Strengths | Weaknesses | Opportunities | Threats | Extending the concept of Social Obligations
Agenda 21. Principles:10. Environmental issues are best handled with the participation of all concerned citizens at the relevant level. 20. Women have a vital role in environmental management and development. Their full participation is therefore essential to achieve sustainable development. 21.The creativity, ideals and courage of the youth of the world should be mobilized to forge a global partnership in order to achieve sustainable development and ensure a better future for all. 22.Indigenous people and their communities and other local communities have a vital role in environmental management and development because of their knowledge and traditional practices. States should recognize and support their identity, culture, and interests and enable their effective participation in the achievement of sustainable development. |
The common vision provided by Agenda 21 is based on an open exchange of information at all levels of society and between all interested parties. Where barriers to information flow exist, conflict follows. The case histories summarized in the preceding two sections of this report offer abundant examples of conflicts and constraints in the gathering, analysis, and use of environmental information for economic decision making.
The greatest and most debilitating barrier in flow of information for sustainable decisions on resource use is the sharp divide between the colonial-imposed European government system, usually based almost entirely in one city, and the hundreds of small, isolated rural villages scattered on different islands or separated by difficult terrain. There is actually better interchange of environmental information and ideas between the countries, via regional organizations, than between the national governments and their own village people. It is as if the rural villages continue to exist as separate, isolated groups with local needs, interests and knowledge quite separate from the regional and national visions.
Most countries have some form of provincial government. In the Melanesian countries of PNG, the Solomon Islands, Vanuatu, New Caledonia, and Fiji the provincial governments are distinct political entities, but suffer from even greater financial and manpower constraints than the National governments. In Polynesian and Micronesian countries, the "provincial" government structures are extensions of the national governments. Information exchange between the provincial and national governments is generally done by individuals, like extension agents, whose jobs bring them back and forth between the national capital and the provinces.
How the European style government differs from the shadow traditional governance.
European |
Traditional |
| Centrally Located | Widely distributed |
| English or French Language | Island or even village specific language |
| European Cash Economy | Barter or local cash economy |
| Export Oriented Extraction of Resources | Resources for survival and small markets |
| Large Scale resource development | Small scale resource development |
| Private Ownership (businesses/land) | Common ownership |
| Weak monitoring capability | Strong monitoring capability |
| Pitiful enforcement capability | Absolute enforcement capability |
| Relies on foreign funding | Semi self reliant |
| Relies on foreign expertise for resource assessment | Relies on direct observation for resource and self-assessment. |
| Policies imposed from foreign nations via colonialism and now via assistance | Home grown |
| Other directed - welfare state (adopted by necessity). | Self directed - welfare state (adopted by preference). |
| Unsustainable without major revisions | 3,500 years of proven sustainability |
Villages in all countries have their own autonomous, traditional government system based on one form or another of a council of elders. In some countries, such as American Samoa, this secondary government system pervades the whole society and acts as a secondary National Government.
The bulk of the population of the Pacific islands relates, on a day to day basis, to their village government system. Since the villagers are the resource owners, it is the village government system that makes the final decisions on resource use. The village elders are likely to have, or have access to, a considerable body of local knowledge about their own resources.
The examination of how conflicts arise in resource use plans in the Pacific islands supports the Agenda 21 vision for improving information linkages between the local, national and regional bodies. The regional organizations have recently begun a major effort, in concert with the World Bank, to improve information exchange between themselves and their member countries which includes a component to improve information flow to the public.
The ESCAP country and local case studies on "integrating Environmental Considerations into Economic Decision Making Processes" revealed a number of Pacific island countries and regional organizations that are in the experimental phase of improving the links between the local, national and regional levels. These efforts are generally described as "participatory." They take the form of participation in gathering research information (such as Participatory Rural Appraisal), setting up community based resource use plans, and more recently, developing long range sustainable development policy starting with the local (village) government's own vision and integrating this with provincial, national and regional policy decision making processes (Participatory Integrated Policy (PIP)).
An overall analysis of the Successes, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT) of the Pacific islanders provides insight into the long term benefits of participatory approaches to sustainable economic policy making. analysis summarizes the ESCAP case histories and information presented in Sections 1 and 2. It is not comprehensive nor do all the features apply equally throughout the Pacific islands, but it does provide clear support for the move towards participatory policy.
Strengths, Advantages, and Abilities.
Advantages
What do Pacific Island governments do well?
Weaknesses of the people and governments of the Pacific Islands relating to sustainable development:
What is done badly that might be improved by training in participatory methodology?
What should be avoided that might be facilitated by participatory processes?
What external opportunities and threats facing the people and governments of the Pacific island countries might be influenced by participatory methods?
Opportunities the Pacific Islanders don't control but would like to take advantage of:
What are the interesting trends that will influence sustainable development?
What are the external threats facing the Pacific island countries that might be abated or mitigated by the improvements in linkages between local, national and regional organizations ?
What is the competition doing?
Can the Pacific islands keep pace in a rapidly changing world?
Bad debt and cash-flow problems plague the Pacific island governments.
Extending the concept of Social Obligations
The key to obtaining and using environmental assessment and monitoring information, and to harmonizing resource use policy, is found in the acknowledged strengths of Pacific islanders, sometimes idealized as "The Pacific Way." The ability of island communities to work together (within family, one-talk or church groups) is perhaps the greatest asset for sustainable resource use in the region. Social pressures enforce the basic concept of sharing with equality, and the importance of altruistic behavior. People regularly do things that is to their own economic disadvantage to conform to socially accepted behavior. This is the missing link between environmental policy and action.
Extending the concept of social obligation to cover the long term protection of the living resources is inherent in many traditional belief systems of the Pacific islands. But these understandings have been or are being lost as the traditional values are eroded by a variety of forces. The modern problem is understanding the scientific truth that:
Government officers complain of a lack of co-operation from communities regardless of ownership rights of the resources. There are innumerable examples throughout the Pacific of rural communities destroying their own resource base, practicing irresponsible and destructive agriculture and fishing; selling forests and standing by while foreign companies clear-cut mountain slopes and pollute water supplies the villagers depend on. Education campaigns, even where successful in instructing villagers about environmental issues, have had little success in changing people's behavior. The problems on the community level are the same ones hampering the adoption of sustainable practices on the government level;
This is a positive feedback loop. The more the government tries to push development the more people become involved in the economic loan/repayment/loan cycle. The more the government tries to control resource use through laws and regulations the less responsibility people (and the Church) take upon themselves. This promotes individual lack of compliance with regulations and generates conflict and lack of understanding between government agents and resource users. Credibility and co-operation are further damaged by the use of foreign scientists whose studies are unlikely to be understood (or reviewed) by the resource users. Financial, human and living resources are wasted on unsuccessful large-scale projects and get rich quick schemes that further alienate communities and cause governments to push development even more, starting another cycle.
Home
| Site Map | Projects
| Tips | News
| Links | Tellus
Consultants |
Contact