COP29 : crucial decisions to protect small island states

Small Island Deve­lo­ping States (SIDS) is a term used to des­cribe a dis­tinct group of deve­lo­ping coun­tries that share spe­ci­fic social, eco­no­mic, and envi­ron­men­tal vul­ne­ra­bi­li­ties. This group of coun­tries and ter­ri­to­ries¹ exhi­bit unique deve­lop­ment chal­lenges due to their small geo­gra­phi­cal size, iso­la­tion, and limi­ted natu­ral resources. Their eco­no­mic vul­ne­ra­bi­li­ties stem from reliance on a nar­row range of exports and high import depen­dence, exa­cer­ba­ted by their expo­sure to envi­ron­men­tal risks, inclu­ding cli­mate change, natu­ral disas­ters, and sea-level rise, which threa­ten both urban and rural com­mu­ni­ties, making cli­mate change a dai­ly rea­li­ty for these island nations rather than a theo­re­ti­cal threat.

The Uni­ted Nations (UN) has reco­gni­sed the unique chal­lenges faced by SIDS and has pro­vi­ded plat­forms such as the Bar­ba­dos Pro­gramme of Action (1994), the Mau­ri­tius Stra­te­gy (2005), and the SAMOA Path­way (2014) to address their spe­ci­fic needs. Inter­na­tio­nal cli­mate confe­rences, nota­bly COP28 and COP29, have increa­sin­gly spot­ligh­ted SIDS resi­lience stra­te­gies, finan­cing gaps, and the pres­sing need for glo­bal col­la­bo­ra­tion to sup­port these vul­ne­rable nations.

Reco­gni­sing these vul­ne­ra­bi­li­ties, inter­na­tio­nal efforts have focu­sed on addres­sing the unique needs of SIDS, par­ti­cu­lar­ly through ini­tia­tives high­ligh­ted at COP conferences.

At COP28, the his­to­ric agree­ment to esta­blish the “Loss and Damage” fund was a momen­tous step for­ward. Ini­tial­ly pro­po­sed at COP27, this fund com­mit­ted nume­rous coun­tries to invest in the eco­lo­gi­cal tran­si­tion and cli­mate adap­ta­tion mea­sures of deve­lo­ping nations. The total amount pled­ged during COP28 rea­ched approxi­ma­te­ly $770 mil­lion. Howe­ver, this figure repre­sents only about 0.2% of the esti­ma­ted needs of SIDS, which encom­pass invest­ments in adap­ta­tion tech­no­lo­gies cru­cial to prevent their phy­si­cal disap­pea­rance and tran­si­tio­ning to sus­tai­nable ener­gy sources².

Buil­ding on this foun­da­tion, COP29 shif­ted the focus from com­mit­ments to ope­ra­tio­na­li­sa­tion. The Loss and Damage Fund became rea­dy to dis­tri­bute funds by 2025, with Swe­den contri­bu­ting an addi­tio­nal $19 mil­lion, brin­ging total com­mit­ments to over $720 mil­lion. This miles­tone reflects pro­gress, yet as UN Secre­ta­ry-Gene­ral Antó­nio Guterres empha­si­sed, much more is requi­red. At COP29, he cal­led for inno­va­tive fun­ding sources such as soli­da­ri­ty levies on ship­ping, avia­tion, and fos­sil fuel extrac­tion, and for streng­the­ning mul­ti­la­te­ral len­ding capa­ci­ties to meet the scale of the crisis :

“The crea­tion of the Loss and Damage Fund is a vic­to­ry for deve­lo­ping coun­tries, for mul­ti­la­te­ra­lism, and for jus­tice. But its ini­tial capi­ta­li­sa­tion of $700 mil­lion doesn’t come close to righ­ting the wrong inflic­ted on the vul­ne­rable (…). I urge coun­tries to com­mit new finance to the Fund. And to write cheques to match. But bila­te­ral flows alone won’t suf­fice. We need new res­ponses, and new sources, to meet the scale of need. I urge coun­tries to agree a new cli­mate finance goal that taps inno­va­tive sources. We need to imple­ment soli­da­ri­ty levies on sec­tors such as ship­ping, avia­tion, and fos­sil fuel extrac­tion – to help fund cli­mate action.  We need a fair price on car­bon. And, more broad­ly, we also need to sup­port Mul­ti­la­te­ral Deve­lop­ment Banks in order to increase the len­ding capa­ci­ty, so they are fit to respond to the cli­mate cri­sis.”

SIDS lea­ders at COP29 echoed these demands. The Chair of the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), Hon. Toeo­le­su­lu­su­lu Cedric Schus­ter, stres­sed the urgen­cy of acces­sing and ope­ra­tio­na­li­zing the fund, unders­co­ring the need for equi­table and stream­li­ned path­ways to cli­mate finance :

“At COP26, we were pro­mi­sed the dou­bling of adap­ta­tion finance, yet access remains chal­len­ging for coun­tries like ours with the least capa­ci­ty and resources. (….) The new­ly esta­bli­shed fund for respon­ding to loss and damage must come into play here. Small island states have advo­ca­ted for such a fund for many years. It is cri­ti­cal that it is ful­ly ope­ra­tio­na­li­sed, capi­ta­li­sed, and begins to dis­burse finance as qui­ck­ly as pos­sible.”

The adop­tion of the Baku Decla­ra­tion at COP29 fur­ther empha­si­sed prac­ti­cal actions, ele­va­ting SIDS voices and addres­sing health impacts through col­la­bo­ra­tions with the World Health Orga­ni­za­tion and other sta­ke­hol­ders. This expan­ded agen­da reflects a holis­tic unders­tan­ding of resi­lience, moving beyond finance and infra­struc­ture to include public health and well-being.

Due to their remote loca­tion, scar­ci­ty of resources, and sus­cep­ti­bi­li­ty to severe wea­ther, SIDS are par­ti­cu­lar­ly vul­ne­rable to the effects of cli­mate change. Inno­va­tive, inte­gra­ted solu­tions that tackle both short-term risks and long-term sus­tai­na­bi­li­ty are requi­red to address these exa­cer­ba­ted issues. Adop­ting Mul­ti­sec­to­ral Action Path­ways (MAPs), a fra­me­work crea­ted to address the inter­re­la­ted issues SIDS face, espe­cial­ly in their most vul­ne­rable regions, like coas­tal cities, is one such solution.

Through coor­di­na­ted efforts across sec­tors such as infra­struc­ture, finance, edu­ca­tion, health, and agri­cul­ture, MAPs pro­vide a coope­ra­tive fra­me­work to address com­plex socie­tal chal­lenges. MAPs gene­rate syner­gies that bol­ster resi­lience by coor­di­na­ting com­mon objec­tives, invol­ving sta­ke­hol­ders, com­bi­ning resources, and gua­ran­teeing gover­nance accoun­ta­bi­li­ty. MAPs pro­mote inte­gra­ted plan­ning in the areas of ener­gy, trans­por­ta­tion, and urban deve­lop­ment for cli­mate adap­ta­tion, which lowers green­house gas emis­sions and increases com­mu­ni­ties’ abi­li­ty to withs­tand cli­mate risks.

Because of their remote loca­tion, deli­cate eco­sys­tems, and reliance on resource-dependent eco­no­mies, SIDS face addi­tio­nal dif­fi­cul­ties. These vul­ne­ra­bi­li­ties grow severe by a lack of fun­ding, hea­vy debt loads, and inade­quate tech­no­lo­gi­cal and human resources. Extreme wea­ther events like hur­ri­canes, cyclones, and rising sea levels exa­cer­bate envi­ron­men­tal threats like soil ero­sion, land degra­da­tion, and water scar­ci­ty, put­ting vital infra­struc­ture and live­li­hoods at risk. The urgent need for focu­sed resi­lience stra­te­gies is high­ligh­ted by the fact that Paci­fic islands like Vanua­tu regu­lar­ly face cyclones and coas­tal ero­sion, while Carib­bean coun­tries like Domi­ni­ca and Jamai­ca struggle with rapid urba­ni­za­tion and the growth of infor­mal set­tle­ments³.

The urgent need for focu­sed resi­lience stra­te­gies is high­ligh­ted by the fact that Paci­fic islands like Vanua­tu regu­lar­ly face cyclones and coas­tal erosion.

Adap­ting to cli­mate impacts is hin­de­red by siloed urban mana­ge­ment that frag­ments res­ponses across sec­tors like infra­struc­ture, health, and envi­ron­ment. Insuf­fi­cient data sha­ring bet­ween agen­cies fur­ther reduces effi­cien­cy and com­pli­cates the imple­men­ta­tion of coor­di­na­ted stra­te­gies⁴.

Finan­cing is ano­ther major obs­tacle, with une­ven­ly dis­tri­bu­ted resources making it dif­fi­cult for SIDS to secure equi­table and consistent sup­port for long-term resi­lience⁵. Tar­ge­ted, mul­ti­sec­to­ral approaches like MAPs are cru­cial for addres­sing these inter­con­nec­ted chal­lenges effi­cient­ly. The fol­lo­wing case stu­dies illus­trate how MAPs are applied to streng­then resi­lience in the Paci­fic and Carib­bean regions.

In Vanua­tu, MAP ini­tia­tives like the Inte­gra­ted Urban Resi­lience in Small Island Deve­lo­ping States (IUR-SIDS) and the Grea­ter Port Vila Urban Resi­lience Pro­ject (GPVURP) demons­trate how mul­ti­sec­to­ral stra­te­gies enhance resi­lience. Sup­por­ted by the Asian Deve­lop­ment Bank and UNDP, resource poo­ling and sta­ke­hol­der enga­ge­ment have been cri­ti­cal to these pro­jects, enabling the inte­gra­tion of infra­struc­ture, gover­nance, and eco­lo­gi­cal solu­tions, such as cyclone shel­ters, urban plan­ning trai­ning, and man­grove res­to­ra­tion for coas­tal defence. Their impact extends beyond Port Vila, ser­ving as a resi­lience model for other Paci­fic islands⁶.

GPVURP focuses on gover­nance and infra­struc­ture, invol­ving public par­ti­ci­pa­tion and hazard map­ping to address disas­ter risks. With $11.77 mil­lion in fun­ding, it empha­sises local solu­tions to withs­tand cyclones and reduce urban floo­ding⁷.

MAP pro­grams in the Carib­bean under­line the impor­tance of local govern­ment invol­ve­ment in cli­mate adap­ta­tion. In Jamai­ca, the Local Gover­nance Act of 2016 man­dates muni­ci­pa­li­ties to enforce urban plan­ning, pro­mote envi­ron­men­tal health, and manage disas­ters. Des­pite fun­ding and tech­ni­cal chal­lenges, ICT tools like social media have impro­ved citi­zen enga­ge­ment, enabling com­mu­ni­ties in King­ston to par­ti­ci­pate in cli­mate adap­ta­tion⁸.

Simi­lar­ly, Tri­ni­dad & Tobago’s Muni­ci­pal Cor­po­ra­tions Act tasks local govern­ments with disas­ter mana­ge­ment and envi­ron­men­tal regu­la­tion, but finan­cial and tech­ni­cal limi­ta­tions hin­der full imple­men­ta­tion. Issues like floo­ding high­light the need for mul­ti­sec­to­ral part­ner­ships to address resi­lience. MAP approaches in Tri­ni­dad and Jamai­ca could enhance cli­mate adap­ta­tion by fos­te­ring col­la­bo­ra­tion bet­ween govern­ments, busi­nesses, and inter­na­tio­nal orga­ni­za­tions, pro­mo­ting resource sha­ring, data access, and capa­ci­ty building.

Paci­fic and Carib­bean SIDS are using dif­ferent stra­te­gies for cli­mate resi­lience. The Paci­fic relies on regio­nal coope­ra­tion, exem­pli­fied by the Paci­fic Islands Forum and PACRES, to coor­di­nate disas­ter res­ponses, pro­tect marine resources, and build sha­red capa­ci­ties. In contrast, the Carib­bean focuses on inter­na­tio­nal part­ner­ships like PACC 2030 (U.S.-Caribbean Part­ner­ship to Address the Cli­mate Cri­sis 2030), which sup­ports clean ener­gy pro­jects and deve­lop­ment finan­cing to meet Paris Agree­ment goals. These dif­fe­rences sug­gest that while Carib­bean islands bene­fit from glo­bal part­ner­ships and natio­nal poli­cy inte­gra­tion, Paci­fic islands require regio­nal col­la­bo­ra­tion. Flexible MAP stra­te­gies are essen­tial to address each region’s unique socioe­co­no­mic and geo­gra­phic needs.

As COP30 approaches, the momen­tum gai­ned at COP29 pre­sents a vital oppor­tu­ni­ty to expand MAP pro­grams and secure mea­ning­ful inter­na­tio­nal sup­port for SIDS. The shift from pledges to tan­gible action unders­cores the need for col­la­bo­ra­tion, inno­va­tive solu­tions, and tai­lo­red resi­lience strategies.

While pro­gress has been made, signi­fi­cant gaps remain. The inter­na­tio­nal com­mu­ni­ty must prio­ri­tise finan­cial resources, tech­ni­cal assis­tance, and stream­li­ned access to cli­mate finance. Part­ner­ships that address the unique vul­ne­ra­bi­li­ties of SIDS are essen­tial to ensu­ring sus­tai­nable and equi­table solutions.

The stakes are exis­ten­tial. With deci­sive action, inno­va­tive invest­ments, and glo­bal soli­da­ri­ty, SIDS can trans­form into models of resi­lience and sus­tai­na­bi­li­ty, navi­ga­ting the chal­lenges of cli­mate change with strength and adap­ta­bi­li­ty. MAPs offer a prac­ti­cal fra­me­work to achieve this, fos­te­ring col­la­bo­ra­tion across sec­tors and empo­we­ring local com­mu­ni­ties to imple­ment tai­lo­red, impact­ful solu­tions. The time for pro­mises is over. The future of SIDS depends on imme­diate, coor­di­na­ted action from the glo­bal community.