ELSEVIER

PII:

Ocean & Coastal Management, Vol. 29, Nos 1-3, pp. 139-163, 1995
Copyright ~) 1996 Elsevier Science Ltd
Printed in Northern Ireland. All rights reserved
0964-5691/95 $9.50 + 0.00
S0964-5691
(96)00004-X

Reflections on the implementation of the Programme

of Action on the Sustainable Development of Small
Island Developing States (SIDS)
M a r k D. Griffith
President, ESI Environmental Systems Inc., Barbados, and Consultant to the Centre for
Environment and Development, University of the West Indies, Mona, Jamaica

ABSTRA CT
The events which led to the convening of the United Nations Conference
on the Sustainable Development of Small Island Developing States
(SIDS) are examined, and provide the basis for an evaluation of the
implementation of the SIDS Programme of Action. The Global
Conference is considered within the broader framework of an evolving
process which has and continues to contribute to enhancing the interests
of SIDS in environment-development negotiations. Copyright ~) 1996
Elsevier Science Ltd.

1. I N T R O D U C T I O N
T h e r e is growing disillusion and disappointment in many segments of
the population in Small Island Developing States (SIDS) about the
tangible benefits they have derived thus far from the implementation of
the outcomes of the Global Conference on the Sustainable Developm e n t of SIDS held in Barbados in April of 1994. Some still continue to
refer to the Global Conference as a 'talk-shop' devoid of practical
significance to their daily lives. SIDS themselves have contributed to
this disillusionment, by not p r o m o t i n g the gains and outcomes of the
Conference and taking greater control of the implementation process at
the national and regional levels. As a consequence, large sections of the
Caribbean population are still unaware of the outcomes and the
practical significance of the Global Conference on the Sustainable
D e v e l o p m e n t of SIDS.
There is however, an alternative view to which the author subscribes,
which argues that the Global Conference, as an important milestone, is
139

140

M. D. Griffith

having a significant impact in advancing the interests of SIDS in

international e n v i r o n m e n t - d e v e l o p m e n t relations, and by extension is
creating the platform for the effective implementation of the Progr a m m e of Action ( P O A ) on the Sustainable D e v e l o p m e n t of Small
Island Developing States (SIDS). O n e must caution however, that the
effective implementation of the P O A will d e p e n d to a large extent on
the response of SIDS themselves, who must be more aggressive,
focused and committed in advancing the ideals enshrined in the Global
Conference and its outcomes and in translating them into national
policy objectives.
A n y critical evaluation of the Global Conference and the implementation of its outcomes must first place t h e m in their proper context. It is
equally important that these initiatives be seen as part of a larger,
evolving process which took root during the UN Conference on
E n v i r o n m e n t and D e v e l o p m e n t ( U N C E D ) and its preparatory activities. The U N C E D process provided island states with an opportunity
to articulate their concerns on a wide range of environment and
development issues, and by so doing ensured that the international
community was aware of these concerns. 1 F u r t h e r m o r e it was argued 2
that small island states must insist that the final outputs of the
Conference contain sections dealing specifically with island development. This they achieved by inclusion in Chapter 17 of Agenda 21, a
p r o g r a m m e area entitled 'Sustainable D e v e l o p m e n t of Small Islands'?
Its inclusion m a r k e d the first time in the history of the United Nations
that the international c o m m u n i t y recognised small island developing
states as a special case for environment and development; this provided
the basis for the convening of the UN Global Conference on the
Sustainable D e v e l o p m e n t of SIDS.
This paper reflects on the events which led to the convening of the
United Nations Global Conference on the Sustainable D e v e l o p m e n t of
SIDS and provides an overview of the outcomes of the Global
Conference, particularly the P r o g r a m m e of Action on the Sustainable
D e v e l o p m e n t of SIDS. It places the Global Conference within the
broader context of an evolving process and advances the viewpoint that
it has contributed to enhancing the interests of SIDS in environmentdevelopment relations. Reflections are also provided on the implementation of the P O A at the national, regional and international levels.

2. P L A C I N G T H E G L O B A L C O N F E R E N C E IN P E R S P E C T I V E
Prior to the adoption of the U N Resolution 44/228 convening the
U N C E D , small island developing states in the United Nations

Sustainable development of SIDS

141

TABLE 1

State members of AOSIS (as of April 1994)

THE CARIBBEAN Antigua & Barbuda, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Cuba, Dominica, Grenada, Guyana, Jamaica, St. Kitts & Nevis, St. Lucia, St. Vincent and the
Grenadines, Suriname, Trinidad and Tobago
INDIAN OCEAN Comoros, Maldives, Mauritius, Seychelles
MEDITERRANEAN Malta, Cyprus
PACIFIC Cook Islands*, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Kiribati*, Marshall
Islands, Nauru, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga*, Tuvulu*,
Vanuatu
ATLANTIC Cape Verde, Guinea-Bissau, Sao Tome, Principe
SOUTH CHINA SEA Singapore
OBSERVERS American Samoa, Guiana, Netherlands Antilles, Niue, US Virgin
Islands
*Indicates non-members of the United Nations.
negotiated as individual countries and not as a block with c o m m o n
interests to advance and protect. W h e n negotiating as a block, however,
each did so either within the context of the G r o u p of 774 or the regional
grouping~ within which each one fell in the UN System. The rise of
environment on the world's political agenda in the late 1980s and early
90s and the recognition of the threat posed to these countries by
accelerated sea level rise were major forces which contributed to the
evolution of a 'negotiating block' by SIDS and low lying coastal states,
to represent their interests in international e n v i r o n m e n t - d e v e l o p m e n t
negotiations. As a consequence, the Alliance for Small Island States
( A O S I S ) - - a grouping of SIDS and low-lying coastal states led by
Trinidad and Tobagty--was f o r m e d in October 1990 at the Second
World Climate Conference (the M e m b e r States of A O S I S are listed in
Table 1). The Alliance became the mouth-piece for this group of
countries t h r o u g h o u t the negotiations in the Intergovernmental Negotiating C o m m i t t e e for a F r a m e w o r k Convention on Climate Change

(rNC/FCCC).
E n c o u r a g e d by the success gained as a result of the formation of
AOSIS, another m o v e m e n t c o m m e n c e d in 1990 within the context of
the preparatory process for the United Nations Conference on Enviro n m e n t and D e v e l o p m e n t to articulate the special concerns and
vulnerabilities of SIDS. Initiated and led by Barbados, SIDS worldwide
m e t daily during the Preparatory C o m m i t t e e sessions of U N C E D to
formulate c o m m o n positions on issues that were subsequently articulated and defended in the formal sessions. This m o v e m e n t was
i n d e p e n d e n t of that which led to the formation of AOSIS and was
largely responsible for the inclusion of ' P r o g r a m m e Area G' in Chapter

142

M. D. Griffith

17 of Agenda 21 which addresses the specific needs and vulnerabilities

of SIDS.
These two initiatives remained separate despite efforts to combine
them both during the Fourth Session of the Preparatory Committee for
U N C E D and the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, 1992. It was not,
however, until the implementation of the provision of Chapter 17 of
Agenda 21 which called for convocation of the First Global Conference
on the Sustainable Development of SIDS that these two initiatives were
forced to come together. AOSIS, which until then focused primarily on
climate change issues, was forced to broaden its mandate to include
sustainable development issues since it was designated as the 'spokesperson' for SIDS in the Global Conference and its preparatory phases.
The broadening of the AOSIS mandate to include sustainable development began at the forty-seventh session of the United Nations General
Assembly when Resolution 47/189 was negotiated and laid the foundation for the convening of the Global Conference. By the commencement of the preparatory process for the Global Conference, sufficient
accommodation had been made by the Group of 77 to recognise AOSIS
as a 'special grouping' operating within the context of the larger
grouping (G77) of developing countries. As a consequence, the Chair of
AOSIS assumed the 'leadership' of the Group of 77 during the
negotiating process and therefore spoke on behalf of G77 and AOSIS.
It would therefore be misleading to view the Global Conference as a
single event. Instead it must be seen as part of a continuing dynamic
evolutionary process in which SIDS seek to articulate their special
concerns and vulnerabilities and to redefine their relationships in
international environment-development negotiations. Any critical assessment of the Global Conference, its outcomes and their implementation should therefore use this contextual framework within which to
evaluate the gains and losses. Before reflecting on the implementation
of the Programme of Action (POA) it is necessary to examine its main
elements.

3. T H E P R O G R A M M E OF A C T I O N - - A N O V E R V I E W

A major criticism of the Programme of Action is its bias towards

environment as against development. This is a valid criticism but must
be viewed within the context in which it evolved. The bias reflects the
mood of SIDS negotiating partners (i.e. the developed world), many of

Sustainable development of SIDS

143

w h o m m a d e a great effort to restrict the parameters of the Global

Conference. In the interest of advancing the process, sacrifices were
made, one being lesser focus on 'developmental' issues. Once the
parameters of the Global Conference were set however, the content of
the P O A was largely influenced, initially at least, by SIDS themselves.
This was achieved through the convening of two Regional Technical
Meetings in V a n u a t u for SIDS from Asia and the Pacific Regions, and
the other in Trinidad and Tobago for SIDS from the Caribbean,
Atlantic and M e d i t e r r a n e a n Regions. The outputs of these two meetings f o r m e d the basis for SIDS positions and by extension that of
A O S I S t h r o u g h o u t the Global Conference and its preparatory process.
A n underlying principle which guided the negotiations on the P O A
was the 'triangular approach', which emphasizes implementation at the
national, regional and international levels. T h e structure of the P O A is
influenced significantly by the approach. The P r o g r a m m e consists of a
Preamble which puts the case of SIDS in context; fourteen priority
areas, each consisting of a basis for action; national action; policies and
measures; regional action and international action; and a section
addressing Implementation, Monitoring and Review (Table 2).
TABLE 2
Elements of the Programme of Action on the sustainable development
of small island developing states

1.
2.

3.

PREAMBLE
PRIORITY AREAS
i. Climate Change and Sea Level Rise
ii. Natural and Environmental Disasters
iii. Management of Wastes
iv. Coastal and Marine Resources
v. Freshwater Resources
vi. Land Resources
vii. Energy Resources
viii. Tourism Resources
ix. Biological Resources
x, National Institutions and Administrative Capacity
xi. Regional Institutions and Technical cooperation
xii, Transport and Communication
xiii, Science and Technology
xiv. Human Resources Development
IMPLEMENTATION, MONITORING and REVIEW
i. National Implementation
ii. Regional Implementation
iii. International Implementation

144

M. D. Griffith

The outputs of the Global Conference were considered

Nations General Assembly at its forty-ninth session and
by UN Resolution 49/122. 6 The budgetary implications of
were further elaborated in the Programme Budget for
1994-95. 7

by the United
were adopted
the resolution
the Biennium

4. I M P L E M E N T A T I O N OF T H E P R O G R A M M E OF A C T I O N
The Programme of Action has been described as the first concerted
attempt by a group of historically marginalised states to define their
problems, highlight their special characteristics and devise SIDS-specific
programmes of action for their sustainable development. 8 In reflecting
on the implementation of the Programme of Action, two critical
questions come to mind. First, has the Global Conference and its
preparatory process contributed to the evolving process aimed at
advancing the interests of SIDS in environment-development negotiations and if it has contributed, in what way? Secondly, should any
reflections on the implementation of the P O A be placed in the narrow
context of the Global Conference as a single event, or in its broader
context of being part of an evolving process? An appreciation of these
two issues is more likely to give a better understanding of the
significance of the Global Conference, and thereby provide a better
basis for an evaluation of the implementation of its outcomes.
Reflections on the implementation of the P O A will be considered at
two levels; first the contribution of the Global Conference and its
preparatory process to advancing the interests of SIDS in international
environment-development negotiations; and secondly, an evaluation of
the implementation of the P O A at the national, regional and international levels.

5. C O N T R I B U T I O N TO AN E V O L V I N G PROCESS
The inclusion of Chapter 17 in Agenda 21 was an important milestone
in that it marked the first time the international community had
recognised SIDS as 'a special case for environment sustainable
d e v e l o p m e n t . . . [that they are] special challenges for implementing

Sustainable development of SIDS

145

sustainable development... [and that they would be] constrained in

meeting the challenges without the cooperation and assistance of the
international community'.9 It also succeeded in highlighting the special
vulnerabilities of SIDS and by so doing created further 'negotiating
space' for these countries.
One of the clearest manifestations of the creation of 'negotiating
space' is reflected in the composition of the Council for the restructured
Global Environment Facility (GEF) in which SIDS have been able to
secure constituencies within the two regions where most SIDS are
concentrated (i.e. Latin America and the Caribbean and Asia and
Pacific Regions) (Table 3). The Council, which consists of 32 members,
represents constituency groupings formulated and distributed taking
into account the need for balanced and equitable representation of all
participants, while also giving due weight to the funding efforts of all
donors. 1 It has two constituencies made up largely of SIDS. The
importance of having adequate representation on the GEF Council
cannot be overstated. As the mechanism responsible for 'developing,
adopting and evaluation of the operation policies and programmes for
GEF funding projects ...,n and for translating the guidance of the
Conference of the Parties for both the Framework Convention on
Climate Change and the Convention on Biological Diversity into
fundable projects, it is essential that SIDS have an effective voice so
that their interests can be represented.
The multiplier effect of the Global Conference is also reflected in the
GEF Scope and Preliminary Operational Strategy. for International
Waters 12 in which specific focus is placed on SIDS~ GEF assistance for
activities concerning international waters could be targeted at five
major issues that most SIDS have in common (coastal zone
management/biodiversity, tourism development, protection of drinking
water supplies, land and marine-based sources of pollution and vulnerability to adverse effects of climate change). This reflects the spirit of
the POA which encourages the GEF that the determination of
eligibility criteria related to, and in the development of project
proposals for funding, the GEF should pay due attention to the special
needs and requirements of SIDS.
The momentum galvanized by the Global Conference along with the
on-going efforts of AOSIS members themselves in the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee for a Framework Convention on Climate
Change (INC/FCCC) also contributed to the decision on 'adaptation'
agreed to at the INC/FCCC at its tenth session. The INC/FCCC ~3
agreed that adaptation to the adverse effects of climate change will

146

M. D. GriJfith
TABLE 3

GEF Recipient Constituencies (as of May 1995)

AFRICA (6)
Algeria, Egypt, Morocco, Tunisia
Benin, Cote d'Ivoire, Guinea, Nigeria,
Sierra Leone, Togo
Burkina Faso, Cape Verde, Chad,
Guinea-Bissau, Mali, Mauritania, Niger,
Senegal, The Gambia
ASIA AND PACIFIC (6)
I.R. Iran
Afghanistan, Jordan, Lebanon, Pakistan,
Yemen
China

LATIN AMERICA AND THE

CARIBBEAN (4)
Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas,
Barbados, Belize, Cuba, Dominica,
Dominican Republic, Grenada,
Guyana, Haiti, Jamaica, St. Kitts &
Nevis, St. Lucia, St. Vincent & the
Grenadines, Suriname, Trinidad and
Tobago
Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador
CENTRAL, EASTERN EUROPE AND
FORMER SOVIET UNION (2)
Armenia, Belarus, Russian Federation

Cameroon, Central African Republic

Djibouti, Ethiopia, Kenya, Madagascar,
Mauritius, Sudan, Uganda
Botswana, Lesotho, South Africa,
Swaziland, Zambia, Zimbabwe
Bangladesh, India, Maldives (prel*),
Nepal (prel*), Sri Lanka (prel*)
D.P.R. Korea, Laos (PDR), Malaysia,
Mongolia, Myanmar, Thailand,
Vietnam
Cook Islands, Fiji, Indonesia, Kiribati,
Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nariru,
Papua New Guinea, Philippines,
Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga,
Tuvalu, Vanuatu
Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala,
Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama,
Venezuela (prel*)

Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Paraguay, Peru,

Uruguay
Albania, Bulgaria (prel*), Croatia (prel*),
Georgia (prel*), Poland, Romania,
TFYR Macedonia (prel*), Ukraine

* Indicates participant preliminarily grouped in the constituency subject to final

agreement between the country and the other participant countries in the
constituency--Source Reference 14.

require short, m e d i u m and long-term strategies which should be

cost-effective, should take into account i m p o r t a n t socio-economic
implications, and should be i m p l e m e n t e d on a stage-by-stage basis in
developing countries that are Parties to the Convention.

Sustainable development of SIDS

147

In the short term the following action was envisaged:

Stage I: Planning, including studies of possible impacts of climate
change to identify particularly vulnerable countries or regions and
policy options for adaptation and appropriate capacity-building.
In the medium and long-term two additional stages were envisaged
for countries of regions identified in Stage I as being particularly
vulnerable.
Stage II: Measures, including further capacity-building, which may be
taken to prepare for adaptation.
Stage III: Measures to facilitate adaptation (e.g. insurance).
INC/FCCC further agreed that for Stage I, the Conference of the
Parties (COP) would entrust GEF to meet the agreed costs of the
activities required by Article 12.1 of the Convention. This would
include meeting the agreed full costs of relevant adaptation activities
undertaken in the context of the formulation of national communications. Such activities might include studies of the possible impacts of
climate change, identification of options for implementing the adaptation provisions (especially the obligations contained in Articles 4.1 (b)
and 4.1 (e) of the Convention) and relevant capacity-building.
The decision of INC/FCCC on adaptation is a major milestone
certainly from the point of view of SIDS. It may be argued that the
Global Conference in part has contributed to this decision. Prior to that
decision, and despite the recognition of the need for SIDS and
low-lying coastal countries to undertake adaptation measures as outlined in the Convention and reaffirmed in the POA, no guidance on
funding for adaptation existed. The decision of INC/FCCC therefore
opened possibilities for funding adaptation, albeit only 'planning for
adaptation' from the GEF. To date both the Caribbean and Pacific
Regions have submitted projects to GEF which address the issue of
adaptation.
The POA has provided the SIDS from the Caribbean with a
'framework' for sustainable development which can be used to advance
their interests in the context of the emerging Agenda for the Americas.
This is exemplified by the specific reference to the Global Conference
in the Summit of Americas Declaration of PrinciplesTM and Plan of
Action 16 and the resolve to advance and implement the commitments
therein. The challenge for the SIDS from the Caribbean is now to
ensure that those sentiments are taken to their logical conclusion and
reflected in practical ways in the emerging hemispheric cooperation
structures. Furthermore, the SIDS from the Caribbean must ensure that

148

M. D. Griffith

the 1996 Summit Conference on Sustainable Development in Bolivia

addresses their specific characteristics and vulnerabilities building upon
the achievements of the Global Conference.
6. N A T I O N A L I M P L E M E N T A T I O N
The P O A outlines a number of actions to be taken by SIDS with the
cooperation and assistance of the international community. Like
Agenda 21, the successful implementation of the P O A is first and
foremost the responsibility of Governments. It is therefore critical that
SIDS themselves play a leading role in translating the P O A into
something practical and tangible to which their populations can relate.
Only then will existing perspectives on the Global Conference change.
To achieve this however, SIDS will have to be more focused and
aggressive in identifying and exploiting the 'opportunities' created by
the Global Conference and its outcomes. This in turn will require
fundamental changes in the states' approach to environmental and
sustainable development issues both at the national and regional levels.
To date, however, Caribbean countries have been slow in identifying
opportunities for implementation of the POA. National agencies
appear, by and large, to be expecting a lead to be given by the UN
system or the donor community, 17 a factor which has contributed to the
slow implementation of the POA.
Another important concern which is inhibiting the effective implementation at the national level is the assignment of the co-ordination
responsibility for the implementation of the SIDS/POA. It is difficult to
identify within existing institutions any formal assignment of responsibility to initiate implementation of the SIDS/POA. TM Closely related
to this is the lack of a coordinated response to the implementation of
the POA. Initiatives that are the direct follow-up to the Global
Conference (i.e. Capacity 21 Project for the Caribbean, the International Coral Reef Initiative, Planning for Adaptation to Climate
Change, S I D S / T A P and SIDS/NET, etc.) in most instances have
different focal points at the national level, without an effective
mechanism for ensuring that each project complements the others
rather than duplicates or conflicts with their goals.
An analysis of country reports ~9-22 on the implementation of the
P O A reveal that the actions and activities contained in the P O A are
being perceived as a reaffirmation of work and programmes already
underway. Such a perception could probably lead to complacency as
far as implementation at the national level is concerned. It could
be perceived by some that because a number of projects being

Sustainable development of SIDS

149

implemented are mentioned in the POA, this translates in to the

effective implementation of the POA. This is not necessarily the case.
More fundamentally, the P O A is not being perceived or used enough as
a 'strategic planning document' which could be utilized to foster a
different approach to sustainable development in these countries and to
provide a framework for resource mobilization to assist in meeting the
challenges for sustainable development. Furthermore, the P O A has not
been translated into practical activities that are perceived by the
population as being relevant and where attempts have been made to do
so, that information has not been clearly disseminated.
A case in point is the establishment of 'national disaster funds' called
for in the POA. This concept has as its basis the recognition of the
increasing vulnerabilities of SIDS due to the dramatic increase in
insurance premiums on property as a result of increased storm and
hurricane activity, and in some instances the withdrawal of coverage by
large international insurance companies. As a consequence, critical
'lifelines' such as electricity facilities are now unable to secure adequate
insurance coverage, further increasing these countries' vulnerabilities. 23
The P O A provides a 'strategic framework' for advancing the concept of
national disaster funds at the national, regional and international levels,
particularly in the wake of the devastation wrought by a number of
tropical storms and hurricanes during the 1995 hurricane season alone.
The framework provided by the P O A could also assist in defining the
capitalization modalities of such a fund and in determining the technical
assistance required from the international community to assist in its
formulation and operation. The POA, if used effectively as a 'strategic
planning document,' could have greatly enhanced utility in SIDS. An
important starting point however, must be the internalization of the
POA.
The formulation of 'National Implementation Strategies' which
includes the full involvement and participation of civic society could be
used as a meaningful mechanism to achieve such a goal. As part of this
process constraints to the implementation of the P O A have been
identified. These include:
the non-allocation or identification of new and additional
financial resources for the implementation of the P O A at the
national, regional and international levels;
slow identification by SIDS themselves of opportunities which
might exist for implementation of the POA;
inadequate institutional capacity and coordination at the national and regional levels;

150

M. D. Griffith

absence of both national and regional 'implementation plans'

for the P O A , as well as of the development of the requisite
mechanisms for mobilizing the resources needed to implement
them;
lack of awareness and active participation by civic society in the
implementation of the POA.

7. R E G I O N A L I M P L E M E N T A T I O N
A critical component of the effective implementation of the P O A is
regional action. Even though national action is fundamental to the
implementation of the POA, regional coordination, facilitation and
direction is also necessary, particularly as a means of influencing both
national and international responses to its implementation. Strategically, in each region where SIDS are concentrated, the formulation of a
'Regional Implementation Strategy' should be undertaken.
One of the major inhibiting factors to the implementation of the
P O A at the regional level in the Caribbean, is the absence of a coherent
regional implementation strategy. To date in the Caribbean, no attempt
has been made at the 'official' level to undertake such a 'regional
implementation strategy'.
A 'Regional Implementation and Strategic Plan' is necessary to:

identify the elements contained in the P O A which are best

suited for regional implementation, the development of project
focus and the possible identification of funding sources;
identify the linkages and relationships between national, regional and international actions;
identify the regional institutional mechanism(s) best suited to
the effective implementation of regional action as it relates to
the POA;
the identification of the channels of communication, and information flows between the regional mechanism(s), the SIDS Unit
in the Department of Policy Coordination and Sustainable
Development, the Regional Commissions; the United Nations
Conference on Trade and Development and other UN agencies
and programmes, and with the regional institutions in other
regions where SIDS are located.
identify a strategy for enhancing inter- and intra-regional
cooperation between SIDS from various regions.

Sustainable development of SIDS

151

Closely linked to this approach is the need for an effective regional

inter-governmental mechanism24 in the Caribbean to advance the ideals
of the POA and sustainable development generally. In the Caribbean,
the CARICOM Secretariat through its sustainable development officer
is normally looked upon to perform this function but does not have
either the institutional capacity or capability to do so. The sustainable
development desk in the CARICOM Secretariat is manned by a
technical officer who, in addition to the responsibility for environment
and sustainable development issues, also has portfolio responsibilities
for disaster preparedness and science and technology. If the POA is to
be implemented effectively in the Caribbean, considerable institutional
and human resource development will need to be undertaken either
within the context of a regional institution that has a mandate for
sustainable development or the creation of an entity to address this
most important aspect of the region's long-term development.
Despite the need for such a mechanism, however, some elements in
the region still slavishly adhere to the adage of 'no new institutions'.
While appreciating the underlying philosophy of such a position, one
would have expected a little more objectivity to prevail, given the high
dependence by the SIDS of the Caribbean on a fragile resource base
which for all practical purposes is also their developmental resource
base. The need for such a mechanism should therefore be evaluated on
its own merit, and not within the context of a predetermined position.
An effective regional mechanism(s) is a fundamental prerequisite(s)
to the effective implementation of the POA at the regional level. While
it will be necessary for existing agencies to implement various aspects of
the POA within their area(s) of competence, a need still exists in the
Caribbean for an effective regional mechanism for directing, coordinating and mobilizing the resources for the implementation of the POA.
A critical evaluation of the POA would indicate that an effective
regional mechanism is vital for the success of both SIDS/TAP and
SIDS/NET, which in order to have practical significance to SIDS
themselves, must be SIDS-driven. Other programmes which are contained in the POA that require regional institutional support are inter
alia the regional centres for pollution prevention and monitoring;
regional mechanisms for the protection of the oceans; regional centres
for training and transfer of cleaner production technology; regional
surveillance and monitoring of activities in the exclusive economic
zones; the promotion of regional studies of the socio-economic and
cultural value of biological resources including genetic engineering,

152

M. D. Griffith

intellectual property rights and access to biotechnology; establishment

of regional gene-bank centres for research; and development/
strengthening of regional ocean networks. In the absence of an
adequate regional inter-governmental mechanism to facilitate the
implementation of the P O A , the Centre for Environment and Development, University of the West Indies, Mona, Jamaica will be looked
upon to play a leading role in the implementation of the POA. One of
the mandates of the Centre is to foster research on the sustainable
development of SIDS.
The absence of a coordinating mechanism at the Caribbean regional
level was identified by the Caribbean Meeting of Experts on Implementation of the S I D S / P O A 25 as a critical factor affecting the slow pace of
the Action Plan implementation, and it was agreed that mechanisms
should be established at the regional level to do so. The interim
arrangement agreed to by the Experts--a joint coordinating mechanism
of the Secretariats of both C A R I C O M and E C L A C / C D C C - - f a l I s far
short of an effective regional mechanism for the implementation of the
POA. 26 The Secretariats involved are accountable to two different
ministerial bodies with their own schedules. Furthermore E C L A C is a
United Nations organisation whose specific functions with respect to the
P O A are clearly outlined both in the P O A and in the Programme
Budget for the Biennium 1994-1995. E C L A C should therefore direct
its energies to ensuring that the responsibilities assigned to it by the UN
are carried out in an efficient and expedient manner and account to
SIDS for its stewardship. To assume the joint responsibility for
coordination of the P O A at the regional level raises issues including
inter alia institutional capacity, the implementation modalities to
facilitate intra-regional collaboration and cooperation between SIDS
from different regions, and the relationship between national focal
points and the two Secretariats. In the implementation of the P O A at
the regional level, the need exists for a clearer understanding of the role
of UN agencies. The role of these agencies should be catalytic-identifying the gaps and directing available resources where they are
most needed.

7.1. Regional level initiatives

Despite the institutional limitations affecting the implementation of the

P O A at the regional level, a number of initiatives have been undertaken aimed at implementing some elements of the POA. The major
initiative which is in the process of being developed to date is the

Sustainable development of SIDS

153

TABLE 4

Project adaptation to climate change

A. ADAPTATION PLANNING
1. Design and Establishment of Sea Level/Climate Monitoring Network:
scientific infrastructure development
human and institutional capacity
monitoring key parameters for response formulation
2. Design and Establishment of Coral Reef Monitoring Network:
quantify impacts
determine temperature stress limits
study adaptation potential
3. Establishment of Databases and Information Systems:
access to databases
effective linkages
dissemination of information
4. Inventory of Coastal Resources and Use:
baseline data collection
classification/quantification of resource use
5. Coastal Vulnerability and Risk Assessment:
sea-level rise impact assessments
natural and socio-economic implications
study of various response strategies
6. Economic Evaluation of Coastal and Marine Resources:
construction of resource accounts
cost of loss and degradation
7. Formulation of Economic/Regulatory Proposals:
review existing legislation and regulations
formulate regulatory measures to stimulate adaptation strategies
8. Formulation of a Policy Framework for Integrated Coastal and Marine Management
and Planning:
support implementation of integrated management
identify options for adapting to climate change
B. CAPACITY BUILDING
1. Institutional Strengthening:
assess institutions and legal methods

Global Environment Facility (GEF) funded project for the Caribbean

Region entitled 'The Caribbean: Planning for Adaptation to Climate
C h a n g e , 2~ w i t h t h e O r g a n i s a t i o n o f A m e r i c a n S t a t e s ( O A S ) as t h e
E x e c u t i n g A g e n c y a n d t h e W o r l d B a n k as t h e I m p l e m e n t i n g A g e n c y .

154

M. D. Griffith
TABLE 5

Projects objectives: Caribbean planning for adaption to climate change

1. Support CARICOM Parties to the UN FCCC in preparing to cope with the
adverse effects of climate change.
2. Strengthen regional capabilities for analysing climate and sea level dynamics to
determine potential impacts of GCC.
3. Identify areas particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of GCC.
4. Develop an integrated planning and management framework for cost-effective
responses to the impacts of GCC.
5. Enhance institutional and human resource capabilities on the regional and national
level.
6. Identify and assess different policy options and instruments for initiating a
long-term programme of adaptation to GCC in vulnerable coastal areas.
7. Collect information needed for preparing national communications, as required
under Articles 4.1. and 12.1 of the FCCC.

T h e project is designed to enable the SIDS of the region to plan for

adaptation to the impact of climate change. T h e project has two main
emphases, n a m e l y adaptation planning and capacity building (Table 4).
D u r i n g the project i m p l e m e n t a t i o n phase, emphasis will be placed on a
regional approach that utilises 'pilot projects' in selected countries to
g e n e r a t e information and expertise. The data, knowledge and experience gained will be shared through regional dissemination and
training involving all participating countries. T h e objectives of the
project are outlined in Table 5.
The design of the project with emphasis on a regional approach has
m a n y strengths w h e n considered in the context of planning adaptive
m e a s u r e s for coping with climate change. T h e collection of data on sea
level and on the p h e n o m e n a of climate change is m o r e cost-effective if
p l a n n e d on a wider scale as in the case of the project. F u r t h e r m o r e , the
sharing of data, information and expertise will lead to m o r e robust
analysis, and adaptive measures m a y be useful for the whole region and
beyond.

7.2. W a t e r r e s o u r c e s

As a m e a n s of facilitating the i m p l e m e n t a t i o n of the P O A , the Centre

for E n v i r o n m e n t and D e v e l o p m e n t , University of the West Indies,
Mona, Jamaica, in collaboration with the C o m m o n w e a l t h Science

Sustainable development of SIDS

155

Council, convened a regional meeting on water resources problems in

SIDS, August 1995. The meeting agreed to a 'Water Resources Action
Plan' which used both Agenda 21 and the S I D S / P O A as the basis.
Central elements which are contained in the Water Resources Action
Plan are the formulation of a 'Programme for Integrated Water
Resources for Caribbean SIDS'; a SIDS Water Resources Information
System and the need for policy reviews and assessments of water
resources within the context of the Commission for Sustainable
Development's mandated comprehensive review of water resources,
which will be the subject of a special session on the U N General
Assembly in 1997. The results of this Workshop were presented to the
Third Meeting of the Collaborative Council on Water Supply and
Sanitation 2s convened in Barbados in the last quarter of 1995.

8. I M P L E M E N T A T I O N
One of the major challenges facing SIDS during the Global Conference
and its preparatory process was to ensure that the international
community committed itself to the establishment of adequate and
appropriate institutional mechanisms at the international level to ensure
that continuous focus be given to SIDS issues and implementation of
the Conference outcomes. The case was advanced for the establishment
of a 'Unit' within the Secretariat servicing the Commission on Sustainable Development. 29 This objective was achieved when the UN
General Assembly, at its forty-ninth session, gave the green light for the
'SIDS Unit' within the Department of Policy Coordination and
Sustainable Development (DSD) which will have responsibility for the
implementation of the POA, including substantive support to and
servicing of the inter-governmental and inter-agency processes, and
promotional and catalytic activities. 3 In addition, specific responsibilities with respect to the implementation of the P O A were assigned
to a number of UN agencies. These are summarised in Table 6.
Prior to the Global Conference it was argued that little focus had
been given by the United Nations and its specialised agencies,
programmatically, to the special problems, needs and vulnerabilities of
SIDS. Most of the agencies, despite having programmes which have
been implemented in SIDS cannot claim to have a special focus on the
sustainable development of SIDS. 31 This situation has not changed
significantly since the convening of the Global Conference, though
limited accommodation has been made by some agencies to increase

156

M. D. Griffith
TABLE 6

Responsibilities of UN agencies in relation to the implementation of the Programme Of

Action
1. UNCTAD
Responsibility for developing and implementing a policy-oriented programme
aimed at strengthening export capacities and increasing competitiveness;
Development of a mechanism(s) for improving regional cooperation arrangements
in trade, air and sea transport, communications science and technology, banking,
insurance and institutional capacity building;
Monitor activities with regard to the implementation of multilateral trading
agreements affecting SIDS;
Conduct studies and research with regard to technical assistance projects;
Servicing of inter-governmental and expert group meetings on issues relating to
SIDS;
Undertake a study on the effects of trade liberalization and globalization of SIDS.
2. R E G I O N A L COMMISSIONS
Responsibility for coordination of activities in the context of implementation of the
POA at the regional and sub-regional level;
Monitor the implementation of regional and country programme and projects;
Regularly report on the activities undertaken and progress achieved in implementation of the POA;
Act as liaison between the UN Agencies and the Department of Policy Coordination and Sustainable Development;
Assist regional and sub-regional organisations and mechanisms involved in the
promotion of sustainable development.
3. UNEP
Provide policy guidance and coordination in the field of the environment.
4. UNDP
Carry out its mandate with respect to capacity building;
Coordinate a feasibility study on SIDS/NET;
Coordinate a feasibility study on SIDS/TAP including the compilation of a
directory of institutions and scholars with recognised expertise in the sustainable
development of SIDS.

their focus on SIDS. The 'Framework for Cooperation' being proposed

b y U N D P c o u l d b e a u s e f u l s t a r t i n g p o i n t in a d d r e s s i n g this issue.
Most of the UN agencies and programmes seem to have interpreted
t h e i r r o l e in t h e i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f t h e P O A in t h e n a r r o w p e r s p e c t i v e
o f w h a t w a s e i t h e r o u t l i n e d in t h e P O A o r e l a b o r a t e d in t h e
Programme Budget for the Biennium 1994-95. For example, UNDP's
mandate with regard to supporting the implementation of the POA

Sustainable development of SIDS

157

derives from three principal areas; namely, consistent with Agenda 21,
to continue to exercise its lead agency mandate in the area of capacity
building and in addition, the coordination of two feasibility studies, one
for a SIDS/Technical Assistance Programme (SIDS/TAP) and the
other for a SIDS/Information Network (SIDS/NET). One could raise
the question as to whether this is the only 'mandate' U N D P should
assume within the context of the POA. As the UN 'development'
agency, it obviously has a much more dynamic and catalytic role to play
in fostering the implementation of the POA, at all levels, but
particularly at the field office level. In doing so however, emphasis must
be placed on the 'catalytic' role accompanied by strategic interventions
which will assist SIDS in the implementation of the P O A at both the
national and regional levels. In discharging such a function, great care
must be taken to ensure that the implementation process is 'SIDS
driven' rather than 'agency driven'. The difference in the two approaches could mean success or failure.
UNDP's efforts in responding to its mandate as defined in the P O A
m u s t be complemented. Its efforts at coordinating the preparation of
the two feasibility studies 32"33prior to the forty-ninth session of the UN
General Assembly must be highly commended. A number of observations are however pertinent with respect to the implementation
modalities for both SIDS/TAP and SIDS/NET. As originally conceptualised, both 34 SIDS/TAP and S I D S / N E T were intended to support
sustainable development in SIDS worldwide, and by so doing, facilitate
inter- and intra-regional collaboration and cooperation. The fostering of
inter- and particularly intra-regional island collaboration between SIDS
from the various regions is a very important underlying philosophy of
the Global Conference. As a consequence, the success of the implementation of the ideals of the Global Conference and its follow-up
will, to a large extent, be determined by the achievement of this
objective. In addition, both S I D S / N E T and S I D S / T A P were intended
to support each other in a fundamental way as major planks on which
intra-regional collaboration between SIDS could be developed (Fig. 1
illustrates the relationships between S I D S / N E T and SIDS/TAP). To
date however, there has been little progress in developing an aggressive
agenda to facilitate meaningful intra-regional collaboration and cooperation between SIDS from the various regions.
A close examination of these mechanisms (SIDS/TAP and
SIDS/NET) underlies the necessity for them to be 'SIDS driven' and
not 'agency-driven'. In addition, one of the main driving forces behind
their implementation could be an identifiable 'facilitator' or 'regional
focal point' in each of the regions (i.e. Caribbean, Mediterranean,

M. D. Griffith

158
Indicative
SIDS/Net data base

by SIDS/TAP

\
S I D S / T A P components
Technical
co-operation
D/oCUmentatinf
*
SIDS/TAP T e c h n i c a l assistance

* Availability

* Experiences M o d a l i t y for utlizing ' Availability of

* Training courses skills in the diaspora
expertise in
Technical assistance
diaspora
programmes
Private sector
* Technical
involvement
~ Availability of
co-operation
institutional
N G O collaboration

University linkages

Fig. 1.

Relationship between SIDS/NET and SIDS/TAP. 3S

Africa, Pacific, Indian Ocean, and the South China Sea) as a means of
interfacing, on the one hand, with SIDS at the national level, and
international and inter/intraregionally on the other. 36 Thus far, both
S I D S / T A P and S I D S / N E T seem too distant from the populations of
SIDS both at the national and regional levels. A n important step that is
now required in their implementation is the 'indigenisation' of these
systems to ensure ownership by SIDS themselves with U N D P and other
agencies playing a catalytic role. Such a process is fundamental if these
systems are not to become simply 'other initiatives'.
A n important part of the 'indigenisation' process must be critical
evaluation by SIDS themselves of the proposed models for S I D S / T A P
and S I D S / N E T .

159

Sustainable development of SIDS

Another initiative being undertaken by U N D P in the Caribbean as a

follow-up to the Global Conference is the Capacity Building Project,
financed from U N D P Capacity 21 and targeting six pilot countries;
namely Barbados, British Virgin Islands, Dominica, Grenada, Jamaica
and St.Lucia. The modest resources available through this project are
being used for strengthening national and regional capacities for
implementing sustainable development plans and programmes. 37 The
resources allocated for each participating country will likely be too
insignificant to make a difference. Underlying the implementation of
this project is the critical issue of the need for a regional mechanism in
the Caribbean for sustainable development. This will continue to
emerge in every regional project until it is addressed in an objective
manner in the region.
U N E P has incorporated in its 1996-97 Work Programme, elements
which could assist in translating the P O A into policy action at both the
national and regional levels. From an institutional viewpoint however,
U N E P should consider re-structuring the Regional office for Latin
America and the Caribbean in such a manner as to increase its focus on
SIDS. Critical evaluation should also be given to the Caribbean
Environment Programme in this respect, while taking care to ensure
that Wider Caribbean focus of the Programme remains paramount.
The harshest reality to date concerning the implementation of the
P O A is the unavailability of new and additional resources for its
implementation. From all indications this situation is not likely to
change in the immediate future. The reality is borne out by the United
Nations 38 in a document entitled 'Selected Funding Sources for Environmental Projects Accessible to AOSIS Member States'. It lists the
GEF, the Convention on Biological Diversity, the U N / F C C C , the
Montreal Protocol, the Basel Convention on the Transboundary
Movement of Hazardous Waste and other Wastes and their Disposal,
Capacity 21 and the United Nations Population Fund as some of the
main sources of funding made available by the international community
for implementing environmental projects. In this region that emphasis
should be directed towards the implementation of the POA.
I

9. C O N C L U S I O N
One may argue that not enough time has elapsed in order to fully
determine and evaluate the extent to which the P O A has been
implemented. Notwithstanding this, it is evident that some progress has
been achieved, particularly in the context of the P O A being used to

160

M. D. Griffith

give SIDS leverage in international environment-development negotiation. From a Caribbean perspective, implementation at both the
national and regional levels has been very slow. Greater effort will be
needed in the coming years if the P O A is to make a difference in the
Caribbean. Some ideas which could probably stimulate more rapid
implementation of the P O A are:

Formulation of a 'national and regional implementation strategy' for the POA.

Identification of a suitable inter-governmental regional institutional mechanism to give guidance and policy direction. An
institution similar in concept to the South Pacific Regional
Environmental Programme could be used as a model for the
Caribbean. Such an entity should assume responsibility for the
implementation of regional projects/programmes in the field of
sustainable development and should develop functional and
operational linkages with the Centre for Environment and
Development, of the University of the West Indies.
A n intense and comprehensive environmental education and
public awareness programme about the purpose, content and
implementation of the POA.
Creation of a 'Regional Environmental Trust Fund' to assist
with financing the implementation of some elements of the
POA.
The 'Indigenising' of both S I D S / T A P and SIDS/NET, and their
promotion as essential pillars for facilitating and enhancing
intra-regional collaboration and cooperation between SIDS
from different regions of the world. In so doing the SIDS-driven
nature of these mechanisms should be emphasised. Presently
both of these concepts are still too distant from the day to day
activities in SIDS, yet they offer them much potential.

REFERENCES
1. Griffith, M. D. & Inniss, V., Environmental diplomacy: an effective tool
for small island states to define a more dynamic role in international
environment-development negotiations. Bulletin o f Eastern Caribbean
Affairs, 17(1-2) (1992) 43-54.
2. op. cit.

3. United Nations, Report of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development Rio de Janerio, 3-14 June, 1992, Vol 1.
Resolutions by the Conference, A/CONF.151/2'6/Rev 1.

Sustainable development of SIDS

161

4. The Group of 77 has its origins in the 'Caucus of 75' developing countries
that met to prepare UNCTAD I in Geneva in 1964. After UNCTAD I
membership having grown to 77 members, evaluated the work of the
conference in a 'Joint Declaration of 77 Developing Countries', hence the
term Group of 77. Membership now stands at 128 accounting for almost all
the developing country members of the UN.
5. The Members of the Assembly are arranged in regional groups, namely
African States, Eastern European States, Latin America and the Caribbean States, and Western European and other States. The USA is not a
member of any regional group, but attends meetings of the Western
European and other states (WEO) group as an observer and is considered
a member of that group for electoral purposes.
6. United Nations Global Conference on the Sustainable Development of
SIDS Resolution Adopted by the General Assembly, A/RES/49/122,
February, 1995.
7. United Nations Programme Budget for the Biennium 1994-95.
8. Ashe, J. & Griffith, M. D., The Barbados Conference for the Sustainable
Development of SIDS. Possible Outcomes, Eco-decision, 55-56, January,
1994.
9. Same as Reference 3.
10. Global Environmental Facility, Instrument for the Establishment of the
Restructured Global Environmental Facility, GEF, Washington D.C.,
1994.
11. op. cit.
12. Global Environmental Facility, Scope and Preliminary Operational Strategy for International Waters, GEF Council Meeting, February 22-24,
1994, Washington, D.C., GEF/c.3/7.
13. INC/FCCC, Conclusions of Working Group II. Draft Report INC/FCCC
Tenth Session, 22 August-2 September, 1994.
14. Global Environmental Facility. List of Representatives at GEF Council
Meeting, 3-5 May, 1995, Washington, D.C.
15. Summit of the Americas Declaration of Principles, Partnership for
Development and Prosperity: Democracy, Free trade and Sustainable
Development in the Americas; Summit of the Americas, December 1994.
16. Summit of the Americas Plan of Action, Summit of the Americas,
December 1994.
17. Charles, H., Operational Review on Implementation of SIDS Programme
of Action in the Caribbean. Prepared for UNECLAC Preparatory to the
Caribbean Regional Experts Meeting on Implementation of the SIDS /POA,
May, 1995.
18. op. cit.
19. Government of Barbados, Barbados Position Paper on the Implementation
of the POA on the Sustainable Development of SIDS submitted by the
Government of Barbados to the Caribbean Meeting of Experts on
Implementation o f the SIDS/POA, May 17-19, 1995, INF 21.
20. Government of Jamaica, Jamaica's Response to the Plan of Action for the
Sustainable Development of SIDS. Submitted by the Government of
Jamaica to the Caribbean Meeting of Experts on Implementation of the
SIDS/POA, May 17-19, 1995, INF 23.

162

M. D. Griffith

21. Government of St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Kitts and Nevis Position Paper
Submitted by the Government of St. Kitts and Nevis to the Caribbean
Meeting of Experts on Implementation of the SIDS/POA, May 17-19,
1995, INF 21.
22. Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States, Progress Achieved in the
Implementation of the SIDS/POA, Natural Resources Management Unit,
OECS Secretariat, Castries, St. Lucia, March 1995.
23. Griffith, M. D. & Ashe, J., The Sustainable Development of SIDS with
Special Reference to the Atlantic and Caribbean States: An Overview,
Centre for Environment and Development, University of the West Indies,
Mona, Jamaica, July 1993.
24. A distinction is being made between an UN Agency/Programme that has a
regional mandate and a regional mechanism which is part of a regional
cooperation mechanism such as CARICOM.
25. United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean. Summary Report of the Caribbean Meeting of Experts on Implementation of the SIDS/POA. ECLAC/CDCC, July 1995, LC/CAR/G.447.
26. A number of Governments placed reservations on the conclusions of the
meeting because of the proposed 'interim arrangement'. Subsequently
these reservations were removed with the exception of one, the host
country of the Conference.
27. Caribbean Planning for Adaptation to Climate Change was approved by
the GEF Council in May 1995. The Project will be implemented in eleven
Caribbean countries including Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Dominica,
Grenada, Guyana, Jamaica, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, and Trinidad
and Tobago.
28. The Collaborative Council on Water Supply and Sanitation came into
being at the end of the International Drinking Water Supply and
Sanitation Decade (1981-1991) to meet a greatly felt need for a common
vision for the sector and to bring about changes in the way we did things in
order to be more effective and efficient.
29. Griffith, M. D., A Change for Island States, Caribbean Affairs,7(2)(1994).
30. Same as Reference 7.
31. Same as Reference 23.
32. United Nations General Assembly, Environment and Sustainable Development: Global Conference on the Sustainable Development of SIDS.
Annex: SIDS/NET Small Island Developing States Network, Feasibility
Study Report, A/49/414, September, 1994.
33. United Nations General Assembly, Environment and Sustainable Development: Global Conference on the Sustainable Development of SIDS.
Annex: A Feasibility Study on a Technical Assistance Programme for
Small Island Developing States SIDS/TAP. A/49/459, September, 1994.
34. Same as Reference 23.
35. Griffith, M. D., Interfacing the Small Island Developing States Technical
Assistance Programme (SIDS/TAP) and the Small Island Developing
States Information Network (SIDS/NET): A Perspective, Background
Discussion Paper Prepared for the UNDP, New York as an input for the
Regional Consultation on SIDS/TAP, September 1994. Unpublished.
36. op. cit.

Sustainable development of SIDS

163

37. United Nations Development Programme, UNDP Information Note

submitted by UNDP to the Caribbean Meeting of Experts on the
Implementation of the SIDS/POA, 17-19 May, Trinidad and Tobago.
38. United Nations, Selected Funding Sources for Environmental Projects
Accessible to AOSIS Member States, Prepared by the Sustainable
Development of SIDS Unit, Economic and Finance Branch (EFB),
Division for Sustainable Development (DED), Department of Policy
Coordination and Sustainable Development, August 1995.