Marine Conservation in Australia
My attention has been drawn to a paper just published with the very forthright title” Marine conservation leadership: does Australia walk the talk” (C. Klein et al., 2025, Conservation Letters, https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.13147). It challenges the repeated portrayal by successive federal and state governments that the nation is a global leader in marine protection.
ACS has a long-standing interest in marine protection. Back in the days when Robert Hill as federal environment minister was pushing the boundaries on oceans policy, it was clear to some of us that interaction with state interests was going to be a potential thorn in his idea of an effective national policy. Of course the history of protection for the Great Barrier Reef had already highlighted various state and federal tensions. Last year when the Commonwealth was again sprouting an Australian Sustainable Ocean Plan, ACS took the opportunity of making a submission to the then taskforce responsible for the plan’s drafting. This submission is consistent with previous advocacy efforts in 2022 (correspondence on ACS website). In 2021 we also contributed to the Academy of Science “Future Earth Australia” report titled Sustainable Oceans and Coasts National Strategy 2021-2030.
The Klein et al. paper recognised the good intentions of successive governments in managing Australia’s unique marine environment. Successful outcomes were noted including the establishment of marine protected areas especially those associated with the GBR, delisting of southern bluefin tuna as a threatened species in 2024, and the introduction of high sustainability standards for high-value export-oriented fisheries. In particular the GBR Marine Park zoning plan showed global leadership in marine conservation. However, the authors of this paper say that “given mounting threats and declining state of marine biodiversity, Australia must do more”.
Figure 1 in the Klein et al. paper is a timeline depicting marine leadership claims by successive governments compared with a selection of policy decisions and excerpts from environmental assessments including State of Environment Reports (SOE). The contrary nature of policy decisions and ministerial claims is stark. An example was in 2001. At that time I chaired the committee that produced the second SOE report (2001). We were confronted with a statement from the then Prime Minister in 1998: “With the release of Australia’s Ocean Policy we again demonstrate our world leadership”. Around this time we were finding evidence of loss of coastal habitat and coral reefs as well as noting the fragmented management of the coastal environment. Jumping to 2025 and the present Minister for the Environment and Water was stating “Australia is a world leader in ocean protection”.
Klein et al. question whether this global reputation is justified. They address the sorry state of Australia’s marine biodiversity by considering four major areas: marine protected areas, fisheries management, climate change commitments, and water quality management. For instance, the statement that c. 52% of the nation’s marine and coastal areas are now designated protected is misleading. This indicates that Australia has fulfilled its commitments under the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework which calls for at least 30% of our marine areas to adequately represent marine biodiversity. Klein et al. state that most highly protected MPAs are located in remote areas with minimal human activity avoiding regions which are economically valuable.
The authors also see stark discrepancies in the management effectiveness among different fisheries Furthermore Australia has a “history on making land management decisions that are inconsistent with its climate commitments”. Back in 1996 the first SOE expressed concerns over decline in water quality in marine regions caused by rising levels of nutrients and sediments. Now we see a “lack of long-term monitoring and inconsistent monitoring approaches for Australia’s coastal waterways” They quote the work of Ian Cresswell and others in 2021 who note that it is difficult to document improvements in coastal water quality across most regions of Australia. This is something that I agree with at this time based on experience in NSW and Victoria.
The paper points to the need for Australia to expand its network of MPAs . There should be more priority regions that are critical for marine biodiversity. These need more effective management involving better coordination with state governments. In their words “This must be complemented by robust policies that promote sustainable production and consumption of seafood and address the urgent challenges posed by climate change and pollution”. So only then can Australia “genuinely claim a leadership role in global marine conservation”.
What is the Commonwealth Government then doing with respect to marine conservation? There used to be an Oceans Office. At the time Nick Harvey and I wrote our chapter on federated coastal management we noted it appeared to exist but was not included in the federal Environment Department’s organisational chart (N. Harvey and B. Thom, 2024 “Coastal governance in federated countries”, Chapter 7.14 in Treatise on Estuarine and Coastal Science). Furthermore, there was no clear linkage to national coastal matters given separate roles in management of coastal waters by state governments. But a recent check online suggests that there is no longer an oceans office as such and that government functions related to ocean policy and management are handled by different departments and agencies (Google search 21 October).
There is no doubt that the Commonwealth Government has major commitments to ocean science and management inside and outside our declared EEZ. These include long-standing support for activities within DCCEEW, AIMS, CSIRO, Australian Hydrographic Office, and the Australian Maritime Safety Authority, as well as specific programs such the Australian Integrated Marine Observing System (IMOS) and work of the Antarctic Division within DCCEEW. Oceans policy is currently guided by the Sustainable Ocean Plan which builds on the nation’s commitments as a member of the High Level Panel for Sustainable Ocean Economy (https://oceanpanel.org). The Australian plan has a long-term vision for our ocean to 2040. One objective is to “guide our collective action to address the complex issues that no single jurisdiction, sector or group can tackle alone”. Given our past history this appears to be an enormous challenge. We look forward to learning more about how oceans management can improve at the national level and not again reflect on the words of Klein et al. “Does Australia walk the talk”.
Bruce Thom (with assistance from Eric Woehler, Jo Mummery and Nick Harvey)
Words by Prof Bruce Thom. Please respect the author’s thoughts and reference appropriately: (c) ACS, 2025. For correspondence about this blog post please email admin@australiancoastalsociety.org.au
#284