REDD in Solomon Islands
The Ministry of Environment, Climate Change, Disaster Management and Meteorology (MECDM) is the focal point for the national UN-REDD Programme. It is also the national focal point for the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC) and the Convention on Biodiversity (CBD). The MECDM is working with the Ministry of Forests and Research (MoFR) to implement national REDD+ readiness activities. UN-REDD agencies the FAO and UNDP provide support to the two ministries as part of the UN-REDD Programme.
The national programme is managed by a Programme Management Unit (PMU) and a national REDD+ Taskforce, which were established in July and November 2012. The REDD+ Taskforce is co-chaired by the two ministries and supported by three Technical Working Groups (TWGs). The institutional arrangements for REDD+ are still being settled, but it is anticipated that additional structures will be set up for a National REDD+ Committee, which will comprise multi-stakeholder government and non-governmental representatives; a National REDD+ Implementation Unit within the Ministry of Forestry and Research to lead REDD+ activities; and a National REDD+ Focal Point to be established within MECDM to lead REDD+ activities in Solomon Islands and support the Ministry with cross-cutting activities (draft National REDD+ Roadmap in Ogle, 2014).
As the UN REDD Programme is coming to an end in 2014 it has been proposed that the national REDD+ Taskforce should be formalised as the National REDD+ Committee. This will occur through a cabinet decision which is due in June/July 2014.
The REDD+ Taskforce is a multi-stakeholder working group comprising stakeholders from the various ministries, private sector, and non-governmental organisations. The role of the REDD+ Taskforce is to coordinate the preparation of the national REDD+ readiness Roadmap, with support from the TWGs. The PMU is responsible for the day to day management of the national REDD+ Programme. This includes the preparation of work plans, reports, and financial and programme reports. The TWGs provides technical expertise on three focus areas: drivers and strategies (WG1), stakeholder engagement and safeguards (WG2), and establishing the national forest monitoring system (WG3).
The first joint meetings between the Taskforce and the Working Groups were held in November 2012 and February 2013. One of the issues that have been raised by the Taskforce and Working Groups is that the government needs to take greater ownership and political commitment to the national REDD+ process to enable cross sector coordination between the ministries. The Taskforce and the TWGs have also proposed the establishment of an official mechanism to coordinate and guide the sustainable development of voluntary carbon activities. This is to prevent the rapid development of an unregulated carbon market in the country, which could be harmful to both local stakeholders and the National REDD+ process.
Stakeholder engagement and participation
Solomon Islands have started the process of stakeholder engagement and in 2014 draft guidelines were developed to guide the national stakeholder engagement process for REDD+. The first stakeholder engagement event was the inception workshop for the UN-REDD programme held in June 2011, and this has been followed by a number of capacity building events throughout 2012. For example, in May 2012 stakeholders reviewed preliminary findings on the drivers of deforestation and forest degradation, and discussed ideas and potential strategies for developing a national safeguard information system. In October 2012 two provincial awareness raising and consultation events were undertaken in Choiseul and Western province, and in November the same year a stakeholder engagement and safeguards workshop was conducted. The purpose of the workshop was to review preliminary stakeholder mapping and to create awareness about Free Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC).
During 2013 these initial engagements have been followed up by a number of awareness raising, capacity building, consultation and training activities at the national level. These have included government officials, NGOs, private sector and traditional authorities and have covered key issues in REDD+ development including safeguards, stakeholder engagement, drivers of deforestation and MRV / REL.
Non-governmental stakeholders are actively taking part in the national REDD+ development process as members on the Programme Executive Board (PEB) and the REDD+ Taskforce. The PEB now includes three non-governmental organisations: Live and Learn Environmental Education (LLEE), Laura Land Conference of Tribal Community (LLCTC) and Kolombangara Indigenous Community Conservation Association (KIBCA). The National REDD+ Taskforce also includes a number of environmental NGOs such as The Nature Conservancy (TNC), Solomon Islands Community Conservation Partnership (SICCP), private sector representatives from financial institutions and plantation companies, and women’s groups such as the National Council of Women. These organisations are likely to be contributing to the development of the REDD+ Roadmap.
Land tenure arrangements and carbon rights
There are two main types of tenure: customary land and alienated land. Nearly 86% of land in Solomon Islands is under customary landownership, which also contains 90% of forestland (Corrin, 2012; GoSI, 2010). Forests on customary land are treated as an integral part of the land, however, ownership and land use rights are determined by customary laws. The remaining 14% is alienated land, which is land that was transferred from customary owners to the Crown (Solomon Islands was a British protectorate until 1978) during the colonial period. It consists of 4 subcategories: public land, perpetual estate, fixed term estate and leasehold.
The Land and Titles Act [Cap 133] is the governing law for the allocation, acquisition and registration of land tenure.
Although customary rights to land and resources are recognised in statutory law, in practice it is the traditional decision making systems and customary laws that govern customary land. These are largely un-written and vary from place to place. Because customary land is communally held by groups of landowners, and as the majority of landownership is unregistered, it is the customary laws that distinguish the multiple levels of interests that may exist in that land (Corrin, 2012). These rights may be clear within the landowning unit and according to the customary laws, but to outsiders it may not be as clear and this often causes problems, especially when separate property rights are to be established on top of existing land ownership rights. For example, before a timber rights agreement between a logging company and customary landowners can be agreed it needs to be established who the owners of the timber rights on customary land are in order to transfer the use of these rights to the company during the contract period.
The Forest Resources and Timber Utilisation Act [Cap 40] (1969) provides for a process to establish timber rights on customary land. This involves a meeting, held by the Provincial Executive, where it is identified which of the landowners in a group holds the right to grant timber rights to a concessionaire. Although this process has facilitated the development of the logging industry in the Solomon Islands, this part of the Forest Resource and Utilisation Act [Cap 40] is widely seen as problematic. Not only has it been known to cause conflict amongst landowners and with companies, but it fundamentally undermines the collective right of customary landowners to both the land and the forest, as it allocates the customary right to control the forest resource to only a few (Corrin, 2012). Those who are identified as timber rights owners, and therefore eligible to sign and transfer rights agreements, are also the ones likely to get paid timber royalties (about 15% of the total log value for local landowners). In rural areas where income opportunities are scarce timber royalties represent a significant cash income - disproportionate to any other potential sources of income. Unfair distribution of timber benefits, largely blamed on the unequal timber rights process, has been known to cause internal conflict and has lead to increased inequality within rural landowner groups (Corrin, 2012; Wairu and Nanau, 2011).
Clarifying tenure and resource rights is a process that is long overdue in the Solomon Islands. REDD+ might help move this process forwards. REDD+ will require clarification on who owns not just the forest but also the carbon rights, which according to the current legal framework is likely to be whoever owns the land (Corrin, 2012). However, as can be seen with timber rights identifying who the owners are is a bit more complex. One solution could be to register titles and landowning groups, as has been done in neighbouring country Fiji where nearly all customary titles and landowners are registered. The Customary Land Records Act (1994) provides for the recording of customary land boundaries and names of land-holding groups and their representatives. Although this Act has not been implemented, draft regulations were developed (but were not approved by the Cabinet or gazetted) and it is proposed that these should be trialed. The proposal for the land recording process is that it should record both primary land rights and secondary user rights in one process during which a management committee should be established with representation based on these rights. A similar system could be used to record resource rights, such as carbon and timber. Most importantly what is needed is a coherent legal framework to deal with how rights are established. At the moment timber rights are established in a separate process to land ownership, which causes significant problems when rights established in one court conflicts rights established in another. Similar contradictions could arise for carbon and timber rights unless a coherent legal framework is in place.
The Ministry of Forests and Research (MoFR) is responsible for the overall management of forestry resources in the Solomon Islands. Protected area management falls under the responsibility of the Ministry of Environment, Climate Change, Disaster Management and Meteorology (MECDM) who is responsible for implementing the Protected Area Act (2010) and the Protected Area Regulations, both which came into force in 2012.The legal framework for the forestry sector is provided in the Forest Resources and Timber Utilisation Act [Cap 40] (1969) and the Code of Logging Practice (1996 revised in 2002). The Forest Resources and Timber Utilisation Act classify forestland into two management types: State Forests and Forest Reserves. State Forests are located on State land and can be leased and used for production purposes, whereas Forest Reserves are managed for preservation and protection purposes and can be declared on any type of land as long as it is in the public interest.
The Forest Resources and Timber Utilisation Act focus on extraction and production and do not provide a framework to support sustainable forest management. For example, the law does not support the participation of local communities in decision making processes concerning logging activities taking place on their land once timber rights have been issued, or promote community forest management involving local landowners. In many aspects the Act is out of date and is no longer appropriate to govern the challenges faced by the sector today. Over the years there has been a dramatic expansion in the number of logging operators and scale of extraction which now far exceeds the capacity of the MoFR to maintain oversight and enforcement. In 1977 an amendment was made to the Act that introduced direct dealings between loggers and landholders, facilitating the logging of forests on customary land. This amendment allowed for the distinction between landowners and timber rights owners, which has become very problematic. It was followed by a sharp increase in logging which has continued until today. Several efforts have been made to reflect challenges posed by increased pressure from logging in the law through reforms of the Act, once in 1999 and again in 2004. The 1999 Act was passed by the Parliament but was repealed in 2000 because it was never gazetted (Gay, 2009). The 2004 Bill failed to pass through the legislature (UN-REDD, 2013). The latest Forest Bill (2012) was due to be presented to the Parliament in June 2013 but remains in draft awaiting further amendments. Considering the history of forestry reform so far it remains to be seen whether this Bill will finally replace the Forest Resources and Timber Utilisation Act of 1969.
Although the MoFR has the mandate to manage the forestry resources of the country, because of the way land and forest ownership is allocated (87% of forest resources are under customary ownership), customary landowners are de facto in control of the majority of forestland. While the government preserves the right to interfere with land matters and acquire land for public purposes, for example to declare forest reserves, this rarely happens for two main reasons. First, acquisition of land requires the government to pay affected landowners compensation and to subsequently manage the area, actions that are extremely difficult within a heavily resource constrained government (SIFMP, 2003). Second, customary rights are strongly upheld by traditional landowners. Any interference on behalf of the government is seen as an infringement on the rights of private ownership and is widely resisted by the affected landowners and in public opinion (ibid; Wairu, 2004).
In the past these challenges have acted as barriers to the expansion of the protected areas network by the government. However, recent changes in the legal framework, such as the Protected Area Act and Regulations, contains important provisions for community leadership and engagement in Protected Area establishment and operation, which may change the way protection is perceived compared to logging which has been the dominant forest use for so long. If effectively implemented the Protected Area Act may provide more incentives and benefits for communities to get involved with forest protection and management than any other forest related law and more investment is being channeled into this area.
Despite being an economically important sector, revenues from the logging boom have not led to a reduction in rural poverty levels or improved livelihoods (UN-REDD, 2013). Overall forest management in the Solomon Islands has suffered due to the dominant role of the logging industry. Customary landownership should command a considerable level of bargaining power, however, in reality the benefits of the logging industry has not fallen on the majority but on a limited tribal elite, ‘big men’ and government officials. The current legal framework, weak enforcement and abuse of traditional governance structures have enabled logging companies to make deals with the tribal elite and ‘big men’ without the consent of, or subsequent benefit sharing with other rights holders or community members (GoSI, 2010). This situation has been perpetuated by close ties between tribal elites, ‘big men’, logging companies and politicians which makes reform difficult to implement and has contributed to a limited focus on enforcement, with limited prosecution of companies or individuals found guilty of gross misconduct (Hughes et. al. 2010).
Although there are many challenges to be overcome in the Solomon Islands forestry sector the government is realising that an imminent change is needed. More than half of all commercially exploitable areas have already been logged and little has been done to ensure stocks are replenished. Reforestation and afforestation are therefore an economic priority for the government (GoSI, 2011b). A national reforestation programme is on-going and small scale forestry operations, such as village or farm based plantations, are promoted in the National Development Strategy 2011 – 2020.
In order to address the governance challenges in the forestry sector the government were looking into developing a national Forest Law Enforcement in Governance and Trade (FLEGT) action plan, which would support the national REDD+ process. A country mission was carried out by the EU to the Solomon Islands in 2010 to assess the potential for implementing a FLEGT action plan and Voluntary Partnership Agreement (VPA) with the EU, however, in the end this project was not followed through. In June 2012 Solomon Islands joined the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI), however, so far this only applies to the country’s mining sector and it remains to be seen whether this could also be extended to the forestry sector.
The national process for establishing reference levels (RL/RELs) has not yet started. However, trainings have been carried out with staff on developing a national forest monitoring system, and the establishment of reference levels and a system for measuring, reporting and verifying (MRV) forest carbon stocks and emission reductions.
The Solomon Islands is at the early stages of developing a national system for forest Measurement Reporting and Verification (MRV). In the past forest monitoring has been performed on an ad hoc basis and there is no regular system in place for measuring or monitoring forest resources (GoSI, 2013). In order to address some of the capacity needs for developing a national MRV system the Solomon Islands is adopting a regional approach. Regional collaboration has its advantages in that it will significantly reduce costs of implementation and capacity building. In 2012 and 2013 discussions were held between the governments of the Solomon Islands, Papua New Guinea, Vanuatu, the FAO, UN-REDD, the GIZ (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit) and the Secretariat for the Pacific Community (SPC), on the potential for regional collaboration. So far the plans involve strengthening the capacity of regional training centres in Papua New Guinea and Fiji and to establish the SPC Applied Geoscience and Technology Division (SOPAC) in Fiji as a regional centre for gathering remote sensing data. The Ministry of Forests and Research has started initial trainings of forestry officers together with the FAO, however, more activities are expected once the process of recruiting a national MRV and reference levels expert has been completed.
The Solomon Islands is still in the process of developing a national Safeguard Information System (SIS) for REDD+. However, the process of identifying and raising awareness around safeguards for REDD+ has started. For example, in 2014 draft guidelines on the development of national REDD+ safeguards for REDD+ had been developed, as were draft guidelines for REDD+ stakeholder engagement, based on initial consultations with NGO Live and Learn and other stakeholders on the use of Free Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) (GoSI, 2013; Ogle, 2014).
Some safeguard measures to protect local livelihoods and the environment are already embedded within existing national and international laws. At the national level the Environmental Act (1998) provides for Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA) to be carried out for any development projects in the Solomon Islands that are likely to have some form of environmental impact; the Land and Titles Act (1969) prohibits the transfer of customary ownership and interest in customary land to non-nationals and declares that any such contracts can be declared void. At the international level the Solomon Island is a Party to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), which both contain decisions on safeguards for REDD+ (UNFCCC Decision 1/CP.16 and CBD Decision XI/19).
Solomon Islands adopted a National Policy on Gender Equality and Women’s Development in 2010 (replacing an earlier National Women’s Policy). This focuses on the active contribution and meaningful participation of men and women at all levels of decision-making. The National Development Strategy 2011-2020 also emphasises the importance of gender mainstreaming and equality. Advancement of women is coordinated by the Ministry of Women, Youth and Children Affairs. The country is also a member of the Pacific Platform for Action on Advancement of Women and Gender Equality, 2005-2015.
This political progress has not been able to overcome entrenched social norms that exclude women from decision-making. Although the Constitution prohibits domestic laws that discriminate on the basis of sex, constitutional protection does not apply to customary laws, or laws relating to land or land tenure, which has implications for equitable REDD+. Although there are some matrilineal societies where women inherit customary land, real control and management of the land are still often by men (Ogle, 2014, section 9.2). A legal analysis of REDD+ and Forest Carbon Rights in Solomon Islands aims to answer the question of ‘who owns the carbon in the forest?’, and points out the difficulties in identifying the ‘owners’ of customary land, but has no consideration of women (Corrin, 2012). The economic position of women is still detrimentally affected by a male-dominated business culture which makes it difficult for women to become entrepreneurs and seek alternative livelihoods. An IFC report on gender and investment remarks that statutory law still discriminates against women in terms of acquiring property, and customary law in rural areas makes it difficult for women to participate in decision-making processes (Hedditch and Manuel 2010).
Gender is given consideration in the Solomon Islands National REDD+ Readiness Roadmap 2014-2020, which is expected to become the foundation for participation in a future REDD+ mechanism (Government of Solomon Islands, 2014). The Roadmap recognises the practical difficulties in attempting to use regulations to address deep-seated social norms around women’s involvement in decision-making (box 5), and recognises that vulnerable groups, particularly women, can be excluded from existing land management and revenue distribution mechanisms (section 3.2). For example, land disputes must first be referred to traditional Chiefs (Corrin, 2012).The Roadmap therefore notes the potential for safeguards systems to promote the engagement of these groups, and it includes women’s empowerment as one of the potential multiple benefits from REDD+ (section 3.2).
One of the activities listed in the 2014 Roadmap is the development of a clear set of guidelines on stakeholder engagement, to guide land use development, support communities in understanding their rights to consultation, and potentially to be part of an approach to FPIC (22.214.171.124). This reiterates the importance of engaging with women, including by using the radio (section 7). It proposes a National REDD+ Committee, with representatives from NGOs and indigenous groups.
Solomon Islands’ earlier REDD+ readiness activities were funded by UN REDD, and the 2014 Roadmap states that the UN REDD programme was being implemented. However, as of November 2015, the latest documents available on the UN REDD programme were from 2013. The 2013 Annual Progress Report (Government of Solomon Islands, 2013b) stated that the REDD+ programme enjoyed strong support from women’s groups (section 2.1.6). Several women’s groups (such as the National Council of Women) were contributing to the REDD+ Roadmap and to decision-making and implementation processes of the REDD+ Taskforce and Technical Working Groups, with four female and three male indigenous/civil society stakeholders represented in national REDD+ development (sections 2.3.3 and 3.3.6). The Laura Women’s Association and Western Women’s Council were also listed as consultation stakeholders (section 3.3.7). Seven women and 23 men received MRV training in a FAO-coordinated workshop (section 3.3.1). However, it was also reported that no gender mainstreaming activities had been carried out to create pro-poor benefit-sharing systems (Section 3.3.12). Six months after the annual report, a semi-annual report was released, stating that the engagement strategy was progressing, but without any further details on the approach to gender in any REDD+ action (Government of Solomon Islands, 2013c).
REDD+ demonstration activities are underway in two sites in South Choiseul. This project was established by the NGO Live & Learn Environmental Education and is supported the regional SPC/GIZ regional REDD+ project “Climate Protection through Forest Conservation in the Pacific Island Countries”; both Live & Learn and the SPC/GIZ are also active in gender and REDD+ in other Pacific Islands (see for example Vanuatu). One South Choiseul project document (Henderson, 2015) identifies women among the main beneficiaries, and recognises the different roles and labour of men and women. This states that women had the opportunity to participate in separate groups to men, in order to encourage an inclusive discussion on land use. However, a project idea note submission for Plan Vivo has no mention of women – a potential concern as the land is owned under customary law, and ownership of at least one tribal project area is vested in three brothers (Weaver, 2013).
ASIAN DEVELOPMENT BANK (ADB) n.d. Solomon Islands. Available here.
CENTRAL BANK OF SOLOMON ISLANDS (CBSI). 2011. Central Bank of the Solomon Islands Annual Report 2010. Available here.
CENTRAL BANK OF SOLOMON ISLANDS (CBSI). 2012. Central Bank of the Solomon Islands Annual Report 2011. Available here.
CORRIN, J. 2012. REDD+ and forest carbon rights in Solomon Islands: background legal analysis. Report prepared for the SPC/GIZ Regional Project ‘Climate Protection through Forest Conservation in Pacific Island Countries'. Available here. [Accessed November 2015]
FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL ORGANISATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS (FAO). 2010. Global Forest Resource Assessment. Country Report Solomon Islands. FAO, Rome.
GAY, D. (eds.). 2009. Solomon Islands Diagnostic Trade Integration Study, 2009 Report. Ministry of Foreign Affairs and External Trade. Honiara, Solomon Islands. Available here.
GOVERNMENT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS (GoSI). 2010. Initial Programme Document – Solomon Islands. Prepared by the Government of the Solomon Islands for the UN-REDD Programme 5th Policy Board Meeting, November 2010.
GOVERNMENT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS (GoSI). 2011a. Statistics Bulletin 06/2011. Electronic publication summary of the Volume I Report on 2009 population and housing census: basic tables and census description. Available here.
GOVERNMENT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS (GoSI). 2011b. National Development Strategy 2011 – 2020. Ministry of Development Planning and Aid Coordination, July 2011. Honiara, Solomon Islands.
GOVERNMENT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS (GoSI). 2013. National Programme Annual Reports Solomon Islands. Report prepared for the UN-REDD Programme, March 2013.
GOVERNMENT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS. 2013b. UN-REDD Programme National Programme Annual Report, Solomon Islands. Available here. [Accessed November 2015]
GOVERNMENT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS. 2013c. UN-REDD Programme National Programme Semi-Annual Report. Available here. [Accessed November 2015]
GOVERNMENT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS. 2014. Solomon Islands REDD+ Readiness Roadmap 2014-2020. Available here. [Accessed November 2015]
HEDDITCH, S. AND MANUEL, C. 2010. Solomon Islands – Gender and Investment Climate Reform Assessment. Report prepared for IFC. Available here. [Accessed November 2015]
HENDERSON, R. 2015. REDD+ Demonstration Activities in Choiseul, Solomon Islands, on behalf of International Climate Initiative Regional Project Climate Protection through Forest Conservation in Pacific Island Countries. Available here. [Accessed November 2015]
HUGHES, T, CRAWFORD, P, SUTCH, H. and TACCONI, L. 2010. SI Forest Management Project II: independent completion report. Report Prepared for AusAid August – March 2010. Available here.
KABUTAULAKA, T. T. 2006. Global Capital and Local Ownership in Solomon Islands’ Forestry Industry. Stewart F. (ed.). Globalisation and governance in the Pacific Islands. State, society and governance in Melanesia. Studies in State and Society in the Pacific, No. 1. Canberra pp. 239-257.
MULTI PARTNER TRUST FUND (MPTF) n.d. Country fact sheet Solomon Islands [online]. Available here.
OGLE, L. 2014. Solomon Islands: Legal framework for REDD+. Report prepared on behalf of the SPC/GIZ project “Climate Protection through Forest Conservation in Pacific Island Countries” supported by the German Federal Environment Ministry. Available here. [Accessed November 2015]
PAUKU, R, L. 2009. Solomon Islands Forestry Outlook Study. Asia Pacific Forestry Sector Outlook Study II. Working Paper Series. WP No. APFSOS II/WP/2009/31. FAO Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific, Bangkok.
SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ (SKM). 2011. Solomon Islands National Forestry Resource Assessment: 2011 Update. SKM, Melbourne Australia on behalf of RAMSI Economic Governance Pillar.
UNITED NATIONS REDD PROGRAMME (UN-REDD). 2011. Solomon Islands now ready for REDD+ readiness. Newsletter issue 19 June 2011 [online]. Available here.
UNITED NATIONS REDD PROGRAMME (UN-REDD). 2013. Solomon Islands: REDD+ Background Document.
URS SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT MANAGERS AND CONSULTANTS. 2003. National Forest Resource Assessment. Report prepared under the Solomon Islands Forest Management Projec for AusAid and the Ministry of Forestry Environment and Conservation. October 2003, Canberra, Australia.
URS SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT MANAGERS AND CONSULTANTS. 2003. National Forest Resource Assessment. Report prepared under the Solomon Islands Forest Management Projec for AusAid and the Ministry of Forestry Environment and Conservation. October 2003, Canberra, Australia.
URS SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT MANAGERS AND CONSULTANTS. 2006. Solomon Islands National Forestry Assessment: 2006 update.
WAIRU, M. 2004. Forest Certification in the Solomon Islands. Paper presented at the symposium “Forest Certification in Developing and Transitioning Societies: Social, Economic, and Ecological Effects” at the Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, June 10 - 11 2004.
WEAVER, S. 2013. South Choiseul Forest Carbon Project: Project Idea Note (PIN). An Improved Forest Management Project on Choiseul, Solomon Islands, For Validation to the Plan Vivo Standard . On behalf of Carbon Partnership Ltd and Live & Learn. Available here. [Accessed November 2015]
WORLD BANK. n.d. Pacific Islands Overview [online]. Available here.