Assessments

Indigenous people experience significant loss of wellbeing due to destruction and loss of heritage. Indigenous people also experience significant distress in not being able to manage heritage and perform custodial obligations.

The relative abundance of protected natural heritage and its overall adequate management, as well as the health-giving activities that can be undertaken in natural heritage environments, contribute significantly to community wellbeing. Ongoing loss of, and damage to, natural heritage, however, are leading to a decrease in wellbeing.

A relatively low level of community wellbeing is being achieved in relation to geoheritage, because of the poor recognition, protection and overall management of geoheritage.

Historic heritage contributes strongly to community wellbeing, given its contribution to desired local character and overall management. However, increasing loss of, and damage to, historic heritage, particularly in urban and urban edge areas, are leading to diminished wellbeing.

The existence and relatively good management of, and access to, World Heritage contributes to community wellbeing. This is diminishing as pressures – in particular, climate change, tourism and biosecurity issues – increase, and there is a poor management response.

The existence and relatively good management of, and access to, National Heritage contributes to community wellbeing. This is diminishing as pressures – in particular, climate change, tourism and biosecurity issues – increase, and there is a poor management response.

Indigenous rights to heritage are not well recognised. Public awareness and perception are poor. Indigenous people strive to maintain their cultural heritage and deep connection to Country through cultural practice.

Indigenous cultural landscapes are being destroyed and degraded. Indigenous languages are endangered, although there is Indigenous community-led language revitalisation. When Indigenous communities are empowered to protect their heritage, the condition of Indigenous heritage improves.

Natural heritage is well recognised across Australia, with generally adequate protections through the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth) and within protected areas. The total reserve system is 483 million hectares (ha), of which 84.5 million ha are International Union for Conservation of Nature categories I or II.

Natural heritage continues to be adversely affected by a range of pressures, with climate change having had a significant and increasing impact in the past 5 years.

Geoheritage values are relatively well understood, and considerable geoheritage inventorying has been undertaken across Australia. However, there are limited protections, no statutory lists and significant gaps in the identification of geoheritage.

Geoheritage continues to be adversely affected by a range of pressures, with extractive industries continuing to have the greatest impact. The lack of adequate protections for geoheritage hinders impact mitigation. Relic landscapes and landforms, karst systems and coastal geoheritage are highly vulnerable.

Historic heritage, including underwater cultural heritage, is well recognised across Australia, with statutory protection available at all levels of government (except for underwater cultural heritage). There is still a significant amount of unrecognised and unprotected historic heritage, but little has been done in the past 5 years to improve recognition. Historic heritage includes Indigenous heritage such as missions and sites of resistance, but these are poorly recognised.

Historic heritage continues to be adversely affected by a range of pressures, with urban redevelopment and rural development continuing to have the greatest impact. Climate change–related adverse impacts are also increasing, mainly through bushfire, and energy and sustainability measures that do not adequately consider heritage value. Re-use and redevelopment continue to degrade integrity, particularly of local heritage.

Australian World Heritage is generally well recognised, and there are strong statutory provisions for its protection. However, there are still significant gaps in the understanding of Australia’s outstanding universal values.

Australia’s 20 World Heritage properties have the highest level of protection and management given their significance, but their condition is deteriorating due to the ongoing and increasing pressures on World Heritage. Significant pressures for World Heritage include climate change, invasive species, tourism and recreation, and inadequate actions to mitigate impacts.

National Heritage is generally well recognised, and there are relatively strong statutory provisions for its protection. However, there are still significant gaps in the understanding of Australia’s national heritage and its protection.

Australia’s 119 National Heritage places have a high level of protection and management. However, the condition is deteriorating due to ongoing and increasing pressures, particularly climate change, invasive species, tourism and recreation; and inadequate actions to mitigate impacts.

Indigenous people’s heritage sites and practices are impacted by many factors, including seasonal changes, rising sea levels, drought, bushfire and invasive species.

Increasing temperatures, marine heatwaves and other extreme events, and more intense and widespread bushfires have significantly adversely affected Australia’s natural heritage.

Impacts on geoheritage from climate change pressures are being increasingly noticed. Documented impacts are mainly from rainfall changes and the increased incidence of bushfires. Impacts from extreme weather events and sea level rise are also of concern. Impacts on limestone and karst geoheritage are the most noticeable.

Extreme events and bushfires, which are increasing in severity and extent, are damaging and destroying historic heritage sites and landscape. Storm surges are also damaging coastal historic heritage. Gradual-onset changes will have a significant impact in the long term.

Australian World Heritage has been significantly impacted by climate change. Impacts include extensive bushfire damage, extensive seagrass loss and marine species drift, and significant coral bleaching of the Great Barrier Reef.

Climate change impacts on Australia’s National Heritage are similar to those experienced by Australia’s World Heritage.

The ongoing circumstance of colonisation and the resulting impacts on the environment and environmental management have high impacts on Indigenous heritage. New development and recreation also impact Indigenous sites.

Invasive flora and fauna species are having a significant widespread impact on species, habitats and ecosystems. Land development and use generally, including for leisure, but primarily through vegetation clearance, are also impacting natural heritage in a variety of ways. This is expected to worsen with increased population and movement.

Population growth has driven land-use change and development, which is impacting geoheritage in a variety of ways. New development is the most significant population pressure. Recreation and leisure activities are having increasing direct and indirect impacts, as these activities have significantly increased.

Significant cultural landscapes and large numbers of historic heritage places are being destroyed or damaged by large-scale urban redevelopment and peri-urban development, and the provision of services. Increased impacts are forecast, given the ongoing erosion of protections for historic heritage. Increased recreational activities have increased direct impacts on underwater cultural heritage.

Invasive species and an increased focus on visitor access and amenities are adversely impacting several Australian World Heritage properties.

Invasive species and an increased focus on visitor access and amenities are adversely impacting several National Heritage properties.

Indigenous heritage continues to be highly impacted by management practices that impede self-determination. Since 2016, there is more evidence that Indigenous communities are beginning to be better included in established heritage organisations, and separate Indigenous organisations are emerging. However, Indigenous heritage continues to be catastrophically damaged, access to Country is often limited, and legal frameworks do not adequately protect Indigenous rights to heritage.

Limitations of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth) (EPBC Act), including poor operationalisation, and slowness in implementing strategic and site adaption planning for key pressures are contributing to the loss of natural heritage values. Government has continued to actively seek to remove barriers and facilitate new uses and development that are damaging to natural heritage.

Inaction on developing and implementing a national protection framework for geoheritage is the key governance pressure for geoheritage. In addition, government has continued to actively seek to remove barriers and facilitate new uses that are damaging to geoheritage.

Government continues to actively seek to remove barriers and facilitate new uses and development that are damaging to historic heritage, including by eroding statutory protections and promoting visitor use. Inadequate inclusion in broader environmental assessment and accounting is also contributing to historic heritage loss and damage.

Limitations of the EBPC Act, including poor operationalisation and reliance on states and territories to undertake the bulk of the management obligations unassisted, are putting World Heritage at risk. If ongoing, this risks cumulative impacts.

Limitations of the EBPC Act, including poor operationalisation and reliance on states and territories to undertake the bulk of the management obligations unassisted, are putting World Heritage at risk. If ongoing, this risks cumulative impacts.

Mining and agriculture are key pressures on Indigenous heritage, as observed through the destruction of Juukan Gorge and damage to water systems. Pressures relating to tourism and recreational activities are also increasing.

Rural land clearance is the most significant industrial pressure on natural heritage, resulting in ecosystem damage, and extensive loss of important communities and habitat. It is also increasing the vulnerability of rare and threatened species. Natural heritage is also being adversely impacted by resource extraction, secondary industries and tourism, but to a lesser extent.

Ongoing extractive industries and agricultural intensification, including land clearance, are continuing to cause significant loss of, and damage to, geoheritage. Tourism and industrial pollution are causing less, but ongoing, damage to geoheritage.

Of the industry-driven pressures, land-use intensification (and land clearance) and secondary industries are causing the most significant loss of, and damage to, historic heritage. Resource extraction and tourism are also causing damage or loss of historic heritage, but these pressures are more spatially restricted.

An increasing focus on visitor access and amenities for World Heritage places is increasingly adversely impacting several Australian World Heritage properties. Although generally outside World Heritage properties, other forms of industry contribute to impacts, particularly where buffer zones are inadequate.

A focus on visitor access and amenities for National Heritage places is having an ongoing adverse impact on the heritage values of these places. Although generally outside National Heritage properties, other forms of industry contribute to impacts, particularly where buffer zones are inadequate.

The legal protection framework for Indigenous heritage is significantly lacking and does not protect Indigenous heritage from destruction. Indigenous people are calling for more control of their heritage. There is evidence of greater Indigenous involvement in heritage management through strategic partnerships, and Indigenous-led engagement and management.

Natural heritage has generally good statutory protections, but the operationalisation of these is less adequate. Local-level protection (statutory planning) for natural heritage is poor.

Although geoheritage can be protected as part of natural heritage at the national level, and in a small number of cases at the state and territory level, there is no legislation to specifically protect geoheritage. Local-level protection (statutory planning) for geoheritage is poor.

There are generally good statutory protections for historic heritage, although aspects such as cultural landscapes, objects and intangible heritage are mostly poorly provided for. However, the operationalisation of some statutory mechanisms is inadequate, and the historic heritage provisions of some statutory mechanisms, largely local government related, are being reduced.

World Heritage has generally good statutory protections, but the operationalisation of these (i.e. how the protections are used and the places managed) is less adequate.

National Heritage has generally good statutory protections, but the operationalisation of these (i.e. how the protections are used and the places managed) is less adequate.

Indigenous heritage is inadequately identified, documented and protected. There is a distrust within many Indigenous communities of registers, and hesitation in disclosing sites and knowledge of significance. Indigenous people experience a lack of free, prior and informed consent within the mechanisms in which heritage is identified and assessed.

Natural heritage has been relatively well identified and reserved within protected areas, as part of developing the National Reserve System (NRS). Greater consideration of heritage as opposed to biodiversity conservation is desirable in expanding the NRS.

Although considerable geoheritage has been identified, this has not translated into listings, except in relation to National Heritage and World Heritage, and even at this level listings have been limited. There is also a need for greater systematic identification of geoheritage across Australia, including in protected areas.

A large amount of historic heritage has been identified throughout Australia, but there are significant thematic and regional gaps that are not being addressed, and archaeological heritage and cultural landscapes are significantly under-represented in listings at all levels. Jurisdictions at all levels have significant numbers of unprocessed nominations.

Limited effort is being made by government to identify World Heritage and to develop the Australian Tentative List. Systematic identification is required to replace the current ad hoc approach.

Although some thematic assessments have been undertaken for National Heritage, there are numerous gaps in the National Heritage List that are not being addressed; the results of studies are not translating into assessments and listings; and there are a quantity of unassessed nominations. The recent focus on Indigenous heritage is starting to address what was a significant imbalance.

Indigenous voices are beginning to be better included in established heritage organisations, and separate organisations are emerging. Co-design and a voice in decision-making are still lacking.

Good planning is generally in place for natural heritage through protected area management plans, which also establish good management processes. However, strategic planning, values monitoring and evaluation, and risk management planning are not keeping up with what is required to successfully manage new and increasing pressures on these properties. Management planning is falling behind, with significant numbers of protected area management plans in need of review.

For geoheritage within protected areas, good planning is generally in place through management plans, which also establish good management processes. However, strategic planning, values monitoring and evaluation, and risk management planning are not keeping up with what is required to successfully manage new and increasing pressures on these properties. Management planning is falling behind, with significant numbers of protected area management plans in need of review.
Unprotected geoheritage is not being managed.

Although recommended for historic heritage places, only a small percentage of historic heritage places, including listed heritage places, have prepared conservation management plans, and these are often outdated. Many fewer places have formal monitoring or risk management planning, and strategic management planning is rare. Very little historic heritage is receiving the conservation work required to maintain places in stable or good condition.

Good planning and management processes are in place for World Heritage. However, strategic planning, values monitoring and evaluation, and adaptation planning are not keeping up with what is required to successfully manage new and increasing pressures on these properties. Although all properties have management plans, 50% require review.

Generally, good planning and management processes are in place for National Heritage. However, strategic planning, values monitoring and evaluation, and adaptation planning are not keeping up with what is required to successfully manage new and increasing pressures on these properties.

Indigenous organisations and alliances have enabled Indigenous people to be empowered in heritage management. However, there is limited resourcing, and there are barriers for Indigenous people to influence mainstream systems of governance.

Despite the National Reserve System framework and strategy for its development, natural heritage management is continuing to suffer from a lack of cohesive management between the various levels of government and lacks holistic Australia-wide oversight. Leadership at all levels is inadequate. Limited action to address climate change is a key issue for natural heritage conservation.

Geoheritage conservation lacks a cohesive national framework for management, as well as having inadequate statutory protection. There is a lack of leadership in relation to this, particularly at the national level where it is most needed.

Historic heritage management is continuing to suffer from a lack of cohesive management between the various levels of government and lacks holistic Australia-wide oversight. However, the Heritage Chairs and Officials of Australia and New Zealand has helped in this area to some extent. Leadership to improve historic heritage conservation at all levels is inadequate, and there is failure in many contexts to adequately defend historic heritage.

Government leadership is regarded as good at the international level, but poor at the national level, particularly in relation to managing major emerging pressures. The lack of a formal Indigenous advisory capacity is a particular issue. Australia is meeting international obligations well, but with some exceptions. Limited action to address climate change has emerged as a key issue for the conservation of natural World Heritage.

Government leadership in this area, although relatively good, could be improved. Management suffers from inadequate cohesion between the 2 levels of government. The Australian Heritage Council has performed well, but its work is significantly constrained by inadequate resourcing.