ADVOCACY FOR SMALL ISLAND DEVELOPING STATES (SIDS)

The threat posed by rising sea levels has been the centre piece of climate change negotiations and is the main issue emphasized by Small Island Developing States, also known as the SIDS. SIDS are already threatened by escalating tides, cyclones, flooding, damaged crops, increased disease, the inundation of coastal areas and the loss of freshwater supplies. SIDS are indeed on the "front lines" of climate change.

There are three sources of SIDS’  influence in international diplomacy: 1) capability, 2) political culture and institutional design and 3) political strategy. SIDS  are the ‘pawns’ of international relations, finding it ‘hard to come to grips with a process  which takes place, so to speak above their heads’. For SIDS one important consequence of their limited influence over international affairs is a narrow margin of time and error in times of change and crisis . As a consequence of their limited resources, SIDS typically lack a buffer allowing them to adjust to new conditions during times of change. They are vulnerable when it comes to shielding themselves against external shocks, e.g. in times of crisis, whether economically, politically or militarily. For this reason, SIDS tend to seek shelter either in the form of bilateral alliances with great powers or through multilateral institutions . Most states have relations where they enjoy the benefits of being stronger than other states, and relations where they suffer from the costs of being weaker than other states. SIDS are likely to be the weaker party in any diplomatic relationship and therefore unlikely to exercise much influence over international affairs.  

SIDS tend to suffer from weaker networks, more limited funds for diplomatic work and a smaller pool of university graduates when recruiting for government positions. One consequence of their relatively small number of diplomats is the inability to be present in all relevant (formal and informal) forums and meetings, leaving them with less information on the position of other governments and less likely to be able to pen drafts of proposals or chair committees, thereby further reducing their bargaining power and influence.

To the extent that SIDS have been able to shape international agenda setting, this has typically happened in highly institutionalized contexts, most importantly the EU. SIDS need to navigate diplomatically in a manner that seeks to limit the consequences of inherent vulnerabilities in order to maximize influence.

Being small entails a number of opportunities that may offset vulnerability and limited capabilities when certain conditions are fulfilled. In particular, there are  three sources of small state influence rooted in the domestic societies of small states: capability, institutional design and culture, and political strategy. While acknowledging that small states suffer from limited material capabilities in both absolute and relative terms, three points challenge conventional understandings of capability in international relations. First, the location of the small state is an important source of its strengths and weaknesses. In addition to location, studies of small states also point to the importance of issue-specific capacity and capabilities . Small states are small because of their limited combined capabilities, but they often have issue-specific capabilities that may be used as a tool for niche influence. These issue-specific capabilities are typically non-material. Thus, small states may have technical expertise or knowledge within specific sectors that they use to advise other states or feed into international negotiations . How small states feed their knowledge and expertise into international negotiations depends on both political culture and institutional design. A political culture that emphasizes the active role of the state when working with non-state actors to secure societal development is likely to spill-over into the international sphere in the form of an activist foreign policy. The institutional design of the small state mediates the effects of a particular political culture on small state diplomacy . Small states that have successfully established communication lines between domestic governments and diplomats posted abroad and are willing to allow these diplomats a flexible action space for influencing negotiations are likely to be the most successful when it comes to the maximization of influence . Finally, the political strategy of the small state is important. Small states need to be ‘smart’, i.e. to set the agenda, to frame international issues, propose rules and norms, and to provide expertise and problem-solving knowledge . A smart state strategy has three key elements. First, regarding the political substance of the strategy, the small state needs to present (part of) the solution to a problem recognized by all or most relevant political actors. A small state is unlikely to succeed in setting a political course that challenges the vital interests of more powerful states, but it can successfully affect the content of international negotiations by focusing on specific solutions that may in turn serve its own interests. Second, regarding the form of the strategy, the small state needs to focus resources and signal willingness to negotiate and compromise on issues that are not deemed to be of vital importance. Playing the role of the pragmatic insider is likely to serve small states better than the principled outsider. Finally, the small state needs to position itself as an ‘honest broker’. Small states have opportunities to maximize influence because they are not considered a threat to anyone, i.e. they play outside the security dilemma, because their gains and losses from international cooperation and conflict are inconsequential for the great powers. Through multiplying diplomatic and informal networks, and using regional organizations as a tool to make their voice and concerns heard, they are able to exercise significant influence. In that way the small state may be able to turn its weakness into an asset and replace a defensive international posture with an offensive smart state strategy.

Analyses of foreign policy and diplomacy often tend to forget that diplomacy is not only dependent on resources and skills, but also on people and is thus shaped by their country’s culture, experience and history.  While the small capacity of the SIDS governments and the size of their foreign service might be interpreted as weaknesses, they can also be understood as strengths. A small government advances whole of government policies. In contrast to large state governments, it is easy to coordinate between ministries. With the ministries in close proximity and staff moving regularly between ministries, more efficient means of communication can be achieved. Administrative stovepipes and an overly bureaucratic culture can be avoided, and a quick flow of information between ministries and departments is ensured. This is of particular importance when it concerns cross-cutting issues such as poverty, sustainable development, maritime security or climate change, which demand whole of government approaches.  

Resources and capacity do not imply influence. Instead factors such as location, expertise, culture and smart strategies make a major difference.

SIDS 

1. Antigua and Barbuda (Pop. 97,929)
2. Bahamas (Pop. 393,244)
3. Barbados (Pop. 287, 375)
4. Belize (Pop. 397,628)
5. Cabo Verde (Pop. 555,987)
6. Comoros (Pop. 869,601)
7. Cook Islands (Pop. 17,564)
8. Cuba (Pop. 11, 326,616)
9. Dominica (Pop. 71,986)
10. Dominican Republic (10,847,910)
11. Federated States of Micronesia (Pop. 115,023)
12. Fiji (Pop.896,445)
13. Grenada (Pop. 112,523)
14. Guam (Pop. 168,775)
15. Guinea-Bissau (Pop. 1,968,001)
16. Guyana (Pop. 786, 552)
17. Haiti (Pop. 11,402,528)
18. Jamaica (Pop.2,961,167)
19. Kiribati (Pop. 119, 449)
20. Maldives (Pop. 540,544)
21. Marshall Islands (Pop. 59,190)
22. Mauritius (Pop. 1,271,768)
23. Nauru (Pop. 10, 824)
24. Niue (Pop. 1,626)
25. Palau (Pop.21,729)
26. Papua New Guinea (Pop.8,947,024)
27. Saint Kitts and Nevis (Pop. 53,199)
28. Saint Lucia (Pop. 183,627)
29. Saint Vincent and the Grenadines (Pop. 110,940)
30. Samoa (Pop. 198,414)
31. Sao Tome and Principe (Pop.219,159)
32. Seychelles (Pop. 98,347)
33. Singapore (Pop. 5,850,342)
34. Solomon Islands (Pop. 686,884)
35. Suriname (Pop.586,632)
36. Timor-Leste (Pop.1,318,445)
37. Tonga (Pop. 105,695)
38. Trinidad and Tobago (1,399,488)
39. Tuvalu (11,792)
40. Vanuatu (Pop. 307,145)

Non-UN Members

1. American Samoa
2. Anguilla
3. Aruba
4. British Virgin Islands
5. Commonwealth of Northern Marianas
6. Cook Islands
7. French Polynesia
8. Guam
9. Montserrat
10. Netherlands Antilles
11. New Caledonia
12. Niue
13. Puerto Rico
14. U.S. Virgin Islands.

Issues at Stake

Climate Change and Sea Level Rise

1. A highly coastal-concentrated agricultural land and infrastructure development increase the threats from any rise in sea-level.
2. The very survival of certain low-lying SIDS will be threatened.
3. Global climate change may damage coral reefs and other fragile island ecosystem and further affect fisheries and food crops, that could affect both subsistence and commercial fisheries as well as food crops.
4. Increased frequency and intensity of storm events due to climate change will also have profound effects on both the economies and environments of SIDS.

Biodiversity

1. SIDS are renowned for their species diversity and endemism.
2. The biological diversity in SIDS is among the most threatened in the world.
3. Marine and costal biological resources are precious to islanders, environmentally, economically and culturally.
4. Many SIDS have initiated national biodiversity strategic actions plans and developed national nature reserves and protected areas based on international norms

Coastal and Marine Resources

1. SIDS’ heritage is their historic, cultural and economic links to the oceans and seas.
2. Population and economic development – both subsistence and cash – are concentrated in the coastal zone.
3. Sustainable utilization of coastal and marine resources is a major challenge for SIDS.
4. Ocean and fisheries issues should be priorized on the national and regional sustainable development agendas.

Natural Disasters

1. SIDS are particularly vulnerable to the pervasive impact of natural disasters.
2. Storm surges, landslides and droughts are occurring more frequently and intensively
3. SIDS face a much more significant economic, social and environmental consequences and higher costs of rehabilitation.
4. The impact of oil spills and other environmental disasters can be severe.

Renewable Energy Resources

1. SIDS heavily depend on imported petroleum products and indigenous biomass fuels.
2. Some SIDS fail to receive necessary renewable energy resources endowments.
3. SIDS are financially constrained for technology development, investment costs, and management capabilities in commercial use of renewable energy resources.
4. The use of renewable energy resources as substantial commercial fuels by SIDS is dependent on the development and commercial production of appropriate technologies.

Transport and Communication

1. Distance and isolation have resulted in relatively high transport costs, including high transport insurance costs, for many SIDS.
2. The environmental uses associated with transport and communications development also need to be properly addressed.
3. Devising innovative approaches to resolving transport and communications problems and improving community access to telephone, radio and related services are major challenges.
4. Improving the management and maintenance of existing transport and communications infrastructure is a further challenge.

Trade and Finances

1. Most SIDS are currently excluded from the global economy due to their smallness, persistent structural disadvantages and vulnerabilities.
2. Trade liberalization and globalization present opportunities and challenges to small island developing states, including in terms of the erosion of trade preferences.
3. Many SIDS are not well represented at World Trade Organizations.
4. Most SIDS also experience serious capacity constraints in meeting WTO obligations.

Management of Waste

1. Waste disposal is a common problem for all SIDS, particularly the wastes generated by urbanization.
2. Limited land area makes the option of landfill disposal unsustainable in the long term.
3. SIDS are highly vulnerable to contamination by toxic and hazardous wastes and chemicals, and radioactive materials due to its isolated oceanic location.
4. The passage of ships carrying toxic and hazardous wastes, chemicals and radioactive materials is of priority concern to SIDS.

Fresh Water Resources

1. Many health hazards in SIDS are caused by poor water quality and limited water quantity
2. SIDS has restricted access to clean water rendered by the lack of adequate storage facilities and effective delivery systems.
3. Inadequate action to safeguard watershed areas and groundwater resources are threats to the sustainable development of SIDS.
4. The freshwater resource of SIDS is threatened by the contamination of human and livestock waste, industry-related pollution and agricultural chemicals.

Land Resources

1. The small size of most SIDS, limits urban settlement, agriculture, mining, commercial forestry, tourism and other infrastructure, and create intense competition between land use options.
2. The major long-term land management issue in SIDS is the degradation of the limited land area.

Tourism

1. One of the special tourist attractions of SIDS is the distinctiveness of their cultures.
2. If not properly planned and managed, tourism could significantly degrade the environment on which it is so dependent.