Comments

Colin, I’m embarrassed it’s taken so long for me to respond to your thoughtful comments on my book on the economic thought of Fred Fisk. Please excuse my discourtesy. Your remarks are particularly welcome because of your actual experience of working – some 40 years ago! – with Fred in the island Pacific. Your positive account of that experience matches the generally high level of regard in which he was held by his contemporaries. I regret not personally having had the opportunity of working with Fred, because for a long time I did other things in other places. However I agree fully with your positive assessment of his personality and goals. I hope that a reading of my book will give you a more systematic grasp of the principles which underlay Fisk’s idea of ‘subsistence affluence’. It was my aim to explain his ideas to a new generation of readers, as well as considering whether they may still be of some continuing relevance to contemporary conditions. I’m glad if the narrative also helps an older ‘development’ practitioner to see his encounter with ‘Fiskianism’ in a new light. Your work with Fisk occurred at about the time he retired from ANU and was beginning to apply his ideas in a more generalized or informal fashion, rather than in the rigorous and formal manner of his initial work, published in the ‘Economic Record’ in the 1960s. In the late-1960s and early 1970s Fisk met eminent economists pursuing interests parallel to his own, This was a watershed between his formal theorisation of PNG ‘affluence’ and his later, more pragmatic application of ‘Fiskian’ principles in other parts of Oceania. After this he gave less emphasis to the ‘transition’ from subsistence to market exchange. Instead, he urged giving attention to the ‘mixed subsistence/cash sector’ of indigenous agriculture, into which most Pacific cultivators had already ‘transited’. I imagine that he promoted these ideas at the time you worked together and that he did not argue them in any formal theoretical framework, even though the original notion of ‘affluence’ continued to underlie his thinking. I was unfamiliar with the categories you recall Fisk as having used in your discussions – regarding countries which were ‘fully furnished’, ‘partly furnished’, and ‘unfurnished’. However these terms are instantly recognizable to me. He used such language because he had moved away from an ideal of affluence based on particular parts of PNG. Instead he had come to recognize varying degrees of affluence observable in other parts of the island Pacific. These were, as you say, based on ‘on the availability of land, water, forests, mineral resources, and so on’ in each of the small island states. In my book I have dealt with his comparative approach to the small states in chapters 10 and 11. Finally, thank you for the positive tone of your comment

In my own understanding of this article, its important to point out countries with bigger land mass and bigger population have lower percentage compared to countries with smaller land mass and small population. If a country has 1 Million Population and 700,000 people use Facebook, their percentage is 70% which is higher than if for example Papua New Guinea at 14%. Thats 1.4Million of 10 Million People on Facebook (Actual Facebook Data). (i think the 14%) data is drawn using 10 Million Population Figure..)

Well presented. Now I understand why the progress of autonomy is delayed.

Thanks, very useful piece.

I totally agree with Anura. The article is so hung up on solar and fails to recognise the potential of mini hydro schemes in PNG. A Decentralised Electricity Supply (DES) Policy workshopped jointly by USAID-PEP, IFC and NEA to stakeholders in 2023 and 2024 appears to have flamed out largely because of fears from PPL loosing its loss making isolated grids to Concession type arrangements or entirely to reputable private sector operators and PPP arrangements between the Provincial Governments and private sector operators. NEA needs to revive the DES policy and push for its adoption ASAP as maintaining the status quo is simply not an option.

Sobering article, Rick. We need to pull our socks up!! Hope you are well.

I'm so glad I came across this thought provoking yet inspiring reflection. I couldn't agree more, the Regional architecture is now more fragmented then ever, and we have become spectators to issues in our Region. A wonderful reflection worth read. Tenkyu Tru

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.