report_oceania-and-australia_(2) (1)

August, Klein, Siemer, Waseem, Willner Australia and Oceania

i

Australia and Oceania

___________________________________________________________________

M.Sc. Global Change Management

Module “Threats & risks to systems functionality and contributing factors”

Eberswalde University for Sustainable Development

March 2016

Adriana August Prof. Dr. Pierre Ibisch

Nikola Klein Prof Dr. Martin Welp

Muhammad Waseem Prof. Dr. Manfred Stock

Marie-Kathrin Siemer Dr. Judith Hardt

Nadine Willner Christoph Nowicki


ii

Abstract

Protecting the world’s ecosystems is one of the most urgent tasks and at the same time one

of the biggest challenges on the local, regional and global scale. The functionality of the

ecological and social systems is deeply intertwined with our human wellbeing. To keep the

balance between the human consumption of ecosystem services and the preservation of the

ecosystem itself, we have to conserve and protect certain elements which are important for a

healthy environment when under threat or stress. For the analytical part we used the

MARISCO approach. By rating the criticality and strategic relevance of stresses, threats and

their contributing factors within Australia and Oceania we can give an assumption of the

conditions of the ecosystems in that region. Since this region is facing many threats, the five

highest rated threats were examined in closer detail with regard to their causes and impacts

on the region; these are droughts, acidification, sea level rise, storms and floods. However,

we enlightened two characteristically and exemplary for this part of the precarious threats:

overfishing and species invasion. Fishery is one of the most significant renewable resources

for the Oceanian countries considering food security, livelihoods and economic growth.

Therefore we figured that it is in the interest of that region to overcome unsustainable

consumption patterns. In addition to overfishing, species invasion is also an abominable

threat. It has been the primary cause of biodiversity loss in Australia and Oceania and is

considered to be an escalating threat to local ecosystems. In this region ecosystems

destruction is already happening but the good news is that we can still manage to make them

sustainable by using right approach, even though the level of manageability varies between

certain contributing factors, threats and stresses and whether they require a local, national or

global strategy. We concluded that the knowledge, non-knowledge and knowledge gaps as

well as uncertainties coming up as political instability or economic changes, and we have to

be aware of them all the time. But for us it is not a matter of what we know and do not know.

It is about to act.


iii

Content

1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 1

2 Opening chapter: regional introduction of Australia and Oceania ..................................... 2

2.1 Geographical scope ................................................................................................... 2

2.2 Climate and biomes ................................................................................................... 3

2.3 Biodiversity ................................................................................................................. 4

2.4 Political and socio-economic situation ....................................................................... 5

2.5 Region at risk ............................................................................................................. 6

3 Methods ............................................................................................................................ 8

3.1 MARISCO-approach .................................................................................................. 8

3.2 Accuracy assessment ................................................................................................ 9

3.3 Ratings and Groupings ............................................................................................ 11

4 The regional and the global scale ................................................................................... 17

5 Results ............................................................................................................................ 19

5.1 Main Threats according to rating ............................................................................. 19

5.2 Examples: Overfishing and Invasive Species .......................................................... 22

5.2.1 Example: Overfishing ........................................................................................ 22

5.2.2 Example: Invasive Species ............................................................................... 31

6 Outlook and Discussion .................................................................................................. 38

6.1 Manageability ........................................................................................................... 38

6.2 Example: Migration – Manageability and uncertainty .............................................. 41

7 Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 43

Sources .................................................................................................................................. 45


iv

August, Klein, Siemer, Waseem, Willner Australia and Oceania Australia and Oceania

1

1 Introduction

Climate change today is one of the leading factors that affect human life in many ways all

around the globe. The effects and stressors on ecosystem´s key ecological attributes are

having severe impacts on biodiversity objects where ecosystem services strongly rely on.

With a degradation of these services the livelihoods of many communities will be heavily

affected and therefore the human wellbeing of every individual. This again leads to further

negative impacts within ecological and social systems.

The goal of the report is to identify and analyse the main drivers affecting these ecological

and social systems regarding risks and vulnerabilities diminishing human wellbeing.

Therefore, we take special attention on the embeddedness of the regional system into the

global one as well as on the interconnectedness of ecosystem stressors on all levels. Along

the principles of the MARISCO-approach, we collected, evaluated, connected, and rated the

impact factors according to their criticality. The focus lays on the assessment of relevant

stresses, threats and contributing factors leading to ecosystem changes within the Australian

and Oceanian region contributing to and by global impacts.

The second chapter gives an overview of the geographical, political, and socioeconomic

situations and the different ecosystems in the region. This leads over to the World Risk Index

that we use as a measurement tool that supports our assumptions regarding the vulnerability

and adaptation capacity of the Australian and Oceanian countries.

The third part of the report will describe the MARSICO-method as well as a critical reflection

on our knowledge, non-knowledge and knowledge gaps. This is followed by the presentation

of the results of the rating and grouping of regionally occurring threats, stresses and

contributing factors based on the MARSICO-approach. The chapter closes with an illustration

of the interconnectivity of dynamics on the local, regional and global scale.

Chapter four includes the main results that we could find out regarding major threats

occurring in the region. Afterwards, we show two examples of human induced threats

overfishing and endemic species which are characteristically for the local and regional

ecosystems.

Finally, we will discuss the manageability of climate change and ecosystem changes and

give some examples regarding these. Though, it is rather to understand as an outlook than

an actual assessment. The last section is a reflection of our outcomes. We are aiming for a

result that can be used as a legitimate foundation for a successful and sustainable risk

management.


2

2 Opening chapter: regional introduction of Australia and Oceania

To give a common understanding of the status quo of the examined region, will this chapter

introduce the geographical scope, ecosystem conditions and socio political situations of the

region. This is important to identify current and potential stresses and threats as well as

eventually to develop efficient mitigation and adaptation strategies.

2.1 Geographical scope

Oceania on the one hand consists of thousands of small islands in the Central and South

Pacific Ocean and is divided in three sub regions: Micronesia, Polynesia and Melanesia (see

Fig.1). Australia on the other hand is counted as the smallest “of the world’s continents”

(Australian Government 2016a). Besides Australia, New Zealand and Papua-New Guinea

are the biggest continental islands in this region; New Zealand belongs to Polynesia, Papua-

New Guinea to Melanesia.

Fig. 1: The three districts of the South Pacific Islands (The Australian National University 2016)


3

2.2 Climate and biomes

Most Pacific islands are affected by tropical climate due to their position between the Tropic

of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn, whereas bigger continental islands like Australia, New

Zealand, and to a smaller extent, Papua-New Guinea have a “diversity of climates” (National

Geographic 2016). The climate is reflected in the biomes of the region (see Fig. 2).

Fig. 2: Biomes, Oceania (adapted from: Center for International Earth Science Information Network 2012 [Biome

categorization after WWF])

Australia has the most diverse climate of the region. The northern part of Australia is shaped

by tropical climate, while the southern part has a more subtropical to Mediterranean climate.

The North of Australia is affected by the warm moist north-westerly monsoon, which brings

heavy rainfalls during its active phases and irrigates grasslands, savannas and shrublands.

During its inactive phases the northern region is quiet dry. One can find here many

eucalyptus forests (Diercke Weltatlas 2008: 186). On the north-eastern coastline a small

amount of moist broadleaf forest exists, that is affected by south-easterly trade winds

(Australian Government 2016b). The deeper one comes to the inland of Australia the dryer it

gets and the more vulnerable the region becomes to fires. The central and western

continental parts of Australia are deserts and xeric shrublands. From the south-western to

the south-eastern coastline, Mediterranean forests, woodlands and shrubs grow. On the

eastern coastline of Australia broadleaf forests and mixed forests occur due to the Eastern


4

Highlands and Australian Alps, where orographic precipitation patterns appear (Beadle 1981:

16). The climate of New Zealand is the mildest in this region, because of cold western winds

and ocean currents. From North to South the climate changes from subtropical to temperate.

Therefore, temperate broadleaf forest and mixed forests dominate both, the North and the

South Island. In higher altitudes, like the Southern Alps of New Zealand, montane grasslands

and savannas occur. Papua-New Guinea, strongly affected by the monsoon, has almost

exclusively moist broadleaf forests just like many other Pacific islands near the equator. On

Papua-New Guinea’s coastline, where the water has water temperatures above 20°C,

mangroves develop. Smaller islands like the Solomon Islands or the islands of Vanuatu, New

Caledonia or Fiji have a tropical climate and therefore tropical forests.

Australia and Oceania are affected by El Niño- and La Niña-events, which lead to changed

precipitation patterns due to fluctuations in air pressure, altered or intensified directions of

trade winds and therewith linked anomalies of ocean surface temperatures. During an El

Niño-year, there is a risk that precipitation decreases because of cool upwelling and the

reversion of trade winds. Those conditions can lead to droughts and heat waves in the north

and east of Australia, Melanesia and South-Polynesia. During a La Niña- year, normal trade

winds intensify and warm water masses are transported to the West-Pacific, whereby

precipitation is frequently higher-than-average. These conditions can cause floods and the

intensification of tropical cyclones. El Niño- and La Niña- events last more or less one year,

appear regularly every three to five years and can have remote to disastrous impacts.

Because of the unpredictable aftermath, the establishment of efficient catastrophe

management is complicated (Hilgers 2012: 4-8).

2.3 Biodiversity

For the region, geographical isolation is very important. For example, oceanic islands show

an impoverished species diversity. Because of their isolation, only a few species colonized

the islands successfully from which multiple species arose (Gillespie 2007: 2). Consequently,

the Pacific islands have high endemism. Gillespie explains, “with greater isolation (and lower

immigration rates), and given sufficient topographical diversity, local endemism will increase

over time” (2007: 2). For instance, the approximate level of endemism of flowering plants on

Hawaiian Islands is 91%, the level of terrestrial invertebrates 98% (Gillespie 2007: 4).

Australia and Oceania have uniquely and naturally diverse ecosystems and a richness of

terrestrial and freshwater species. Typically for Australia is the big number of marsupials.

Importantly to be mentioned is the richness of aquatic ecosystems like salt marshes,


5

mangroves, seagrass meadows, or coral reefs which grow in warm, shallow waters. Coral

reefs play an important role as wave-breakers, for sand aggradations, and as nurseries and

feeding grounds for fishes and other species. A popular example here for is the Great Barrier

Reef on the East-coast of Australia. In addition, the Coral Triangle region in the west of

Oceania, including Papua New-Guinea and Solomon Islands, “encompasses the highest

diversity of coral reef fishes in the world“ (WWF Australia 2009: 19). Coral reefs are “the

most productive ecosystems on Earth” and provide crucial livelihoods for islanders (Reakla-

Kudla 1997: 83).

Coral reefs, which grow on supergened volcanic islands, are called atolls. Many inhabited

islands in the Pacific are parts of atolls, for example the Marshall Islands or Islands of

Kiribati. Many islands are made by volcanic activities, because the region is influenced by the

Ring of Fire which is the result of plate tectonics (Turgeon 2015).

2.4 Political and socio-economic situation

Australia and Oceania has 16 sovereign states with democratic constitutions and several

non-sovereign territories, which are dependent on former imperial powers such as France,

the United States of America, New Zealand or Australia. Just to mention some examples,

French Polynesia and New Caledonia are overseas territories of France; Hawaii, American

Samoa, Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands are territories of the United States of

America; and the Easter Islands are a special territory of Chile (CIA 2016). Today, many

Pacific Island countries face socio-economic issues and political instability (Aqorau 2016).

Due to the “remoteness, geographical spread, susceptibility to natural disasters, high level of

exposure to overseas markets, small internal markets and limited natural resources”, Pacific

Island countries are very vulnerable to sudden environmental and economic changes (Oxfam

2016). Therefore, poverty, access to safe water and insufficient education become a growing

problem in this region (ibid.).

On many islands, for example New Guinea, people mainly depend on subsistence

agriculture and coastal fishery. Often rural infrastructures are of poor quality, so communities

live isolated and have no access to markets. To live a modern life, imports become more and

more important. Many Pacific islands have few economic resources; tourism is their biggest

economic sector because of “the region’s tropical, exotic appeal, its culture and its way of

life” (IUCN 2010: 24). Australia, and on a smaller scale New Zealand, are the most important

economic powers in this region. Their economies “rely on natural resources, agriculture,

minerals, manufacturing and tourism” (IPCC 2014: 1379). In the last two decades Australia’s


6

economy grew continuously, the country’s financial system was strong and stable. In 2015

the estimated real growth rate of Australia’s GDP was 2.4 % (CIA 2016). In 2014 most of

Australia’s Top 10 exports were provided by ecosystem services, such as iron cores, coal,

natural gas, gold, crude petroleum, aluminum cores or wheat (Australian Government 2015).

New Zealand industrialized the agrarian sector over the last 30 years, expanded its export

markets and had a GDP growth rate of 2.2 % in 2015 (CIA 2016).

Excursion: Historical background of Australia and Oceania

In the 16th century first Europeans sailed the waters of this region. In the 18th century they

started colonizing Australia and Oceania and claimed the region’s lands as their own,

although it was homeland to indigenous populations who arrived centuries earlier. Colonial

powers “implemented their own system of governance, land management, and trade”

(McDaniel et al. 2012a). Especially in Australia, New Zealand and New Caledonia the

majority of its populations is European. Many indigenous populations were displaced from

their homeland by force, for example the Aborigines and many were subjected to social

change and modernization, but until today indigenous populations still exist in this region.

The culture and spiritual identity of many Pacific indigenes is strongly influenced by the

ocean. Their human wellbeing relies “on healthy and functioning ecosystems” (IUCN 2010:

7). With reward to indigenous diversity, Papua-New Guinea is the most diverse country in the

region and in the world, with over “700 indigenous groups and 850 indigenous languages”

(McDaniel et al. 2012b). Especially in Papua-New Guinea, but also in other Pacific countries

exist many ethnic conflicts, often linked to land tenure rights.

2.5 Region at risk

As already been stated, the region is at high risk to extreme weather events which even

intensified due to climate change. According to the World Risk Index, five countries of

Oceania are among the Top 16 of the world’s most threatened countries (see Fig. 3). The

Risk Index is a mathematical model, which combines the exposure to natural hazards and

the vulnerability of people or systems, whereupon vulnerability is composed of “[…]

susceptibility, lack of coping capacities and lack of adaptive capacities […]” (Bündnis

Entwicklung Hilft & UNU-EHS 2015: 44).


7

Fig. 3: Top 16 of the World Risk Index 2015 (Bündnis Hilft & UNU-EHS 2015: 64)

Especially the exposure to natural hazards is high in Oceania. Major hazards in this region

can be earthquakes, tsunamis, high waves, floods, volcanic eruptions or tropical cyclones

(Pacific Disaster Center 2016). For example, in March 2015 tropical cyclone “Pam” hit

Vanuatu with wind speed up to 300km/h and damaged about 70 per cent of the nation’s

households (Flannery & Steffen 2015: 1). Apart from hazards, sea level rise threatens

oceanic islands as well, because many of them are low-laying, which means they are on sea

level height.

As the World Risk Index shows, the risk not only depends on exposure, but also on

vulnerability and adaptation capabilities. Strategies can be found to cope with extreme

weather conditions or other hazards. To do this, one has to identify the contributing factors

which will cause threats to the regions and eventually stress the ecosystems. In this report,

we will analyse the region according to the MARISCO-approach to detect the main drivers, to

find strategies and to tackle adaptation.


8

3 Methods

3.1 MARISCO-approach

We tend to ignore risks which are present in our daily lives. For instance, a road accident, it

may cause a serious damage to health or property, but precautionary measures can reduce

damages and risks. However, when it comes to ecosystem management it is much more

complicated. Even though human wellbeing greatly depends on healthy ecosystems, we do

not treat them with appropriate respect and we do not use their services in a sustainable way

to conserve them for future generations. This means we are constantly challenged by human

induced risks. International increasing demand for timber and pulp by industries has led to

worldwide deforestation on an unprecedented level. Excessive toxic waste disposal and

pollution adds additional pressure to ecosystems that are already under stress. The problem

is getting worse facing the exponential growth of human population. All these combined

activities push ecosystems to their limits. Negative climate change impacts also disturb the

complex ecosystems and their interactions between each other.

But how much disturbance can ecosystems take before they collapse? However, to manage

the ecosystems, the MARISCO-management approach provides crucial guidelines. This

method is derived from the Conservation Measures Partnership's Open Standards for the

Practice of Conservation and it stands for Adaptive MAnagement of vulnerability and RISk at

COnservation sites. And it is designed to follow a proactive risk analyses conservation

approach.

First of all, a working group comprised of all the necessary stakeholders, identifies the project

scope and composes all areas that are relevant for the planning and management of the

project site. The next step is identification and analyses of biodiversity, constituting the

elements of conservation. From these elements ecosystem services are derived, e.g. food

and fresh water. Team members analyse all the processes threatening these systems,

including future risks. To get to the bottom of these causes and effect chains the underlying

root causes are determined. This process is continued until a near clear picture of the

situation emerges. Finally a classification into explicit domains such as biophysical,

institutional and socio-economic factors enhances the understandings of the share of impact.

Rating of an individual element has been carried out using a variety of criteria, such as

systemic activity and as well as the criticality over time. For this the team evaluates the past

and future statuses of each element comparing them with the current situation. This can

contribute to proactive management. This process can help to evaluate key elements which

may serve as possible strategies. MARISCO equips conservation practitioners with all the


9

means to detect potential future risks and enables them to find possible strategies in order to

react in time.

Fig. 4: This MARISCO cycle diagram illustrates all the important methodological steps (Ibisch&Hobson 2014:15)

3.2 Accuracy assessment

An important part of the MARISCO-approach is the accuracy assessment. We needed to be

critical of ourselves: How much do we actually know? Of what kind of aspects are we aware?

Which aspects are left out? And which perspective do we have?

Taking into account perspective, one main attribute of this approach is the interdisciplinarity.

The idea behind this is to bring people together from different backgrounds to broaden the

perspective into the analysis and thus shed light on aspects which would have been left out.

In our group, we were two people with an anthropological background, and respectively one


10

with a background in political science, geography, and environmental engineering. Regarding

nationality, we were rather homogeneous as four of us were brought up in Germany and one

in Pakistan. As we were to model Oceania and Australia, the backgrounds and nationalities

already hint at other perspectives we did not take into consideration: No “locals”, neither from

villages, cities nor islands, could bring in their perspectives. Other disciplines such as

economy or agriculture were left aside completely. Our different backgrounds enabled us to

have vivid discussions about the elements in the model. Still, four people were from social

sciences, which shifted the focus and the knowledge especially to this sphere.

The MARISCO-approach incorporates the non-knowledge as the rating takes into

consideration the knowledge the group has. We had to face knowledge gaps (the

theoretically knowable), the known unknowable and unknown unknowns (blindspots)

(Ibisch&Hobson 2012: 44). During our analysis, though, we found out yet more knowledge

gaps, unknowables and blindspots. It seemed the more we got to know, the more we knew

that we do not know. And apparently, we were not alone:

“Thus, it is ever harder to ignore the fact that science does not only eliminate knowledge gaps, but also creates new and risky non-knowledge. This non-knowledge appears to be more relevant to goals of achieving sustainability than all available and achievable knowledge put together.” (Ibisch&Hobson 2012: 17-18)

In our very small group, we faced this “risky non-knowledge” which made us wanting to do

even more research. Unfortunately, we did not have the time to get deeper into the

investigation. This is what Jan Schwaab calls “dynamically determined blindspots”, as the

“decision-making conditions are characterised by a range of factors which can also be

regarded as causing `blindspots´” (Schwaab 2012: 78-79). Thus, we had to accept the

blindspots which were caused by the factor of time (as well as other factors) and rather had

to work with and focus on the knowledge we had. This also led to the decision not to re-do

the rating process again: Even after two times re-doing especially the direct connections in

the matrix we were not satisfied as we noticed that other elements were missing and that

connections actually could not be drawn directly. At some point though, we had to accept this

shortcoming. And yet again, we were not alone in our discontent:

“The evidence-based philosophy that is so central to modern ´Western´ science has exposed the vulnerability and limitations of this approach to resolving


11

problems of indeterministic change. In the minds of the anxious masses, vulnerability translates quickly in to (sic!) inadequacy and eventually distrust.” (Ibisch&Hobson 2012: 33)

Coping with the model of Oceania and Australia, we had to be careful not to get into the

“Complexity trap” (Schwaab 2012: 89): Thinking about so many possibilities and aspects, we

were in danger to lose the general overview of our topic and “overestimate the role of

knowledge and our capability of understanding complex systems.” (Hobsen&Ibisch 2012:

230). The question remains, though, if we will ever be able to do a “perfect” risk model: “The

future will surprise us, even if we use the most advanced analytical tools and models to look

into the future.” (Welp&Frost 2012: 213) Thus, the following ratings and groupings are based

on a heuristic approach. This means we were aware of certain knowledge gaps, known

unknowables and blindspots, but would rather accept these than remain in a passive attitude

waiting for certainty to come and liberate us from the responsibility to act.

The next step would be the revision of our model, especially including missing steps and

drawing direct connections. This is not yet included in the following ratings and groupings.

3.3 Ratings and Groupings

The MARISCO-method not only enabled us to identify important aspects for our analysis. We

also had to group and rate the identified stresses, threats and contributing factors.

For this, we first had to assess direct impact relations which we drew in a matrix. Here, we

were facing the problem of identifying direct connections. We noticed that elements would

not be directly connected, but we were missing the step in-between. Thus, we sometimes

would draw connections between elements which we knew were not directly, but which we

thought we had to draw as they were important. For others, we would re-examine the matrix

and re-discuss certain cause-effect relations and come to other conclusions. At some point

we had to accept our results to proceed with the ratings, even though we could have

continued working on them.

Coming to the ratings, every stress, threat and contributing factor then had a certain amount

of incoming (influenced by other elements) and outgoing (influencing other elements) cause-

effect relations. This assessment would contribute to the calculation of the systematic

activity. Apart from this, we also rated the current criticality regarding the scope, severity and

irreversibility/permanence; the current trend of change of criticality, and the past and future

criticality: High numbers indicate a high criticality, while low numbers indicate a lower


12

severity. Finally, we would rate the manageability, meaning: to which extend the concerned

element can be managed or not; and the knowledge of our group. Here, high numbers would

indicate low possibilities of manageability and little (accessible) knowledge.

But, the more elements a model has, the more connections between the elements exist.

Thus, it is confusing if the systemic activity is only depending on outgoing and incoming

amounts of connections. This could be relative numbers rather than absolute.

From all these aspects, the strategic relevance can be calculated which permits to rank the

elements to identify tackling points.

STRESSES

We determined twelve main stresses due to our rating and ranking out of the stresses we

had (see table below). The highest rated and ranked stresses were loss of groundwater

sources, loss of habitat, bleached corals (a very specific element) and polluted air. All of

them have a very high current and future criticality and a rather poor manageability, apart

from the element “polluted air”.

Evaluation of strategic relevance – Stresses

Stress

Past

crit

ical

ity

Cur

rent

crit

ical

ity

Tren

d of

cha

nge

Futu

re c

ritic

ality

Stra

tegi

c re

leva

nce

(val

ue)

Stra

tegi

c re

leva

nce

(fina

l ran

ge)

Manageability

Knowledge

Lossofgroundwatersources 1 4 4 4 12 4 3 3 Lossofhabitat 2 4 4 4 12 4 3 2 Bleachedcorals 1 4 4 4 12 4 4 2 Pollutedair 1 4 4 4 12 4 1 3 Lossoffreshwatersources 1 4 4 3 11 4 2 3 Salinizedfreshwaterregimes 1 4 4 3 11 4 3 3 Changednutrientregime(NutrientCycle) 2 4 4 3 11 4 4 3


13

Fragmentedhabitat 2 3 4 3 10 3 1 2 AcidifiedOcean 2 4 3 3 10 3 3 2 LossofConnectedness 1 3 4 3 10 3 2 2 Pollutedwater 1 3 3 3 9 3 2 3 Lossofspecies(fauna) 2 3 4 2 9 3 2 2

To structure the elements in a better and more systemic way, we identified two groups, the

aquatic stresses (blue) and the biospheric stresses (purple). Aquatic stresses would be loss of

groundwater and freshwater resources, salinized fresh water regimes, acidified ocean and

polluted water. The biospheric stresses would be loss of habitat, loss of connectedness, loss

of species, fragmented habitat and bleached corals.

Evaluation of strategic relevance – Stresses

Stress

Past

crit

ical

ity

Cur

rent

crit

ical

ity

Tren

d of

cha

nge

Futu

re c

ritic

ality

Stra

tegi

c re

leva

nce

(val

ue)

Stra

tegi

c re

leva

nce

(fina

l ran

ge)

Manageability

Knowledge

Lossofgroundwatersources 1 4 4 4 12 4 3 3 Lossofhabitat 2 4 4 4 12 4 3 2 Bleachedcorals 1 4 4 4 12 4 4 2 Pollutedair 1 4 4 4 12 4 1 3 Lossoffreshwatersources 1 4 4 3 11 4 2 3 Salinizedfreshwaterregimes 1 4 4 3 11 4 3 3 Changednutrientregime(NutrientCycle) 2 4 4 3 11 4 4 3 Fragmentedhabitat 2 3 4 3 10 3 1 2 AcidifiedOcean 2 4 3 3 10 3 3 2 LossofConnectedness 1 3 4 3 10 3 2 2


14

Pollutedwater 1 3 3 3 9 3 2 3 Lossofspecies(fauna) 2 3 4 2 9 3 2 2

Regarding these main stresses both groups are represented by five elements. From this we

can conclude that aquatic and biospheric stresses are main categories which affect the

ecosystems of Australia and Oceania.

THREATS

We also identified twelve main threats during our analysis, which, again, could be allocated

to two groups: local climate change (light green) and human induced environmental changes (light blue;

see table below). The elements with the highest strategic relevance are drought, acidification

(both with a strategic relevance of 16) and sea level rise (strategic relevance of 15). It is

striking that within the highest ranked threats four of five elements belong to the group of

local climate change.

We are aware that the grouping of local climate change could be understood as human

induced environmental changes as well. Still, we thought to make this distinction as local

climate change is being constituted especially by higher CO2eq-emissions which cause

higher temperatures. Thus, these are rather indirect effects, whereas we understood human

induced changes as direct influences from humans on the environment.

Evaluation of strategic relevance - Threats

Threat

Past

crit

ical

ity

Cur

rent

crit

ical

ity

Tren

d of

cha

nge

Futu

re c

ritic

ality

Syst

emic

act

ivity

(lev

el o

f ac

tivity

) Sy

stem

ic a

ctiv

ity (n

umbe

r of

influ

ence

d el

emen

ts)

Syst

emic

act

ivity

Stra

tegi

c re

leva

nce

(val

ue)

Stra

tegi

c re

leva

nce

(fina

l ra

nge)

Manageability

Knowledge

Drought 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 16 4 3 4 Acidification 1 4 4 4 3 4 4 16 4 3 1 Sealevelrise 1 4 3 4 4 4 4 15 4 3 1 Storms 1 4 3 3 4 4 4 14 4 4 4


15

Floods 1 3 4 4 1 4 3 14 4 2 4 Deforestation 3 3 4 3 4 4 4 14 4 1 1 highrateofUltravioletradiation 2 4 3 3 4 3 4 14 4 3 3 Erosion 1 4 3 3 1 4 3 13 3 3 2 Pollution(air,water,land,Light,Nuclear) 2 4 3 3 1 4 3 13 3 2 3 (Extreme)fires 2 3 3 3 4 4 4 13 3 2 2 Over-fishing 1 3 4 3 1 4 3 13 3 2 2 Overharvesting 1 3 3 3 4 4 4 13 3 1 3

Green: Local Climate Change

Bright blue: Human induced environment changes

CONTRIBUTING FACTORS:

The main contributing factors we could identify are elements related to the groupings of

climate change (green) and socioeconomic-factors (dark purple, see table below). The element

ranked highest (strategic relevance of 16) is increasing human population. This is also the

least manageable, even though our knowledge about how human population increases is

rather high. For the group of climate change, quite the opposite is valid: The knowledge of

climate change and its factors and dynamics is low, while it is possible to manage it, though

not likely. This is why the elements of change of precipitation patterns, temperature change,

global climate change and shift and change of seasons are ranked high (strategic relevance

14-15). The socio-economic factors are, in our group, known better.

Evaluation of strategic relevance - Contributing factors

Contributing factor

Past

crit

ical

ity

Cur

rent

crit

ical

ity

Tren

d of

cha

nge

Futu

re c

ritic

ality

Syst

emic

act

ivity

(lev

el o

f ac

tivity

) Sy

stem

ic a

ctiv

ity (n

umbe

r of

influ

ence

d el

emen

ts)

(Sys

tem

ic a

ctiv

ity)

Stra

tegi

c re

leva

nce

(val

ue)

Stra

tegi

c re

leva

nce

(fina

l ran

ge)

Manageability

Knowledge

Increasinghumanpopulation 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 16 4 4 1

Change of precipitation 2 4 3 4 3 4 4 15 4 3 4


16

patterns(TimeandAmount)

Temperaturechange 2 4 3 4 4 4 4 15 4 3 4 Logging 1 4 4 4 1 4 3 15 4 2 2 GlobalClimateChange 1 4 4 3 4 4 4 15 4 3 4 Shift&changeofseasons 1 4 3 3 4 4 4 14 4 3 4 Illegalfishing 1 4 4 3 1 4 3 14 4 2 2 LandClearing 1 3 4 4 1 4 3 14 4 2 3 Extractionofgroundwater 1 4 4 4 1 3 2 14 4 2 2 HigheruseofFertilizer 2 3 4 3 3 4 4 14 4 1 3 EmissionofGreenHouseGases 1 4 4 3 1 4 3 14 4 3 3 Competition for naturalresources 2 3 4 3 3 4 4 14 4

2 3 Intensiveshippingonharbours 2 3 4 3 4 4 4 14 4 2 3 Increase inDemand (e.g. food,water) 2 3 4 3 4 4 4 14 4

2 3 Mining 2 3 3 3 4 4 4 13 3 2 3 Legalfishing 1 4 4 3 1 3 2 13 3 2 2 IntroducedSpecies 2 4 3 3 2 3 3 13 3 3 2 Green: Climate Change

Purple/red: socio-economic factors

As one can see, most of the elements are part of the contributing factors of the socio-

economic sphere. In our case examples in chapter five, we will focus on two main elements

which belong to the socio-economic factors. However, we have identified the group of local

climate as a main threat, as well as the group of climate change as a main contributing factor

which is why we first give a very short introduction of global climate change. Here, we will

draw the connections of our regional model within the global scale.


17

4 The regional and the global scale

The regional and the global scale are deeply intertwined. One of the factors that indicates

this the most is the CO2eq-emission. Australia, as one country of the region we analysed, is

ranked on 10th place of the highest emitters of CO2 per capita (Joint Research Centre 2016,

see also figure 5).

Fig. 5: CO2 emission per capita (Joint Research Centre 2016)

Higher amounts of CO2 in the atmosphere lead to higher temperatures. However, these are

spread unevenly around the continent. As figure 6 shows, temperature anomalies have been

observed especially in the (northern) Polar Regions.


18

Fig. 6: Decadal surface temperature anomalies relative to 1951 – 1980 base periods (Hansen et al 2010: 12)

The higher temperatures in the Polar Regions lead to severe ice melting (contributing factor).

Additionally, the overall warming leads to the expansion of water. This strongly increases the

threat of sea level rise and floods. The visible stresses conditioned by these threats are

reduced populations, habitat and species loss which then affect the key ecological attributes,

such as species and genetic diversity, biomass distribution and production, and

connectedness. These processes can be observed globally. For the Australia-Oceania-

region, sea level rise is a big threat, as many islands lay just above sea level. These

populations, humans, animals and plants, face severe problems to find refuge.

These global dynamics of higher temperatures also lead to higher occurrences of extreme

weather conditions, causing for example our identified no.1 threat droughts. Especially the

“Millennium” drought during 1997-2009 had major environmental impacts as well as water

restrictions in urban centres (IPCC 2014: 1387) in Australia. Due to the threat of heat waves

and droughts, the stress of loss of population is affecting the key ecological attributes. For

example, the drought caused a high number of deaths in the flying fox population (IPCC

2014: 1391). Flying foxes are a key species, as they are seed disposers and pollinators and

thus an important biodiversity object. In a worst case scenario, pollination processes are


19

being impacted which could affect the ecosystem service of food such as crops. This, again,

is directly connected to the human well-being of food.

Another impact of higher temperatures and a higher amount of CO2 in the atmosphere are

bleached corals, one of our highest ranked major stresses. Increased sea surface

temperature and acidification firstly lead to bleached corals (especially in north-eastern, and

more recently in Western Australia) and finally to their death (IPCC 2014: 1374-1375). For

the ecosystem of coral reefs, corals are a key species (biodiversity objects) and essential.

Their loss means the loss of habitat, species, and finally, the loss of a whole ecosystem.

The increase of temperature is only one example of the interconnectedness of dynamics

around the globe. We will now focus on Australia and Oceania, to focus on the connections

within the regional systems.

5 Results

5.1 Main Threats according to rating

With respect to the grouping in our MARISCO-model we have seen that out of the 12 top

rated threats most of them can be either categorized under “local climate change“ (7 out of

10) or belong to the group of what we named “human induced environmental changes“ (3 out

of 10). The rating indicates that climate change is already highly affecting this world region

with far-reaching impacts on ecosystems and societies. In the following, the five highest

rated threats shall be examined in closer detail with regard to their causes and impacts on

the region.

Droughts

Though the current understanding of the impacts of climate change on biodiversity generally

remains poor, there are indicators for a certain development that are very likely to happen

(Kingsford: 270). One is that rising temperatures and changes in precipitation will have an

effect on groundwater quantity and quality putting vast areas in Australia and Oceania under

the risk of drought (IPCC 2014: 1389). The Australian Bureau of Meteorology defines a

drought as a “prolonged absence or marked deficiency of precipitation (rain)“ (Australian

Government 2016c). Here it must be taken into account that a decrease in rainfall patterns

only shows in comparison to typical rainfall patterns (including seasonal variations); which

leads to an understanding of “drought” as a relative term. Studies of the temporal-spatial


20

characteristics of severe drought events show that intensity, duration, and affected areas of

droughts are increasing worldwide since the 1970s, with devastating impacts on agriculture

and increased risks of habitat loss through desertification and extreme forest fires (Wang,

Wu et al. 2014).

While Oceania in general does not belong to the most affected areas regarding an extreme

increase in drought events (Wang, Wu et al. 2014), large parts of Australia are expected to

experience greater intensity of droughts and heat waves in the future (IPCC 2014: 1377),

intensified through a naturally high climatic variability in the region, especially regarding

rainfall. As mentioned earlier, the El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) plays an important

role for driving the climatic variability over Australia (ibid). Droughts in the region may even

result from the El Niño Phenomenon, as El Niño leads to decreased precipitation in many

land areas.

The experienced severe drought events threaten biodiversity with loss of population and

habitat, for example loss of amphibians in southeast Australia and savannah trees in

northeast Australia and eucalyptus in the sub-alpine regions of Tasmania (IPCC 2014: 1390-

1391). While peat-forming wetlands dry out, tropical and subtropical rain forests (for example

in Queensland) are suffering from drying and warming (IPCC 2014: 1391). Inland freshwater

and groundwater systems are severely affected by drought, over-allocation and altered

timing of floods (ibid).

Acidification

According to our MARISCO model, the second highest threat for the region is primarily

induced by human action: Ocean acidification is caused by anthropogenically elevated CO₂

concentration in the atmosphere that is being absorbed by the sea water leading to a

decrease in the pH of seawater. The acidified seawater imposes a critical threat to calcify

marine organisms and coral reef ecosystems. Though, current understanding on potential

biological responses is limited, a worldwide changing and dying of certain marine populations

indicates, that decrease in seawater pH alters the acid-base balance with the cells of marine

organisms. That means increasing ocean acidification is expected to affect many taxa

including corals, coralline algae and calcareous plankton, with unpredictable consequences

for the higher levels of marine food chains. Marine ecosystems like the famous Great Barrier

Reef are therefore highly vulnerable to warming and acidification showing developments of

recent bleaching and reduced calcification which lead to “significant change in community


21

composition and structure of coral reef systems in Australia“ (IPCC 2014: 1411).

Sea level rise

Sea level rise poses a significant risk for the Pacific islands, Australia and New Zealand. As

mentioned in an earlier chapter, the main reasons lie in the world’s greenhouse gas

emissions that lead to higher temperatures and a melting of the Arctic ice shield. At the same

time, the global mean sea level rise shows regionally different faces. While Oceania

contributes itself to a rather small proportion to the global greenhouse gas emission it suffers

at the same time a disproportionately large impact. Even at current mean sea levels, many

locations in the South Pacific region are highly vulnerable to extreme sea levels and

projections indicate that this vulnerability will increase further in the future (Walsh 2011: 149).

Many of the islands coastlines are located on a very extremely low level which exposes them

to the risk of disappearing or at least shrinking with even small rises in sea levels. Even large

islands like New Guinea may lose their major conservation reserves with a sea level rise of

already one meter (Woinarski 2009: 2389). Extreme sea levels can be caused by several

processes, including severe weather events such as tropical cyclones, which lead to

elevated coastal sea levels through storm surge and high waves (Walsh 2011: 149). Adding

up to the global interlinkage of this issue – greenhouse gas emission and temperature rise –

there are some rather regional factors that contribute to the vulnerability towards sea level

rise, like intensified coastal development and the location of population centres and

infrastructure. The responsibility here for adapting to sea level rise in the South Pacific region

rests principally with local governments and communities through spatial planning (IPCC

2014: 1384).

Storms and Floods

Number 4 and 5 on our list of highest rated threats in Oceania and Australia are storms and

floods, which in this context can – together with severe drought – be seen as “climate-related

disasters” (IPCC 2014: 1405). As increased storminess and rainfall may raise the potential

risk of flooding, there can also be a causal connection in the occurrence of these two

extreme events. Projections indicate that tropical cyclones are worldwide likely to decrease in

number, and that the average wind maximum speed as well as the rainfall intensity related

with cyclones are likely to increase. In other words, extreme storm events per year will be

fewer but more extreme. Particularly in the South Pacific region, tropical cyclones are likely

to intensify, generating extreme sea levels in this region, while increasing extreme rainfall

leads to increasing flood risk in many locations. Flood damages to human settlements and


22

infrastructure have been intensifying and increasing in frequency in Australia and New

Zealand (ibid: 1374 f.). Societies whose economies rely fundamentally on natural resources,

agriculture and tourism suffer from high socio-economic damages by the intensifying of

climate-related disasters. According to the IPCC 2014, floods and storms are the second

most costly natural hazards in New Zealand after earthquakes (ibid: 1403).

In the above examination of the major threats on the Australian and Oceanian region, we can

see clearly the connection of the global climate issues affecting the climate conditions on the

local level. The cause-effect chains in these cases are quite long, intertwined and the level of

upcoming uncertainties are pretty high.

5.2 Examples: Overfishing and Invasive Species

Negative effects from climate change occurring all around the world, of cause in different

appearance and strength. In the following part we examine two threat-examples that we think

are rather typical for the region of Australia and Oceania. Undoubtedly, both threats are not

exclusive to find only in this region. Overfishing is a general issue of the global marine

ecosystem, as well as invasive species might be a problem also for other islands as in the

Caribbean. But compared to the threats examined in Chapter 5.1 we expect to find the

tackling points rather on a regional level than on a global one.

5.2.1 Example: Overfishing

Definition of overfishing

Overfishing can be defined as “(…) the human act of extracting aquatic fauna from natural

water bodies at a rate greater than the reproductive and recruitment functions can replace

that extraction.” (Hogan 2014) In general, due to intensive fishing the breeding stock levels

get reduced to such a low level, that the fish cannot sustain their population. In this case the

ecosystem would get out of balance with great consequences for ecological and

anthropogenic lives.

The following chapter explains the impacts of overfishing on the local level and shows the

direct connection to the global MARISCO-model (see figure on page 30).


23

Regional and global connection to overfishing within the Australian and Oceania

region

Due to the geographical location of Oceania and Australia in the pacific region, the marine

ecosystem is the largest ecosystem. Therefore, the fishing industry is a major nutrition,

welfare, culture, employment, and recreation resource for the population of the Pacific

Islands within that region (Gillett 2011: 4). For example, tuna vessels and tuna canning alone

provide about 12,000 jobs within the region and contribute up to 10 per cent of the GDP. Also

very important for the Pacific island countries and territories (PICTs) is the export of fishing

products. In half of the countries the export of fishery products accounts for about 80 percent

(Gillett 2010: 4). Papua New Guinea as a regional leading country in fishery was responsible

for about 37 per cent of the fishery production within the region (see figure below). Local

coastal and offshore fishing make about 43 per cent of overall fishery in the southern pacific.

Notable, foreign companies are paying license fees to the PICTs which are essential and in

some cases even the major income of government revenue for some of the countries (Gillett

2011: 4). As such, foreign based offshore fishing has a major impact on the regional eco-

and social systems and is responsible for about half of the value of fisheries there. Here one

can see the intertwined connectivity between the local and the global MARISCO-mapping

considering overfishing issues within Oceania.


24

Fig. 7: Production from fisheries by countries (Gillett 2010: 4)

On another global scale, the impact of fisheries within the southern Pacific Ocean seems to

be marginal (see chart below). But due to the connectivity of the ecosystems by e.g.

migratory fish or currents and streams regional system disturbances will always have a great

impact on a global level and vice versa.

Considering these natural connections between the different eco-regions, and regarding the

importance of the fishery sector within the PICTs we also have to include the impacts on the

Oceanian region coming from a global systems. Interlinkages between ecoregions due to

global environmental change as well as global human interaction make it impossible to treat

overfishing as an isolated and only regional problem.

Fig. 8: Aquaculture production by region: quantity and percentage of world total production (FAO2014)

Impacts of overfishing on human wellbeing

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

2012


25

According to the MARISCO-approach, human wellbeing arises from “a combination of

recognizable goods and services derived from biodiversity” (Ibisch/Hobson, 2014: 55) and

depends tightly on a healthy environment. The following paragraph will show the impacts of

overfishing on human well-being by some examples.

Following the MARSICO-model, we have to regard certain indications that show us in detail

which elements of the ecosystem are affected by the threat “overfishing” and eventually

leading to disturbances in our wellbeing.

Overfishing as a given threat within the region of Australia and Oceania, leads to certain

stresses regarding the marine ecosystem. Stresses as reactions of the system to the threat

“overfishing” might appear as a decrease or even a loss in species. Without addressing and

managing the overexploitation of the ocean, a high loss in certain species leads to a shift of

habitat or even to a loss of it.

Threats and stresses have a negative impact on the key ecological attributes of ecosystems.

When certain key species are overfished and therefore degraded we can observe sever

impacts on the ecosystem functionality. For instance, a huge loss in tuna as one of the big

predators in the Pacific Ocean might have a great impact on the food web: While the amount

of tuna decreases, the amount of pray fish increases and thus causes an imbalance of the

marine ecosystem.

The selected stresses and key ecological attributes mentioned above assess the current

status of the biodiversity objects within the given region, especially in the Pacific. Talking

about species diversity, while examining overfishing, we have to have a closer look at the

main fish species that are in interest of the fishing industry. Noteworthy are in particular

tunas, billfish, inshore finfish as well as invertebrates which are counted here as biodiversity

objects of the marine ecosystem.

The biodiversity object fish contributes certain ecosystem services to the beneficiaries. An

increase in a loss of this fish species has a negative effect on the ecosystem´s services that

are providing food for the local and global communities.

If these ecosystem services are scarce or even not available anymore the effects on human

needs might be sever. These interrelations might have impacts on food security and

therefore on human health. Another effect might be that the fulfilment of material needs fail

due to the economic dependency of the local people on the fishery sector.


26

Contributing factors

Considering the impacts on human well-being, it is important to figure certain driving factors

that lead to overfishing. As mentioned above, overfishing is not only a regional but a global

problem. Regarding the contributing factors that are having impacts on the local marine

ecosystem we can point out the connectivity between the local and global issues.

Population growth and urbanization

The overall exponential population growth might be a leading factor for the exploitation of the

world´s ecosystems, especially because it is bringing along a lot of side effects. Most of

these side effects are connected to our unrestrained consumption patterns. So will an

estimated regional expansion to almost 15 million people by 2035 be a challenge for the

Pacific island’s ecosystems due to the increasing usage of the ecosystem services.

Especially Melanesia is expecting a high growth (Gillett 2010: 7). In connections, there will

be a continuing urbanization that will result in about one-third of the population of Melanesia,

one-half of that in Polynesia, and three-quarters of that in Micronesia living in urban areas by

2035 (ibid.).

Increasing demand in seafood

In consequence of the population growth we are going to face a higher demand of food in

general. Experts claim that the fishery sector might play an interesting role considering the

exponential population growth and challenging future food security. The high nutritious

potential of fish is seen as one of the major advantages of fish compared to other animal

proteins. Therefore, one can expect that the demand on fish will increase even more over the

next years and decades. This demand will have a huge impact on the capacity of aquatic

ecosystems and maintaining a sustainable fishery industry might become one of the major

issues we will have to deal with. According to the FAO, the today´s global fish production is a

steadily growing business by an annual rate of 3.2 per cent (FAO 2014, 3).

Developing of new technologies

As mentioned in the MARISCO-guideline: “The rapid development of technology has

engendered the exponential growth in the human exploitation of natural resources”

(Ibisch/Hobson, 2014: 29). This is an important factor when considering overfishing. Due to

new large scale fishery methods as bottom trawling where the large net scooping up


27

everything in its path, biological sustainable fish levels declined from 90 per cent in 1974 to

71.2 per cent in 2011 (FAO 2014: 7). It even destroys severely other ecosystems like the

seafloor. This large-scale fishing method has taken place on the regional as well as on the

global level in order to take advantages of the so called economies of scale. Therefore, 28.8

per cent of the fish stocks are estimated as overfished. Hence overfishing is one of the

“Threats” that we ranked as one major global issue which has great impacts on the local

level as well as on the global level and so should be regarded not only on the local

MARCISO-mapping but also on the global one.

At this point it might be important to mention the dramatic side effect of fishing especially on

a large scale: The by-catch. It is still a big issue considering new technologies. Not only does

it cause the avoidable death of many non-target species, and threatening endangered

species but it has also major impacts on the marine ecosystem itself as in species

distribution or changes in the food web.

Economic development

Another contributing factor that leads to overfishing is the economic development of PICTs.

Due to their small size and their lack of natural resources most of the PICTs are facing a

slow economic growth. Foreign aid supporting the fishery sector on the local level – even

when it is tried to keep sustainable – might help to increase and safe the income for local

communities but it still has great impacts on the regional fish stocks.

Even when the PICTs will not play a big role on the international fishery export markets, it will

be still important on the local level. But as the demand on seafood increases due to

population growth and the growing wealth of import-depending countries as China it is very

likely that more foreign vessels want to fish in the islands waters.

Others argue that due to the rise of poverty in that region – one-third of the people on the

Pacific Islands are living below the poverty line – there will be large impacts on coastal

fisheries (Gillett & Cartwright 2010: 7). More people without jobs will seek for employment in

the sector for food security and immediate money and harvest and threaten the coastal fish

stocks (ibid.). In a long term the reduced resources of fish might increase global market

prices for seafood which could be an encouraging factor for PITCs fishery sectors to harvest

more fish for the international markets. On the other side, as soon as the fish stocks are

exploited, the income of lots of people will be lost.


28

Lack in international regulation and laws and merged governance structures

The management of the fishery sector might be only effective if it gets carried out on a multi-

national level. Considerable is here especially the tuna as one of the highly migratory species

in the Pacific (Gillett 2011: 2). Covered by regional arrangements, it is still to national

governments to implement those. Regarding the slow economic growth of the PICTs

governance is very prone to corruption in connection with (foreign) unsustainable fishery

interests (Tsamenyi & Hanich 2008: 6).

Another issue concerning international regulations is the large areas of international waters

within the region, which complicates the regional fishery management efforts (ibid.). Even

when there are high efforts on international and national level to draft and implement certain

laws to protect the ocean and coastal regions from overfishing, especially countries with poor

levels of government are not able to close loopholes in fisheries law (Managing fisheries on

High Seas, n.d.). Compared to most of the Islands, Australia and especially New Zeeland

have indeed strong fishery management laws.

On the other side, the large numbers of government agencies that are involved in finding

binding solutions against marine exploitation tend to slow and stifle the management efforts.

Finding sustainable compromises might also be a challenge for those countries with poor

governance structures, especially since many countries like Nauru, Vanuatu or Papua New

Guinea have trouble to deal with high population growth or diminishing other social services

as fresh water supply or unemployment rates (Aqorau, 2016).

Climate change

Additionally to the human induced impact of the fish population in the oceans, the steadily

increasing amount of greenhouse gasses and carbon dioxide in the atmosphere will affect

the marine ecosystem as well. Global warming and ocean acidification will have its effects on

the species distribution in the ocean. As oceans warm up, many marine species will move

towards the poles. This shift in distribution will lead to a shift in fishing patterns and loops

back into food insecurity. Due to this shift and the destruction of coastal reef habitats (IPCC

2014: 1621), the fishing sector depends on new technologies to get the fish from offshore

waters. From an economic point of view this is rather efficient on a larger scale fishery than

on a small-scale. This will lead – if not managed – to non-sustainable fisheries and again

overfishing.


29

Illegal fishing

Illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing (IUU) remains a major problem that the marine

ecosystem has to deal with. Unimpeded fishing leads to over-exploitation and depletion of

fish stocks. A big problem here, are the weak laws and control mechanisms, which are

especially devastating when countries suffering a weak governance system anyway. To fight

and prosecute IUU should be a goal of every PICTs. According to the Pacific Island Fishery

Forum, it is almost impossible to estimate the IUU activities within the Pacific. But they say

IUU fishing by licensed fleet accounts for 95 per cent of the volume and value of IUU activity

(…) in the Pacific (Roy 2016). We can see, that controlling and preventing IUU is a

concerning issue with huge impacts on regional but also on global level.

Conclusion

Fishery is one of the most significant renewable resources for the Oceanian countries

considering food security, livelihoods and economic growth. Therefore it is in the interest of

that region that they balance the fish and seafood demand with the sustainable capacities of

the ocean and its fish stocks.

Regarding the threat factor “overfishing” we can point out that this issue is not only solvable

by local or regional strategies but global ones. Because the main reasons for overfishing -

that this theoretical examination pointed out – are global issues: Climate change and

unsustainable consumption patterns.

The loss of fish species as a food securing resource has not only a negative impact on the

biodiversity and the delivery of ecosystem services, but leads to high costs for societies to

trade-off these losses, especially in countries with a low GDP as Kiribati or the Solomon

Islands.


30

Fig. 10:

Visio

Example

for Over

fishing


31

5.2.2 Example: Invasive Species

A second ecological threat with vast socio-economical implications on this world region is the

invasion of alien species.

Definition of “Invasive species“

The US-American National Invasive Species Council (NISC) together with the Invasive

Species Advisory Committee (ISAC) define the term invasive species in the Executive

Summary of the National Invasive Species Management Plan (NISMP) as „a species that is

a) non-native to the ecosystem under consideration and

b) whose introduction causes or is likely to cause economic or environmental harm or harm

to human health“. (NISC 2006: 1)

To specify the term „invasive“ in comparison with merely „alien“, the NISMP’s Guidance

Principle #1 points out that “many alien species are non-invasive and support human

livelihoods or a preferred quality of life” (ibid). Despite numerous scientific attempts to further

clarify the term, not every case of an introduced species might be clearly categorized as

invasive or not, as a species could well be considered invasive – and therefore harmful – by

some sectors of a society while others see it as rather beneficial. Here, differing interests in

categorizing a species as invasive often derive from economic interests contrasting

ecological implications and prospects. As an example: In Australia one quarter of the listed

20 “worst weeds“ are still legally sold on the market. At the same time invading weeds

together with major pests cost the Australian government more than $ 4.7 billion yearly. Just

six of Australia’s worst weed species have degraded more than 20 million hectares of natural

and grazing land (Australian Biosecurity Group 2005: 6 ff.).

However, in many cases the harm caused by non-native species invading a territory is

unambiguous, ranging from agricultural damages to species extinctions. In Australia alone,

the impacts of invasive species have been more severe than on any other continent and are

considered a key escalating threat to the continent's biodiversity.


32

Regional and global connection to invasive species in Australia and Oceania

The impacts of species invasion affect species and ecosystems in all parts of the planet. On

a global scale, invasive species have even been recognized as the most serious threat to

biodiversity after habitat loss (ISC 20091), particularly threatening islands biodiversity with a

high endemic rate resulting from limited migration capacities.

With respect to the genesis as well as the impacts of species invasion this phenomena has

per se a local as well as a global side to it. The global embeddedness seems somewhat

obvious as introduced species are literally brought to a region “from the outside“ (the global

level), whereas the newcomers interact with endemic wild or domestic life in a certain local

environment that itself has specific key ecological attributes to it (the local/ regional level) that

either provide ecological niches and benefit invasion or not. Here, high levels of endemism

are associated with a higher climatic vulnerability as well as with lower adaptation capacities

(IPCC 2014: 1391).

The reason why Australia, New Zealand and parts of the Pacific islands have been

particularly affected by the negative impacts of species invasion relates to an early isolation

of this part of the world from the other continents resulting in a genetic isolation during more

than 50 million years of evolution. For that matter a relatively high number of endemic

species belong to the key ecological attributes of this continent, bringing about a worldwide

unique flora and fauna in Australia as well as New Zealand that differs strongly to the one of

Eurasia or America. Among the more prominent examples of endemic wildlife in Australia

and Oceania is the Kiwi that lives on New Zealand's islands, the Australian duckbill and

several marsupial species that are endemic on the Australian continent, like the kangaroo,

the koala and the marsupial mole. Moreover high numbers of endemic bird species as well

as other vertebrates, invertebrates and plants are to be found here.

Island biotas in particular suffer from non-native species invasion, partly because endemic

species are typically small in population size and limited in their genetic diversity and

reproduction rate, and also because they show limited defence capacities – being

behavioural, immunological or otherwise – towards new predators or diseases (Woinarski

2010: 2388). Therefore, endemic species find themselves quite often in an inferior position to

introduced ones. Australia's mostly terrestrial small species for example can’t protect

themselves by flight or defence behaviour from foreign predators. Besides, the remoteness

and genetic endemic isolation of these regions relate to other key attributes that favour the


33

spreading of introduced species even further: Only very few endemic predators exist in these

ecosystems and the areas are often sparsely populated. Thus, some key characteristics of

Australian and Oceanic ecosystems impose highly favourable conditions for non-native

species to invade new habitats.

Impacts of invasive species on human wellbeing

In the regional MARISCO-model we named the threat “outcompeting endemic species“,

pointing at the problem: New species compete with native flora and fauna for food and

habitat; they may change predatory patterns, modify habitats and/or introduce new diseases

and pathogens that endemic wild and domestic species had no evolutionary chance to adapt

with (yet). Invaders may therefore lead to changes in species distribution as well as to

changes in population size (flora and fauna); and invasive predators or outcompeting species

eventually cause extinction, causing a loss of species in both flora and fauna (IPCC 2014:

1391).

Consequently, the Invasive Species Council (ISC) in Australia considers invasive species to

be one of the top three threats to Australian biodiversity, along with habitat loss and climate

change (ISC 20091). Almost two-thirds (61 per cent) of Australia’s threatened species are

today threatened by introduced non-native plants or animals. In the last 200 years, 22

mammals (16 species, 6 subspecies) and 13 island birds (3 species, 10 subspecies) have

become extinct in Australia due to predation by invasive mammals and the competition from

invasive birds and honeybees. Four to six species of frog were wiped out by infection from an

invasive fungus in eastern Australia and two rodent species on Christmas islands got extinct

by a certain type of blood parasite from introduced black rats (ISC 20092). At the same time

invasive weeds are increasingly dominating many ecosystems, fundamentally altering their

function and composition, and invading the habitat of already threatened species.

Many other Australian species are seriously endangered. In Australia and New Zealand one

exotic pathogen threatens 100 of endemic plant species. According to the World Wide Fund

for Nature Australia over 54.000 native plants and animals are threatened with extinction

(WWF 2007: 1). Although such a high number of species loss is caused by the interaction of

several reasons, European foxes, rats and cats rank among the main sources of this

development in Australia. The situation on the Oceanic islands shows a similar picture,

where invasive vertebrates and plants have caused 75 per cent of all terrestrial vertebrate


34

extinctions. Rats and mongoose attacking birds on Fiji and other islands just being one

example out of numerous others (SCBO 2015).

With natural and agricultural landscapes, freshwater biomes and coastal ecosystems shifting

their constitution under the influence of species invasion, the economic, environmental and

social wellbeing of humankind is strongly affected as well. With regard to various ecosystem

services, invasive species impose a threat to human wellbeing and health causing

agricultural damages by reducing sizes of domestic populations and/or spreading diseases.

Contributing factors

Before looking at possible management and mitigation strategies, it is crucial to constitute

driving factors that contribute to and may even aggravate or accelerate the threat of species

invasion. What we face here is a mostly human induced stress: Most invasive species have

been brought from other continents to a specific region by people, either deliberately or

without any knowledge or intention. Consequently, our MARISCO-model lists the contributing

factors mainly among the grouping of socio-economic factors, complemented by key drivers

of climatic changes (see fig. 11).

Political and legal control

Political and legal control plays a fundamental role in reacting on invading species as well as

in protecting areas from future invasions. Australia as well as other countries started to

implement laws and restrictions for species import to their territories in the late 1990ies.

There has been a growing concern about species invasion to the local ecosystems and

societies since. Still, often a lack of social, economic and cultural sustainability awareness

leads to an underestimation of this threat adding up to the fact that anticipation of specific

impacts an exotic invader might have is in most cases highly difficult (Low 2001: 40).

An ostentatious example for a deliberate import of foreign species with unintended outcome

was the introduction of the European red fox and the European rabbit for hunting reasons on

the Australian continent during the 19th century. Not long after that, rabbits began to

explosively increase in number causing serious damage to local ecosystems by eating seeds

and sprouts and thus exposing the naked soils to erosion. As a reaction to this, growing

ecological threat Australian politics decided to import a natural predator of the rabbit, the

domestic cat, to hunt down the proliferating rabbit populations. The well-known end of the


35

story serves as a showcase for failed ecosystem conservation politics: Instead of limiting the

size of the rabbit population to an environmentally compatible level, European cats and fox

rapidly increased in number themselves (together with invasive rat species that came

unintended with expanding shipping transportation to the island continent). Up to this very

day, it is these few foreign mammal species that pose the biggest threat to endemic wildlife

in Australia and New Zealand.

Historical colonization and its effects

Since European colonization, about three-quarters of the vertebrate animal extinctions in

Australia have been caused – at least to a major part – by invading species. In this context,

Australia serves as a vivid example for the causal connection between species invasion and

the factor of Historical colonization and its effects: Within the last 200 years only, Australia

experienced nearly half of all global mammalian extinctions – to the major part caused by

predation from invasive feral cats and red foxes, and in some cases rabbits implicated as a

contributing factor (Evans et al. 2011: 281 f.).

Globalization

Nowadays most species are being introduced without any intention. A driving factor here is

globalization, defined by the Monetary Fund as “the growing economic interdependence of

countries worldwide through the increasing volume and variety of cross-border transactions

in goods and services and of international capital flows, and also through the more rapid and

widespread diffusion of technology” (Low 2001: 39). Increasing mobility through a greater

world trade and transport network, travel and tourism plays the key role, to a certain degree

intensified by the dependence of imported goods, as many species are brought to remote

areas through transportation of goods. Accordingly, factors for growing species invasion are

associated with economic drivers, an increasing (human) population size and changes in

consumption patterns (Low 2001: 39).

Intensive shipping on harbours

A specific result of globalization caused by a growing world trade and tourism market is the

vast and intensive transportation network of giant cargo ships, which spread invasive species

in their hulls. In fact, the rate of invasion increases parallel to the growing of world trade. Also

the potential of ballast water to spread pests has become a major concern in recent years:


36

As large cargo ships carry sea water to maintain stability they transport containing larval fish,

worms, algae and possibly diseases within the water over huge distances. Over three billion

tonnes of water are yearly carried around and discharged somewhere else this way.

According to the International Maritime Organization (IMO) marine invaders cost the world

tens of billions of US dollars every year, imposing a serious threat to ecosystems and

potentially to human health by spreading diseases (Australian Biosecurity Group 2005: 11).

Climatic and Temperature Change

Beside these human induced factors the pressure on endemic species through invasion is

highly accelerated by climatic change. Where temperatures rise and rainfall patterns change

animals and plants migrate out of their hotter and drier habitats to more suitable climates

where they often impose an imminent threat to endemic species. For a number of reasons

invasive species are likely to cause more harm under climate change. Many invasive species

are highly adaptable and able to tolerate or take advantage of change and disturbance. Like

this, a temperature shift towards a warmer and drier climate encourages the spread of

existing invasives and provides favourable conditions for other exotic species, like ants and

mosquitoes, once they got introduced in a given location. The endemic species, killed or

stressed by climatic changes or by infection of exotic diseases, get then all too often be

replaced by invasive weeds or feral animals. Vice versa, the eventual loss of biodiversity that

may result, again affects the local ecosystem: The stress caused by invasive species

increases its vulnerability to rapid climate change by reducing its resilience capacity (IPCC

2014: 1391). Thus, extreme weather conditions and events like floods, storms, cyclones,

extreme fire regimes and droughts favour and sometimes accelerate invasion. Especially in

regions like south-eastern Australia where there is a heterogeneity of predominant threats to

biodiversity, many different threats operate simultaneously and synergistically (ISC 20092).

Conclusion

Invasive species have been the primary cause of biodiversity loss in Australia and Oceania

and are considered to be an escalating threat to local ecosystems. The damages caused by

species invasion affect endemic biota as well as ecosystem services and lead to high costs

for societies and communities. Prevention strategies through stricter laws and border

controls have been implemented in all of the highly affected countries in the region and have

led to a worldwide rising awareness towards the problem. Still the invasion of species keeps

growing together with globalized markets and mobility. Mitigation efforts prove to be difficult


37

to implement with unforeseeable long term consequences within ecosystems. Here, it is of

highest interest to find mitigation management strategies that work in a specific location

taking variations as well as the nestedness of different influencing factors and threats – like

climate shifts – into consideration.

Fig. 11: Visio example for invasive species


38

6 Outlook and Discussion

So far, we have shown some cause-effect chains regarding the examples of overfishing and

outcompeting endemic species. Already with this knowledge we can think about possible

tackling points. To work on this feasible the MARISCO-approach advises to assess the

manageability of threats and stresses, mainly to avoid ´unmanageable` management

attempts. Therefore, we would like to shortly introduce an outlook on the manageability to our

report along the examples of overfishing and endemic species.

6.1 Manageability

Some ecosystems which suffer from (potential) severe changes can become rather stable

again due to the right management. According to the MARISCO approach the successful

management of the ecosystem´s threats and stresses depends especially on the preparation

to deal with non-knowledge. This includes “to be more risk-robust and prepared for surprises,

and to anticipate worst-case scenarios” (Ibisch/Hobson 2014: 33). Non-knowledge

management hereby is crucial for mitigation and adaptation strategies:

“A non-knowledge-based risk-management approach would also be rooted in the precautionary principle that it is better to prepare for an unlikely risk that later turns out to be based on wrong assumptions, than to be negatively surprised by a risk that could not be modelled from existing evidence.” (Ibisch/Hobson: 2014, 34)

We can cherish, that the level of manageability differ between certain contributing factors,

threats and stresses (cf. Ibisch/Hobson, 2014: 117) and whether they require a local, national

or global strategy. The logical corollary is that short-term solutions are desirable on a local

level, while on a global level long-term solutions seem to be more effective.

Regarding the manageability of ecosystem impacts and the high embeddedness of regional

ecosystem changes on a global scope we would like to shortly examine the manageability of

the two examples above:


39

Manageability: Overfishing

In the case of overfishing it is most important to manage the recovery of the fish stocks. But

the success depends on the conditions of the ecosystem. Is the system already too unstable

due to an ecosystem shift it is impossible to re-introduce the lost species. If the ecosystem is

still intact it is – with the right management – possible to re-establish a breeding population.

Fishery management thresholds will have to be reassessed as the ecological basis on which

existing thresholds have been established changes, and new thresholds will have to be

developed for immigrant species (IPCC 2014: 1290). And international and national fishery

management and controlling laws have to become more transparent and binding, especially

regarding to licensing foreign vessels.

Manageability: Endemic species

As has been pointed out, interactions with climate change are likely to favour species

invasion in future and at the same time to aggravate its impacts (Low 2009. 1). At the same

time, spatial variation in the distributions of threats to biodiversity often complicates the

manageability. An understanding of this variation is therefore important to implement specific

management actions to mitigate processes that are threatening species in a given location.

As invasive species and habitat loss spread widely over the Australasian world region, the

problem will not be solved by protected areas without additional management. Here, it has to

be taken into consideration that the threat of species and biodiversity loss does not operate

in isolation but is closely bound to a multiplicity of threats (like habitat loss and climatic

changes) and contributing factors.

Even when we draw a broad outline of management strategies, there are some highly risky

factors that might negatively influence the success of certain management strategies on the

regional level in Australia and Oceania. These are amongst others, the following:

Political instability

We can find high political instability or at least many catalysts benefiting political instability in

the region, especially in most Melanesian countries. Social systems are lying under a

constant dynamics and changes as demographic shifts, new economic investments,

elections or social uprising. So it seems to be very likely that one have to take these kinds of

side effects into consideration when striving for successful management strategies. Not only


40

management affords on a local level might be affected by political instability but also global

ones. Regarding multilevel governance, multinational coalitions might become weak when

political instability occurs. According to the IPCC 2014 report, preconditions for a successful

management are closely related to principles of good governance (e.g. IPCC 2014: 576),

which might help countries to become more resilient to negative changes in social systems.

Climate change impacts are already a driving factor for possible political instability. When a

country is yet unstable, it might be not easy to implement management strategies

successfully especially regarding long-term achievements.

Low GDP and high costs for implementing management strategies

Management strategies with large up-front overhead cost are not easy to bear for small

islands, especially when their GDP is generally low. The costs cannot be downscaled in

proportion to the population size. The cost per capita on small islands is substantially higher

than in other territories with a larger population. “This is a major socioeconomic reality that

confronts many small islands (…)”. (IPCC 2014: 1626) This makes them more likely rely on

foreign aid or credits. The donors in turn rather act in politically stable countries where a

success of certain management strategies is more likely.

All this manageability obstructing factors on the regional level might have great impacts on

the global scale. On the other side, the possibility for uncertainties obstructing a successful

manageability is most likely and even higher on a global scale than on a regional. Here we

would like to quote Ibisch and Hobson again: “The ´Earth super-ecosystem` is a complex

higher-order system of nested and/or overlapping and interacting subsystems.” (ibid.: 37)

The same applies to the human systems. When both together interact in an unsustainable

way, we will find ourselves in a complex system of uncertainties and feedback loops.

In the following part we want to demonstrate this intertwinedness of highly complex social

and eco-systems with the example of climate change induced migration. Regarding the

environmental circumstances in the region, especially speaking of the Oceanian islands,

people there will face high numbers of migration due to territory losses brought by sea level

rise, which is according to our ranking one leading threat in the region.


41

6.2 Example: Migration – Manageability and uncertainty

Increasing occurrence of seasonal droughts, floods or rising sea levels increase the

migration of people both regional and global. Migration due to environmental factors is not a

modern phenomenon. But their official recognition as refugees got firstly acknowledged in

Paris COP21 in December 2015, when the world leaders drafted the first agreement on so

called “Climate migrants”. The United Nations expect about 200 million climate refugees by

2050 (De Bode, 2015). According to the International Migration Organization (IMO) these

migrations will have uncertain impacts on livelihoods and as well on ecosystems (Migration

and Climate Change, n.d.).

Migration is a short-term solution on long-term environmental disturbances. Migration,

climate change and their impacts on the ecosystems might occur in a positive feedback loop

that is embedded and interconnected within the local, regional and global system as

demonstrated here.

Climate Change

Climate Change

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

Climate Change

GHGEmission

+

Ecosystemdisturbance

Destructionoflivelihoods

Migration

Creatingnewlivelihoods

Increasedusageofecosystem

services

Increasedecosystemstrain

+

Positivefeedbackloopforclimatechangeinducedmigration

+

Fig. 8: Positive feedback loop for climate change induced migration


42

The feedback loop shows the significant connection between the local, regional and global

scope. The effects are here also interrelated. Climate change, as a global issue, has different

impacts on local ecosystems, which leads to different threats and stresses and to

disturbances within the system. As soon as these impacts start to hit people’s daily life they

will most likely migrate.

The impact of migration on a global level might occur in an increase of GHG within the

countries of destination. We have to view the surveys on that topic still with caution because

(a) they are mostly written by (government) offices of the destination countries, all of them

high emitters like the USA, UK or Australia, (b) there are only small bodies of research, and

(c) the effects are uncertain and vary from case to case. Still, these countries fear, that the

“movement of people from ´high-carbon` parts of the world will cause an absolute increase in

GHG emissions if migrants from ´low-carbon` areas increase consumption of carbon-

intensive products once they have migrated.” (Environmental impact of immigration, n.d.)

The US based Center for Immigration Studies explains that even if the averaged migrant

produces less CO2 than a native-born American, they would produce about four times for

CO2 in the USA as they would have in their country of origin (Camarota & Kolankiewicz,

2008).

Breaking this feedback loop we have to deal with all uncertainties that might appear on all

levels of the migration process. The manageability within these feedback loops seems to be

quite difficult. Especially if we see the whole perspective from the other side: migration does

not only have negative impacts. It can also be a coping mechanism for the environment they

left behind as well as for the area of destination (Migration and Climate Change, n.d.): less

people using ecosystem services in areas that suffer from negative impacts, the better is the

chance for these systems to recover.

We can cherish, that developing effective management strategies to mitigate all sort of

impacts, need a broader thinking and calculation of all possible uncertainties to be best

prepared for external and internal shocks disrupting mitigation attempts. But quoting Welp

and Frost: “(…) scenarios made today under uncertainty and risk, fuzziness, and limited

knowledge of future contingents shape future expectations and thus the future itself.”

(Welp&Frost 2012: 214). Regarding the examined region we can just answering on that with

an import maxim from the Pacific people: "(…) ´land is life, without land there is no life´" (Kwa

2008: 1). So we need to act, react.


43

7 Conclusion

As we have shown in our MARISCO-analysis, we gathered all possible major and minor

ecosystem disturbances and their impacts and connections. We hereby focused on two

examples which enabled us to exemplary illustrate the complex interconnections and

intertwinedness between the elements as well as between the social system and

ecosystems. The mapping via VISIO especially visualises the connectivity of impacts, even

though this endangers the analysis to be ever more complicated and thus confusing. We

therefore decided to only show the examples as an extract from the whole model, while

hiding irrelevant factors regarding our examples. Still, one has to keep in mind that there

always might be more than one factor that impacts other elements such as the biodiversity

object.

Most presumably, many regional threats and stresses also might occur on a global scale and

show similarities in their appearance around the world e.g. shift in species distribution, loss in

fauna and flora. Also certain contributing factors might occur globally, such as increasing

human population (and thus intensify current consumption patterns) and competition for

natural resources. But even though impacts of global climate change might affect similar

ecosystems around the world in the same way, concerning individual political, economic, and

sociocultural systems it might be challenging to create universal and general regulations. For

example, according to the IPCC 2014 current vulnerabilities make it difficult to address

strategies especially on the islands. They “(…) are heterogeneous in geomorphology,

culture, ecosystems, populations,” and their vulnerability (IPCC: 2014, 1635). Here, the

global model faces the same issues with generalisations as we faced these problems in our

regional model.

Our research is based amongst others on the recent and information-rich IPCC reports. In

this, we found major impacts on the Oceania and Australia region. Still, we clearly see

shortcomings in our analysis as only certain disciplines were represented as well as the

actual field research and the involvement of the local communities are particularly missing.

Also, the high interconnectedness of the whole region is a great challenge itself. During the

rating, but especially by drawing the connections we were constantly confronted with non-

knowledge, generalisations and the already mentioned “complexity trap”.


44

The final outcomes of our research are thus far from complete. Still, our analysis is enough to

start working on strategies to tackle the most important factors and issues and accept these

knowledge gaps rather than remain in a passive attitude waiting for certainty to come and

liberate us from the responsibility to act. The act itself without knowing about the outcome

could be understood as a liberating act to start the future. Already past generations shaped

our present-day life not only by deliberate visions for the future. “Throughout history it is clear

that the driving forces of social change are not founded on precautionary decisions or

rational action, but rather on impulsive (almost instinctive) behaviour.” (Ibisch&Hobsen 2012:

38). Even though one could discuss if this is for the better or the worse, this quote

emphasises one important aspect: We cannot foresee the future, no matter what. We will not

change the current systems if we wait and rather react instead of taking the stir in our own

hands to give impulses for new changes. After all, change will continue to be the only

constant. The question remains how much we as persons would like to shape it.


45

Sources

Aqorau 2016 AQORAU, Transform (2016): Political intrigues in the Pacific

islands – the dire need for political stability, DevpolicyBlog,

URL: http://devpolicy.org/political-intrigues-in-the-pacific-

islands-the-dire-need-for-political-stability-20160210/,

[16.03.2016].

Australian Biosecurity Group 2005

Australian Biosecurity Group (2005): Invasive Weeds, Pests

and Diseases. Solutions to Secure Australia. CRC for Animal

Pest Control, CRC for Australian Weed Management and WWF

– Australia, Canberra.

Australian Government 2015

Australian Government (2015): Australia’s Top 10 Goods and

Services. Exports and Imports, URL:

http://dfat.gov.au/trade/resources/trade-at-a-glance/pages/top-

goods-services.aspx> [15 March 2016].

Australian Government 2016a

Australian Government (2016): The Australian Continent.

Geographical and climatic features, URL:

http://www.australia.gov.au/about-australia/our-country/the-

australian-continent [24 February 2016].

Australian Government 2016b

Australian Government (2016): Australia Climate Influences,

Bureau of Meteorology, URL:

http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/about/#page-top [24 February

2016].


46

Australian Government 2016c

Australian Government (2016): Glossary, Bureau of

Meteorology, URL:

http://www.bom.gov.au/lam/glossary/dpagegl.shtml

[20.03.2016]

Beadle 1981 Beadle, NCW (1981): The Vegetation of Australia. Stuttgart,

New York.

Bündnis Entwicklung Hilft & UNU-EHS 201

Bündnis Entwicklung Hilft & UNU-EHS (2015): World Risk

Report 2015. Focus: Food Security. Berlin

Camarota & Kolankiewicz 2008

Camarota, Steven A. & Kolankiewicz, Leon (2008): Immigration

to the United States and World-Wide Greenhouse Gas

Emissions, URL: http://cis.org/GreenhouseGasEmissions [24

February 2016]

Center For International Earth Science Information Network 2012

Center for International Earth Science Information Network/

Columbia University (2012): Biomes, Oceania. National

Aggregates of Geospatial Data Collection: Population,

Landscape, Climate Estimates, Version 3. New York, URL:

http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/maps/gallery/search?facets=th

eme:sustainability&facets=region:oceania [24 February 2016].

CIA 2016 CIA (Central Intelligence Agency) (2016): The World Factbook,

URL: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/resources/the-

world-factbook/geos/xx.html [1 March 2016].


47

De Bode 2015 De Bode, Lisa (2015): “Climate migrants” recognized in Paris

draft agreement, Aljazeera America, 11.12.2015,

http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2015/12/11/climate-

migrants-included-in-paris-draft-agreement.html [23.3.2016]

Diercke Weltatlas 2008 Diercke Weltatlas (2008) pp. 186

Evans et al. 2011 Evans, Megan, Watson, James, Fuller, Richard et al. (2011):

The Spatial Distribution of Threats to Species in Australia, in:

BioScience, 2011, Vol. 61 (4), pp. 281-289

FAO 2014 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2014):

The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture – Opportunities

and challenges, FAO, Rome.

Flannery & Steffen 2015 Flannery, T & Steffen, W. (2015): Climate Council Briefing

Statement: Damage from cyclone Pam was exacerbated by

climate change, Climate Council, URL:

<www.climatecouncil.org.au/uploads/417d45f46cc04249d55d59

be3da6281c.pdf [18 March 2016]

Gillett et al 2010 Gillett, Robert/ Cartwright, Ian (2010): The future of Pacific

Island fisheries, Secretariat of the Pacific Community, Noumea,

New Caledonia.

Gillett 2011 Gillett, Robert (2011): Fisheries of the Pacific Islands –

Regional and national information, Food and Agriculture

Organization of the United Nations regional office for Asia and

the Pacific, RAP Publication 2011/03, Bangkok, Thailand.


48

Hansen et al 2010 Hansen, J., R Ruedy, M Sato, and K Lo (2010): Global surface

temperature change, Rev. Geophys., 48, RG4004, URL:

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2010RG000345/pdf

[05.01.2016]

Hilgers 2012 Hilgers, A. (2012): “Dürren, Buschbrände und

Überschwemmungen in Australien. Auswirkungen von El Niño

und La Niña”. in: Geographische Rundschau, Vol. 10/2012. pp.

4-10.

Hobsen&Ibisch 2012 Hobsen, P & Ibisch, P (2012): “Learning from Nature for

Sustainability: An Econical Approach to (Non-) Knowledge

Management” in Global Change Management: Knowledge

Gaps, Blindspots and Unknowables, eds P Ibisch, L Geiger & F

Cybulla, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft, Baden Baden, pp. 223-

251.

Ibisch&Hobsen 2012 Ibisch, P & Hobsen, P (2012): “Blindspots and Sustainability

under Global Change: Non-knowledge Illiteracy as a Key

Challenge to a Knowledge Society” in Global Change

Management: Knowledge Gaps, Blindspots and Unknowables,

eds P Ibisch, L Geiger & F Cybulla, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft,

Baden Baden, pp. 15-54.

IPCC 2014 Reisinger, A., R.L. Kitching, F. Chiew, L. Hughes, P.C.D.

Newton, S.S. Schuster, A. Tait, and P. Whetton (2014):

Australasia. In: Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and

Vulnerability. Part B: Regional Aspects. Contribution of Working

Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Barros, V.R., C.B.

Field, D.J. Dokken, M.D. Mastrandrea, K.J. Mach, T.E. Bilir, M.

Chatterjee, K.L. Ebi, Y.O. Estrada, R.C. Genova, B. Girma, E.S.

Kissel, A.N. Levy, S. MacCracken, P.R. Mastrandrea, and L.L.


49

White (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United

Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp. 1371-1438.

ISC 20091 Invasive Species Council (2009): Invasive Species. One of the

top three threats to Australian biodiversity, URL:

http://invasives.org.au/files/2014/02/Invasive_species_one_of_t

he_top_three_threats_to_Australian_biodiversity_2009.pdf

[21.02.2016]

ISC 20092 Invasive Species Council (2009): Invasive species and climate

change. Factsheet, URL:

http://invasives.org.au/files/2014/02/fs_invasivespeciesclimatec

hange.pdf [21.02.2016]

Joint Research Centre 2016 Joint Research Centre. EDGAR – Emission Database for

Global Atmospheric Research (2016): CO2 time series 1990-

2014 per capita for world countries, URL:

http://edgar.jrc.ec.europa.eu/overview.php?v=CO2ts_pc1990-

2014&sort=des9 [18.02.2016]

McDaniel et al. 2012a McDaniel, M, Sprout, E, Boudreau, D & Turgeon, A (2012):

Australia and Oceania: Human Geography. Culture and Politics.

National Geographic Society, URL:

https://education.nationalgeographic.org/encyclopedia/oceania-

human-geography/ [4 March 2016]

McDaniel et al. 2012b McDaniel, M, Sprout, E, Boudreau, D & Turgeon, A (2012):

Australia and Oceania: Resources. Environment and

Econonmy. National Geographic Society, URL:

https://education.nationalgeographic.org/encyclopedia/oceania-

recources/ [4 March 2016]

McNeil et al. 2007 McNeil, Ben and Richard J. Matear (2007): Climate change

feedbacks on future oceanic acidification, in: Tellus, 2007, Vol.

59B, pp. 191-198


50

NISC 2006 National Invasive Species Council (2006): Invasive Species

Definition Clarification and Guidance White Paper, ISAC, URL:

http://www.invasivespeciesinfo.gov/docs/council/isacdef.pdf

[21.02.2016]

Kingsford&Watson 2011 Kingsford, Richard T, and James E.M. Watson (2011): Climate

Change in Oceania – A synthesis of biodiversity impacts and

adaptations, in: Pacific Conservation Biology, 2011, Vol. 17(3),

pp. 270-284

Lipset 2013 Lipset, David (2013): The New State of Nature. Rising

Sea-levels, Climate Justice, and Community-based Adaptation

in Papua New Guinea (2003–2011), in: Conservation and

Society, 2013, Vol. 11(2), pp. 144-157.

Low 2001 Low, Tim (2001): From ecology to politics. The human side of

alien invasions, in: MecNeely, Jeffrey A. (Ed.): The Great

Reshuffling. Human Dimensions of Invasive Alien Species.

IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK, pp. 35-42.

Oxfam 2016 Oxfam (2016): Poverty in the Pacific, URL:

https://www.oxfam.org.nz/what-we-do/where-we-work/poverty-

in-the-pacific [29 March 2016].

Pacific Disaster Center 2016 Pacific Disaster Center (2016): Hazards Information. URL:

www.pdc.org/resources/natural-hazards [17 March 2016].

Tsamenyi et al 2009 TSAMENYI, Ben M./ Hanich, Quentin A. (2009): Addressing

corruption in Pacific Islands Fisheries: A report/prepared for

IUCN PROFISH Law enforcement, corruption and Fisheries

Project, Faculty of Law, Humanities and the Arts – Papers,

University of Wollongong, Australia.

Reakla-Kudla 1997 Reakla-Kudla, ML (1997): The Global Diversity of Coral Reefs:

A Comparison with Rain Forests. pp. 83-108, In: Reakla-Kudla,


51

ML, Wilson, DE & Wilson, EO 1997, Biodiversity 2:

Understanding and Protecting Our Biological Resources.

National Research Council. Washington DC.

Roy et al 2016 Roy, Eleanor Ainge (2016): Illegal fishing worth $600m in the

Pacific amounts to ‘daylight robbery’, in: theguardian, URL:

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/mar/15/illegal-

fishing-worth-600m-in-the-pacific-amounts-to-daylight-robbery

[15.3.2016].

SCBO 2015 Society for Conservation Biology Oceania (2015): New Science.

Managing invasive species in Oceania, URL:

http://scboceania.org/2015/09/conservation-science/invasive-

species/ [26.2.2016].

Schwaab 2012 Schwaab, J (2012): “Blindspotting in Development Cooperation”

in Global Change Management: Knowledge Gaps, Blindspots

and Unknowables, eds P Ibisch, L Geiger & F Cybulla, Nomos

Verlagsgesellschaft, Baden Baden, pp. 75-90.

The Australian National University 2016

The Australian National University (2016): Micronesia,

Melanesia, Polynesia, URL:

http://asiapacific.anu.edu.au/mapsonline/base-

maps/micronesia-melanesia-polynesia [24 February 2016].

Tsamenyi et al 2009 TSAMENYI, Ben M./ Hanich, Quentin A. (2009): Addressing

corruption in Pacific Islands Fisheries: A report/prepared for

IUCN PROFISH Law enforcement, corruption and Fisheries

Project, Faculty of Law, Humanities and the Arts – Papers,

University of Wollongong, Australia.

Turgeon 2015 Turgeon, A. (2015): Ring of Fire. Pacific Ring of Fire, circum

Pacific-belt, in: National Geographic, URL:

<education.nationalgeographic.org/encyclopedia/ring-fire/ [15

March 2016].


52

Walsh et al 2011 Walsh, Kevin J.E., Kathleen I. McInnes and John L. McBridge

(2011): Climate change impacts on tropical cyclones and

extreme sea levels in the South Pacific – A regional

assessment, in: Global and Planetary Change, Vol. 80-81,

2012, pp. 149-164.

Wang et al. 2014 Wang, Qianfeng, Wu, Jianjun et al. (2014): Temporal-spatial

characteristics of severe drought Events and their impact on

agriculture on a global scale, in: Quaternary International, 2014,

Vol. 349, pp. 10-21.

Welp&Frost 2012 Welp, M & Frost, I (2012): “Non-Knowledge and Organisational

Learning” in Global Change Management: Knowledge Gaps,

Blindspots and Unknowables, eds P Ibisch, L Geiger & F

Cybulla, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft, Baden Baden, pp. 213-

222.

Woinarski 2009 Woinarski, J.C.Z. (2009): Biodiversity conservation in tropical

forest landscapes of Oceania, in: Biological Conservation, Vol.

143, 2010, pp. 2385-2394.

World Bank 2013 World Bank (2013): FISH TO 2030 – Prospects for Fisheries

and Aquaculture, Agriculture and environmental services

discussion paper 03, World Bank Report Number 83177-GLB,

Washington DC.

WWF Australia 2009 WWF (2009): The Coral Triangle and Climate Change.

Ecosystems, people and societies at risk, Sydney.

Environmental impact of immigration (n.d.), URL:

http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/briefing-paper/215 [26.2.2016]


53

Migration and climate change (n.d.), URL:

http://www.iom.int/migration-and-climate-change [26.2.2016].

report_oceania-and-australia_(2) (1)

Documents