Australia Boosts Spending to Keep Great Barrier Reef off "in Danger" List

The money will help with issues like water quality and ecosystem health, but activists say it's not enough

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

By Colin Packham

SYDNEY, Dec 2 (Reuters) - Australia will spend A$1.3 billion ($965.3 million) in the next five years to improve the water quality and wellbeing of the Great Barrier Reef to prevent the World Heritage Site being placed on the United Nation's "in danger" list.

But activists say the money - in addition to the A$1 billion fund announced earlier - is insufficient and want the government to take more concrete action to protect the reef.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


A negative rating for the Great Barrier Reef - located off the country's north east coast - would be embarrassing for the Australian government and damage its lucrative tourism industry.

In the first progress report to the UN's scientific arm, UNESCO, after it stopped short earlier this year of listing the reef as "in danger", Australia said it would spend A$1.3 billion improving the world's largest living ecosystem.

Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull pledged a A$1 billion fund for the Great Barrier Reef in June.

Much of the accelerated spending will address water quality and ecosystem health, Australia said in the UNESCO report, including programmes to minimise spillage of chemicals from farming and tightening oversight of connected waterways.

UNESCO will now consider the progress but if it is not satisfied with Australia's performance, it could place the Great Barrier Reef on the "in danger" list.

"This report will hopefully see Australia stay off the UNESCO in danger watch list," said Josh Frydenberg, Australia's minister for the environment and energy.

Environmental groups, which believe the reef needs more investment than the government has committed to, criticised the progress report, coming just days after confirmation of significant damage.

"It is unacceptable that this government is now congratulating itself over its handling of the reef's health during that same period without promising any meaningful improvement," said Shani Tager, reef campaigner, Greenpeace Australia.

Earlier this week, Australian scientists said two-thirds of a 700-km (435 miles) stretch of coral within the Great Barrier Reef has been killed in the past nine months, the worst die-off ever recorded on the World Heritage site.

Their finding of the die-off in the reef's north is a major blow for tourism at the reef which, according to a 2013 Deloitte Access Economics report, attracts about A$5.2 billion ($3.9 billion) in spending each year.

Climate scientists argue that increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere traps heat radiating from earth, creating global warming and damaging coral. Australia is one of the largest carbon emitters per capita because of its reliance on coal-fired power plants for electricity.

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe