Skip to main content

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Mar. Sci.
Sec. Marine Conservation and Sustainability
Volume 11 - 2024 | doi: 10.3389/fmars.2024.1418784

Early stage outcomes and cost-effectiveness of implementing tourism-led coral propagation and outplanting in the Whitsundays (Great Barrier Reef)

Provisionally accepted
Rachael Scott Rachael Scott 1*David Suggett David Suggett 2,3Cassidy Hayward Cassidy Hayward 4Brent Chatterton Brent Chatterton 5John Edmondson John Edmondson 6Johhny Gaskell Johhny Gaskell 4Gemma M. Gillette Gemma M. Gillette 1Lorna Howlett Lorna Howlett 1Emily Monacella Emily Monacella 5Christine D. Roper Christine D. Roper 1Paige Strudwick Paige Strudwick 1James Unsworth James Unsworth 5Mikaela Veltri Mikaela Veltri 5Emma Camp Emma Camp 1*
  • 1 University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia
  • 2 Red Sea Research Center, King Abdullah University of Science and Technology, Thuwal, Makkah, Saudi Arabia
  • 3 Reefscape Restoration Initiative, King Abdullah University of Science and Technology, Thuwal, Makkah, Saudi Arabia
  • 4 Other, Mackay, Australia
  • 5 Other, Airlie Beach, Australia
  • 6 Wavelength Reef Cruises, Port Douglas, Australia

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

    Implementation of coral restoration practices within reef management strategies is accelerating globally to support reef resilience and recovery. However, full costs underpinning restoration project feasibility have historically been underreported yet are critical to informing restoration cost-benefit decision-making. Such knowledge is especially lacking for Australia's Great Barrier Reef (GBR), where a coral restoration program led by reef tourism operators, Coral Nurture Program (CNP), was initiated in 2018 (northern GBR) and continues to scale. Here we describe the early outcomes and costs of implementing similar tourism-led asexual coral propagation and outplanting practices in a new region, the Whitsundays (central GBR) through the CNP. Specifically, we detail the local operational and environmental context of CNP Whitsundays, describe the costs of implementation and continuation of restoration activities, as well as evaluate survivorship of coral outplants across three restoration sites for nine months after project establishment (August 2022 to June 2023). Baseline benthic surveys revealed relatively low hard coral cover at restoration sites (ranging from 3.22-8.67%), which significantly differed in benthic composition from coral collection sites (ranging 16.67-38.06%), supporting strong motivation by tourism operators to undertake restoration activities. Mean coral survivorship of coral outplants in fate-tracked plots differed between the three restoration sites after 267 days (ranging 23.33-47.58%), with declines largely driven by coral detachment. Earlystage cost-effectiveness (costs relative to outplant survival) associated with implementation of restoration activity varied widely from US$33.04-178.55 per surviving coral (n = 4,425 outplants) depending on whether 'in-kind' costs, restoration activity (outplanting only vs. total costs encompassing planning through to monitoring), site-based survivorship, or a combination of these factors, were considered. As coral reef restoration projects continue to be established globally, our results highlight the need for ongoing, long-term monitoring that can inform adaptive practice, and fully transparent cost-reporting to understand and improve feasibility for any given project. We further highlight the inherent context-dependency of restoration costs, and the importance of considering local social-environmental contexts and their associated cost-benefits in economic rationale for reef restoration projects.analysis. This publication is amended from research originally produced as part of a thesis (Scott, 2024).

    Keywords: reef restoration1, Coral propagation2, Coral outplanting3, Restoration costs4, Cost-effectiveness5, Great Barrier Reef6, Reef tourism7, Reef stewardship8

    Received: 17 Apr 2024; Accepted: 09 Sep 2024.

    Copyright: © 2024 Scott, Suggett, Hayward, Chatterton, Edmondson, Gaskell, Gillette, Howlett, Monacella, Roper, Strudwick, Unsworth, Veltri and Camp. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

    * Correspondence:
    Rachael Scott, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia
    Emma Camp, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia

    Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.