Off the coast of India lies a chain of atolls called the Maldives. On the global scale, tourism on its stunning beaches and scuba diving in its wonderful coral reefs are what places it on the map. This island chain, due to its low height of about 1.8 meters above sea level causes scientists to predict that it will be the first victim of climate change. Unlike many island chains in the middle of the ocean, the Maldives boasts a very hefty population roughly the size of Baltimore in the U.S. (~600,000 people). Studies show that the island chain could disappear within 30 years, resulting in the first mass exodus of climate refugees.
From a bird’s eye view, an atoll consists of a ring shaped island, formed from the peak of a volcano. This ring of land surrounds a lagoon. In the lagoon, due to the high fertility of volcanic soil and natural protection from the surrounding island, a wide variety of corals and vegetation is allowed to thrive. Atolls are located across the world, from the Caribbean, to the Pacific, to the Indian ocean.
During the country’s previous presidency, the Maldivian Democratic Party, led by Mohammed Nasheed, strived to make the country a poster child for global warming. Plans had even been made to buy a new homeland from another country. A new government recently took office in 2013, led by Abdulla Yameen of the Progressive Party. The new government has a different approach to combating climate change: terraforming and island building; nulling previous ideas of carbon neutrality (rate of carbon absorbance through carbon sinks equaling the rate of carbon expulsion) in favor of production. How will government change an entire ecosystem without disrupting the coral reefs and natural beauty that makes the islands their money?
According to this article, the first stage of terraforming includes using boats called dredgers to bring sand up from the bottom of reefs and using it as building material for new islands. While this method is plausible for land building, the coral reefs that generate a large amount of revenue for the country will be in danger. As seen around the world, coral reefs are amongst the most delicate and endangered environments by global warming. The reefs also assist the people of the islands by providing food and sheltering from monsoon winds. In addition, they replenish the area with fresh sand from coral skeletons, allowing for a small amounts of natural land growth. The filling of these reefs will cause the short term negative effects of diminishment of local fish populations for food and a drop in lucrative tourism. A long term difficulty includes the replacement of natural island replenishment with human maintenance. Erosion is another difficulty with island building. Structures made of sand such as man-made islands need constant maintenance to counteract increasingly harsh wind and waves. The predicted increase in production will also affect the ecosystem negatively. Chemical residues from industry will likely prove to be one of the largest issues for the Maldives, seeing that they do wish to maintain a tourism friendly environment in the future. Increased plastic use will also be an issue, inevitably resulting in even larger quantities of debris on local beaches. Overall, the ecosystem of the Maldives lies on a balance. While global warming pushes down on one side, the current plans to transform the economy only further pushes down on an already collapsing ecosystem. Because of the bleak future for the Maldives, either path the country chooses may lead to its demise. While industrializing may be speeding up the destruction of the ecosystem, the government has an option: either to let their homeland be devoured by the sea and prepare for escape, or try to diversify its economy and build land to prolong the stability of the country in its current form.
Posted by Isaac Collibee (1)
I find it sickening how much money and economics play a role in sustaining the Maldives. It seems that the decision on how to sustain the Maldives will be handled like a business decision (how can we save money). At the end of the day, this decision on what to do about the Maldives should be based on the needs of the environment regardless of how it affects business and income. I understand that tourism is their main form of income, however you will not have any income if there is no Maldives.
ReplyDeletePosted by "Nicholas Georgette"
When you mentioned how global warming shifted pipefish sex ratios it reminded me of a similar situation I learned about in BIO 280. Sea turtle sex is determined by sand temperature during development in the egg. In some parts of the world female sea turtles are currently outnumbering male sea turtles by ~116:1! It is interesting (and a bit frightening) to see just how quickly some species are responding to climate change. But even if some species can adapt quickly enough to survive, others in the same ecosystems may not be able to; ultimately affecting those that are fit as well.
DeleteIt is quite a shame that politics and money has to be the main factor in determining the fate in a dying environment. I am hoping that once the situation becomes dire, the U.N. can get involved and assist the population in eco-friendly ways, such as planting mangrove trees and assisting in reviving the dying coral reefs through polyp transfer from healthy reefs. With its current trajectory, I don't believe there will be any natural beauty left within the Maldives in several years.
DeletePosted by "Isaac Collibee"
We are seeing cases like this all over the world as a byproduct of climate change. It's very easy for people to say that environmental health should be a priority over the tourism industry when they are not the ones who have been using this method their whole lives to make a livelihood. You have to stop and think, what if this was you and how you were providing for your family? It's called empathy.
ReplyDeleteThis is happening to a lesser extreme in my hometown on the east coast of New England. Historically, much of the population has made a living off of the fishing and lobstering industry. Since the government has started putting out hefty regulations, many people have been put out of work. Fortunately, the government (local and federal) has been working to increase job alternatives that will still provide the community with a sense of pride and stability. As scientists, we must remember that we cannot exclude the local people and their well-being from the conversation. Yes, I understand that "you will not have any income if there is no Maldives." But to me, that is an ignorant approach. The situation must be addressed as a whole; scientifically, politically, and locally.
Posted by Lauren Mason
As discussed in the article, who would you see yourself siding with? The old government who was ecofriendly and looked to start from scratch in a new place? Or the current government that uses the idea of industrialize at all costs?
DeletePrevious comment posted by Isaac Collibee
Delete