Position Statement
The development of the tourism industry depends on the level of satisfaction of the visitors and hence, the changing needs and preferences of the visitors influence the emergence of new policies and plans in the tourism development. At the present time, the tourism development elucidates the introduction of a plan for the newly emerging issue of coral bleaching. Due to an enhanced number of visitors in the Great Barrier Reef, a huge percentage of nutrients, sediment and other pollutants enter reef waters. Hence, the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority (GBPMPA) is responsible for the ecologically sustainable use, long-term protection and enjoyment of Great Barrier Reef for the Australian communities through the care and development of Marine Park. The GBRMPA is an Australian Government statutory authority and reports to the Australian Government Minister for sustainability, care, control and development of Great Barrier Reef (Gbrmpa.gov.au 2018).
The prime roles and responsibilities of the authority are to address the key risks that affect the outlook of the Great Barrier Reef and ensure that the management practices the sustainable use of the Great Barrier Reef. Thereby, it can be stated that the authority is fully responsible for the maintenance of ecological factors so as to protect the marine area effectively. Hence, in terms of values, it can be stated that the organisation endeavours to work collaboratively and display innovation and objectivity in the decision making to reach the objective effectively and efficiently. From this perspective, it can be stated that the prime objective of the study is to introduce a policy and planning approach that aims to provide long-term protection and conservation of the coral and the environment of entire Marine Park of the Great Barrier Reef and the World Heritage Area by utilising an effective ecosystem-based management approach (Oceanservice.noaa.gov, 2018). In addition to this, the goal of the policy is to allow public enjoyment and appreciation and recreational, cultural and economic activities and assist in meeting the international responsibilities of Australia under World Heritage Convention (Unwto.org 2018).
At the present time, the tourism development is highly affected due to the emergence of Coral Bleaching in the Great Barrier Reef and hence this section aims to identify the key drivers of the issue such as economic, social, cultural and other factors that influence the issue abruptly. Great Barrier Reef can be referred to as the world’s largest coral reef system composed of around 3000 individual reefs of coral. According to the viewpoint of Hoegh-Guldberg & Ridgway (2016), around 1.6 million visitors visit the aforementioned GBR each year. Thereby, it is worth mentioning that the tourism on the reef and the adjacent coastal area employs around 47,000 people (around 3 million people annually) and thereby, it is worth over Aus$4 billion each of the years. However, it is worth mentioning that the appearance of the coral bleaching in the Great Barrier Reef is highly impacted the tourism development. While the sustainable tourism is the prime goal of the management of the GBRMPA, the emergence of the tourism has some of the negative impact on the reef, both environmental and social. It is worth noting that, as the reef in the aforementioned marine protected area continues to suffer the effects of insignificant coral bleaching, international visitors are likely to find elsewhere for their holidays (Hughes et al. 2017). This kind of practice has a potential impact on the growth of the tourism industry and thereby, impacting the growth of the country’s GDP rate negatively.
Background Context
With the changing number of visitors and their trends and preferences, the coral bleaching can be predicted to become more severe and frequent. According to the viewpoint of Stuart-Smith et al. (2018), the sea activity of the tourists in the marine protected area of Great Barrier Reef is increasing and this increment enhances the coral stress which in turn influences the corals’ vulnerability to bleach. There are some of the key drivers that influence the growth of the coral bleaching issue in the tourism development and these factors can be provided in the following section.
Social factors have the significant impact on the coral damage and thereby, influencing the coral bleaching incidents in the marine protected area. As for instance, it can be marked that range of recreational activities such as Scuba, Snorkelling and trampling have a significant impact on the coral damage. The lack of experience and enhanced number of visitors are performing as the catalyst of the coral damage. However, Wolanski et al. (2017) argued that the damage of coral influences the visitors’ attraction and thereby influence the growth of the tourism.
Apart from the social factors, the cultural factors can perform as one of the key drivers of the aforementioned issue. Hence, as opined by Lewis et al. (2018), fishing practices are one of the cultural factors of the domestic people of Australia and these fishing practices have a devastating impact on the emergence of the coral bleaching issue. The destructive fishing practices such as cyanide and blast fishing provide the ill impact on the coral reefs through the toxic chemical. Apart from this, as argued by Scott & Hoey (2017), bottom dragging gear such as beach seines has a negative impact on the corals by fracturing and abrasion. In addition to this, in the Great Barrier Reef, the seafloor trawling by the travellers for scallops and prawns causes the localised extinction of some of the coral species.
With increased population, transport system and improved storage, the impacts of travellers on the coral reefs have grown exponentially. As for instance, the supplying demand for the reef resources and markets of coral have become global and this has a significant impact on the coral damage potentially. The reef that is closed proximity to the travellers’ invasion can face a range of stresses such as poor water quality, pollution from land-based sources and others. As claimed by Becken et al. (2017), around 93% of the reef was affected in the year 2016 and near about 22% of its coral has died due to the low quality of water. Further, the industrial pollutant grows the coral polyps that influence the growth of the coral reefs in the aforementioned marine protected area negatively. As a result of this, the attraction of visitors is decreasing. Around 175,000 visitors could be put off to visit Australia because of such coral bleaching. It costs the country around £ 616 million (that is AU $1 billion) loss in revenue (Greatbarrierreef.org 2018).
Social factors
In addition to the cultural and social factors, the introduction of different facilities for enhancing the number of visitors can influence the growth of the coral bleaching in the marine protected areas. Coastline development has a significant impact on the coral damage (Austrade.gov.au, 2018). Due to attract a lot of visitors, the tourism industry practices coastline development that used to damage the coral reef unintentionally. Further, it is worth mentioning that the artificial beach creation in the marine park can result in the sedimentation and runoff that washes into sea water. Around 19% of the world’s coral reefs have lost permanently and around 15% is at risks in the next 10 to 20 years (Environment.gov.au 2018).
Aside from positive impacts, the advent of technology has negative impacts on the coral reefs as well. The use of the positioning satellite and the high-resolution satellite imagery technology influences the growth of the coral reefs by damaging the sides or the heads of the corals (Kamenos & Hennige 2018). Further, the use of different technologies for measuring air temperature and tide levels damage the salinity of the sea water and this, in turn, provides an ill impact on the coral reefs in terms of coral bleaching and death.
From the above-held discussion, it can be marked that the emergence of different visitor attractions influences the coral bleaching in the marine protected area heavily. As a result of this huge coral bleaching, the environmental balance is highly affected. As a result of this, it is required to introduce new policy and planning approach so that, it can be possible to protect coral reefs from bleaching as well as attract visitors to visit a coral reef. Such kind of practice can influence the growth of the country’s GDP and employment significantly. Thereby, it can be added that the issue has its own importance to have a new policy to introduce.
The rationale of the new policy that is being proposed for the emerging issue can be provided in this section so as to highlight the benefits or the outcomes of the prosed plan and policy. In this regard, this section aims to identify the need of the need of a plan or policy for protecting the coral from bleaching. From the above-held discussion, it can, therefore, be stated that the requirement of the new policy is significant as the growth of the tourism in Australia depends on the attraction of corals in the Great Barrier Reef. As opined by Piggott-McKellar & McNamara (2017), the death of the coral reefs represents a huge loss of economic condition as the government of the country losses around $35 billion annually due to the loss of domestic tourism.
Cultural factors
Further, it is worth mentioning that the commercial fishing industry is highly affected due to the coral bleaching and a number of international visitors put off to visit Great Barrier Reef due to this emerging issue. As opined by Chen et al. (2015), the reef tourism areas are at potential risks of losing around 1 million visitors annually and huge sums in the potential lost tourism revenue. Hence, it can be estimated that, because of such loss of tourists arrival, the government of Queensland faces a loss of AU$1 billion (this is around US$747 million) revenue in the year 2016. In addition to this, around 10,000 jobs in Queensland are at risks from a drop in tourism. The coral bleaching is not only impacting Australia’s status of being a premier international tourist destination but also affecting Australia’s identity as an international tourist destination. Thereby, it is worth mentioning that, the emergence of the new policy is required for enhancing the growth of the tourism industry in terms of revenue and employment.
Hence, it can be marked that the government has a significant role in the introduction of the new tourism plan and policy for protecting the coral reefs. As opined by Mortiz et al. (2017), the tourism policy needs to be created in such a way for ensuring hosting travellers by enhancing or maximising the benefits of the stakeholders, minimising the cost and negative impacts and the effects associated with the accomplishing significant destination. The government must define its roles for the sake of undertaking operative activities and measures in order to accomplish the projected financial targets of the tourism plan. On the other hand, Becken et al. (2017) argued that the state intervention does not have positive impacts on tourism development as the absence of the governmental intervention in case of the effective market economy.
Apart from the state and regional government, the particular tourism plan is associated with a range of internal and external stakeholders.
The internal stakeholders associated with the tourism policy includes the employees of GBRMPA, trade unions of GBRMPA, the financial institutions, the World Tourism Organisation (UNWTO), suppliers of the products for the welfare programs and plan implementation such as positioning satellite, high-resolution imagery technology and others.
The external stakeholders include the travellers (business travellers and visitors to tourism sites, destinations and attractions), national government and government of Queensland, Department of Environment and Energy, host community, local coastal population and non-governmental Australian organisations, industries, interest groups and border community.
Demographic factors
It is worth mentioning that, the concerned agency GBRMPA may face some of the key challenges while planning and implementing the tourism plan. The sustainable development recognises the tourism planning and policy as the driving force and proclaims sustainability in terms of basic requirements for the tourism planning and development. Hence, some of the key challenges faced by the organisation include:
- Low level of local coastal community involvement
- Low involvement of volunteers
- Lack of financial resources while implementing the plan and arrange welfare programs
- Low level of UNWTO support
Thereby, the possible reasons for government interventions in this tourism plan can be provided.
- The government can combat the tourism plan an essential one through the regulation, subsidiaries and taxation
- Another reason for government intervention is the promotion of the national unity and the advancement to protect the coral reefs from bleaching
In addition to this, the other reasons for government intervention can be provided in the following section.
The government needs to intervene for the sake of minimising the damage caused by occurring economic events. In case of regulating the tourism plan for protecting coral reefs, it is required to have government intervention through subsidiaries and manipulation of the fund’s supply in order to minimise the harsh impact of several economic forces on constituents of stakeholders.
It is worth mentioning that, the GBRMPA would require financial resources so as to implement the policy in order to promote tourism as well as protect corals from bleaching. Further, it is essential for the agency to consider some of the welfare programs to educate and aware all the stakeholders about the ill impacts of coral bleaching and requirement of tourism plan (Australia.gov.au 2018). Hence, the government intervention is required for reallocating financial resources through taxation and for establishing welfare programs as well.
Thus, with the government and other stakeholders’ involvement, the GBRMPA can reach to the desired outcomes through the implementation of the specific tourism plan.
- Generation of best available science for improving understanding of ecosystem resilience and response options
- Provides possible controls over the traveller’s entry into the marine protected area
- Possible controls over the bottom dragging fishing practice
- Lower the coral death by around 25%
- Improvement of travellers’ attraction for viewing attractive coral reefs and thereby improving the employment rate
First, possible policy approach is conflict management in the Great Barrier reef where the government of Australia needs to balance up the conflict with World Travel and Tourism Council (WTTC). In Great Barrier Reef, water is warm and corals expel the algae living in the tissues and it makes the coral turn into white. Here, the Australian government needs to take the collaborative approach towards WTTC and they need to take a basic plan about coral bleaching which is open to the positive possibilities of conflict. In addition, the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority (GBRMPA) can take the approach of communicative planning to create a perfect planning to reduce coral bleaching. Communicative planning is started with the determining the objectives, choosing the audiences, selecting the appropriate channel to reach to the audiences (Ainsworth et al. 2016). Finally, GBRMPA can also take the idea of crisis response where the process of reducing the coral bleaching will be the main focus. GBRMPA needs to take the prompt intervention strategy that facilitates the comprehension the trauma.
Economic factors
There must be several instruments which might be appropriate for the plan. At first, advocacy is the first instrument where the stakeholders’ support is needed to influence decisions within the system. Stakeholders of this problem can be travellers, GBRMPA, the Australian government, sellers related to tourism shopping and the owners of the hotels or lodge. Therefore, advocacy helps to have the stakeholders’ voice to be heard on the problem which is significant to them and stakeholders can defend or safeguard their rights as well. In addition, money is another instrument of the policy as without the monetary help the proposed plan cannot be implemented. The money is needed for the promotion of the proposed plan as all the stakeholders of the issue can get to know without the help of communication. Department of Environment and Energy is the Australian Government’s programme and policies makers. Without the help of the Australian government; GBRMPA cannot make any rule that tourists need to follow. In Australia, the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 is there to take action which may have a significant impact on the environment.
Mainly Australian government’s permission letter is needed as a resource for this plan. GBRMPA need to make a document stating the plan and objective. Thereafter, the Australian government’s agency should provide permission for the proposed plan.
This plan will provide benefit with increasing of the growth rate of fish populations and the marine lives. The plan will state where the tourists can visit and where they cannot. A tourism plan will also conserve the national heritage and it will also conserve the cultural heritage (Hannam 2017). In addition, this plan will help to conserve the sustainable production of coral in the Great Barrier Reef area. On the other side, this plan will provide a disadvantage when maximum surveillance, monitoring and enforcement is needed to implement the plan. In addition, this plan will dishearten the international tourists when their visit in some places will be restricted.
The planning process has five steps and each of the steps describes the implementation of the plan. At first, GBRMPA identifies the benefits of the marine estate as it can allow the community and stakeholders to define the community benefits. Second, the agency can assess threats and risks of advantages of the plan as this step will allow the associated risks and benefits to be evaluated. The functional body can use the independent and departmental knowledge incorporating the community feedback (Cowburn et al. 2018). In addition, the third stage is about assessing the management options along with the process of maximising the benefits. This stage involves with the current management response to determine the priority threat and it can increase the stakeholder benefits. The fourth stage is about the implementation of the preferred management option to reduce the threat and risks involved in the cost-effective way. Priority threat and risk of the Great Barrier Reef will be considered under CAR principle. The final stage of planning is associated with accountability as it involves the ongoing monitoring, evaluating, reporting which can design the implementation of the plan in the Great Barrier Reef.
Technological factors
In order to implement the plan, GBRMPA needs to consult with Department of Environment and Energy, the government agency of Australia and GBRMPA also consults with the Environmental Protection Authority and finally, GBEMPA can consult with the World Tourism Organisation (UNWTO).
The plan can be implemented through taking the permission from the government and the plan needs to determine the groups and users within the community. GBRMPA needs to create a policy document for general users.
The plan can be reviewed by taking an in-depth look at existing administrative policies. The success of the plan depends on meeting the objectives of the plan and efficiency of the plan needs to judge. Coral bleaching is a severe issue and measuring cost-effectiveness is another success factor which can be judged through the maximum output.
Reference list
Ainsworth, T.D., Heron, S.F., Ortiz, J.C., Mumby, P.J., Grech, A., Ogawa, D., Eakin, C.M. & Leggat, W., 2016. Climate change disables coral bleaching protection on the Great Barrier Reef. Science, 352(6283), pp.338-342.
Austrade.gov.au. 2018. Tourism – Austrade. [online] Available at: https://www.austrade.gov.au/australian/tourism [Accessed 30 Aug. 2018].
Australia.gov.au. 2018. Information and Services | australia.gov.au. [online] Available at: https://www.australia.gov.au/information-and-services [Accessed 30 Aug. 2018].
Becken, S., Stanton, B., Chen, J., Alaei, A.R. & Connolly, R.M., 2017. Monitoring the environment and human sentiment on the Great Barrier Reef: assessing the potential of collective sensing. Journal of environmental management, 203, pp.87-97.
Chen, P.Y., Chen, C.C., Chu, L. & McCarl, B., 2015. Evaluating the economic damage of climate change on global coral reefs. Global Environmental Change, 30, pp.12-20.
Cowburn, B., Moritz, C., Birrell, C., Grimsditch, G. & Abdulla, A., 2018. Can luxury and environmental sustainability co-exist? Assessing the environmental impact of resort tourism on coral reefs in the Maldives. Ocean & Coastal Management, 158, pp.120-127.
Department of the Environment and Energy. 2018. Department of the Environment and Energy. [online] Available at: https://www.environment.gov.au/ [Accessed 30 Aug. 2018].
Gbrmpa.gov.au. 2018. GBRMPA. [online] Available at: https://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/ [Accessed 30 Aug. 2018].
Great Barrier Reef. 2018. Great Barrier Reef | Australia’s Great Natural Wonder. [online] Available at: https://www.greatbarrierreef.org/ [Accessed 30 Aug. 2018].
Hannam, P., 2017. Great Barrier Reef tourism headed for tough times as coral bleaching worsens. The Sydney Morning Herald, 19, pp.23-34.
Hoegh-Guldberg, O. & Ridgway, T., 2016. Coral bleaching hits Great Barrier Reef as global temperatures soar. Green Left Weekly, (1090), p.10.
Hughes, T.P., Kerry, J.T., Álvarez-Noriega, M., Álvarez-Romero, J.G., Anderson, K.D., Baird, A.H., Babcock, R.C., Beger, M., Bellwood, D.R., Berkelmans, R. & Bridge, T.C., 2017. Global warming and recurrent mass bleaching of corals. Nature, 543(7645), p.373.
Kamenos, N. & Hennige, S., 2018. Reconstructing four centuries of temperature-induced coral bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef. Frontiers in Marine Science, 5, p.283.
Lewis, Sophie C., & Jennie Mallela. 2018. A multifactor risk analysis of the record 2016 great barrier reef bleaching: Anthropogenic greenhouse gases likely increased the risk of the extreme Great Barrier Reef bleaching event through anomalously high sea surface temperature and the accumulation of thermal stress.” Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society. 99(1), pp.144-149.
Moritz, C., Ducharme, F., Sweet, M.J., Fox, M.D., Zgliczynski, B., Ibrahim, N., Basheer, A., Furby, K.A., Caldwell, Z.R., Pisapia, C. & Grimsditch, G., 2017. The “resort effect”: Can tourist islands act as refuges for coral reef species?. Diversity and Distributions, 23(11), pp.1301-1312.
Oceanservice.noaa.gov. 2018. NOAA’s National Ocean Service. [online] Available at: https://oceanservice.noaa.gov [Accessed 30 Aug. 2018].
Piggott-McKellar, A.E. & McNamara, K.E., 2017.Last chance tourism and the Great Barrier Reef. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 25(3), pp.397-415.
Scott, A. & Hoey, A.S., 2017. Severe consequences for anemonefishes and their host sea anemones during the 2016 bleaching event at Lizard Island, Great Barrier Reef. Coral Reefs, 36(3), pp.873-873.
Stuart-Smith, R.D., Brown, C.J., Ceccarelli, D.M. & Edgar, G.J., 2018. Ecosystem restructuring along the Great Barrier Reef following mass coral bleaching. Nature, pp.01-23.
Wolanski, E., Andutta, F., Deleersnijder, E., Li, Y. & Thomas, C.J., 2017. The Gulf of Carpentaria heated Torres Strait and the Northern Great Barrier Reef during the 2016 mass coral bleaching event. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 194, pp.172-181.
Www2.unwto.org. 2018. World Tourism Organization UNWTO | Specialized agency of the United Nations. [online] Available at: https://www2.unwto.org/ [Accessed 30 Aug. 2018]
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
