Maxine Newlands

Dr. Maxine Newlands


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

17Years (2010-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
26 August 2020 in PLOS ONE
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
KAKenneth R. N. Anthony
Kenneth R. N. Anthony
KHKate J. Helmstedt
Kate J. Helmstedt
LBLine K. Bay
Line K. Bay
PFPedro Fidelman
Pedro Fidelman
KHKaren E. Hussey
Karen E. Hussey
PHPaul E. Hardisty
Paul E. Hardisty
Climate change is impacting coral reefs now. Recent pan-tropical bleaching events driven by unprecedented global heat waves have shifted the playing field for coral reef management and policy. While best-practice conventional management remains essential, it may no longer be enough to sustain coral reefs under continued climate change. Nor will climate change mitigation be sufficient on its own. Committed warming and projected reef decline means solutions must involve a portfolio of mitigation, best-practice conventional management and coordinated restoration and adaptation measures involving new and perhaps radical interventions, including local and regional cooling and shading, assisted coral evolution, assisted gene flow, and measures to support and enhance coral recruitment. We propose that proactive research and development to expand the reef management toolbox fast but safely, combined with expedient trialling of promising interventions is now urgently needed, whatever emissions trajectory the world follows. We discuss the challenges and opportunities of embracing new interventions in a race against time, including their risks and uncertainties. Ultimately, solutions to the climate challenge for coral reefs will require consideration of what society wants, what can be achieved technically and economically, and what opportunities we have for action in a rapidly closing window. Finding solutions that work for coral reefs and people will require exceptional levels of coordination of science, management and policy, and open engagement with society. It will also require compromise, because reefs will change under climate change despite our best interventions. We argue that being clear about society’s priorities, and understanding both the opportunities and risks that come with an expanded toolset, can help us make the most of a challenging situation. We offer a conceptual model to help reef managers frame decision problems and objectives, and to guide effective strategy choices in the face of complexity and uncertainty.

27 October 2020 in PLOS ONE
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
DCDaniela M. Ceccarelli
Daniela M. Ceccarelli
IMIan M. McLeod
Ian M. McLeod
LBLisa Boström-Einarsson
Lisa Boström-Einarsson
SBScott E. Bryan
Scott E. Bryan
KCKathryn M. Chartrand
Kathryn M. Chartrand
LBLine K. Bay
Line K. Bay
Coral reef ecosystems are under increasing pressure from local and regional stressors and a changing climate. Current management focuses on reducing stressors to allow for natural recovery, but in many areas where coral reefs are damaged, natural recovery can be restricted, delayed or interrupted because of unstable, unconsolidated coral fragments, or rubble. Rubble fields are a natural component of coral reefs, but repeated or high-magnitude disturbances can prevent natural cementation and consolidation processes, so that coral recruits fail to survive. A suite of interventions have been used to target this issue globally, such as using mesh to stabilise rubble, removing the rubble to reveal hard substrate and deploying rocks or other hard substrates over the rubble to facilitate recruit survival. Small, modular structures can be used at multiple scales, with or without attached coral fragments, to create structural complexity and settlement surfaces. However, these can introduce foreign materials to the reef, and a limited understanding of natural recovery processes exists for the potential of this type of active intervention to successfully restore local coral reef structure. This review synthesises available knowledge about the ecological role of coral rubble, natural coral recolonisation and recovery rates and the potential benefits and risks associated with active interventions in this rapidly evolving field. Fundamental knowledge gaps include baseline levels of rubble, the structural complexity of reef habitats in space and time, natural rubble consolidation processes and the risks associated with each intervention method. Any restoration intervention needs to be underpinned by risk assessment, and the decision to repair rubble fields must arise from an understanding of when and where unconsolidated substrate and lack of structure impair natural reef recovery and ecological function. Monitoring is necessary to ascertain the success or failure of the intervention and impacts of potential risks, but there is a strong need to specify desired outcomes, the spatial and temporal context and indicators to be measured. With a focus on the Great Barrier Reef, we synthesise the techniques, successes and failures associated with rubble stabilisation and the use of small structures, review monitoring methods and indicators, and provide recommendations to ensure that we learn from past projects.

8 July 2023 in Marine Policy
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
JVJeremy De Valck
Jeremy De Valck
DJDiane Jarvis
Diane Jarvis
ACAnthea Coggan
Anthea Coggan
ESElla Schirru
Ella Schirru
PPPetina Pert
Petina Pert
MNMaxine Newlands
Maxine Newlands

1 October 2019 in Environmental Science & Policy
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PFPedro Fidelman
Pedro Fidelman
CMChris McGrath
Chris McGrath
MNMaxine Newlands
Maxine Newlands
KDKirstin Dobbs
Kirstin Dobbs
BJBelinda Jago
Belinda Jago
KHKaren Hussey
Karen Hussey

6 May 2021 in PLOS ONE
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MGMark T Gibbs
Mark T Gibbs
BGBridget L Gibbs
Bridget L Gibbs
MNMaxine Newlands
Maxine Newlands
JIJordan Ivey
Jordan Ivey
The health and condition of the world’s reefs are in steep decline. This has triggered the development of fledgling micro-scale coral reef restoration projects along many reef coastlines. However, it is increasingly recognised that the scale and productivity of micro-scale coral gardening projects will be insufficient to meet the growing global threats to reefs. More recently, efforts to develop and implement restoration techniques for application at regional scales have been pursued by research organisations. Coral reefs are mostly located in the unindustrialised world. Yet, most of the funding, and scientific and engineering method development for larger-scale methods will likely be sourced and created in the industrialised world. Therefore, the development of the emerging at-scale global reef restoration sector will inevitably involve the transfer of methods, approaches, finances, labour and skills from the industrialised world to the unindustrialised world. This opens the door to the industrialised world negatively impacting the unindustrialised world and, in some cases, First Nations peoples. In Western scientific parlance, ecological imperialism occurs when people from industrialised nations seek to recreate environments and ecosystems in unindustrialised nations that are familiar and comfortable to them. How a coral reef ’should’ look depends on one’s background and perspective. While predominately Western scientific approaches provide guidance on the ecological principles for reef restoration, these methods might not be applicable in every scenario in unindustrialised nations. Imposing such views on Indigenous coastal communities without the local technical and leadership resources to scale-up restoration of their reefs can lead to unwanted consequences. The objective of this paper is to introduce this real and emerging risk into the broader reef restoration discussion.

1 October 2015 in Marine Policy
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
ALAlly J. Lankester
Ally J. Lankester
EBErin Bohensky
Erin Bohensky
MNMaxine Newlands
Maxine Newlands