LATE TACKLES for Climate Change

NB: Samoa is very late in tackling the climate change debate and even later in tackling the climate change impacts.

For our rural villagers to respond to climate change, we offer here 36 activities to contemplate, preferably very quickly.



Samoa may have just won the 2008 International Rugby 7s Tournament against Fiji (May 2008), but if it wasn’t for a vital call from the Side-line Referee just as the final bell rang, who had mind you luckily identified a ‘late tackle’ penalty against the Fiji Team, then Samoa was bound to have lost against Fiji who had just scored hopefully their winning try – to then have it disallowed.

And, ironically, Samoa may have once again been saved by yet another ‘late tackle’, this time from the GEF-PAS. Yes, the Global Environment Facility's Pacific Alliance of Sustainability is offering millions of dollars to help Samoa fight climate change.

And Samoa is inheriting $USD2Million in August 2008 from GEF-PAS LDC Climate Change Fund to ‘tackle’ climate change impacts on its 10 islands. This is indeed a very late ‘tackle’ in that we have all known for many years that global warming is seriously affecting our Pacific Island Countries.

By the way the whole community is responding, rugby is by far much more important than climate change impacts. Well, so it seems. So what will it take before 20,000 Samoans are seen marching on Parliament House in protest against the following array of serious climate change related impacts already being felt in Samoa, namely:
high susceptibility and vulnerability of Pacific Islands to climate change and sea level rise,
episodic extreme weather events, such as tropical cyclones, floods and droughts,
sea-level rise with salinization of ground-waters,
ecological impacts through temperature and ocean acidification related stressors on natural systems,
storm related inundation of low-lying coastal communities/infrastructure,
increased coastal erosion due to worsening tropical cyclone events,
flooding as a result of higher intensity/increased duration rainfall events,
drought as a result of longer periods without rainfall,
increased evapo-transpiration at higher ambient temperatures. This could be exacerbated in some low-lying areas by as sea levels rise,
threatened socio-economic development,
reduced national security and development,
increased necessity for extra hazard management,
altering traditional community disaster preparedness,
growing reliance on ecological and environmental knowledge,
growing necessity for culturally appropriate adaptation policies and measures,
necessity now for climate early warning advisories,
need for improved climate change decision-making,
need for capacity building framework,
need for community awareness building framework,
need for improved climate change educational outputs,
building the overall resilience of Pacific Islands to climate change related hazards, need for strengthened weather and climate observation systems and activities,
updating analysis of existing climate data for all South Pacific Island nations,
developing international scientific linkages,
Improving climate change risk assessment skills,
Improving adaptation development at community levels,
Developing hazard models for communities,
Improving Cyclone Recovery Reconstruction Plans,
Designing appropriate stakeholder engagement and adaptation plans,
Implementing CIMs and CERPs,
Identifying fundamental gaps in understanding the effects of climate change on Pacific Island communities,
Developing practical hazard mitigation and climate change adaptation measures to respond to these risks,
Increasing the investment in sustainable development by implementing An investment for sustainable development in the Pacific Island Countries – Disaster risk reduction and disaster management – A framework for action 2005-2015,
Increasing economic growth without harming ecosystems,
Alleviating poverty,
Improved environmental and social resilience to the impacts of such natural hazards,
Help implement the Pacific Island for Action on Climate Change 2006-2015 and
Making ESD compulsory in the schools and all public sector segments.

This is a comprehensive list of things to consider.

For the sake of those who have just joined this broadcast, GEF-PAS is investing $USD99Million into hopefully restoring vulnerable, threatened and degraded Pacific Island ecosystems. And about half of these funds are going towards adapting to climate change impacts in one way or another.

What if Pacific governments still prefer to importing fossil fuels and, therefore, continue to add to the global warming impacts being felt globally? Samoa has taken a different tack by looking at growing its own ‘oil’. This may be the saviour crop our farmers have been looking for?

Palm oil is now being grown in Indonesia at the expense of its own valuable vast tracts of native rainforests. Yes, the third largest set of ‘lungs’ of the Earth are being ‘surgically’ removed. But, no matter what bio-fuel crop we plant in Samoa, we still need to complete a safety check, an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), to ensure that no such damage like this is caused in Samoa.

But, just think about it. Samoa can grow these ‘energy’ crops and make its own electricity. In fact, we can help replace some of our expensive imported fuels (~$SAT100million per year is imported).

Samoa is about to design an agro-forestry project that could, if considered in light of the climate change impacts on Samoa, indeed become another very ‘late tackle’ from our agricultural sector.

Now our health sector needs to adapt to climate change. Yes, climate health is now a priority area for our health services to concentrate on. With more climate change impacts, Samoa may get more floodings and hence more typhoid and other water-borne, food-borne and vector-borne diseases like dengue fever and leptospirosis.

Should Samoa’s tourism industry also adapt to climate change impacts?

Should Samoa’s energy sector also adapt to climate change impacts?

Should villagers also adapt to climate change impacts?

These are just some of the questions that MNRE are asking their key climate change stakeholders. And the question we’d like to leave you with is:

“Why are we all tackling these climate change impacts above so late?” Why the late tackle?

Luckily, The Global Environment Facility (GEF) has asked all Pacific Islanders to form a Pacific Alliance of Sustainability (PAS) so that all the governments of the Pacific can take a serious programmatic approach to one of the world’s most serious environmental challenges. The GEF-PAS is going to tackle this climate change issue very seriously, spending in fact well over $USD10million to help protect the Pacific from climate change impacts.

So, what can you do to help?

What can you do to help Samoa protect itself against these serious consequences of air pollution - all caused by carbon emissions.

Eco-Villages in the Making - SAMOA 2008

NB: Samoa, thanks to GEF-PAS, is funding a major coastal re-development to help combat global climate change.


IN SAMOA, South Pacific, we are targeting 7 coastal villages and trying to turn them into a model village setting, a small step towards an eco-village.

We have 21 sustainable environmental restoration projects nationally, valued at $USD15Million, thanks to the Global Environment Facility and their Pacific Alliance of Sustainability Programme (2008-2012) valued at $USD99million, Pacific-wide.

We now want to harmonize some of these projects into these 7 villages on the shores of Vaiusu Bay, inner city Apia. We have renewable energy projects, we have micro-financing access, agro-forestry projects, climate change adaptation projects increasing ecosystem resilience, mangrove re-afforestation, biodiversity conservation, etc. Should anyone be keen to suggest some helpful hints, we'd like to hear from you.

We're even moving one village, Sogi, away from sea level and to higher ground. Other villages in Vaiusu Bay are now prone to increasing floodings and climate health risks. We're even restoring the old Vaitoloa household dumpsite which ceased operation in 1996.

Wish us luck. A monumental task, but we're trying, hopefully ending-up with a Marine Protected Area by 2010 as a tourist attraction complete with ecotourism activities and an educational Environmental Resource Centre.

This would be a landscape architect's dream project, South Seas, desperate villagers, and well financed, backed by Government and hopefully the potential of being a Pacific 'first'.
Samoa is moving towards becoming a sustainable tourism destination, a carbon-neutral holiday destination, but we are floating in the middle of the largest ocean mass in the world, subject to the full brunt of climate change.

And where's the climate justice from our main tourism markets? For example, Australians are mining and exporting more polluting coal to China than ever before, New Zealanders are opposing their own self-regulatory Carbon Trading Scheme designed to reduce their own carbon emissions, Americans still refusing to sign the Kyoto Protocol, and whilst Australians have signed the Kyoto Protocol, they still refuse to honour the real intention of reducing climate change impacts on their neighbouring Pacific 'development partners'.

Then, where's the real partnership here? Where are the value-based societies that breed such injustices?

PLEASE HELP Pacific Islands retain their 300,000 islands and their 3000 languages and cultures as climate change continues to impact Pacific Islanders, especially as airline bunker fuels increase their global carbon pollution at an increasing alarming rate of 5% annually, and pollution from shipping fuel also increasing at 5% annually.

So, where's the social and cultural interest in the world's top tourist destinations? Or is it only short-term economic interests?

What does PATA and SPTO say about this? Nothing. Neither the Pacific Asia Travel Association nor the Secretatiat for the Pacific Travel Organization have addressed this concern for the past 20 years, despite receiving this advice repeatedly. And these are our Pacific tourism advisory boards? What do Pacific Islanders say about this? Very little. Not enough?

God help our travellers to the South Seize. God help Pacific Islanders.

SUSTAINABLE LIVING – Vaiusu Bay Style

NB: There is an attempt here in Samoa to build a model Sustainable Village around Vaiusu Bay, employing all the best practices, introducing all the latest proven renewable energy technologies, and improving the natural resource management skills. Close on $USD500,000 will be spent initially to achieve this.



Some of the coastal villages within Faleata District, those surrounding Vaiusu Bay, have been selected for some real improvements in their lifestyle. Vaiusu Bay, as you all remember, had once been the local household rubbish dumping site, and even acting as a sand-dredging site for many years.

Can anyone remember taking all their rubbish and throwing it into the mangroves, into the Vaiusu Bay?

In 1996, Government relocated the dumpsite to Tafaigata. Has anyone been to Tafaigata Dumpsite lately? It is truly amazing how so much rubbish can be carefully processed and buried. No more burning of these wastes is allowed at this site. Why? That’s right. It is so poisonous to our health, and even our wildlife. So why do we still see villagers, and sometimes even schools, burning all their rubbish? It is time for all of us to stop unnecessary burning of rubbish, especially plastics (that can cause cancer) and leaves and grasses (that can be better used as good compost for the nearby plants). Getting the picture?

In February 2008, Government also put a stop to the sand dredging in the Bay. We now all realize that all of our coastal villages are relying on their marinelife as a source of food. We cannot afford to keep reducing the production of marinelife and seafoods. Or can we? Remember, as climate change impacts our shores even more, food security becomes a more serious issue. We all need to prepare for all the damage that global warming will cause.

As an aside, does anyone know the connection between air pollution and global warming? Of course we do, so why don’t our pulenuu ban all fires in our villages, except those for cooking? Come on now, go and see your pulenuu today and ask kindly for his help. Suggest a $10 fine for each family court polluting our air, causing cancer, and causing more global warming.

Please write in and tell us what your pulenuu said.

Attempts have also been made to protect the remaining mangroves in Vaiusu Bay, these mangroves being so important for our inshore fisheries, as a source of medicinal plants, even helping to protect our coastline from storm damages.

The question now is: “Can Vaiusu Bay be fully restored to its original status?”

May be one day soon, Vaiusu Bay will become a popular ecotourism destination, maybe equipped with a beautiful mangrove walkway where our children can wonder safely to view some pristine mangrove ecosystems, with fish and crabs breeding beneath the walkway, seabirds resting and feeding in the shallows, and even plant-out a few new mangrove seedlings themselves.

Imagine if every school child in Apia planted one new mangrove tree per year in Vaiusu Bay? Wouldn’t it start to look beautiful within say 10 years time? And if every school child picked-up a paelo/bucket of tins and rubbish from around the shores of Vaiusu Bay, then imagine what Vaiusu Bay would soon look like? Mind you, we all need to stop throwing our household rubbish into all the streams and drains flowing into Vaiusu Bay. Do you see your neighbours discarding of their rubbish this way? Does the rubbish truck collect rubbish in front of your house twice a week? Then, for the sake of all the fish and crabs in Vaiusu Bay, let’s get all our household rubbish onto those trucks and send all those trucks out to …………….? Where? That’s right. Tafaigata Dumpsite.

Now, the residents of Vaiusu Bay have expressed all these concerns at recent consultations with the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (MNRE), wanting the old dumpsite restored, wanting more mangroves planted out where they once grew, wanting to also prevent some serious floodings from further reducing their living standards. Mind you, these same residents in Vaiusu Bay were also happy to hear that the sand dredging has finally stopped, the dumpsite is about to be finally restored, and that somehow Government is going to try and help stop some of the damage being caused by floodings in these low-lying areas.

UNDP have designed a Programme of Works for Protected Areas (PoWPA) and this funding has been offered to these coastal villages to now try and protect this once beautiful mangrove and coastal ecosystem, restoring it to the best possible level, with the best possible management of these coastal natural resources.

But the question now is: “Do we have the management skills within Samoa, within Vaiusu Bay, to successfully restore these mangroves and coastal ecosystems?

The answer is: “Even if we don’t, we are all going to get trained on how best to protect not only our mangroves and fish and crabs, but also all the wildlife in Samoa. The MNRE is now preparing a new Key Biodiversity Area Booklet with all the best wildlife conservation sites in Samoa being recorded within this booklet. And this booklet will contain all the latest wildlife management advices on how best to manage Samoa’s unique and precious wildlife, both marine and terrestrial.

Two other such MPAs have been operating in Aleipata and Safata Districts for the past 10 years or more. The lessons learnt and the results from these two MPAs will be applied to the new MPA in Vaiusu Bay. But what does this all mean to you and I?

Well, it simply means that we may soon be learning how to live a more sustainable lifestyle with good food, good schooling, good ecosystems and good management of all our wildlife, including human beings.

After all, UNDP want us all to achieve our Millennium Development Goals, our MDGs, by 2015. So in rehabilitating Vaiusu Bay, it means that all of us can help by keeping our air clean, sending ALL our rubbish to Tafaigata, by clearing all the rubbish away from our drains and rivers that feed into Vaiusu Bay, and by learning with us over the next few weeks how we can all Save Samoa’s Siosiomaga.

Do Pacific Islanders need to do their own EIAs?

We Pacific Islanders (PIs) have been the Professors of Sustainability for over 40,000 years, so just ask us PIs, especially Samoans, if you think you may need some sustainability help.

Allow us to share some public documents, see www.thegef.org, detailing some of the Pacific’s main Country Environmental Priorities, many of them caused by a refusal to sign the Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change Impacts and applying it. Now the Pacific is spending 30% of its environmental restoration budget on combating climate change negative impacts, both mitigation and adaptation, amounting to $USD10s of millions regionally wasted.

This is millions of USD that could have been spent on increasing our Pacific sustainable livelihoods and eliminating poverty here in the Pacific. Pacific Islanders are being pushed into poverty more and more, at a time when we should all be alleviating poverty in the world, not causing it.

The current (2008) Federal Labour Govt in Australia is sending not only the Pacific into further poverty by its ongoing poor relationships with Pacific Islanders, but sometimes even causing it with their poor use of taxpayers’ money/aid dollars. I’ll try to explain this comment:

Either Australia is prepared to do EIAs on all its aid projects in the Pacific (an Environmental Impact Assessment tool that gives us all some pertinent knowledge of the positive and negative impacts of a project, and whether the project should proceed or not), and be prepared to do an EIA even once projects have been completed.

You can even do a project EIA during and even AFTER a project, as long as you, as the donor, is prepared to accept all the responsibilities and even learn from it for your other planned/implemented Pacific projects.

Guess we PIs could also do our own EIAs and pass this knowledge on to our donors. Here are just a few areas causing we PIs great concern:

1. RADIATION FALLOUT
We Pacific Islanders have suffered radiation fallouts in the past here in the Pacific, and will continue to suffer from such radiations for many generations to come, albeit Australian, French and/or South African radiations.

2.DEFORESTATION CAUSING POVERTY
Australia, and Australia’s trading partners, Pacific or otherwise, are importing Asian/Pacific rainforests, depleting, non-sustainably, Asia’s and the Pacific’s unique rainforest ecosystems, causing villagers to face poverty head-on.

3. DEFORESTATION CAUSING ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS
Extensive deforestation is affecting water catchments and food supplies. There is now no potable water in some villages, lowered hygiene, no native forest foods where they once belonged, lowered nutrition for some, soil siltation in our coral lagoons, less fish, no oxygen (well, less oxygen), etc.

4. INSUFFICIENT LEGISLATIONS
Australia, and Australia’s trading partners, ONLY need to legislate to help protect Australia’s reputation of this on-going souring relationship with the Pacific and its peoples. Why not legislate about trading with our trade partners who refuse to legislate against importing and even exporting vulnerable Asian and/or Pacific rainforests (about 98% of the Sumatran and Borneo rainforests may be destroyed by 2022 because of expanding logging and palm oil production). Why?

5. NEW CASH CROPS AND CATTLE CAUSING DESTRUCTION
Now PNG and Solomon Islands are planting palm oil. We in Samoa have nearly stopped non-sustainable logging, but not quite. Cattle ranching is now the new cancer with cattle pastures expanding into our few remaining rainforests that we needed for our water catchments, hydro-power, biodiversity conservation, even our own medicinal plants and cultural spirituality.

6. NON-SUSTAINABLE PRACTICES CONDONED. WHY?
We need every Ministry in every Pacific Island Country within the Pacific working collectively towards sustainability, yet we fail (as development partners) to take some obvious and very inexpensive vital development steps. Children are not even being taught sustainability, nor are our Pacific politicians – just look at ALL the non-sustainable practices throughout Australia and the Pacific that are on-going today, with full political support. No wonder the Pacific Youth are annoyed, disillusioned, turning to drugs and choosing suicide instead.

7. 20 SIMPLE POSITIVE STEPS CAN EASILY BE TAKEN
There are 20 obvious environmental management steps that could have been taken over the past 20 years by Australia to help Pacific Island relations, and the same 20 obvious environmental management steps can still be taken over the next 20 weeks or 20 months and even 20 years. Just ask your best Federal Australian Environmental Planners to come-up with this list of 20 FIRST STEPS, and then we’ll show you ours.

8. IS AN APOLOGY DUE? THINK OF THE UNNECESSARY IPACTS TO DATE.
We Pacific Islands also accept apologies, but Australia has never seen fit to offer a National Apology to Oceanic Islanders in total. Oceania now suffers the largest cultural/language extinction rate in the world, many of our 3000 languages are eroding or disappearing/degrading at an alarming rate. And you’ve taken much of our forests as well.

9. 50% PACIFIC BIODIVERSITY ALREADY THREATENED
Bird species in Oceania are facing extinction, in fact, Oceania has the highest extinction rate for avian species in the world (Australia has the highest extinction rate for native mammal and native plant species in the world). Today, 50% of the biological diversity (wildlife) in the Pacific is threatened or extinct. And who cares?

10. PACIFIC CRISES BURGEONING AND BURDENING
A blind eye is being turned to important AIDS/HIV epidemics here in the Pacific. Why? PNG, and may be Bouganville, are facing a crisis handling just one additional disease on-top of an already ailing health system and illiterate education system and agricultural sectors that are starved for sound sustainable advice (excuse all the puns).

11. NON-COMMUNICABLE DISEASES
Obesity and diabetes, and other non-communicable diseases, are also rife now in the Pacific, thanks to poor quality imports and processed foods and introduced non-sustainable lifestyle aspirations. So sweet of you!

12. ADDICTIVE HABITS
Pacific women and children are now taking-up smoking, and even illicit drugs. And who cares? We in the Pacific are now just learning to make the same bad mistakes that have been made overseas.

13. PACIFIC LOSING ITS ROMANCE
And the Kids in the Pacific will soon be another ‘lost generation’ as we Pacific adults destroy the very sanctity of the Pacific that even our visitors are seeking. Even this travel branding with the famous ‘Romance of the South Seas’ slogan is tiring for all us Pacific Islanders. It is certainly not a romantic lifestyle for us anymore.

14. SIMPLE OR COMPLEX ISSUES?
We PIs are really worried about what the rest of the world is doing to assist us. Are we fully aware of this simplicity? I was going to say ‘complexity’, but that’s not exactly correct.

15. GAP BETWEEN RICH AND POOR WIDENING
Mind you in this context, poor political stability is inevitable in the Pacific when rural villagers/different ethnic factions realize that the gap is widening between the rich and the poor, and the struggle from day to day gets harder.

16. MACRO-ECONOMIC REFORMS
We in Samoa have successfully reformed our macro-economic policies, and we now have more villagers electrified than ever before (98%), we have compulsory education until 15 years old, we have an almost free education and medical system, we have one of the world’s highest public transport ratios.

17. CROSS-CULTURAL TRENDS - GOOD AND BAD
We’ve even learnt your language, adopted your dress and belief systems, and even import your foods, so you will feel at home in Samoa. In return, we can teach you to play rugby on our white sandy beaches, if you have the time and the interest.

18. MONEY OR COMMITMENT?
We have enough money from the Global Environment Facility (GEF with its $USD3.3 billion to invest in environmental management globally) (http://gef-passamoa.blogspot.com) as we form a Pacific Alliance of Sustainability (PAS) with those countries that are genuinely interested in not only repairing the damaged livelihoods of we Pacific Islanders, but are prepared to also stop the on-going malpractices and mismanagements of the global environment, and Australia is one of the biggest global environmental offenders.

19. LEVELS OF PACIFIC COMMITMENT?
However, our Pacific brothers and sisters are no exception. Collectively, we in the Pacific need to re-think the GEF Pacific Alliance of Sustainability (PAS). What does it really mean, other than an extra $USD100 million injection of money that may not really change our level of Pacific commitment to truly attaining sustainable livelihoods once again?

20. FOOD SECURITY
Food security is now a major issue for PIs (Pacific Islanders). We PIs are going hungry, starving, malnourished because of disturbed national parks and water catchments with Australian cattle now grazing in them (unbeknown to Australia) and causing leptospirosis, E. coli bacterial infection of the gut, especially our children, and even more impacts on our biodiversity and sustainable livelihood options.

21. CUMULATIVE EFFECTS AND NEW ISSUES LIKE 'CLIMATE HEALTH'
We PIs cannot face the current barrage of environmental mis-managements, let alone as PIs now being asked to face your induced ‘climate health’ issues as well. The first consequence of these added negative impacts on the Pacific and we PIs, many of them caused by poor understanding from Australian decision-makers, means that our health, education and agricultural sectors will now suffer even more so.

22. COST OF IMPLEMENTING ESD
Where is the subject ‘Education for Sustainable Development’? Well, we in the Pacific now have ESD, we have an ESD Framework (Sept 2006 – signed by all our PI Education Ministers), we have an ESD Action Plan (as of February, 2008, again signed by all our PI Education Ministers), but we don’t have the funds to implement it. Do you?

23. WANTED - Sustainable development partners
We PIs are looking for a development partner, a sustainable development partner, one that is interested in Sustainable Development, to be our on-going mentor, re-introducing sustainability and romance back into the Pacific. We all need to take a more holistic and harmonized viewpoint to attaining sustainable livelihoods, after-all, we all now live in the one Global Village.

24. SHARING RESOURCES WORLDWIDE
We PIs are at least prepared to share our Pacific resources with the whole world, but only on one condition: ‘that you share all your resources with us sustainably, and that you allow us to utilize our natural resources equally sustainably’.

So, to answer the question: "Do we PIs need to do our own EIAs?", the answer is "Yes, most likely, as no one else is really interested in these on-going issues in the Pacific. If they were, then they would have taken the necessary precautionary measures by now.

Best we PIs can do is to encourgage a sense of responsibility in all our Pacific aid donors.

Village Development with or without micro-financing institutions

PS: We are just learning in Samoa how to better develop our villages with micro-financing, whilst simultaneously protecting our wildlife and our ecosystems.







And thanks to http://www.greenmicrofinance.org/ (GMf), we may even learn some more exciting village development skills. We Kids are already working with South Pacific Business Development (SPBD) which offers micro-finance loans of $SAT500-5000 to our mothers only (can't trust our dads, they'll probably just drink it or give it to the Church). Samoan women are renown for village development achievements - we even have legends claiming Samoan women are better than men (see http://nuanuasooaemalelagi.blogspot.com/ - short story 79).



So, if we have our way, we Kids can solicit SPBD micro-financing loans for our PAs (Protected Area) villages, hence successfully packaging micro-financing with a conservation cause, and giving all the credit to our mothers in the village.

All we need are the proven existing micro-enterprises in Samoa (and any new ones of course), some expanding nearby markets, the fancy technologies to do it easily and cheaply, and this is where GMf may come in, especially when “Energizing the Pacific” as they are doing likewise in India, “Energizing India Project with a German partner”. Sometimes, all we need is cheap electricity and our new businesses will flourish.



We are also thinking of producing our own electricity using coconut oil - first we need a coconut oil press, hence the great demand for some fancy modern micro-technologies here in Samoa.

However, in Samoa, we may also need to quickly help underwrite and establish some novel business incentives within our wildlife conservation projects for these selected conservation villagers, and this is where SPBD’s expertise comes in with a perfect-fit. And if GMf can help make this happen within this 2-Year period (2008-2010), then all the better.

This only leaves us with the need to increase the village consultations with the Councils of Chiefs and the Womens Committees, offering them conservation trainings, possibly with some underwritings of certain novel project activities like mangove tree plantings, captive breeding of various seafood species, construction of a mangrove walkways made from recycled plastic (collected out of the old dump right here in the largest mangrove forest in Samoa). Luckily, Samoa moved its household waste dumpsite further inland 10 years ago.



We now need to restore these mangroves, possibly creating an ecotourism destination of it, adding interpretation resources and canoe-tours through the mangroves.

We also need to offer villagers prompt business acumen skills, environmental management advice and skills, with good marketing support, and demonstrate how to develop the best village in the South Pacific.



Luckily, our micro-financing partner, SPBD, is in each village each week collecting micro-loan repayments, offering more business advice, helping to solve business problems, creating new market opportunities where possible, and offering all the moral support that new businesses usually need, especially if this is the first time these women have been in business.



Trouble is, we need more incentives for these villagers to better protect their ecosystems. Therefore, an Incentives Partnership Group is being formed in each conservation village, and all partners in this Wildlife Conservation Project (PoWPA) will help provide new incentives for villagers to adopt more biodiversity-friendly activities.

We, therefore, have a partnership here with the Government of Samoa and rural villagers, as well as numerous NGOs (non-government organizations) such as Conservation International (CI), SPBD and GMf, that if the Incentives Partnership Group is steered carefully, we may all have an excellent Wildlife Conservation Project for Samoa and the Pacific in the making.



We just need to hold this partnership together, develop a 'conservation model' for attaining excellent conservation management skills and sustainable livelihoods skills.

In addition, we are hoping that CI can also pull more funding partners to the table, and that GMf can ‘Energize the Pacific’ with its key global partners, opening-up opportunities here for other conservation villages in Samoa and elsewhere in the Pacific Ocean.

Taking this just one step further, we still see a great opportunity here for women (SPBD only lends to women) and the role to be played by our Ministry of Women and Community and Social Development (MWCSD) here in Samoa is yet to be exploited. We still need to consult with the Minister of Women and she’s usually very enthusiastic, so allow us a few more days/weeks to tap this huge female resource in Samoa.

Sad day, however, for we ‘Samoan’ men, but look at the collective mess we ‘global’ men have put the world in.

Call for tighter Pacific/Regional legislation on sustainability

Pacific Island Countries (PICs) are about to launch into a new programmatic approach to development with the Global Environment Facility's (GEF) injection of $USD100 million by April 2008.

GEF has over $USD3 billion to invest in environmental protection and restoration, but calls for a specific Pacific Regional approach to sustainability.

PICs have prepared their National Country Priorities, and now the GEF Pacific Alliance of Sustainability (PAS), including 15 PICs, are to focus on climate change impacts and adaptations, deforestation, loss of biodiversity, pollution from pesticides and other poisons, energy supply issues, land degradation, management of international waters, coastal/marine management, invasive species control and eradication, and protection of drinking water supplies.

Ideally, had the PICs protected their environments (a) better in the past (i.e. too many overseas interests and too many non-sustainable markets), (b) better in the present (i.e. too many global environmental impacts from pollution and climate change, non-sustainable foreign investments, too few Environmental Impact Assessments or EIAs being performed, non-sustainable harvesting of natural resources by foreigners and local Pacific Islanders [PIs], etc.), and (c) better in the future (i.e. by legislating in a more proactive manner to help bring about sustainability and good governance - mind you, this would require tighter environmental management legislation in all PICs and their trading partners), then this $USD100 million GEF-PAS investment could be better spent on more protection and less restoration.

Pacific villages need to develop sustainably, and this draft operations manual is needed to advise us all of what we all need to do to get a better outcome for all PIs and the world at large.

Peruse http://gef-passamoa.blogspot.com and see what your country can do to assist Samoa whilst jointly improving our global environmental management.

Mainstreaming ESD into your Pacific Village

GOAL FOR ALL PACIFIC ISLANDERS (PIs)

To empower Pacific peoples through all forms of locally relevant and culturally appropriate education and learning to make decisions and take actions to meet current and future social, cultural, environmental and economic needs and aspirations.

And GEF-PAS has a real role to play here.

Unless we PIs are cognizant of the following 20 documents:
1. The Pacific Plan
2. Forum Basic Education Action Plan
3. Pacific Youth Strategy 2005
4. Pacific WSSD Type II Partnership Initiative on Education (2002)
5. Education and Communication for a Sustainable Pacific 2006 (SPREP)
6. Regional Framework for the Protection of Traditional Knowledge and Expressions of Culture
7. Pacific Platform on the Advancement of Women and Gender Equality
8. SPC Land Resources Division Strategic Plan 2006-2008
9. Action Strategy for Nature ConservationPacific Islands Framework for Action on Climate Change 2006-2015
10. SPC Oceanic Fisheries Programme 2006-2008 Strategic Plan
11. SPC Costal Fisheries Programme 2006-2008 Strategic Plan
12. Pacific Ocean Pollution Prevention Programme – PACPLAN
13. Solid Waste Action PlanSolid Waste Management Strategy for the Pacific Region
14. International Coral Reef Imitative (ICRI) Pacific Region Strategy
15. Disaster Risk Reduction and Disaster Management – A Framework for Action 2005-2015
16. Mauritius Strategy of Implementation
17. Barbados Programme of Action for the Sustainable Development of SIDS
18. Forum Fisheries Agency Strategic Plan 2005-2020
19. The Regional Tourism Strategy for the South and Central Pacific
20. http://VillageDevelopmentOperationsManual.blogspot.com,

we will never be able to implement the Pacific Education for Sustainable Development Framework. PIs need to mainstream the recent (December, 2007) ESD Action Plan into all sustainable development initiatives within the Pacific, especially GEF-PAS.

What we PIs need is an ESD/G-PAS Implementation Plan (2008), with ESD written into every G-PAS-funded project within the Pacific. So, rewrite your PIFs boys, mainstream ESD into your final Project Design Documents for each G-PAS funded proposal. Just a rude suggestion from we PIs. It ain't going to come from all our PIC governments because it may not get Cabinet approval for obvious reasons.

We PIs can only accomplish this with the direct assistance and insistance of G-PAS directly because there is still too much opposition within the Pacific to sustainability outcomes, that's why we PIs will continue logging non-sustainably and even illegally irrespective of the negative impacts on our G-PAS projects and our air, our water, our wildlife, our soils, our reefs, our rainforests and our cultures and our spirituality.

Anyway, who cares?

GEF should care because the G-PAS Programme is an integral component of the Pacific Alliance of Sustainability.


The ESD Framework was endorsed by the Pacific Forum Education Ministers
27 September 2006, Nadi Fiji, as follows:

PURPOSE
This paper presents a Pacific developed and driven Framework as a mechanism to assist in the implementation of the Pacific Plan and the basis for a regional approach to coordinating actions to achieve its vision of a prosperous region where “all people can lead free and worthwhile lives.” It further recognises the commitment made by Pacific countries in adopting the UN Decade of Education for Sustainable Development. The Framework can be adapted for national policy as well as regional strategy documents. The Framework can also be used by both national and regional organisations to identify priority initiatives for implementation in Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) within the Pacific.

INTRODUCTION
This paper briefly covers the background to the initiative, presents the Framework vision, goal and scope, and describes the three priority areas for ESD actions. The implementation of the Framework is discussed and a monitoring matrix provided. An outline of the proposed next steps is at the end of the paper. A background paper that presents more detail on ESD in the Pacific is also available.

The United Nations adopted 2005-2014 as the decade to recognise education and learning as the key to accelerate changes to a more sustainable way of life. The Education for Sustainable Development conceptual basis, socio-economic implications, and environmental and cultural connections make it an enterprise which potentially touches on every aspect of life.

The overall goal of ESD is to integrate the values inherent in sustainable development into all aspects of learning to encourage changes in behaviour that allow for a more sustainable and just society for all. The ESD approach requires this basic philosophy to be adapted to suit local conditions and culture. This Framework is the first step in a Pacific response to ESD, providing an umbrella for coordinated and collaborative action to achieve the region’s vision to integrate and mutually reinforce the three pillars of economic development, social development and environmental conservation (Pacific Plan:14). Regional and national level adoption and incorporation into policy and strategic documents will provide the next step towards an appropriate cultural context for regional, national and local actions. The flexible nature of the Framework enables each country to adjust the Framework and priorities for ESD implementation to suit national and needs.

Pacific Island countries joined their global counterparts in pledging support to ESD in the Mauritius Strategy for the Further Implementation of the Programme of Action for the Sustainable Development of Small Island Developing States (s72e, January 2005). This meeting focused on important issues of island development including sustainable environments, education and culture and agreed a strategy for action for addressing these.

In line with the eight strategic objectives for sustainable development endorsed within the Pacific Plan, ESD provides a critical mechanism for achieving long term change to improve environmental sustainability, health, education and training, gender equality, youth involvement and the recognition and protection of cultural values, identities and traditional knowledge. It will also complement the realisation of universal and equitable educational participation and achievement outlined in the Forum Basic Education Action Plan.

This Framework was prepared by a regional ESD Working Group comprised of representatives of community, government, regional, international and private organisations from across the Pacific at the request of UNESCO National Commissions[1] for a regional, collaborative and interlinked approach that can be used throughout the Pacific. Consultation has occurred with a variety of stakeholders from regional organisations, community organisations, governments, educators and the private sector. The Framework sets a course of coordinated action for ESD until 2014. However a five year review of the Framework will refine priority areas and objectives based on research findings to guide actions beyond this and regular reporting and adjustment will be conducted on an on-going basis to ensure that the Framework is consistent with regional and national needs.


PACIFIC ESD FRAMEWORK
This framework puts the “Think global, act local” adage into practice by taking the international vision and a specific goal for the Pacific, and translating these into focussed priority areas and objectives for action at local, national and regional levels appropriate to the Pacific. The development of local ownership respecting local context and culture is an important aspect to implementation of ESD at all levels.

VISION
The international implementation scheme for the Decade states its vision as:

A world where everyone has the opportunity to benefit from education and learn the values, behaviour and lifestyle required for a sustainable future and for positive societal transformation


GOAL FOR THE PACIFIC

To empower Pacific peoples through all forms of locally relevant and culturally appropriate education and learning to make decisions and take actions to meet current and future social, cultural, environmental and economic needs and aspirations.

PRINCIPLES
There are a number of important approaches to consider and use when working towards the priority objectives. These implementation principles are to:
- use participatory, people-based approaches
- foster partnership and collaboration (e.g. building on Pacific WSSD type II partnership initiative)
- incorporate appropriate cultural and intergenerational elements
- use appropriate mix of regional, national and local approaches
- ensure that within the mix of ESD activities the needs of remote, rural and outer islands areas are met
- build on existing initiatives
- work for the long-term, achieving sustainability and building social capital
- use information and communication technologies effectively

There are already many projects aligned with ESD and agencies working in this area. This Framework is not intended to add a new layer of effort on the Pacific community, rather to focus effort and form partnerships and collaboration among the diverse stakeholders to deliver improved outcomes for achieving a sustainable future.

The priority areas and initiatives should be a focus for initial action but it is intended for major projects such as curriculum review to be phased into existing national timetables for reviews rather than be undertaken as separate exercises.

SCOPE OF THE FRAMEWORK
The sustainable development concept is one of “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”. This evolving concept is a vision of development that encompasses people, society, animal and plant species and natural resources, and that integrates concerns such as the fight against poverty, gender equity, human rights, education for all, health, peace and human security, and intercultural dialogue. It has environmental, social and economic domains operating in many cultural contexts. Education is critical for promoting sustainable societies and improving our capacity to address environment and development issues.

The idea behind the Framework is to provide a whole-Pacific response and approach to Education for Sustainable Development and into the future. Realistically the countries of the Pacific have many different characteristics and responsibilities, as do the agencies that work here. Some islands are part of much larger countries such as France and the USA. International, regional and NGO agencies operate within their own mandates and areas of expertise. The 16 Pacific Forum countries within this area are at different stages in addressing ESD.

The Framework is intended to take a strategic, big picture view of actions required and complement other regional and international initiatives, particularly the Pacific Plan, the Millennium Development Goals, the Forum Basic Education Action Plan, Education for All, the UN Decade for Literacy and the many regional initiatives developed to progress these such as the SPREP Education and Communication for a Sustainable Pacific.[2]

This Framework is therefore intended to provide a basis for both regional and national responses by the countries in the Pacific but is not limited to them. The Framework can be adopted at the national level by governments through incorporation into national policy and planning documents (such as the national sustainable development strategies and education policy). The priority areas can be used to focus regional, national and local responses to ESD. As more information is gathered on country specific needs to promote ESD these policies and programs of action can be reviewed and more tightly focused on country needs.

All countries and agencies have an interest and expertise in elements of education for sustainable development. This Framework is intended to focus effort into a few priority areas and be the starting point for collaboration and partnerships essential to the changes needed for a sustainable future.


FRAMEWORK PRIORITY AREAS
To give the broad vision, goals and philosophy some substance, three priority areas for action have been developed based on what are considered as the key issues facing the Pacific. For each priority area, objectives have been identified to further enhance the focus on that area. Research and monitoring initiatives are integral within each priority area, as is the importance of developing partnerships within and between ESD collaborators.

PRIORITY AREA 1 – FORMAL EDUCATION AND TRAINING

Structured learning initiatives for improved knowledge and understanding to support implementation of sustainable practices

Formal education and training; at primary, secondary, tertiary and vocational levels as well as through traditional learning practices influences much of our way of thinking and, in turn, our attitudes and behaviour. Formal education is all structured learning which includes early childhood education, primary and secondary schools, TVET (technical and vocational education and training) and tertiary institutions usually leading to accreditation of some form. It is therefore an important transformative tool.

Rigorous teaching schedules, exam-based programmes, donor policies, parental desires and the way we tend to think about education all play a role in how education systems are shaped and their ability to be transformative. If formal education is to be able to play a prominent role in improving sustainability in the Pacific, the systems and structures will need to be strengthened and educational content reoriented by “rethinking” of education and its role and purpose[3] to provide a stronger focus on the future needs of our children.

The objectives identified under this priority area build on existing education initiatives, such as the Pacific Forum Basic Education Action Plan, achieving Millennium Development Goal 2, implementing PRIDE and other local and regional efforts. The key delivery agents for these objectives would be national governments, Pacific Island researchers both at academic and operational levels, and education institutions supported by a wide range of other agencies with expertise in all aspects of sustainable development from health to the environment.

Objectives:

1 Support countries with implementing the Forum Basic Education Action Plan and other regional, national and international initiatives to improve the quality and deliver of basic education in the Pacific

2 Promote quality education in all member countries through:

2.1 Development of education policies and strategies that recognise the critical role of learning in progress towards achieving sustainable development;

2.2 Research and development of innovative models and resources that support ESD in Pacific contexts – schools, teacher training, technical and vocational education, field and extension educators, university, including cultural and traditional community values and associated local indigenous knowledge;

2.3 Inclusion of learning outcomes that focus on sustainability content and learning activities in the curriculum at all levels;

2.4 Development of strategies to assess student understanding of sustainability and sustainable living as part of core curriculum;

2.5 Building teacher capacity to incorporate sustainable development topics into their teaching programmes using a practical and relevant approach; and

2.6 Development and identification of appropriate ESD resources to support this priority area using appropriate information and communication technology tools.


PRIORITY AREA 2 – COMMUNITY-BASED EDUCATION

Community-based activities for improving people’s knowledge, understanding and skills to implement and promote sustainability

All sections of the community have roles to play in ESD. These include the private sector, non-governmental organizations, civil society and community groups (women, youth, church, etc). People can only participate actively and effectively when they are equipped with the necessary knowledge, understanding, skills, perspectives, value systems and confidence to do so.

Although there are many training and awareness activities being implemented across the region, there is no clear picture of what these activities are, how successful they have been or where there are gaps that need to be filled.

A wide range of delivery agents are involved in the effort to achieve this non-formal education priority area and its objectives, including media, TVET, traditional leaders, sports groups, NGOs, church elders, business, Pacific Island researchers, regional agencies and national governments.

Objectives

1 Increase understanding of the meaning of ESD in the local, Pacific-wide and global contexts, taking into account the cultural diversities of the different countries

2 Develop community participation skills for both government officials and key community members to effectively engage in policy development and decision-making

3 Increase awareness of sustainable development among community leaders and influential groups and develop their knowledge and skills in ESD through training and participation in ESD activities to act as champions to undertake further ESD activities
(e.g. influential community leaders such as media; traditional leaders; church leaders; women, youth and NGO groups, regional organisations, the policy community – all those that develop and decide policies)

4 Prepare communications resources that clearly articulate sustainability issues and their importance to the Pacific (i.e. what makes it necessary news and important to know)

5 Research and highlight good practical approaches to sustainable practices in businesses, communities and with individuals, including traditional practices and other areas related to lifestyles and livelihoods

6 Develop skills to enable sustainable development projects that strengthen existing, and promote new, long term revenue generating opportunities in communities

7 Identify other ESD mechanisms to engage the business sector in sustainable development activities


PRIORITY AREA 3 – POLICY AND INNOVATION

Policy development and innovative models and approaches to implement ESD

Sustainable development and ESD will be more effective if embedded in the structures and policies at national levels of government and regional forums so that strategies and implementation of initiatives flow from these. At national and regional levels policy reform could enable more meaningful, sustainable development oriented learning and awareness programmes to be conducted through a wide range of government portfolios at all levels of society.

The effectiveness of any ESD initiative in the region will depend on the quality of the partnerships that are formed among stakeholders. Partners will need to work together, recognizing their differences while acknowledging they are working towards a common goal and by the development of new approaches and pathways to enable effective collaboration.

Many national and most regional development strategies include some elements of education and awareness activities for achieving their goals and objectives. In practice, however, education has not been used to its full potential. In many cases, it tends to be relegated to classrooms and the formal education arena where it does not fulfil its potential to maximise impact in terms of behaviour change.

The key delivery agents for this priority will be national governments, regional agencies, and Pacific Island researchers supported by all other stakeholders.

Objectives

1 Evaluate current ESD initiatives and their contributions to achieving sustainable outcomes for the Pacific thus establishing baseline information and support for policy development

2 Work with national governments to ensure appropriate national level policies and plans are in place to implement ESD across governments through an intersectoral approach so that the role of learning in achieving sustainable development and the role of sustainable development in education systems is clear and reinforced

3 Develop new, and foster existing, partnerships and models that support ESD

4 Research and highlight ESD examples of private-public partnerships

5 Collaboration with Australia, New Zealand and others who have identified similar priorities for ESD, e.g, teacher capacity building, educational resources, evaluation and research, and promote understanding and collaboration
..
Annex II presents some example activities and relates them to the target areas and objectives.
IMPLEMENTATION

The main roles envisaged for different stakeholders are:

National governments – adopt the Pacific ESD Framework formally, incorporate it into national planning documents and identify ESD initiatives for implementation at the country level.
Regional/international agencies – commit to the Pacific ESD Framework, identify priority areas in respective work programmes and use as a focus for ESD programmes and collaboration
NGOs and community groups – commit to the Pacific ESD Framework, identify priority areas and use as a focus for ESD action programmes and collaboration
Business sector and media – focus on the community-based activity priority area starting with own industry awareness raising, and use knowledge in wider communications with public
All stakeholders – participate in projects, form partnerships and assist monitoring of the Framework

Overall coordination of the Framework will need to be developed and may include a regional coordinator and ESD advisory group to promote ESD and monitor progress. Capacity development to enable all stakeholders to have the skills and to participate in implementation may need to be incorporated into implementation activities.

Partner in principle mechanism
Regional programmes, organisations and development partners can, through an exchange of letters, agree with/adopt the Framework as ‘partners-in-principle’, the first step in greater regional collaboration. Detailed discussion and development of further responses and projects for ESD would then follow.

Review
The priority areas represent the initial analysis of the ESD activities that should be addressed. The Framework will be reviewed in five years to determine if these are still the appropriate priorities. The review will be based on monitoring and research gathered during implementation.

MEASURING PROGRESS
A monitoring and evaluation component is essential for an action oriented Framework. The monitoring focuses on indicators that will assist us to understand how much progress is being made in implementing this Framework and does not include measures of progress for implementing ESD and determining how effective this is in achieving transformative change. As implementation plans are developed for ESD, monitoring components to measure their success and the effectiveness of ESD investment in improving quality of life in the Pacific will also be developed.

Specific indicators relating to the outcomes sought through this Framework are outlined below:


The following staggered matrix is too slow to be commensurate mwith the G-PAS Programme commencing in April, 2008. G-PAS, if adopting ESD in principle as an integral component of G-PAS, would like to see this following Matrix completed by December, 2008, not 2011.


PACIFIC ESD FRAMEWORK MONITORING MATRIX
To empower Pacific peoples through all forms of locally relevant and culturally appropriate education and learning to make decisions and take actions to meet current and future social, cultural, environmental and economic needs and aspirations.
Area
Desired Outcome
Indicator of Progress




Pacific ESD
Framework
Acceptance and adoption by all Pacific countries and agencies



ESD Framework reviewed and a forward plan developed
Critical mass of countries actively adopt Framework in time for project implementation in 2008 measured through;
- ACCU/PP funding requests made.
- Bi-annual country progress report by UNESCO

Number of countries/agencies that contribute to bi-annual report
First regional ESD Framework Implementation Report covering 2007-2008 completed by March 2009

ESD Framework reviewed 2011



Priority Area:
Formal Education & Training
ESD contributes to FBEAP and EFA

Pacific educators have ability to and do include sustainability issues in their work
ESD contribution evident in MDG/EFA reporting

All levels of national curricula include ESD elements by 2014

Assessment of student learning of SD units in the curriculum occurs by 2014

ESD part of core teacher training at all levels by 2014

ESD skills building programme for trainers working in informal and technical education in place by 2014





Priority Area:
Community-based education
ESD better understood in Pacific context and cultural terms



Active participation in policy and decision-making

Increased awareness of SD in the Pacific community

Media well informed to report sustainable development issues

Business groups engaged in sustainable development activity
Systematic research in 3 different countries using appropriate methodologies undertaken by 2011

Mapping of community-based education programmes in the Pacific

Courses on community participation, and, participatory techniques of policy development available in 10 countries by 2014

Influential leader groups (including government officials) ESD training undertaken in all countries by 2014 and community champions identified

Articles that clearly enunciate why SD matters to the Pacific appear in media

Number of sustainable business projects that develop revenue generating skills underway
Area
Desired Outcome
Indicator of Progress
Priority Area:
Policy development and innovation
Good understanding and data collected of factors necessary for successful ESD policy in the Pacific


Innovative ESD programme models available



Improved communication between countries and agencies for data collection

National policies recognise the key role of learning in achieving sustainable development

Partnerships that support ESD flourish
Baseline data available by 2008 that identifies best practice, and gaps and challenges for ESD

Research into effective ESD underway by 2011

Pacific ESD methodologies and resource materials available by 2014

ESD programmes aimed and government and community leaders developed

Empirical and anecdotal evidence of new or strengthened project collaboration between agencies


The key role of learning in SD acknowledged in policies in 10 countries by 2014


‘Partner-in-principle’ understanding achieved with all relevant CROP agencies and 10 NGOs/community groups by 2007 and two business or media ESD partnerships developed by 2011



This may also contribute to reporting on achievements for other international, regional and national level initiatives including the Forum Basic Education Action Plan, Education for All, the Millennium Development Goals, the Johannesburg Sustainable Development Plan of Implementation, and the Mauritius Strategy for Small Island Developing States.

WHERE TO FROM HERE?

The following shows the next steps in the process to progress this regional Pacific ESD Framework initiative:
1. Regional workshop meeting to finalise the Framework and develop specific initiatives for action – Nadi, September 2006.
2. Forum Education Ministers meeting – Nadi, September 2006. Seek endorsement of Framework and priority projects.
3. Endorsement of the Framework by CROP agencies, NGOs, community and church groups, business etc.
4. National level consultations, adoption and identification of programs of action to implement ESD in countries.
5. 2007 – finalise projects, seek partners, collaborations, and funding. Following the outcomes of the Ministers meeting, consultations will continue at the regional and national levels, including the development and negotiation of funding proposals, both within partner organisations’ budgets and with external donors.
6. 2007 onwards new projects implemented.
8. 2009 First bi-annual report on the Pacific ESD Framework.
9. 2011 Pacific ESD Framework reviewed, target areas and objectives refined.

ANNEX I:

RELEVANT PACIFIC STRATEGIES AND PLANS

The Pacific Plan
Forum Basic Education Action Plan
Pacific Youth Strategy 2005
Pacific WSSD Type II Partnership Initiative on Education (2002)
Education and Communication for a Sustainable Pacific 2006 (SPREP)
Regional Framework for the Protection of Traditional Knowledge and Expressions of Culture
Pacific Platform on the Advancement of Women and Gender Equality
SPC Land Resources Division Strategic Plan 2006-2008
Action Strategy for Nature Conservation
Pacific Islands Framework for Action on Climate Change 2006-2015
SPC Oceanic Fisheries Programme 2006-2008 Strategic Plan
SPC Costal Fisheries Programme 2006-2008 Strategic Plan
Pacific Ocean Pollution Prevention Programme – PACPLAN
Solid Waste Action Plan
Solid Waste Management Strategy for the Pacific Region
International Coral Reef Imitative (ICRI) Pacific Region Strategy
Disaster Risk Reduction and Disaster Management – A Framework for Action 2005-2015
Mauritius Strategy of Implementation
Barbados Programme of Action for the Sustainable Development of SIDS
Forum Fisheries Agency Strategic Plan 2005-2020
The Regional Tourism Strategy for the South and Central Pacific


ANNEX II:

SOME EXAMPLE ACTIVITIES BY PRIORITY AREA

PRIORITY AREA – FORMAL EDUCATION & TRAINING
Structured learning initiatives for improved knowledge and understanding to support implementation of sustainable practices


EXAMPLE ACTIVITIES
· Mainstreaming of ESD into tertiary education programs across courses in many faculties at the University of the South Pacific (1)
· Educator capacity building for teachers, trainers and others involved providing formal, informal and non-formal education and building skills (crosses all three priority areas) (2)
· The PRIDE (Pacific Regional Initiative for the Delivery of basic Education) initiative working to strengthen the capacity of Pacific Ministries of Education to plan and deliver quality basic education (1)

PRIORITY AREA – COMMUNITY-BASED EDUCATION
Community-based activities for improving people’s knowledge, understanding and skills to implement and promote sustainability


EXAMPLE ACTIVITIES
· Live & Learn’s Rivercare programme which recognises the role of young people in managing future environmental issues by promoting action-based and discovery learning by students, teachers and communities (1)
· Partnership of schools, community and the private sector to develop programs to support youth through the transition process following leaving formal education to increase retention of skilled Pacific Islanders, address youth unemployment and build an employment base (2)
· UNICEF’s Pacific Lifeskills Programme (1)

PRIORITY AREA – POLICY DEVELOPMENT & INNOVATION
Policy development and innovative approaches and models to implement ESD


EXAMPLE ACTIVITIES
· SPREP’s promotion of reusable cloth shopping bags through local retail outlets to reduce the use of plastic bags to assist in sea turtle conservation (1)
· FSPI’s Pacific Governance Programme to address critical governance issues facing Pacific communities through promoting participation of civil society, transparency, accountability and the rule of law using consensus oriented, inclusive and responsive methodologies (1)
· Mapping of TVET providers in the Pacific and their resources, courses and capabilities (1)



(1) These programmes are already being implemented in the region
(2) The ESD Workshop in Nadi on 21-22 September 2006 identified these as important projects that should be further investigated and developed.

What about the GEF-PAS Project inputting $USD100 million into the development of the Pacific? Sorry, not considered. Afterall, GEF-PAS could implement all your entire programmes and activities without being innovative at all. Just ask.


ANNEX III:

This is for presentation purposes only. Annex 2 will be completed and added to the framework only after each listed country/organisation has agreed to this.

List of Participating Countries and Organisations

Participating Countries

Cook Islands
Federated States of Micronesia
Fiji
Kiribati
Marshall Islands
Nauru
Niue
Palau
Papua New Guinea
Samoa
Solomon Islands
Tokelau
Tonga
Tuvalu
Vanuatu



Participating Organisations (examples only)
Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat (PIFS)
Pacific Association for Technical Vocational Education and Training (PATVET)
Secretariat for the Pacific Community (SPC)
Secretariat for the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP)
South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission (SOPAC)
South Pacific Board of Educational Assessment (SPBEA)
University of the South Pacific (USP)
Pacific Islands News Association (PINA)
Australian National Commission for UNESCO
New Zealand National Commission for UNESCO
United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)
United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF)
World Health Organization of the United Nations (WHO)
Too late to add Global Environment Facility's Pacific Alliance of Sustainability (GEF-PAS)?

Civil Society Organisations (examples only)
Commonwealth of Learning
Foundation of the Peoples of the South Pacific International (FSPI)
Live & Learn


[1] The UNESCO National Commissions are national cooperating bodies set up by the Member States for the purpose of associating their governmental and non-governmental bodies with the work of the Organization.
[2] A comprehensive list of existing Pacific plans and strategies relevant to ESD is provided in Annex I.
[3] See Tree of Opportunity: Rethinking Pacific Education, USP 2001


In conclusion, for all of you who took the time to read this truly innovative document, we PIs can see why little progress has been made with education development in the past. Nowhere in this document did GEF-PAS get an original mention, yet GEF-PAS has $USD1000 million to invest in Pacific Education, the largest education in education within the Pacific ever.

Hence our sense of hopelessness!

And if Pacific governments are unable to mainstream ESD into GEF-PAS, and are equally unable to mainstream GEF-PAS into ESD, then what have have we PIs got?

To make matters even worse, few PIC governments will even agree to applying ESD because it will undermine initiatives being taken by FSPI, namely:

"FSPI’s Pacific Governance Programme to address critical governance issues facing Pacific communities through promoting participation of civil society, transparency, accountability and the rule of law using consensus oriented, inclusive and responsive methodologies".

Here's the GEF-PAS ACID TEST: When will all PICs adopt their 'anti-corruption legislation'?

Remember, we PIs do things best as a collective, by concensus, so let's start today by asking all PICs to adopt this long over-due piece of legislation, making GEF-PAS funding conditional, regionally, and not nationally.

Get the point?

No funding for any PIC until all countries have ratified/gazetted their own anti-corruption legislation nationally, and regionally. Yes, imagine a Pacific Regional Anti-corruption Legislation that was making it illegal to import rainforest logs from illegal international sources, etc.

Pacific Regional Climate Pact Proposed - makes sense

Peter Christoff, www.globalcollabortive.org, argues strongly for PIs to develop a Pacific Regional Climate Pact, having Pacific Islanders (PIs) take control of their own destiny, without delay. Spend 5 minutes reading the following:

http://www.globalcollab.org/Nautilus/australia/apsnet/policy-forum/2007/a-south-seas-carbon-bubble/

Well, as you can imagine, we PIs couldn’t resist commenting on this article, poorly researched and lacking vision. In fact, it offers PIs nothing but hopelessness. And no one will take the initiative and act appropriately. Or will they? Hopefully, GEF-PAS will.

Whilst the European Union may have made considerable economic progress, largely through economic cooperation boosted by appropriate tough enforceable legislation and appropriate education, Australia’s appalling record of cooperation in the Pacific, for example, is sadly not recognized by most.

Likewise, we PIs need stronger regional legislation to help protct ourselves from ourselves.

And Australia continues to play-down its environmental and developmental and cultural abuses, covering a span of over 200 years, internally and regionally throughout the Pacific Region. AusAID could do well to fund Education for Sustainable Development (ESD), learn from it, apply it at home and in the Pacific, collectively.

GEF-PAS could do well to also fund ESD - see next postings.

Show we PIs a curriculum or a Pacific Village Development Operations Manual that we in the Pacific can follow, outlining all the positive steps that we can take in order to attain sustainable development within our villages with our co-called ‘development partners’ or ‘aid partners’.

I aptly refer to them as our ‘raid partners’, raiding our natural resources, our cultural integrities, our future hopes and our small niche lucrative international markets. We PIs need to legislate against such 'raidings' if we are to protect our region's resources, natural and cultural.

This is better explained in the GEF-PAS where, finally, Pacific Islanders (PIs) are taking their destiny into their own hands. We PIs can simply no longer rely on, for example, Australia to be a responsible ‘partner’ in development when it not only limits our development options, but adds to our development burdens.

Take a close moral look at their/our imports and exports, judging for yourself whether they are good for PIs or not (e.g. ‘edible animal fats’ is one example, no longer eaten in Australia/NZ for health reasons, instead exported to Pacific Islanders). Thanks Bro. And the list goes on. Yes, we PIs will continue ‘bubbling along’, too polite to comment on such neo-colonialistic attitudes and practices that are basically environmentally-unfriendly, unethical, culturally-insensitive and ………economically disasterous.

Whilst Christoff argues convincingly, and we admire his moment of forethought, but it comes a little late and it comes with little future hope. The Pacific cannot wait any longer, and the sooner the PIs formulate their own development strategies, with strict regional sanctions in place, the sooner Australians and New Zealanders will need to take a good look at the poverty and hardship being caused by their own international aid policies, in effect, a waste of taxpayers’ money today, and a larger burden to their taxpayers in the future as they hopefully continue to fund this dependency here in the Pacific.

We PIs would do well to act as one group of Micronesians and Polynesians and Melanesians - we're all PIs. Let's unite and have a collective regional policy on whaling, on trans-shipments of nuclear waste, on sustainable development, on logging, on climate change, .......climate change impacts in the Asia/Pacific region are now rapidly becoming the key development issue to be tackled by PIs above all other issues.

And ironically, we PIs are one of the major contributors to climate change with our deforestation, with our coral dynamiting, with our reliance on fossil fuels and trade, with our dependency on tourism and all its carbon emissions.

We PIs need look forward to the post-carbon economy, and look forward to a little more academia and compassion for fellow PIs, and we PIs look forward to seeing a more constructive positive proactive harmonized effort being made by the Australian Government to assist PIs in a more sustainable manner (commencing with the signing of the Kyoto Protocol with strict targets applied).

We PIs plan to improvise sustainability indicators, indicators as simple as signatores to the Kyoto Protocol. This time the ‘Penny’ has dropped in Australia after decades of ignorance.

Our heart goes out to Kevin Rudd, the new Labour Prime Minister of Australia, for all his labourings on this topic. And we see no improvement in Australia’s relationship with PIs under his stewardship until all such sustainability indicators are pointing in a more mutually-beneficial direction. Show us your list of such pertinent indicators, and we’ll show you ours, or just read on.

Finally, if I was Australian Federal Minister of Agriculture and Environment, I would offer no drought relief to any Australian farmer (or Pacific farmer for that matter) until the whole agricultural profession took Bill Mollison (founder of Permaculture) seriously, took sustainability seriously, and gave more consideration to our future generations of Australians and PIs.

As Australians, we have ignored advice on sustainability for some 200 years, just ask our Aborigines. And now we want to say ‘Sorry’ to our Aborigines when we cannot even forgive ourselves for what we are continuing to do to desecrate these ‘Dreamlands’.

Finally, here in the Pacific, we PIs have formal cultural apologies, called ifoga or hou-lo-ifi or matanigasau, in Samoan, Tongan and Fijian, respectively, and Kevin Rudd, you should learn this culturally-sensitive process of apology before you ever attempt a culturally-correct apology in Australia. Kevin, this is good advice to you as well: do your apology, say “sorry”, but do it in accordance with the Aboriginal culture, the recipients of your apology, that’s if you want your national apology to have any meaning within the Aboriginal community as well as within the non-Aboriginal community.

If we PIs were Aborigines, we’d accept your apology, that’s the Pacific Way, but it would be conditional to signing the Kyoto Protocol and much much more.

HOW CAN WE PIs HELP? With or without GEF-PAS.

Well, we can see from the Contents Page that there are numerous ways we can help make our Pacific villages the most sustainable villages in the world, but we may need to think laterally and think fast.

First, we may need to seek some cooperation (help) from our neighbouring villagers who may be polluting our river as it flows down from their deforested mountain tops above us. This means less water to drink.

We may also like to seek some more cooperation (help) from our global neighbours who are changing our global climate, altering our climate health and possibly leading to more coral bleaching in our lagoons and less fish to eat.

Therefore, this effort, to attain a really sustainable village, will require local, national, regional and global cooperation (help). We need a global effort (help), hence the role of the Global Environment Facility (GEF) (see http://www.thegef.org/).

We need a dedicated sustainable environmental management effort (help) right here in Samoa and in the Pacific, hence the GEF is offering to assist us PIs (see http://gef-passamoa.blogspot.com/).

We need an investment facility with over $USD100 million to help solve just the Pacific Island issues, some of them raised in the Contents Page, hence the GEF's funding plans for 2008-2010.

We, therefore, need cooperation (help) from within the whole South Pacific, hence the GEF Pacific Alliance of Sustainability (PAS).

We need some joint cooperation (help), an alliance of partners in Pacific development, hence the PAS is seeking all 15 PICs to harmonize their efforts.

Our Pacific Island (PI) focus is on our sustainability, hence the GEF-PAS.

So, money is the GEF-PAS answer, enough money to help solve all our Pacific ills: environmental, social, cultural, political and economic. IWe all, however, doubt that money alone will help us.

So, how canwe help, even if we have no money, to build the Pacific's most sustainable villages?

We PIs need to look after (help) ourselves first. Don't wait for the global conventions on biodiversity to help save our whales and other wildlife. Don't wait on the Kyoto Protocol to help reduce the impacts of global climate change. Those foreign palagi/kaivalagi/pakea all see the world differently from the way our PI ancestors saw it and still see it. We PIS want to remain in harmony with Nature.

OK, we modern-day Pacific Islanders (PIs) will then have to help ourselves by writing our own 'Kyoto Protocol', a climate change impact reduction just for the Pacific Region. We PIs will also have to write a 'save the Pacific wildlife' convention, 'save the Pacific cultures' convention, etc. to help address all these Pacific issues raised in the Contents Page. Therefore, written by PIs for PIs with future PIs in mind, our new approach relies on we chiefs tautua-ing or serving our childrens' interests, not just our own. This will require a major shift in thinking, unfortunately. Our Pacific chiefs, to date, have let us down.

On this blog, you will then see these 'Pacific environmental conventions' drafted, albeit brief, to help you think about the few options we PIs have got left.

Time is running out as our Pacific birds become extinct, as our Pacific cultures/languages become extinct, as our traditional medicinal plants become extinct and/or exploited by foreign interests, etc. We PIS can only blame ourselves. Mind you, we can't just sit back and blame the foreigners only.

We can all help by applying these drafted pieces of 'legislation', preferably with approval (help) from all our chiefs, womens committees, church groups, politicians, etc. And don't forget the Kids (you Kids will probably be insisting on helping more so than your parents, and we adults are certainly not looking after your interests - see http://nuanuasooaemalelagi.blogspot.com/) .

To illustrate these points raised above, we PIs can either learn from the horrible experiences from overseas or we can learn from our own horrible experiences right here in the Pacific. Sadly, most of us PIs are totally unaware of this destruction of our islands, our societies and our cultures, and we are possibly less prepared to admit that this destruction is being caused mostly by we fellow PIs.

So, how can we PIs help ourselves? We could start by applying, formally and informally, some Education for Sustainable Development (ESD). All Pacific Ministers of Education signed an ESD Framework in September, 2006, noe they have all signed an ESD Action Plan in December, 2007. Both documents will be posted on this blog because this is our 'operations manual' for sustainability. All we need to do is apply it to making our villages sustainable.

Once we PIs know the level of destruction elsewhere in the world, say deforestation in Indonesia and PNG and Solomon Islands (and Samoa, for that matter, as we have already felled 50% of our Samoan rainforests, and it's continuing in 2008 in the name of cattle ranching), then we may be forced to take action (help) personally (see next posting re the impacts of deforestation within the Asia/Pacific region on our global climate change impacts here in the Pacific.) We are losing our air, our water, our soils, our wildlife and our water through this madness: how can we develop sustainably alongside this level of deforestation?

In 2008, non-sustainable deforestation continues in Samoa, the Pacific, Asia and even globally. GEF needs to stop this madness by making the GEF funding conditional nationally and regionally (if PNG doesn't stop deforestation, then the whole Pacific suffers as other PICs become ineligible for funding assistance.

Is this too much to ask? Doesn't it represent our true 'absorptive capacity', our capacity as PICs to absorb this much reasoning and financial assistance?

Is our PI ability to think sustainably being questioned? The answer is "Yes".

And can we PIs think sustainably? The answer is "No". Well, we can, but we choose not to.

So, before GEF-PAS kicks-in with its $USD100 million in 2008 for assisting with attaining Pacific Sustainable Development, let's see if all Pacific Island Countries (PICs) can agree on one thing: namely, if we PIs are concerned about global climate change impacts on our villages, and we are ALL signatores to the Kyoto Protocol on Greenhouse Gas Reduction, then we need to put a stop to our legal and illegal, sustainable and non-sustainable, intra-Pacific and extra-Pacific logging trade. All Kyoto Protocol signatores, Pacific and non-Pacific need to stop buying rainforest timbers, and this Rule has to be written into the old and the new Kyoto Protocol.

What this means is, we PIs need to force our trading partners, our aid partners, our so-called sustainable development partners, our so-called 'signatores to the Kyoto Protocol' partners not to export, or even import, any rainforest logs, legally or illegally sourced, sustainably or non-sustainably logged, until two things happen:

Firstly, the impacts of global climate change have been reduced to NIL, and, secondly, an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) has been completed and approved for all so-called sustainable logging practices here in the Pacific (and elsewhere), for both legal and illegal logging practices.

Once we know that this global level of deforestation is not affecting our wildlife, our air quality, our potable water supplies, our cultures, our spirituality, our soils, our reefs (through siltation and climate change impacts) and our food security and our health, then we can commence EIA-approved legal and sustainable logging here in the Pacific once again, but monitored by independent objective bodies/studies funded possibly by the GEF-PAS.

For example, just take a look at what commercial palm oil production is doing to the Asian environment, and now the delicate and vulnerable environments of the Pacific Islands. Why do we allow this level of non-sustainability to occur here in the PICs, and yet we still apply simultaneously for GEF-PAS funding support.

Where's our commitment to sustainability?

How can we PIs avaoi such audacious and ludicrous steps?

And where's our absorptive capacity, our capacity and sustainability skills to absorb this high level of funding?

And where's GEF-PAS's capacity to absorb such anomalies?

GEF asks for our 'absorptive capacity' to assist, but we PIs need to ask GEF what is its absorptive capacity? How much lack of capacity to do PICs need to have before it jeopardizes our ability to raise funding to repair our on-going and non-sustainable environmental damages, the very things we are being funded to repair?

To conclude, we can all help by applying a little reasoning, developing a little commitment and, most importantly, holding all other PICs to ransom by acting collectively, holistically andharmoniously. Reciprocally, GEF-PAS should hold all us PIs to ransom as well: no evidence of commitment, no funding.

Think about it.

Nothing else has worked in the past in the Pacific to raise our levels of sustainability: we need to think differently then, take another approach, do it internally before someone decides outside for us.

Let's act now PIs and help ourselves.

CONTENTS PAGE

HOW TO BUILD THE MOST SUSTAINABLE VILLAGE

This Contents Page is constantly under construction as more ideas come-in.

So, feel free to add your suggestions, but, basically, we will be monitoring all 330 villages in Samoa over time, ranking them according to the following 100 or more criteria. And Pacific Islanders (PIs) elsewhere can do likewise.

Each Pacific village is asked to adopt each criteria, where possible, therefore harmonizing such development efforts.

The following list of criteria (ideas, projects, programmes, processes, etc.) will eventually constitute a Pacific Village Development Operations Manual (PVDOM), doubling as an Operations Manual for Sustainable Development in your village.

And this PVDOM could also become a sustainable Pacific village development curriculum, even becoming an Operations Manual for Village Development, and something that possibly the Commonwealth of Learning may be interested in including in its web-based educational programmes for all, both formally and informally.

So, do you think that a Pacific Village Development Operations Manual is really necessary?

Yes, because for us Kids, we will soon realize where our guardians are failing us. So, this time, we Kids are going to put all the necessities on paper, compile all these good (and bad) ideas/practices/experiences into an Operations Manual, then circulate it to every adult for comment.

Let's also do it purely for Pacific Islander (PI) epistemological reasons and see if we can trace our cultural roots, may be even tracing our ancestors' reasonings.

By December 2008, if we complete this Pacific Village Development Operations Manual, we PIs will know exactly where we stand, what the main hurdles/barriers are to sustainability, where to invest our environmental/developmental dollars, and how best to monitor and evaluate our success (i.e. possibly with a lot of sustainability indicator research, looking at those things that indicate good practices and those that indicate bad sustainability practices).

So, here it is:

AGRICULTURAL
- monitor sustainable agricultural indicators
- ratify all the regional and global conventions on agriculture and food security
- village laws on sustainable agriculture
- Fruit tree project
- Permaculture demonstration
- Organic certified plantations (NASA)
- Organic certified village (NASA)


AGRO-FORESTRY
- monitor sustainable agro-forestry indicators
- ratify all the regional and global conventions on agro-foresty
- village laws on sustainable agro-forestry


ANCESTRAL


ANTHROPOLOGICAL
- ratify all the regional and global conventions on anthropology
- village laws on protecting sites of anthropological significance


ARCHAEOLOGICAL
- ratify all the regional and global conventions on archaeology
- village laws on protecting archaeological sites
- Archaeological legislation enacted/enforced
- Archaeology Museum
- Archaeological rescue work performed
- Archaeological sites protected


BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION
- ratify all the regional and global conventions on biological diversity (CBDs)
- monitor sustainable biodiversity conservation indicators
- identify Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs)
- complete Biological Gap Analyses
- finalize Protected Area management Plans
- establish Protected Areas System with National Parks, Marine Protected Areas, Reserves, etc.
- manage and eliminate invasive plant and animal species
- village laws on conserving nature - Biodiversity Gap Analyses completed
- Treatened species captive breeding programme


BIOLOGICAL
- monitor sustainable biological indicators
- ratify all the regional and global conventions on bio-safety
- establish national biological targets


BIRDS
- establish Important Bird Areas (IBAs)


BOTANY



CLIMATE CHANGE
- Sustainable Climate Change Indicators

CLIMATE HEALTH



CULTURAL
- monitor sustainable cultural indicators
- ratify all the regional and global conventions on cultural preservation/enhancement
- village laws on retaining one's culture


DEVELOPMENTAL
- monitor sustainable development indicators
- ratify all the regional and global conventions on sustainable development
- village laws on sustainable community development
- village laws on sustainable social development

DISASTER MANAGEMENT
- monitor sustainable disaster management practices
- ratify all the regional and global conventions on disaster management
- village laws on reducing disaster management


DISEASE
- ratify all the regional and global conventions on disease control and monitoring
- village laws on reducing disease (e.g. AIDS/HIV) DRUGS (illicit)
- ratify all the regional and global conventions on illicit drug control
- village laws on illicit drug cultivation, manufacture, sale and use


ECOLOGICAL
- monitor sustainable ecological indicators
- ratify all the regional and global conventions on ecological stability
- village laws on protecting unique and threatened ecosystems


ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
- monitor sustainable economic indicators
- ratify all the regional and global conventions on sustainable economics
- village laws on adopting sustainable economic practices


ECOTOURISM
- monitor sustainable ecotourism indicators
- ratify all the regional and global conventions on ecotourism
- village laws on adopting sustainable ecotourism practices
- Community tourism
- Educational tourism


EDUCATIONAL
- monitor sustainable education indicators
- ratify all the regional and global conventions on education
- village laws on adopting sustainable education practices
- implement Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) Action Plan
- implement Education for All (EFA)
- make education compulsory until completion of high school


EPIDEMIOLOGICAL
- village laws on assisting epidemiological studies (e.g. climate health)


EPISTEMIOLOGICAL
- ratify all the regional and global conventions on epistemology
- village laws on knowing ones' traditional knowledge



ENERGY
- Energy efficiency in the electricity sector project
- Energy efficiency in the transport sector project
- Renewable energy project (solar, hydro, wind)
- Sustainable Energy Indicators


EPISTEMOLOGY


ETHNOBOTANY


FISHERIES
- monitor sustainable fisheries indicators
- ratify all the regional and global conventions on sustainable fisheries
- village laws on protecting fisheries (e.g. ban on dynamite fishing, fish poisoning, gill nets, SCUBA fishing, etc.)
- establish Village Fisheries Reserves (VFRs)
- establish Fisheries No Take Zones


FOOD SECURITY - monitor sustainable food security indicators - ratify all the regional and global conventions on food security - village laws on ensuring food security (especially in light of climate change impacts)


FORESTRY
- monitor sustainable forestry indicators
- ratify all the regional and global conventions on sustainable forestry
- village laws on reforestation (see agro-forestry)
- village laws on illegal and non-sustainable deforestation
- village laws on export of rainforest logs internationally
- village laws on exporting to countries without a ban on importation of rainforest logs!!


GENDER ISSUES
- monitor sustainable gender equity indicators
- ratify all the regional and global conventions on gender equity
- village laws on gender equity
- equal education for both


GEOGRAPHICAL


GOOD GOVERNANCE
- Anti-corruption legislation enacted


HUMAN POPULATION GROWTH
- monitor sustainable human population indicators
- ratify all the regional and global conventions on human population growth
- village laws on producing more Kids (e.g. encourage family planning)


INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
- village laws on new IT technologies


KIDS
- ratify all the regional and global conventions on Rights of the Child
- village laws on giving Kids the rights within the village to plan for sustainability
- village laws on the establishment of a Kids Parliament
- village laws on the rights of Kids to take adults to court for abusing the planet


LEGISLATION
- monitor sustainable legislature indicators
- ratify all the regional and global conventions on sustainable legislation
- village laws to introduce more laws to protect Kids from adults
- village laws to introduce more laws to protect adults from adults


POLLUTION
- ratify all the regional and global conventions on pollution reduction
- village laws to help prevent pollution locally, nationally, regionally and globally


POVERTY
- Poverty alleviation initiatives


RESEARCH


SEWERAGE DISPOSAL
- Compost toilets


SOCIO-ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
- monitor sustainable socio-economical indicators
- village laws to improve the socio-economic wellbeing of the village (e.g. micro-financing)


SOCIOLOGICAL
- monitor sustainable sociological indicators
- ratify all the regional and global conventions on social advancement
- village laws to improve local societies


TOURISM
- monitor sustainable tourism indicators
- ratify all the regional and global conventions on sustainable tourism
- village laws to ban international tourism until it is proven to be sustainable


WASTE MANAGEMENT
- monitor sustainable waste management indicators
- ratify all the regional and global conventions on waste management
- village laws to improve waste management (e.g. plastics recycling)


NB: All of the above topics will be discussed and included in our Pacific Village Development Operations Manual.

We want to take the best working examples from the few remaining most sustainable villages throughout the Pacific.

So, if you can assist us, please send in your suggestions now. We want to have a first draft of the Pacific Village Development Operations Manual ready by Xmas, 2008.

And if this means getting more research assistance from our Pacific/Pacific Rim universities, then so be it. We need some rapid monitoring and evaluation conducted right now in order to take stock of the severity of this crisis.

Some of you may still not believe us. Trust us, we Kids never lie (especially when it comes to protecting Gods' creations, just as you adults taught us - remember?).

Hopefully, having learnt all there is to learn and apply from this Operations Manual, we Kids do not follow in your adult footsteps and "do as adults do'.