Ocean Acidification: Federal Response Under Way, but Actions Needed to Understand and Address Potential Impacts
Published: 2014-09-12T00:00:00

Fast Facts:

Highlights:
section_title: Why GAO Did This Study
paragraphs: Increasing carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere and oceans are resulting in chemical changes referred to as ocean acidification. These changes may pose risks for some marine species and ecosystems, as well as for the coastal communities that rely on them for food and commerce. FOARAM requires various federal entities to take specific actions related to ocean acidification.
GAO was asked to review federal efforts to address ocean acidification. This report discusses (1) the scientific understanding of the effects of ocean acidification; (2) the extent to which federal agencies have implemented FOARAM; and (3) additional actions, if any, that could be taken to advance the federal response to ocean acidification. To address these issues, GAO reviewed six summary reports on ocean acidification, other scientific studies, and agency documents, and interviewed key agency officials.
section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: Ocean acidification could have a variety of potentially significant effects on marine species, ecosystems, and coastal communities, according to six summary reports that GAO reviewed. The reports were developed by federal agencies and others and were based on extensive reviews of the scientific literature. The scientific understanding of these effects, however, is still developing, and uncertainty remains about their scope and severity. Potential effects of ocean acidification include:
Reducing the ability of some marine species, such as oysters, to form shells or altering their physiology or behavior. These impacts could affect some species' growth and survival.
Altering marine ecosystems, for example, by disrupting predator and prey relationships in food webs and altering habitats.
Disrupting the economy or culture of some communities, for example, by harming coastal fishing and tourism industries.
The National Science and Technology Council's Subcommittee on Ocean Science and Technology, in the Executive Office of the President, and several federal agencies have taken steps to implement the Federal Ocean Acidification Research and Monitoring Act of 2009 (FOARAM) but have yet to complete some of the act's requirements. For example, an interagency working group, which includes representatives from 11 agencies and is chaired by the Department of Commerce's National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, has been established. The working group has developed a research and monitoring plan outlining steps to advance the nation's understanding of, and ability to respond to, ocean acidification. However, the agencies involved have yet to implement several FOARAM requirements, including outlining the budget requirements for implementing the research and monitoring plan. Some agency officials told GAO that not providing budget estimates has prevented the agencies and Congress from accurately understanding the funding needed to implement the plan and how it compares with current funding levels.
Further action could be taken to advance the federal response to ocean acidification. GAO's previous work on interagency collaboration has found that a variety of mechanisms can be used to implement efforts involving multiple federal agencies by helping to facilitate collaboration. One possible approach, recommended by the interagency working group, is to establish an independent national ocean acidification program office to coordinate the next steps in the federal response. The working group, however, has not established such an office because it has been unable to reach agreement on how it should be funded. Until greater clarity is provided on the entity responsible for coordinating the next steps in the federal response to ocean acidification, completing important actions, such as implementing the research and monitoring plan, will be difficult.
section_title: What GAO Recommends
paragraphs: GAO recommends the appropriate entities within the Executive Office of the President take steps to improve the federal response to ocean acidification, including estimating the funding that would be needed to implement the research and monitoring plan and designating the entity responsible for coordinating the next steps in the federal response. GAO provided a draft of this report for review and comment to the Executive Office of the President and the departments and agencies reviewed. None of the agencies commented on GAO's recommendations; several provided technical comments that were incorporated, as appropriate.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: Scientists estimate that the oceans have absorbed approximately  30 percent of the carbon dioxide emitted by humans over the past 200  years. This increased uptake of atmospheric carbon dioxide is resulting  in chemical changes in the oceans, including a decrease in the average  pH of surface ocean waters and a reduction in the availability of minerals  needed by many marine organisms to build shells and skeletons.  Collectively referred to as ocean acidification, these chemical changes  may pose risks for some marine species and ecosystems, as well as for  the human communities that rely upon them for food and commerce.  Often referred to as “the other carbon dioxide problem,” ocean  acidification is a distinct issue from climate change but one that stems, in  large part, from the same source—carbon dioxide emissions—according  to a report that provided technical input to the 2013 National Climate  Assessment.
In 2009, the Federal Ocean Acidification Research and Monitoring Act  (FOARAM) became law. FOARAM requires, among other things, that:
The National Science and Technology Council’s Subcommittee on  Ocean Science and Technology, which is part of the Office of Science  and Technology Policy, establish an interagency working group on  ocean acidification. The interagency working group is to be  composed of senior representatives from the National Oceanic and  Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), National Science Foundation,  National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), U.S. Fish  and Wildlife Service, U.S. Geological Survey, and other federal  agencies, as appropriate.
The Subcommittee on Ocean Science and Technology develop a  strategic plan for federal research and monitoring—which we refer to  in this report as the research and monitoring plan—to “provide for an  assessment of the impacts of ocean acidification on marine organisms  and marine ecosystems and the development of adaptation and  mitigation strategies to conserve marine organisms and marine  ecosystems.”
NOAA conduct interdisciplinary and coordinated research to improve  the understanding of ocean acidification, establish a long-term  program to monitor ocean acidification, and coordinate monitoring and  research activities with appropriate international entities, among other  actions.
The National Science Foundation support research and monitoring of  ocean acidification and its impacts.
NASA ensure that space-based monitoring assets are used for  monitoring ocean acidification and its impacts.
Against this backdrop, you asked us to review the federal government’s  efforts to address ocean acidification. This report discusses (1) the  scientific understanding of the effects of ocean acidification; (2) the extent  to which federal agencies have implemented FOARAM; and (3) additional  actions, if any, that could be taken to advance the federal response to  ocean acidification.
To identify the scientific understanding of ocean acidification, we  reviewed six summary reports on ocean acidification developed by  federal agencies and others. These reports were based on extensive  reviews of the scientific literature related to ocean acidification. We  identified the reports by reviewing the websites of the National Research  Council, NOAA, and the Ocean Carbon and Biogeochemistry program  and through discussions with the interagency working group. We  reviewed the reports to identify common themes and summarized the  reports’ findings in four broad areas of scientific inquiry: changes to ocean  chemistry, effects on individual species, effects on ecosystems, and  socioeconomic effects on coastal communities. To obtain more  information and examples to help illustrate the potential effects the  reports identified, we examined peer-reviewed scientific articles and  interviewed ocean acidification experts, including federal and other  scientists who contributed to the reports. To identify the extent to which  federal agencies have implemented FOARAM, we reviewed agency  documents and interviewed agency officials to identify (1) actions the  federal agencies involved with the interagency working group have taken  in response to FOARAM requirements and (2) actions, if any, the  agencies plan to take. We also reviewed agency documents and  interviewed agency officials to obtain estimates of the agencies’ overall  expenditures related to ocean acidification. To identify additional actions  that could advance the federal response to ocean acidification, we  reviewed key agency documents, including the interagency working  group’s research and monitoring plan and the National Research  Council’s review of that plan. We also reviewed our earlier work to identify  key practices that federal agencies have used in implementing  interagency collaborative efforts. In addition, to obtain a broader  perspective on agency actions to implement FOARAM and respond to  ocean acidification, we interviewed nonfederal stakeholders involved with  or interested in ocean acidification issues, including state agencies,  conservation groups, and fishing industry groups.
We conducted this performance audit from May 2013 to September 2014  in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.  Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain  sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our  findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that  the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and  conclusions based on our audit objectives.
subsections: section_title: Background
paragraphs: The primary cause of ocean acidification is an increase in carbon dioxide  in the oceans that is caused by increasing levels of carbon dioxide in the  atmosphere. Human activities—including the burning of fossil fuels,  cement production, deforestation, and agriculture—release carbon  dioxide into the atmosphere. Since the 1700s, atmospheric carbon  dioxide concentrations have risen from approximately 280 parts per  million to approximately 400 parts per million (see fig. 1). As the carbon  dioxide concentration in the atmosphere increases, more carbon dioxide  is absorbed by the oceans, where it reacts with water to form carbonic  acid, most of which separates to form a hydrogen ion and a bicarbonate  ion.the pH of the water.
The resulting increase in hydrogen ion concentration is what lowers  Since the 1700s, the average surface ocean pH has decreased from  about 8.2 to 8.1, a change representing an approximately 26 percent  increase in ocean acidity. At the current rate of carbon dioxide  emissions, scientists project that, by 2100, the average pH of the ocean  surface will drop to between 7.9 and 7.7. Such a drop would correspond  to a rise in acidity of approximately 100 percent to 200 percent over  preindustrial levels. Moreover, the current rate of acidification is believed  to be faster than at any point in at least the last 20 million years.
In addition to increasing acidity, the higher levels of carbon dioxide in the  oceans also cause chemical reactions that reduce what is known as the  “saturation state” of calcium carbonate minerals such as aragonite and  calcite. As the saturation state of these carbonate minerals decreases,  some marine organisms will need to use more energy to acquire the  carbonate ions needed to build shells or skeletons. In addition, when the  saturation state drops below 1 (i.e., undersaturated), then structures such  as animal shells that are made of carbonate minerals may begin to  dissolve. As the oceans absorb more carbon dioxide, scientific models  predict that the saturation state of many surface waters, including areas  supporting rich fisheries, will continue to decline (see fig. 2).
The carbonate mineral saturation state is affected by several other factors  in addition to carbon dioxide. For example, the temperature, pressure,  and salinity of the ocean water at a particular location affects the  saturation state. As a result, the latitude of a particular ocean location, the  depth of the water there, and the extent to which it receives freshwater  input from rivers all play a role in determining the saturation state. In  general, saturation state is highest in warm, shallow, saline waters.  Therefore, the Arctic Ocean, which has colder water and receives large  amounts of fresh water from rivers and melting ice, and deepwater  environments generally have naturally lower saturation states.
Biological processes also affect the pH and saturation state of the  oceans. During the day, marine plants, including phytoplankton and  seagrasses, use sunlight and carbon dioxide to create and store energy,  a process known as photosynthesis.dioxide levels, thus increasing the pH and carbonate mineral saturation  states of the upper reaches of the ocean. Conversely, as organic (i.e.,   This activity reduces carbon  carbon-based) matter decomposes, carbon dioxide is released back into  the water, thus decreasing pH. Some of the decomposing organic matter  sinks into deeper water, which, over time, has contributed to deeper  waters naturally being lower in pH and having lower saturation states with  respect to calcium carbonate minerals.
The effect of biological processes on ocean chemistry also means that pH  and saturation states vary more widely in coastal and estuarine waters  than in the open ocean. Coastal and estuarine areas have high  concentrations of plant life and receive freshwater inputs from rivers,  factors that influence ocean chemistry. The resulting variation may occur  both daily, because of the effect of photosynthesis, and seasonally, due  to changes in the amount of available solar energy and of river flows.
Although the primary cause of ocean acidification is the increase in global  atmospheric carbon dioxide emissions, other factors also contribute to  acidification, particularly in coastal and estuarine areas. In particular,  increased nutrient pollution (e.g., of nitrate, phosphate, and iron) from  agricultural fertilizers and from septic systems and sewage treatment  plants results in higher than normal levels of biological growth, a condition  known as “eutrophication.” In the short run, the faster growth of plants  such as phytoplankton may raise the pH of coastal and estuarine waters  by consuming carbon dioxide in the water and releasing oxygen. In the  long run, however, when plants die, the decomposition process releases  carbon dioxide and may lower the pH, sometimes substantially.addition, local sources of air pollution may also contribute to acidification  in coastal and estuarine areas. For example, in addition to releasing  carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, the burning of fossil fuels releases  other gases such as nitrogen oxides and sulfur oxides that can be   In  deposited on coastal and estuarine waters, or on streams and rivers  flowing into coastal waters, lowering the pH.
section_title: The Scope and Severity of Ocean Acidification’s Effects Are Potentially Significant but Not Fully Known
paragraphs: Ocean acidification could have a variety of potentially significant effects  on marine species, ecosystems, and coastal communities, according to  the six summary reports we reviewed. However, the scientific  understanding of these effects is still developing, and there remains  uncertainty about their scope and severity.
subsections: section_title: Ocean Acidification Could Hamper the Ability of Some Species to Form Shells and May Have a Variety of Other Potential Effects on Species
paragraphs: Calcifying species—that is, species that produce shells and skeletons  composed of calcium carbonate minerals—are expected to be among the  most vulnerable types of species to ocean acidification. Not all calcifying  species, however, are expected to respond the same way to reductions in  carbonate ion concentrations resulting from ocean acidification, and some  are expected to be more at risk than others. For example:
Mollusks. Ocean acidification could negatively affect the survival  and growth of some mollusks—including bivalve species such as  oysters and mussels—by making calcification more difficult, according  to the summary reports we reviewed. Among bivalve species that  have displayed a negative response to ocean acidification, larval and  juvenile bivalves may be more susceptible to harm than adult  bivalves. For example, according to a 2013 study of Pacific oyster  (Crassostrea gigas) larvae, during the period of initial shell formation  in the early days of an oyster’s life, oyster larvae rely primarily on the  energy derived from their egg reserves to build their shells because  the oysters have not yet developed their primary feeding organ.  When exposed to an environment with a lower carbonate ion  concentration, however, the larvae have to expend more energy to  build their shells. This increased energy expenditure during the period  of initial shell formation makes it more difficult for the oysters to  develop their feeding organs and reduces the probability that the  oysters will survive.
Figure 3 compares Pacific oyster larvae raised in acidified conditions  (characterized by reduced pH levels and carbonate mineral saturation  states) with those raised under more favorable ocean conditions. The  figure shows that the Pacific oyster larvae raised under acidified  conditions experienced impaired shell development, and their shells  had various deformities compared with the larvae raised under more  favorable conditions. Even in instances where oysters are able to  survive their larval stage under acidified conditions, the greater energy  required to produce their shells could contribute to decreased growth  in later life stages. For example, a 2012 study examined the effects of  ocean acidification on the Olympia oyster (Ostrea lurida) and found  that larvae raised in water with a low pH (7.8) exhibited a slower shell  growth rate that continued even once the oysters became juveniles.
Not all mollusk species have responded negatively to ocean  acidification conditions in research experiments, according to the  reports we reviewed. One of the reports noted that roughly half of the  mollusk species examined have displayed no effects from ocean  acidification, and that a few mollusk species have displayed positive  effects. For example, one study cited in the report found that  mortality rates declined for juveniles of one clam species (Ruditapes  decussatus) kept in seawater with artificially lowered pH levels compared with juveniles kept in seawater at higher pH levels.
Corals. Corals were also identified in the summary reports we  reviewed as being among the calcifying species most at risk for harm  from ocean acidification. Ocean acidification may make it more  difficult for some corals to grow their skeletons due to the reduced  carbonate ion concentration and may affect coral reproduction. In  addition, ocean acidification could potentially increase the rate at  which coral skeletons dissolve and erode. However, not all coral  species are expected to be negatively affected by ocean acidification,  according to the reports we reviewed. and  Reduced pH: Variable Responses to Ocean Acidification at Local Scales?” Journal of  Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, vol. 396 (2011). could cause behavioral changes in some fish species by interfering with  the functioning of sensory systems, such as the ability to smell. Such  changes in sensory systems could, in turn, produce behavioral changes  that alter predator-prey interactions, among other things. For example,  one study cited in two of the summary reports we reviewed found that  clownfish larvae raised in an elevated carbon dioxide environment  became attracted to the scent of predators rather than avoiding this odor,  whereas clownfish larvae raised under carbon dioxide conditions similar  to the current environment exhibited a strong avoidance to the odor of  predators. Similarly, another study found that juvenile damselfish and  cardinalfish living in ocean waters with naturally high carbon dioxide  levels—caused by nearby volcanic vents that emit carbon dioxide and  lower the pH of surrounding waters—were attracted to predators’ odors  and exhibited bolder behavior than fish from ocean waters that were  unaffected by the volcanic vents.behavioral changes cause species to be at a higher risk from predators,  such changes could potentially lead to increased mortality rates for  affected species. However, according to the reports we reviewed, the  extent to which other fish species—including commercially important fish  such as salmon—are vulnerable to behavioral effects caused by changes  in the functioning of sensory systems due to ocean acidification is  unclear.
To the extent these types of  Another way in which ocean acidification could affect marine species is by  enhancing photosynthetic processes in ocean waters with elevated  carbon dioxide concentrations. In particular, the possibility that some  marine plant species, such as certain seagrasses, could experience  increased photosynthesis and growth was highlighted by the summary  reports we reviewed as a primary example of the potential for ocean  acidification to benefit some species. However, this type of beneficial  effect appears to be variable among photosynthetic species, and the net  effect of ocean acidification on some marine photosynthetic species could  be negative. For example, the reports we reviewed noted that marine  macroalgae (seaweeds) are expected to display a diverse response to  ocean acidification, in part because macroalgae include a mix of  calcifying and noncalcifying species. Since ocean acidification may  reduce calcification abilities, the growth of calcifying macroalgae may be  compromised under future ocean acidification conditions even if these  species experience increased photosynthesis, whereas the growth of  noncalcifying macroalgae is more likely to be enhanced. For instance, in  a study cited in one of the reports we reviewed, researchers examined  the abundance of calcifying versus noncalcifying species of macroalgae  near volcanic vents in the ocean and found that the abundance of  noncalcifying macroalgae increased as the pH declined, whereas the  abundance of calcifying macroalgae decreased.
The presence of other stressors in the marine environment—such as  warming ocean temperatures, hypoxia, and pollution—were highlighted in  the summary reports we reviewed as factors that make it difficult to  determine how ocean acidification will affect different species. Knowledge  about the simultaneous effects of ocean acidification and these other  stressors on species is incomplete, but these stressors could potentially  exacerbate the effects of ocean acidification. For example, a recent study  found that the combined effects of hypoxia and ocean acidification were  more severe on early life stage bivalves than would be expected for either  stressor on its own. reviewed stated that ocean acidification may compromise the resiliency of  corals to the other threats they face, such as increased ocean  temperatures, by, for example, causing some coral species to be more  susceptible to coral bleaching.
Hypoxia is a condition where waters have low dissolved oxygen concentrations. Gobler  et al., “Hypoxia and Acidification Have Additive and Synergistic Negative Effects on the  Growth, Survival, and Metamorphosis of Early Life Stage Bivalves,” PLoS ONE, vol. 9,  issue 1 (January 2014). effects on different species is the potential for species to adapt to  changes in ocean chemistry. In this context, adaptation refers to the  ability of a species to evolve over successive generations to become  better suited to its habitat, which in the case of ocean acidification would  mean a reduced carbonate ion, lower pH ocean environment. If species  are successful in adapting genetically to these changing conditions, it  could be possible for them to avoid some of the negative effects that  might otherwise occur from ocean acidification. For example, one of the  summary reports we reviewed noted that it might be possible for some  coral species to evolve a mechanism that would enable them to calcify at  normal rates even in waters with lower carbonate ion concentrations,  although this type of adaptation has not been documented in corals.  Moreover, since the changes to ocean chemistry currently taking place  are occurring rapidly on evolutionary timescales, the reports we reviewed  stated that it is unknown whether species will be able to adapt to the  expected rate and magnitude of ocean acidification’s changes.
section_title: Ocean Acidification May Pose Risks to Food Webs or Otherwise Disrupt Marine Ecosystems
paragraphs: The potential for ocean acidification to alter marine food webs was  identified in the reports we reviewed as one of the most significant  ecosystem-level effects that could result from ocean acidification.difficult to predict exactly how a change to a species in one part of a food  web will affect other species, but if ocean acidification were to negatively  affect species at lower levels in a food web, it is possible those negative  effects could lead to broader ecosystem effects involving species at  higher levels. For example, pteropods—a type of small calcifying sea  snail—represent an important component of some marine food webs and  were highlighted as potentially being vulnerable in several of the  summary reports we reviewed. Among other things, pteropods are an  important food source for salmon and other animals such as seabirds and  whales. Some pteropods’ calcification and growth rates decline as pH  levels decrease, and their shells can partially dissolve under acidified  conditions (see fig. 4). For example, a recent study found a strong  relationship between increased shell dissolution in one pteropod species  (Limacina helicina) and reduced carbonate ion concentrations off the   It is  West Coast of the United States.acidification on pteropod populations is unknown, but if pteropod  populations were to decline, there could be cascading effects through the  food webs of some marine ecosystems—including those supporting  economically important fisheries such as salmon.
section_title: Ocean Acidification’s Effects May Cause Economic and Cultural Disruptions to Some Communities
paragraphs: The effects of ocean acidification on marine species and ecosystems may  affect the goods and services they provide, which may cause economic  disruptions, according to the summary reports we reviewed.example:
Shellfish harvest and aquaculture. Shellfish harvest is the most  valuable sector of the commercial fishing industry in the United  States, accounting for 53 percent of U.S. commercial fishing landings  and valued at approximately $2.7 billion in 2012, according to  NOAA.  In addition, NOAA reported that the approximate value of  shellfish produced by aquaculture in the United States in 2011 was  $422.0 million. Potential declines in the health of shellfish  populations from ocean acidification could negatively affect both  shellfish harvest and aquaculture. Oyster aquaculture has already  experienced significant disruption in the Pacific Northwest. The  Washington State Blue Ribbon Panel on Ocean Acidification reported  that, between 2005 and 2009, acidified conditions killed billions of  oyster larvae at two of the three primary hatcheries that provide  Pacific oysters to growers in the Northwest, disrupting the industry  throughout the region. A representative from one of the affected  hatcheries said that the hatcheries—assisted by federal and state  agency efforts to improve monitoring of ocean chemistry—have been  able to change the systems that bring seawater into their hatcheries to  avoid particularly low pH levels. Nonetheless, both the hatchery and  agency officials we spoke with expressed concern that future ocean  conditions could exceed the hatcheries’ ability to adapt. Similarly, crab  harvest constitutes an important component of the fishing industry in  Alaska, and recent research suggests that some juvenile crab species  are less able to survive in lower pH waters, which could lead to  declines in an industry that, in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands,  harvested crabs valued at approximately $245 million annually, on  average, from 2008 through 2012.
Finfish harvest. As with shellfish, potential future declines in the  health of finfish populations from ocean acidification could negatively  affect their harvest, which NOAA reported was valued at  approximately $2.4 billion in 2012. Finfish—including those that are  important components of commercial marine fisheries such as  salmon, pollock, and cod—may be directly affected by ocean  acidification. In addition, if ocean acidification changes marine food  webs or habitat—such as coral and oyster reefs—that are important to  finfish reproduction, growth, and survival, the finfish industry could  also be affected.
Tourism and recreation. Marine ecosystems also generate important  economic and social benefits from tourism and recreation that may be  at risk from ocean acidification. Recreational saltwater fishing  contributed approximately $17.5 billion to the U.S. gross domestic  product in 2011, including money spent on food, lodging, and  transportation, according to an estimate by an industry trade  association. In addition, NOAA has reported that millions of people  visit coral reefs to dive, snorkel, and sightsee, contributing significantly  to local economies in Florida, Hawaii, and many U.S. territories. If  ocean acidification leads to declines in the health of marine  ecosystems, the economic and social benefits from marine tourism  and recreation could also decline.
Storm protection. Certain marine ecosystems, such as coral and  oyster reefs, help protect coastal communities from flooding caused  by hurricanes and other storms, thereby reducing the damage and  social disruption that can accompany such storms. If ocean  acidification harms such ecosystems, the storm protection benefits  they provide could decline.
The expected effects of ocean acidification may disproportionately affect  some regions and communities that are strongly connected economically  and/or culturally to the goods and services provided by marine  ecosystems. For example:
Fisheries are important in both New England and on the West Coast,  but one economic study estimated that potential revenue losses due  to ocean acidification would be four times higher in New England, due  to the significance of the shellfish harvest to the local economy.  Moreover, some communities may be disproportionately affected. For  example, in recent years, New Bedford, Massachusetts, has been the  U.S. port with the highest value of fish landed, largely due to its  scallop fishery. The study concluded that a decline in scallop revenue  due to ocean acidification would further depress a community that has  struggled economically. Similarly, shellfish aquaculture operations are  major employers in Pacific and Mason counties in Washington State;  consequently, if ocean acidification harms shellfish aquaculture, it  could have a significant economic impact on these communities.
Harvesting fish and shellfish is an important element in many tribal  communities for economic, dietary, and cultural reasons. Many tribal  communities in Washington State view ocean acidification both as an  economic issue and, because salmon and shellfish are important  ceremonial foods, as a threat to their identity and cultural survival,  according to one of the summary reports we reviewed.In some coastal communities, harvesting marine resources is not just  an economic activity but “a way of life.” For example, commercial  fishing not only provides household income but also is intertwined with  how families, generations, and the community as a whole interact with  each other and with nature, according to one of the summary reports  we reviewed.
section_title: Federal Agencies Have Taken Steps to Implement FOARAM but Have Yet to Complete Certain Requirements
paragraphs: Federal agencies have taken a variety of steps to implement FOARAM  and to support the federal response to ocean acidification more broadly.However, the agencies have yet to complete other FOARAM  requirements.
subsections: section_title: An Interagency Working Group Has Developed a Research and Monitoring Plan, and Individual Agencies Have Taken Steps to Implement FOARAM
paragraphs: The Subcommittee on Ocean Science and Technology implemented the  FOARAM requirement to establish an interagency working group and  subsequently delegated responsibility for developing the required  research and monitoring plan to the working group. NOAA, the National  Science Foundation, and NASA—the three agencies required by  FOARAM to take specific actions related to ocean acidification outside of  the working group—have also taken steps to implement those  requirements. In addition, the other federal agencies that are part of the  interagency working group have taken steps to support the federal  response to ocean acidification (see app. I). The agencies participating in  the interagency working group have estimated that from fiscal year 2010,  the fiscal year after FOARAM was enacted, through fiscal year 2013 they  have spent approximately $88 million ($22 million annually, on average)  on activities directly related to ocean acidification (see app. II).
subsections: section_title: An Interagency Working Group Has Been Established and Developed a Research and Monitoring Plan
paragraphs: The interagency working group on ocean acidification is composed of  senior representatives from 11 federal agencies involved in responding to  ocean acidification. FOARAM specified five agencies—NOAA, the  National Science Foundation, NASA, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and  U.S. Geological Survey—as well as “other federal agencies as  appropriate,” to be part of the working group. In addition to the agencies  specified in the act, as of August 2014, six agencies with missions that  could be affected by ocean acidification—the Bureau of Ocean Energy  Management, Department of Energy, Department of State, Environmental  Protection Agency (EPA), U.S. Department of Agriculture, and U.S.
Navy—have also joined the working group.interagency working group, which is chaired by NOAA and vice-chaired  by NASA and the National Science Foundation, has met approximately  quarterly.
Since January 2010, the  One of the primary tasks of the interagency working group has been to  guide the development of a research and monitoring plan, which  FOARAM required to be developed by March 2011. was approved by the Office of Science and Technology Policy and  released to the public in March 2014, outlines key efforts identified by the  interagency working group that need to be taken over the next 10 years to  advance the nation’s understanding of, and ability to respond to, ocean  acidification.
The working group has also issued two reports, required by FOARAM, describing  federal actions related to ocean acidification research and monitoring. The first report was  required to be issued by March 2010 and the second to be issued two years later. The first  report was issued in March 2011 and the second in 2013. Interagency Working Group on  Ocean Acidification, Initial Report on Federally Funded Ocean Acidification Research and  Monitoring Activities and Progress in Developing a Strategic Plan (Washington, D.C.:  March 2011), and Second Report on Federally Funded Ocean Acidification Research and  Monitoring Activities and Progress on a Strategic Research Plan (Washington, D.C.:  2013). acidification on species and ecosystems is needed to determine the  magnitude and extent of acidification and to advance research. The  plan’s goals include evaluating existing ocean monitoring systems that  could be expanded to monitor ocean acidification (e.g., by adding new  sensors) and identifying regions where new monitoring systems may  be warranted.
Modeling to predict changes in ocean chemistry and impacts on  marine ecosystems and organisms. The plan stated that models  are needed to help predict likely changes to ocean chemistry and  marine ecosystems resulting from ocean acidification and to provide  information that can inform resource management decisions (e.g.,  decisions related to managing fisheries). The plan’s goals include  developing and improving models that can be used to predict direct  and indirect effects of ocean acidification on culturally, economically,  and ecologically important species.
Technology development and standardization of measurements.
The plan stated that new technologies and standardization of  measurements are required to support research and monitoring. The  plan’s goals include (1) developing standardized methodologies for  measuring how plants and animals respond to ocean acidification and  (2) improving the accuracy and affordability of monitoring  equipment.
Assessment of socioeconomic impacts and development of  adaptation and mitigation strategies. The plan stated that better  understanding the social and economic effects of ocean acidification  can help inform discussions about how society can adapt to it and  mitigate its causes. The plan’s goals include developing models to  estimate the economic effects of ocean acidification and assisting  national, state, and local governments and businesses to develop  adaptation plans.
Education, outreach, and engagement. The plan recognized the  importance of effective outreach and education to improve awareness  of the potential effects of ocean acidification and to engage  stakeholders (e.g., nongovernmental organizations, fishing industry  representatives, and natural resource managers) and the public in a  discussion of policy options for responding to acidification. The plan’s  goals include engaging federal and academic partners to develop and  implement outreach programs.
Data management and integration. The plan stated that the success  of the federal response to ocean acidification depends on effective  data management and recognized that it is critical that data be shared  and integrated across organizational boundaries and blended from  diverse information systems. The plan’s goals include establishing a  program or office to manage ocean acidification data collection and  determining how the data will be archived and accessed.
section_title: NOAA Has Established an Ocean Acidification Program
paragraphs: NOAA formally established an ocean acidification program, required by  FOARAM, in May 2011. The program is staffed by a director and two to  three other staff and is overseen by an executive board consisting of  senior officials from the four NOAA offices involved in ocean  acidification. Because of the number of NOAA offices involved, a  primary responsibility of the ocean acidification program is to coordinate  all of NOAA’s actions related to ocean acidification. It also coordinates  and collaborates with other agencies, stakeholders, and researchers,  both within and outside of the United States.
NOAA ocean acidification program officials estimated they spent  approximately $6 million annually, on average, between fiscal year 2011  and fiscal year 2013, to support the types of activities envisioned in the  interagency working group’s research and monitoring plan. Program  officials estimated that the program has directed about 50 percent of its  funds towards ocean acidification monitoring and about 20 percent toward  research on species’ responses to acidification, with the remainder aimed  at improving scientific models of acidification, data management, and  other activities. Examples of program actions include:  Improving ocean acidification monitoring capabilities. NOAA has  taken steps to address FOARAM’s requirement to establish a long- term ocean acidification monitoring program. For example, the agency  is working with state agencies and regional stakeholders, including  regional associations of the Integrated Ocean Observing System, to  identify (1) locations where additional monitoring capabilities would be  useful and (2) opportunities for adding ocean acidification monitoring  equipment to locations where other monitoring equipment already  exists. NOAA’s ocean acidification program, often in conjunction  with state agencies and others, has also helped fund deployment of  new monitoring assets in some locations, but the director of the  program told us that funding levels have hindered the agency’s ability  to further expand monitoring networks. NOAA has also taken steps to  address FOARAM’s requirement to coordinate its monitoring activities  with international partners. For example, NOAA, along with  international partners and others, has sponsored workshops to,  among other goals, develop consensus within the international  scientific community on the chemical, physical, and biological  variables that an ocean acidification monitoring network should  measure and on data collection protocols to ensure appropriate data  quality and comparability.hindering development of a monitoring network, including, for  example, limitations in the quality of existing monitoring equipment. crab or scallop populations might have on fishing communities in  Alaska or New England, respectively.
section_title: The National Science Foundation Has Supported Research and Monitoring of Ocean Acidification
paragraphs: To respond to FOARAM’s requirements for the agency, the National  Science Foundation established ocean acidification research as a specific  agency focus for fiscal years 2010 through 2014. During these years,  the agency issued four solicitations requesting scientists to submit  research proposals related to ocean acidification. Overall, from fiscal year  2010 through fiscal year 2013, the National Science Foundation selected  approximately 50 proposals to receive funding and directed an estimated  $11 million annually, on average, to ocean acidification research. The  projects selected for funding covered diverse aspects of ocean  acidification, including (1) changes to ocean chemistry in a variety of  locations; (2) effects on the biological, chemical, and physical processes  of a variety of marine species; and (3) how the effects on species might  affect different ecosystems. Funded projects included examinations of:
Changes to ocean chemistry during a previous geological period,  research that could provide insights into the short- and long-term  impacts of human-caused carbon dioxide emissions on surface ocean  pH and carbonate chemistry.
The effects of elevated carbon dioxide levels in the ocean on a  pteropod species (Limacina retroversa) in the Gulf of Maine that is  preyed on by commercially important fish species.
The effects of elevated ocean carbon dioxide levels on the growth,  calcification, and physiology of corals and other species inhabiting a  remote coral reef in the Pacific Ocean.
The National Science Foundation has reported that its most recent  solicitation, issued in fiscal year 2014, is expected to be the final one  requesting research proposals specifically for ocean acidification. A  senior agency official told us that the agency would continue to fund  ocean acidification research in the context of its overall research program,  although likely at a lower level of funding. The official also said that it is  common for the agency to focus research on a specific issue for a few  years and then reintegrate that issue into its overall program.
section_title: NASA Has Collected Relevant Data and Supported Research
paragraphs: NASA maintains a system of satellites that collects data on many aspects  of the Earth, including on aspects of the global carbon cycle and ocean  ecology that are relevant to ocean acidification, and has made its data  available to other researchers. It also has provided funding to outside  researchers to study ocean acidification. Between 2007 and 2012, the  agency issued approximately 10 solicitations for research and provided  funding for four research projects, according to an agency official. For  example, one project funded by NASA is examining the effects of ocean  acidification on ocean chemistry and phytoplankton photosynthesis in the  Arctic Ocean.
section_title: Agencies Have Yet to Take Action to Implement Several FOARAM Requirements
paragraphs: The agencies have yet to implement the following FOARAM  requirements: (1) establish each agency’s role in implementing the  research and monitoring plan and outline the budget requirements for  implementing the plan, (2) establish an ocean acidification information  exchange, and (3) develop adaptation and mitigation strategies to  conserve marine organisms and ecosystems.
subsections: section_title: Agency Roles and the Budget Requirements for Implementing the Research and Monitoring Plan Have Not Been Established
paragraphs: The agencies completed the research and monitoring plan required by  FOARAM, but that plan does not include all of the required elements.  Specifically:
FOARAM requires the research and monitoring plan to set forth the  role of each agency in implementing it, but the plan does not do so.  Interagency working group officials told us they expect that additional  information on the roles and responsibilities of the agencies will be  provided in an implementation plan, which the working group has  begun developing, according to its chair. Our previous work on  interagency collaborative efforts has found that clarifying the roles and  responsibilities of the participating agencies is an important factor in  the success of such efforts. Until the specific roles and  responsibilities of the agencies are clarified, it will be difficult for the  working group and its member agencies to make progress in  implementing important actions called for in the research and  monitoring plan.
FOARAM also requires that the research and monitoring plan outline  the budget requirements for each agency to implement the plan’s  research, monitoring, and assessment activities, but the plan does not  include them. According to the previous chair of the working group, a  high-level estimate of the federal funding needed for each agency to  implement the research and monitoring plan was developed during  the early drafting of the plan, but this information was excluded from  the final plan at the direction of the Office of Management and Budget.  Many officials and stakeholders we interviewed said that the level of  funding directed to ocean acidification to date has been insufficient  given the potential scope and severity of effects expected in the  future. Some of the officials expressed concern that excluding budget  estimates from the research and monitoring plan has prevented the  agencies and Congress from accurately understanding the funding  needed to implement the plan and how it compares with current  funding levels. Developing and disclosing estimates of the needed  funding may be particularly important for efforts involving multiple  agencies. In our previous work on interagency collaborative efforts,  we reported that effective interagency collaborative efforts require,  among other things, the identification of the types and level of  resources needed to implement the planned activities.
section_title: An Ocean Acidification Information Exchange Has Not Been Established
paragraphs: FOARAM requires the Subcommittee on Ocean Science and Technology to establish or  designate an ocean acidification information exchange. The subcommittee delegated this  responsibility to the interagency working group on ocean acidification, the group they also  tasked with development of the research and monitoring plan. stored and made available to government officials, researchers, and the  public. The chair of the working group told us the group has not  established a single exchange but said that information on ocean  acidification, including on federal agencies’ actions and research results,  is available on the working group’s and other federal websites. The  chair also said she recognized the value of establishing a single  exchange but that doing so was a lower priority than other needed  actions, such as developing the research and monitoring plan.  Nonetheless, it has been more than 5 years since FOARAM was enacted,  and some stakeholders we interviewed said that, without establishing a  single information exchange, researchers and the public may have  difficulty accessing all of the information on ocean acidification that the  agencies are developing. In addition, our previous work has found that  information technology, such as shared databases and web portals, can  be a tool that facilitates interagency collaboration. According to NOAA  officials, the National Oceanographic Data Center could serve as a  building block for an ocean acidification information exchange.
section_title: Adaptation and Mitigation Strategies Have Not Yet Been Developed
paragraphs: The interagency working group has not developed the adaptation and  mitigation strategies to conserve marine organisms and ecosystems  exposed to ocean acidification that are required by FOARAM.  The  research and monitoring plan developed by the interagency working  group includes a high-level discussion of adaptation and mitigation, but it  does not clearly describe adaptation and mitigation strategies. The chair  of the working group said that the research and monitoring plan  recognizes the importance of these topics but that more research on the  effects of ocean acidification needs to be done before appropriate  adaptation and mitigation strategies can be fully developed. For example,  the research and monitoring plan states that future research on  organisms’ responses to ocean acidification could assist with developing  adaptation strategies. Research could, for instance, identify certain  genetic strains in shellfish species that may be more tolerant of  acidification, which could help aquaculture operations adapt to more- acidic conditions. Similarly, research on the effects of ocean acidification  on species and ecosystems could assist government agencies in  developing options for fishery management or assist businesses and  communities in adapting to changing conditions in the future. In regard to  mitigation, many officials and stakeholders we interviewed said that  without timely action to mitigate its root causes, ocean acidification is  likely to have significant impacts. The research and monitoring plan  identified two approaches to mitigate the causes of ocean acidification:  (1) reducing carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere and (2) reducing the  impact of other environmental stressors—such as nutrient runoff  pollution—that can exacerbate the effects of acidification.however, did not provide a strategy for addressing these issues.
section_title: Designating an Entity to Coordinate the Next Steps Could Bolster Federal Efforts to Implement FOARAM and Respond to Ocean Acidification
paragraphs: Further action could be taken to advance the federal response to ocean  acidification. Our previous work on interagency collaboration has found  that the federal government has used a variety of mechanisms to  implement collaborative efforts involving multiple agencies. These  mechanisms include, among others, (1) establishing an interagency  working group, (2) creating an independent interagency office with its own  authority and resources, and (3) designating one or more agencies as the  lead for the effort. In some cases, agencies have used more than one  mechanism to implement a collaborative effort. Eleven agencies with  widely varying missions are contributing to the federal response to ocean  acidification. The research and monitoring plan developed by the  interagency working group identified a number of goals and priorities to  help guide the federal response to ocean acidification, but in many cases  it is unclear which agencies will be responsible for taking action to  implement them.
The working group has recommended that an independent national  ocean acidification program office be established to coordinate the next  steps in the federal response. The National Research Council has concurred with this recommendation. Key functions envisioned for the  proposed office include:  facilitating coordination among federal agencies, academic  researchers, and other stakeholders; developing an implementation plan that outlines the specific actions  needed to achieve the goals presented in the research and monitoring  plan;  coordinating U.S. ocean acidification research and monitoring  activities with international entities conducting similar work; establishing an ocean acidification information exchange; and developing a comprehensive ocean acidification data management  plan.
It is uncertain, however, when, or if, a national program office will be  established. According to the former chair of the interagency working  group, such an office has not been established because the working  group has been unable to reach agreement on how it should be funded.  Given the uncertainty about the proposed national program office, some  officials we interviewed identified other options that could be pursued,  such as designating NOAA as the lead agency to implement the next  steps in the federal response and fulfill the functions the working group  envisioned for a national program office. Regardless of the option chosen,  until there is greater clarity on which entity is responsible for coordinating  the next steps in the federal response to ocean acidification, completing  important actions, such as implementing the research and monitoring  plan, will be difficult.
section_title: Conclusions
paragraphs: In response to FOARAM’s requirements, an interagency working group  including 11 federal agencies has been established and has begun taking  steps to better understand and respond to ocean acidification. One  important action the working group has taken is the development of an  ocean acidification research and monitoring plan, which outlines key  efforts needed to advance the nation’s understanding of and ability to  respond to acidification. However, federal efforts to implement FOARAM  are incomplete. Because the research and monitoring plan does not  establish each agency’s role or the budget needed for implementation, as  required by FOARAM, it is unclear to what extent the actions outlined in  the plan will be taken. In addition, research results and other information  related to ocean acidification are available on various federal websites,  but the information has not been consolidated into a single ocean  acidification information exchange as required by FOARAM, which may  make public access and scientific research more difficult. Finally, the  research and monitoring plan lays out a broad scope of work, but an  entity has not been designated to coordinate the plan’s implementation,  or to identify and take whatever additional steps may be needed to help  the nation address ocean acidification in the future. Without designating  such an entity, federal agencies may struggle to advance the federal  response to ocean acidification.
section_title: Recommendations for Executive Action
paragraphs: To improve the federal response to ocean acidification, we recommend  that the appropriate entities within the Executive Office of the President,  including the Office of Science and Technology Policy and the National  Science and Technology Council’s Subcommittee on Ocean Science and  Technology, in consultation with the agencies in the interagency working  group, take the following four actions:
Clearly define the roles and responsibilities of each agency with  regard to implementing the Strategic Plan for Federal Research and  Monitoring of Ocean Acidification.
Estimate the funding that would be needed to implement the Strategic  Plan for Federal Research and Monitoring of Ocean Acidification.
Establish an ocean acidification information exchange.
Designate the entity responsible for coordinating the next steps in the  federal response to ocean acidification.
section_title: Agency Comments
paragraphs: We provided a draft of this report for review and comment to the  Executive Office of the President; Departments of Agriculture, Commerce,  Defense, the Interior, and State; EPA; NASA; and National Science  Foundation. None of the agencies commented on our recommendations  or findings. NOAA, on behalf of the Department of Commerce, and the  Departments of Agriculture and the Interior provided technical comments,  which we incorporated, as appropriate.
As agreed with your offices, unless you publicly announce the contents of  this report earlier, we plan no further distribution until 30 days from the  report date. At that time, we will send copies to the appropriate  congressional committees; the Executive Office of the President; the  Secretaries of Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, the Interior, and State;  the Administrators of EPA, NASA, and NOAA; the Directors of the Bureau  of Ocean Energy Management, National Science Foundation, U.S. Fish  and Wildlife Service, and U.S. Geological Survey; and other interested  parties. In addition, the report will be available at no charge on the GAO  website at http://www.gao.gov.
If you or your staff members have any questions about this report, please  contact me at (202) 512-3841 or morriss@gao.gov. Contact points for our  Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on  the last page of this report. GAO staff who made key contributions to this  report are listed in appendix III.
section_title: Appendix I: Other Agencies’ Actions to Support the Federal Response to Ocean Acidification
paragraphs: The department’s National Institute of Food and Agriculture chairs the Interagency  Working Group on Aquaculture, which works to increase the overall effectiveness and  productivity of federal aquaculture research and assistance programs. The working group,  previously known as the Joint Subcommittee on Aquaculture, was created by statute and  operates under the Office of Science and Technology Policy’s National Science and  Technology Council. marine and coastal national wildlife refuges.considering establishing coral reefs located in national wildlife  refuges, which are often in remote areas and experience little human  disturbance, as “sentinel sites” where the service can monitor the  effects of ocean acidification.
In addition, it is
U.S. Geological Survey. The Geological Survey has researched  ocean acidification and its effects by collecting data on ocean  chemistry at different locations and studying the effects of acidification  on certain species. For example, one of the areas the agency has  focused on is the West Florida Shelf in the Gulf of Mexico, where it  has studied spatial and temporal variations in carbon chemistry and  the effects of ocean acidification on the growth of calcifying  organisms. The agency, in conjunction with the U.S. Coast Guard,  also monitored ocean chemistry in the Arctic Ocean from 2010  through 2012, documenting that about 20 percent of the area was  undersaturated with respect to aragonite, according to an agency  official.
U.S. Navy. The Navy has monitored research on ocean acidification  conducted by others to assess any potential implications for naval  operations. One implication for naval operations described in the  research and monitoring plan is the potential for ocean acidification to  threaten the food supply in areas of the world that are heavily  dependent on marine resources for food, which, in turn, could lead to  increased political instability in those regions.  The Navy has also  helped fund research on the effects that ocean acidification might  have on how sound travels through water, because of its potential  impact on sonar systems, which are important to naval operations.
Any disruption to food supply that may be caused by ocean acidification will  disproportionately affect countries that are dependent on fish protein as a key element of  their diet. The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations reported in 2012  that fish accounted for 50 percent or more of animal protein consumed in some island and  developing countries, whereas it accounted for only 16.6 percent of animal protein  consumed globally.
section_title: Appendix II: Approximate Agency Expenditures Related to Ocean Acidification, Fiscal Years 2010 through 2013
paragraphs: The agencies that were part of the interagency working group in 2013  estimated that between fiscal years 2010 and 2013 they collectively spent  approximately $88 million on activities directly related to ocean  acidification (see table 1). The expenditures shown for fiscal years 2010  and 2011 are estimates provided by the working group’s component   Expenditures shown for  agencies to the interagency working group.fiscal years 2012 and 2013 are preliminary estimates, according to the  chair of the interagency working group, and were provided to us by  agency officials. For all years, estimates do not include expenditures for  actions that may have benefitted the federal response to ocean  acidification but that were not made with ocean acidification specifically in  mind (e.g., research on the global carbon cycle that provides information  useful to ocean acidification researchers but that was funded as part of an  agency’s climate change portfolio).
section_title: Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments
subsections: section_title: GAO Contact
section_title: Staff Acknowledgments
paragraphs: In addition to the individual named above, Stephen D. Secrist (Assistant  Director), Cheryl Arvidson, Christina Cantor, Jonathan Dent, Karen  Howard, Timothy M. Persons, Anne Rhodes-Kline, Jeanette Soares,  Sarah Veale, and Joshua Wiener made key contributions to this report.