As we enter not only a new year but a new decade, there is much to anticipate in the Pacific islands region.
Elections and domestic politics
A number of countries in the region will have elections during 2020: Kiribati, Niue, Palau and Vanuatu. The lingering discontent in Kiribati surrounding last year's switch in diplomatic relations from Taiwan to China may have an adverse impact on the incumbent government. In Vanuatu, Prime Minister Charlot Salwai Tabismasmas can point to having served a full parliamentary term as Prime Minister as a reason why he should remain in the top job but that may not be enough. The current premier of Niue, Sir Toke Talagi, has been suffering from ill health recently casting doubt on whether he will contest this year. Meanwhile, there have been calls for more young people to stand for parliament in that country.
Elsewhere in the region, some of what happened on the political scene in 2019 will continue to play out. In Marshall Islands, the Niitjela (Parliament) met last week and elected David Kabua as the new President further to last year's elections. In the immediate aftermath of Solomon Islands' switch from Taiwan to China last year there were indications that Prime Minister Sogavare might face a motion of no confidence. Whilst that did not eventuate in 2019, it remains on the cards for this year. In Papua New Guinea, this year will be crunch time for the Marape/Stephens government. The grace period that protects them from a challenge by way of a motion of no confidence comes to an end in late 2020 and there are already whispers of this paving a comeback for Peter O'Neill who was ousted from the PM's seat in the middle of last year.
There will also be elections in New Zealand, which will be closely watched given that country's closeness to the Pacific islands region, and the centrality of the Pacific Reset to the Ardern/Peters government's policy platform. The incumbent, Jacinda Ardern, was named Islands Business' 'Pacific Person of the Year' for 2019.
There are also significant elections taking place at sub-national level. In Vanuatu, the SANMA provincial elections taking place this month will be closely watched to see if they cast any light on what we can expect in the general elections in March. In Bougainville, there will be elections for President and government of the autonomous region. These elections will be heavily influenced by the results of last year's referendum on independence. However, there is currently some debate as to whether constitutional arrangements should be modified to allow the current President, John Momis, to run for another term. If this is what is to happen, the elections may need to be delayed.
The last couple of years has seen a proliferation of policies, programs and photo opportunities as established and emerging Pacific partners seek to (re)establish their influence in the region. This is expected to continue through 2020, including by way of high- level visits to the region. For example, President Emmanuel Macron will visit French Polynesia in April. This is significant given France's displeasure at the territory having been reinscribed onto the UN's Decolonisation List.
The impacts of Solomon Islands and Kiribati switching their diplomatic allegiance from Taiwan to the People's Republic of China will continue to be felt during 2020. We have already seen some developments with the visit of President Maamau of Kiribati to Beijing where he met with President Xi Jinping and signed up to the Belt and Road Initiative. Whilst the Taiwanese government has expressed confidence of the continuing relationship with Marshall Islands, Taipei will be watching President Kabua's early movements closely and has already announced a high-level visit to Majuro to help keep this relationship on track. Taiwan now has four allies in the region (Marshall Islands, Nauru, Palau and Tuvalu) and will continue to expend diplomatic and political capital to avoid losing any of them during 2020.
Independence and self-determination
Work will begin on the negotiations between the Bougainville and Papua New Guinea governments further to the result of last year's referendum which saw 97.7% of those who voted opt for independence. This will have to be ratified by the Parliament of PNG, under the terms of the Bougainville Peace Agreement. Positions on the future of Bougainville vary among PNG parliamentarians, including PM Marape's suggestion of 'economic independence'. Moreover, that agreement does not provide a timeline for how long this process should take. There will need to be a lot of work done around managing community expectations and keeping the flow of information moving in order to avoid frustration.
In New Caledonia, the second of a possible three referendums on independence from France will be held on 6 September. In 2018, the result was much closer than many had predicted with 43.6% voting in favour of independence, exceeding the 30% that some had been predicting.
After some considerable delay, the people of Chuuk in the Federated States of Micronesia will hold an independence referendum in March.
The question of self-determination for West Papua and addressing issues of alleged human rights abuses by the Indonesian state will loom large during 2020, particularly during the meeting of the Pacific Islands Forum leaders in Vanuatu. At last year's meeting of Pacific Islands Forum leaders Vanuatu lobbied successfully for the issue of West Papua to be given more prominence in the final communiqué than had been the case in the preceding couple of years. This includes a strong signal from leaders that they expect the government of Indonesia to facilitate a visit to the region by Michelle Bachelet, the UN High Commissioner
for Human Rights, in order for her office to report to leaders when they meet this year in Port Vila.
Meanwhile, in a region dominated by relatively young countries, Fiji will mark its 50th anniversary of becoming independent this year and Vanuatu its 40th.
We have already seen a change of leadership at the oldest of the region's peak bodies, the Pacific Community (SPC). Dr Colin Tukuitonga was replaced as Director-General by Dr Stuart Minchin late last year. The meeting of the Pacific Islands Forum leaders to be held in Vanuatu in August will be Dame Meg Taylor's last as Secretary-General. By convention, it is Micronesia's turn to nominate the person to take on this position. The front runner is Gerald Zackios, the current ambassador of Marshall Islands to the United States.
There will be ongoing work to further develop and embed the 'Blue Pacific' as a unifying narrative that speaks to the needs and aspirations of all members. However, this will take place in a context where there are multiple pressures on national governments, in domestic as well as foreign policy spheres. Divergences of approach when it comes to climate policy will continue to be a significant fault line at the meeting of PIF leaders. Vanuatu, the 2020 host, has already made it clear that the primary focus for that meeting will be climate change.
This item was first published on the DevPolicy blog of the Development Policy Centre, Australian National University
By Nic Maclellan in Funafuti, Tuvalu
In a marathon leaders’ retreat that continued well into the night, with often heated debate, the Pacific Islands Forum has issued a joint communique and a new declaration on climate change.
Throughout this week in Tuvalu, the Australian delegation has defended a series of negotiating red lines against strong pressure from island leaders, seeling more urgent responses to the climate crisis from the largest Forum member.
During the final development of the Forum’s annual agenda, Prime Minister Scott Morrison, Minister for International Development and the Pacific Alex Hawke and Australian officials insisted on the removal of references to coal, establishing a target below 1.5 degrees Celsius for global warming, and being required to announce next year a strategy for zero emissions by 2050.
Islands Business asked Prime Minister Morrison if the pleas of island leaders had persuaded him to change his government’s policy, refusing to make further financial contributions to the Green Climate Fund. He replied: “No, it hasn’t, because I just want to invest directly in helping the Pacific family here. I don’t need to send a cheque via Geneva or New York or wherever it has to go.” The GCF Secretariat is actually in Incheon, South Korea, which he should know, given Australia was previously co-chair of the global climate fund.
Tense arguments in the retreat
In the end, however, all Forum members agreed to the “Kainaki II Declaration for Urgent Climate Change Action Now - Securing the Future of our Blue Pacific.”
Forum host Enele Sopoaga, Prime Minister of Tuvalu, Vanuatu Foreign Minister Ralph Regenvanu and Prime Minister Morrison presented a united front at the post-conference press conference (delayed until Friday morning after leaders debated long into the night). But this diplomatic façade could not belie the damage done to Australia’s reputation and Morrison’s relationship with some leaders.
Sopoaga acknowledged that there were heated moments during the leaders retreat: "We expressed very strongly during our exchange, between me and Scott. I said: ‘You are concerned about saving your economies, your situation in Australia, I’m concerned about saving my people in Tuvalu and likewise other leaders of small island countries.’”
“That was the tone of the discussion. Please don’t expect that he comes and we bow down or that.
“We were exchanging flaring language, not swearing, but of course you know, expressing the concerns of leaders and I was very happy with the exchange of ideas, it was frank. Prime Minister Morrison, of course, stated his position and I stated my position and other leaders: we need to save these people.”
There were two occasions where the meeting almost broke down without agreement, but after a 12-hour marathon, a final compromise on wording was achieved. Fiji Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama has used his Twitter account to express concern about the final compromises by some fellow Forum Island Countries, tweeting: “Watered-down climate language has real consequences – like water-logged homes, schools, communities, and ancestral burial grounds.”
After the meeting, Vanuatu Foreign Minister Ralph Regenvanu said: “Everyone had to shift their positions. It was very fierce and very frank, and some people just didn’t want to move. But in the end, everyone had to move a bit.”
Regenvanu told Islands Business that overall Vanuatu was happy with the final Kainaki II climate declaration, which will be presented to the UN Secretary General’s Climate Action Summit in September. Leaders will call on Secretary General Antonio Guterres to urgently appoint a Special Adviser on climate change and security.
“I think the wording is strong,” Regenvanu said. “There’s reference to 1.5 degrees throughout, there’s reference to the IPCC report throughout, there’s references to achieving net zero emissions, eliminating inefficient fossil fuel subsidies and a just transition away from fossil fuels. Most of the key language we want to be included that has not been included in the past is there.”
Leaders noted (but did not endorse) the proposal for a United Nations General Assembly Resolution seeking an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice on the obligations of States under international law to protect the rights of present and future generations against the adverse effects of climate change.
Despite the deletion of most references to coal and wordsmithing to give flexibility to all parties, the language of the declaration may cause some grief at home for Scott Morrison. His conservative Liberal/National Coalition government contains many people who are resistant to the Pacific’s ongoing call for urgent action on climate, including the closure of coal mines and reduction of fossil fuel exports.
In the face of ongoing climate denial in Australia amongst conservative members of the government, the Kainaki II declaration states: “The science is non-negotiable. Urgent action by the international community to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is critical to keep us on the 1.5°C pathway.
“Right now, climate change and disasters are impacting all our countries. Our seas are rising, oceans are warming, and extreme events such as cyclones and typhoons, flooding, drought and king tides are frequently more intense, inflicting damage and destruction to our communities and ecosystems and putting the health of our peoples at risk. All around the world, people affected by disaster and climate change-induced displacement are losing their homes and livelihoods, particularly the most vulnerable atoll nations.”
Forum leaders welcomed the work of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), stating that it “remains the authoritative scientific body on climate change and is regarded as providing governments the best available science on climate change. The IPCC Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C indicates that in model pathways with no or limited overshoots of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels, global net anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions decline by about 45% from 2010 levels by 2030, reaching net zero around 2050.”
Important provisions of the declaration call on “all parties to the Paris Agreement to
meet or exceed their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) in order to pursue global efforts to limit global warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels, recognising that this is critical to the security of our Blue Pacific.”
They called on G20 countries to formulate and communicate mid-century long-term low greenhouse gas emissions development strategies by 2020; rapidly implement their commitment to phase out inefficient fossil fuel subsidies; and accelerate support for the work of the Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage.
New vision for Forum
Key decisions from the final communiqué include plans for the development of a vision statement on Pacific regionalism for coming decades, and a range of initiatives on Forum governance.
Leaders endorsed the development of the “2050 Strategy for the Blue Pacific Continent, which must ensure social, cultural, environmental and economic integrity, sovereignty and security in order to protect people, place and prospects of the Blue Pacific”.
The Forum Secretariat is tasked to prepare a draft strategy for leaders’ consideration at next year’s Forum in Vanuatu. However, at their July meeting, Foreign Ministers stressed that there needed to be a mid-term target of 2030, with clear objectives set out over the next decade in line with the period of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
Leaders endorsed the concept for the establishment of the regionally owned and led Pacific Resilience Facility, although there were some reservations from Fiji. Samoa has offered to host the new funding facility for resilience initiatives by island government and communities.
There were a range of decisions on oceans and fisheries policy, including moves towards a regular Regional Fisheries Ministers Meeting. Leaders reaffirmed their commitment to conclude negotiations on all outstanding maritime boundaries claims and zones, although there are many ongoing disputes between member states over conflicting claims.
Tuvalu Prime Minister Sopoaga confirmed: “We spoke very strongly against the leakage of nuclear waste into the Pacific and about the need to address them as urgently as possible.”
Leaders expressed concern “for the significance of the potential threat of nuclear contamination, World War II wrecks and unexploded ordnances to the health and security of the Blue Pacific her people and prospects, acknowledged the importance of addressing the long-standing issues of nuclear testing legacy in the Pacific and called for the operationalisation of the provisions of the Rarotonga Treaty, as necessary.”
To support Marshall Islands President Hilda Heine, who has pushed the issue of nuclear and toxic contaminants throughout her term, the Forum agreed to commission “a comprehensive, independent and objective scientific assessment of the contamination issue in the Pacific, including in the nuclear test site at Runit Island in the Marshall Islands”.
Leaders agreed to request a meeting with US President Donald Trump to discuss the current and emerging issues of the nuclear testing legacy in the Republic of the Marshall Islands, Kiribati and in the Blue Pacific.
The Forum endorsed an Action Plan to implement the Boe Declaration adopted at the 2018 Forum meeting in Nauru, and agreed to set up a Sub-Committee of the Forum Officials’ Committee on Regional Security.
Reflecting the multiple, conflicting positions on climate change during the week, and the demands of Smaller Island States (SIS), leaders “endorsed with qualification, the Summary of Decisions of the 28th Smaller Island States Leaders Meeting and directed the Secretariat to institute a process for tabling the SIS Leaders’ decisions at Leaders Meetings.”
For a full wrap up of the 50th Pacific Islands Forum, subscribe now for the next edition of Islands Business magazine
Members of the Pacific Islands Forum have urged Indonesia to take action on human rights violations in West Papua, and strongly encouraged Jakarta to facilitate a long-mooted visit by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet.
Regional Prime Ministers and Presidents met this week in Tuvalu for the 50th Pacific Islands Forum. Echoing the language of the Forum Foreign Ministers Meeting in July, the leaders “welcomed the invitation by Indonesia for a mission to West Papua (Papua) by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, and strongly encouraged both sides to finalise the timing of the visit and for an evidence-based, informed report on the situation be provided before the next Pacific Islands Forum Leaders meeting in 2020.”
Human rights groups have long reported on violations by Indonesian police and military forces deployed in West Papua. However, concern has escalated since the Indonesian army extended operations around Nduga in West Papua last December, following the shooting of construction workers on road-building operations through the regency. Since then, West Papuan human rights monitoring groups have reported that more than 30,000 people have been displaced, with healthcare facilities and schools damaged during Indonesian military operations. The Jakarta Post has reported that at least 182 displaced people have died from exposure and lack of food after fleeing their homes since December.
Lobbying the leaders
In recent years, West Papua has been a constant topic on the agenda of the 18-member Pacific Islands Forum. This week in Funafuti, members of the United Liberation Movement of West Papua (ULMWP), including chair Benny Wenda and spokesperson Jacob Rumbiak, have been lobbying island leaders for support. Indonesia too has a delegation in Funafuti to participate in the Post-Forum Dialogue, including West Papuan lobbyist Nick Messet.
West Papua was a key issue raised in the formal dialogue between Forum leaders and civil society organisations (CSO) on Wednesday. CSO leaders presented a wide-ranging statement which included the request “that Forum Leaders call on Indonesia to immediately allow access of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and UN special mandate holders to West Papua….None of us can speak of an inclusive and peaceful Pacific and remain silent on the serious human rights issues for West Papuans. We call on Pacific Leaders to observe the importance of human rights in all parts of our region.”
Tongan Prime Minister Akilisi Pohiva responded emotionally to their call for action on West Papua.
“We should not let others control us. We should stand together in solidarity in support of the people of West Papua”, said Pohiva.
Speaking after the CSO dialogue, General Secretary of the Pacific Conference of Churches Reverend James Bhagwan said: “I’m very encouraged by the discussions and that they have made this a priority in the leaders retreat. We try to look at this not just as a moral issue, but to be pragmatic about the realities, knowing that there are strong partnerships between Indonesia and some Forum island countries – that was mentioned by Fiji and Australia.”
“Coming from a human rights perspective, you cannot talk about a Pacific household if people are excluded from that,” Reverend Bhagwan said. “You can’t talk about Pacific regionalism if there’s no Pacific solidarity. The inaction by Pacific leaders on West Papua speaks very loudly to that, and I think that was recognised. The responses from Tonga, from Samoa, even Kiribati and of course Vanuatu – with their consistent support – was very important today.”
Rev. Bhagwan stressed: “You can’t build a house and then ignore people. That recognition of one family, the Pacific family, is very key to this.”
Leaders want action by Indonesia
In their final communique, Forum leaders “reaffirmed recognition of Indonesia’s sovereignty over West Papua (Papua). Leaders acknowledged the reported escalation in violence and continued allegations of human rights abuses in West Papua (Papua) and agreed to re-emphasise and reinforce the Forum’s position of raising its concerns over the violence.”
ULMWP Chair Benny Wenda said: “I welcome all the leaders’ decision. This is the first time that Forum leaders have called for a United Nations human rights visit. It’s time for Indonesia to allow the UN Human Rights Commissioner to come to visit West Papua. I think it’s an important step now.”
While the resolution makes no mention of the right to self-determination, Wenda welcomed the decision as a positive move forward: “This is step by step. This is the starting point and the fact that the resolution is a really, really important step for us to go to another level.”
Vanuatu has long championed the West Papuan cause and lobbied strongly for action. Vanuatu Foreign Minister Ralph Regenvanu said: “It’s the resolution we wanted so we’re very grateful to all the Pacific Island leaders. The resolution from the leaders and the very strong statements made in the CSO session on this issue shows that they all recognise that something more has got to be done, because the human rights situation is worsening.”
Regenvanu said he hoped that the UN Human Rights Commissioner could provide an “honest and frank account” to the next Forum leaders’ meeting
“The resolution is the result of the worsening situation just in the last year for human rights in West Papua,” he said. “In the last few years, the resolution has been about constructive engagement with Indonesia on the issue. But I think the leaders realised that the open and constructive engagement had not necessarily achieved the improvements in human rights that are desired. I think the situation in Nduga over the last year has caused Forum leaders to elevate the tone of the resolution.”
With his country scheduled to host the 51st regional summit next year in Port Vila, the Vanuatu Foreign Minister said: “We also want a report back by the next Forum so the leaders can consider it under this agenda, which is a standing agenda of the Forum.”
“The onus is now on the Secretariat of the Forum and the member states of PIF, including the members that are part of the Human Rights Council, that they need to make sure the Commissioner gets to go,” he said. “Indonesia should see that there is a very clear concern and we hope this this statement will make them come to the table and work with the Commissioner to make sure this mission does happen.”
By Makereta Komai, PACNEWS Editor in Funafuti
After a marathon meeting, Pacific Islands Forum Leaders have issued a communique and a climate change declaration with qualifications in Tuvalu
Chairman of the Pacific Islands Forum Leaders’ Summit, Prime Minister Enele Sopoaga of Tuvalu was particularly happy with the affirmation of declaration on climate change for the survival of Pacific Small Island Developing States (PSIDS).
“The Forum leaders agreed with no brackets on the declaration for climate change. It’s quite an outcome and we are happy that we have the endorsement from members with qualification.
Admitting that Australia was the only member to make a qualification, Prime Minister Sopoaga said the communique still reflected the language used in Nauru last year.
“I think we can say that we should have done more work for our people but it’s a matter for our people to reflect more. I seek the respect and understanding of the Pacific people on the outcome which is really a negotiated outcome and still contains some references to the United Nations Secretary General’s message to accelerate actions against climate change and that’s the way forward. It provides a basis for stronger Pacific presentation in New York and we have to live with that.
Sopoaga said the SIS climate change declaration was endorsed in full. A number of Forum members have said they will not sign up to document they did not negotiate.
“It is there and the language will never change and not a single t or comma was taken out. That was the ultimate objective.
“We can work together as a Forum family by coming here in this location, the Kainaki Rua, where we have the ocean and the lagoon on the other side which further amplifies the extreme vulnerability of Tuvalu. I am sure Leaders have taken note of this and are focused on the survival of the Pacific. We ask please understand this – our people are dying," said Sopoaga.
Prime Minister Scott Morrison held a different view on the two outcome statements from the Forum Leaders Retreat.
“We worked through issues in a spirit of commitment. It commits us to realise that here in the Pacific, the impact of climate change and rising sea level is real and happening to them right now and has been for some time, so the actions and directions that are set out in both those documents speak about commitments to address those issues.
“It’s a general statement and what that means is that what the Smaller Island States (SIS) agree to is not binding on the rest of the members.
The Australian leader, who many speculated was isolated during the Leaders Retreat, denied being left out by the group
“No Australia was not isolated at all. We agreed to our communique and the Smaller Island States statement was exactly the same as what was agreed to in Nauru last year.
The Australian leader praised his New Zealand counterpart, Jacinda Ardern for the way she worked with Pacific leaders at the Retreat.
“We don’t always have to agree and but when we disagree we do it well. I am all for lively debate and discussion. We’ve got to learn to disagree better, showing respect to one another as we did last night, showing respect to the existential challenges that faces our region."
Australia, Morrison said is here in the region to stay and it is committed to supporting its ‘family’ in the Pacific.
“What we are doing is we want to want to help our family in the Pacific with resilience challenges of climate change. We are just going to do that directly and get on with it. We’ll do it quicker, we’ll do it better and we will do it with greater partnerships.
“I am accountable to the Australian public and I came here with a very strong record to demonstrate what we have done to turn our situation to reduce our emissions to meet our 2030 target.
He revealed that Australia has invested AUD$500 million (US$339 million) this financial year, which includes AUD$200(US$135 million) million through the Global Climate Fund. "That money is going into serious resilience work right across the world particularly the Pacific. And what we are doing at the end of this financial year is putting down another AUD$500 million and that is going here in the Pacific to address resilience. That is big commitment," Morrison told journalists after the Retreat after 10pm Thursday night.
The Australian PM maintains the reliance on coal to provide energy is falling.
“That is expected to continue to happen as the economy goes through a transition, not just in the next ten years, 20 and 30 years. What Australia has done in the last six years is that it has taken what was a 700 million tonne deficit in what we were expecting in 2020 in our projection of carbon emission and turned that around in a AUD$300 million (US$203 million) surplus. So Australia’s action on climate change has produced a more than 1 billion tonne turn around on carbon emission," said Morrison
By Nic Maclellan in Funafuti, Tuvalu.
Most Forum island countries have already accessed funding from the Green Climate Fund (GCF), the global climate finance mechanism created under the UN Framework Convention for Climate Change. It’s a crucial source of funding for developing countries, operating under the Paris Agreement on Climate Change.
Around the world, Small Islands Developing States (SIDS) already have 24 approved GCF projects, with 11 already under implementation. So far, US$5.2 billion has been programmed from the fund, with $830 million (16 per cent) going to SIDS – and half of this amount has gone to Pacific island states.
Now there’s a need to replenish the US$10.3 billion fund, for future grants after 2020. Starting from October, the GCF is seeking to replenish the fund with significant pledges from OECD countries and voluntary contributions from large developing nations.
Jerry Velasquez is Director of the GCF’s Mitigation and Adaptation Division. He attended this week’s Sautalaga Climate Dialogue in Tuvalu, and met with a range of Pacific delegations at the Pacific Islands Forum to discuss future co-operation with the GCF.
Velasquez told the Sautalaga that Pacific governments need to address three core issues for future GCF funding. The first is easing access to the GCF, through the Readiness Fund (a GCF mechanism that provides preliminary finance for preparation of the technical and scientific studies required to make a full bid to the fund). There’s also a need to increase country capacity to manage and implement programs.
Velasquez called for a strategic plan to increase financing for Pacific SIDS. With more funding available in coming years, there will be growing competition for the proportion of GCF funding specifically allocated to Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and Small Island Developing States (SIDS).
“It would be useful for governments to raise their ambitions and articulate their priorities,” he said. “Some are already clear, some are not, but we need to understand the common issues. There are ideas for low-emissions shipping, most countries have problems accessing water, they have a lot of countries with coastal protection issues and some would like to increase the percentage of renewable energy
Accessing the fund
In recent years, there have been significant debates on the GCF Board between developed and developing countries on how to improve access to the fund. The GCF Readiness Fund provides resources to hire or deploy technical staff to prepare for a major bid to the GCF. It’s a crucial mechanism for Smaller Island Developing States that often lack the staff to deal with the complex international bureaucracy.
Exsley Taloiburi is Climate Change Financing Adviser at the Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat in Suva. Taloiburi told Islands Business: “We have ten of our Forum island countries that have already had access to the GCF Readiness Fund. Although countries are eligible to access US$1 million per year, a number of our countries have not fully utilised that cap. Countries that have accessed funds from the GCF envelope have accessed well below $1 million a year.
“But it’s not a prerequisite – they can just go and apply for project funding instead of accessing GCF readiness funds. Some of these countries feel that they have the enabling environment to absorb the funds that the GCF is offering, not only the scale of funding, but the reporting requirements and other requirements for Forum Island countries.”
Despite these successes, the GCF Secretariat has recently approved changes to further cut back the bureaucracy.
Jerry Velasquez noted: “The debate is not just the size of the Readiness Funding but how we deploy this funding more easily. One innovation that’s already been approved is three-year readiness grants. Instead of applying each and every year, you apply for it once for three years, up to a maximum of US$3 million. This cuts the bureaucracy by one third and allows for some stability in hiring staff and capacity building.
“The other thing that’s an innovation here that could be applied elsewhere is the regional readiness, because you cannot do everything by yourself. You cannot hire a technical expert on water and fisheries and everything in each and every country. So, you could draw down resources regionally.”
Forum host Enele Sopoaga, Prime Minister of Tuvalu, welcomed the notion of regional readiness systems.
“I’m welcoming the GCF’s presentation saying there’s the capacity for readiness resources to be packaged and bundled for a regional facility,” Sopoaga said. “I can see there could be a way forward for this to be approved, dispersed and housed in the Pacific from which island countries can draw from as readiness resources. That could be an innovative way of moving forward. But it’s not only access, but also implementation and disbursement – for funds to be disbursed as soon as possible in order to help the island countries survive.”
Battle over replenishment
At the global climate negotiations in 2010, OECD countries agreed to an annual global target of US$100 billion in public and private funds by 2020, to support developing country efforts to adapt to climate change and cut greenhouse gas emissions. As they signed the Paris Agreement in 2015, industrialised countries reaffirmed this objective, and made a series of recommendations about the effective use of these resources.
In Paris, countries pledged to review the global US$100 billion climate funding target by 2025, but this commitment comes in a separate “decision text” rather than the binding agreement.
The GCF began operations in 2015, but is about to launch a replenishment round, to increase OECD pledges beyond the current level of US$10.3 billion.
However, the Morrison government in Australia has now joined the Trump administration in refusing to commit further funding to the GCF replenishment. In 2014, former US President Barack Obama pledged US$3 billion to the fund. Trump administration however has refused to commit the remaining US$2 billion, a significant hole in the GCF’s budget. The chaos surrounding Brexit has also complicated the delivery of funding pledges from the UK government, given possible fluctuations in the value of the British pound.
Throughout this week’s Pacific Islands Forum in Funafuti, there’s been growing concern over Australia’s position. Despite an Australian announcement that A$500 million of re-badged aid will be directed at climate infrastructure and resilience projects across the Pacific, some island leaders are concerned that the refusal to commit more funds to the GCF will undercut international efforts to reach and increase global financing targets.
Jerry Velasquez welcomes the news that some European countries are increasing their support.
“What’s happening now is that some of our donors are doubling their pledges,” he said. “Germany and Norway have just announced doubling their funds – Germany to 1.5 billion euros. The question is, what will happen with the rest? It’s up to the countries of the Pacific to call for a strong replenishment. The more money that gets into the replenishment, the more money they will get.”
That call was taken up in this week’s Tuvalu Declaration on the Climate Change Crisis, which welcomes “the significant role that the GCF plays in supporting developing countries in their efforts to address climate change. We call for a prompt, ambitious and successful replenishment of the GCF.”
Partners in implementation
Velasquez noted: “We also need to get the partners in place, because more often than not, the limiting factor is the partners. We need more different kinds of partners. Some entities like the Ministry of Finance of the Cook Islands is limited to project management for up to US$10 million. Obviously, that limits the type of things they could do.
He encouraged greater private sector involvement in leveraging resources: “Ideally, we should have a commercial bank that have a larger ability to program money so they could access concessional loans. Fiji has the Fiji Development Bank that is larger, but you have very few entities here in the Pacific that can channel non-grant instruments, such as concessional loans, equity and guarantees. That’s where you can leverage private sector finance.”
International climate finance is managed through National Implementing Entities (NIE) – often government departments, development banks, technical agencies or other organisations that can manage public finance or implement projects.
Exsley Taloiburi explained that national and regional bodies around the region had already achieved GCF accreditation: “In the Pacific, the NIEs we have with the GCF are the Cook Islands Ministry of Finance and the Fiji Development Bank, while the Regional Implementing Entities (RIEs) we have at the moment are the Pacific Regional Environment Program (SPREP), the Pacific Community (SPC) and the Micronesian Conservation Trust.
“The Cook Islands Ministry of Finance obtained accreditation to the Kyoto Protocol Adaptation Fund initially, and they applied through the fast-tracking process and they were able to get GCF accreditation as well. Tuvalu’s Ministry of Finance has just been granted NIE status to the Adaptation Fund, and I think that puts them in a very good position to be able to apply for fast-tracking for NIE status to the GCF.”
In recent years, regional organisations like PIFS and SPREP have expended a lot of effort to share success stories between Forum member countries, to see what works best in accessing funding or implementing successful projects.
“There can be good South-South learnings, where Forum Island Countries can learn from each other,” said Taloiburi. “One way to do this that we’ve been working on is South-South attachments between different countries that allows countries to explore and understand other options.
“I think information sharing is really critical for Forum Island Countries. We’ve undertaken National Climate Finance Assessments in 11 of the 14 FICs and there are a lot of very good lessons that can be shared. A number of countries have established national sustainable funding mechanisms, such as the Tuvalu Climate and Disaster Survival Fund, or Fiji’s Green Bonds.”