Abstract Summary
The Great Barrier Reef is a global icon facing unprecedented pressure from climate change, back-to-back bleaching and Australia’s historical attachment to coal. Securing the public debate over the long-term health of the reef is a battle between environmental advocacy groups and industrial growth. In a polarised public debate between environmental non-government organizations (ENGO), leading scientists, industry representative, and liberal governments, reef restoration is emerging as a middle ground. However, Reef Restoration is also a polarizing and contested area of marine science, drawing both admiration and criticism from many sectors. The tradeoff between ‘doing nothing’ and ‘meddling’ is a fine line, and one that many Reef managers face on a daily basis. From politicians, to philanthropists, marine park managers, geo-engineers, citizen scientists, professional ENGO, and stakeholders, each of them plays a role in shaping public discourse and ultimately un/acceptability of a restoration projects. Getting ‘buy-in’ from ENGO’s often requires a strategic battle over public support. Media coverage and political comments influence public and political debate. ENGO’s such as Greenpeace, Sea Shepherd and WWF, can mobilize public and media discourse as either positive or negative. Through transnational networks, lobbying, a cast of millions, supported by philanthropic organizations and donors, an ENGO can be a powerful broker in shaping the restoration discourse. This paper will examine the role of ENGO's groups in Reef restoration debates; and asks if large-scale Marine Park (LSMP) managers can learn from activists and advocacy groups in public engagement practices? Drawing on transnational literature, new social movement studies, interviews and survey data, this paper will explore the role of ENGO's in the Reef Restoration space. We test how influential an ENGO can be in the debate, and if there can be lessons for the Great Barrier Reef restoration projects.
