisheries)• Part 4: Policy recommendations (both)• Structure should work for Florida study,

suggest testing through scoping phase

Scientific evidence – general • Global warming intensifying in 21st Century• Biological systems already responding to

minimal warming to date (0.6-0.8oC)• Coral reefs early indicator of climate change

as thermal thresholds have been increasingly exceeded since 1979

• Exacerbated by coastal land practices, overfishing and marine pollution potentially causing removal of 50% of world’s reefs over next 30-50 years.

GBR specifics

• Well-managed reef ecosystem but threatened by coastal land and fisheries practices (which government is acting upon)

• Expected temperature change 21st Century 2-6oC

• Coral not sufficiently adaptive and can’t exchange larvae over hundreds of miles

• Thermal stress of 5 degree heating months would remove majority of coral

• Likely to be reached on annual basis by 2050• Coral cover <5% by 2050, replaced by

macroalgae and cyanobacteria.

Some main economic impacts

• Reef-based tourism through changing environmental quality

• Commercial fisheries through changing fish community structure and abundance

• Recreational fishing (treasured social activity)• Subsistence gathering (significant Indigenous

population, especially in Far North region)• Bio-prospecting (also threatened in adjacent

Daintree National Park)• Coastal protection requirements.

Principles of regional analysis• Part 2 of report• Focus on all elements, not just economic• Bridge to scenario planning (Part 3) which is

based on all factors whether or not statistical• Factors may be Socio/cultural, Technological,

Ecological, Economic and Political (‘STEEP’)• Economic theory is evolving (in secret

apparently) to encompass the long term• Practice, such as national accounting and

valuation techniques, lagging behind theory• Sustainability, resilience and attempting to

‘value the invaluable’ (ecosystems)

Economic and demographic data• Five regions along GBR from Far North around

Cairns to Wide Bay-Burnett in south• Total population just over 1 million (2004)• 26% of Queensland population• Regional GDP data, official and other industry

statistics on main reef-dependent industries (tourism and fisheries)

• Useful research (mainly James Cook University, CRC Reef)

• Tourism by far the dominant industry (Far North especially), but fisheries, including recreational, has big ‘social’ significance

The value of tourism• Tourism is dominant ‘reef-dependent’ industry (but

its adaptability is well-known)• Directly contributes 7% to GDP and 10% to

employment along GBR (+ multiplier effects)• 14% to GDP in Far North region• Major node of tourism (especially international)

around Cairns and Port Douglas• Minor node Whitsunday Islands• Estimated reef-interested tourism spending 64% of

total tourism spending in GBR regions • Varying from 90% in Far North and 72% in

Whitsundays to 23% in Wide Bay-Burnett

Total and reef-interested tourism spending. GBR regions

Social indicators• Not well developed from official indicators,

and nothing specific from GBRMPA• Australian Bureau of Statistics Index of Social

Disadvantage shows these regions slightly worse off than Australian average

• More apparent than real as lifestyle factors not well covered in index, and some like percentage of older people and Indigenous population may exaggerate ‘disadvantage’

• Localities with high tourism better off and Wide Bay-Burnett worse off – probably real.

Environmental factors• Coastal management crucial issue: runoff

from grazing, pesticides and herbicides, especially from sugar cane (Cairns, Whitsunday coast, Mackay, Wide Bay-Burnett)

• Fisheries• Tourism• Potential mining activities (there is oil)• Shipping accidents waiting to happen• Encapsulated in Townsville Declaration

Townsville Declaration 2002• 17 leading Australian and international scientists

meeting in Townsville, Queensland• Global warming will accelerate• In excess of coral survival threshold• Increase resilience by curbing overfishing and

pollution (subsequent GBRMPA rezoning to 33% no-take areas)

• Coral reefs (global canary) already affected by climate change

• Clear need to reduce rate of global warming

Scenario planning (Part 3)

• A strategic tool designed to cope with unpredictability

• Selecting a range of plausible futures• Scenarios are stories about the future,

which can then be supplemented with numerical projections

• They incorporate all ‘STEEP’ factors: socio-cultural, technological, ecological, economic and political

The four SRES 2000 scenarios

Our scenarios were derived from the four main SRES 2000 ‘marker’ scenarios

GBR report versions of scenarios

• A1: Full speed ahead as far as possible (economic – global)

• A2: Heterogeneous regionalisation (economic – regional)

• B1: Global policy reform (environmental – global)

• B2: Regional sustainability (environmental – regional)

Quantitative SRES scenarios to 2100: A1 (three variants), A2, B1 and B2

Summarised on next slide

Summary of SRES assumptions• Population: A2 $15B by 2100, B2 $10B (too

high?), A1, B1 peaks at <$9B mid-century, reducing to $7B

• GDP: A1 implausibly high, A2 high, B1 high, A2 and B2 lower (B2 too low?)

• GDP per head: Ditto; very low B2 (too low?)• CO2 emissions: A2: Rising to 4x current level, A1

marker peaks mid-century then reduces to 2x current level by 2100, B1 peaks before mid-century then reduces to current level by 2080; B2 rises throughout to 2x current level

SRES strengths

• Direct link to climate change models• Most stories are plausible• Stories linked to numerical projections of CO2

emissions, population growth and GDP• Can check for internal consistency and sense• Can be extended to individual countries and

regions as in GBR report

SRES weaknesses • Regional base demographics need improving • Lumping Japan with Australia/NZ (‘Pacific OECD’)

is not a good projection base• A1 in particular suffers from chosen assumption of

developing country ‘catch-up’ • Exchange rate based comparison exaggerates

poor and rich country difference (World Bank uses purchasing power parity (PPP))

• Gap between GDP and GDP per head in the two environmental marker scenarios may be too big (population forecast B2 too high?)

SRES modified for GBR report• A1 fading into B1 from mid-century to lessen

implausible A1 growth 2050-2100• B2 fading into B1 from mid-century, as strong

local community concern for ecology (B2) becomes generally accepted (global B1)

• Many ideas derived from scenario planning workshops (Port Douglas, Townsville and Brisbane)

• We will be less hesitant making changes to main scenario source in future!

Scenario construction

Successive narratives for world (developed from SRES 2000), Australia, Queensland and Great Barrier Reef (with input from scenario planning workshops), followed by narratives for …….

Benthic & pelagic fisheries, trawling,

aquaculture; recreational fishing

Domestic and international tourism, total

and reef

Impact on Queensland

coastal regions

Base projections(Productivity Commission

Report on GBRcatchment 2003)

Projected regional reductions from base, 2010, 2020: tourism, fisheries, regional multiplier, Gross Regional Product (GRP)

Estimated regional industry loss to 2020, four scenarios; differences due to intensify in subsequent years

Implications for Florida • General approach has been tested• Elements (scientific input; socio-economic input;

future implications using alternative scenarios) seem logical

• The first two could be undertaken simultaneously or in tandem; both need to precede futures study

Tentative issues for scoping study• Socio-economic data and investigations available now• Coordinate with planned 2005-06 NOAA importance-

satisfaction Keys surveys • Identification of reef-dependent industries (tourism,

fisheries, other?)• Tourism industry structure in different Keys sectors• Which region or regions are affected? (Apart from

Monroe County, Broward and Miami-Dade?)• Need for a ‘feel’ for possible futures of reef deterioration• Build-up of a view of total study (outcome of scoping

study but inputs needed from outset)

Bleaching of inner GBR reefs, 1998

© GBR Marine Park Authority

Presented by Hans Hoegh-Guldberg, co-author with Ove Hoegh-Guldberg of The Implications of Climate Change for Australia’s Great Barrier Reef,

www.wwf.org.au/News_and_information/News_room/viewnews.php?news_id=65