Australia’s heritage registers list natural and cultural places at national, state and local levels, but in an inconsistent manner, and with disparate levels of resourcing and regulation. As announced during the 2014 International Union for Conservation of Nature World Parks Congress, more than 17 per cent of Australian land is now within conservation reserves and Indigenous Protected Areas (IPAs), meeting one element of the threshold nominated in the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). The number of IPAs, in particular, has increased during the past 5 years, although not all IPAs have the same protected status, and the allowable uses and the statutory controls for some may not ensure protection of natural and cultural heritage values. Australia has one of the largest marine reserve networks in the world—more than 36 per cent of Australian waters are protected, exceeding the CBD Aichi Biodiversity Target 11, which is to include at least 10 per cent of marine waters in marine protected areas. However, such summary targets do not reflect the fine grain of significant ecosystems and habitats. Thirty-two of Australia’s 89 terrestrial bioregions have less than 10 per cent of their area within reserved land. A greater percentage than the Aichi target is needed, comprising both protected and privately held lands, selected and managed to retain large-scale landscapes and promote ecosystem connectivity.

The role of Indigenous people in managing Indigenous heritage has expanded, as has recognition of the importance of intangible Indigenous heritage. Landscape-based approaches to assessing and managing Indigenous heritage are more prevalent, but individual assessment and development decisions continue to cause incremental destruction. Indigenous cultural practices can also be adversely affected by other environmental factors, such as land degradation and weed infestation.

Australia’s reserved lands and marine reserves continue to face threats from invasive species, fire, erosion, use and impacts on threatened species. In addition, resources allocated for conservation of reserved lands have decreased relative to their extent. (Available information on reserved lands has been gathered from diverse sources and may not be truly representative.)

Attention has been focused on the integrity and representativeness of historic heritage registers. Nationally consistent information is not available about the condition of listed heritage places, but processes have been instigated to facilitate improved monitoring of the state of listed places. There have been no systematic national assessments to determine whether historic heritage places, apart from those on the National Heritage List, remain in good condition and retain their identified values. Historic heritage places that are vacant, not in use or in poor condition remain under threat.