This final chapter will offer three key policy recommendations. The first is a more rapid international timeline for emissions reduction to prevent the extinction of coral that make up reefs due to climate change. This will require bipartisan relationships that mirror those being formed in Congress around coral reef legislative topics. The second is increased cooperation between authorities within federal and state governments to ensure that existing conservation laws and policies are followed, in contrast to the Miami and Cayman Islands cases. The third is that private multinational companies should not be allowed to subvert the conservation laws and policies of sovereign countries, as seen in the case of the Cayman Islands.

In 2022, the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released its Sixth Assessment Report, an extensive document examining the ongoing effects of global climate change. Among the key findings of the report lies an ominous warning:

The effects of climate change are the most significant threat facing coral reefs, driving their decline, and endangering the communities that depend upon them (International Union for Conservation of Nature, 2021). How can policy-makers rise to the broader challenge of managing coral reefs under the threat of climate change? This question is complicated and, as such, has become the focus of hundreds, if not thousands, of research projects aimed at understanding coral reef management in the Anthropocene. Some studies have found that returning to historical baselines for coral reefs may be impossible and that local management systems are insufficient to rescue them (Bellwood et al., 2019; Hughes et al., 2017). In response, researchers have suggested implementing multilevel, international initiatives such as the Coral Triangle Initiative in Southeast Asia or polycentric governance (or governance systems with many power centers) of the Great Barrier Reef in Australia to promote large-scale ecosystem recovery (Fidelman et al., 2014; Morrison, 2017). Other policy responses include government assistance for livelihoods and building capacity for local communities to adapt to change (Hoegh-Guldberg et al., 2018).