the regional scale of ocean governance regional cooperation in the pacific islands

Ocean & Coastal Management 45 (2002) 873–884

The regional scale of ocean governance regionalcooperation in the Pacific Islands

Tamari’i Tutangata1, Mary Power*

South Pacific Regional Environment Program, Coastal Management, PO Box 240, Apia, Samoa

Abstract

The Pacific Islands community is committed to protecting the quality of life of its people

and the integrity of the environment with which island life is inextricably intertwined. It

would, however, be impossible for Pacific Island Countries to cope individually with the

common regional issues and the increased impact of global climate and economic problems.

The support of the various regional organisations, strengthened further by inter-agency

collaboration under the Council of Regional Organisations of the Pacific is critical to success.

Use of a regional approach to develop strategic responses to issues has many advantages:

sharing of high investment or establishment costs for capital intensive activities; augmenting

capacity or capability constraints that arise in small populations, economies of scale in the

provision of centralised training services; better formulation of policies or activities that have

transboundary ‘‘spill-over’’ or ‘‘mutually reinforcing’’ impacts; and most critically—a stronger

voice in global fora.

r 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

The combined sea area of 33 million km2 that comprise the Pacific Islands regionaccounts for 98% of the region’s total area with the remaining 2% that is landtotaling an area of only approximately 550,000 km2. Only seven of several thousandislands have land areas of over 700 km2 while four have less then 30 km2 each. TheExclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) of the nations are by contrast enormous (rangingfrom 120,000 km2 in Samoa to more than 3.0 million km2 in French Polynesia). Ninecountries/territories have a sea area (EEZ) extending over 1 million km2 (Table 1 and

*Corresponding author. Tel.: +684-685-25037; fax: +684-385-20231.

E-mail address: [email protected] (M. Power).1Director of SPREP.

0964-5691/02/$ - see front matter r 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

PII: S 0 9 6 4 - 5 6 9 1 ( 0 2 ) 0 0 1 1 1 - 4

Fig. 1). Fifteen countries/territories are either made up wholly or largely of low-lyingatolls and coral islands. The remainders, with the exception of Samoa, have acombination of both high volcanic islands and low atolls.

Table 1

Expanse of Pacific Islands EEZs relative to land areas and affiliations to regional organisations

Country/

territory

Political status Land (km2) EEZ (km2) Membership

American

Samoa

Unincorporated US

territory

197 390,000 2,3,5

Cook Islands Self-governing free

association with New

Zealand

240 1,830,000 1,2,3,4,5

Federated

States of

Micronesia

Self-governing free

association with the US

702 2,980,000 1,2,3,4,5

Fiji Independent republic 18,736 1,260,000 1,2,3,4,5,6

French

Polynesia

Overseas territory of

France

3,521 5,030,000 2,3,5

Guam Unincorporated US

territory

549 218,000 2,3,5

Kiribati Independent republic 726 3,600,000 1,2,3,4,5,6

Marshall

Islands

Self-governing republic in

free association with US

720 2,131,000 1,2,3,4,5,6

Nauru Independent republic 21.2 436,490 1,2,3,4,6

New Caledonia Overseas territory of

France

19,103 1,740,000 2,3,5

Niue Self-governing free

association with New

Zealand

258 390,000 2,3,4,5,6

Northern

Mariana Is.

Commonwealth of the US 475 2,3,4

Palau Independent republic 34.5 600,900 1,2,3,4

Papua New

Guinea

Independent state 461,960 3,120,000 1,2,3,4,5

Samoa Independent state 2,934 120,000 1,2,3,4,5,6

Solomon

Islands

Independent state 29,785 1,630,000 1,2,3,4,5,6

Tokelau Dependency of New

Zealand

12.1 290,000 2,3,6

Tonga Independent monarchy 696.7 700,000 1,2,3,4,5,6

Tuvalu Independent state 25.9 757,000 1,2,3,4,5,6

Vanuatu Independent republic 12,189 680,000 1,2,3,4,5,6

Wallis &

Futuna

Overseas territory of

France

124 300,000 2,3

Note: 1—Pacific Islands forum; 2—Secretariat for the Pacific Community; 3—South Pacific Regional

Environmental Programme; 4—Forum Fisheries Agency; 5—South Pacific Applied Geoscience

Commission; 6—The University of the South Pacific.

Adapted from: South and Veitayaki [1].

T. Tutangata, M. Power / Ocean & Coastal Management 45 (2002) 873–884874

For Pacific Islanders, this vast expanse of ocean is an integral part of our lives,with strong social, spiritual and cultural significance and dependence. Associatedindustries and resource use activities play an ever-increasing role in the developmentof our island economies.There are specific disadvantages and vulnerabilities that derive from the small size

and geographic isolation of our islands, which contribute to our particular brandof ‘‘islandness’’. Of particular importance is the critical reliance on a healthyenvironment for subsistence living, limited human and financial capacity and astrong reliance on, and vulnerability, to, external inputs and influences. In addition,due to their size, most of our island states are entirely coastal entities, meaning thatNational Governance is synonymous with Integrated Coastal Management. In thiscontext, Chapter 17 of Agenda 21, United Nations Conference on Environment andDevelopment (UNCED) is particularly relevant.There has been significant progress among Pacific Island Countries (PICs) in

addressing the challenges relating to sustainable use of coasts and oceans, much of itdue to effective regional coordination. Many issues are transboundary, managementof migratory fish stocks, ocean pollution and shipping, atmospheric transfers and thespread of invasive and exotic species. Even when problems are at the National level,similar concerns regarding solutions to sewage problems, unsustainable fishing

Fig. 1. SPREP Pacific Island Member Countries and their EEZs. (Source SPC 2002).

T. Tutangata, M. Power / Ocean & Coastal Management 45 (2002) 873–884 875

practices and economic development have led to the pooling of resources for asharing of knowledge and experience and expertise. It would be impossible for PICsto cope individually with the common regional issues and the increased impact ofglobal climate and economic problems. This paper briefly explores the nature of thisregional approach, the success achieved and the constraints to current and futureeffectiveness of these arrangements.

2. Key issues requiring regional governance approaches

Whilst management and governance are essentially sovereign responsibilities andeach state and territory has its own priorities, strategies and responses to the issuesoften need to be common across the region due to the resource constraints at thenational level and the transboundary nature of many issues.A series of key issues for the Pacific Islands requiring a regional approach to

governance and management have previously been highlighted (1992 Report toUNCED, the Barbados Programme of Action 1994, the 1998 Regional Submissionto the UN Commission on Sustainable Development, the Follow-up Workshop onthe Implementation of UNCLOS August 1999) and highlighted more recently inregional documents (CROP [2,3] and SPREP [4]). The Barbados Programme ofAction, adopted in Barbados in May 1994, was a particularly significantdevelopment for Small Island Developing States (SIDS). This was the firstinternational effort to translate the agreements and promises emanating fromAgenda 21 into practical action for SIDS globally (Slade [5]). The key regional issuesare as follows:

* implementation of management regimes and conventions relevant to the PacificIslands,

* sustainable management of living resources (fisheries),* sustainable management of non-living resources (minerals),* pollution prevention and waste management,* marine biodiversity and natural resource conservation and management,* coastal degradation,* marine scientific research,* defense, surveillance, monitoring and enforcement,* sustainable tourism,* training, education, and public awareness,* shipping,* appropriate technology transfer,* climate change and sea level rise,* natural and environmental disasters,* intellectual property rights/ownership and access to genetic resources,* globalisation,* vulnerability (CROP [2]).


3. Regional governance in the Pacific Islands region—assessing progress

Regional organisations (Table 1) range from those of a political and economicnature such as the South Pacific Forum, to specialised bodies that have beenestablished to address specific issues: Fisheries (Forum Fisheries Agency—FFA andSecretariat of the Pacific Community—SPC, in part); non-living resources (SouthPacific Applied Geoscience Commission—SOPAC), environment (South PacificRegional Environment Programme—SPREP), agriculture and health (SPC) andtertiary education (University of the South Pacific—USP).Since UNCED PICs have responded by strengthening regionalisation by the

establishment of the Council of Regional Organisations of the Pacific (CROP).Under the CROP umbrella a series of cross-agency sectoral working groups ensurecollaboration on regional issues and activities. Ocean and Coastal matters areaddressed through the CROP Marine Sector Working Group established in 1997.Other relevant Working Groups that were established to deal with emerging issuesinclude Trade and Economic Development, Landuse and Energy and HumanResource Development.The agencies serve their member countries by being reactive to the initiatives and

agendas of the international fora and by being proactive through development andpromotion of regional frameworks, conventions, treaties, agreements and pro-grammes governing the use of the oceans, coastal and marine environments. In thisway, International arrangements can be linked to regional and sub-regionalmechanisms.

3.1. Key regional initiatives

Key regional programmes and initiatives include:

* Regional oceans policy.* Convention for the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory FishStocks in the Western and Central Pacific.

* Pacific Ocean Pollution Prevention Programme (PACPOL).* Waigani Convention (Regional Convention for implementation of the BaselConvention).

* Pacific Island Climate Change Assistance Programme (PICCAP).* Framework for the Protection of the Marine Environment from Land BasedActivities

* WSSD Pacific Regional Preparatory Processes.* International Waters Strategic Action Plan and Programme for the PacificIslands.

Under these and other initiatives there has been progress towards sustainabledevelopment in the region. This progress has been consistent with Agenda 21 butnot necessarily driven by it, and also the Barbados Programme of Action. At astrategic level the benefits that have already accrued to the region as a result of


include:

* Completion of the Implementing Agreement for Highly Migratory and StraddlingFish Stocks that led to the Multi-lateral High Level Consultations concerning theconservation and management of critical tuna resources in the region (MLHLC [6]).

* Agreement to a ‘‘special case for islands in environment and development’’ thatled to the Barbados Conference and international platform for the sustainabledevelopment of SIDS.

* Development of the concept of vulnerability particularly in relation to islands.* Additional financial resources through the Global Environment Facility (GEF)totaling over USD30 million (with an additional USD8.4 million in the pipeline).

* Progress to address critical waste management issues in the region, including theidentification of hazardous waste stockpiles.

* International agreement to targets and timetables to reduce greenhouse gasemissions under the Climate Change Convention and Kyoto Protocol.

* Acceptance of the precautionary approach.* Increased engagement of CROP organisations in sustainable development policiesand programmes.

* Recognition of islands as a substantive negotiating group within the UN systemnotably through the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS).

3.2. Advantages of regional approach

The use of a regional approach in the PICs to develop strategic responses to issuespost-RIO to address Programme Areas in Agenda 21, has many advantages:

* sharing of high investment or establishment costs for capital intensive activities;* augmenting capacity or capability constraints that arise in small populations, thatnonetheless have a need for specialist skills or advice, but not on a fully occupied basis,or which come at an internationally competitive wage that cannot be easily borne;

* economies of scale in the provision of centralised training services;* better formulation of policies or activities that have ‘‘spill-over’’ or ‘‘mutuallyreinforcing’’ impacts that create their own economies of scale;

* critically—a stronger voice in global fora.

Examples, which can be readily found in existing regional organisations, include:

* improved tertiary education system, for which both the investment cost and skillsrequired are high and cannot be borne by small states on their own;

* centralised laboratory and other technical services;* specialist skills for support and advice in a diverse range of activities, includingsupport on statistical and legal activities, in scientific disciplines or in economic,social or other policy formulation;

These advantages were highlighted in the Commonwealth Secretariat/World BankJoint Task Force Report on Small States [7], which advocates increased use ofregional organisations for the reasons outlined above.


3.3. Continuing challenges

In their efforts to pursue sustainable development, Pacific Island States/Territoriesencounter a range of difficulties, which slow down or impede the process ofimplementation. Despite the benefits of strong regionalisation, a range ofimpediments exist at regional and national levels.

3.3.1. Institutional weaknesses

The sectoral nature of CROP Agencies and working groups is an impediment atthe regional level. At the national level, fragmentation of authority/jurisdiction isentrenched and there is a lack of integration of environmental dimensions into socio-economic planning and development practices. National priorities are often sectorbased or understandably relate to fundamental social and economic goals that areessential to job creation, health, education and food security but do not alwaysconsider environment as an integral part of any programmes.Further, for most governments, the legal instruments required to enforce ocean-

related Agreements and Conventions to which they are a party, have not beenenacted and implementation levels are consequently low. Nevertheless, countriesseem to prefer to ratify International Agreements over Regional Instruments thatwould address specific issues due to the funding that usually accompanies (or isassumed to accompany) such ratification. This can lead to international prioritiestaking precedence over regional and national prioritiesOften it appears that member states do not welcome the support of regional

organisations, or indeed the full value of regional cooperation. This can be reflectedin the lack of political or financial support, in being selective in such support or innot cooperating in key policy or implementation areas. When members do notappreciate the value of overall regional cooperation, they tend to pursue theirnational interests in key transboundary areas, such as fisheries, without sufficientregard to the interests of other members or the region as a whole (CROP [8]).Despite the generally vast expanse of most EEZs in the Pacific, there still tends to

be a focus on the ‘‘Small Island Developing State’’ character of countries withoutadequate emphasis on the potential benefits and associated management obligationspertaining to EEZs.

3.3.2. Capacity

Despite the benefits of regionalism and the support of regional organisations, thefull strength of the Pacific PICs is only as strong as the individual strengths of thecountries themselves. At the country level, progress in capacity development hasbeen much slower than desirable, often leading to an inability to maximise thebenefits of regional initiatives. Most of the PICs lack expertise on many ocean issues,and there is an urgent need to build capacity at all levels.Cash-strapped governments are unable to employ the highly qualified individuals

that they need to meet their many obligations to the post-UNCED Agreements andConventions to which they are signatories. Many talented individuals from thePacific migrate to other countries, since opportunities are better there.


3.3.3. Finance

Regional agencies have inadequate ‘core’ funding and have to rely on projectfunding to deliver many ‘core’ advisory services. This tends to weaken their efforts atregional coordination of key issues.Aid dependency and the use of geopolitical conflict to underpin support for

developing countries is common. There is an almost total (often unavoidable)reliance on donor funding. Unfortunately, there can be a considerable gap betweennational priorities and the support provided under the banner of OverseasDevelopment Assistance (ODA) for sustainable development activities. At the sametime donors sometimes question the value of a regional approach compared tobilateral assistance, when the former nonetheless has advantages in many instances.ODA to small island States had substantially declined (by some US$400 million in

the period from 1994 to 1998). This has had a discernible impact on island States,and their development efforts. At the same time, however, small island Statesrecognise that they must step up their own efforts to foster an enabling environmentfor external assistance. For the most part, they have endeavored to adopt, asappropriate, policy reforms to cope with global change, since they recognise thatsound policies foster effective implementation. Island States also accept that theyshould search for new modalities for resource mobilisation, particularly for regionalinitiatives (Slade [5]).

3.3.4. Externalities

Sustainable development strategies are currently being formulated in the frame-work of climate change and globalisation for the most part.The burden of dealing with global impacts of economic changes and the

anticipated impacts of climate change and accompanying Sea Level Rise areincreasingly impacting on regional and national economies.The increasing emphasis on climate change issues which involve long-term

perspectives, and the donor focus on associated programmes, may be overshadowingmore urgent and immediate issues such as solid and other waste management, waterquality and availability and inshore fisheries depletion.International trade and investment are becoming increasingly important drivers of

growth in PIC developing countries. International development banking institutions,United Nations and other international development assistance institutions haveprovided much of the impetus for such resolve. But, despite considerable effort, wefind globalisation is impacting negatively on Small Island States and our marinecoastal areas in particular. PICs are finding it difficult to secure the necessary benefitsof international trade due to their isolation, remoteness from metropolitan markets,lack of skilled labour, underdeveloped economic infrastructure and subsistencestatus. The newly emerging global trade and investment regime discourages(regional) protectionism in the interest of more open and competitive trade thatwill result in rapid economic growth and sustained (rather than sustainable)economic development. Developing export industries and inviting direct foreigninvestment are generally considered the natural and possibly only options for mostcountries bent on increasing their economic growth. Related activities are promoting


a shift from subsistence to cash based economies and accompanying socialdislocation.

4. Where to from here—addressing the challenges

1. Improving the implementation of sustainable development will need to addresspressing national priorities directly. Any response will need to provide ways toconcentrate effort, to bring individual and community skills and institutionalsupport together in a more focused way. This is clearly not about single agencies orinstitutions assuming the sole responsibility for sustainable development, but aboutharnessing and enhancing the skills and capacity of individuals, communities andorganisations (government and non-government) and the private sector. Thisapproach, one of cooperation rather than control, of enhancement rather thanimposition, is essential to the next phase. It will also need to be based on peopleempowerment. This approach is best facilitated through (sub-)regional coordination.Regional coordination could be further strengthened by:

* Encouraging greater interaction through more strategic multi-agency, multi-sectoral meetings, bringing together the Heads of Fisheries, Environment, Tradeand Development and other sectors.

* Achieving improved efficiencies in regional cooperation. In this context aconcerted effort towards a more comprehensive analysis of the costs and benefitsof actual and potential activities of, and cooperation among, regional organisa-tions could be of advantage in:

* demonstrating value, and thus gaining stronger member and developmentpartner support;

* identifying areas where there is greatest potential and value in region basedactivity and cooperation,

* identifying activities presently undertaken that do not give value in the contextof regionalisation (CROP [7]).

The Pacific small island states must further recognise our identity as large marinestates as well as small island states and further focus our attention towardsintegrated economic and environmental planning for our vast ocean areas for thelong-term benefit of our people and the world at large. The Pacific Region OceansPolicy focuses strongly on this factor.2. There is a need to accord greater emphasis towards building national capacity

that is essential to make progress (lasting progress rather than simply projectimplementation) at country and community levels. The fact remains that bothformal and non-formal education and training are seriously inadequate in mostPICs. In building on effective education and training programmes emphasis must beplaced on traditional conservation techniques and encouragement provided for moreculturally compatible and sensitive education materials, projects and programmes.The techniques to build capacity must also be re-examined as ‘‘workshops’’ often do


not ‘‘work’’. The use of mentors and coaches for longer-term engagement ofindividuals, leadership development, peer learning networks and accessible expertsshould be encouraged (South and Power [9]).3. Innovative financing schemes (e.g. marine investment bonds, fees for

environmental ‘‘services’’, etc.) need to be explored to move away from donordependence. We need to secure greater and sustainable returns from ocean resourcesfor the region through (i) improved terms of trade in ocean resources; (ii) higher levelof investment (domestic and foreign) in the sector; (iii) greater foreign investment inonshore processing to add value to ocean products before export; and (iv) equitablereturns from access arrangements.The element of ‘core’ funding for regional organisations needs to be strengthened

to ensure continued ability to provide advisory services. Donors should recognise thevale of these core services and shift from the current project funding cycle to a moresustained long-term approach.Aid practices need to be reviewed to ensure full involvement of stakeholders in the

conceptualisation and design of both large and small projects. ODA to PICs needs tobe targeted more (or as much) towards dealing with national and regional prioritiesrather than longer-term global issues. The region would also benefit from an increasethe amount of, and access to, ‘small project funds’ as these represent ‘‘useful’’amounts of money for opportunistic deployment to deal with emerging issues/problems at local/relevant scales.4. There needs to be a de-coupling of the connection between poverty reduction

and sustainable development. Poverty reduction should not simply be seen as a shiftfrom subsistence to cash economies and an increase in per capita consumer spendingpower or growth in GDP. Increased power to consume or engage in the marketeconomy, or rampant economic growth, should not be considered the measure ofsustainable development. We need to replace the concept of economic growth withthat of human development and emphasise self-sufficiency and domestic marketsfirst, and promote in-country value adding to products and processes rather thanexport of raw product.

5. Conclusion

An integrated approach to ocean management is required at both national andregional levels to address the crosscutting effects that sectors have on each other.National efforts in managing coastal areas and the ocean need to be guided bycollectively agreed regional agreements and approaches. It would be impossible forindividual States in the Pacific region to cope with the increased impact of globalclimate and economic problems and the common regional issues individually.Ocean governance in the Pacific Island countries is being strengthened through

consolidation of existing regional arrangements and through the development ofregional instruments in response to global and international conventions andagreements. The region is a developing model of how regionalism can assist when,


individually, the participating countries lack the infrastructure and capacity to workon their own in the global ocean community.Nonetheless, there needs to be a strong parallel focus on building capacity at the

national level and empowering communities for strong and integrated governanceand appropriate, sustainable economic growth. In this context, in reviewing theprocesses of international financing and development institutions such as the GlobalEnvironment Facility, the international community must bear in mind that ‘Romewas not built in a day’ and adjust such processes to the realities of lasting socialchange.In addition, intergovernmental organisations have taken on the role of advocating

and supporting PICs in the global arena. There is a concerted effort, coordinatedthrough the SPREP and the Forum Secretariat with the full involvement of otherregional agencies, to develop a united Pacific Islands position at the forthcomingWorld Summit on Sustainable Development (Rio +10) (SPREP/FORSEC [10]).There remains serious concern that environmental degradation continues at an

alarming rate in the region. Increasing vulnerability and the challenges ofglobalisation are expected to reinforce this trend. The Rio+10 process musttherefore be used to assist countries to galvanise the commitment and resourcesrequired to slow and ultimately reverse the loss of resources and environmentalquality that is so essential to the well-being of this region of small developing islands.It must rekindle the confidence in global processes to address common environ-mental concerns and sustainable development. To do so, Rio +10 must not onlyfocus the support of the international community in areas where urgent action isrequired but also in ways to ensure long term, systematic building of essentialcapacity is achieved.

References

[1] South GR, Veitayaki J, Global initiatives in the South Pacific: regional approaches to workable

arrangement. Canberra, Australia: Asia Pacific Press at the Australian National University, 1999.

p. 7.

[2] CROP. Draft Pacific Regional Ocean Policy, 2001.

[3] CROP. An Ocean Policy for the Pacific Islands—Background Paper 2001.

[4] SPREP. Action Plan for Managing the Environment of the Pacific Islands Region 2001–2004,

2001.

[5] Slade TN 2001. United Nations conference on environment and development (UNCED)+7 and

Barbados: Where are we now? In: South GR, Cleave G, Skelton PA, editors, Oceans in the new

millennium: challenges and opportunities for the islands. Proceedings, Pacem in Maribus XXVII,

Suva, Fiji, November 1999. International Ocean Institute Operational Centre for the Pacific Islands,

1999. pp. 17–26.

[6] MLHLC. Report of the third session of the Multilateral High Level Conference on the Management

and Conservation of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean, held in

Tokyo, 22–26 June 1998.

[7] ComSec/ADB Joint Task Force Report on Small States. Commonwealth Secretariat/World Bank

1999.

[8] CROP. Valuing regional multilateral cooperation. Council of Regional Organisations in the Pacific,

Thirteenth Meeting: Agenda item 10: 2001.


[9] South GR, Power M. Ocean and coastal issues and policy responses in the Pacific Islands.

Paper presented at IOC-UNESCO Conference Oceans and Coasts at RIO+10, Paris, December

2001.

[10] SPREP/FOREC 2001. Draft Pacific Regional Submission to the World Summit on Sustainable

Development 2002. South Pacific Regional Environment Programme & Forum Secretariat.


the regional scale of ocean governance regional cooperation in the pacific islands

Documents