Review of Economic and Livelihood Impact Assessments

All rights for commercial/for profit reproduction or translation, in any form, reserved. SPREP

authorises the partial reproduction or translation of this material for scientific, educational or research

purposes, provided SPREP and the source document are properly acknowledged. Permission to

reproduce the document and/or translate in whole, in any form, whether for commercial/for profit or

non-profit purposes, must be requested in writing. Original SPREP artwork may not be altered or

separately published without permission.

Original text: English

Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme Cataloguing-in-publication data

Institutional capacity within Melanesian countries to effectively respond to climate change impacts, with
a focus on Vanuatu and the Solomon Islands / by Frank Wickham, Jeff Kinch and Padma Lal.

Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme

I. Frank Wickham. II. Jeff Kinch. III. Padma Lal. IV. Title. V. Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Envi-
ronment Programme. VI. Series.

1. Climate Change. 2. Vanuatu. 3. Solomon Islands. 4. Socio-economic Impacts. 5. Institutional
Arrangements.

ISBN: 978-982-04-0392-5

Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme

PO Box 240, Apia, Samoa

Tel: +685 21929

Fax: +685 20231

Email: sprep@sprep.org

http://www.sprep.org/

Prepared for publication by

Ricardo Morris/Freesoul Media, Suva

Table of Contents

Page

List of Tables

List of Figures

List of Boxes

Acronyms

Acknowledgement

Executive summary

1:0

Introduction and background

1:1

Melanesian paradox – well endowed and very vulnerable

1:2

Working definitions and approaches

2:0

Institutional Capacity Assessment Methodology

2:1

Assessment framework and scope

2.2

Key institutional variables for use in a spatially derived vulnerability
assessment to gauge institutional capacity.

3:0

Institutional capacity in Melanesia – existing capacity, impediments, priority gaps

3:1

Government and community structures

3:2

Political commitment to address climate change impacts

3:3

Public awareness and understanding

3:4

Lead agency arrangement

3:5

Participation in global and regional agendas

3:6

Regulatory framework

3:7

Policies and strategies

3:8

Coordination mechanisms

3:9

Programming

3:10

Mainstreaming

3:11

V&A Assessment

3:12

Participation and partnerships

3:13

Knowledge management

4:0

Opportunities to strengthen institutional capacity, and implementation needs.

4:1

Short to medium term institutional capacity development options and

opportunities

4:1:1

Raising public awareness and understanding

4:1:2

Strengthening capacity of national lead agencies

4:1:3

Review, revise and develop policies and strategies

4:1:4

Strengthen coordination mechanisms

4:1:5

Develop national programs

4:1:6

Broaden and strengthen participation and partnerships

4:1:7

Strengthen V&A capacity

4.1.8

Mainstreaming

4:1:9

Improve knowledge management

4:2

Longer term institutional capacity development measures and

implementation needs
4:2:1

Strengthen links between government and communities for

V&A work

4:2:2

Strengthening political commitment

4:2:3

Enhance participation in global agendas

4:2:4

Reform and strengthen regulatory framework

5:0

Support needed to implement recommended capacity development measures.

6:0

Conclusion

References

List of Tables

Table 1:

Melanesian countries HDI compared to Samoa (2005)

Table 2:

Past programs and projects involving major consultations on climate change and
related issues in Fiji, PNG, Vanuatu and Solomon Islands

Table 3:

Formal government and community structures in Fiji, PNG, Solomon Islands and
Vanuatu

Table 4:

Extent of political commitment by government in countries of Melanesia
to addressing climate change impacts.

Table 5:

Global and regional climate change related Multilateral Environmental
Agreements (MEA) and agendas that Pacific Island Countries are involved in.

Table 6:

Review of Environment Legislation in Melanesian Countries

Table 7:

Climate change and related policies and strategies in countries of Melanesia.

Table 8:

Status of UNCCD NAP and DRM NAP in four countries of Melanesia.

Table 9:

V&A Assessments tools used in the Pacific

Table 10:

The established shift of disaster management to disaster risk reduction agenda

Table 11:

Vanuatu DRR and DM NAP – Example of a Strategy and its related Action,
Expected Results and Performance Indicator.

Table 12:

GEF PAS Climate Change Adaptation Projects to be implemented in
PICs over the coming years beginning 2009

Annexes

Annex 1:

Specific Tasks for the Institutional Capacity Assessment under the Bishop

Museum Service Agreement

Annex 2:

People and teams consulted in Vanuatu and Solomon Islands

Annex 3:

Vanuatu National Advisory Committee on Climate Change Terms

of Reference

Annex 4:

Coral Triangle Initiative’s Climate Change Adaptation Measures

Annex 5:

Action Plan for the Implementation of the Pacific Islands Framework

for Action on Climate Change 2006-2015

Acronyms

ADB

Asian Development Bank

AusAID

Australian Assistance for International Development

CBDAMPIC

Capacity Building for the Development of Adaptation Measures in Pacific
Island Countries

CBSI

Central Bank of Solomon Islands

CLIP

Climate Livelihood and Production in the South-West Pacific

COP

Conference of the Parties

CRP

Comprehensive Reform Program

CV&A

Community-based Vulnerability and Adaptation Assessment

DEH

Department of Environment and Heritage

European Commission

EIA

Environmental Impact Assessment

EMCA

Environmental Management and Conservation Act

GEF

Global Environment Facility

GDP

Gross Domestic Product

HDI

Human Development Index

ICZM

Integrated Coastal Zone Management

IGCI

International Global Change Institute

IPCC

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

KGA

Kastom Gaden Association

LDC

Least Developed Country

LEG

Least Developed Country Working Group

LGC

Local Government Councils

LMMA

Locally Managed Marine Areas

MECM

Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Meteorology

MoH

Ministry of Health

MTDS

Medium Term Development Strategy

NACCC

National Advisory Committee on Climate Change

NAPA

National Adaptation Programmes of Action

NCSA

National Capacity Self Assessment

NDMO

National Disaster Management Office

NGO

Non-government Organisations

NSRC

National Scientific Research Council

OECD

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

PAA

Priorities and Action Agenda

PACC

Pacific Adaptation to Climate Change

PICCAP

Pacific Islands Climate Change Adaptation Project

PICT

Pacific Islands Countries and Territories

PNG

Papua New Guinea

RAMSI

Regional Assistance Mission to the Solomon Islands

SEG

Scientific Expert Group on Climate Change

SoE

State of the Environment

SPREP

Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme

TAR

Third Assessment Report

UNCBD

United Nations Convention on Biodiversity

UNCCD

United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification

UNDP

United Nations Development Programme

UNFCCC

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

V&A

Vulnerability and Adaptation Assessment

VEU

Vanuatu Environment Unit

VFD

Vanuatu Fisheries Division

VLD

Vanuatu Lands Department

VNMS

Vanuatu National Meteorological Services

Acknowledgements

On behalf of the Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP) the authors wish
to acknowledge and express deep appreciation to the following organisations and people:

The MacArthur Foundation for generously providing funding to the Bishop Museum that has enabled this
Institutional Capacity Assessment to be carried out and reported on. The Foundation’s assistance will cer-
tainly go a long way in assisting the governments and people of Melanesia better prepare for the predicted
impacts of climate change on the coastal and marine ecosystems. SPREP is privileged to be involved in
an initiative funded by the MacArthur Foundation.

The Bishop Museum for placing special emphasis on the Melanesia sub-region with its globally important
biodiversity and diverse cultures that are threatened by the impacts of climate change and enabling the var-
ious scientific and socio-economic and capacity assessments to be undertaken. SPREP values the collab-
orations with the Bishop Museum and looks forward to future partnership opportunities.

The Vanuatu National Meteorological Service and the Solomon Islands Ministry of Environment, Con-
servation and Meteorology for the permission and support that has enabled the in-country consultations
and gathering of information for this report.

The people consulted who provided very useful information, insights and experiences that have greatly
informed and enriched this report.

Executive summary

t is now widely acknowledged that the causes of climate change are mostly anthropogenic in nature
and that its effects will have far reaching consequences across the globe. Governments have been ex-
horted by the world’s scientists to expedite and scale up implementation of mitigation measures and

prepare to adapt in order to “avoid the unmanageable and manage the unavoidable” (SEG 2007). This will
require concerted and coordinated action by all parties affected at the global, regional, sub-regional, and
national and community levels. While international cooperation is essential, each country will need to pre-
pare for and adapt to environmental and socio-economic changes brought about by changes in tempera-
tures, sea level, weather patterns, etc, which are expected to impact people and environment in different
ways. The extent to which a country is able to mobilise and manage resources to mitigate and/or adapt
to these impacts will depend largely on the capacity of its institutions and people, commonly described
in this report as “institutional capacity”.

This report presents findings from an assessment of institutional capacity within Melanesian countries to
address climate change impacts. The assessment covers the four independent countries of Melanesia with
a particular focus on the archipelagic countries of Vanuatu and the Solomon Islands.

The assessment has been made possible with funding from the MacArthur Foundation through the Ber-
nice P. Bishop Museum, commonly known as the Bishop Museum and executed by the Secretariat of the
Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP) during August to December 2008. The John D. and
Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, commonly known the “MacArthur Foundation,.” has identified
Melanesia as one of its geographic priorities and is focussed on conservation of biodiversity in marine and
coastal areas.

The Bishop Museum is a leading natural and cultural institution in the Pacific involved in a range of her-
itage and development initiatives including conserving the Pacific’s cultures and the environment. SPREP
is a Pacific inter-governmental organisation with a mandate to “promote cooperation in the Pacific Islands
region and to provide assistance in order to protect and improve the environment and to ensure sustainable
development for present and future generations.”

The institutional capacity assessment involved a review of literature on global climate change agenda and
issues; capacity development; institutional capacity; national programmes and projects and vulnerability
and adaptation (V&A) assessment work undertaken in Melanesia; and in-country consultations in the two
archipelagic countries of Melanesia – Vanuatu (Port Vila) and the Solomon Islands (Honiara). A frame-
work used for the assessment distinguishes two categories of institutional capacity, each with a set of
components. These two main categories include: “enabling institutional capacity,” or the minimum capacity
needed to provide an enabling environment to support V&A work; and “adaptive institutional capacity,”
i.e. the capacity needed to coordinate, integrate, mainstream and up-scale actions to implement vulnerability
and adaptation assessments as well as to prioritise and implement adaptation actions. The assessment also
benefited findings from consultations undertaken and documented as part of the GEF-funded National
Capacity Self Assessment (NCSA) project, Second National Communication Project and the National
Adaptation Program of Action (NAPA) project.

The report begins with an overview of vulnerability situation in Melanesia, establishes working definitions
for the main terms and concepts used in the assessment and presents a summary review of institutional
capacity in the independent states of Melanesia to respond to climate change impacts on the coastal and
marine environments including identification of the main institutional capacity impediments and gaps. This
is followed by recommendations on opportunities and options to develop institutional capacity which are
grouped into immediate/short-term and on-going measures. Recommendations are also provided as to
the types of assistance that will be needed to implement institutional capacity initiatives and key institu-
tional variables that can be used in a spatially derived vulnerability assessment to gauge institutional re-
silience.

Melanesia is a development paradox. While rich in biodiversity and cultural diversity and well endowed with

renewable and non-renewable natural resources, it is also a very vulnerable sub-region when assessed
against a number of development indicators and the predictions of relatively higher effects of tempera-
tures and sea-level rise in the future, compared to other regions of the Pacific. Its human development
indicators are very low compared with neighbours in the Pacific that are less endowed with natural re-
sources. Its track record with governance, transparency and gender is poor, giving rise to a general situation
of very low social capital. On the political front its governments have experienced military and civilian
coups, periods of social unrest and political instability. The culturally diverse population, with the majority
living in rural areas, has the potential to play a greater role in social and economic development but is
poorly linked to government systems and services.

There is an urgent need to strengthen institutional capacity in the countries of Melanesia to implement
measures that address the impacts of climate change on coastal and marine environments. The assessment
has found that there is an emerging “enabling institutional capacity” to address climate change impacts:
appropriate government and community structures and regulatory frameworks are in place that can con-
tribute to enhancing adaptation to climate change; understanding and awareness of climate change mainly
within central government agencies is rising; political commitment to global and regional climate change
agendas has been established (though still needs strengthening); lead agencies have been established (albeit
poorly resourced); and generally good progress is being made in the development of climate change poli-
cies and strategies.

However, there is currently very weak institutional capacity to scale up and harness broad stakeholder in-
volvement in the implementation of vulnerability and adaptation assessments and in the planning and
implementation of adaptation actions. This category of institutional capacity, referred to in this report as
“adaptive institutional capacity,” is weak due to a number of impediments, including: inadequate coordi-
nation mechanisms; very limited mainstreaming of climate change in sector policies and strategies; very
limited capacity across a wide range of agencies and actors to undertake vulnerability and adaptation as-
sessments; limited understanding by the majority of the rural population of links between observed
changes in weather patterns and climate change predictions; generally a narrow base and low level of par-
ticipation and partnerships; limited scope of national adaptation programs; very limited knowledge man-
agement; limited access to tools for V&A work; and limited sharing of western and indigenous knowledge,
skills and experiences to enhance coping and adaptation capacity.

A well-coordinated, sustained, incremental and catalytic approach to capacity development is needed to
scale up vulnerability and adaptation assessments and begin adaptation work across sectors and different
levels in society. This report identifies and recommends existing and new options and opportunities to
strengthening institutional capacity of Melanesian countries to address the impacts of climate change on
the coastal and marine environments and develop adaptive capacity. These are divided into immediate
and short- to medium-term institutional capacity development, targeting “adaptive capacity”, and on-
going institutional capacity development targeting “enabling capacity.”

The immediate and short-term options and opportunities include: raising public awareness and under-
standing, strengthening capacity of national lead agencies, reviewing, revising and developing climate
change adaptation policies and strategies, strengthening coordination mechanisms, developing national
programmes, broadening and strengthening participation and partnerships, strengthening V&A capacity,
mainstreaming climate change adaptation into national plans and budgets, and improving knowledge man-
agement. The on-going options and opportunities include: strengthening links between government and
communities for V&A work, strengthening political commitment, strengthening political commitment, en-
hancing participation in global agendas, and reforming and strengthening regulatory framework to enhance
adaptation capacity.

The report also identifies a number of areas where Melanesian countries may need support for planning
and developing measures to strengthen institutional capacity to address the impacts of climate change on
the coastal and marine environments and presents some key institutional variables for use in a spatially de-
rived vulnerability assessment to gauge institutional resilience.

Over the coming years the influx in numbers, types and different size of climate change adaptation projects

1:0 Introduction and background

he Bishop Museum is currently conducting a series of assessments and studies on the impacts of
climate change on Melanesian countries with a special focus on coastal and marine biodiversity, with
funding from the John MacArthur Foundation. These assessments are part of several global proj-

ects funded by the MacArthur Foundation aimed at gauging the vulnerability of important biodiversity
hotspots (e.g. Melanesia and Madagascar) which is intended to lead to the development of adaptation
strategies that are appropriate for different local circumstances and are based on local information, good
governance and strengthening of conservation practices. The project is also intended to assess information
gaps and capacity needs for implementing adaptation.

The Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP) is an inter-governmental or-
ganisation with a mandate to “promote cooperation in the Pacific Islands region and to provide assistance
in order to protect and improve the environment and to ensure sustainable development for present and
future generations” (SPREP 2005). SPREP’s Action Plan and Strategic Programmes include biodiversity
conservation, climate change, support to meteorological services, waste management and pollution pre-
vention and a range of cross-cutting issues including environmental impact assessments, mainstreaming,
environmental reporting, laws and regulations, information management, education, awareness and capac-
ity development.

The Bishop Museum and SPREP are undertaking an initial Vulnerability and Assessment (V&A) study
within the framework of the “Climate Change and Biodiversity in Melanesia” project. SPREP’s involve-
ment was formalised through a service agreement with the Bishop Museum in August 2008. Under this
agreement both parties agreed for SPREP to:

review and assess the socio-economic impacts of climate change, and
review and assess institutional capacity for responding to climate change.

Annex 1 outlines the specific tasks required under the institutional capacity assessment. Between Septem-
ber and November 2008, SPREP officers with the support of a regional consultant undertook reviews and
in-country consultations which led to the development of this report. Vanuatu and Solomon Islands were
chosen for the in-country consultations because of their similarities in being large archipelagic countries
(see Annex 2). The scope of the review and assessments in Melanesia also covered the independent coun-
tries of Fiji and PNG but did not include New Caledonia because it was thought that it had adequate sup-
port through the Secretariat of the Pacific Community and the French government.

This review and assessment has also drawn from the experiences and information generated from a num-
ber of major initiatives addressing climate change in Melanesia. This includes the GEF-funded National
Adaptation Program of Action (Vanuatu and Solomon Islands), implementation of the Canadian-funded
Capacity Building for the Development of Adaptation Measures in Pacific Island Countries (Vanuatu), the
design of the GEF-funded Pacific Adaptation to Climate Change (Fiji, PNG, Solomon Islands and Van-
uatu) and the implementation of the GEF-funded Second National Communication (Fiji, PNG, Solomon
Islands and Vanuatu). These four countries have also benefited from GEF funding to implement a Na-
tional Capacity Self Assessment (NCSA) Project aimed at assessing the capacity of countries to address
requirements under the UNFCCC, UNCBD and UNCCD. The Solomon Islands and Vanuatu have com-
pleted their NCSA’s while PNG and Fiji are still undertaking assessments.

1:1

Melanesian paradox – well endowed and very vulnerable

Vulnerability to climate change is defined as a function of an entity’s exposure to climate factors, sensitivity
to change, and capacity to adapt to that change (IPCC TAR 2001) (DEH Australia 2005). Application of
this definition within the context of countries in Melanesia presents one with a paradox. While Melanesian
countries represent a diverse and rich sub-region in the Pacific by way of social and natural capital, the
types and extent of vulnerability of Melanesian countries to the impacts of climate change can easily be
considered to be of a much larger dimension to that of other Pacific Island countries and territories
(PICTs).

Melanesia has the biggest land area in the region (511,700 sq km). Papua New Guinea is the the largest
country in Melanesia, both in land area and population. Close to 80 per cent of PNG’s population lives
in the coastal areas and this rate is growing at an average of approximately 2.5 per cent annually. The sub-
region is home to some of the most diverse and abundant marine and terrestrial biodiversity by global stan-
dards, has many very low lying islands and contains an abundance of natural resources, such as minerals
and timber resources.

The sub-region also has the most potential in the Pacific for generating its own renewable energy with its
vast coastlines and mountain ranges, many geothermal sites and abundance of rivers. Its natural and
planted forests represent the biggest carbon sink in Oceania. Sadly, much of its terrestrial biodiversity
may be fast disappearing due to unsustainable logging practices and the rapidly increasing population’s de-
mand for fuel wood, building materials and agricultural land.

The extent of the region’s vulnerability can be gauged from a number of dimensions. Politically most of
the countries – PNG, Solomon Islands and Fiji Islands – have been dubbed fragile or weak states and have
been publicised as being unstable and demonstrating very weak governance. Fiji has seen a number of
coups in the past years and is currently under a military government. The Solomon Islands is recovering
from an ethnic and political crisis that nearly brought the country to its knees were it not for the inter-
vention of its Pacific neighbours through the RAMSI. While New Caledonia has experienced some po-
litical disturbances in the past, it is now relatively stable and experiencing relatively favourable economic
growth compared to its Melanesian cousins through support from the Government of France. Political
analysts and development experts predict future instability in Vanuatu if land issues are not handled care-
fully and if wealth generated from the bourgeoning tourism and agriculture industry does not impact
positively on the majority of the population in the rural areas. This has implications for the capacity of
governments and communities to respond to the challenge of not only national development but also to
the challenges of climate change.

From a social dimension the Human Development Index for Melanesian countries features amongst the
poorly developed nations in the world. Even when compared to countries such as Samoa, the bigger of
the Polynesian islands in the region, human development in Melanesian countries is low (see Table 1
below). Literacy rates are generally low and, in the case of PNG, health services are under immense strain
with HIV/AIDS predicted to go pandemic. As inequality is a major contributor to vulnerability, the marked
gender inequalities in Melanesia will also exacerbate its general vulnerability. Official corruption is generally
high. The 2008 Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index placed PNG 151st with the
Solomon Islands and Vanuatu tied for 109th out of 180 countries (Transparency International 2008). In
PNG and Solomon Islands this is manifested in the rate and extent of uncontrolled extraction of natural
resources and distribution of revenue earned from logging, fishing and mining.

Table 1: Melanesian countries HDI compared to Samoa (2008)

Cultural diversity also makes the countries very vulnerable. Communicating development messages can
also be very difficult in countries with so many languages like PNG (approximately 800 languages),
Solomon Islands (approximately 95 languages) and Vanuatu (109 languages). Due to cultural and language
diversity, governments also have difficulty in development planning and implementation of initiatives

Source: Adapted from UNDP 2008. HDI Reports: http://hdrstats.undp.org/countries/

aimed at meeting the needs and aspiration of the people as well as in maintaining equity in the delivery
of services and economic growth across its culturally-diverse and geographically-scattered constituents.
Unit cost of service delivery is often very high. These challenges are expected to increase with the increas-
ing demands for greater autonomy of provinces, fuelled by local politics. Politics, usually based on patron-
age and the “big man” patrimonial system, is deeply rooted in tradition and culture, and continues to hold
sway affecting response to natural disasters, which often cause significant impacts, further increasing vul-
nerabilities.

Natural disasters through volcanic activity, earth tremors and tsunamis have also caused economic losses,
deaths and environmental damage in the past. The majority of the rural population lives along vast
stretches of coastline and is exposed to cyclones and sea-level rise. Population growth rate is high, with
the coastal population in Melanesia expected to double in less than 20 years, resulting in increased pressure
on marine and terrestrial resources that generally support rural livelihoods. The tropical and humid con-
ditions coupled with vast areas of swamps, bush land and forests provide perfect breeding grounds for
mosquitoes that cause malaria and dengue fever.

By overlaying the socio-economic and environmental vulnerabilities of the countries of Melanesia with
the predicted climate change impacts and consequences, the gravity of the vulnerability of local commu-
nities, including to climate related disasters, becomes evident. To improve resilience, urgent concerted ac-
tions are needed.

Climate change will aggravate the situation and response to climate change will stretch the capacity of na-
tional institutions and communities in these countries. The incremental costs expected to be borne by
Pacific Island countries is likely to be significant as a result of climate change and will be an added burden
on national budgets and community resources. It has been predicted that small island states could face
losses far exceeding 10 per cent of their GDP (Berz 2001) and that the Asia Pacific region in general, will
be where much of the “human drama of climate change will be played out” (Australian Human Rights
Commission 2007). According to recent models and predictions on sea temperature increases, the Melane-
sian sub-region may be the most affected area in the Pacific with potentially significant losses in marine
biodiversity due to likely future occurrences of coral bleaching (Coles 2008). Studies on the effects of cli-
mate change on disease incidence in the Pacific have predicted that cases of malaria and dengue are ex-
pected to increase significantly in the coming years in Fiji, PNG, Vanuatu and the Solomon Islands (Potter
2008).

There is now a growing need for countries to be more proactive and take risk-reduction and ‘no regrets’
measures that can be more cost effective rather than retrospective adaptation which would incur far greater
costs (World Bank 2000). Enhancing capacity to plan and prepare for adaptation will mean inter-alia:
strengthening and scaling up vulnerability and adaptation assessments at different levels and across sectors,
strengthening risk-reduction capacity, and promoting and securing wider participation of stakeholders.
These measures will require the leadership and facilitation of national governments and the strengthening
of national institutional enabling environment and governance systems.

The ability of governments and communities in Melanesia to adapt to the impending impacts of climate
change and climate variability will depend largely on the capacity of its people and institutions. Weak in-
stitutional capacity and poor governance systems are closely interrelated and widely recognised as obstacles
to effective planning and delivery of development including actions addressing the causes and effects of
climate change. Strengthening institutional capacity and improving governance are therefore critical re-
quirements for enhancing the ability of a country to adapt to the impacts of climate change. Before we
address institutional capacity development issues, it is useful to first define key concepts used in the report,
particularly since many different definitions are found in the literature

1:2

Working definitions and approaches

Capacity
Many different definitions have been used for the term capacity, which while commonly advocated and
used, remains an elastic, sometimes confusing and somewhat elusive concept. Some development organ-

isations define it as “the ability of individuals, institutions and society to perform functions, solve problems
and set and achieve objectives in a sustainable manner” (UNDP 2006). Others have described it to be the
ability of individuals, institutions, and societies to solve problems, make informed choices, define their pri-
orities and plan their futures. Kaplan (1999) applies the concept to organisations and describes it as, “the
ability of an organisation to function as a resilient, strategic and autonomous entity.”

The concept was initially applied to smaller units such as individuals and institutions and has evolved over
time to include broader and more complex systems such as organisational arrangements, inter-agency re-
lations, the external socio-political environment and governance. It has also evolved from its origins of
addressing tangibles such as structures, equipment, skills etc to include the intangibles or aspects of social
capital such as trust, interpersonal relationships, and social organisation, (Pelling 2005), empowerment, val-
ues, and power relations, which are now recognised as essential attributes of capacity.

Morgan (2006) identifies five central characteristics of the concept of capacity including empowerment
and identity, collective abilities, involving systems, a potential state, and a creation of public value. It is also
generally accepted that capacity does not equate to performance, although they are closely related concepts
and both are about the overall ability of a system to create value.

Institutions and institutional capacity
Like capacity, the concept of institutions and institutional capacity has also evolved over the years, and ac-
quired many different meanings and definitions. Its meaning has expanded beyond individual organisations,
their mandates, structures and processes, to what Lehan refers to as “administrative stock” (Lehan 1975).
Institutional capacity includes inter-alia: empowerment, social capital, the enabling environment and power
relations (Segnestam et al. 2002). Strengthening institutional capacity also entails improving vertical and
horizontal coordination and integration across organisations, ensuring ownership, supporting endogenous
growth, knowledge management and learning and enhancing the enabling environment (policies, coordi-
nation mechanisms etc) to support individual and collective actions. Leadership can also be an aspect of
institutional capacity as well as a strategic asset. (Pasternack et al. 2001)

The ubiquitous term “governance” is closely related to the term “institutional capacity”. The term “gov-
ernance” is broader in meaning than “institutional capacity”, which as seen earlier refers to institutional
and decision-making structures (Leftwich 1993), although the two concepts share some similarities in
meaning. Both are context dependent, relate to institutional environments through which citizens and
government interact, and are influenced by value systems and power relations. Governance stretches its
definition beyond that of institutional capacity to include and emphasise principles of accountability of
stakeholders, equitable participation, transparency and predictable legal and regulatory frameworks (ADB
2006). “Good governance” usually refers to situations where the above principles are observed and applied.

In many modern development approaches, both Western as well as traditional forms of governance are
recognised, albeit to different degrees. In Melanesia, traditional governance systems have been in place
since time immemorial and have evolved to their current meanings and practices. Such systems usually

This study uses the term “institution” to mean institutions, organisations and communities func-
tioning within a contextual setting of relationships, collaboration and coordination mecha-
nisms, regulatory framework, power relations etc.

“Institutional capacity” is the ability of this broadly defined system of institutions, organisa-
tions, communities, rules, relationships and values, within their different contexts, to achieve
organisational and societal goals.

This report uses the following definition of capacity:

“The ability of individuals, institutions and society to perform and adapt functions, solve
problems and set and achieve objectives in a sustainable manner.”

comprise tribal and clan units held together by traditional leadership and kinship systems, customs, values
and territorial boundaries. At times traditional governance may exist in parallel to the introduced gover-
nance arrangements. Finding the right balance and resolving tensions between modern expectations of
good governance and the traditional practices and kinship systems continue to be a challenge for Melane-
sia.

Capacity development
“Capacity development” refers to actions needed to enhance the ability of individuals, institutions and sys-
tems to make and implement decisions and perform functions in an effective, efficient and sustainable
manner (CDI 2000). It has also been referred to as a process by which people and organisations create
and strengthen their capacity over time (Willems and Baumert 2003, OECD 2003). It is complex, involves
multiple levels and actors, power relationships and linkages (Lusthaus et al. 1999). Emphasis on capacity
development has shifted from targeting institutions and individuals to also include the broader enabling
environment, requiring a more nuanced, multilayered and synchronised approach and a result-oriented ap-
proach (Boesen 2005).

The terms “capacity development” and “capacity building” have often been used interchangeably and at
times have caused some confusion amongst users. Generally, the former is referred to as an on-going
gradual, endogenous and iterative development process building on existing capacities, while the latter
(capacity building) has been associated with externally driven interventions aimed at creating new capacity
(UNDP 2008). For the purpose of this assessment and report “capacity development” is the preferred
term.

While there are no silver bullets for capacity development, past experiences provide some lessons and
guidance for future planning and implementation of capacity development programmes. Notably, country
ownership and endogenous process of change are essential principles when defining capacity development
initiatives. Beneficiaries need to also be supported to “define their own needs and shape their learning
process” (Newman 2001). Capacity development needs to be framed within the context of national pol-
itics, institutional arrangements, culture, tradition and historical backdrops. It is inextricably linked with
power relations, competition and levels and types of control over resources exerted by different stakehold-
ers (Morgan 1997).

Institutional capacity is therefore a broad concept that constitutes factors such as: technical ability, lead-
ership, legitimacy of organisations, political support, supporting enabling environment, e.g. legal frame-
works and coordination arrangements etc. Each of these constituent parts are interrelated and, if
strengthened can contribute to the overall strengthening of institutional capacity. In Section 2 of this re-
port, a range of factors of institutional capacity are used in an assessment framework to ascertain the
level of institutional capacity in Melanesian countries and the capacity gaps.

Vulnerability and Adaptation to Climate Change
The IPCC Second Assessment Report (SAR) defines vulnerability as: “The extent to which a natural or
social system is susceptible to sustaining damage from climate change”. It is a “function of the sensitivity
of a system to changes in climate, including beneficial and harmful effects” and adaptive capacity. Adaptive
capacity is referred to as the “degree to which adjustments in practices, processes or structures can mod-
erate or offset the potential for damage or take advantage of opportunities created by a given change in
climate” (IPCC 1996).

There are spatial (local, national, regional) as well as sectoral considerations to adaptation. Adaptation ac-
tions can be one or any combination of physical, technological, regulatory, or market actions, among oth-
ers. Adaptation actions can be undertaken by one or more actors and can take place over different climatic
zones and at different economic levels. From a temporal perspective adaptation to climate change can be
viewed at three levels:

responses to current variability including learning from past adaptations to historical
climates;
responses to observed medium to long term trends in climate; and
anticipatory planning in response to model-based scenarios of long term climate change.

2:0 Institutional Capacity Assessment Methodology

his institutional capacity assessment is largely based on review of literature on capacity development
needs, strengthening capacity in the Pacific. Many of these reports, project documents etc. were
based on extensive stakeholder consultations in Melanesian and other PICTs in relation to capacity

needs and experiences with climate change. Table 2 presents examples of a number of projects, strategies
and action plans developed and implemented that have included consultations on climate change impacts
and other related issues. In particular, this study draws on community-based vulnerability assessment con-
sultations undertaken by the NAPA team and NGOs to identify common climate change related capacity
issues and options and opportunities for addressing them.

Table 2: Past programmes and projects involving major consultations on climate change and related is-

sues in Fiji, PNG, Vanuatu and the Solomon Islands

In addition to drawing on the above consultations and assessments, this literature review also accessed as-
sessments and reviews on material produced on subjects such as governance and state building. Govern-
ment reports, corporate plans and strategies were also studied to gauge the extent to which climate change
and related issues are beginning to be mainstreamed. To provide validation of the observations derived
from published and grey literature, the research team also used semi-structured consultation/discussions
with key stakeholder groups.

2:1

Assessment framework and scope

To systematically assess institutional capacity, the team used an assessment framework adapted from the
approach used by Willems and Baumert (2003). William and Baumert distinguishes two main categories
of capacity needed to address impacts of climate: “climate specific capacity” and “climate related capacity”.
The former refers to the minimal level of capacity needed to plan and implement climate change specific
(direct) actions, while the latter refers to other socio-economic capacity that need to be developed to bring
about enhanced adaptive capacity (which may be regarded as capacity that deals with basic economic and

human development conditions (see Lal et al for a discussion of this economic and human development-
related capacity issues).

This institutional capacity assessment focuses on “climate specific capacity”. Drawing on various inter-
national reports (reference the LEG; IPCC guidelines), and as discussed earlier, this assessment examines
two groups of inter-related components. These include:

Institutional enabling capacity – Ability of institutions to initiate and support the planning, imple-
mentation and strengthening of adaptation actions. These can also be referred to as the minimal ca-
pacity needed in the country to plan, initiate and coordinate vulnerability assessment and adaptation
work.

Institutional adaptive capacity – Ability of institutions to effectively integrate, coordinate broad
stakeholder involvement and scale up V&A work in the country.

The two categories and different components of institutional capacity are presented in Figure 1 below as
building blocks. While not typically a component of institutional capacity, V&A Assessment Capacity is
included as one of the building blocks because of its importance as the main tool for assessing vulnerability
and adaptation options involving a process that needs to be coordinated and managed.

Figure 1: Building blocks for institutional capacity to respond to climate change

The above categories of institutional capacity and their components are closely inter-connected and need
to co-exist in various degrees to ensure effective planning, implementation and monitoring of V&A as-
sessment and adaptation actions across different spatial and temporal situations.

2:2

Key institutional variables for use in a spatially derived vulnerability assessment to

gauge institutional capacity

The Assessment Framework discussed earlier in this report is used as the basis through which a range of
variables has been developed to gauge institutional capacity and resilience. The framework and the set of
variables can be used to gauge:

Institutional enabling capacity

Institutional adaptive capacity

Institutional capacity at the national, province or local government level to address

c l i m a t e

change impacts on the coastal and marine environments.

ii)

Institutional capacity at the organisational level to address climate change impacts

the

coastal and marine environments.

These are presented in the “Institutional Capacity Diagram” in Figure 2 below. These are to be used as a
guide in assessing for institutional capacity. Very detailed assessments are not necessary in a context like
Melanesia as institutional capacity is a ‘moving target’ and is subject to changes.

Figure 2: Institutional Capacity Diagram

2:2:1

Institutional capacity variables

Components

Government and community structures

formal and legal links exist between the different levels of government;
links exist between government and communities;
extent of resourcing of provincial and local governments by national governments; and
extent of support for community projects by national and provincial governments.

Political commitment

formal political agenda to support climate change adaptation;
political agenda reflected in national policies and strategies; and
political agenda reflected in government programmes and budgets.

Public awareness and understanding

existence of a communication strategy on climate change and adaptation, including
indicators;
extent of implementation of communications and awareness raising; and

Categories

Components

Institutional Capacity

Government & community structures
Political commitment
Public awareness and understanding
Lead agency arrangement
Participation in global agendas
Regulatory framework
Policies and strategies

Variables for each

component

Enabling Capacity

Coordination mechanisms
Programming
Mainstreaming
V&A capacity
Participation and partnerships
Knowledge management

Variables for each

component

Adaptive Capacity

extent of awareness and understanding of climate change impacts on coastal and marine
environments by government, stakeholders and people.

Lead agency

national lead agency has formal mandate and a strategic plan including indicators;
provincial and sectoral lead agencies has formal mandate;
extent of resources (personnel, financial, equipment etc) available to the lead agencies to
successfully implement its strategy and work plans;
extent of coordination by lead agencies of programmes and initiatives aimed at
addressing impact of climate change on the coastal and marine environments;
existence of a communication strategy and resource mobilisation strategy amongst lead
agencies; and
quality of leadership by heads of lead agencies.

Participation in global agendas

extent of participation in global and regional conferences and meetings;
extent of briefings and communications to national stakeholders prior to and after
conferences and meetings; and
extent of communications on important decisions and technical and funding support
opportunities to national stakeholders.

Regulatory framework

number and types of laws and regulations that directly or indirectly contribute to
enhancing resilience of coastal and marine environments against the impacts of climate
change;
extent of communication and awareness of laws and regulations; and
extent of enforcement and compliance.

Policies and strategies

number and types of policies and strategies addressing climate change impacts on coastal
and marine environments;
extent of awareness by government officers, stakeholders and communities of policies
and strategies;
extent to which policies and strategies are used to guide plans and actions to address
impact of climate change on coastal and marine environment;
extent of coordination single policies and strategies; and
extent of coordination of related policies and strategies.

Coordination mechanisms

number and types of coordination mechanisms for planning, implementation and
monitoring of V&A addressing climate change impacts on the coastal and marine
environments;
extent of coordination beyond government departments and beyond projects;
type and clarity of TOR for coordinating teams including indicators;
type and extent of resources used for coordination purposes;
type and extent of communications used to maintain and strengthen coordination; and
extent of linkages between related coordination mechanisms.

Programming

type and quality of resources available to develop national V&A programmes;
type and extent of mandate and scope of Climate Change Adaptation Programme;
extent of links between programmes and national policies and strategies;
extent to which programme outcomes and outputs can be measured;
extent of participation by provincial and community level stakeholders in the programme;
and;
extent of donor support and involvement in national climate change adaptation programmes.

Mainstreaming

level of awareness and understanding by government and stakeholders on mainstreaming,
and
extent to which climate change is included in programmes and budgets of governments,
NGOs, private sector organisations.

V&A Assessment

extent to which V&A work is included in strategies, programmes and budgets of lead
agency, other government ministries, provincial government agencies, NGOs and private
sector organisations;
level of awareness and understanding on V&A approaches and tools by staff of
organisations;
competency levels of staff of organisations and community members for using V&A
approaches and tools;
type and effectiveness of V&A networks at the national, sectoral, provincial and
community level;
number of organisations and people receiving training in use of V&A approaches and
tools;
extent to which organisations and communities can access funding and expertise to
undertake V&A;
extent of funding, personnel and other resources committed to V&A work; and
extent to which organisations and communities can access information on V&A including
lessons learnt best practice etc.

Participation and partnerships

number of organisations and communities involved in V&A work;
type, effectiveness and sustainability of partnership arrangements;
type and extent of participation by organisations and individuals in V&A work;
extent and effectiveness of role of lead agencies to promote and monitor partnerships
and participation;
extent of empowerment by organisations and individuals as a result of their
participation in V&A programmes and initiatives;
extent in use of gender considerations and analysis during planning and implementation
of V&A work;
extent and quality of involvement by women, elderly and youth in V&A work; and
number of conflicts arising between organisations and individuals involved in V&A
work and successfully resolved.

Knowledge management

extent of awareness and understanding on importance of knowledge management in
organisations and communities;
extent to which knowledge management is promoted within and across organisations;
type and extent of networking to promote and enhance knowledge management; and
extent to which information and knowledge is shared and used across and between levels
of organisations including communities.

3:0 Institutional capacity in Melanesia – existing

capacity, impediments, priority gaps

his section discusses institutional capacity in Melanesia to address the impacts of climate change
on the coastal and marine environments, with particular focus on Vanuatu and Solomon Islands.
The assessment framework described above guide the assessment of the existing capacity situation,

the main impediments (vulnerability factors) and priority gaps in relation to each of the components or
“building blocks” described in Figure 1.

3:1

Government and community structures

Government and community structure provide the overall context within which institutions across all
levels of government and actors make decisions. All four Melanesian countries have multi-tier government
systems in an approach to decentralise government and involve wider participation. Table 3, below, pres-
ents an overview of the government and community structures in the four countries.

Table 3: Formal government and community structures in Fiji, PNG, Solomon Islands and Vanuatu

Given the current organisational structures, Fiji and Vanuatu are better positioned than PNG and Solomon
Islands in terms of the potential for government agencies and development partners to reach and collab-
orate with village local government and communities through formal government and traditional struc-
tures. In theory they should also be in a better position to coordinate and implement measures to enhance
adaptation of coastal and marine ecosystems to climate change. In practice however, the reality is quite
disheartening across all four countries. In PNG the decentralised system is fraught with problems. An ADB
Thematic Assessment Report on Governance in PNG has observed that decentralisation has actually
contributed to a decline in accountability at all levels and institutional weaknesses continue to undermine
links between policy, budgeting and implementation (ADB 2008). Studies on coastal governance in Van-

uatu (Lane 2006a) and Solomon Islands (Lane 2006b) echo the same issues and concerns. Similar con-
straints are also observable in Fiji.

Recent studies on coastal governance in Solomon Islands (Lane 2006b) highlight the serious disconnect
between the central government and entities involved in local level governance i.e. villages, communities
and provincial governments. Many village people still view the modern governance system and central gov-
ernments as foreign and disempowering (Wairiu et al. 2003). The same can be said of other countries in
Melanesia and this is clearly one of the main impediments to linking community-level with national level
planning and implementation of V&A assessments and organising adaptation actions. Provincial govern-
ment officials in Solomon Islands have complained that donors do not help strengthen this link when they
bypass local institutions and engage directly with local communities. (SIG 2007; Schoeffel and Turner
2003)

There is a strong potential for greater involvement of traditional leaders and systems in adaptation work
as chiefs or other village and clan leaders play an important role across Melanesia in mobilising people,
resolving conflict and supporting government programmes. The Vanuatu National Council of Chiefs
(Malvatumauri) established in 1977 and the National Cultural Centre are good examples of formal insti-
tutions established to promote and coordinate the role of custom and custom chiefs in development.
Similarly, in Fiji the presence of the Fijian administration system, has the potential to engage with the
Fijian people, at least, in addressing adaptation to climate change. However, here, too, the disconnect be-
tween the national governance machinery and the traditional decision-making process and governance
arrangement is a major impediment to coordination and systematic approach to management

Despite this disconnect between national governments and rural governance structures and mechanisms,
there is a large potential and resilience of the rural population to cope with adversities. For example,
Solomon Islands and Fiji have experienced political upheavals that have handicapped national institutions
but their rural populations continued with subsistence and economic activities. In Solomon Islands, rural
communities and the private sector provided the main source of economic stability during the height of
the recent ethnic tension and the turnaround of the country’s economy has been attributed to their hard
work and resilience (CBSI 2003). While the rural population that make up between 80-90 per cent of the
population in most of Melanesia do not enjoy the luxury of services such as electricity, roads and televi-
sion, etc. they are very capable of mobilising and using traditional knowledge and skills to contribute to
V&A work. With incremental and coordinated support and strengthened links between the central gov-
ernment and rural communities this resilience or coping capacity can be harnessed and enhanced to ad-
dress climate change impacts.

3:12

Case Study 1 – Governance in Vanuatu

Vanuatu gained independence in 1980 after being governed as an Anglo-French condominium since 1906.
For most of the period since independence, two political parties, one anglophone and the other fran-
cophone, has dominated parliament. Since the 1990s, politics in Vanuatu has been fragmented and is char-
acterised by a high degree of instability, which has caused long periods of policy paralysis and economic
mismanagement (Schoeffel and Turner 2003; Cox et al. 2007). The current political system in Vanuatu gen-
erally follows “traditional” avenues of politics, and is thus described as one being based around patronage,
characterised by fierce infighting amongst unstable coalitions. This system of patronage also drives cor-
ruption at the highest levels, leading to chronic “short-termism” that undermines any sustained approach
to development. Policy initiatives also tend to be inconsistent and short-lived, driven by immediate reaction
to constituents’ concerns, rather than advice from an informed executive, with policy-making at its weakest
in multi-annual planning and cross-sectoral prioritisation. This causes concern when looking at governance
issues in relation to “longer-term” projections of climate change in Vanuatu.

To help address these problems of governance and to improve service delivery, a Comprehensive Reform
Programme (CRP) was underwritten by the Asian Development Bank (ADB) and other aid donors in
1997, which culminated in the development of the Priorities and Action Agenda (PAA) for the country
in 2003 (Lane 2006a). The PAA involved improving service delivery in rural areas by expanding market
access to rural produce, the lowering of credit and transportation costs, and ensuring sustainable use of

natural resources; raising private investment by removing obstacles to private enterprise and facilitating
long-term secure access to land, and providing better support services to business; increasing general
equity in access to income and economic opportunity by enabling universal access to primary education
and basic health services, and inducing increased employment opportunity for those seeking work; improv-
ing governance and public service delivery by providing policy stability and fiscal sustainability via a
strengthened law-enforcement and macro-economic management capacity and a small, efficient, and ac-
countable government; and enabling greater stakeholder participation in policy formulation by institu-
tionalising the role of chiefs, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), and civil society in decision-making
at all levels of government (Williams 2006).

There are three levels of government in Vanuatu, and for a country that is small in both demographic and
geographic terms, this is a complex and cumbersome arrangement. The national government, centred in
the capital, Port Vila, is organised around a series of departments which in turn fall under several ministries
that are responsible for public policy and administration. The six provinces are administerd by provincial
governments. The major functions of the provincial governments are to promote rural development and
undertake land use and physical planning with the assistance of the centralised Department of Provincial
Affairs. These provincial governments are under-resourced and largely unable to deliver services outside
the provincial headquarters (Cox et al. 2007). The provincial structure is commonly seen as artificial and
ineffective. Part of the provincial structure are the two municipalities of Luganville and Port Vila, which
are constituted under the auspices of the 1980 Municipalities Act.

Local Government Councils (LGCs) are highly autonomous entities established under the 1980 Decentral-
isation Act

, and have powers to prepare development policies. These LGCs, numbering 63, are the lowest

formal level of government, with most having only one employee each, and are active mainly in tax col-
lection.

Many of Vanuatu’s LGCs and municipalities suffer from a lack of planning, and this is particularly evident
in Port Vila. Subordinate governments in Vanuatu, at both provincial and local levels, are generally poorly
resourced in both financial and human terms (Lane 2006). There is also little coordination between the
provincial administrations and central government departments, resulting in limited reach of the State
outside the capital, Port Vila. Apart from primary schools and first aid posts, most ni-Vanuatu in fact have
little contact with the State. In terms of environmental management and climate change adaptation and
mitigation, the geographic focus of policy activities means that the central government finds it difficult
to be active in areas away from the capital.

While a number of agencies have responsibilities that are integral to the health of coastal environments
(the VEU, for instance, is responsible for biodiversity and environmental management through the 2003
Environmental Management and Conservation Act

, and the VFD has responsibility for managing the harvesting

of marine resources , the 2005 Fisheries Management Act, No.: 55, and the 2008-2013 Aquaculture Development
Plan

) no line agency has a policy objective centred on integrated management. Given that 70 per cent of

the population live on the coast, the absence of policy leadership on integrated coastal management is likely
to lead to sub-optimal management of coastal resources, particularly when the added impacts of climate
change are also considered.

3:12

Case Study II – Governance in Solomon Islands

Solomon Islands gained independence from Great Britain in 1978. On independence, it inherited a West-
minster system of government and established a governing structure comprising a national government,
nine provincial governments and local area councils. The councils were abolished in 1996/7. National
unity and state-building was seriously threatened during 2000 onwards following tensions between people
from the two big provinces of Malaita and Guadalcanal, which escalated into armed conflict. Government
operated under duress from then until 2003 when the Regional Assistance Mission to Solomon Islands
(RAMSI) led by Australia and supported by Pacific Forum countries intervened to restore law and order.

Today the country of about 900 islands and nearly 500,000 people, expected to double in 20 years’ time,
is being provided the opportunity to re-build with the help of RAMSI. The Coalition of National Unity

and Rural Advancement (CNURA) government which came to power at the end of 2007 has recently de-
veloped a Medium Term Development Strategy (2008-2012) and is determined to make strong progress,
with support from RAMSI and donor partners, in the areas of public service, fiscal and economic reform
and strengthening of the police and judiciary.

Provincial governments have been in decline over the past years with ill-defined responsibilities from
sector to sector and a heavy reliance on the national government for service grants and technical expertise.
They are able to pass ordinances that are not in conflict with the national laws and their revenue-raising
ability is limited to charging for business licenses. Development assistance is channelled to rural commu-
nities in the provinces through various conduits including: ministry programmes and operations, discre-
tionary funding from members of parliament, NGO funding, church projects, private sector investment
and donor projects. In many situations provincial governments have been “marginalised by prevailing aid-
supported approaches to development management, which either rely on centralised delivery by line min-
istries or channel financial and technical assistance directly to the grassroots through CBOs and NGOs”
(SIG MTDS 2008).

Recent studies on Coastal Governance in the Solomon Islands (Lane 2003) highlight the serious disconnect
between the central government and entities involved in local level governance i.e. villages, communities
and provincial governments. Many village people still view the modern governance system and central gov-
ernments as foreign and disempowering (Wairiu et al. 2003) and are more strongly affiliated with informal
governance entities such as churches, house of chiefs, council of chiefs, community-based organisations
and village committees.

The current national government recognises the need to strengthen institutional capacity at the provincial
level and is addressing this through a UNDP-funded Governance and Institutional Strengthening Project
aimed at improving the capacity of provincial governments to allocate and spend public resources, deliver
infrastructure and services, manage natural resources and promote local economic development.

3:2

Political commitments to address climate change impacts

Climate change is a relatively ‘new’ phenomenon, and one which requires substantive change in mindset
of all level of decision makers, including political commitment at all levels of government. This assessment
uses a set of indicators to gauge the extent by which national leaders and governments show political
commitment to addressing climate change impacts. They include:

political endorsement of global and regional climate change agendas and targets;
explicitly addressing climate change in national development strategies;
establishment and adequate resourcing of a clearly identified lead agency;
directing the mainstreaming of climate change in sector policies and strategies; and
directing the development, financing and implementation of national climate change
programmes.

Table 4 on the next page presents an overview of the extent to which progress has been made by the in-
dependent countries of Melanesia in relation to the five introduced indicators.

Generally, all four countries have demonstrated a relatively strong and consistent political commitment at
the higher levels of planning and strategising, e.g. global, regional, national strategies and policies. PNG
is a lead player in the mitigation arena and has been at the forefront of international negotiations on use
of forest resources for emissions trading in the growing global carbon market. Leaders of these countries
continue to make public their concerns about climate change and its impact on the pillars of sustainable
development and continue to make representation on behalf of their countries during important global
forums such as the UNFCCC COP. Over time this commitment will be tested as more national resources
will be needed to address climate change impacts. At the regional level, too, Melanesian countries, along
with other Forum members, have made a strong commitment to the ongoing development and implemen-
tation of Pacific-tailored approaches to combating climate change” (2008 Pacific Islands Forum Commu-
niqué p 2). At the national level, the Leaders have also called for the operationalisation of the PIFACC
and closely related DRR&DM Plan of Action. Countries are making an effort to meet this commitment

albeit on what appears to be on an ad hoc basis and without a cohesive countrywide coordinated approach
(as discussed below).

Across all Melanesian countries, although lead agencies have been established, they are poorly resourced.
Project-based programming and mainstreaming initiatives have largely been prompted and supported by
donor funded projects such as the GEF-funded NAPA in Vanuatu and the Solomon Islands, CBDAMPIC
project in Fiji and Vanuatu. The proposed GEF-funded PICCAP programs in all four countries also in-
clude mainstreaming as an integral component.

Increased efforts at V&A work using scientific models and community based approaches are needed and
the application of cost-benefit analysis and economic assessments need to be supported so that both sci-
ence and economics can be used to prompt politicians to take proactive action.

Table 4: Extent of political commitment by government in countries of Melanesia to addressing climate
change impacts.

The recently developed MTDS in Solomon Islands is perhaps the first high-level national strategy in
Melanesia that specifically addresses climate change. See Box 1.

Most politicians’ planning and strategies are limited to their tenure in parliament i.e. an average of four
years in all four countries. Senior planners and technocrats consulted in Solomon Islands lament the dif-
ficulties in getting politicians to commit to longer-term issues such as climate change. A suggested way

forward would be to guide politicians to understand how climate change will continue to impact on their
electorates and why proactive adaptation measures are essential to safeguard people’s livelihoods and
ecosystem services.

Box 1: Climate change considerations in Solomon Islands Medium Term Development Strategy

The main impediments to enhanced political commitment to addressing climate change include:

limited understanding by politicians of the extent in impacts of climate change on the coastal and
marine environments and looming threat to biodiversity, ecosystem services and livelihoods;
focus of politicians on immediate livelihood needs of their constituents;
limited ability of the small pool of national experts and policy makers to use and simplify science and
economics to influence political leaders; and
limited opportunities for the national climate change team to brief cabinet and Members of Parliament
of the impacts of climate change and the importance of taking urgent adaptation actions.

3:3

Public awareness and understanding

Generally the level of public awareness and understanding of climate change scenarios and impacts
amongst communities and the general public in Melanesia is still very low. The NCSA reports from Van-
uatu and Solomon Islands identify awareness-raising as an important capacity issue as well as the need to
incorporate climate change in the national curricula (Vanuatu NCSA Report 2007; Solomon Islands NCSA
report 2007).

Public awareness and understanding of climate change and its impacts need to be raised in order to en-
hance coping strategies and capacities. As a result of past and recent GEF and other donor projects there
is growing awareness and understanding amongst technocrats and bureaucrats within governments in
Melanesia about climate change and its impacts. In Vanuatu and Solomon Islands past climate change
projects such as the Initial National Communications to the UNFCCC; the NAPA, NCSA and CB-
DAMPIC have involved and supported media campaigns, radio and television programs, public talks,
drama, distribution of leaflets etc. on climate change. These have targeted the public, mainly in townships
and peri-urban communities, and will continue intermittently with government and donor support. In
Vanuatu, the Wan Smol Bag Theatre group has been using drama very effectively to convey development
messages and have included climate change in their productions.

At the rural level people have begun experiencing doses of climate variability in the changing weather
patterns and sea-level rise that can be attributed to climate change. However many are not aware of the
links to global development issues and the gloomy outlook predicted by climate scientists. Community-

Environmental Protection and Management
(a) Contribution to National Objectives
Recognising the importance of environmental management to maintain natural resources in
sound and productive condition, the Policy Statements set a National Objective to “ensure sus-
tainable utilisation and conservation of natural resources, protection of the environment and suc-
cessful adaptation to climate change”.

(b) Sectoral Objectives and Strategies
The Policy Statements set a policy goal “to act as the focal point for all international, sub-re-
gional conventions, treaties and protocols relating to environment, conservation, global warming,
climate change, and others in addressing environment, conservation and meteorological issues, to
integrate national issues, in a holistic way so as to adapt to climate change, halt deterioration of
ecosystems, restore damaged eco-systems and ensure their survival in the long term”. The fol-
lowing strategies will be implemented: (i) protection, restoration and enhancement of the quality
of the environment; (ii) strengthen institutional and technical capacity: and (iii) ensure effective
mitigation of and adaptation to climate change.

Source: Solomon Islands Medium Term Development Strategy 2008-2010.

based consultations undertaken through the CBDAMPIC and PACC projects in Vanuatu, Fiji and PNG
and field studies such as those carried out by research institutions and NGOs in Solomon Islands (Kastom
Gaden 2007) and Vanuatu (Warrick 2007) have been able to record rural people’s experiences and reflec-
tions on these changes particularly increased salt-water inundations, increased frequency of flooding,
coastal erosion as well as prolonged and heavier rainfalls. A study on coping strategies of Polynesian com-
munities in the outlying islands of Solomon Islands undertaken by a team from a number of scientific or-
ganisations have found that there is a marked discrepancy regarding the awareness between government
agencies in the national capital and the people on the island of Bellona, regarding the threats of climate
change (CLIP 2007). While communities in these outlying islands have developed a very good under-
standing of climate change variability and have traditional coping strategies, they are not aware of the
global trends in climate change and the predicted impacts for the region of Melanesia. This means that
their planning horizon is shorter placing them in a very vulnerable situation.

The “climate change message” is being delivered throughout Melanesia by different entities with variations
in medium and content. There has not been a formal assessment or evaluation of climate change com-
munications in the sub-region and there are concerns about mixed or wrong messages being conveyed.
There is currently an absence of a government-led communication strategy on climate change in these
countries to guide communications and awareness raising programmes and activities. Such a strategy can
be stand-alone or be part of the NAPA. They need to be developed and guided by communication and
social-marketing principles and make use of science and up-to-date information from reliable sources
such as the IPCC Reports, Pacific Islands Global Ocean Observing System (PI-GOOS), the Pacific Islands
Global Climate Observing System (PI-GCOS), and the Pacific Islands Hydrological Cycle Observing Sys-
tem (Pacific HYCOS).

Experiences and perceptions of people at the grassroots -level need to be recognised and recorded as they
can contribute to the pool of knowledge on vulnerability assessments and adaptation planning. Climate
change communication strategies usually include components such as: understating different audiences and
their perceptions of climate change and impacts on their livelihoods, framing key messages, identifying
appropriate mediums and tools etc. Government agencies and NGOs that have staff posted in rural lo-
cations, provincial governments and churches all have a role in communicating climate change but have
very limited knowledge, skills and tools. In the area of formal education, national primary and secondary
school curricula in the two countries are beginning to incorporate information and teaching resources on
climate change and will need significant funding support to make such resources available to all schools
in the country.

Climate change communication strategies should also include actions to support rapid expansion and up-
scaling on knowledge and understanding of climate change. International NGOs, donors and development
partners need to play a proactive role in supporting climate change communications. For example, in
Solomon Islands, the Red Cross has held awareness sessions for its board, staff and volunteers and has
been participating actively in the national consultation processes to develop the NAPA.

Main impediments to effective communication throughout the countries on the impact of climate change on the coastal and
marine environments and options and opportunities for adaptation actions:

absence of a national communication strategy on climate change;
limited capacity of the national government to organise and develop a national communication strategy to
be coordinated by the lead agency and used to support communications by other national stakeholders;
limited access to and funding to develop communication tools and use a range of mediums; and
limited capacity of the lead agencies and government ministries to continue updating the public and

policy-makers on emerging climate change issues, scientific findings, experiences of other countries and

funding opportunities.

3:4

Lead agency arrangement

Climate change is a cross-cutting issue that requires an integrated and coordinated approach, with a lead agency
that can play the critical role in leading and coordinating climate change initiatives. When such an agency is
ineffective the link between policy (central governments) and action becomes weak and uncoordinated.

Governments in the Melanesian countries have made good progress in establishing lead agencies to over-
see climate change work. Vanuatu has established a Climate Change Unit within the Vanuatu National Me-
teorological Service (VNMS) which is also the focal point for any climate change projects in Vanuatu.
The Climate Change Unit is staffed by one officer and works in close relation with the Vanuatu Environ-
ment Unit (VEU). Solomon Islands has established a Climate Change Division within the Ministry of En-
vironment, Conservation and Meteorology (MECM). The division is staffed by a director and two officers.
In Vanuatu and Solomon Islands the lead agencies are responsible for coordinating and monitoring the
implementation of the NAPA, National Communications, PACC project and upcoming adaptation proj-
ects to be funded under the GEFPAS. The government of PNG recently endorsed the establishment of
the Climate Change and Environment Sustainability Office (PNG Office of the Prime Minister 2008)
while the Environment Department continues to be the lead agency for climate change in Fiji.

Lead agencies therefore need to focus their limited resources and efforts at guiding, coordinating and fa-
cilitating mitigation and adaptation actions instead of directly implementing projects which can be left to
other sector agencies, NGOs and the private sector. The capacity of lead agencies will need to be strength-
ened to facilitate and monitor the growing number and scope of climate change initiatives and effectively
link scientific and technological developments and funding resources with needs and priorities of govern-
ment, national stakeholders and communities.

NCSA reports for Vanuatu and Solomon Islands and records of capacity constraints in PNG and Fiji have identified the
following as main impediments to lead agencies effectively carrying out their roles:

lead agencies lack of a strategic plan, prioritised core functions and accountabilities to lead, coordinate
and facilitate climate change policy and strategy implementation in the country that includes strategic out
comes and actions, performance indicators and resource requirements;
absence of lead agencies at the provincial government and local government levels to coordinate climate
change work;
limited linkages between national lead agency and focal points of other government, NGO, private sector
and community entities;
limited personnel, equipment and operational budget to support annual work plans of lead agencies at
the national and provincial government levels;
limited technical, leadership, coordination and resource mobilization skills of staff involved in
coordination roles; and
limited access of lead agencies’ teams to appropriate tools for effective coordination e.g. websites,
e-discussions and regular forums and meetings.

3:5

Participation in global and regional agendas

LDCs and PICTs can no longer afford to be passive players in the global climate change agenda. While
strongly urging developed countries to cut back on emission levels, they must also strive to make the most
of growing funding sources and technology to support and supplement national adaptation efforts. One
measure of institutional capacity at the national level is the ability of its political leaders and lead agency
to engage in, influence and derive benefits from the range of global and regional agendas on climate
change. Global agendas such as the UNFCCC and other Rio Conventions and their main financing mech-
anism, the GEF, are at the forefront of addressing climate change and provide opportunities for LDCs
and SIDs to obtain support for climate change related work. Many multilateral and bilateral organisations
also have climate change programmes that can benefit Pacific Island countries and territories. Strong lead
agencies can also guide and support NGOs to find ways of leveraging external funding for climate change
projects and provide coordination to support their implementation.

Over the past years representatives from government lead agencies in Melanesian countries have been par-
ticipating in many climate change conferences overseas and have engaged in climate change negotiations.
Some have also benefited from training in MEA negotiations and other related capacity-building activities
organised by SPREP and its development partners. There is, however, a disconnect between country in-
volvement and engagement in international and regional fora and national level actions. As a result, one
of the recurring complaints from within government agencies and other national stakeholders interested
in the global climate change agenda is that these representatives do not provide pre-conference and post-

conference briefs to update national stakeholders on recent developments, trends and opportunities. Nor
is there much effort made by the lead agencies to coordinate response to climate change. Agencies are
often left to develop, resource and implement their own climate change initiatives, making it difficult for
institutions in the country to align their work, and to effectively play their role in communicating climate
change information and opportunities to the general public.

Table 5 below presents the range of climate change related global and regional agendas that Vanuatu,
Solomon Islands and other Pacific Island countries are involved in.

Table 5: Global and regional climate change related Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEA) and
agendas that Pacific Island Countries are involved in.

Main impediments to governments and national stakeholders making full use of and benefiting from participation and en-
gaging in the global climate change agenda:

limited awareness by those outside of the lead agencies of trends and opportunities presented by the
global climate change agenda particularly in connection with opportunities relating to a range of
information, tools, technical assistance and project funding; and
disconnect between international and regional level engagement and national actions lead agency officers
not consistently and clearly communicating to the public and partners through pre and post-conference/
meetings/workshop briefings.

3:6

Regulatory framework

“[T]he need to enact environmental legislation must be carefully justified rather than assumed, and the precise components
of that legislation must be tailored to the policy context and needs of PICs and not based on imported models from developed
countries…more attention needs to be given to the development of community-driven, strategic land use planning processes”.
(Farrier 2003)

Since the attainment of political independence the legal systems in Vanuatu and Solomon Islands, as in
most of Melanesia, were based on their colonial governments’ (British and French) jurisprudence and
have evolved in similar fashion. Many of these have since been reviewed in light of changing national in-
terests and circumstances, and have also identified conflicting provisions, overlaps and gaps. Table 6 pres-
ents some of the past review work undertaken in Melanesia.

A number of challenges confront countries of Melanesia wishing to strengthen and reform their laws to
enable joint management of natural resources by traditional resource owners and the State. The national
constitution in most Melanesian countries recognises the customary and traditional rights of its people
over land and natural resources. This places indigenous resources owners in a powerful role to plan and
implement development as they see fit, but makes it very difficult for national governments to play their
part in guiding and controlling resource use to achieve national development goals and aspirations.

Table 6: Review of Environment Legislation in Melanesian Countries

For example in Vanuatu, because constitutionally recognised land ownership extends to inshore reefs and
marine areas, customary tenure is a crucial issue in environmental policy and climate change management.
Customary tenure also creates a number of important complexities for effective environmental governance
and climate change adaptation in Vanuatu. First, the shared locus of environmental authority (between
government and communities) creates ongoing policy tensions and confusion. Second, the village-dwelling,
subsistence population is materially poor and in need of a cash income. The natural resources they control
constitute their major source of food and their only source of capital. This duality limits the ability of gov-
ernment to achieve national conservation and resource management standards (see Alley, 1999). The at-
tenuation of government regulatory ability, and the operation of this dual system limits the national
government to a few strategies for raising community awareness and promoting community-based climate
change adaptation.

Furthermore, much of the resources (land and marine) are owned collectively by tribes and clans with in-
dividuals having user rights. This system of tenure has supported Melanesian societies over the years and
continues to be a “safety net” and a form of livelihood security. Custodianship over land and marine re-
sources is vested in traditional leaders, however more recently in parts of PNG and Solomon Islands, the
educated elite have successfully written themselves into resource extraction agreements and concessions,
as trustees representing tribes or clans. This has contributed to further mistrust of the “educated” leaders
by rural communities and has been the cause of disharmony within and between tribes and communities.

Recent studies on coastal governance in the Solomon Islands (Lane 2006b) and Vanuatu (Lane 2006a) has
highlighted the range and extent of governance problems in the area of coastal zone management. The
studies recommend that systemic institutional reform would be needed to delineate roles and legal re-
sponsibilities of traditional resource owners and the State if community-based ecosystem management is
to be an effective component of overall environmental governance. In theory this would be the ideal
arrangement. However in practice, until such a time when this breakthrough is achieved and when adequate
resources are available, government and community institutions in Melanesia will need to build on the lim-
ited institutional capacity already established and identify and implement capacity development initiatives
in incremental fashion that also have a catalytic effect. These are recommended later in this report.

In the context of climate change, the various provisions in the range of existing national laws and regu-
lations of countries in Melanesia can contribute more to enhancing the capacity of communities to min-
imise risks and adapt to the impacts of climate change on the coastal and marine ecosystems. Some of
these include: provisions for EIA, code of logging practice, fisheries management, watershed management.
Unfortunately, compliance is not always guaranteed and enforcement measures are minimal and often in-
effective due to very limited human and financial resources and corrupt practices. Compounding this sit-
uation is the fact that many rural communities are not well aware of the laws and regulations that govern

the use of natural resources. If and when this eventuates they may still find it difficult to understand and
accept how a central government that is far removed from their lives can make rules that govern how they
use their resources.

Until such a time when legislative reforms are carried out and enforcement capacity is strengthened, vol-
untary compliance and pro-active adaptation measures will need to promoted and up-scaled including
through education, targeted awareness raising, practical demonstrations that show benefits to resources
owners and use of traditional governance systems and resource management practices. In other words
community-based sustainable development principles and practices, supported where possible by legisla-
tion, stand a better chance of being used to guide adaptation actions by rural communities of Melanesia
over the coming years.

Efforts to develop and enforce appropriate laws for better management of natural resources should begin
with and focus on protecting ecosystems and ecosystem services that are known to be seriously threatened
by development practises and that pose a serious threat to the resilience of communities e.g. watersheds,
marine areas, coastal buffer zones (mangrove areas).

Main impediments for development, use and enforcement of laws and regulations that address climate change impacts on the
coastal and marine environments:

limited awareness of the majority of resource owners and communities on appropriate laws and
regulations;
difficulties in applying laws and regulations on customary owned land and marine resources;
limited capacity of regulators and environment staff to raise awareness on how laws and regulations can
build resilience and enhance coping capacity; and
very limited capacity of law enforcement and government agencies to enforce relevant laws and regulations.

3:7

Policies and strategies

National policies and strategies are important components of overall institutional and enabling capacity
needed to support V&A Assessment and action in developing countries. Together with laws and regula-
tions there are also many national policies and strategies in countries of Melanesia that can contribute to
minimising vulnerabilities and enhancing adaptive capacity. Table 7 below presents the Climate change spe-
cific and related policies and strategies in Melanesia countries.

Table 7: Climate change and related policies and strategies in countries of Melanesia.

Two approaches to integrating climate change into national policies and strategies are being taken in coun-
tries of Melanesia. The first approach involves integrating or mainstreaming climate change considerations
into other sector policies and strategies e.g. agriculture, fisheries, land-use policies and strategies. The sec-
ond involves having a specific national climate change policy and/or strategy. The former approach is at
a very early stage of development while more progress has been made on the latter. This may be necessary
for central government control and lead agency coordination; however, greater attention to enhancing
adaptive capacity in priority sectors have a better chance of being expedited if more effort is placed on
supporting the former approach. Governments will need assistance to attend to this as the policy review
and revision process requires time, personnel and funding, all of which are in short supply across gov-
ernment departments. With limited resources it would be necessary to prioritise the sector policies that
need “climate-proofing” based on priority vulnerabilities. In the case of Solomon Islands and Vanuatu
these are already identified in the NAPA.

As parties to the UNCCD, the independent countries of Melanesia have committed to developing a Na-
tional Action Programme (NAP) to Combat Land Degradation and Mitigate the Effects of Drought.
Also as a signatory to the Hyogo Framework for Action (2005-15) on Disaster Risk Reduction and the
Pacific Disaster Risk Reduction and Disaster Management Regional Framework for Action 2005 (2005-
2015), these same countries have committed to developing a Disaster Risk Management National Action
Plan (DRM NAP). The UNCCD NAP focuses more on addressing land degradation but there is expected
to be a component that addresses drought preventative and mitigation measures. The DRM NAP is a
comprehensive multi-sector action plan that includes minimising risk to a range of disasters including
those associated with climate change. Table 8 below presents the status of these programmes and plans
across the four countries.

Table 8: Status of UNCCD NAP and DRM NAP in four countries of Melanesia.

From the above information, Vanuatu is clearly ahead of the other Melanesian countries with putting in
place national climate change and related risk reduction policies and strategies. But having more than one
policy and/or strategy addressing similar issues requires a certain degree of integration and coordination.
Without this there will likely be on-going unnecessary competition for scarce resources, duplication and
overlaps. Expert guidance and funding will be needed to progress this as it will take a very long time if
the currently overstretched government resources are expected to be used to undertake this task.

Main impediments to effective use of national policies and strategies to address climate change impacts on the coastal and
marine environments and to developing adaptive responses:

limited awareness of government policies and strategies by the majority of rural communities;
limited capacity (time, personnel and funding) of government to analyse, review and formulate national
policies and strategies and integrate climate change and disaster risk reduction considerations;
limited awareness by government, stakeholders and communities on how national policies and strategies
can address climate change and help strengthen adaptive capacity;
lack of coordination of national policies and strategies; and
very limited use of vulnerability and adaptation indicators in national policies and strategies

3:8

Coordination mechanisms

Good coordination is important for a multi-stakeholder approach to addressing a complex and cross-cut-
ting issue like climate change. It entails having an appropriate lead coordinating agency and participation
by appropriate stakeholders. Some of the indicators of effective coordination mechanisms include: good
leadership by the appropriate lead agency, an effective lead coordinating team, clear terms of reference out-
lining roles of the lead coordinating team and intended outcomes, representation in the coordination

team by a good selection of stakeholder representatives, strong ownership by the coordinating team mem-
bers of the intended outcomes, active participation by team members, timely distribution of relevant in-
formation and efficient use of time and resources for coordination purposes. In a geographically spread
and diverse setting as in the countries of Melanesia, there is a need for a network of teams to coordinate
climate change work.

Across Melanesia climate change coordinating teams usually become fully operational and effective when
projects are implemented. The first climate change coordinating teams were established under the PICCAP
project and were primarily responsible for coordinating project activities. Most continue to exist on paper
after project closure and become active again when a new project comes along. Recent climate change proj-
ects such as the CBDAMPIC in Vanuatu and Fiji, the NAPA in Vanuatu and Solomon Islands and now
the Second National Communication (2NC) and PACC in all four countries, have given new life to the
coordinating teams. The 2NC will be establishing Thematic Working Groups which will enable additional
coordination teams to be established at the sector level. It is not yet clear how the provincial governments
and communities will be involved and which lead agency will coordinate teams at the provincial and local
levels. The proliferation of project committees has given rise to concerns over duplication and inefficient
use of resources. This has led governments to establish one, over-arching coordinating body for all envi-
ronment related projects.

In Solomon Islands an attempt at coordination of similar or related policies and strategies took place in
2005 with the development of the Solomon Islands Sustainable Development Advisory Council (SIS-
DAC). This initiative was led by the then Department of Environment. The initiative encountered diffi-
culties when the Department of Planning and Aid Coordination realised that the Permanent Secretary of
the Ministry of Forest Environment and Conservation was the designated chair of the council. Meetings
called by the chair could not form a quorum and eventually the chair lost enthusiasm to convene any
meeting. Recently, the MECM has established a Technical Committee (TeCOMM) to provide the coordi-
nation role for environment related projects and be the mechanism for coordinating climate change and
its closely related national policies and strategies.

In Vanuatu, the National Advisory Committee on Climate Change (NACCC), initially established in 1989,
is the body mandated by the government to oversee the coordination of all climate change initiatives or
programmes emanating from the UNFCCC processes (see Annex 3 for the NACCC’s terms of reference).
It is made up of relevant government and civil society personnel that meet on a regular basis to inform
policy formation and project implementation activities.

The NACCC has subsequently overseen the implementation of several major projects including the NAPA
that have assisted in identifying and reducing Vanuatu’s vulnerability to climate change, while at the same
time contributing to the country’s wider sustainable development goals. These projects include:

Pacific Islands Climate Change Assistance Program;
National Communications to the UNFCCC;
National Capacity Self Assessment (NCSA);
Capacity Building for the Development of Adaptation Measures in Pacific Island
Countries (CBDAMPIC) project;
Pacific Adaptation to Climate Change (PACC) project;
Pacific Islands Renewable Energy Program (PIREP);
Pacific Islands Energy Policies and Strategic Action Planning;
Pacific Islands Greenhouse Gas Abatement through Renewable Energy Project
(PIGGAREP);
Pacific Islands Global Climate Observing System (PIGCOS); and
activities relating to the United Nations Convention on Combating Desertification and
United Nations Convention on Biodiversity Diversity.

While the Vanuatu government’s Priorities and Action Agenda provides for clear lines of communication and
authority within individual agencies, it does not address the coordination of information and strategies
across government. In addition, the national government’s organisational structure exhibits duplication
and policy gaps as well as programmatic fragmentation. Some departments lack clarity in the delineation

of responsibility between departments. In environmental management in particular, it is clear that there
is a need for a cross-sectoral analysis of those agencies centrally engaged in different aspects of this policy
domain, leading to a re-specification and perhaps reconfiguration of responsibilities (see Lane 2006a).

These impediments to effective coordination are similar across the other Melanesian countries and rep-
resent a major constraint on the ability of national governments to link environment and development
strategies with climate change impacts. They also constrain efforts to move toward more coordinated and
integrated approaches to climate change adaptation. Improving horizontal (cross-sectoral or agency) as
well as vertical (between national, local government and communities) integration and coordination is
crucial to development of more systematic responses to climate change problems.

Main impediments to effective use of multi-level and multi-sector climate change coordination mechanisms to address climate
change impacts and strengthen adaptive responses:

absence of national climate change policies and strategies make coordination difficult, ad-hoc and
project-driven;
coordination mechanisms usually exist only at and for the central government level and stakeholder
representatives based in the capitals, and are usually project-driven;
limited use of indicators to guide and monitor the work of coordination teams;
limited participation by provincial and local government and communities in coordination mechanisms;
limited access by rural teams to cheap and reliable communication for coordination purposes; and
links between climate change coordinating mechanisms and other national coordinating mechanisms
addressing coastal and marine resources is yet to be established.

3:9

Programming

National policies and strategies are usually implemented through government programmes or a cluster of
projects. Programming has also taken the form of “National Action Programmes” (UNCCD), National
Action Plans (DRR and DRM), National Implementation Plans (Montreal Protocol) and NAPA (UN-
FCCC). The move from project-based implementation to a broader integrated and coordinated program-
matic approach or programme-based implementation relies on, inter-alia: good teamwork, strong
leadership, effective communication and information management, and strong inter-agency partnerships.
The extent to which these are present or effective can be an indicator of institutional capacity. None of
the Melanesian countries to date has a long-term V&A programmatic approach that addresses multiple
sectors, includes multiple layers of government and communities. The closest so far is the NAPAs in
Vanuatu and Solomon Islands, however these are intended to address urgent and priority adaptation needs
and are primarily targeted at GEF funding.

The Vanuatu NAPA project commenced activities in October 2004, and is being executed by the Vanuatu
National Meteorological Services (VNMS). The VNMS is the focal point for any climate change projects
in Vanuatu and works closely with the Vanuatu Environment Unit (VEU). It has recently established a
designated Climate Change Unit.

The objective of the NAPA project for Vanuatu was to develop a country-wide programme of immediate
and urgent project-based adaptation activities in priority sectors in order to address the current and an-
ticipated adverse effects of climate change, including extreme events. Activities proposed through the
NAPA were those where it was thought further delay would increase vulnerability or lead to increased costs
at a later stage. The NAPA therefore provided an opportunity to facilitate dialogue and consultations. The
purpose being to identify and elaborate on the immediate and urgent adaptation issues and appropriate
activities by conducting an assessment of the available and necessary information on Vanuatu’s vulnera-
bility to climate change and of the response measures and other activities needed to enhance the resilience
of the most threatened parts of Vanuatu’s environment, society and economy. Given Vanuatu’s vulnera-
bility status with regards to climate change and sea-level rise, the NAPA also served as an avenue to raise
awareness and understanding at all levels in society.

To assist in determining climate change impacts, a scenario generator was used by the VNMS to generate
climatic scenarios for the country. The results using two Global Circulation Models were compared with

analogue predictions based on observation of past trends. The two climate change scenarios predicted
similar increases in temperature of between one and two degrees Celsius up to 2050, but varied signifi-
cantly with respect to rainfall, and predicted a sea-level rise of 50 cm over the next 100 years. One model
also indicated there may be more frequent El Niño type conditions associated with prolonged dry seasons.
(Brian Phillips – personal communication)

The outcomes of the NAPA, stressed that several core issues were relevant to all sectors and should be
integral to any proposed climate change adaptation and mitigation activities. These were:

Awareness raising at all levels;
Capacity-building including institutional capacity;
Research and development;
Promotion of appropriate traditional knowledge and practices;
Technology Transfer;
Education and training;
Mainstreaming climate change issues; and
Biodiversity issues are essential considerations in all issues relevant to marine terrestrial,
forestry, land and agriculture.

Vanuatu is now attempting to implement the NAPA project which would see the following priority sectors
targeted because of their vulnerability to the impacts of climate change and climate variation and sea-level
rise. Focal areas are:

Water resources, especially rural water supply;
Coastal zone management;
Infrastructure of national, provincial and community importance;
Human settlements, both urban and rural; and
Food security, including subsistence and commercial agriculture and fisheries.

Solomon Islands has also completed its NAPA and recently had it endorsed by Cabinet. It is similar in pur-
pose, structure and content to the Vanuatu NAPA and is the product of excellent collaboration between
national stakeholder representatives and guidance from an international consultant with effective coordi-
nation by the new Climate Change Division within the recently established Ministry of Environment,
Conservation and Meteorology (MECM). The exercise has provided valuable experience in V&A work for
the NAPA teams that undertook consultations in various parts of the country. Using V&A methodology
and tools similar to those used in Vanuatu, the NAPA teams facilitated community-based V&A assess-
ments, documented the findings and proceeded to use a set of established criteria for prioritising adap-
tation needs. This resulted in the following issues or themes being identified as priority vulnerabilities that
require urgent adaptation actions in Solomon Islands:

Food security and agriculture;
Water resources management;
Human health; and
Coastal zones (biodiversity and infrastructure).

Several adaptation project profiles and an implementation strategy were then developed as part of the
NAPA to address these priority vulnerabilities. These are to be used to develop project proposals to be
presented to the GEF Climate Change LDC fund through the GEF PAS framework.

The NAPA represents a major initiative in these countries to assess, plan and implement adaptation to cli-
mate change. While primarily intended for LDCs, there is a strong interest by other SIDS and donors in
the NAPA approach and it is hoped that SIDS in Melanesia (PNG and Fiji) will also get to develop their
NAPAs. As mentioned earlier the NAPA focuses on urgent and priority adaptation needs and is intended
for the GEF, particularly the LDC Climate Change Fund. There are also other projects that are being
planned and are about to be implemented that are in effect outside of the NAPA. These include the Coral
Triangle Initiative that has a component on adaptation to climate change (See Annex 4) and the GEF
PACC. AusAID is also currently planning a regional climate change adaptation programme and an EC-
funded project, to be implemented through UNEP and executed by SPREP, to support countries in ad-
dressing capacity development needs to implement MEAs, including the UNFCCC. The Government of

Japan “Cool Earth” programme also presents opportunities for adaptation funding. The coming years
will most likely see an increase in funding for adaptation to climate change. This situation may require gov-
ernments to consider taking a programmatic approach to climate change adaptation.

Some of the main advantages of taking a programmatic approach to climate change V&A work include:

potential for galvanising and mainstreaming climate change work across government
agencies and other national partners;
better coordination, collaboration, integration and monitoring of V&A work;
greater opportunities for leveraging additional donor funding for adaptation; and
greater opportunities for entities at the provincial government and community level to
be involved in implementation.

There is on-going debate between developed and developing countries on the merits of taking a pro-
grammatic approach. During the recent UNFCCC COP in Poland, Pacific island countries were wary of
considering this approach as they feared it might be perceived by developed countries as normal devel-
opment programming. Further, developing countries may run the risk of losing out on adaptation funding
intended to address incremental costs, as guided by the UNFCC. This can be a sensitive issue and will need
to be progressed with care. Pacific countries will have to strengthen capacity in order to identify and justify
funding proposals intended to address adaptation and incremental costs. The argument for taking a pro-
grammatic approach is still a strong one considering the growing emphasis on taking ‘no-regrets’ risk re-
duction and adaptation measures.

Main impediments and gaps to development and use of a programmatic approach to addressing climate change impacts and
strengthening adaptive capacity:

limited governmental capacity to design, develop, implement and coordinate a programmatic approach;
concerns from government leaders about the implications of taking a programmatic approach;
likelihood of donors pursuing their own ‘agenda’ and continuing with funding projects; and
absence of national policies and national strategies that can guide a programmatic approach.

3:10

Mainstreaming

Mainstreaming climate change has been described as the integration of climate change issues into policies,
plans and budgetary processes of governments (Nakalevu et al. 2005). It implies factoring adaptation
costs into national budgets and has thus been addressed with some uneasiness by SIDS because the ad-
ditional or incremental costs of adapting to climate change is the result of developed countries’ excessive
and unbridled emissions of green house gases causing global warming. Once considered a fine line for de-
veloping countries to walk, it is now considered an imperative, especially when the major financial mech-
anisms for the UNFCCC, the GEF, and other donors expect developing countries to provide co-financing
for adaptation projects. The design of projects to implement the priorities identified in the NAPA as well
as the design work on the PACC is providing Melanesian countries with good experience in identifying
incremental costs, however there currently is limited progress in mainstreaming climate change into na-
tional and sectoral policies.

Moves to make provisions for supporting climate change work in national work programmes and budgets
is at its early stages, although one can argue that the extent of in-kind co-financing provided by govern-
ments towards the GEF-funded PACC projects already represents a form of mainstreaming. One of the
main indicators of “mainstreaming” is the extent to which the issue or theme is addressed in the opera-
tional budgets of government ministries.

In Solomon Islands, one of the many challenges experienced by the Department of Development Plan-
ning and Aid Coordination is how to deal with mainstreaming. According to a senior planning officer, “just
about everything is expected to be mainstreamed e.g. gender, climate change, sustainable land management,
biodiversity, disaster-risk reduction etc and it is difficult to guide government departments on how this can
be practically done.” The Pacific inter-governmental organisations are aware of this challenge and con-
vened a meeting in 2007 to develop “mainstreaming” guidelines for countries.

The main impediments to mainstreaming climate change to enhance adaptation:

limited understanding by many in government on the recently promoted concept of “mainstreaming” and
how it can be done;
difficulty of politicians to consider climate change as a development issue and the concerns that allocating
resources for climate change work may reduce support for other pressing livelihood and economic needs;
limited understanding by politicians and policymakers of the looming threat of climate change and its
links with, and implications for, ecosystems and livelihoods; and
limited ability of government technocrats to use science and economic tools to convince politicians and
policy-makers to appreciate the need to support actions to support mitigation and adaptation measures.

3:11

V& A Assessment

V&A assessment is regarded as the main approach for assessing vulnerability and planning actions to ad-
dress climate change. Although not specifically a component of institutional capacity, it is considered one
of the building blocks and accorded special attention because of its central role in climate change adap-
tation work and because it involves a process that strongly relies on the other components of institutional
capacity discussed in this assessment.

The V&A “tool box” used by both developed and developing country governments, donors and devel-
opment agencies continues to expand and contains various versions of V&A tools ranging from “top-
down” complicated modelling tools to “bottom-up” community-based participatory methods (UNFCCC
2008). Experiences in the Pacific have led to the recommendation that V&A work is most effective when
a mixed approach is taken including top-down modelling and bottom-up community-based assessments
(Nakalevu et al. 2005 ). Table 9 below presents some of the V&A Assessments tools that have been de-
veloped for use with governments and communities in the Pacific.

Table 9: V&A Assessments tools used in the Pacific

Discussions with regional experts and some government officials in Vanuatu and the Solomon Islands have
revealed that top-down modelling programmes (tools) such as those listed in the table above are seldom used
and updated due to limited access to data, insufficient resources allocated to support their use and maintenance
and limited opportunities for using them by trained staff who also have other day to day duties to perform.
In the Pacific a few countries have acquired V&A modelling software from the producers, International
Global Change Institute (IGCI) of New Zealand including; Fiji (VITICLIM), Cook Islands (COOKSCLIM)
and Solomon Islands (SOLCLIM). The Solomon Islands Government has just purchased SOLCLIM software
from IGCI and training was recently carried out on its use. Feedback from officers from these countries in-
dicate that the modelling tools are not fully utilised in terms of input of new information and generation of
maps and reports. Generally models will continue to be effective V&A tools but governments will need to
maintain the appropriate human resources and budgets to maintain and make good use of them.

The bottom-up community based participatory V&A approaches can be very effective in generating very
useful information on experiences and perceptions of vulnerability by communities and documentation
of introduced and indigenous coping strategies. While there are variations to community-based V&A ap-
proaches they are all based on established participatory approaches and can be effective when facilitated
by a multi-disciplinary team and complemented by social and scientific assessments. Figure 3 presents the
main process involved in a CV&A approach used in the CBDAMPIC project.

The majority of personnel across the Melanesian countries that have been trained in V&A methods are
government employees. Most have received their training through workshops and a handful has been for-
tunate to undergo a four month V&A training offered by the USP. These have all been project funded ac-
tivities and V&A work usually do not continue after projects are closed because most technical staff are
back to their regular duties, the ministry work plans and operational budgets do not cater for V&A work
and outside of a project setting it is not very easy to mobilise multi-disciplinary teams comprising mainly
of government officers on a regular basis. Despite the training sessions attended these officers now need
to engage more in practical V&A work to develop confidence in use of a range of tools e.g. models,
socio-economic reports, participatory methods etc.

Figure 3: Components of the CV&A process used in the CBDAMPIC Project

In addition to the V&A work led by government agencies work has also been undertaken by NGOs and
academic communities. WWF has undertaken V&A work with communities in Fiji, Solomon Islands and
PNG, which has included baseline assessments and training for communities to enhance the coping abil-
ities of important ecosystems and species. In Solomon Islands the Red Cross has facilitated V&A assess-
ments amongst families and communities living on “artificial islands” in the Lau Lagoon of the Solomon
Islands and the Kastom Gaden Association has facilitated community-based assessments and reported on
vulnerabilities and coping strategies of communities in Solomon Islands living in remote and very difficult
environments.

In Fiji, the USP Institute of Applied Science and Pacific Centre for Environment and Sustainable Devel-
opment has started to develop experience and expertise in both modelling work and community based
V&A. In PNG, the University of Papua New Guinea has established an Environment Centre and has
begun work in assessing climate change issues. Macquarie University of Australia has also supported stud-
ies in the use of Western and indigenous coping mechanisms (Mercer 2008). All these assessments con-

Source: Nakalevu et al. 2005:17.

Identify modifications for

future adaptive capacity

Current vulnerability

Document current

Future vulnerability

Exposure

Climate science

Assess future changes in

exposure

Assess current adaptive

capacity

Social science

Assess future adaptive capacity

tinue to provide governments and communities with valuable information to use in planning and imple-
menting measures to enhance resilience and coping capacity but are yet not linked to any coordinated na-
tional V&A programme.

NGOs and tertiary institutions in Melanesia have strong comparative advantage in working with commu-
nities to undertake V&A with the aim of enhancing ecosystem resilience. Both are able to mobilise sci-
entific expertise and have developed strong capacity in using participatory methods. NGOs in particular
continue to work closely with communities and at times can do V&A work at a lower unit cost than gov-
ernment officers. In Solomon Islands the Red Cross has been able to mobilise and use its volunteers to
assist with community-based vulnerability assessments.

Of relevance here is the David and Lucille MacArthur Foundation-funded project, “Enhancing Coastal
and Marine Ecosystems Resilience to Climate Change Impacts through Strengthened Coastal Governance
and Conservation Measures”, implemented by SPREP. This project has been given by the NACCC to the
Vanuatu Fisheries Division (VFD) to implement, and has the following objectives, which are very much
in line with Concept Project, No.: 3 of the NAPA entitled “Community-based Marine Resource Manage-
ment Programmes.” These objectives are:

the development of an Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) framework and
establishment of appropriate institutional mechanisms for implementation for long-term
adaptation to climate change;
the provision of technical support and training opportunities for government officials
and local communities in integrated coastal management approaches and site-based
adaptation measures based on maintaining functioning coastal and marine ecosystems;
the facilitation and implementation of measures in demonstration sites in areas
experiencing high vulnerability to coastal degradation and erosion and climate change
impacts; and
the raising of awareness and understanding of the linkages between climate change and
biodiversity, the application of integrated coastal management and targeted adaptation
measures as long-term adaptation strategies to climate change impacts and disseminate
lessons learnt through national, regional and international fora.

An added opportunity to scale up V&A work can be found in the field of disaster management, particu-
larly with the recent shift in discourse and practice from Disaster Risk Management (DRM) to Disaster
Risk Reduction (DRR) (see Table 10 below). The increase in attention to DRR is driven by predictions
that climate change will increase the severity of climate-related hazards. As such DRR is now recognised
as an important element of adaptation planning (IPCC 4AR 2008) offering the potential for synergies
between the two approaches. A recent UNFCC technical report dedicated to promoting this opportunity
has identified a range of challenges and opportunities for initiating and scaling up the integration of DRR
and adaptation (UNFCCC 2008) and proposes a menu of interventions under each of the following
themes of 1) establishing, streamlining and scaling up financial support for adaptation, and 2) enhancing
knowledge-sharing at national, regional and international levels.

Table 10: The established shift of disaster management to disaster risk reduction agenda

Source: Salter J. 1998. Risk Management in the emergency management context. The Australian Journal of
Emergency Management.

12(4) and Handmer J. 2000. Flood hazard and sustainable development. In: DJ Parker

(ed). Floods: Volume II. Routledge. p.278

All the Melanesian countries have established disaster management offices (DMO) and national and
provincial disaster committees, through Acts of Parliament. Over the years these entities have gradually
improved on their capacity to promote risk reduction measures and address disaster situations. DMOs have
very close working partnerships with the provincial governments, private sector, NGOs and communities
and continue to implement and support advocacy, awareness raising and training activities. The Solomon
Islands DMO now has a Disaster Coordinator in each of the nine provinces actively involved in awareness
and training activities and participating in the coordination of disaster relief operations. DMOs also have
good experience collaborating with donors and are supported by strong global and regional networks. In
the Pacific, DMOs and the public can now access information, tools on DRR and DM using the Pacific
Disaster Net, a website established with leadership from SOPAC to promote and support DRR and DM
work in the Pacific. On many fronts DMOs are a fitting partner to work very closely with lead agencies
coordinating climate change work in Melanesia. There are many best-practices and lessons to learn from
disaster work in Melanesia. In terms of framing a strategic approach the DRR DRM NAP currently pro-
moted by SOPAC and a range of partners have developed a very good approach that can be used to guide
strategies for V&A work related to climate change.

Vanuatu is the first Pacific country to develop a DRR and DM National Action Plan (NAP). Solomon Is-
lands will have one completed by mid-2009 and hopefully the other Melanesian countries and New Cale-
donia will be able to have their NAPs developed during 2009. Compared to the NAPA, which focuses on
priority and urgent adaptation needs, the DRR and DM NAP is a broader and more comprehensive frame-
work that includes: guiding principles, specific objectives, themes, strategies and key actions with associated
key results, responsible agencies and performance indicators. Strategies in the NAP include: strengthening
of national policy, mainstreaming, strengthening organisational arrangements and processes for main-
streaming, information and knowledge management, capacity development and monitoring.

Table 11 below presents one of the actions from the Vanuatu DRR and DM NAP together with their re-
lated expected results and indicators corresponding to one of the NAP Strategies under the theme on ca-
pacity development.

Table 11: Vanuatu DRR and DM NAP – Example of a Strategy and its related Action, Expected Re-

sults and Performance Indicator

Source: Government of Vanuatu, 2007. Vanuatu DRR and DM National Action Plan (2006-2016)

Given the strong complementarities and potential for synergies between DRR and Climate Change Adap-
tation (CCA) there is benefit in working towards establishing institutional capacity to integrate the DRR
DM NAP and the NAPA. The Government of Vanuatu PIF (concept paper) recently developed and pre-
sented to the GEF for funding under the LDC fund and within the framework of the GEF PAS, which
includes a component on mainstreaming with the following activities:

Incorporating CCA and DRR into national, provincial and community-level policy,
planning, fiscal and budgetary processes
Awareness and education to foster links between national, provincial, community levels
of governance on CCA and DRR
Strengthening the integration of CCA and DRR at the institutional level (departmental
and coordination entities) and improve organisational arrangements. (GEF 2008)

Some of the impediments to up-scaling V&A work in Melanesia include:

absence of a national strategy or programme on V&A, coordinated by lead agencies and involving
broad stakeholder participation;
V&A yet to be a permanent feature in the work programmes and budgets of line Ministries and NGOs;
absence of a network of V&A practitioners in the countries and limited capacity of lead agencies to
manage and coordinate such networks;
relatively small amount of personnel who have had training and practical experience with V&A work;
limited financial resources to maintain and expand V&A work;
project funding not efficiently utilised to up-scale V&A work;
weak partnership arrangements between lead agency and partners; and
limited capacity of lead agency to manage and disseminate information generated from V&A work.

3:12

Participation and partnerships

The far reaching impacts of climate change will need adaptation actions that require strong participation
and partnerships across sectors and between different levels of governments and societies. An important
component and indicator of institutional capacity is the quality and extent of stakeholder participation,
the quality and types of partnerships forged to address common goals and how these are coordinated and
managed. The ubiquity of participatory tools and approaches reflects the on-going concern by both de-
velopment agencies and developing countries about the extent to which target audiences are taking own-
ership of and benefiting from consultations and development initiatives. V&A approaches are essentially
participatory in nature and can be very effective when involving networks and multi-disciplinary teams and
ensure ownership of communities over the process and the outcomes.

Participatory approaches have been used in Melanesia over the years in a number of development sectors.
Much experience in participatory rural appraisal (PRA) and similar methods have been built up over the
years by agriculture research and extension officers as well as forestry and fisheries field officers. The SPC
Development of Sustainable Agriculture in the Pacific (DSAP) Programme has received commendations
for promoting and applying participatory approaches in assisting farmers and rural communities assess and
identify sustainable farming options, while the CBDAMPIC project in Vanuatu, Fiji, Samoa and Cook Is-
lands has promoted and used participatory methods in the community-based vulnerability assessments.
NGOs have long promoted and used participatory approaches in village consultations such that it has now
become one of their comparative advantages.

Partnership arrangements and participation by stakeholders in V&A work across Melanesia is gaining mo-
mentum but currently far from being adequate. NGOs in Melanesia are gradually increasing in numbers
over the years and are becoming active in the rural areas. Together with church organisations they continue
to be important partners of the government and can play a big role in scaling up V&A work in the rural
areas. Private sector-government partnerships to address climate change have also begun. In Fiji, the
tourism industry and the Government has collaborated in a national workshop on “Adaptation to Climate
Change in the Tourism Sector in the Fiji Islands” (Government of Fiji 2006). The workshop identified
likely impacts and potential adaptation and risk reduction measures, links to protection of biodiversity, in-
stitutional capacity impediments and capacity development needs. The NAPA, PACC, CBDAMPIC and
Second National Communications work in Melanesia has contributed significantly to increasing partner-
ships and participation for V&A work.

There is also a growing number of networks established to address various conservation and sustainable
development issues in Melanesia. Some of these networks include:

Locally Managed Marine Areas Network (Fiji, PNG, Solomon Islands);
Melanesian Farmer First Network (PNG, Vanuatu, Solomon Islands);
Pacific Invasive Learning Network (Fiji, Vanuatu); and
Pacific Disaster Risk Management Network.

These networks are addressing marine and coastal ecosystem management and conservation but are yet
to be formally incorporated into national V&A plans and strategies in Melanesia.

There is yet no strategy and mechanism for up-scaling and improving the quality of partnerships and par-
ticipation across each of the countries. Capacity development assessments and initiatives to strengthen
partnerships must include tangible practical implementation and outcomes, otherwise stakeholders may
lose interest from “consultation fatigue”. Member countries have recently experienced “consultation fa-
tigue” which stem not only from stakeholders getting tired of the increasing number of consultations
but also the number of consultations that do not result in any tangible benefits to those consulted. This
message was made clear during consultations held as part of this assessment.

The main impediments to scaling up and maintaining the relevance and quality of partnerships and stakeholder participation
for V&A work in Melanesia include:

absence of a policy or strategy providing the basis and guidance for up-scaling participation and
participatory approaches to V&A work;
limited understanding and awareness by government agencies, some NGOs and field staff on climate
change impacts and V&A approaches;
limited training opportunities for government agencies, NGOs and field staff to incorporate V&A in
their programmes and work plans and apply it in their field work;
limited capacity of lead agencies to coordinate and promote partnerships and participatory approaches;
lack of tools and medium to disseminate information that can contribute to promoting and strengthening
partnerships and participatory approaches;
limited feedback mechanism whereby documentation of V&A results are made available to
communities for use in on-going adaptation work; and
limited funding and necessary resources (transport, equipment etc) to expand V&A work in rural
communities as part of normal work of government agencies and NGOs.

3:13

Knowledge management

Data is not information, information is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom. (Clifford Stoll)

Knowledge management basically refers to the capture, documentation and dissemination of knowledge
or the sharing of intellectual assets to enhance performance. Used in an organisational context it usually
means using data and information to generate and communicate new knowledge. Knowledge management
is important for enhancing institutional capacity whether it be individual organisations, inter-agency
processes, team approaches, and is essential for fostering and maintaining participation and partnerships.
Climate change brings with it a new dimension to development work, is loaded with science and requires
fresh self-reflections, new investigations and careful observation of cause and effect relationships to bring
about new ways of adapting to its effects.

In the Pacific, new data, information and knowledge continue to be generated on climate change issues
from scientific studies, community-based assessments etc. Climate change has also prompted many com-
munities to reflect on historical events, changes in tradition and practices and to start drawing from the
rich well of indigenous knowledge on adaptation to hazards and risks. There is growing recognition that
traditional adaptation practices are more effective than top-down approaches (World Bank 2000). Gov-
ernment institutions, NGOs and the private sector organisations also need to start preparing to adapt to
the effects of climate change on their mandates and ways of doing business. Lead agencies and relevant
national institutions have an important role in spreading information and knowledge about climate change
to national stakeholders.

To date there is limited progress in countries of Melanesian with respect to strengthening capacity for knowl-
edge management including development of baseline information. Climate change and related information
is stored in various locations and is not easily accessible by the public. With funding from the EU, SPREP
has established the Pacific Environment Information Network (PEIN) and is assisting countries strengthen
capacity to capture and disseminate environmental information. This initiative is experiencing difficulties in-
cluding: upkeep of hardware, engagement of full-time personnel, support with operational expenses and lim-
ited capacity for networking amongst government agencies and other stakeholders. The absence of any
policy or strategy on knowledge management by institutions established as the PEIN hubs, as well as the cli-
mate change lead agencies, further hampers capacity development in this area.

In Vanuatu, there is a considerable amount of meteorological data at the VNMS with some records ex-
tending as far back as the late 1960s. However, the VNMS has in the recent past experienced problems
in terms of processing historical data, maintaining high observation standards and further developing
services due to funding, training and staffing constraints. This presents a problem since the data will con-
tribute to the assessment of how vulnerable a system is to climate change. Presently, the Vanuatu National
Meteorological Services (VNMS) is converting its outlier weather observing stations into better-equipped
climate stations. It is also operationally changing from a routine simple weather recording to include a wider
range of weather/climate observations as well as hosting communications systems for the delivery of
up-to-date local and regional weather forecasts and a host of other related information products to better
serve information demands. These are being supported by Australian and New Zealand meteorology de-
partments.

Currently, basic environmental information and associated research in Vanuatu is underdeveloped and, as
a result, government and communities face significant impediments in addressing and responding to cli-
mate change impacts. There is also an absence of mechanisms that ensure that scientific and other valuable
environmental information is shared across government and civil society sectors. The Coral Reef Initiative
for the Pacific has been implementing a project with the Vanuatu Lands Department (VLD) that allows
for increased governance and information sharing across government sectors by developing adequate
Global Information Systems software and training. The recent establishment of the National Scientific
Research Council (NSRC) will also assist in improving the quality of information available to policy-mak-
ers.

It has been suggested by Lane (2006a) in relation to the development of an ICZM policy that a return of
State of the Environment (SoE) reporting would be a cost effective way of improving the level of infor-
mation available to all government departments as well as civil society in Vanuatu, and signal high-priority
environmental issues for which a response is required. The production of SoE reports would also be
highly important for the understanding and monitoring of climate change impacts. Under the 2003
EMCA, SoE reports are to be completed at least once every 10 years. These SoE reports are to include:

an assessment of the state of all natural resources,
a review of the current use of natural resources,
an assessment of the quality of Vanuatu’s environment;
an assessment of social and economic development trends and their likely impact upon
the environment;
a summary of government and private sector policies, programs and initiatives to
address and monitor environmental management and conservation issues; and
such other matters as the minister considers appropriate.

It is suggested that these SoE reports be modified to incorporate climate change data as one of its infor-
mation criteria. The ADB was to develop a comprehensive and compatible SoE database with the Vanuatu
Statistics Unit; this needs to be revisited so as to allow for relevant capture of sectoral environmental in-
dicators or data.

The main impediments to enhance knowledge management to support V&A work include:

poor baseline information;
limited understanding and knowledge within government and lead agencies on knowledge management;
absence of guiding policies and/or strategies on knowledge management;
very limited capacity (personnel, equipment, operational budgets) to promote and enhance knowledge
management in lead organisations;
limited networking of government and NGO entities to promote and enhance knowledge management;
lack of commitment by governments and policy for information management that promotes
government-wide information sharing; and
CROP and donor agencies promoting separate information networks instead of an integrated system.

4:0 Opportunities to strengthen institutional

capacity, and implementation needs

he preceding sections have described the range of institutional capacity constraints or impediments
faced by Melanesian countries to effectively respond to climate change impacts. This section pres-
ents the options to address the main impediments to institutional capacity and the opportunities

available to address the options. While most of these can be addressed in the short- to medium-term
future there are some that will require on-going work over the medium to long term future. These include:
strengthening links between government and communities, strengthening political commitment to ad-
dressing climate change, enhancing participation in the global climate change agenda, and reforming and
strengthening regulatory frameworks. From records of experiences in Melanesian countries, the latter will
be the most challenging.

It is divided into two parts: 1) short to medium or more immediate measures; and 2) on-going measures
to strengthen enabling institutional capacity. Many of the options and opportunities presented focus on
the more urgent measures and the components of adaptive institutional capacity. This is in response to
the overall findings of the assessment, that while an enabling institutional capacity has been established
and still needs strengthening, stronger focus and emphasis over the short to medium term should be on
up-scaling and strengthening V&A work through a catalytic capacity development approach which basically
entails strengthening all the components of “adaptive institutional capacity.” Many of these options are
also reflected in the Pacific Islands Framework for Action on Climate Change (2006-2015) and its Action
Plan which have been endorsed by leaders of the Pacific Countries and Territories.

4:1

Short to medium term institutional capacity development options and opportunities

4:1:1

Raise public awareness and understanding

5:0 Support needed to implement recommended

capacity development measures

ver the next three to five years the independent countries of Melanesia will be supported with a
number of climate change projects that have components to strengthen capacity for V&A. Those
that are to be funded by the GEF are presented in Table 12 below.

Table 12: GEF PAS Climate Change Adaptation Projects to be implemented in PICs over the coming

years beginning 2009

In addition to the above projects, AusAID and Government of Japan, EC and GTZ are also making
available funding for climate change projects from which the countries of Melanesia could seek assistance.
Vanuatu is beginning to implement the project “Enhancing Coastal and Marine Ecosystems Resilience to
Climate Change Impacts through Strengthened Coastal Governance and Conservation Measures,” funded
by the MacArthur Foundation through the Bishop Museum and SPREP. AusAID and SPREP are currently
holding discussions for a Pacific region project that strengthens V&A to address the impacts of climate
change on the coastal and marine environments. Closely related to these specific climate change projects
are the projects intended to strengthen meteorological services and disaster-risk reduction. These can also
contribute to strengthening V&A capacity.

This sudden increase in projects across the countries will place some strain on government resources and
result in concerns about ‘absorption capacity’. To avoid these initiatives being seen as supply driven, there
is an urgent need to strengthen institutional enabling capacity as well as adaptive capacity and help increase
the effectiveness of management and coordination of all these projects and interventions in a program-
matic approach. This can also be assisted by helping countries to develop sound policies and effective
strategies. The NAPAs in their current form and scope, and the existing governance arrangements are not
able to provide the necessary guidance. The capacity of government ministries and other national insti-
tutions, such as training and research institutions, NGOs and community-based organisations (CBOs)
will need to be strengthened over the coming years to undertake and scale up V&A work.

Based on the findings from this assessment including the short- to medium-term capacity development
measures, Melanesian countries will need assistance in the following areas to enable them to implement
capacity developments actions that strengthens V&A to address climate change impacts on the coastal and
marine environments:

Assist governments to consider and plan the development of a programmatic approach
for climate change adaptation, building on the NAPA and utilising resources from the various
climate change projects currently or about to be implemented.

ii)

Assist lead agencies expedite the development and completion of national climate change
policies, programmatic approach and a strategic plan.

iii)

Assistance with development of V&A approaches and training activities targeting the
impacts of climate change on coastal and marine ecosystems

iv)

Assist governments and lead agencies develop a resource mobilisation strategy

Considering the predictions on the relatively significant effects of climate change, particularly temperature

6:0 Conclusion

limate change impacts and the generally weak institutional capacity will exacerbate Melanesia’s al-
ready vulnerable situation. In general, institutional capacity and governance in Melanesia, particu-
larly Fiji, PNG, Solomon Islands and Vanuatu is weak and will take some time to be strengthened.

Also, human development indicators reveal a situation of generally low social capital in these countries
and the rapid rise in

populations will place increasing pressures on coastal and marine ecosystems. To-

gether these situations place these countries in a very vulnerable situation. Enter climate change, and vul-
nerability takes on a new dimension with a potentially much greater scale. The future impact of climate
change on the Melanesian region is being assessed and already the predictions are worrying. Melanesia is
indeed a paradox – well endowed and very vulnerable.

The assessment has found that institutional capacity needed to effectively address the impacts of climate
change on the coastal and marine environments is generally weak in Melanesia, particularly in relation to
the types and extent of participation by actors and stakeholders including organisations and communities
across different sectors and levels.

There is an urgent need to develop and strengthen institutional capacity in Melanesia in light of the current
weak institutional capacity to address the impacts of climate change on the coastal and marine environ-
ments.

Based on the identification of a range of institutional impediments/vulnerability factors, a two-pronged
approach to developing and strengthening institutional capacity has been recommended in this report for
effective consideration of climate change impacts on coastal and marine ecosystems and development of
adaptive responses

The first approach is to develop and strengthen the ‘enabling institutional capacity’ including policies,
strategies, legal frameworks and an effecitve lead agency, as well as developing a good level of awareness
and understanding of climate change issues. This should provide the enabling environment within coun-
tries to progress measures to address climate change impacts on the coastal and marine environments. The
report recognises that good progress is being made by the countries in this area and that

incremen-

tal improvements can be expected as reviewing and revising laws, regulations and policies is a lengthy
process and even after they are revised, compliance and enforcement capacity will need to be enhanced.

The second approach and one that needs more focus and resources, involves the development and
strengthening of ‘adaptive institutional capacity’ including; enhancing collective, integrated and coordinated
action by communities and organisations, strengthening systems, networks and capacity of a broad range
of actors and stakeholders to undertake on-going V&A work and promoting and strengthening knowledge
management. This approach has the potential of involving a wider range of stakeholders over a relatively
shorter period of time in an inclusive, sectorally and vertically integrated approach to V&A work.

There are options and opportunities to strengthen institutional capacity in Melanesia to address the impacts
of climate change on the coastal and marine environments over the coming years. Within each of the two
approaches, this report has identified a range of options and opportunities for strengthening institutional
capacity.

Over the coming years there will be an increase in numbers and types of climate change adaptation projects
in Melanesia. Some of these have been identified in this report and will provide a lot of opportunities to
strengthen the different categories and components of institutional capacity identified. These projects
can also potentially place strain on governments’ resources and there is the danger that this likely ‘overload’
may actually weaken overall institutional capacity. This may give rise to another form of vulnerability.

A strong lead agency guided by a strategic plan and a programmatic approach is needed to lead, support,
coordinate and monitor V&A work in countries.

The report recommends that the capacity of national lead agencies as well as the lead agencies within the
different sectors and NGOs be strengthened to support, lead, coordinate and monitor work on climate
change adaptation that is expected to expand across different sectors and stakeholders over the coming
years.

Coordination amongst donor governments and agencies, philanthropic organisations, international NGOs
and Pacific regional inter-governmental organisations planning to support Melanesian countries over the
coming years with funding, technical assistance and advice is important.

SPREP is the coordinator of the Pacific Islands Framework for Action on Climate Change and its Action
Plan, which was approved by SPREP Members in 2008 (See Annex 5). It is recommended that SPREP
liaises with national governments and donors and other funding bodies of the countries and offer support
to strengthen capacity of lead agencies to provide leadership, coordination and monitoring of V&A ac-
tivities and promote and support scaling up of V&A work in the countries to address climate change im-
pacts on the coastal and marine environments. Many of the immediate options and opportunities for
doing this are presented in this report.

References

ADB. 2005. Climate Proofing: A Risk-based Approach to Adaptation. Philippines: Asian Development Bank Pa-

cific Studies Series. Available at: http://www.adb.org/Documents/Reports/Climate-Proofing/cli-
mate-proofing.pdf>.

ADB. 2006. Governance in PNG: Thematic Assessment – Strategy and Programme Assessment

ADB 2008. PNG: Governance in Papua New Guinea: A Thematic Assessment. ADB Strategy and Pro-

gramme Assessment.

Alley, R. 1999. The South Pacific’s Environmental Policy Tensions. Public Administration and Development. 19:

137-151.

Australia Human Rights Commission, 2008. Human Rights and Climate Change – Background Paper.

Boesen, N. 2005. Institutional Assessment and Capacity Development: Why, what and how? Aid Delivery

Methods Concept Paper: A contribution to development thinking. Paper developed for the Eu-
ropean Commission.

CLIPP. 2007. Sustainable Resource use or Imminent Collapse?: Climate, Livelihood and Production in the

South West Pacific. Collaborative research by University of Copenhagen, Danish Meteorological Institute, Uni-
versity of the South Pacific, Solomon Islands Meteorological Services

Cole, S. 2007. Potential climate change impacts on corals and coral reefs in Melanesia from bleaching

events and ocean acidification, Climate Change and Biodiversity in Melanesia, Report produced
by the Bishop Museum with funding support from the McArthur Foundation.

Cox, M.; Alatoa, H.; Kenni, L.; Naupa, A.; Rawlings, G.; Soni, N.; Vatu, C.; Sokomanu, G. and Bulekone,

V. 2007. The Unfinished State: Drivers of Change in Vanuatu. Canberra: AusAID.

GEF. 2008. Project Identification Form: Increasing resilience to climate change and natural hazards in Van-

uatu. Submitted for GEF funding under the Least Developed Country Fund.

Government of Fiji, 2006. Adaptation to Climate Change in the Tourism Sector in the Fiji Islands: Sum-

mary Report of the Initial Stakeholder Workshop.

Government of Vanuatu, 2007. UNFCCC Thematic Assessment

IPCC. 2007. Assessment of adaptation practices, options, constraints and capacity. In: Climate Change 2007:

Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of
the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp.717–743.

IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature) et al. 2003. Livelihoods and Climate Change:Combining

Disaster Risk Reduction, Natural Resource Management and Climate Change Adaptation in a New Approach
to the Reduction of Vulnerability and Poverty.

A conceptual paper prepared by the Task Force on Climate

Change, Vulnerable Communities and Adaptation. Available at: <http://data.iucn.org/dbtw-
wpd/edocs/2003-034.pdf>.

Lane, M. 2006a. Evaluating the Governance of Coastal Resources and Environments in Vanuatu. International Wa-

ters Project Technical Report, No.: 37, Apia: SPREP.

Lane, M. 2006b. Coastal governance in Solomon Islands: An evaluation of the strategic governance issues

relating to coastal management. International Waters Project Technical Report, No.: 29, Apia:
SPREP.

Lane, M. and McDonald, G. 2005. The Limits to Community-based Environmental Planning: Operational

Dilemmas and Practical Remedies. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management. 48 (5): 709-731.

Lusthaus, C; Adrien, M; Perstinger, M. 1999. Capacity Development – Defining issues and implications

for planning , monitoring and evaluation, Universalia Occasional Paper No. 35.

Nakalevu, T.; Carruthers, P.; Phillips, B.; Saena, V.; Neitoga, I. and Bishop, B. 2005. Community-level

Adaptation to Climate Change – Action in the Pacific; Proceedings of the Regional Workshop on
Community-level Adaptation to Climate Change, Suva, Fiji: 20-23 March 2005.

National Communications Support Programme. 2007. Workshop Report: Initiation workshop on Second National

Communications and V&A Assessments for Pacific Island Countries

Newman, A. 2001. Built to Change: Catalytic Capacity-Building in Non-Profit Organizations. Sabbatical

report submitted to TheDavid and Lucille Packard Foundation and The Nature Conservancy.

OECD. 2006 The challenge of capacity development – Working towards good practice, A Development

Assistance Association Reference Document.

Papua New Guinea Government. 2004. The Medium Term Development Strategy. 2005 – 2010.

Papua New Guinea Government. Establishment of Climate Change Office: Statement to Parliament by

M.T. Somare, GCL GCMG CH F KSt J, Prime Minister, On the Establishment of the Office of
Climate Change & Environment Sustainability. www.pm.gov.pg/index.hp/speeches

Pelling, M. and High, C. 2005. Social Learning and Adaptation to Climate Change: Disaster Studies Working

Paper II.

Benfield Hazard Research Centre.

Potter, S. 2008. The sting of climate change: Malaria and Dengue Fever in maritime South East Asia and

the Pacific Islands, Policy Brief, Lowly Institute for International Policy.

Reti, M.J, 2007. An Assessment of the Impact of Climate Change on Agriculture and Food Security in

the Pacific: A Case Study in Vanuatu. Prepared for the FAO SAPA, Apia, Samoa.

Schoeffel, P. and Turner, M. 2003. Local-level Governance in the Pacific. State, Society and Governance in

Melanesia Discussion Paper, No.: 2003/7. Canberra: ANU.

Scientific Expert Group on Climate Change (SEG), Bierbaum, Rosina, John P. Holdren, Michael Mac-

Cracken, Richard H. Moss, Peter H. Raven, et al., 2007. Confronting Climate Change: Avoiding
the Unmanageable and Managing the Unavoidable. Report prepared for the UN Commission on
Sustainable Development. Sigma Xi Research, Triangle Park, NC, and the UN Foundation, Wash-
ington, DC.

Solomon Islands Government, 2008. Medium Term Development Strategy 2008-2010. Ministry of Develop-

ment Planning and Aid Coordination

Solomon Islands Government, 2008. National Adaptation Programme of Action (draft). Ministry of Environ-

ment, Conservation and Meteorology.

Solomon Islands Government, 2006. Thematic Report for Solomon Islands. Solomon Islands National

Capacity Self Assessment Project

Solomon Islands Red Cross Society, 2008. Climate Change: Preparedness for Climate Change: Background

document: Consequences Of Climate Change To Humanitarian Work Through the Eyes of the
Solomon Islands Red Cross.

SPREP, 2005. Strategic Programmes 2004-2013

Torre, M. and Anderson, M. 2004. Fragile States. Defining difficult environments for poverty reduction.

PRDE Working Paper: UK Department for International Development. Pp3

Transparency International, 2008. Global Corruption Report 2008

UNDP (United Nations Development Programme) Capacity Development Initiative. 2001. Country ca-

pacity needs and priorities – Regional report for Asia and the Pacific

UNDP (United Nations Development Programme). 2007. Human Development Report2007/2008.Fighting Cli-

mate

Change:

Human

Solidarity

Divided

World

Available

at:

<http://hdr.undp.org/en/reports/global/hdr2007-2008>.

UNDP. 2008. Practice Note: Capacity Development, pp5

UNFCCC. 2007. Vulnerability and Adaptation to Climate Change in Small Island Developing States –

Background paper for the expert meeting on adaptation for Small Island Developing States.

UNFCCC. 2008a. Compendium on methods and tools to evaluate impacts of, and vulnerability and adap-

tation to, climate change.

UNFCCC, 2008b. Integrating practices, tools and systems for climate risk assessment and management

and strategies for disaster risk reduction into national policies and programmes: Technical Paper.

UNFCCC, 2008c. Compendium of methods and tools to evaluate impacts of, and vulnerability and adap-

tation to, climate change. UNFCCC Secretariat

UN/ISDR, 2008. Indigenous knowledge for Disaster Risk Reduction: Good Practices and Lessons

Learned from the Asia-Pacific Region.

Wairiu, M.; Tabo, S.; Hasiau, J. 2003. Assessing community perspectives on Governance in Solomon Is-

lands: Assessing Community perspectives on Governance in the Pacific Region. A report to the
ADB.

Warrick, O. (2007). Development, forest conservation and adaptation to climate change: a case study for

integrated community-based sustainability on rural Vanuatu School of Geography, Environment
and Earth Sciences, Victoria University of Wellington.

Williams, A. 2006. Country Report for the National Capacity Self Assessment on the implementation of the United Na-

tions Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

Report prepared for the NACCC, Port

Vila, Vanuatu.

World Bank, 2000. Cities, Seas and Storms: Managing Change in Pacific Island Economies Vol IV, Adapt-

ing to Climate Change. Papua New Guinea and Pacific Island Country Unit of the World Bank.

WWF South Pacific Programme, 2006. Climate Witness: Community Toolkit

Annex 1:

Specific Tasks for the Institutional Capacity Assessment under the Bishop –
Museum Service Agreement

Review existing information on legal, policy, management systems, and institutional
mechanisms (national, provincial, local) and initiatives and how they address
impacts of climate change on coastal and marine environments in Melanesia.

Undertake in-country consultations with government, community leaders and other
stakeholders in at least two countries to:

Identify impediments/vulnerability factors for effective consideration of
climate change impacts on coastal and marine ecosystems and development of
adaptive responses such as integrated coastal and marine resource management
(awareness, information availability, political will, legislation, policy, IDP etc.);
Identify existing and new opportunities and propose solutions, including
traditional management systems and knowledge to strengthen institutional
capacity to incorporate and undertake vulnerability and adaptation assessments
as part of coastal and marine resource management;
Identify implementation needs to strengthen institutional capacity for integrated
coastal marine resource management and other management tools to enhance
resilience to climate change impacts (e.g. networks of marine managed areas);

Propose key institutional variables (and datasets as available) that could be included in a spatially derived
vulnerability assessment to provide guidance to policy makers on institutional resilience.

Annex 3:

Vanuatu National Advisory Committee on Climate Change Terms of Reference

The National Advisory Committee on Climate Change (NACCC) is a multi-disciplinary team that draws
its membership from different government agencies, civil society and other relevant stakeholder. Its terms
of reference include:

Provision of operational directives to the NACCC Secretariat;
Make informed consensus decisions on issues arising from the Climate Change
Convention, Kyoto Protocol and any future Plans for Action as decided by the
Conferences of the Parties;
Facilitating political inclusion in the national climate change process, particularly to
encourage appropriate policy development to enable effective national responses to
climate change;
Coordinate international climate change negotiations, ensuring consistency,
relevancy and real benefits to Vanuatu in participation;
Inform respective departments on Climate Change issues, particularly consideration of
climate change issues in sectoral policies and other department plans;
Monitor and facilitate the work of the Greenhouse Gas Inventory Network, detailed in
Chapter 6 of the National Climate Change Policy, and including any relevant
data collection and information systems;
Ensure that the Department responsible for settling the financial contributions of
Vanuatu to the UNFCCC is accorded;
Recognise and encourage human resource development in the field of scientific
research and development, including the formulations of projects and joint projects,
particularly in the context of Climate Change;
Establish and coordinate the work of the National Group of Experts;
Ensure appropriate climate change act/legislation is enacted; and
Facilitate access to funding for the national climate change effort.

Annex 5:

Action Plan for the Implementation of the Pacific Islands Framework for
Action on Climate Change 2006-2015

Implementing Adaptation Actions

Adaptation measures will have to be identified at the national and local levels, with regional support and
backstopping provided through agreed modalities. Linkages will be maintained with regional and national
projects such as PACC. Adaptation measures and information on adaptation technologies will be compiled
by SPREP on the climate change portal and listed and updated on a regular basis. In particular it is crucial
to encourage community participation in planning, management and implementation of adaptation meas-
ures.

Expected Outcomes by 2015 as presented in the Framework are:

1.1

Adaptation measures to the adverse effects of climate change developed and implemented at all
levels;

1.2

Identification of vulnerable priority areas/sectors and appropriate adaptation measures using
available and appropriate information recognising that such information may be incomplete;

1.3

Adaptation measures in vulnerable priority areas supported by existing data sets and traditional
knowledge, or new data developed in some instances as necessary; and

1.4

Appropriate adaptation measures integrated into national/sectoral sustainable development strate-
gies or their equivalent and linked to budgeting process.

National Actions

A step-by-step process should be identified according to national circumstances so as to ensure that in-
dividual adaptation actions are consistent with national priorities. Such a framework could involve:

clearly identifying national adaptation priorities;

engaging with stakeholders in priority sectors to discuss impacts and appropriate
adaptation responses;
developing national adaptation plans based on the priorities identified, with appropriate
support from regional organisations and donors;

designing national adaptation programmes, with appropriate support from regional
organisations and donors, to implement these plans that address underlying
vulnerabilities and support resilience building;
committing national budgets for adaptation programmes as appropriate.

Elements that could be considered as part of such a process include: establish integrated coastal manage-
ment and adaptation measures to increase the resilience of coastal systems; protect, inter alia, coral reefs,
coastal communities, and mangroves, and promote sustainable in-shore fisheries; protect freshwater re-
sources and promote watershed management; diversify economic opportunities in agriculture, biodiversity
conservation and management; protect human health from climate change related diseases; formulate ap-
propriate building and zoning codes and promote integrated early warning and response systems. Account
should also be taken of social and gender impacts of climate change so remedial actions can be prepared.
Community-based approaches developed in the region

should also be considered.

LDCs can undertake this through their NAPAs; other PICTs through a NAPA-like process (if approved by the FCCC

COP), the national communications process or other means

For the purposes of this action plan, the phrase “regional and international partners” includes national and regional

non-governmental organisation, civil society organisations and other agencies active in the region.

CBDAMPIC (SPREP) or IAAMCCSD (USP)

Regional Actions:

Regional organisations and international partners

can provide the following support as requested:

assist with the design, financing and development of national adaptation measures, such
as those referred to above;
provide capacity building and training for the implementation of national adaptation
measures;
map existing adaptation projects in the region to support co-ordination and limit
duplication and promote regional adaptation projects that involve local communities and
promote livelihoods;

facilitate regional exchange on best practices and lessons learned from adaptation
activities that can be replicated within the Pacific Islands context;
assist in accessing adaptation funds and the development of proposals including through
the provision of advice on the drafting of project proposals;
develop or enhance integrated early warning and response systems;
establish close linkages with the Pacific Nature Conservation Roundtable process.

Relevant ongoing activities on adaptation include the Pacific Adaptation to Climate Change Project, the
Kiribati Adaptation Project phase II, National Adaptation Programmes of Action (for the Pacific LDCs)
(NAPAs), as well as aspects of the development of 2

National Communications to the UNFCCC (2

NatComs).

Governance and decision making

In order to situate climate change at the appropriate level of governmental decision-making processes it
will be necessary to ensure that national sustainable development strategies and planning give prominence
to climate change issues.

Expected Outcomes by 2015 as presented in the Framework are:

2.1

Climate change considerations mainstreamed into national policies, planning processes, plans and
decision-making at all levels and across all sectors;

2.2

Partnerships and organisational arrangements between government agencies, private sector, civil
society, community and other stakeholders strengthened;

2.3

CROP agency partnerships coordinated, harmonised and strengthened to ensure country, and
outcome, focused delivery of services; and

2.4

Good governance by all stakeholders in climate change activity management at regional, national
and local levels strengthened.

National Actions

In order to establish the appropriate governance and enabling environment for climate change, the fol-
lowing activities could be considered:

promote adaptation action at both the national policy level (top-down) and at the
community level (bottom-up) and incorporate adaptation and mitigation into
national planning, policies and regulations;
promote closer links between climate change teams, environment agencies and
budgeting agencies to enhance the influence of the climate change teams and the
environment agencies on funding decisions related to climate change;
promote communication and coordination between the national agencies involved in
engaging donors so that climate change funding is optimised;
require that risk assessment are carried out as part of project appraisals, including
environmental impact assessment for all major infrastructure and economic

CBDAMPIC (SPREP) or IAAMCCSD (USP)

For example the Fiji School of Medicine Piloting Climate Change Adaptation to Protect Human Health project, the

SPREP PACC, Kiribati national KAP II project, etc.

development projects;
identify, assess and implement suitable regulatory and incentive based strategies and
instruments to climate proof communities and physical infrastructure and incorporate
future climate risk into hazard mapping and decision making, including national energy
policies and action plans that identify and promote low-emission and cost effective
measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and meet national energy needs.

Regional Actions

Regional organisations and international partners, through a multidisciplinary team of technical experts,
where necessary, can provide the following technical and scientific support:

the development of decision-making processes for prioritisation and resource allocation
at the national level to reflect effects of climate change;
the documentation and dissemination of best practices in the formulation of national
sustainable development strategies, using existing networks where appropriate;
guidance on how to integrate climate change considerations into national sustainable
development policies and strategies through the use of risk management tools,
economic and social assessment of options, prioritisation and decision-making process,
scientific and technical assessment supporting capacity building;
the integration of links between all regional centres compiling data on climate change,
extreme climatic events and sea level rise

and linkages to the regional natural disaster

management process;
support to PICTs to develop and implement legislations and support informal
institutions to climate-proof communities and infrastructure, and provision of
technical assistance to build the capacities of PICTs for the integration of
comprehensive risk management into sustainable development planning; and
support to completing needs assessments that may be required to access additional funds.

Relevant ongoing activities on governance and decision-making include work done by the Pacific Plan Ac-
tion Committee (PPAC), the development of national sustainable development strategies as well as aspects
of the development of 2

NatComs.

Improving our understanding of climate change

Developing scientific capacity in the region will be an important element of this Action Plan. The need
to communicate climate change science to stakeholders and climate change officials is also important.
There will be a need to link in with the scientiic and meteorological work undertaken by PI-GCOS to en-
sure that the projects under the PI-GCOS implementation plan that are already budgeted and planned are
implemented as a matter of priority.

Expected Outcomes by 2015 as presented in the Framework are:

3.1

Existing meteorological, hydrological, oceanographic and terrestrial institutional capacity including
data collection systems sustained and upgraded;

3.2

Technical data sets integrated with relevant climatic, environmental, social and economic informa-
tion and data sets, and traditional knowledge for risk management;

3.3

Analytical frameworks, models and tools for projections of regional climate change and variability,
risk assessment and management strengthened; and

3.4

Develop, and strengthen where, necessary datasets and information required to underpin,
strengthen and monitor vulnerable priority areas, sectors and adaptation measures.

Fiji regional cyclone centre, SPREP, SOPAC (SPSLCMP), USP etc.

National Actions

In order to improve knowledge and understanding of climate change the following actions could be con-
sidered:

enhance existing institutional capacity of national meteorological, hydrological and
oceanographic services and enhance human capacity to observe, predict and monitor
climate change and climate variability, and enhance use of climate prediction by National
Meteorological Services staff and potential users in climate sensitive industries;

develop national data policies on how institutional capacity to sustain observational
collection systems, networks and technical data sets, and convert existing climate data into
digital form;
install affordable and user-friendly observation and application systems for local
communities; and
maintain and enhance basic instrumentation

needed for weather, hydrological, terrestrial

and oceanographic forecasting and prediction.

Regional Actions

Regional organisations and international partners can provide the following support as requested:

improve paleoclimatic understanding of the Pacific;
facilitate implementation of the PI-GCOS Implementation Plan and of the
Meteorological Services Needs Analysis Projects, build on the South Pacific Sea Level
and Monitoring Project (SPSLCMP), and promote regional mechanisms that focuses on
synergies and efficient delivery of these and other relevant regional plans;
establish a Regional Clearing House on Climate Change Information

and promote

improvements in telecommunications capacity across the region and provide this
Clearing House with relevant documentation on climate change and extreme events, and
monitoring and characterisation of the impacts of sea level rise and storm surges;
facilitate assistance for the maintenance of meteorological equipment, and the collection
and security of climate data to ensure ongoing reliable data at the national level and
satellite/remote sensing with in-situ monitoring and to ensure the data is secure,
accessible and in a form capable of being utilised in the mitigation of adverse impacts of
climate change and climate variability;
increase capacity for climate change and health research in the Pacific, and improve
regional and international collaboration in this regard.

Relevant ongoing activities on improving our understanding of climate change are the PI-GCOS imple-
mentation projects, the SPSLCMP as well as regional implementation of the UNFCCC Nairobi Work
Programme and Research and Systematic Observation.

Education, training and awareness

Climate change in the context of sustainable development necessitates a holistic approach conducive to
a better quality of life within a long-term time frame, rather than one aimed at short-term gains. Sustainable
development strategies are multifaceted, taking into consideration economic, social, cultural, environmen-
tal, participatory, and political factors that affect human welfare. An optimal level of understanding of cli-
mate change in PICT communities can only be fruitfully and effectively realised if the stakeholders are
adequately educated to understand the values underpinning sustainable development and to participate in
relevant and appropriate action on climate change. Even more so, public education and awareness are
prerequisites for behavioural change and for gaining support among the general public for actions to im-
plement climate change action for sustainable development.

in-situ measurements and instrumentation systems such as satellites, ARGO floats, etc.

This Clearing House Mechanism could be a virtual network to be established at SPREP within the climate change portal.

Expected Outcomes by 2015 as presented in the Framework are:

4.1

Strengthened human capacity to monitor and assess environmental, social and economic risks
and effects of climate change;

4.2

Strengthened human capacity to identify, analyse and implement cost effective adaptation measures
as well as greenhouse gas reduction measures and creation of a pool of informed resource persons
conversant with development of practical steps in adaptation tools and methods;

4.3

Strengthened human capacity to identify and integrate economic, scientific and traditional knowl-
edge into adaptation and greenhouse gas reduction practices; and

4.4

Better informed public on climate change issues.

National Actions

In order to ensure that education, training and awareness are given appropriate attention the following ac-
tions could be considered:

appoint national focal points for education, training and awareness

and seek resources

to complete the needs assessment under relevant articles of UNFCCC for
appropriate community-level training, development of curriculum for all levels and
translation of educational material into local languages for advocacy and awareness
purposes;
develop national communications strategies appropriate to local and national needs;

strengthen the expertise of local staff for the effective management and coordination of
climate change activities;
disseminate information and tools about climate change, variability and extreme events

and on issues related to economic and social implications and health risks, to
policy-makers, landowners, private sector, the general public and outer island and
remote communities, acknowledging the importance of individual responsibilities in
tackling climate change issues;
promotion in schools of the range of career opportunities in climate science, targeting
both boys and girls;
incorporate climate change adaptation into public awareness programmes on
conservation of biodiversity;
establish exchange, secondment and mentoring programmes for training of
scientific, technical and managerial personnel and for the media, including on climate
change negotiations; and
develop and implement training programmes that enable local implementation,
management and ongoing maintenance of renewable energy technologies.

Regional Actions

Regional organisations and international partners can provide the following support as requested:
the development and maintenance of regional expertise for research and development focused on climate
change, climate variability and sea level rise;
developing a directory of regional and national organisations and individuals, with a view to building
active networks in the implementation of climate change activities, and increase the capacity of regional
educational and research institutions;
providing resources to facilitate the capacity development of PICTs working on climate change and climate
variability related issues through intra-regional cooperation and training;
regional workshops to prepare for climate change negotiations;
regional scholarship funds, mentoring programs and expert training in support of national actions outlined
above, including for climate change negotiations;

in-situ measurements and instrumentation systems such as satellites, ARGO floats, etc.

This Clearing House Mechanism could be a virtual network to be established at SPREP within the climate change portal.

coordinate the collection and dissemination of information, advice, training, networking and linkages to
ongoing research in CROP, at USP and other tertiary institutions, through the Clearing House Mechanism.

Relevant ongoing activities on education and awareness include work done on UNFCCC Article 6, as
well as communications strategies under development in the context of 2

NatComs.

Partnerships and cooperation

The success of this Action Plan will be directly linked to the commitment and political will of the partners.
Engagement by all relevant stakeholders, coupled with integrated national and local partnerships will be
important. At the regional level coordination is ongoing, but there is also a corresponding need for national
coordination between the various relevant agencies engaged in climate change and sustainable develop-
ment. Building capacity is vital to greater national coordination in PICTs. Key challenges include the need
for measurable partnership targets, maintaining momentum and for securing a sustainable financial base.
A range of concrete outcomes could be pursued under this component, including regional information-
sharing networks; capacity-building activities at the local level; utilising non-climate change related festivals
and conferences; and the launch of a number of new partnerships on specific climate change areas.

Expected Outcomes by 2015 as presented in the Framework are:

6.1

Existing and emerging international partnerships for the Pacific islands region on climate change
and related issues strengthened and established;

6.2

Enhanced coordination of regional action on climate change issues;

6.3

Climate change related assistance from development partners coordinated and harmonised to
maximise benefits to PICTs;

6.4

Access by PICTs to secure increased resources from funding mechanisms related to climate change
instruments optimised; and

6.5

Promote significant international support through advocacy for further reduction in greenhouse
gases and securing resources for adaptation.

National Actions

In order to enhance partnerships and cooperation the following actions could be considered:
seek to promote increased bilateral and international partnerships from traditional and non-traditional
partners to address national climate change issues and to secure funding and seek access to financial and
technical assistance under all currently available sources;

participate actively in the development and implementation of relevant international programmes

and

provide high level and consistent national representation to climate change negotiations meetings;
seek the support of the private sector in national climate change initiatives; and
prepare reports on national activities taken to implement the Pacific Islands Framework for Action on Cli-
mate Change and this action plan.

Regional Actions

Regional organisations and international partners can provide the following support as requested:

promotion of joint climate change projects between international organisations,
education and research institutions and PICTs;
assistance in convening regular Pacific Climate Change Roundtable Meetings to promote

NAPA’s, Second National Communications, Special Climate Change Fund, GEF Adaptation Pilot funds, Clean Develop-

ment Mechanism Adaptation Fund, UNDP Small Grants Scheme etc.

For example, the UNFCCC Nairobi Work Programme on Impacts, Vulnerability and Adaptation.