Chapter 5
Forestry and mining
5.1
In this chapter, the committee continues its consideration of the sustainable
development of the natural resources of Pacific island countries. It focuses on
resource management in the forestry sector before examining mining and then the
broader issue of managing resources in a region prone to natural disasters and
the adverse effects of climate change.
Forestry
5.2
Forests are a vital part of the subsistence economies in a number of Pacific
island countries. In particular, the region's forest industries in PNG, Solomon Islands, Fiji, and Vanuatu are important to both their formal and informal
economies.[1]
In PNG, 80 per cent of the population still live in rural areas and depend
heavily on forest areas for their livelihood and culture.[2]
Aside from timber, forests produce a range of goods for domestic use and for sale,
among which are fuel wood, game, fruit, nuts, berries, roots and medicinal
herbs. Notably, they provide a rich and diverse source of food and materials
especially during times of hardship.[3]
Forests and sustainable development
5.3
All governments in the region have made a commitment to sustainable,
multiple-use forestry. Even so, the future of the forests is under threat. In
some countries, the forecasts regarding the effects of forest degradation on
their economies are dire. DAFF noted:
Unsustainable rates of forest harvesting in many Pacific
Island countries have led to a significant reduction in the forest resource and
a decline in its productive capacity with potentially major impacts on forest
biodiversity and the forest environment. Increasing sustainable forest
management is important to address these issues, and to mitigate the impacts of
climate change.[4]
5.4
Forest activity in Solomon Islands in particular has generated considerable
disquiet. A number of international organisations have expressed concern about
the 'years of unsustainable logging' in Solomon Islands and the 'anticipated
depletion of its national forests'.[5]
For example, a 2008 World Bank publication warned that the existing rate of
logging in Solomon Islands 'implies a rapid decline in timber stocks ending in
depletion by 2015'.[6]
In its submission, Treasury noted that aggressive natural resource extraction,
as is occurring in the Solomon Islands forests, ‘will present serious
adjustment problems as resources are depleted’.[7]
5.5
International organisations have also raised concerns about the use of
PNG's forests. A 2006 World Bank assessment noted that
'deforestation and irretrievable loss of forest biodiversity in PNG was, and still is, imminent and severe'.[8]
DAFF informed the committee that many commentators have suggested that the
larger forested countries of both Solomon Islands and PNG are 'exploiting
resources at such a rate that their foreign exchange benefits will either
disappear or be significantly reduced during the period to 2020'.[9]
5.6
The governments of these countries have taken steps to ensure better
management of their forests. For example, over the past two decades the PNG Government has moved to exercise greater control over forest areas in order to enhance
sustainability and overall sector efficiency. It has updated its Forestry Act,
refined the adoption of sustainable forest management practice rules and, in
some cases, imposed a moratorium when it was clear that violations needed
investigation.[10]
The Solomon Islands Government has cancelled the licences of logging companies
failing to submit acceptable public environment reports and in some cases has
refused applications for new licences. Even so, recently the IMF found that
since 2003 logging in Solomon Islands has steadily risen:
In 2007, logging increased by about 25 per cent and accounted
for a quarter of real GDP growth, 65 per cent of exports, and almost 20 per
cent of tax revenue. The sharp increase in logging activity was in part the
result of the issuance of new licenses, re-entry into former logged areas, the
approval of tree-felling operations to allow palm oil and reforestation
projects to occur, favourable international prices, and continued strong demand
from major log importers such as China.[11]
5.7
A country report to the 2008 meeting of the Heads of Agriculture and Forestry
Services stated that the Government of Solomon Islands had limited influence
over the decisions of customary landowners in the issuing of logging licences.
It also stated that 'related efforts to legislate for better forest management
had been largely unsuccessful'.[12]
The committee now considers some of the major impediments to sound and prudent management
of forests in relevant Pacific island countries.
Causes of forest degradation—priorities
5.8
In 2005, participants in a regional awareness raising tour were told
that the strong conservation values of Pacific people towards their forests
were 'slowly diminishing as the need for money takes priority and as population
expands'.[13]
A 2006 assessment for the World Bank expressed similar concerns about the
preference given in PNG to short-term gains that produce long-term problems,
such as land degradation.[14]
It noted that improvements in logged areas are often 'little more than putting
in forestry skidding roads, which are then not maintained'. It explained:
Many households in these areas use their temporarily
increased incomes to increase their dependency on consumer goods. However, when
logging ends, little sustained development or income base remains, so
households revert to exploiting the now-degraded land resource base.[15]
5.9
This trend persists today. The Prime Minister of PNG explained that the
reasons for deforestation were complex but put simply, 'it is driven by the
fact that the world values forests more dead than alive'. He indicated that many
'deforest their land so as to trade low-value commodities like timber, beef,
palm oil, soy, coffee, and cocoa'.[16]
According to the Prime Minister, rural communities must be empowered to develop
their natural environment without destroying it, thereby 'creating sustainable
wealth for themselves and future generations'.[17]
5.10
Poor logging practices contribute significantly to the problem of forest
degradation. A recent study of forestry in Fiji, PNG, Solomon Islands and
Vanuatu was highly critical of harvesting methods. It referred to:
...poor attitudes towards improved logging practices, dismal
road construction and maintenance, tendencies to disregard exclusion zones
(e.g. buffer strips along streams), high logging intensities that leave
severely damaged residual stands behind and training programs that focus on the
wrong people and wrong subjects.[18]
5.11
Clearly communities must become aware of the importance of sound
management of their forests and have the capacity and incentive to work toward
sustainable development. Landowners, however, are not the only ones swayed by immediate
financial gain or responsible for the health of a country's forests. The
promise of short-term rewards combine with other factors to influence the
behaviour of all engaged in the forestry industry, notably governments.
Understanding sustainable development
5.12
The recent study of forestry practice in four Pacific island countries
noted that 'conflicting political and economic interests often prioritize the
liquidation of today’s natural forests over their sustainable use'. Although
governments have put in place regulations, the study noted poor compliance with,
and monitoring and auditing of, the codes of logging practices (COLP) and the
short-sightedness that characterises the approach taken toward forestry in
these countries.[19]
This time the criticism was levelled at all who have a major role in forestry,
including governments, land owners and logging companies and operators:
Local people, many of them landowners themselves but without
the necessary influence to press for more sustainable management, and officials
of respective forestry services have been delegated to a passive-bystanders'
role, although this general finding bears out differently in the four countries
visited. The result of this secondary role is that a lack of interest in is
joined by a lack of enthusiasm for implementing COLPs. On the ground, this
translates into diminished interest in monitoring and auditing COLP provisions,
a prerequisite to enforcing compliance with the COLPs.[20]
5.13
Overall, it found that all stakeholders in PNG, Vanuatu and Solomon
Islands had a 'very weak' commitment to, and understanding of, sustainable
forest management. In Fiji, it was deemed to be 'weak'.[21]
The study placed a high importance on awareness raising and support for sustainable
forest management and the codes of logging practice among policy makers and
landowners in Vanuatu and Solomon Islands.
Capacity and resources to manage
forests
5.14
Despite the overall poor record of forest management, there are positive
cases demonstrating a commitment 'to continue battling for changes in attitudes
and practices' in the forestry sector in Pacific island countries.[22]
ANZ cited examples in PNG where some organisations engaged in the forestry
industry 'develop roads and start to build infrastructure for people in
outlying areas'. They also build churches, schools, health facilities that
'actually provide a community with social wellbeing that they never had
previously'.[23]
5.15
Mr Talbot, DAFF, also acknowledged that
some forest companies were endeavouring to develop the skills of their
workforce and help the local community. Even so, he recognised that some of the
problems in the forestry sector stemmed from a lack of technical skills. He
informed the committee of the need to build up the technical management skills
of people who look after the forests including the 'need to be able to
participate in certification schemes'.[24]
5.16
The study of the four Pacific island countries also referred to the
limited financial and human resources in the forestry sector.[25]
It found 'research in Fiji, Solomon Islands and PNG, to be inadequate'.[26]
In this regard, both Fiji and Solomon Islands have raised concerns about the
lack of an institute for forestry students. Fiji noted that Pacific students
currently 'went overseas for forestry diplomas and degrees and it would be
advantageous to offer such courses in the region'.[27]
Solomon Islands has indicated that it requires assistance to determine the best
species for reforestation and to develop a long-term forestry policy.[28]
5.17
A regional workshop for improved forest practices concluded inter
alia that more effort was needed to develop appropriate silvicultural
techniques and advantage should be taken of extension methods being developed
to transfer knowledge about reforestation to landowners.[29]
Reinvestment for sustainable
development
5.18
Governments also need the financial management skills and political will
to ensure that revenue generated from forest activity and intended for
reinvestment is used appropriately. Forestry companies operating in PNG pay a silvicultural levy to the PNG Forestry Authority. According to ITS Global, the levy is
intended 'to maximise the probability of the forests regenerating themselves
with the same species and as fast as local growing conditions allow'. It noted
that the Forest Authority is failing to make those investments.[30]
The PNG Forest Industries Association maintained that the governance problems
in the forestry sector stem from 'institutional arrangements for forestry and
the behaviour of those who can access funds'. It asserted that the problem is
not between the forestry companies and the government, but:
...at the next level up the governance chain: where forestry
funds do not trickle down' to local people because officials, the well
connected and landowner companies take their cut.[31]
5.19
With regard to Solomon Islands, one study noted that the tax regime in
Solomon Islands, primarily the tax on log exports, had contributed very
considerable sums to government but there had been 'insufficient government
investment in the sector to safeguard its future'.[32]
5.20
This matter of the prudent use of revenue generated from natural
resources for re-investment in sustainable development is again mentioned in
the mining context and considered further in chapter 14 covering governance and
financial management.
Illegal activities and corruption
5.21
Although illegal logging is not well documented or understood in the
Pacific, it is recognised as a problem in some Pacific island countries.[33]
A report prepared for the New Zealand Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry identified
PNG and Solomon Islands as countries that supply 'suspicious wood'.[34]
As with the fishing sector, unauthorised activities result not only in a loss
of revenue to government but may cause serious long-term damage to the
environment.
5.22
With regard to PNG, even though its forestry industry is regulated,
issues with illegal and non-compliant operations remain and the underreporting
of logging activity could be substantial.[35]
Moreover, for years the logging industry in PNG has been dogged by allegations
of corruption. For example, a World Bank evaluation found that sustainability
in PNG's forestry sector had been compromised by major financial and
operational malfeasance.[36]
Also, a 2007 study, commissioned by the Government of PNG, chronicled the
findings of various reviews of the logging industry in PNG, starting with the 1987
Barnett commission of inquiry. This inquiry referred to robber barons 'bribing
politicians and leaders, creating social disharmony and ignoring laws in order
to gain access to, rip out and export the last remnants of, the province's
valuable timber'. A 2003 review, cited in the 2007 report, found these barons to
be 'as active as they ever were'.[37]
The 2007 study concluded that despite reforms introduced since the mid-1990s,
there would 'appear to be continuing significant instances of unlawful
behaviour'. In its view, this situation may:
...reflect a more general malaise in Papua New Guinean society
that tolerates such behaviour. Finding solutions under such circumstances is
bound to take time and requires strong political leadership to carry the reform
process forward.[38]
5.23
A 2008 report published by the Australian Institute of Criminology noted
that attempts to establish systems for controlling logging and sustainable
development in PNG were often undermined by the national and provincial
governments and that the logging industry was 'racked with problems and
controversy'.[39]
Mr John Talbot, DAFF, informed the committee that although PNG was taking some
steps to manage the resources:
...at the political level there has also been a number of
issues in terms of politicians taking bribes and forests being logged in either
an unsustainable or an illegal manner'.[40]
5.24
He stated that, 'Illegal logging is being done under the carpet to actually
assist money laundering'.[41]
5.25
A report prepared for the New Zealand Ministry of Agriculture and
Forestry found that illegal or unreported logging was also a problem in Solomon
Islands. It noted that the concentration of economic activity in the hands of a
few players requires 'strong institutions and control to ensure logging
concessions are properly administered'.[42]
In a paper published by the Australian Institute of Criminology, Andreas
Schloenhardt cited reports on widespread corruption in the Solomon Islands’
logging industry and allegations about large Malaysian logging companies
exercising influence by paying bribes instead of taxes.
5.26
According to an IMF mission, better monitoring of logging in Solomon
Islands:
...would not only generate revenues that could finance
much-needed social and development spending (for example, for financing free
primary education or for funding more vocational training), but would also
encourage sustainable logging activity.[43]
5.27
It urged the authorities 'to enhance monitoring by employing qualified
personnel'. The previously-mentioned study of forest practices in four Pacific
island countries also recommended that improvements be made to the monitoring,
auditing and control systems.[44]
This suggestion raises the issue of the capacity of Pacific island countries to
exercise control over activities in their forests, especially in areas that are
often remote and difficult to access.[45]
In relation to fishing, the committee has already drawn attention to the
limited capacity of Pacific island countries to monitor their EEZs.
Summary
5.28
An understanding of the importance of sustainable development coupled
with the necessary knowledge and skills to manage forests effectively is central
to ensure that forests in Pacific island countries are viable and long term
enterprises. But education alone is insufficient to address the problem of poor
harvesting practices and over exploitation. Appropriate policies, political
will, technical capacity to manage forests and adequate resources to enforce
compliance with government policies are also needed.
5.29
In this regard, the role of governments in managing forests is critical.
Ultimately they are responsible for formulating and implementing policies designed
to enhance the sustainable development of their forests. Clearly, helping local
communities to manage forests better through R&D, education and technical
assistance is central to sustainable development. Government commitment and
adequate funding is also required to ensure that those engaged in the timber
and logging industry comply with the rules and regulations governing the use of
forests.
Mining
5.30
A number of Pacific island countries, including Fiji, PNG and Solomon Islands, have rich mineral reserves. A recent report by the Commission on
Sustainable Development found that for a few small island developing states,
mining operations have contributed meaningfully to the rural economy:
Papua New Guinea has porphyry-copper, silver and gold mines;
Fiji is endowed with large porphyry-copper deposits and two gold mines; the
Solomon Islands recently opened its first gold mine.[46]
5.31
PNG, in particular, has a long history of mining operations which now form
a significant part of its economy, accounting for 85 per cent of exports.
Indeed, the mining industry in PNG is one of the largest in the Asia–Pacific
region. The major mines are Lihir Gold, Porgea and Ok Tedi. There is also the
proposed liquefied natural gas (LNG) project.
Environmental concerns
5.32
The Pacific Islands Forum identified environmental degradation as one of
the major challenges facing the mining industry in the region.[47]
Similarly, the University of Queensland's Consortium on Community Building and
Responsible Resource Development was of the view that mining operations,
particularly large-scale ones, present significant challenges in the region.[48]
It cited environmental pollution and social dislocation as a possible and
serious downside to be avoided.[49]
5.33
Indeed, experience shows that over the years poor mining practices have
caused 'physical dislocation and environmental degradation in rural areas'.[50]
For example, exploitation has seriously degraded the land in Nauru. In 2003, the UN Department of Economic Development and Environment estimated that,
'by the time primary mining is completed this early 21st century,
nearly two-thirds of the island will have been converted from a gently
undulating, productive forestland to an almost totally unproductive pinnacle
and pit topography'.[51]
5.34
Located in the Western Province of PNG, Ok Tedi also provides a warning
of the damage and dislocation that mining may cause to the environment and to
the livelihood and the culture of local communities.[52]
In the past, tailings and rock waste from this mine were discharged into the
Fly River and its tributaries causing extensive damage to the river and
disruption to the social fabric of local people; a legacy that will continue
long after the mine closes. Mitigation and remediation measures are currently
in place and a program of community development projects operates to assist
local people.[53]
5.35
Although by its nature mining causes environmental and, in some cases,
social disruption, the Pacific 2020 report highlighted the critical role of
government in minimising the risk of environmental damage due to the extraction
of minerals. It argued that without effective governance, mining 'will not only
cause local environmental damage, but also generate prosperity only in the
short run and do nothing to lay the foundations for long-term growth'.[54]
5.36
The committee has already raised concerns about the importance of
capacity in the governments of Pacific island countries to manage their natural
resources in a sustainable and effective way. The mining sector further
underlines this now dominant theme.
5.37
For instance, the proposed PNG LNG project highlights the requirement
for the PNG Government to have expertise across a range of disciplines to
oversee the project effectively. The project involves 'in excess of US$10
billion for the initial phase' and is 'the largest private sector investment
ever contemplated in PNG'.[55]
To start with, the government needs people with the relevant scientific and
technical skills to assess the environmental implications of this project.
According to Mr Peter Graham, Esso Highlands Ltd, the project co-venturers have
spent two years developing the environmental impact statement. The document is
made up of 'some 5,000 pages and 36 independent studies'.[56]
Even though the co-venturers have published the document on their website and
undertaken to provide copies to anyone who asks for it, the Government of PNG
confronts the difficult challenge of sifting through and analysing the contents
of the document. The magnitude of this project places a heavy demand on the
capacity of the PNG Government to supervise it effectively. Should it proceed,
the government will have to manage not only environment and social issues, but
also the revenue stream created by the project. The way in which governments oversee
and support these large projects is discussed further in chapter 14 on
governance and financial management.
5.38
The large scale commercial mining operations underscore the importance
of governments having the necessary expertise to analyse the environment and
social impacts of proposed projects and to manage the revenue windfall from
these operations. Donor countries, such as Australia, could assist the
governments of the Pacific island countries to build their capacity in these
areas.
Summary
5.39
As with agriculture and fisheries, concerns abound about resource
management in the forestry and mining sector, including the tendency for short
term gains to crowd out consideration of the long term economic sustainability
of the economy and the environment. The occurrence of natural disasters and the
adverse effects of climate change magnify the importance of sound sustainable
development.
Sustainable development, natural disasters and climate change
5.40
To this stage, the committee has considered the major threats posed to
the sustainable development of the region's natural resources. The pressure
from population growth, the over-exploitation of resources, poor harvesting
practices, lax or inappropriate management of resources, and inadequate
monitoring of, and compliance with, regulations increase the vulnerability of
the region's natural resources. Fragile environments already under strain are
less able to withstand the added effects of a natural disaster or changes in
climate.
Natural disasters
5.41
In chapter 3, the committee noted the damage caused to the economies of
Pacific island countries by natural disasters and the growing concerns about
the effects of climate change on economic development in the region. In this
section, the committee looks at the measures being taken to minimise the
adverse effects of natural hazards and climate change on Pacific island
countries.
5.42
The natural disasters that strike Pacific island countries have far-reaching
effects on land use and serious environmental consequences especially when
combined with unsustainable development behaviour.[57]
The committee has noted the over exploitation of trees and poor road
construction that degrade the land. These damaging practices also increase the
vulnerability of the environment to the effects of weather extremes and
highlight the importance of developing and implementing sustainable
environmental management regimes.
5.43
Indeed, as noted in a United Nations environment paper 'land use and
land cover changes are eroding the natural buffers' that protect communities
from serious risk. The resulting environmental degradation 'is known to
transform a hazard into a disaster or to increase several times fold the impact
of a disaster'.[58]
For example, the Ministerial Conference on Environment and Development in Asia and the Pacific noted that the storm damage caused by Cyclone Ofa, which devastated Samoa, was 'amplified by the loss of resilient traditional housing and farming practices
and loss of mangrove areas'. It stated:
Poor logging and farming practices now result in greater
flooding and soil loss and these, in turn, cause loss of valuable soil from the
land and siltation of coastal coral reef and sea grass communities.[59]
5.44
Clearly, an environment weakened by the pressure from increases in
population, by overuse and poor practices is also more susceptible to changes
in climate.
Climate change
5.45
Numerous studies identify the lower lying small island states as being
among the most vulnerable countries to the adverse effects of climate change.[60]
In some cases, changes in weather patterns are already creating problems.[61]
The Garnaut Climate Change Review noted that small rises in sea level
have been associated with saline intrusion into gardens and household water supplies.
It cited examples of village communities that have been displaced by the destruction
of food and water supplies because of unexpectedly high king tides.[62]
A number of witnesses also highlighted concerns about the damaging effects of
changes in climate in the Pacific region.[63]
The attachment to AusAID's submission, Pacific Economic Survey 2008,
stated that climate change is 'the biggest long-term threat':
The most recent assessment by the International Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC, 2007) highlighted the special vulnerability of small
island states to climate change, including changing rainfall patterns and
temperature increases, the potential for an increase in extreme weather events,
and, in the longer term, rising sea levels.[64]
5.46
Dr Hearn informed the committee that communities experiencing salination
and reduced crop yields on previously fertile soils because of changes in
climate are 'very concerned and very frightened' by them.[65]
Professor Jane McAdam similarly spoke of dire circumstances where people are no
longer able to grow traditional crops with consequences such as increases in
diabetes. She noted that as the water starts encroaching on the land and
mosquito infestations begin, there have been increases in malaria.[66]
5.47
Despite growing concerns about the effects of changes in climate, a
recent UN report described the overall response by Pacific island countries to
these changes as 'project-based, ad hoc and heavily dependent on external
resources'. It stated that some of the common reasons for such a feeble
response include 'competing priorities, lack of national government commitment,
limited capacity and the dominance of international priorities over national
ones in the climate change agenda'.[67]
5.48
It recognised the critical importance of subsistence and commercial
agriculture to local food security and export earning revenues. In its view,
the 'implementation of adaptation measures to build resilience of food systems
is critical to avoiding enormous economic losses in agricultural, forestry and
fisheries'.[68]
The study made a number of observations based on case studies of climate change
undertaken in Pacific island countries. They included:
-
a clear need to focus on supporting agricultural production in
the context of changing climatic conditions and future climate change
scenarios;
-
the limited human capacity among Pacific island countries which
highlights the need to focus on capacity development;
-
the potential opportunities for increased food in coastal marine
area through mariculture/aquaculture;
-
a lack of awareness and information available to governments and
communities to enable them to assess the potential of climate change and to
make appropriate decisions; and
-
real progress can only be made with support from development
partners.[69]
5.49
It argued that Pacific island countries should focus on adaptation and,
to a lesser extent, on mitigation. It suggested they need to concentrate on:
...win-win measures, such as switching to drought resistance
crop varieties, improving climate information dissemination systems and farm
level management, strengthening the enforcement of fisheries and forestry
legislation and eliminating bureaucratic inefficiencies in government.[70]
5.50
One of the major challenges for Pacific island countries is to find the
resources to meet the challenges posed by climate change. Peceli Vocea, Governor
of the Bank for Fiji, argued that, because of their greater susceptibility to
the adverse effects of changes in climate, poor and developing countries will
bear a bigger burden of the adaptation and mitigation costs:
As a result, rehabilitation costs of climatic events are
sometimes met at the expense of planned developmental programs, which add
pressure to Government finances.[71]
5.51
The President of Kiribati similarly noted the limited resources
available to combat the effects of climate change. He told the United Nations
General Assembly that seawall construction was Kiribati's main adaptation
measure but that protection was limited to public infrastructure. He stated,
'We simply do not have the resources to extend the protection to private
properties.' Ultimately, though, he noted, that low-lying countries such as
Kiribati 'will have to face up to the reality of their islands being unable to
support life and to plan accordingly beyond existing adaptation strategies'.[72]
According to the President:
While the international community continues to point fingers
at each other regarding responsibility for and leadership on this issue, our
people continue to experience the impact of climate change and sea level rise.
And practical solutions continue to evade us.[73]
![Image](/~/media/wopapub/senate/committee/fadt_ctte/completed_inquiries/2008_10/swpacific/report/c05_1_jpg.ashx)
Rising sea levels and
flooding cause damage in low-lying islands of the Pacific. Here people in
Kiribati are repairing a breakwater damaged by strong currents (image courtesy
of the Pacific Calling Partnership at the Edmund Rice Centre).
5.52
This observation highlights the importance not only of raising the level
of awareness and understanding of climate change and its potential threat to
sustainable development and food security but also ensuring that these
countries have the resources, including human capacity, to meet the challenges.
For some low-lying islands, the matter of resettlement is a real prospect.
Summary
5.53
With their small populations and land mass, Pacific island countries are
not in a position to make a significant difference to the advent or extent of
climate change. Their main efforts focus on adapting to change as best they can
and ensuring that human activity does not expose their environment to greater
risk from the damaging effects of natural disasters and changes in climate. In
this regard, donor countries such as Australia can assist them. Indeed, the
potential adverse effects of changes in climate strengthen the need for
research into sustainable development, raising awareness of the need for best
practice in managing land and marine resources and capacity building covering
all facets of resource management. For the low lying small island states,
Australia could take a leadership role to find, and help these countries
implement, practical solutions to deal with the detrimental effects of climate
change.
Conclusion
5.54
The committee has highlighted the importance of agriculture, fishing,
forestry and mining to Pacific island countries. It has also noted the critical
need to ensure that these resources are used and managed in a manner that does
not endanger the physical environment and livelihoods of communities and allows
the economy as a whole to benefit. In many cases, the committee drew attention
to problems within each sector due in part to inadequate education on, and
research and development into, the sustainable development of natural resources
in the region. It also identified difficulties with poor resource management
practices and attitudes toward sustainable development, the lack of human
capacity and inadequate physical resources. Finally, it found that weak
political will to manage natural resources effectively and to promote and
enforce best management practices compounds the problems. These themes around
the importance of research, development, education and capacity building across
a range of activities, even at this stage of the report, are firmly established
and are key areas in which Australia could have a significant role in assisting
Pacific island countries to meet their economic challenges.
Navigation: Previous Page | Contents | Next Page