Marine Biologists: We need further investment in scientific research.

The second role play was a debate about coral management among politicians from Australia, economists who want to cooperate with others, social scientists and ourselves, marine biologists (estmon, jihjeo, joakol, and minmon).

The discussion started with a statement from our side as marine biologists. As many studies show the direct and indirect impacts of climate change on coral reef due to temperature rise and ocean acidification, it is certain that coral reef is significantly influenced by climate change. Dealing with uncertainty given in the coral reef management, it is substantially needed to invest for further and deeper scientific research to clarify evolutionary capacity in adaptation and scientific causations in detail. In addition, we argued that we need to implement strategies in the sense of adaptation and protection at the same time. Aiming protection of coral reef, we suggested to prohibit or decrease the access of tourists during spring bloom, which is critical period for corals breeding. By constraining for short term of time, we can expect high level of protection only by implementing it in right season, having less influence on local economy.

As a climate change adaptation method, coral cultivation was first mentioned by economists who agree and fully recognize the importance of coral protection in the economic sense. Commenting on this suggestion, we agreed on it as far as it is not disturbing the existing ecosystem with concern of material building coral community and competition with other macro algae.

I found the second discussion more constructive and realistic then the first round. It was interesting to have own opinions but also to have own stance and strategies to yield the desirable conclusion. Especially, the economists tried to convince others about the importance of forming alliance driven from every single entities. It was impressive and more realistic that they stuck on the stance and kept trying to reach their goal. I had an impression that panels are asking questions each other, not only stating their argument. I found it more constructive and live that seemingly we were in a real debate not in a role-play.