123

Institutional Responses to Environment andNatural Resources Management:
A Case of the Sustainable Development Bill for Fiji1
Biman PRASAD
Senior Lecturer in Economics, The University of the South Pacific, Fiji Centre
e-mail: Chand_b@usp.ac.fj

Abstract
The proposed Sustainable Development Bill (SDB) is a comprehensive piece of legislation, which
proposes to lay the foundation for appropriate policies for the management of the environment in Fiji.
Many developing countries are having difficulty in developing appropriate institutions to protect andsustainably manage their environment. In many cases, legislation enacted by governments fails todeliver results for environmental quality because it is not implemented effectively. This paper briefly
discusses the proposed legislation from the point of view of its shortcomings for effective implementation and its implications for environmental degradation due to climate change.
Key words: environment, Fiji, institutions, natural resources, Sustainable Development

1. Introduction
Fiji’s draft Sustainable Development Act 1999 has
been debated in Fiji’s parliament since 1999 (Bill,
No.34 of 1999). However, just when the Act was
about to be accepted and approved by Fiji’s Parliament, a military coup led to the overthrow of thedemocratically elected government. The Sustainable
Development Bill may not be implemented in the
short-term, but the Act represents an historic opportunity for Fiji to develop an appropriate set of legislation
for management of environmental and natural resources. This paper analyses the Act in the context of
its applicability in Fiji in the hope that it can be
adopted sooner rather than later.
The Act is a comprehensive document and lays
down the rules for the establishment of a National
Sustainable Development Council. The Council willoversee the following: (1) requiring environmental
impact assessments in respect of Development
proposals, (2) providing for codes of environmental
practice and (3) requiring a national resource management plan and (4) prohibiting pollution of the environment. The legislation compares well with the environmental laws normally adopted in the economicallymore advanced nations. However, the apprehension
about these laws and regulations is how effectively it
would be administered and if the resources are available and allocated. Additionally, there is no mentionof climate change in the Bill. This paper will first

analyse the major focus of the Act and what it intends
to achieve from the point of view of the management
and conservation of the environment. Second, it discusses the Bill in relation to the levels of politicalresponses to the issue of climate change, and suggests
improvements that could be included in the Bill totake into account the impact of climate change at the
local and national level.

2. The Components of the Sustainable
Development Act (SDA)
The act provides for the establishment of the
National Council for Sustainable Development(NCSD). The role of the NCSD is to direct the formulation of the following national policies on sustainable
development:(a) Policy on Integrated Resource Management, whichmust include the following:(i) Policy on Sustainable Coastal Management;(ii) Policy on Sustainable Mineral Resource Development;(iii) Sustainable Forestry Development Policy;(iv) Sustainable Fisheries Development Policy;(v) National Biodiversity, Conservation and Protected Areas Policy;(vi) Policy on Sustainable Agricultural Development;(vii) Policy on Sustainable Resource Management
on Native and State Lands;

124

B. PRASAD(b) Policy on Poverty, Sustainable Human Settlements
and Achieving a Sustainable Population;(c) Policy on Integrated Waste Management;(d) Policy on Sustainable Human and Environmental
Health;(e) Sustainable Tourism Policy;(f) Policy on Energy Conservation; and(g) Policy on Training, Education and Investment.
The Bill further states that the sustainable development policies that could be developed must:• Not adversely impact the carrying capacity of thenatural resources of the state; and• Balance environmental, economic and social activities and interests, to provide the guiding principles for any subsequent legislative framework thatis formulated for each ministry, department or
statutory authority.
The Environmental Trust Fund is for the financingof• Debts for nature swaps;• Programmes to support biodiversity conservationand other programmes required under the environmental Practice, including the retention of technical experts, the investigation or analysis of any
matter or the undertaking of any environmental
monitoring or audit programme;• Necessary expenses incurred in the formulation of
the national state of the environment report,
National Environment Strategy and the National
Resource Management Plan;• Environmental rehabilitation work; and• Environmental awareness programmes.
Other features include the establishment ofEnvironmental Management Units and Environmental
Management Committees. These Units and Committees would not achieve much as the matter will be left
in the hands of the department and the business owners. Particularly dangerous is the establishment ofmanagement committees by the employers. In fact,by any measure, these management committees would
legitimize environmental actions which may run
counter to good practice.
The preparation of a state of the environment
report is a good requirement, as it will allow strategies
to be put in place at least at five-year intervals. The
Environmental Impact Assessment requirement isanother comprehensive aspect of the bill, which iscommendable. However, one of the biggest difficulties with this is the availability of human resources tocarry out detailed and proper impact assessments. The
process can become very political as well, given the
powers granted to the Minister of Environment. For
example, by Sections 37 (5) and 38 (e), the minister
may add classes of proposals to, or delete classes of
proposals from subsection (2) and (3) and decide anyother class of development proposals exempted fromthe EIA process by the Minister by regulation.
Regulations set in Section 39 give the Minister exces-

sive powers over the EIA process.
The National Resource Management Plan is a good
provision in the bill. However, there are already various units and departments in the government, whichhave some of the same responsibilities, for example
the Mineral Resources Department, has its own
resource management plan. The government would
need to rationalise the operation of these different
departments and units so that there is no overlap or
duplication of the work that must be carried out.

3. Funding Implications of the New BillOne of the most difficult and contentious issues
regarding any environmental legislation is the availability of resources, in terms of both funding andhuman resources to ensure the implementation of theregulations. Often other economic imperatives andbudgetary constraints do not allow governments tospend appropriate levels of money on management of
the environment. Budgetary allocations are often at
the expense of allocations for environmental management.
In the case of the Fiji’s Sustainable Development
Bill (SDB), an estimate of the funding implications
would bring about more acceptability and responsibility to the public, who would ultimately pay for thecosts that would be involved in implementation of thebill. These costs must be transparent and the community must see the costs and benefits as a social
responsibility. The people must understand the idea ofsustainability. Environmentalists have used the term
sustainability to indicate a balance between economic
growth and environmental conservation and management. While there are many definitions of sustainability, one that is most commonly used refers to“meeting the needs of the present generation withoutcompromising the needs of future generations” (World
Commission on Environment and Development;
1987). Economists define a sustainable development
path as, “If and only if the stock of overall capital
assets remains constant or rises over time” (Pearceand Warford, 1993). Implicit in these statements is thefact that future economic growth and prosperity must
be critically dependent on the quality of air, water andland resources. If these endowments are destroyed
indiscriminately for short-term economic gains thenboth the present and future generations will be worse
off. Therefore, it is important for policy makers andplanners to have some idea of the costs involved andhow this could be factored into the figures for economic growth and human welfare. Environmental
accounting is important in making appropriate estimates of the costs. There is now a view and awareness in the accounting profession of the need to reportand evaluate environmental costs in corporate annual
accounts.
In terms of environmental accounting, the overall
capital assets in society include manufactured capital,

A Case of the Sustainable Development Bill for Fijihuman capital and environmental capital. If we accept
this definition, sustainable national income or sustainable net national product (NNP) is the amount thatwould be consumed without reducing the overall capital stock. This can be represented as follows:

NNP* = GNP − DM − DN
Where NNP is the sustainable national income, DM isthe depreciation of manufactured capital and Dn isthe depreciation of the environmental capital.
According to Todaro (2000), an even better measure
would be as follows:

NNP* = GNP − DM − DN − R − A
Where R is the expenditure required restoring
environmental capital (fisheries and forests) and A isthe expenditure required to avert destruction ofenvironmental capital (air pollution, water and soil
degradation, etc). The sustainable development bill
therefore should make a beginning and require corporate sectors to include environmental reporting in theirannual accounts. This would promote awareness inthe corporate sector and would be the first step invaluing resources at the local level.
In fact, it appears that there two kinds of forces
which have doubts and reservations about the SDB.
The first is the corporate sector and the second may be
the resource owners and the institutions, which
manage these resources on behalf of the owners.
While there is now much more awareness about
corporate social responsibility in developed countries,
it is not the case in developing countries and certainly
not in Fiji. Companies still believe in the traditional
idea that their responsibility is profits and with profits
they can provide jobs for employees, good returns forinvestors and prosperity for the community as a whole(Andriof & McIntosh, 2001). In the case of SDB,
there are already concerns from the business sector.
The second problem with respect to the implementation of the SDB is the nature of property rights in landand other natural resources. There is a possibility ofconflict between the legislation, its implementationand the needs of the communal owners. In the case ofFiji, about 88% of the land is communally owned andis managed by the Native LAND Trust Board on
behalf of the indigenous owners. 1 The SDB will
therefore have to be carefully blended and harmonizedwith the traditional property rights regime if it is be
successfully implemented.

4. Climate Change and the Implications of
the SDBIt must be stated that the sustainable development
bill or any other legislation or policies for the proper
management of the environment is a political responseby the government and other stakeholders in the125

whole game of managing the environment. It mustalso be pointed out that while abatement and controlof greenhouse gas emissions is the most certain wayof avoiding climate change, for many countries
including the Pacific Islands this is not an option.
Climate change will occur due to the actions of others
but the countries themselves will have to ascertain theimpact of climate change and put out policies foradaptation and adjustment to minimise the adverse
impact of climate change on resources.
It is therefore important to study the Sustainable
Development Bill of Fiji to see whether the bill has
provisions to provide policies for adaptation andadjustment to possible impacts of climate change on
the various sectors of the economy.
For Fiji and indeed for many of the Pacific Island
Nations the following sectors are perhaps the mostimportant and it may be appropriate to concentrate onthese areas. They are as follows:• Agriculture:
We have to accept the fact that it will become
necessary to adjust and adapt agricultural policies toclimate change. Additionally, to what extent countries
can do this successfully will determine their ability to
produce food and maintain their comparative advantage in agriculture. While one might argue that agriculture will adapt and adjust to economic and technological conditions in any case, that in relation toclimate change would be different. Agricultural
responses can be either short-term or long-term. In
the short term farmers would be able to respond to theexisting technologies and strategies, but in the longterm substantial investment would have to be made toadjust and adapt to climate changes. These responses
will only be possible if both the government and nongovernment institutions actively promote the development of new technology and practices for farming.
These institutions will play a critical role in the allocation of resources and the perception or attitude towards climate change. More often than not agricultural policies in developing countries address theimmediate needs of the country and because problemsof climate change are highly uncertain and long-term,
climate change is not taken seriously. It is not surprising therefore; that the Sustainable Development Billof Fiji does not include any detailed guidelines on
actual agricultural policies. Agriculture in any casecauses some damage to the environment, but at thefarm level, responses such as the use of irrigation areseen as a mitigating factor to climate change impact.
According to Rosenberg, Crosson, Easterling,
Frederick and Sedjo (1989), there are two examples ofpolicy options that are adaptive to climate change:• The fostering of new technologies and management practices and• Strengthening institutional mechanisms for flexible
movement of land and other resources into or outof agriculture in response to climate change.

126

B. PRASAD• Forests:
Climate change can affect forests, and forests caninfluence the climate. Forests have an important rolein Pacific Island societies:• To protect and conserve the environment (including soil, water and biodiversity resources);• To provide cash income to landowners, timber processors and governments;• To produce wood and other forest products;• To provide cultural, recreational and tourism
opportunities; and• to sequester carbon. (This role is gaining prominence as the world’s forests are being depleted andconcerns are growing regarding the potential
impact of climate change.) (World Bank, 1996;
p.74)
Global warming affects temperature and precipitation, and this can make forests more susceptible toinfestation, diseases and eventually fire. Forests canalso influence climate, and it is a well-established factthat tropical rainforests are disappearing at a very fast
rate throughout the Pacific. Large areas of forests arebeing lost due to increasing agricultural activities,
unsustainable timber harvesting and logging (World
Bank; 1996). Because of this concern, a common
agreement has been reached among Australia, Fiji,
New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, the Solomon
Islands and Vanuatu to:• Work towards a common code of conduct governing logging of indigenous forests, to which companies operating in their countries will have toadhere; and• Urgently increase monitoring of logging and exports of timber.
The Sustainable Development Bill from the pointof view of climate change does not specificallyaddress forestry issues from a policy point of view.
For example, the bill does not have specific provisions
for reforestation to postpone the buildup of CO2.
Another important aspect is the wildfire policy; questions should be raised as to what provisions are in theBill to address this menace.
• Water:
The impacts of climate change or global warming
on water resources are in many ways uncertain.
Climate change models may provide general indications but this again may be highly uncertain. The only
certainty is that greenhouse warming will add to watersupply uncertainties. However, in certain cases, theimpact can be easily seen. For example, water supplies in the coastal regions of the pacific islands are aconcern; sea level rises could accelerate salt-water
intrusion and may threaten drinking water. In the caseof Fiji hydrological droughts cause much sufferingand pain to the people and the economic costs to thecountry have been very high (Terry and Raj, 1998)
There are ways in which countries could adapt tohydrologic change and uncertainty. These are infrastructure development such as dam, canals, and reservoirs to meet the increasing demand; inter-basin transfers such as those in the USA and management
through new research and technology.
The policy recommendations in the midst of uncertainty are difficult, for example building new
infrastructure in anticipation of climate change is not
appropriate. However, new projects that are being
built anyway could take into account the possible
impacts of climate change. The high cost of infrastructure requires greater emphasis on management
practices so that water is managed efficiently from thepoint of view of both costs and its availability in the
future. For example, pricing of water and its usage
would provide better incentives for conservation andefficient management of water. The SDB bill does notinclude specific rules on the management of thisimportant resource. It leaves the development of policies to the National Council. The Bill could have provided for appropriate institutional development tofacilitate the allocation of water supplies.
• Sea Level Rises and the Management of Coastal
Zones:
Estimates of sea level rises due to green house gas
emissions vary widely but in the last century the sea
level has risen by about 12 cm– a rate of over 1 mm
per year. The impact of sea level rises can not be
underestimated, because they not only threaten coastal
land and water resources but those inland as well andmany other impacts, as is well known in other parts of
the world. On a global scale, about one Billion people
living on coasts are threatened due to sea level rises.
The value of this coastal land can be very expensive,for example, in Bangladesh the coastal land threatenedby inundation is about $3,000 per hectare compared to$30,000 per hectare in the Netherlands.
Abandonment
The first obvious response would be to move outof lands threatened by sea level rises. This may be theonly solution in the ultimate end, as small island
nations may not have a lot of choiceProtective structures
The second response would be to provide protective structures, but this again may be too costly formany of our island nations. In some cases, this has
already been done and may be the only appropriate
response for coastal land protection. It is already being done in other more developed countries, for example, the Netherlands protects its cities and agriculturalland through an extensive system of dikes (Rosenberg,
Crosson, Easterling, Frederick and Sedjo; 1989).
However, for the purposes of many of our island
nations mangrove forests are very important and could
act as a natural response to land degradation due toA Case of the Sustainable Development Bill for Fijisea level rises. We know, however, that mangrove
forests are being removed at an accelerated rate due toland reclamation, fishpond construction, and mining
and waste disposal. Fiji already has a mangrove
management plan, which requires zoning of mangrove
areas into traditional use, reserve, industrial use andtourism development. For purposes of climate change
adaptation and response, it would be appropriate tosee how this could be integrated into the SDB.
As a policy response, national governments must
undertake a detailed survey of their coastal resources
and the human activities that are occurring there. The
SDB does not specifically address these responses tosea level rises due to climate change. In fact, nowherein the Bill are the words “sea level rise” mentioned.

5. Levels of Political Response by the
National Government
The SDB of Fiji is a political response for theproper conservation and management of the environment. In the traditional sense of the issues affecting
the environment, national legislation has supported byinternational agreements and in many cases was
harmonized with the existing national legislation. The
Bill in its present form achieves the objective to alarge extent. However, when it comes to climatechange, different dynamics are involved; that is, many
aspects of climate change can only be asertained at theinternational level. However, this does not rule out fornational and even sub-national policy initiatives forhelping shape international policies on climate change.
According to Moltke and Ramakrishna (1989: 111)
• National governments remain the determiners at
international levels; there is no “international
legislator” separate from the will of sovereignstates;• Implementation of international policy remains thedomain of national authorities; hence international
measures which do not lend themselves to implementation in a wide range of national political,
economic and social settings stand little chance of
success;• To be successful, policy measures on climatechange will require changes in the daily lives ofmany people and institutions. For most of these,international policies will tend to be remote so thatthe support and participation of individuals andgroups down to the local level will be required toachieve compliance.
Any legislation or policy for the environment must
be targeted to achieve the desired outcomes. Because
policies do not influence the environment directly,
they prone to the use of surrogates, that is, policy is
focused towards influencing key parameters in thedrive to change environment policy.

127

6. Concluding Comments
The SDB of Fiji is a leap forward in bringing aboutawareness in the country of the need to manage our
natural resources in an efficient and sustainable manner. While critics would suggest that the Bill does not
go far enough to ensure that the environment is protected, the introduction of the Bill must be seen in apositive light. This is a first attempt to put legislationin an integrated manner to achieve a broad range ofpolicy options for the management and conservationof the environment.
However, it must be pointed out that the ultimate
goal of any environmental legislation is not its adoption, nor its ratification, but the actual implementationand practice of the legislation. Fiji’s SDB has thepotential of merely remaining a piece of legislation if
proper costing and the allocation of resources are notdone properly. The government must attempt to provide an honest and transparent assessment of the costof the implementation of the Bill and establish theopportunity costs of implementing the Bill.
The glaring absence of provisions for or even mention in the Bill of adaptation and response to climatechange is worrying. The impact of climate change on
agriculture, water, coastal zones and other natural resources cannot be underestimated. While Fiji andother Pacific Islands nations may not be contributors
to greenhouse warming, they cannot escape the impacts of global warming on the lives of their people.
It is therefore imperative, that appropriate policy responses for adaptation to climate change be included
in any policy directions for the environment. The
SDB of Fiji does not make any mention of provisions
for anticipated sea level rise, temperature change, andchange in the level of precipitation and its impact on
agriculture. The Bill should have a section on climatechange, and appropriate legislation has to point out
policy options for the adaptation to climate change.
Only then can the Bill be called a Sustainable
Development Bill.

References
McIntosh, M. and J. Andriof (ed) (2001) Perspectives on
Corporate Citizenship, Greenleaf Publishing Ltd, UK.
Moltke, K. and K. Ramakrishna (1989) Levels of Political
Response by governments, International Agencies and Social
Systems. In: UNEP ed., The Full Range of Responses to
Anticipated Climate Change, The Beijer Institute.
Pearce, D. W. and J. J. Warford (1993) World without End:
Economics, Environment and Sustainable development– A
Summary, World Bank, Washington D.C.
Rosenberg, N. J., P. Crosson, W. Easterling, K. Frederick and
R. Sedjo (1989) Policy Options for Adaptation to Climate
Change. In: UNEP ed., The Full Range of Responses to
Anticipated Climate Change, The Beijer Institute.
Terry, J and R. Raj (1998) Hydrological drought in western Fijiand the contribution of tropical cyclones In: J Terry, ed.,Climate and Environmental Change in the Pacific, The

128

B. PRASAD

University of the South Pacific, Suva.
Todaro, M. (2000) Economic Development. Addison-Wesley,
New York.

World Commission on Environment and Sustainable Development (1993) Our Common Future. Oxford University Press,
New York.

1

2

An earlier version of this paper was presented at the PacificIslands Conference on Climate Change, Climate Variability
and Sea Level Rise, National Auditorium, Rarotonga, Cook
Islands, 3-7 April 2000.

The Native Lands Trust Board (NLTB) was formed in 1940
under the British Colonial rule to manage indigenous Fijian
land and other natural resources. It remains the key institution in the management and development of the land.

(Received on 10 October 2002, Accepted on 7 March 2003)