The Pacific: why it matters

Coral Pasisi

Senior Advisor to the Director General of SPC, member of the Climate Security Experts Network and the Global Strategic Advisory Board on Climate Security and Foresight, and former Regional Advisor to the Green Climate Fund’s Pacific Regional Advisor and private consultant.

We have much in common – our region is a vast, blue Pacific continent, with 96 per cent ocean and providing half of the oxygen required for human existence.

Our 24 countries and territories – including Australia – have jurisdictional responsibility for a combined 30 per cent of the world’s exclusive economic zones.

We share the governance of this great resource, as well as responsibility for its health and longevity.

Since 2009, Pacific leaders have stated in their annual communiqué that climate change is the single greatest threat to the region. Its consequences are manifesting in several ways across the Pacific, the combination of which is very troubling.

One is jurisdictional certainty: as sea levels rise, the integrity of exclusive economic zones (EEZs) are at risk for Pacific nations. Base points for defining these are often features like shoals or small sandy keys, which are vulnerable to climate change and sea level rise. As a result, there is uncertainty around whether countries might lose those EEZs as base points erode. There isn't any greater threat than the potential loss of one’s entire nation or jurisdiction as established under international law.

Food security and productivity is also a major risk. Long before islands go underwater, they become so unproductive through saltwater intrusion and coastal erosion that they can no longer sustain Pacific communities, more than 50 per cent of which rely on coastal food sources.

Climate change is also threatening our blue economy. Many Pacific nations derive a significant portion of their revenue from tuna fishing licences: we produce over 50 per cent of the world’s tuna supply and manage the last sustainably harvested tuna stocks left in the world. Climate change threatens the migratory paths of these stocks, moving them into the high seas, where – ironically – the countries producing the most greenhouse gases will source them for free.

There is also the increased frequency and intensity of disasters, which Australia is very familiar with. Pacific islands are simultaneously the most exposed and the least insured in the world against these events. The capacity to recover from these compounding disasters is limited, and every event sends states further into debt. 

There are many other risks, including displacement and forced migration, which are happening across the region.

This is the reality for Pacific nations. Proposals to address climate challenges (called climate financing) require complex project proposals and copious amounts of data communities often don’t have. If they are finally approved three to five years later, the limited in-country capacity to implement the project has often moved on, or the need has changed.

This is a very painful and frustrating cycle. Climate financing needs to not be project-based, but injected directly into a country’s own national systems (like budgetary support or trust funds).

When we talk about capacity building, we have to move beyond just training – it has to be about capacity supplementation and retention for small countries. Climate financing should be used to ensure we have sufficient people on the ground to understand, plan for and respond to climate change in a sustainable way.  

The threats facing the Pacific are threats facing us all. We have to work together – there is no choice. Even with our combined capabilities and resources, we may still fall short of addressing these challenges; but without our collective efforts, we will certainly have very little change of success.