Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Save our waves: surfing pumps $2.71 billion into the Australian economy and boosts wellbeing

News Feed
Friday, August 2, 2024

Ever since Polynesian pioneers took to the ocean on wooden rafts, people have been hooked on riding waves. Today, surfing is one of the world’s fastest-growing sports and one of the latest additions to the Olympic games. Surfing is especially valuable to Australia. My new research shows surf-related expenditure contributes nearly A$3 billion to the Australian economy every year. And the mental health benefits to Australian surfers are in the order of $6 billion a year. Yet many surf breaks are subject to coastal erosion, water pollution and other threats. The surfing event in Tahiti for this year’s Olympics is a case in point: it involved drilling into delicate coral reef to build a new judging tower. It’s vital to recognise and measure the true benefits of surfing in dollar terms, so decision-makers realise it makes sense to invest in protecting Australia’s surf breaks. Both surfer and scientist, author Ana Manero volunteers for Surfing Mums. Ana Manero The economics of surfing Waves are essentially free. All you need is a surfboard and you’re set. Well, you might want to grab yourself a leg rope and a wetsuit too. If you have a wave virtually at your doorstep, it’s likely you’re paying a real estate premium. Otherwise, you’re probably spending your weekends chasing waves up and down the coast. You may even have your family in tow. The costs soon add up. Using an online survey of 569 Australian surfers, my team and I explored the influence of recreational surfing on the economy and people’s wellbeing. We found the average Australian surfer spends more than $3,700 a year, within Australia, on surfing-related purchases. Half goes on equipment, while the rest is spent on domestic travel. A further $1,975 is spent on international travel. There are an estimated 727,000 Australian adult surfers, which brings the total spend to $2.71 billion every year being pumped into the domestic economy. If we factor in flow-on effects, such as business-to-business spending, the overall contribution of recreational surfing comes to $4.88 billion. Economic impacts can inform government priorities and public decisions affecting coastal management. For example, the 2023 Margaret River Pro drew $8 million and 3,500 visitors to the region. These figures, as well as local and international support, encouraged the organisers to renew the contest until 2028. Mental health and wellbeing Besides direct economic impacts, surfing contributes to participants’ wellbeing in multiple ways. In our survey, more than 94% of respondents reported improvements in their physical and mental health, as well as their ability to deal with stress and difficulty in their lives. More than 75% of surfers reported an improvement in their sense of belonging to a community and ability to foster positive relationships. One way to measure wellbeing in economic terms is by comparing workplace productivity and healthcare costs between groups. Previous research has quantified the benefits of being in nature to mental health, using data from national parks visits. When applying this approach to surfing, the researchers found gains in surfers’ mental health worth $7,650 per person per year – or $5.6 billion across Australia’s surfers. Deadly but delicate The first-time inclusion of surfing in the 2020–21 Tokyo Olympics was hailed as a landmark recognition of the sport’s cultural significance. A year later, surfing was admitted as a permanent Olympic sport. But built infrastructure, such as ports and sea walls, human-induced climate change, coastal erosion and water pollution are endangering waves around the world. The tiny village of Teahupo'o, in Tahiti, is home to one of the world’s “heaviest” waves. But some residents feared the Olympics would irreversibly damage their pristine environment. In response, visitor numbers were capped and construction minimised. The world-renowned wave of Mundaka, in Spain’s Basque Country, disappeared in 2005 as a result of dredging activity in the nearby rivermouth. The wave eventually came back, but the area had already suffered a slowdown in economic growth, including the cancellation of a professional contest. In Australia, three surf breaks were lost to construction of Perth’s Ocean Reef marina in 2022. Local residents’ calls for an artificial reef are now being considered. Highlights from the Men’s Surfing at the 2024 Olympics. Protection for a precious resource Australia is blessed with more than 1,440 surf breaks and a surf-loving culture. But if we want those waves to exist for future generations, we must look after them now. A good starting point could be to include surf breaks in the Australia State of the Environment Report. The review already evaluates pressures on recreational fishing, snorkelling and scuba diving – but not surfing, despite it attracting more participants than the other three sports combined. Form a legal standpoint, only a few of our waves are protected: the iconic Bells Beach in Victoria comes under the Heritage Act 2027. A dozen of “surfing reserves” in New South Wales are safeguarded by the Crown Lands Act 1989. In Queensland, coastal protection policies are being developed for the Noosa and Gold Coast World Surfing Reserves. Across the world, more countries are adopting protections for surfing’s recreational and environmental values. In Brazil, the waves at Doce River Mouth were recently granted special protection, as a new bill acknowledged the ocean as a living being with intrinsic rights. The goal to better understand and protect the value of surf breaks is in line with the 2021–30 Oceans Decade, a United Nations initiative to leverage scientific knowledge for ocean sustainability. It’s often said “only a surfer knows the feeling” of riding a wave, but research quantifying the benefits of surfing can help decision-makers appreciate the need to preserve a truly irreplaceable resource. Ana Manero is a volunteer with not-for-profit Surfing Mums.

A new study quantifies the benefits of surfing, to the Australian economy as well as health and wellbeing, as Aussie surfers rule the waves in the 2024 Olympic Games. Let’s protect our surf breaks.

Ever since Polynesian pioneers took to the ocean on wooden rafts, people have been hooked on riding waves. Today, surfing is one of the world’s fastest-growing sports and one of the latest additions to the Olympic games.

Surfing is especially valuable to Australia. My new research shows surf-related expenditure contributes nearly A$3 billion to the Australian economy every year. And the mental health benefits to Australian surfers are in the order of $6 billion a year.

Yet many surf breaks are subject to coastal erosion, water pollution and other threats. The surfing event in Tahiti for this year’s Olympics is a case in point: it involved drilling into delicate coral reef to build a new judging tower.

It’s vital to recognise and measure the true benefits of surfing in dollar terms, so decision-makers realise it makes sense to invest in protecting Australia’s surf breaks.

The author riding a wave
Both surfer and scientist, author Ana Manero volunteers for Surfing Mums. Ana Manero

The economics of surfing

Waves are essentially free. All you need is a surfboard and you’re set. Well, you might want to grab yourself a leg rope and a wetsuit too.

If you have a wave virtually at your doorstep, it’s likely you’re paying a real estate premium. Otherwise, you’re probably spending your weekends chasing waves up and down the coast. You may even have your family in tow. The costs soon add up.

Using an online survey of 569 Australian surfers, my team and I explored the influence of recreational surfing on the economy and people’s wellbeing. We found the average Australian surfer spends more than $3,700 a year, within Australia, on surfing-related purchases. Half goes on equipment, while the rest is spent on domestic travel. A further $1,975 is spent on international travel.

There are an estimated 727,000 Australian adult surfers, which brings the total spend to $2.71 billion every year being pumped into the domestic economy. If we factor in flow-on effects, such as business-to-business spending, the overall contribution of recreational surfing comes to $4.88 billion.

Economic impacts can inform government priorities and public decisions affecting coastal management. For example, the 2023 Margaret River Pro drew $8 million and 3,500 visitors to the region. These figures, as well as local and international support, encouraged the organisers to renew the contest until 2028.

Mental health and wellbeing

Besides direct economic impacts, surfing contributes to participants’ wellbeing in multiple ways.

In our survey, more than 94% of respondents reported improvements in their physical and mental health, as well as their ability to deal with stress and difficulty in their lives.

More than 75% of surfers reported an improvement in their sense of belonging to a community and ability to foster positive relationships.

One way to measure wellbeing in economic terms is by comparing workplace productivity and healthcare costs between groups. Previous research has quantified the benefits of being in nature to mental health, using data from national parks visits. When applying this approach to surfing, the researchers found gains in surfers’ mental health worth $7,650 per person per year – or $5.6 billion across Australia’s surfers.

Deadly but delicate

The first-time inclusion of surfing in the 2020–21 Tokyo Olympics was hailed as a landmark recognition of the sport’s cultural significance. A year later, surfing was admitted as a permanent Olympic sport.

But built infrastructure, such as ports and sea walls, human-induced climate change, coastal erosion and water pollution are endangering waves around the world.

The tiny village of Teahupo'o, in Tahiti, is home to one of the world’s “heaviest” waves. But some residents feared the Olympics would irreversibly damage their pristine environment. In response, visitor numbers were capped and construction minimised.

The world-renowned wave of Mundaka, in Spain’s Basque Country, disappeared in 2005 as a result of dredging activity in the nearby rivermouth. The wave eventually came back, but the area had already suffered a slowdown in economic growth, including the cancellation of a professional contest.

In Australia, three surf breaks were lost to construction of Perth’s Ocean Reef marina in 2022. Local residents’ calls for an artificial reef are now being considered.

Highlights from the Men’s Surfing at the 2024 Olympics.

Protection for a precious resource

Australia is blessed with more than 1,440 surf breaks and a surf-loving culture.

But if we want those waves to exist for future generations, we must look after them now.

A good starting point could be to include surf breaks in the Australia State of the Environment Report. The review already evaluates pressures on recreational fishing, snorkelling and scuba diving – but not surfing, despite it attracting more participants than the other three sports combined.

Form a legal standpoint, only a few of our waves are protected: the iconic Bells Beach in Victoria comes under the Heritage Act 2027. A dozen of “surfing reserves” in New South Wales are safeguarded by the Crown Lands Act 1989. In Queensland, coastal protection policies are being developed for the Noosa and Gold Coast World Surfing Reserves.

Across the world, more countries are adopting protections for surfing’s recreational and environmental values. In Brazil, the waves at Doce River Mouth were recently granted special protection, as a new bill acknowledged the ocean as a living being with intrinsic rights.

The goal to better understand and protect the value of surf breaks is in line with the 2021–30 Oceans Decade, a United Nations initiative to leverage scientific knowledge for ocean sustainability.

It’s often said “only a surfer knows the feeling” of riding a wave, but research quantifying the benefits of surfing can help decision-makers appreciate the need to preserve a truly irreplaceable resource.

The Conversation

Ana Manero is a volunteer with not-for-profit Surfing Mums.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Under Current Guidelines, Most Lung Cancer Patients Weren't Eligible for Cancer Screening

By Ernie Mundell HealthDay ReporterMONDAY, Nov. 24, 2025 (HealthDay News) — Under current screening guidelines, almost two-thirds of Americans with...

By Ernie Mundell HealthDay ReporterMONDAY, Nov. 24, 2025 (HealthDay News) — Under current screening guidelines, almost two-thirds of Americans with lung cancer would not have qualified for the CT chest scans that could have spotted tumors early and extended their lives, new research shows. The finding hits home for 38-year-old Carla Tapia, a mother of three from Beltsville, Maryland. She smoked a bit in her youth but had kicked the habit by 18. Nevertheless, Tapia first developed respiratory symptoms in 2018, and was diagnosed with inoperable stage 4 lung cancer in 2020. After numerous chemotherapies failed, Tapia received a life-saving double-lung transplant at Northwestern Medicine in Chicago in 2024. She’s now attending college back at home in Maryland.According to Tapia, it's an ordeal timely screening might have prevented.“I keep hearing stories about young people being diagnosed with lung cancer, and if we could expand the screening guidelines, I believe more lung cancers could be caught at earlier stages, and more lives would be saved,” she said in a Northwestern Medicine news release.Current guidelines from the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) advise annual CT chest scans for adults ages 50 to 80 who have a 20 pack-year smoking history and currently smoke or have quit within the past 15 years. According to study senior author Dr. Ankit Bharat, those eligibility guidelines are too restrictive and miss many people still at risk for the leading cancer killer.“We moved to universal age-based screening for breast and colon cancer with tremendous success, and we need to move to the same approach for lung cancer,” Bharat said in a Northwestern news release. “Chest screening offers something unique — with one low-dose scan, we can assess lungs, heart and bones comprehensively. This baseline scan becomes invaluable for monitoring their health over time,” said Bharat. He is chief of thoracic surgery and executive director of the Northwestern Medicine Canning Thoracic Institute.Lung cancer can strike anyone, including people who only smoked a short amount of time and even never-smokers. And, as happened in Tapia’s case, nearly 80% of the time lung cancers are first diagnosed in an advanced stage. The new study was published Nov. 20 in JAMA Network Open. It tracked nearly 1,000 consecutive patients whose lung cancers were treated at Northwestern Medicine.Based on their history of smoking (including never-smokers), Bharat’s group estimated that only 35% would have been eligible under USPSTF guidelines to be referred to annual lung CT scanning. Women and never-smokers made up a significant number of those who would have been excluded from eligibility for screening, the researchers said.They believe that moving to a universal screening approach — recommending lung screens for everyone ages 40 to 85 — could spot more tumors early, boost the cost-effectiveness of lung cancer care, and help level the playing field for disadvantaged Americans. According to the researchers, a typical lung CT scan takes less than 10 seconds and doesn’t require any intravenous imaging dyes. Bharat notes that the leftover effects of the COVID-19 pandemic could mean heightened risks of other lung illnesses among relatively young Americans."Nearly six years after the pandemic's start, we're seeing increasing numbers of patients with lung scarring and fibrosis from COVID-19, especially those who get reinfected with respiratory viruses," he said. “The damage compounds with each infection. Early detection through comprehensive screening can help us intervene before these conditions progress to requiring [lung] transplantation.”Northwestern’s Lung Health Center created a list of patient types who might want to consider lung screening:COVID-19 survivors who are having ongoing respiratory issues People exposed to contaminants such as wildfire smoke, industrial pollution or high radon levels People with family histories of lung disease or pulmonary fibrosis Those exposed to secondhand smoke, vaping or marijuana use Asian women and other demographics at elevated risk for lung conditions Anyone seeking baseline chest health assessment “We're seeing younger patients with respiratory problems from vaping, environmental exposures and COVID-19 who would never qualify for traditional screening,” said study co-author Dr. Scott Budinger, chief of pulmonary and critical care at the Canning Thoracic Institute.A more inclusive approach to screening “allows us to catch interstitial lung disease, pulmonary fibrosis, lung cancer and other conditions years before they'd typically be diagnosed,” he said in the news release.SOURCE: Northwestern Medicine, news release, Nov. 20., 2025Copyright © 2025 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

New Flu Variant Could Bring Another Severe U.S. Season

By I. Edwards HealthDay ReporterTHURSDAY, Nov. 20, 2025 (HealthDay News) — A new flu variant spreading overseas may set the stage for another tough...

THURSDAY, Nov. 20, 2025 (HealthDay News) — A new flu variant spreading overseas may set the stage for another tough winter in the United States, experts warn.The strain, called subclade K, has caused a rise in flu cases in the United Kingdom, Canada and Japan. And now signs suggest it is beginning to take hold across the United States as flu activity rises.According to the latest U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) FluView report, reported flu activity in the United States remains low but is climbing quickly.Last year’s flu season was the worst the United States had seen in nearly 15 years and led to at least 280 child deaths, according to the CDC.Most cases this year are from the H3N2 virus and about half of those belong to the subclade K variant, the same strain that fueled a difficult flu season in the Southern Hemisphere.Because it wasn’t circulating widely when strains were selected for the vaccine update, this year’s flu shot targets close strains of the virus."It’s not like we’re expecting to get complete loss of protection for the vaccine, but perhaps we might expect a little bit of a drop-off if this is the virus that sort of dominates the season, and early indications are that’s probably going to be the case," Richard Webby, a researcher at St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital in Memphis, Tennessee, told CNN.Early findings from the UK Health Security Agency suggest the variant carries seven genetic changes on a major part of the virus, making it a bit harder for the body's immune system to recognize.Even so, they found that the flu shot has reduced the risk of hospitalization or emergency care by about 75% in children and 30% to 40% in adults so far this season.What worries experts even more is that fewer Americans appear to be getting the flu shot.Data from IQVIA shows that pharmacies gave 26.5 million flu vaccinations from August through October, down from 28.7 million during the same period last year."I’m not surprised," Jennifer Nuzzo, professor of epidemiology and director of the Pandemic Center at Brown University in Providence, Rhode Island, said.She said recent debates about vaccine safety have "left people confused but possibly at the worst have left people worried about getting vaccinated."Australia’s flu shot rates also fell this year and the country went on to record more than 443,000 cases."What they saw in Australia is that they had a bad season. And so it’s concerning for you and us, what’s coming," Dr. Earl Rubin, division director of infectious disease at Montreal Children’s Hospital, told CNN.Several early indicators already show flu levels rising in the U.S.The WastewaterSCAN network found type A flu in 40% of samples in November, up from 18% in October, according to Marlene Wolfe, an assistant professor in the department of environmental health at Emory University in Atlanta.Only four U.S. monitoring sites in Maine, Vermont, Iowa and Hawaii have officially crossed the threshold for declaring flu activity high, but experts say the trend is clear.While it’s not yet clear whether subclade K could cause more severe illness, a rise in infections alone could cause hospitalizations to skyrocket, Rubin noted."It’s not too late. Go and get your flu shot," Dr. Adam Lauring, chief of the division of infectious diseases at the University of Michigan Medical School, in Ann Arbor, said.These results are preliminary and have not yet been peer-reviewed.The Texas Department of State Health Services (DSHS) has more on the flu vaccine.SOURCE: CNN, Nov. 18, 2025Copyright © 2025 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

Thousands of US Hazardous Sites Are at Risk of Flooding Because of Sea Level Rise, Study Finds

A new study finds that thousands of hazardous sites across the U.S. are at risk of flooding due to sea level rise that could pose public health threats to neighboring communities

If heat-trapping pollution from burning coal, oil and gas continues unchecked, thousands of hazardous sites across the United States risk being flooded from sea level rise by the turn of the century, posing serious health risks to nearby communities, according to a new study.Researchers identified 5,500 sites that store, emit or handle sewage, trash, oil, gas and other hazards that could face coastal flooding by 2100, with much of the risk already locked in due to past emissions. But more than half the sites are projected to face flood risk much sooner — as soon as 2050. Low-income, communities of color and other marginalized groups are the most at risk.With even moderate reductions to planet-warming emissions, researchers also determined that roughly 300 fewer sites would be at risk by the end of the century. “Our goal with this analysis was to try to get ahead of the problem by looking far out into the future," said Lara J. Cushing, associate professor in the Department of Environmental Health Sciences at the University of California, Los Angeles who co-authored the paper published in the science journal Nature Communications.“We do have time to respond and try to mitigate the risks and also increase resilience," she added, speaking at a media briefing Wednesday ahead of the study's release. The study was funded by the Environmental Protection Agency and builds on previous research from California. Climate change is driving and accelerating sea level rise. Glaciers and ice sheets are melting, and the sea's waters are expanding as they warm. In many places along the coastal U.S., sea level rise is accelerating faster than the global average because of things like erosion and land sinking from groundwater pumping, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Thomas Chandler, managing director at the National Center for Disaster Preparedness at Columbia University who was not involved in the research, said it’s “a really important study” that the public, policy makers and government agencies “need to make note of.” Derek Van Berkel, an associate professor in the school for environment and sustainability at University of Michigan who was also not involved in the study, wasn't surprised to learn about the disproportionate risks. What was “alarming” was considering the magnitude of “feedback effects” from flooding, he said. How researchers approached the data The study's researchers started by identifying and classifying tens of thousands of hazardous sites near the coasts of Puerto Rico and the 23 states with coastline. Next, they wanted to know each site's projected future flood risk. They did this by calculating how likely each year coastal flooding could inundate a site using historical sea level measurements and projected sea level rise in 2050 and 2100 under low and high emissions scenarios. Lastly, they identified and classified communities as being at-risk if homes are located within 1 kilometer (0.62 miles) of a hazardous site with a high threat of future flooding, and compared those communities' characteristics with other coastal neighborhoods with no at-risk sites nearby. But researchers did not include all types of hazardous facilities, such as oil and gas pipelines, nor did they account for groundwater upwelling or more intense and frequent storms in the future, which could lead to underestimates. On the other end, the flood-risk model they used could have overestimated the number of threatened sites. “It is important to note that previous disasters, such as hurricanes Katrina, Rita and Harvey, did result in a lot of toxic contamination from oil and gas pipelines,” Chandler said. The 5,500 at-risk sites includes 44% that are fossil fuel ports and terminals, 30% power plants, 24% refineries and 22% coastal sewage treatment facilities. Most of the sites — nearly 80% — are in Louisiana, Florida, New Jersey, Texas, California, New York and Massachusetts. Potential health impacts from exposure to hazards People exposed to flood waters near industrial animal farms or sewage treatment plants could be exposed to bacteria like E. coli, said Sacoby Wilson, professor of global, environmental and occupational health at the University of Maryland during the briefing. Symptoms can include bloody or watery diarrhea, severe stomach cramps or vomiting and fever. Those living near industrial sites like refineries could be exposed to heavy metals and chemicals that can cause rashes, burning of the eyes, nose and throat, headaches or fatigue, added Wilson, who was not involved in the study. “For folks who are vulnerable, maybe have an underlying health condition, those health conditions could be exacerbated during those flood events.” Longer term, some of these exposures could contribute to cancer, liver, kidney or other organ damage, or have reproductive effects, he said. For Chandler, the Columbia University director, the study highlights the need to heavily invest in hazard mitigation. “It's really important for federal, state and local governments in the United States to address these factors through multi-stakeholder resilience planning and encouraging local governments to integrate climate risk assessments into their mitigation strategies.”The Associated Press receives support from the Walton Family Foundation for coverage of water and environmental policy. The AP is solely responsible for all content. For all of AP’s environmental coverage, visit https://apnews.com/hub/climate-and-environment.Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See – Nov. 2025

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.