Australia’s Endangered Diverse Marine Ecosystem

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Climate Change
Governance
Counterarguments
Conclusion
References

Introduction

Australia is one of the most marine-dependent countries in the whole world. Australians demonstrate an ingrained proclivity to settle near the coastal regions. Unsurprisingly, the country’s most developed cities and globally renowned tourist destinations are strategically allocated along the coast. The nation derives food, energy, and other natural resources from the marine waters. Additionally, it relies on the marine environment for recreational activities. However, these benefits are facing intense environmental pressures that pile up at a rate that has convinced many people that Australia is on the verge of losing its diverse marine environment. At the center of this bleak situation is a speedy climate change whose causes and effects –human population growth and overdependence on deteriorating marine ecosystems – are becoming increasingly difficult to mitigate due to governance shortcomings.

Climate Change

Climate Change and population increase are becoming increasingly difficult to perceive distinctly, especially when the question is about the loss of a diverse marine environment. The global human population is growing fast, and lifespan has increased remarkably. This recognizable success, though commendable, comes at a great price. Population pressure has increased waste production in addition to high demand for food, energy, transport, and the marine environment, especially oceans, for recreational use. As Evans et al. (2017) observe, despite Australia having a relatively low population, the vast majority of Australians – 85 percent – live within a 100-kilometer radius of the ocean. Moreover, these residential areas are increasingly becoming urbanized, intensifying pressure on deteriorating marine environments.

Marine diversity loss as a factor of explosive global population growth is epitomized in the increased dependence of Australia’s economy on its oceans. In 2012, the Australian economy extracted $47.2 billion from marine-based industries such as tourism, energy production, and fishing – both for commercial and recreational purposes (Evans et al., 2017). This economic contribution is projected to peak at $100 billion annually by 2025 (Evans et al., 2017). From these figures, it suffices to conclude that the marine environment is one of Australia’s most precious resources. However, the progress is still unimpressive because Australia has lost 80-90% of its native vegetation since European settlement (Hallett et al., 2017). Increased urbanization and industrialization threaten to intensify the conditions that contributed to the heights of climate change hitherto recorded.

Climate change is arguably the biggest threat to Australia’s diverse marine environment. It triggers numerous environmental changes at an alarming rate – a pace too fast for many species to adapt. For example, enduring warming and drought trends have decimated 70 percent of freshwater flows in just five decades (Hallett et al., 2017). Sadly, this speedy water loss is eventually opening a floodgate of more devastating consequences. For example, Hallett et al. (2017) warn that increased evaporation will raise the salinity of estuarine environments, making hypersaline conditions more frequent and severer. Although Hallett et al.’s (2017) study focus on South-west Australia, their warning about the adverse effects of climate change are convincing. They caution that reduced rainfall will extend the closure of periodically open systems, thus hampering the detoxification and cooling of these environments is highly convincing that the marine environment is at risk.

An examination of the implications of climate change on marine ecosystems at the species level produces a bleak picture. It is often tempting to adopt a macro-level approach to environmental issues, but this methodology suffers a serious limitation. It obstructs one’s view, increasing the likelihood of incorrect generalization. To address this specific problem, Gissi et al. (2021) zoomed in on the matter to reveal that climate change intensified local human stressors at the individual species level. For instance, coral reefs continually record a reduced capacity to recover from disturbances because of the cumulative effect of climate-caused bleaching, as well as reduced calcification, increased pollution, nutrients, and sedimentation.

Governance

Australia’s marine migratory species are in danger due to numerous anthropogenic threats. Migration plays an important role in an animal’s quest for survival. Many marine species must migrate to satisfy varying biological and ecological needs. With the changing climatic conditions and the resultant conditions, many animals have to traverse unsafe territories to mate or feed and to find optimal climatic conditions. Convinced that Australia’s marine migratory species are of national significance, Miller et al. (2018) commenced an inquiry that indicted local environmental and management policies of weak integration and lack of breadth that counter-intuitively impede conservation goals. Indeed, protected area legislation and other conservation policies limited by political borders cannot be effective in protecting endangered species travel internationally. Australia risks losing many migratory species, a crucial part of the marine environment, due to chronic policy dysfunction that exposes these organisms to incalculable anthropogenic threats in unprotected areas.

Another indicator that Australia’s diverse marine environment is endangered remains discernible in the general lack of enthusiasm for conservation measures. The vehemence channeled to extracting resources from the oceans is conspicuously lacking when attention shifts to protection. Generally, the impact of activities on marine environments hinges on two principles: avoidance and mitigation. Evans et al. (2017) concede that these measures are rendered ineffective in many cases due to ineffective, or total lack thereof, management. They add that some impacts are challenging to avoid, mitigate, or assess the full impact. Amidst these difficulties and failures, climate change and debris remain the leading causes of residual risks in the marine environment.

Australia is undoubtedly losing its marine treasure due, in part, to poor governance. Many marine protection policies are highly questionable in that they seemingly serve corporate interests instead of pursuing genuine sustainability goals. For example, shark attack deterrent measures have been criticized for being lethal and adversely affecting endangered marine species, including other harmless species like turtles. The shark nets used to reduce potentially dangerous shark species before they reach recreational spaces often attract unintended consequences, such as entangling and killing sharks and non-targeted marine species (Cullen-Knox et al., 2017). Meanwhile, Australia has demonstrated a pattern of appealing to corporate demands and sometimes relents only when it is politically suicidal to adopt specific legislation.

Australia may have no prime marine environment to exploit because of the failure to make marine governance integrated, sustainable, and ethical. It is quite disturbing that existing marine protection legislation measures and implementation strategies are morally questionable and show a proclivity to stoke the fire they are intended to extinguish. Cullen-Knox et al. (2017) accused the government of sanctioning the overexploitation of certain marine species and, in response to public outcry, making rushed decisions that leave the perpetrator free to operate in other locations. These circumstances let Cullen-Knox et al. (2017) argue that the widely used processes for making decisions in the government and consulting stakeholders are outdated and unable to guarantee a participative public policy process.

The lack of a democratized policymaking process can be seen as another danger to marine diversity sustainability. Coastal environments comprise organisms, including native inhabitants. However, they are often rendered insignificant in the pursuit of economic goals conceived by foreigners or investors from other urbanized areas. Marine environments are threatened by a twisted mentality that equates development to concrete structures, thereby reducing nature to a threat worth concurring. If only some coastal inhabitants could have their say, they would prefer the areas conserved as is, in their natural conditions. Unfortunately, this request seems primitive in the 21st century.

Counterarguments

The debate about the implications of climate change on Australia’s marine life is not necessarily pessimistic. Some critics have suggested that while climate change is real, the light in which many scholars and commentators highlight it is exaggeratedly one-sided and ignores the potential benefits of the process. For example, Hallett et al.’s (2017) study predict that decreasing annual flows will reduce scouring and flushing, promoting nutrient retention and internal cycling. Additionally, Gissi et al. (2021) observed that climate change triggered effects that either intensified or mitigated the consequences of human stressors at the trophic and ecosystem levels. These arguments, along with many others, are convincing; however, they are diluted by the negative consequences of climate change that clearly outweigh many associated benefits.

Perhaps the most convincing acquittal of climate change as the precursor to the threats to the diverse marine environment is the lack of comprehensive knowledge regarding the area. In an extensive literature review, Gissi et al. (2021) examined the combined effect of climate change and local human stressors in marine ecosystems. They discovered a gaping knowledge gap and that many studies examining the cumulative effects of climate change on habitats often fail to offer accurate reflection or prediction. However, not all studies in this niche suffer from these limitations. For example, Hallett et al. (2017) conducted an extensive analysis of estuaries of southwestern Australia. Their study primarily relied on observations of the consequences of climate change. Subsequently, they predicted the consequences this changing weather will cause in the future. Interestingly, they also acknowledged that the expected impacts would not exclusively be negative. Taken together, it is believable that climate change will expose marine environments along with ecosystems to unprecedented challenges, some of which are difficult to comprehend in full scope due to limited knowledge.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Australia’s diverse marine environment faces numerous risks due to climate change, whose effects are eluding mitigation and avoidance measures due to poor governance. This paper shows that explosive human population growth has intensified pressure on the oceans, which face additional threats from pollution and global warming. Yet the existing governance systems remain reluctant to adapt to the emerging issues. Climate change poses a great threat at the individual species level by altering conditions to which the organism is accustomed. For migratory marine species, these changes can be life-threatening since they have to traverse unregulated waters in response to biological and ecological needs. Interestingly, some critics believe that cumulative climatic change might not be as bad as mostly depicted because there are some positive benefits associated with the new conditions. These pessimists proceed to fault many scholars advocating for climate change reforms as alarmists who base their convictions on flawed research. Nonetheless, the adverse consequences of climate remain observable and, so far, unsettling, demanding improved policy interventions.

References

Cullen-Knox, C., Haward, M., Jabour, J., Ogier, E., & Tracey, S. R. (2017). The social licence to operate and its role in marine governance: Insights from Australia. Marine Policy, 79, 70-77. Web.

Evans, K., Bax, N., & Smith, D. C. (2017). Australia state of the environment 2016: Marine environment, independent report to the Australian Government Minister for the Environment and Energy. Australian Government Department of the Environment and Energy.

Gissi, E., Manea, E., Mazaris, A. D., Fraschetti, S., Almpanidou, V., Bevilacqua, S., & Katsanevakis, S. (2021). A review of the combined effects of climate change and other local human stressors on the marine environment.Science of the Total Environment, 755, 1-14. Web.

Hallett, C. S., Hobday, A. J., Tweedley, J. R., Thompson, P. A., McMahon, K., & Valesini, F. J. (2018). Observed and predicted impacts of climate change on the estuaries of south-western Australia, a Mediterranean climate region.Regional Environmental Change, 18(5), 1357-1373. Web.

Miller, R. L., Marsh, H., Cottrell, A., & Hamann, M. (2018). Protecting migratory species in the Australian marine environment: A cross-jurisdictional analysis of policy and management plans. Frontiers in Marine Science, 5, 1-13. Web.

Click Here To Order Now!