Climate Finance Assessment Framework

Halitesh Datt, Fiji TV

5 July, 2013, Nadi, Fiji - In order to assess the challenges and some of the issues that Pacific Island Countries are facing in climate financing, the Pacific Islands Forum has come up with a Climate Finance Assessment Framework.

In 2010 Forum leaders proposed to look at options to improve access to and management of climate finance in the region.

This involved a broad assessment of challenges, sources, interaction between climate finance and development.

This framework has already been applied in Nauru with positive results.

 Coral Pasisi - Regional and International Issue Advisor - PIF'S

There are six dimensions of this framework that came out of Nauru and can be applied to all the countries.

These are Assessing the available sources of finance, looking at policy framework, institutional capacity and arrangement, public financial management and expenditure, human capacity assistance and development effectiveness.

Pasisi says this framework gives Pacific countries a better understanding of its own context of climate financing.

Statement delivered by Nauru on behalf of the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) at the Opening Plenary, 18th Conference of the Parties, Doha, Qatar

26 November, 2012

Ambassador Marlene Moses, Chair of the Alliance of Small Island States

"Thank you very much, Mr. President.

Nauru has the honour to speak on behalf of the Alliance of Small Island States, a coalition of 44 members particularly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change.

AOSIS associates itself with the statement made by Algeria on behalf of the Group of 77 and China, The Gambia on behalf of the Least Developed Countries, and Swaziland on behalf of the African Group.

Mr. President, 

At the outset, please allow me to congratulate you on your election to the presidency and to thank the Government and the people of the State of Qatar for their warm reception. Let me also assure you of our support and our constructive engagement in these negotiations as we seek to ensure a successful outcome here in Doha. 

Mr. President, 

Twenty years ago, in recognition of the dangers of climate change, we came together as a global family and negotiated the UNFCCC. It was then a truly ambitious agreement – the product of a time when humanity seemed ready to tackle the greatest challenges of our generation. 

We agreed that those with the greatest responsibility for the problem and greatest capability to address it would take the lead. It was recognized that developing countries would need assistance, particularly the most vulnerable among us. And we set as our objective, not to slow, not to delay, but to prevent dangerous interference with the climate system.

At its heart, the Convention was a pact we all made to safeguard the lives and life prospects of present and future generations. As we convene here in Doha at what is an important crossroads in our global effort to combat climate change, it is appropriate to reflect on whether or not we have realized our noble ambitions. 

It is difficult to answer in the affirmative when only one month ago, Hurricane Sandy hit our brothers and sisters in the Caribbean and in the United States, resulting in dozens of deaths and billions of dollars in damage, and reminding us that we are all in this together. Many island communities have been experiencing the impacts of more frequent and more intense extreme weather effects for some time, but when the tragedies occur far away from the media’s spotlight, they are too easily ignored or forgotten. 

As we embark on our negotiations over the next few weeks, we must keep in our minds and in our hearts the victims of Hurricane Sandy, many of whom are still trying to put their lives back together, and the countless other members of our global family who are impacted by climate change. 

Mr. President, 

This conference is about nothing less than preserving the fundamental integrity of the climate change regime, and that must begin with a strong second commitment period under the Kyoto Protocol. The Kyoto Protocol is the legal embodiment of the commitment made by Annex I Parties to take the lead in addressing climate change. It is only because of the promise of a second commitment period that the developing world agreed to enter negotiations under the Durban Platform on a new legal agreement “applicable to all.” 

Bringing all countries under one protocol is a fundamental change in the regime with potentially far reaching implications, but it was also part of a larger package. If the developed world shirks its responsibility, then there will be no chance of a meaningful legal agreement under the Durban Platform.

But a second commitment period under the Kyoto Protocol cannot be a second commitment period in name only - it must be ambitious and it must be credible. 

AOSIS Leaders met in New York two short months ago and adopted a Declaration reaffirming our positions on the Kyoto Protocol. Our Heads of State and Government have agreed that a credible second commitment period must include more ambitious QELROs from Annex I Parties, a 5-year commitment period, provisional application, flexibility mechanisms limited to those Parties taking on internationally legally binding mitigation commitments, and lastly, strict limits on the carryover of surplus AAUs, as proposed by the G77 and China. 

The offer from partners currently on the table is deeply inadequate in ambition, would subvert the integrity of the international regime, and thereby jeopardise the entire Durban package. If developed countries cannot live up to their current obligations, how can we have any confidence in a future agreement. 

Mr. President, 

The UNEP Gap Report makes it clear that ambition must be raised urgently. The gap is growing! The world is on a dangerous trajectory that will take us to over 3 degrees of warming and we are running out of time to change course. This is why AOSIS has proposed a comprehensive workplan to continue enhancing mitigation ambition over the next two years. The agreement to undertake such a workplan was another critical element of the Durban package and essential to allowing AOSIS to join consensus. It must remain a central priority for our work here in Doha. 

An outcome in Doha that does not include a substantive set of workplan activities for 2013 to increase pre-2020 mitigation ambition is one that AOSIS cannot accept. As we have said before, a failure to close the pre-2020 mitigation ambition gap would have profound implications for the scale, scope and nature of the necessary commitments and obligations under the new Protocol we have committed to adopt in 2015. An intensive and concerted effort to close the gap must start here in Doha.

Mr. President, 

Long-term finance was the missing element of the Durban package and it must not be forgotten in Doha. Developed countries have committed to mobilize 100 billion dollars per year by 2020 to fund adaptation and mitigation in developing countries. We need concrete commitments towards fulfilling that promise. As it now stands, the Green Climate Fund is an empty shell and the fast start financing period will conclude at the end of this year. 

AOSIS calls for a commitment by developed countries to ensure that there is no gap in the provision of scaled-up, new and predictable climate finance to developing countries after the end of the fast start finance period. In this regard, we call for the commencement of a second fast start-like period from 2013-2015. We also call for common accounting rules to ensure that these funds are truly new and additional. This is critical given the urgent and immediate needs of developing countries that are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change. 

Mr. President, 

Lastly, establishing an international mechanism to address loss and damage from the adverse effects of climate change has long been a priority of AOSIS. It takes on even more urgency in light of the low mitigation ambition reflected in current pledges, the worsening of climate impacts, and the inadequacy of international support for adaptation strategies in vulnerable countries. AOSIS has made a concrete proposal on a mechanism for loss and damage and we look forward to agreeing to establish such a mechanism here in Doha. 

Mr. President, 

AOSIS is here to ensure that our rhetoric is reflected in our actions. How can we accept an outcome that lacks environmental integrity and pat ourselves on the back for having reached an agreement that fundamentally jeopardises our future? The letter and the spirit of the Convention must guide our work here in Doha. We must be able to look our children and grandchildren in the eye, and tell them that we fought to protect a safe and prosperous future for all. 

Thank you, Mr. President."

AOSIS calls for strong political will to back steps made in oceas at Rio+20

By Evan Wasuka, One Television, Solomon Islands

21 June 2012, Rio de Janeiro - The Alliance of Small Islands States is calling for strong political will to back the progress made in commitment for oceans conservation and protection at Rio+20.

Political will must now match the progress made in getting commitments, said AOSIS's Sustainable Development Director, Margo Deiye at a Pacific Small Islands Developing States and Earthjustice side event.

“Rio must just be the beginning. Commitments made here after all are just words on paper until they are implemented.”

She said it was imperative that countries leave the talks with renewed political will to implement longstanding commitments to restore and protect coastal habitats and marine environments.

Oceans, she said are vital for sustainable development especially for countries in the Pacific.

"We can’t develop if we don’t have food to eat, water to drink, or land to build on."

In a statement the chair of AOSIS, Ambassador Marlene Moses, the Permanent Representative to the United Nations from Nauru said there were gains for SIDS in the outcome document.

“The agreement to convene the Third International Conference for the Sustainable Development of SIDS in 2014 is an important outcome and it will provide a crucial opportunity to highlight the existential threat many small islands face from sea level rise, as well as the devastating effects ocean acidification, coral bleaching, and other climate change impacts. The Pacific looks forward to hosting this meeting.

“Heartening progress has also been made in Rio on fisheries conservation. For many islands, fisheries are fundamental to our national economies and are an essential source of protein for our diets.

“The new commitment to identify strategies that further assist SIDS in developing the capacity to sustainably manage and realize the benefits of sustainable fisheries have the potential to revitalize many national economies.

Ambassador Moses said ocean acidification is an international crisis and countries must work together to urgently reduce greenhouse gas emissions and work collectively to build the resilience of marine ecosystems and of the communities whose livelihoods depend on them.

Australian initiative to declare marine protected areas welcomed by Nauru

By Makereta Komai, PACNEWS Editor in Rio de Janeiro

19 June 2012, Rio de Janeiro - Australia’s announcement to create the world's largest network of marine protected areas, covering 1.3 million square kilometres of the Great Barrier Reef and the Coral Sea marine reserve, has been welcomed by Nauru.

And, Nauru’s Margo Deiye, speaking at a side event at the Rio+20 conference here in Rio de Janeiro said an initiative like this by the Julia Gillard government is encouraging for Pacific Small Island Developing States (PSIDS) who are championing the concept of a ‘blue economy.’

“As you know, the people of the Pacific are closely connected to the oceans. About half the citizens of the Pacific Islands live in coastal areas. Papua New Guinea and the Solomon islands are part of the Coral Triangle, the global center of coral reef diversity with more species of fish and corals than anywhere else on the planet.

“For our countries, healthy coral reefs and marine ecosystems are the foundation of coastal communities’ livelihoods, our culture, critical to local food security, and, in many cases, major contributors to our national economies through fishing and tourism revenues.

Healthy reefs, Deiye said are essential for marine biodiversity and for protecting coastal communities and infrastructure from storms which are ever more intense and damaging as the oceans warm and sea level rises.

Citizens of Pacific SIDS will suffer in terms of both food, economic and physical security as a result of coral reef degradation, undermining our countries’ opportunities and aspirations for sustainable development.

Ms Deiye said ocean acidification is a fundamental threat - alongside climate change and sea level rise - to our communities.

Pacific SIDS have championed proposals to build marine resilience to ocean acidification.

That is why the Pacific is well represented at the Rio+20 to seek political will to implement what has already been agreed in relation to marine and coastal resources.

“We need stronger action now to restore fish stocks, so that they are healthier and more resilient as the seas acidify.

“We need real action on the ground and on the seas. Rio must just be the beginning. Commitments made here must be implemented on the ground. And we need commitments of capacity development and support so that developing countries can build resilient marine ecosystems.

Pacific waters sustaining local livelihoods

The Parties to the Nauru Agreement have adopted measure to limit tuna catches, through a “vessel day scheme” to reduce fishing pressure, and ban on high seas fishing, among other measures. These are big commitment by small countries to restoring tuna stocks – as a continued source of income for sustainable development.

“If small countries like the Pacific SIDS that are so highly dependent on fisheries income can take these measures, we would like to see other countries commit to greater efforts to reduce fishing pressure and restore stocks.” said Ms Deiye.

Agenda 21, penned here 20 years ago, and the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation both laid the way forward – but implementation has been sorely lacking, she said.

Nauru ready to take over AOSIS chair

By Makereta Komai for Climate Pasifika in Panama

Ambassador Marlene Moses

02 October 2011 Panama --- Taking over as lead negotiator for the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) on climate change will be a challenge but Nauru’s top diplomat at the United Nations, Ambassador Marlene Moses is ready to rise up to the challenge.

Ambassador Moses takes over the reign from another equally able and strong negotiator, Ambassador Dessima Williams of Grenada, who has served as chair of AOSIS since 2007.

“I will be filling an incredibly big shoe. Grenada has set the bar very high and we can only do our best to match what Grenada has achieved on behalf of 43 countries.

“Ambassador Williams is a wonderful woman. Her dedication, personality and passion have reflected in the work she has done for AOSIS, said Ambassador Moses.

The Nauru diplomat, who has spent six years representing her island nation at the United Nations in New York, said she will continue to draw on the experiences of Grenada in the transitional period.

“I can only build on her legacy. She is a wonderful negotiator. During the transition, we will draw on her wisdom and guidance as we begin to chair AOSIS.

Ambassador Moses will also rely on the support and experiences of her colleagues in New York.

“My colleagues in New York have given me 120 percent of support. Nauru cannot let the Pacific down and we will not let them down, a confident incoming chair of AOSIS told Climate Pasifika in Panama.

On what Nauru’s chairmanship means for the Pacific, Ambassador Moses said, “This will be an opportunity for our region to raise its profile in terms of climate change”

“Nauru has capacity limitations, so we will be looking to our Pacific colleagues to provide us with expertise to chair the 43-memebr group.

“In this regard, Nauru has placed a number of advertisements in key outlets in the Pacific to advertise for a chief negotiator, deputy chief negotiator, science advisor and economic climate adviser.

“We are hoping that the Pacific will take this opportunity and come forward and support Nauru as AOSIS chair.

“Climate change is critical to the survival of Pacific Island Countries and we hope that Pacific Islanders will apply for these positions to be based in New York for the duration of Nauru’s term as chair, said Ambassador Moses.

On the future of the Kyoto Protocol, the incoming AOSIS chair said there won’t be major changes to the current AOSIS negotiating positions.

“Nauru’s position and the Pacific position are well embedded in the AOSIS position, in terms of temperature, of the Kyoto Protocol and the ambitious reduction targets.

“We are not making changes to the AOSIS position but building on what Grenada has achieved during its chairmanship. I think having this opportunity for the Pacific to be directly involved will add another level or a different perspective because the Pacific is one of the most vulnerable regions.

“So we bring in that urgency, we bring in that impetus that climate change negotiations cannot fail. “It’s the only legal framework available to us and we need this to continue after 2012. If I can use a quotation from a civil society in South Africa at the talks yesterday, ‘we don’t want the Kyoto Protocol to die in our soil.’ And this is exactly where we are coming from. We don’t want the Protocol to die a premature death, said Ambassador Moses.

Q and A with Ambassador Marlene Moses

From 01 January 2012, the Pacific takes over as the lead negotiator for the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) on climate change. This role has been taken up Nauru’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations in New York, Ambassador Marlene Moses. She takes over from another able and strong negotiator, Ambassador Dessima Williams. Here she shares some of her initial thoughts with PACNEWS Editor and Climate Pasifika journalist, Makereta Komai.

Ambassador Marlene Moses

Q: Ambassador Moses you will take over as chair of the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) in January next year. This will be an important responsibility not just for you but for the Pacific as a whole. What are your expectations?
Ambassador Moses: Nauru takes over the chair of AOSIS from 01 January 2012. In terms of the expectations for the Pacific, this will be an opportunity for the Pacific to raise its profile in terms of climate change. Nauru is a small and modest mission in New York. It has capacity limitations, so we will be looking to our Pacific colleagues to help us in chairing AOSIS, providing us with the expertise that we need as Nauru chairs the 43-memebr group. In this regard, Nauru has placed a number of advertisements in key outlets to advertise mainly for a chief negotiator, deputy chief negotiator, science advisor and economic climate adviser. We are hoping that the Pacific will take this opportunity and come forward and support Nauru as AOSIS chair. Climate change is critical to the survival of Pacific Island Countries and we hope that Pacific Islanders will apply for these positions to be based in New York for the duration of Nauru’s term as chair.


Q: The advertisements have gone out?
Ambassador Moses: Yes they have gone out. First of all, we have written to all Pacific Islands that are members of AOSIS. We have placed ads in the Pacific Law Journal and written to SPREP, SPC and PIFS where most of our experts are based. We are also providing an opportunity for the Pacific to be directly involved in mapping and driving the climate change negotiations. This is important because of our survival and the future of our nations must be central to the climate change negotiations.


Q: Any responses so far?
Ambassador Moses: We have received some applications and we are encouraging Pacific Islanders to apply for these jobs. Applications close on October 14.


Q: Apart from your push for more Pacific Islanders to be involved in climate change negotiations, what are some other important issues for the Pacific, especially now in the lead up to Durban, there are a lot of discussions on the future of the Kyoto Protocol?
Ambassador Moses: Everything is relevant to the Pacific, especially what you just mentioned about the future of the Kyoto Protocol post 2012. Nauru’s position and the Pacific position are well embedded in the AOSIS position, in terms f temperature, of the Kyoto Protocol and the ambitious reduction targets. We are not making changes to the AOSIS position but building on what Grenada has achieved during its chairmanship. I think having this opportunity for the Pacific to be directly involved will add another level or a different perspective because the Pacific is one of the most vulnerable regions. So we bring in that urgency, we bring in that impetus that climate change negotiations cannot fail. It’s the only legal framework available to us and we need this to continue after 2012. If I can use a quotation from a civil society in South Africa at the talks yesterday, ‘we don’t want the Kyoto Protocol to die in our soil.’ And this is exactly where we are coming from. We don’t want the Protocol to die a premature death.


Q: There are some discussions of a transitional period for Kyoto Protocol after it expires in 2012. Do we accept that?
Ambassador Moses: I think we need to look at that further but right now the survival and future of our island countries are central to how we chair the AOSIS group.


Q: Ban Ki Moon was in the Pacific a few weeks ago and in Kiribati he said the island was the ‘frontline of the frontline’ states impacted by climate change. That is the situation of many Pacific Island countries, we are the frontline states.
Ambassador Moses: Absolutely. The UN Secretary General, I believe after his visit to the Pacific now totally understands and appreciates the urgency of our situation. In New York, two years ago, we ran a Security Council resolution that linked climate change to peace and security. In July this year there was a debate at the UN Security Council and my President, Marcus Stephens was there on behalf of Pacific Island countries. We managed to get the Security Council to recognise that climate change was a security threat. We are hoping that during our term as AOSIS chair, the issue will be highlighted, respecting off course that not all AOSIS member countries share the same position


Q: I remember when Nauru took up the issue, you featured prominently at the UN talking about it
Ambassador Moses: I think Nauru’s name was profiled because we were the chair of PSIDs (Pacific Small Island Developing States in New York. But I have to tell you and place on record that it wasn’t just Nauru but the coalition of 11 PSIDS represented at the United Nations in New York. All of us with our modest missions did our best because we realised that climate change needs to be featured and promoted at the UN and the world over. If we fail, it undermines all the development gains we have achieved in the past years.


Q: That’s exactly what your President said in New York recently. He called on the UN Security Council to take further action. What did he mean?
Ambassador Moses: We are asking the Secretary General to appoint a Special Representative and we are also asking the Secretary General to assess the capacity of the UN system to see f it can respond to the security implications of climate change.


Q: So you see your role as incoming chair of AOSIS as a critical moment for the Pacific to again lift its profile to another level on climate change internationally?
Ambassador Moses: We hope this is one of the things we are able to push during our chairmanship.


Q: The current chair, Ambassador Dessima Williams has done a great job during her term?
Ambassador Moses: Absolutely. It’s a supremely difficult job. We will be filling incredibly big shoes. Grenada has set the bar very high and we can only do our best to match what Grenada has achieved on behalf f 43 countries. She is a wonderful woman. Her dedication, personality and passion have reflected in the work she has done for AOSIS.


Q: As a woman?
Ambassador Moses: Even great. I can only build on her legacy. She is a wonderful negotiator. During the transition, we will draw on her wisdom and guidance as we begin to chair AOSIS.


Q: Support from the Pacific on your chairmanship?
Ambassador Moses: 120 percent! We are grateful to Pacific Island Countries, especially my Ambassadorial colleague in New York who have given me all their support. Nauru cannot let them down and will not let them down!

Italy and the Pacific unveil development finance model

By Stanley Simpson, Climate Pasifika Media

9 December Cancun Mexico - The government of Italy and Pacific island countries today unveiled a model for international cooperation they say can generate action on the ground at remarkable speed and is an example of what to do in practice to address the threat of climate change.

Further – they say the project ensures ownership to communities most affected by the negative effects of climate change.

The partnership between Italy and 14 Pacific island countries is in the area of renewable energy projects with some pioneering, dynamic and groundbreaking projects being undertaken across the region.

It started with a signing of a Memorandum of Understanding in 2007, and was further strengthened in 2008 when the government of Austria and the Municipality of Milan in Italy also joined and contributed to the partnership.

Italy’s Minister for the Environment, Land and Sea Stefania Prestigiacomo revealed today that more than 20 renewable energy projects have been designed and implemented in the 14 countries.

“These projects are contributing to assess the islands vulnerability to long term climate change effects to implement adaptation measures to strengthen the island energy infrastructure through the development of the local renewable energy potential,” she said. “It also ensures increased access to energy services of the islands population particularly for the remote rural communities."

Prestigiacomo stressed that the projects are designed at local scale and are strictly based on islands priorities and specific needs.

Nauru MP, the Hon. Dominic Tabuna in response said Italy and the Pacific have pioneered a unique development system model that delivers tangible results on the ground in a fraction of time. He outlined several reasons for the success of the model:

1. It works because it relies on streamlined vetting and approval process conducted directly by the donors and the recipients. This arrangement avoids unnecessary bottlenecks encountered under other models – where multiple layers of review – often by third parties – delay the commencement of critical projects

2. It works because it establishes clear funding priorities – in this case – renewable energy – giving clear guidance to project planners while also facilitating the review and approval process

3. It works because it operates out of New York at the United Nations. Tabuna says the Pacific challenge has always been its geographical remoteness which makes international coordination very difficult. Only in New York does the Pacific have the permanent presence of 11 Pacific island countries.

“The programme has been a wonderful success. We think it provides an alternative to multi-layered models and could provide a valuable model for the delivery of climate change finance,” says Tabuna.

He stated his belief that this was the single most effective funding model for the Pacific.

“It is responsive to the challenges we currently face in the Pacific. The model has the potential to usher in a new era of development assistance based on mutual trust and cooperation."

Leaders of Samoa, Nauru and Kiribati tell their stories and seek political leadership on climate change

By Makereta Komai, Climate Pasifika Media in Cancun, Mexico

Leaders Dialogue image courtesy of UNFCCC

09 DECEMBER 2010 CANCUN --- Samoan Prime Minister did not mince his words when he told the international community ‘we need your technology but don’t use the islands as a testing ground.’

Prime Minister Tuilaepa Sailele Malielegaoi was part of a high level panel of world leaders that’s simultaneously trying to find solutions to reach an acceptable outcome here in Cancun that will reverse the climate crisis.

“Technology must be appropriate and affordable for us in the islands. We should not be used as a dumping ground for obsolete technology, said the Samoan Prime Minister. 

"To benefit from these technologies, we cannot do it alone but need the partnership of the private ector and the multilateral donors", he added.

Also on the panel were the Presidents of Kiribati and Nauru, who spoke from the heart and reminded the international community of their obligations to ensure their nations remain on the face of the earth.

“I have been asked several times in parliament about resources to build sea walls to protect the outer islands from rising sea level. My replies have been yes, we have done the studies and the costs involved but we have no resources."

“It’s now a year after Copenhagen, and we still have not received any o f the promised money", said President Tong.

The Kiribati leader, who is a well known advocate for vulnerable states said the situation is so grim for Kiribati that, ‘as a nation, we might not even be part of these negotiations in the next decade.’

He suggested to the chair of the dialogue, the President of Mexico, the need for world leaders to intervene and rescue the negotiations.

“I don’t know whether it’s too late in the process now but the climate change negotiations need a political and humanitarian decision.  I don’t know whether we need to convince the negotiators but, we as Leaders need to sit down and make decisions on issued that negotiators cannot resolve", said President Tong.

Kiribati did not support the Copenhagen Accord in 2009 but recently associated itself with the Accord to access the fast start finance package that accompanied the Accord.

Similarly, President Marcus Stephen of Nauru, with few words expressed the gravity of the effects of climate change on his home island

“Our priority is survival before financing,  Financing is perfect for us to adapt to the changes that we are seeing but survival is our immediate need."

President Nauru was responding to the comments by the President Felipe Calderon who said that ‘perfect may be the enemy of the good.’

He rejected any notion that the small island nations were trying to ‘derail’ the negotiations but merely putting their case for the world to see.

“1.5 degree Celsius is what the science is saying and we cannot ignore that", said President Stephen.

Pacific Island nations, together with other small island developing states in the Caribbean and Indian Ocean have lobbied for global temperatures be limited to well below 1.5 degree Celsius and concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere stabilise at around 350 parts per million. 

The group of 43 nations also want global greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) to peak by 2015 and decline thereafter. They also want Annex 1 parties to the UN Climate Convention (rich and industrialised nations) to reduce their GHG emissions by more than 45 percent below 1990 levels by 2020 and more than 95 percent by 2050, given their historical responsibility.



 Below is the Statement made by the Hon. Tuilaepa Sailele Malilegaoi, the Prime Minister of Samoa at the second Panel of "Heads of State or Government Dialogues" on "The struggle against climate change, what would our legacy be?" at Moon Palace Hotel, Cancun, Mexico, 9 December 2010.

Mr President,

Excellencies,

Ladies and Gentlemen

Leaders who spoke before me had given us rare insights on how we should own up individually and collectively to our responsibility to protect our environment for future generations.

My input, by necessity, will be through the perspectives of Samoa, a small island developing state in the Pacific Ocean. Already we have quite a diverse and colorful menu and hopefully my contribution will give it a Pacific tropical flavor.

Let me respond to the five questions posed one by one.  

1) Which characteristics should an economic development model have in order for it to be sustainable?

From Samoa’s perspective, development must be country owned and country led and should be a bottom-up approach through an extensive consultation and negotiation process utilizing both traditional channels and structures. Moreover, development should be country focused & country tailored taking into account the physical, socio-economic and political circumstances and capacities as well as the aspirations of the people.  

Underpinning all this is the need for bold leadership and a stable government capable and willing to provide an enabling environment for people’s views to be articulated and to help strengthen the private sector’s role as the engine of growth.

In the context of climate change, we need to bear in mind that as much as the challenges of climate change are the product of man’s actions, the existing technologies, lifestyles and level of consumption by society, one hopes that these same challenges will bring forth a wave of innovative solutions to help mitigate against the negative impacts of climate change.

Importantly, what seems to have endured in any model, be it economic, social, military or political is an integrated approach that allows innovation to build on and strengthen indigenous, local or existing systems.  As local ownership of any policy or model, adaptation or mitigation, is critical to its long terms success.

2) How can we ensure that there is sustained and sufficient financing for climate change in the long term?

Samoa’s adaptation and mitigation funding needs will continue to outstrip the level of resources available to it at any given time.

The Global Environment Facility (GEF) as the Convention’s financial mechanism had a successful 5^th replenishment. This is positive news for most of the Pacific island states that will get national allocations of GEF resources for the first time, after being recipients for many years mainly of enabling activities. As well, the decision to trial out on a pilot basis direct access of parties through accredited national or regional implementing agencies is long overdue.

Outside of GEF, there is funding potential in the Adaptation Fund under the Kyoto Protocol. The line of parties queuing up with requests for financial resources under this modality is getting longer, not shorter, and the current level of resources is insufficient to accommodate all the requests.

How can the financing be sustained?

This can partly be achieved by all, or most of the following being realized;

• the full monetization of the US$5.5 billion replenishment pledges for GEF 5
• the need for clarity on the level of Fast Start Finance not yet committed and unearmarked and specific criteria for accessing them,
• Possible increase of the current level of CDM proceeds to the Adaptation Fund
• More development partners donating generously to the Adaptation Fund
• Replenishment of the Least Developed Countries Fund and the Special Climate Change Fund respectively through an assessed contribution formula, and not via voluntary pledges as currently is the case;
• Pursuing bilateral or region-specific arrangements for funding towards climate-related projects
• Coming into force of the new Green/Climate Fund  etc

3 What are some of the trends in mitigation and adaptation?

The Pacific island countries are heavily reliant on fossil fuels for energy, electricity and transportation, yet their 0.03 % of global emissions is relatively insignificant to solving of the climate change problem.

This however has not deterred Pacific island countries from undertaking both regional and national level mitigation projects on a voluntary basis. Samoa is amongst these countries, and has adopted a national energy policy to become carbon-free by 2020. Similarly, Tonga, Vanuatu, Cook Islands, Marshall Islands and others are undertaking national level initiatives under various funding mechanisms.

The magnitude and cost of climate change and the fact that small island states are right up there with the rest doing their share to adapt and mitigate against the adverse effects of climate change within the confines of limited resources availability, sometimes at great expense, underscore their determination to be part of the global solution. 

On the adaptation side, some key initiatives in the Pacific include the mainstreaming of climate change into sectoral and to national development planning, integrating climate change with disaster risk reduction and education and awareness through information dissemination and capacity building.

Renewable energy, ocean energy, solar power and hydro electricity all have appeals for the Pacific islands given the plentiful supply of some of these inexhaustible resources like sunlight, wind, waves and ocean etc. Yet start up costs and overall maintenance can be challenges though not insurmountable.

 4) Is existing technology enough to face the challenges of climate change?

Technology must be appropriate and affordable. It must be suitable to the conditions in the islands both in terms of the weather, terrain, population size and even distance from sources of expertise and supplies for maintenance purposes. Importantly, the islands should not be used as testing or dumping grounds for obsolete, inferior and untested technology no matter how it was procured.

A genuine concern is the relatively small sizes of the islands, their markets, populations and the lack of economies of scales.  Combined, they will serve to discourage potential investors from investing or selling climate-related technology in large quantities in the islands. Effectively this means that for the islands to benefit from any new technology, they will have to access it via partnerships with the Public sector, i.e. developed countries through bilateral or other funding arrangements.

5) How can we teach the future generations to face these changes?

Samoa has been concerned with the lack of progress on the issue of education and awareness under the Convention and is happy to see that there is new impetus to address this.

We have been working on a number of initiatives to mainstream climate change into our school curriculum and found that the best approach is not to have a stand-alone climate change course or an elective course. The more efficient way is to include climate change modules with the existing curriculum that is being taught for the purpose of national exams. It is feasible to incorporate climate change issues in different types of lessons, from mathematics’, social science and physical science to literacy and expressive arts.  We need to assist the teachers by facilitating easy access to lesson modules they can use in the context of teaching towards the national exams.

The regional meteorology work is assisted by installing weather stations at schools that are maintained and monitored by the students who in turn gain a better understanding of climate variability and climate change.

A climate change documentary festival organized 2 years ago by SPREP resulted in 17 movies produced to educate the people of the industrialized countries of the stark reality that Pacific islands face. Once they realize the importance of Annex1 countries taking action, perhaps they could put greater pressure on their national leaders to help stop this climate change disaster.  

Alternatively, may be a summary version of the movies can be produced for kindergarten levels. Perhaps by aiming our message at a more simple audience we could drive home the message more forcefully that inaction is placing small island states in greater peril than people will care to admit.

Finally, what should our legacy be?

It has been a long and frustrating journey of high expectations and shattered hopes especially for small island developing states. They contributed the least to the causes of climate change, yet stand to suffer the most and least able to adapt effectively to the adverse impacts.

Notwithstanding these grim realities, Pacific small island nations continue to negotiate in good faith. Even if everyone deserts the negotiating table for whatever reason, we will continue to be there and hopeful that reason will prevail, and the time will come when we are finally able to turn a global problem into a global opportunity, where our focus should be on the positive of climate change, not on its negative consequences and when, as the true world leaders we are, we should just fix our mistakes and those of our predecessors, after all, the buck stops here and climate change is happening under our watch. That’s should be our legacy.