Planning
for Sustainable Community Lifestyles in the Pacific Island
Countries
![]()
Proposed
Partners
Governments
Pacific island countries and
territories including: American Samoa, Commonwealth of the Northern
Mariana Islands, Cook Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji
Islands, French Polynesia, Guam, Republic of Kiribati, Republic of
the Marshall Islands, Republic of Nauru, New Caledonia, Niue, Palau,
Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tokelau, Tonga, Tuvalu,
Vanuatu and Wallis & Futuna
Intergovernmental Organisations
South
Pacific Regional Environmental Programme (SPREP), Pacific Islands
Forum Secretariat (PIFS), Secretariat of the Pacific Community
(SPC), South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission (SOPAC), Pacific
Islands Development Program (PIDP), South Pacific Tourism
Organisation (SPTO), University of the South Pacific (USP),
Australian National University and University of Hawaii.
Potential
Major Groups/NGOs/Civil Society
FAO (Land Tenure Service
– SDAA), RICS Foundation, National Oceans and Atmosphere Agency (US
Dept if Interior); FSP (Foundation for the People of the South
Pacific); UNESCO - Live & Learn; World Wide Fund for Nature –
New Zealand and Pacific (WWF); Pacific Concerns Resources Centre
(PCRC);The Nature Conservancy; local Municipalities; Women, Youth
and church groups and professional/technical associations.
Possible
Donors
Asian Development Bank (ADB), AusAID,
Commonwealth Secretariat, European Union (EU), Global Environment
Facility (GEF), JICA, NZAID, United States Department of the
Interior (USDOI), World Bank, Canada.
Global
Partners
Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the
Pacific (ESCAP), Institute for Global Environmental Strategies
(IGES), Asia-Pacific Network for Global Change Research (APN),
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), United Nations
Environment Programme (UNEP), United Nations Educational, Scientific
and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO), International Association for
Impact Assessment (IAIA), Millennium Environment Assessment
Secretariat (MEA), International Conservation Union (IUCN).
Leading
Partners
SPREP, SPC and USP – (Land Management) to be
confirmed through consultation)
Name of
the contact persons:
Matt McIntyre (SPREP)
.South
Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP),
Apia,
Samoa.
Phone: + 685 21929, Fax: + 685 20231,
E-mail: mailto:[email protected]
![]()
Main
objectives of the Partnership/Initiative
Provide
long-term community based capacity-building activities to fully
integrate environmental and development needs, using people and
customs as the central parameters for decision-making, management,
fostering social cohesion and the promotion of sustainable community
livelihoods.
Principles:
![]()
People are at the core of the pursuit of sustainable
development;
![]()
Sustainable community
lifestyles for Pacific Island communities and nations are dependent
on the sustainable use of terrestrial, freshwater and marine
biodiversity and the protection and application of traditional
knowledge of this biodiversity.
![]()
Traditional and local knowledge enhances scientific knowledge and
can guide future directions to ensure pragmatic and mutually
beneficial efforts;
![]()
Environmental
and sustainable development are for the people and communities and
therefore their aspirations and needs should dominate policies,
plans, decision making, management and practice;
![]()
Sustainable development requires Environmental
justice, and preservation of human rights.
![]()
Early community involvement and partnering with government
in the development and project pipeline presents the best means to
suit people’s aspirations, values, issues and priorities to
socio-economic progress.
![]()
Integrating environment and socio-economics in the development
process provides the means for better decision making for
sustainable development;
![]()
Ensuring
equity in development processes and environmental management, with
social justice and empowerment through community development
frameworks - will assist poverty eradication and improve people’s
quality of life.
![]()
Purpose
To develop local and national
capacity to institute community development frameworks to assist
with partnering, prudent anticipation and decisions regarding the
planning for environmental change, as well as the pursuit of
sustainable development to enhance the quality of life for all
communities.
Intended
ActivitiesCommunity capacity-building activities to fully integrate
environmental, social and development issues, needs a long term
horizon to cover the following facets:
![]()
Improving the availability and use of information,
knowledge and expertise;
![]()
Strengthening the participatory process of policy-making, policy
integration and strategy formulation, especially as relates to land
and resource access;
![]()
Institute
planning processes which are fully participatory/holistic systems
driven by information and community involvement, incorporating
abilities to value our environment and ensure user pay systems are
adopted.
![]()
Strengthening capacities
at the community level to assess the state of their local
environment and biodiversity as a basis for more informed decision
making in pursuit of sustainable livelihoods.
![]()
Developing capacities for converting strategies into
action plans;
![]()
Providing enabling
environments for the implementation of strategies and plans;
![]()
Strengthening abilities to
mobilise resources within and outside of government;
![]()
Developing effective partnerships with all
elements of civil society, particularly the private sector;
![]()
Securing greater effective empowerment of
local or village level government;
![]()
Maintaining awareness and education of the need for change through
the use of traditional methods of communication including music and
dance.
![]()
Community
Development Frameworks
The benefits of indigenous or
local peoples’ involvement for ‘good governance’ of sustainable
development and biodiversity conservation initiatives
(co-management) have been commonly expounded (Chambers, 1983: 101:
Burkey 1993; Courrier 1992: 85; Kothari & Parajuli 1993; Thaman
1994, 1999). However this ethos of ‘practice’ needs to be
transferred to integrative decision-making systems where the local
community is involved with central government throughout the
development and management decision-making process.
This promotion of
community development frameworks relates to Chapter 26 of Agenda 21
and specifically the objectives under 26.3:“In full partnership with
indigenous people and their communities, Governments and, where
appropriate, intergovernmental organizations should aim at
fulfilling the ….establishment of a process to empower indigenous
people and their communities through ….” through various measures…
To strive for a
‘sense of ownership’ in environmental planning, conservation and
management the community needs to be involved at the outset of
policy, program or project design and implementation. Participation
rather than consultation should be the redeeming principle in
ensuring the sense of ownership (Burkey, 1993; Chambers,
1983).Integrative decision making systems should consist of a number
of ingredients – in addition to base laws and ‘raw’ scientific data.
Decision support systems including use of technology, use and
development guideline documents, policy integration methods, best
practice criteria and user pay systems should be delivered in a
manner which allows the local community to dictate actions (or be
partners to same) consistent with national objectives and
strategies. Such local ‘empowerment’ could see the re-establishment
of respect for elders and matua, which has slowly diminished in some
Pacific Island countries under ideals of western style centralised
governance. Successful traditional management practices survive on a
high respect level afforded to elders and matua. Application of
traditional knowledge can supplement or be used in concert with
western scientific and management knowledge.
Communities Addressing Poverty
Inequitable distribution of the economic and lifestyle benefits
of development instils poverty of opportunity and often leads to
environments of tension and conflict between those with access to
resources and benefits and those without. Tension in land, resource
management and development stifles and investment. Lack of means to
establish valuation of resources through coordinated development
decision making often leads to inappropriate cost: benefit analysis,
often to the detriment of local communities. Lack of means to
establish user pays principles and ongoing responsibility by
developers often leads to hidden costs being borne by local
communities. Community development frameworks incorporating
integrated development and environment planning can establish
fairness and equity in decision-making and if developed with
community participation in design and inception can assist
investment by establishing coordination and certainty in development
and environmental management.
Community
driven conflict resolution
With strengthened respect
offered from community based frameworks for decision making - the
adjudication of land/resource conflict matters (defining and
redistribution of rights) could be transferred to the local village
level away from the ‘foreign’ traumatic centralised court systems
(Objective 26.3 (v) of Agenda 21).Between 83-97% of land in Pacific
Islands is held under customary ownership. Growing conflict over
land and resource access and use stemming from value-conflicts
between customary and western ideals is seen as an impediment to
economic development, astute environmental management and poverty
alleviation. This Initiative strives for reform led from the
grass-roots level that is both based on and sensitive to the reality
of continuing customary ownership. The Initiative aspires to
facilitate a productive interface between indigenous and western
information to ensure sustainable land and resource use.The
Initiative will assist the region by building capacity of landowners
and communities to take an active part in decisions regarding their
own land and resources, with land tenure mechanisms and resource use
strategies for poverty alleviation and environmental sustainability
in accordance with existing SIDS BPOA and Agenda 21 protocols.
Critical to such capacity building is facilitating more people to be
able to express their views (at various levels) through on-going
meetings of locals to talk more about solutions; networking to
improve inter-group relationships (understand problems of other
islands, improve landlord/tenant relationship; review the role,
place and responsibilities of intermediaries); and open transmission
of information to explain issues/proposals to people, where possible
in their own language.
Information
Quality, up-to-date
information on ecological characteristics, cultural values, land
tenure systems, land use, status of biodiversity and traditional
use, land capabilities & suitabilities and management systems -
are central to good governance, mainstreaming the environment and
integrated decision making for sustainable development (Chapter 8
& Chapter 40, Agenda 21). Concerted targeting and consistent
efforts to fill data voids, from local, traditional and modern
scientific perspectives, shall be managed by priorities established
by communities. Capacity building will aim to suite communities and
governments with information systems to enable them assess the
status of their own resources, the pressures for detrimental change
and the performance of responses. Systems based information
development (e.g. catchment, ecological) will assist the integration
of environment and development, enable state of environment
monitoring and environmental impact assessment and strategic
planning.Information collation and GIS enhancement is a critical
element for developing environmental planning systems. It provides
an effective communication tool for community participation,
products and platforms. It allows for both rudimentary, multi-level
and multi-disciplinary query based analysis of resource status,
sensitivity, capacity and suitability. Resource inventory and GIS
enhancement for systems based planning can be developed as an
interactive information tool to assist decision making. Community
involvement at the outset in the planning, gathering, analysis and
application of information is a critical element of community based
resource management and environmental planning.Customary and
traditional means of communication and education such as
in-the-field mentorship, traditional meeting and dance, art and
music shall be explored as the mediums to increase awareness of the
benefits of community based development, improve information bases,
convey local messages, establish priorities as well as assisting in
the delivery and monitoring of outputs.
Community
Planning and Participation
Chapter 10 of
Agenda 21 notes that: ".... If, in the future, human requirements
are to be met in a sustainable manner, it is now essential to
resolve these conflicts and move towards more effective and
efficient use of land and its natural resources. Integrated physical
and landuse planning and management is an eminently practical way to
achieve this.”PICs have seen the push for better governance
stimulated by economic planning over the last decade. Countries and
Territories are now calling for the filling of the void in physical
resource use/land use planning (PIC National Assessment Reports for
WSSD). Many PICs do not have systems or procedures for integrated
environmental and resource use planning, development and management.
Such systems are necessary to ensure countries are able to cater for
sustainable development (physical, ecological, economic, social and
cultural considerations). Planning systems can bring certainty and
confidence into development and environmental management processes
especially when targeted at the local level - through the provision
of adequate environmental information, policy integration,
safeguards, planning strategies and development guidelines. Current
philosophies aim to integrate economic and physical planning as
there are inherent linkages. For example economic policy (especially
fiscal) can stimulate physical development and physical development
stimulates economic activity and/or creates an asset value system.
Both perspectives have implications for the environment and are best
integrated at the grass-roots level consistent with national policy
directions.The aim is to provide countries and territories with
concepts of objective based planning systems that maintain community
level decision making, while enabling national action when key
threats are faced. The benefits of a total package including
enhanced GIS, sustainable development guideline documents, land and
resource use development objectives and criteria, as well as
integrated environmental planning legislation - will be conveyed.
The holistic system should be driven by information and community
involvement, incorporating abilities to value the environment and to
ensure user pay systems are included in decision making at the
outset of the development process.
Features of
contemporary community based planning systems in additional to those
depicted above include: