The Reef 2050 Plan is a joint Federal and Queensland Government plan for protecting and managing the Great Barrier Reef from 2015 to 2050. Its overarching framework is based on the vision; ‘to ensure the Great Barrier Reef continues to improve on its Outstanding Universal Value every decade between now and 2050 to be a natural wonder for each successive generation to come.’ The framework aims to address the key threats identified in the 2014 Outlook Report by the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, which included climate change, coastal development, runoff and fishing. While there was a thorough consultation process with stakeholders in the early stages of the policy formation, it ultimately failed to translate these theoretical concerns into practical effect. The result of which has been the development of a sustainability project which is insufficient to maintain the ‘natural wonder’ of the Great Barrier Reef for future generations.
The Great Barrier Reef is the world’s largest coral reef system, and extends over 3000km from Bundaberg in Queensland to the northern tip of Cape York, there are a large number of stakeholders who have a vested interest, right or claim in the Reef. A stakeholder in this context can be defined as either an individual or ‘any group of people… who share interest or stake in a particular issue or system’. The presence of stakeholder participation in the decision making process of an environmental management policy is indicative of a project which is more likely to succeed in the long-term, given that it represents a more unanimous resolution. In regards to environmental management projects ‘one of the central challenges is in integrating the full range of perspectives- biophysical, socioeconomic, and public health- in the management of a given space.’ While integrating the large number of stakeholder perspectives into the management of a space such as the Great Barrier Reef is a difficult task, it is an essential step in the decision making process of a successful policy.
Given the expansive, coastal and biologically diverse nature of the Reef there are some primary stakeholder groups which have a vested interest in the management of the Reef, including the Federal and Queensland government, environmental groups, Indigenous groups and resource management industries such as mining. The Reef 2050 Plan identifies a number of specific stakeholders who have expressed an opinion on the Plan including Agforce Queensland, the Association of Marine Park Tourism Operators, the Australian Academy of Science, the Australian Coral Reef Society, the Australian Marine Conservation Society, Cairns Regional Council, CSIRO, the GBR Foundation, General Electric, Magnetic Island Nature Conservation Association, Ports Australia, Queensland Resources Council, Rio Tinto, Traditional Owners, WWF and hundreds more. Evidently, there are a considerable number of stakeholders who each have their own perspective on how the Great Barrier Reef should be managed.
In environmental management projects, those making the decisions must ensure that they exert their power effectively, and give the range of stakeholder perspectives legitimate consideration during the policy formation period. This concept is supported by Fisher who states that ‘power can be thought of as the capacity to have a meaningful input into making and implementing decisions’. Policy makers are in a unique position of influence where they are able to take stakeholder views and transform them into meaningful projects. Stakeholder engagement is vital in the decision making process of any management project as it yields benefits through incorporating a rage of perspectives and fostering social acceptance of the decision. Furthermore, stakeholder engagement will ensure the long term viability of the project, acting as a hallmark of sustainable development through engagement with multiple perspectives.
2020 Public Consultation for the 2021-2025 update was a major six-week public consultation period from August 19 to September 30, 2020, led by the Australian and Queensland governments. It used online surveys, written submissions, and 21 targeted information sessions with stakeholder groups (Local Marine Advisory Committees, Queensland Resources Council, CSIRO, Natural Resource Management Groups, and Reef 2050 advisory bodies).
Over 4,900 responses were received, including campaigns from organizations like the Australian Marine Conservation Society. Key themes mirrored some of the article’s concerns, such as stronger action on climate change (the most dominant feedback), water quality improvements, governance clarity, funding increases, better integration of Traditional Owners, fisheries management, and ports/dredging restrictions.
The updates address some of 2013-2014 consultation shortcomings. For instance, climate change (largely dismissed in the original plan) is now explicitly called the “biggest threat” with enhanced adaptation actions, commitments to global limits 1.5°C, and integration across work areas. Dredging and ports remain restricted (no major expansions allowed outside priority areas), with feedback leading to clearer shipping management. Water quality and agriculture targets have been reviewed with stakeholder input, including calls for legislation and equity, resulting in phased improvements and innovation funding. Traditional Owner or First Australian integration has been bolstered through dedicated plans and partnerships, responding to earlier gaps in Indigenous engagement.
Feedback in recent consultations still echoes 2013-2014 concerns, like insufficient urgency on climate (reliance on international agreements rather than aggressive domestic cuts) and calls for more funding/legislation. The business-as-usual elements (no full ban on dredging or coal projects) persist, influenced by powerful industries. Initial consultations were performative, recent ones could be seen as incremental rather than transformative, especially amid ongoing reef decline from bleaching events (2022 and 2024). Stakeholder voices are heard but not fully translated into “substantive policy and legislative change.”
If we want to sustain the Great Barrier Reef for future generations then substantive policy and legislative change is needed from a government who legitimately and passionately cares about the longevity of Australia’s incredible environment.
