Putting farmers at the centre of industry innovation
As the world’s population grows there is increasing pressure on the agriculture sector to produce safe, high quality food in production systems that are climate smart, transparent and ...
Introduction:
The rapid pace of climate change over the last century has affected ecosystems and people across the globe. Coral reefs are one of the most heavily impacted ecosystems. Many industries, like fisheries and tourism, rely on coral reefs; but little is known about how reef-dependent industries are adapting to climate change and whether they have the capacity to continue to respond effectively. A recent study led by Henry Bartelet from Cairns Institute, James Cook University, addressed these questions by surveying 231 reef tourism operators in the Asia-Pacific (APAC) region, which is home to nearly 80 percent of the world's coral reefs, to understand their responses to climate impacts and the role of adaptive capacity in helping them adapt. The findings provide valuable insights and recommendations that both tourism operators and the public can use to foster resilience to climate change.
Understanding Operator Responses:
The study investigated how APAC reef tourism operators responded to climate disturbances like coral bleaching and cyclones, which are becoming more severe due to increasing ocean temperatures. Through surveys, researchers identified three clusters of responses: coping (doing nothing or looking for relief), adaptive (minor adjustments that can potentially buffer the impacts of climate disturbances), and transformative responses (actions that could affect long-term social-ecological outcomes in the context of change). For example, relocating to new, less degraded reef sites and changing operational procedures were adaptive, while reef restoration and climate action were seen as transformative.
Social Organization Enables Transformative Action:
Adaptive capacity here describes the potential for a tourist operator to respond successfully to challenges raised by climate change. It was measured using 15 indicators, divided over six domains (agency, assets, flexibility, learning, social organization, and socio-cognitive constructs). The study tested whether the specific details of a reef operator's adaptive capacity had a meaningful effect on the type of responses the company prioritized in response to a climate disturbance. An important finding was the significance of the adaptive capacity domain of ‘social organization’ in driving transformative action. It showcased that strengthening collaboration among tourism operators, research institutions, and government agencies is instrumental in implementing valuable measures to address climate change. By working together, sharing knowledge, and making collective decisions, stakeholders are better equipped to create long-term sustainability and resilience in the face of climate disturbances.
Barriers To Transformative Action:
Operators that were more confident in their company's ability to adapt to climate change were less likely to prioritize transformative action. This finding was unexpected because most prior research has shown that people's self-efficacy is an essential determinant of their overall ability to respond to climate change. In this case, adaptation confidence might be associated with an operator's perception of the (future) severity of climate change. Operators that are less worried about climate change may be less inclined to prioritize transformative actions such as coral restoration and reducing carbon emissions. Surprisingly, operators in countries with lower government effectiveness, like Indonesia, were more likely to prioritize transformative action than operators in countries with higher government effectiveness, like Australia. We did not find support for the so-called 'adaptation deficit' hypothesis, which argues that people in less-affluent countries have a lower capacity to adapt to climate change. Instead, people in countries with less government support might rely more on self-organization to address common challenges, while people in more-affluent countries might expect their governments to take the lead in transformative action.
Re-evaluating Adaptive Capacity:
The study also indicated that an operator's adaptive capacity may not be a reliable indicator for prioritizing adaptive responses (minor adjustments to buffer impacts). Instead, the severity of climate impacts on operators emerged as the primary driver that led operators to prioritize adaptive measures such as the spatial diversification of their reef sites. This finding indicates that the prioritization of adaptive measures in response to severe climate impacts might be necessary for all operators, even those with relatively low levels of adaptive capacity. However, whether the different types of implemented adaptive actions ‘successfully’ reduced climate vulnerability, the potential to be adversely affected by climate change, is a question for future research.
Implications for Tourism Operators and Beyond:
To address climate change challenges, our research suggests that policymakers and reef tourism operators should proactively improve collaboration efforts and networks. Strengthening partnerships between industry associations, research institutions, and (local) government agencies can enhance adaptive and transformative capacity. These collaborations can help to make accessing valuable knowledge and resources, aligning agendas, and supporting effective climate adaptation possible and financially feasible.
Image (top inset): Reef tourism in the Okinawa Islands, Japan. Photo shows tourists enjoying the coral reefs around Cape Maeda, one of the many reef tourism locations included in our study. The Ryukyu Islands (including Okinawa) were one of the many locations in the Asia-Pacific Region that were affected by a mass coral bleaching event in 2016. Images supplied.