Comments

As a predecessor to Sione Tekiteki at PIFS, I welcome his powerful reflection and share his concern that the Pacific is again at a crossroads — not merely due to external pressures like USAID’s retreat or U.S. moves to bypass the International Seabed Authority, but because of our own hesitation to act collectively. The creeping militarisation of the region — through initiatives like AUKUS and growing geopolitical competition — highlights how urgently we must reassert a home-grown, human security vision. True Pacific security lies not in alliances or armaments, but in protecting our people, environment, and cultural sovereignty. If we fail to define this on our terms, others will define it for us. Tekiteki is right to note that Pacific regionalism is fraying not from outside interference alone, but from within — worn down by our reluctance to confront hard choices. I recall similar frustrations in my own time: declarations without decisions, unity deferred to avoid discomfort. But our strength has always come from solidarity, not from donor dependency or institutional formality. The Blue Pacific must reclaim its identity through genuine collaboration and a values-based security framework anchored in human dignity. Only then can we resist being relegated to pawns in a global contest and instead shape a future that reflects who we are — not who we are paid to become.

Finally justice has been served in a long-awaited process? Goodbye Fiame! Good luck to the next Prime Minister of Samoa 😇👍❤️

Thank you for the information.

Malo e ngaue lahi mai mei hena Sione pea mo'oni aupito ho'o lau ko kitautolu pe e makatu'unga ai 'etau ma'uma'uluta mo uouongataha he fu'u Moana Loa koe Pasifiki. Ofa atu Pakilau

Thank you so much for this wonderful perspective.

Thank you for your paper.

Great analysis and true.

“Our field of vision on what PEA is must be widened to take account of these different fields and the ways in which they fundamentally impact aid effectiveness.” Mark Moran, Lisa Denny “Alternative Paradigm: smaller projects using experiential learning to build development management capacity of local decision makers at micro and meso levels coursed through experienced and capable NGOs, initially mentored by reputable international NGOs.” John Dalton I could not agree more strongly with the conclusions of the authors and commentator. Speaking from the perspective of four decades in PNG the fifth and most important political economy is the communities who are ultimately the target group for interventions. It is with some dismay that five decades after independence we continue to observe that communities rarely, if ever genuinely feature in the planning delivery and ownership of program outcomes. Reliance upon government instrumentalities and agencies to implement and sustain outcomes is a cruel joke that is not lost on communities who are increasingly desperately for sustainable education, health, economic services and development. There are fundamental reasons for this. Firstly, the notion that district or provincial representatives represent a district or provincial population is a fantasy. The electoral boundaries are the construct of a system that bears no relationship to actual societal order. A fiction that has been perpetuated at the expense of human capital development for fifty years. Secondly, in PNG the government does not have jurisdiction over ninety-seven percent of the land and by inference the people that live there. Land belongs to traditional owners and no government officer is ignorant of that fact. They are acutely aware that nothing can happen on traditional land without the full support of the traditional owners. A process that can take years to complete to the satisfaction of multiple stakeholders with varying customary claims. This is one reason why government officers rarely visit communities populated by traditional rivals for land and resources. They know their advice would not be listened to and they might not be safe in some rival areas, which they strenuously avoid. In toto the adopted and adapted Westminster system as it exists, in the absence of genuine community input and control where deliverables are designed to touch them is a dead duck. Every community focussed intervention must have equal and simultaneous input from both ends of the value chain encompassing government systems and the community world views. Otherwise expect another five decades of abject failure in human capital development.

It is good you are digging deeper. Through nearly 5 decades and 45 individually contracted assignments of frontline work in rural development type projects (smallholder agriculture, community-based NRM and catchment management) with major multilateral donors (WB, ADB, FAO, UN, IFAD) and ADAB/AusAID/DFAT across 9 countries implementing project ID, design, management, review & evaluation ranging from 2 weeks to 5 years, one most important change as been the rise of major consulting companies and their mutually convenient relationship with and educate but relatively inexperienced aid bureaucracy, most notably DFAT after it 'absorbed' AusAID. The companies are contracted to design projects, to manage and implement, to tick the required boxes as designed so DFAT can happily inform the Minister of good results. On the basis of their performance and established DFAT relationships one or other of them are contracted to repeat the process. What's the real development impact? To what extent has local development management capacity been built that will sustain the development outcomes claimed by the project? Do local decision makers (development managers) at micro and meso levels now have the individual capability and institutional capacity to not only sustain but expand and scale out those impacts? Has corporate capture turned development assistance into an industry learning how to more effectively "give the man a fish" while consuming most of the catch? Alternative Paradigm: smaller projects using experiential learning to build development management capacity of local decision makers at micro and meso levels coursed through experienced and capable NGOs, initially mentored by reputable international NGOs.

I'm very interested to join your company.

Insightful research into coffee and election impact is important as it is a livelihood sustainer. It would be good to see relation with cocoa and election as cocoa is main income generation option for cocoa farmers in coastal communities and even highlands now. Both cocoa and coffee are Green and have strategic importance in government Vision 2050, MTDG 4, and Government dreams of making PNG a rich black nation and take back PNG. These small coffee green and cocoa beans have potential for transformative rural development with support from national government and donor assistance like PPAP. It was a wonderful read.

Brilliant piece. Thank you Annabel.