This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-36376226
The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
Previous version
1
Next version
Version 0 | Version 1 |
---|---|
Australia removed from UN world heritage climate report | Australia removed from UN world heritage climate report |
(about 5 hours later) | |
All references to climate change's impact on World Heritage sites in Australia have been removed from a United Nations report. | All references to climate change's impact on World Heritage sites in Australia have been removed from a United Nations report. |
A draft of the report contained a chapter on the Great Barrier Reef and references to Kakadu and Tasmania. | A draft of the report contained a chapter on the Great Barrier Reef and references to Kakadu and Tasmania. |
But Australia's Department of the Environment requested that Unesco scrub these sections from the final version. | But Australia's Department of the Environment requested that Unesco scrub these sections from the final version. |
A statement from the department said the report could have had an impact on tourism to Australia. | |
It also said the report's title, Destinations at Risk, had "the potential to cause considerable confusion". | It also said the report's title, Destinations at Risk, had "the potential to cause considerable confusion". |
"In particular, the World Heritage Committee had only six months earlier decided not to include the Great Barrier Reef on the in-danger list and commended Australia for the Reef 2050 Plan," the statement said. | "In particular, the World Heritage Committee had only six months earlier decided not to include the Great Barrier Reef on the in-danger list and commended Australia for the Reef 2050 Plan," the statement said. |
"The department was concerned that the framing of the report confused two issues - the world heritage status of the sites and risks arising from climate change and tourism. | "The department was concerned that the framing of the report confused two issues - the world heritage status of the sites and risks arising from climate change and tourism. |
"Recent experience in Australia had shown that negative commentary about the status of world heritage properties impacted on tourism." | "Recent experience in Australia had shown that negative commentary about the status of world heritage properties impacted on tourism." |
'No substance' | 'No substance' |
Prof Will Steffen, an emeritus professor at the Australian National University and head of Australia's Climate Council, was one of the scientific reviewers on the paper. | Prof Will Steffen, an emeritus professor at the Australian National University and head of Australia's Climate Council, was one of the scientific reviewers on the paper. |
He told the BBC that he was "amazed by the apparent overreaction that's gone on". | He told the BBC that he was "amazed by the apparent overreaction that's gone on". |
"I don't understand it at all. I think it was a very balanced report. There was nothing in that report that was not already known," he said. | "I don't understand it at all. I think it was a very balanced report. There was nothing in that report that was not already known," he said. |
Prof Steffen was sceptical about official explanations that the report risked causing confusion over the status of the reef and could impact tourism. | Prof Steffen was sceptical about official explanations that the report risked causing confusion over the status of the reef and could impact tourism. |
"There's no substance to either of those arguments," he said. | "There's no substance to either of those arguments," he said. |
"There was no mention at all that the Great Barrier Reef might be listed as endangered. There was also a paragraph at the end that discussed steps the Australian government is taking to mitigate risks to the reef." | "There was no mention at all that the Great Barrier Reef might be listed as endangered. There was also a paragraph at the end that discussed steps the Australian government is taking to mitigate risks to the reef." |
Prof Steffen also noted that distribution of the report, which summarises risks to World Heritage areas in many nations, would likely be limited to specialists who worked in associated fields. | Prof Steffen also noted that distribution of the report, which summarises risks to World Heritage areas in many nations, would likely be limited to specialists who worked in associated fields. |
"You wouldn't expect to see it on a bestseller list," he said. | "You wouldn't expect to see it on a bestseller list," he said. |
The report was created by Unesco in partnership with the Union of Concerned Scientists and the United Nations Environment Program. | The report was created by Unesco in partnership with the Union of Concerned Scientists and the United Nations Environment Program. |
It is not clear why Unesco agreed to the government's request to remove the passages. | It is not clear why Unesco agreed to the government's request to remove the passages. |
Previous version
1
Next version