Search the SPREP Catalogue

From the perspective of Pacific island states and territories (PICTs) much of the intense speculation and debate over climate policy seems irrelevant and immature given the oft-repeated warnings of the severe consequences for low-lying islands and atoll countries of climate change. The Pacific is not just ‘any region’ when it comes to climate change but rather, as Farbotko (2010) argues, is an ‘experimental space’ of climate change ‘canaries’. The position of the Pacific at the frontline of climate change has spurred voluminous research, however studies of the politics of climate change within the region is limited, particularly with regard to and regional processes. This paper explores the regional politics of climate change in the Pacific. Within the grand architecture of global climate governance, the region provides compelling new insights into the ways climate change is constructed, governed, and shaped by—and in turn shapes—regional and global climate politics. Through an exploration of regional governance as a strategy by which small vulnerable states respond to urgent crises, the paper explores both the potential and the limitations of collective action on environmental issues following the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP21) in Paris 2015. We argue that evolving regional governance on climate change is mobilizing resources and finance to combat climate change. On the surface it appears to be a successful manifestation of solidarity among states and territories facing a shared fate. This solidarity has been institutionalized in three key regional organizations that mobilize resources climate change action through distinct policy narratives about the place of the Pacific in global climate crisis. These organizations also distribute these resources to members. As a result climate finance in the Pacific is mostly generated by multilateral rather than bilateral donors. However, despite this apparent demonstration of regional agency, beneath the surface regional climate governance is heavily dependent on donors for finance and expertise. This exposes a dual vulnerability of PICTs. They are extremely vulnerable to the impacts of climate change while also being extremely vulnerable to growing dependencies on donors to address these impacts.

The 2015 Human Development Report is the latest in the series of global Human Development Reports published by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) since 1990 as independent, analytically and empirically grounded discussions of major development issues, trends and policies.

Reducing the risk of climate change requires large and rapid reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, most of which are caused by the burning of fossil energy sources (1). The debate around emission reductions has been dominated by concern for economic growth, and its reliance on cheap and plentiful energy. Instead, I believe energy’s role in achieving human development should be our core priority.

The concept of ‘climate finance’ has gained considerable currency following commitments from developed countries to provide new and additional funding for action on climate change. There have been a series of studies estimating the size of the financing need and assessments of how the international financing architecture can meet those needs. Sources of ‘climate finance’ comprise not only finance that governments spend, but also private finance for private actions on climate change. These studies have served a useful purpose of putting the mobilization and effective use of increased international resources for action on climate change firmly on the agenda.

The Pacific Islands Greenhouse Gas Abatement through Renewable Energy Project (PIGGAREP) is a Global Environment Facility (GEF) US$5.25 million project in eleven Pacific Island Countries (PICs). Implementation of the project started on 1 January 2008. PIGGAREP’s planned five year duration has been extended to six and a half years, with a scheduled end date now of December 2013.

In 1989, the Asian Development Bank provided technical assistance to the then Department of Agriculture and the Survey Department through a NZ Consulting Firm - ANZDEC under an ADB Land Resource Planning Survey Project. The Project provided training on mapping and GIS capability for the survey staff who were involved in the mapping work. Electronic GIS data and equipment were handed over to the Department of Agriculture at the end of the project which were later on damaged by Cyclone Ofa in 1990. A decade later, the Integrated Climate Change Risks in Agriculture and Health Sectors (ICCRAHSS) Project funded by the GEF through UNDP contracted the services of a consultant to provide: -improved GIS maps for soil, crops and rainfall distribution under different climatic projections; -review existing GIS systems and possible areas for collaboration; -consider a program to support capacity building on the use of the system and; -some applications that addresses options for climate change adaptation for the agriculture sector. Based on this report, a GIS system for the Ministry of Agriculture was procured to address the need for such a system to be in place with the expectation that the system will be properly utilized and maintained by relevant people.

In collaboration with the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment and members of the health technical team in the project Integrating Climate Change Risks into Agriculture and Health, the development of this Synthesis Report formulates the baseline of the linkages in climate change and health based on the local context of Samoa. The purpose of this report is to compile and consolidate efforts in addressing risks of climate change to health with scenarios outlines throughout the analysis. The development was reviewed by experts involved in the areas of climate services and health experts in the areas of communicable diseases. This report has developed a baseline to future research work into climate change and health to guide policy formulation as well as to consolidate resource prioritisations for health services to adverse impacts of climate change.

The Federated States of Micronesia (FSM) submitted its Initial National Communication in October, 1999. This Second National Communication uses it as the baseline to document the increases in FSM's vulnerability to climate change, and changes in its greenhouse gas emissions, since the Initial National Communication was prepared. This National Communication also reports on the efforts FSM is making to reduce its emissions and to identify and implement adaptation options that reduce climate risks.