Commission staff working document accompanying the green paper “Future relations between the EU and the Overseas Countries and Territories” {COM(2008) 383 final}
Date: 2008-06-25
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU relations, cooperation policy, development aid, overseas countries and territories, sustainable development, trade policy

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 25.6.2008 
SEC(2008) 2067 

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 

accompanying the 

GREEN PAPER 

Future relations between the EU and the Overseas Countries and Territories 

{COM(2008) 383 final} 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
  
 
 
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 

Future relations between the EU and the Overseas Countries and Territories 

The present Commission staff working document comprises the annexes to the Green paper 
on future relations between the EU and the Overseas Countries and Territories.  

Annex I 

The diversity and common characteristics of the OCTs 

There are huge differences between the OCTs themselves in terms of the degree of autonomy 
vis-à-vis the Member States to which they are linked, but also in the economic and social field 
and as regards their geographical characteristics and climate.  

The  diversity  in  the  relationships  of  the  OCTs  with  their  Member  States  should  not  be 
underestimated. Even though in most cases the Member State remains competent for defence, 
foreign  affairs,  public  order,  justice  and  monetary  policy  (although  some  OCTs  also  have  a 
certain degree of autonomy in one or more of these areas), the powers devolved to the local 
authorities of the OCTs under the constitutions of the Member States concerned vary greatly, 
including between OCTs linked to the same Member State. Moreover, the status of an OCT in 
relation  to  its  Member  State  can  evolve  as  a  result  of  a  democratic  process,  not  only  in  the 
direction  of  greater  autonomy  or  eventual  independence,  but  in  some  cases  also  towards 
strengthening the ties with the Member State.  

There are also huge differences between the OCTs in terms of financial transfers from their 
related  Member  States,  which  are  often  the  only  contributor  besides  the  Community.  In 
certain  cases,  the  level  of  financial  transfers  from  a  Member  State  to  its  OCTs  is  very 
significant,  whereas  in  other  cases  the  Member  State  considers  some  of  its  OCTs  to  be  no 
longer  in  need  of  direct  bilateral  development  assistance.  The  latter  is  the  case  for  all  the 
British  OCTs,  except  Montserrat,  Pitcairn  and  Saint  Helena.  Consequently,  Anguilla,  the 
Falkland Islands, and the Turks and Caicos Islands in particular rely solely on the Community 
for financial assistance for their sustainable development. 

The  level  of  economic  and  social  development  also  differs  from  one  OCT  to  another. 
According  to  the  Development  Assistance  Committee  of  the  Organisation  for  Economic 
Cooperation  and  Development  (OECD/DAC)1,  Wallis  and  Futuna  is  the  only  lower  middle 
income  territory,  whereas  Anguilla,  Mayotte,  Montserrat,  Saint  Helena  and  the  Turks  and 
Caicos  Islands  are  upper  middle  income  territories.  In  contrast,  all  the  other  OCTs  are  not 
considered by the OECD/DAC as eligible for official development assistance (ODA), since in 
particular Greenland, New Caledonia, French Polynesia, Aruba, the Netherlands Antilles and 
the Falkland Islands enjoy a relatively high standard of living, while the standard of living in 
the British Virgin Islands and the Cayman Islands (and Bermuda) is even very high compared 
to the Community average.  

1 

List effective from 2006 for reporting on 2005, 2006 and 2007. See www.oecd.org/dac. 

EN 

2 

   EN 

                                                 
Of the OCTs with a permanent local population, seven are located in the Caribbean, four in 
the Pacific, one in the Indian Ocean, two in the North Atlantic and two in the South Atlantic2. 
This means that there are considerable differences between the OCTs in terms of geographical 
characteristics and climate, but also in terms of isolation from the outside world. In particular, 
it  is  easier  for  some  OCTs  than  for  others  to  cooperate  with  neighbouring  countries  or 
territories. Such cooperation is especially difficult for OCTs like the Falkland Islands, Saint 
Helena, Greenland and Saint-Pierre and Miquelon, because of geographical, political or other 
reasons. 

However,  despite  the  immense  diversity  between  the  OCTs,  they  also  share  common 
characteristics: none of them is a sovereign country, they are all parliamentary democracies, 
they are all islands, the size of their populations is very small and their ecological richness is 
extraordinary compared to continental Europe. They are all relatively  vulnerable to  external 
shocks and are in general dependent on a narrow economic base that mostly revolves around 
services. They are also heavily reliant on imports of goods and energy. In general, exports of 
goods  from  the  OCTs  to  the  EU  or  within  their  respective  geographical  regions  remain 
limited. 

The  trade  balances  of  the  OCTs  are  usually  negative.  Most  OCTs  have  very  few  natural 
resources  and  most  goods  need  to  be  imported,  in  particular  from  the  EU  (which  is,  for 
example,  the  case  for  most  French  OCTs  and  the  Falkland  Islands,  Saint  Helena  and 
dependencies, and Greenland) or from major regional trade partners (like the US for a number 
of OCTs in the Caribbean). The economies of the OCTs are usually not very diversified, and 
in several OCTs, especially in the Caribbean and the Pacific, are to a great extent dependent 
on tourism. As mentioned above, quite a few OCTs are also heavily dependent on financial 
transfers  from  their  Member  States.  However,  there  are  a  few  OCTs  with  important  natural 
resources  or  processed  products  that  account  for  the  bulk  of  their  exports  and  constitute  an 
important  additional  source  of  revenue,  albeit  rather  volatile:  nickel  from  New  Caledonia, 
pearls from French Polynesia, ylang-ylang from Mayotte, fish from Greenland and from the 
Falkland  Islands,  etc.  Moreover,  several  OCTs  in  the  Caribbean  are  important  international 
financial  centres,  while  oil  refining  plays  an  important  role  in  the  economies  of  the  Dutch 
OCTs. Some  OCTs  possibly also dispose of oil reserves. Yet  the vulnerability of the OCTs 
can lead to a rapidly declining economy, as illustrated by the effects of the volcanic eruption 
in 1995 in Montserrat or the collapse of the fishing industry in Saint-Pierre and Miquelon in 
the early 1990s. 

The  total  OCT  population  is  close  to  1.25  million  inhabitants,  which  clearly  illustrates  that 
individual  population  sizes  are  extremely  small  compared  to  other  countries  or  territories. 
Once again, there are significant differences between the OCTs, the populations of the British 
OCTs being exceptionally small: all the British OCTs together (including Bermuda, which is 
the  largest  British  OCT)  account  for  only  about  196 000  inhabitants,  which  corresponds  to 
around  16%  of  the  total  OCT  population.  Saint-Pierre  and  Miquelon  also  has  a  very  small 
population, whereas Mayotte, New Caledonia, French Polynesia, Aruba and the Netherlands 
Antilles constitute the ‘larger’ OCTs. 

2 

EN 

In  the  Caribbean:  Aruba,  Netherlands  Antilles,  Anguilla,  British  Virgin  Islands,  Cayman  Islands, 
Montserrat,  Turks  &  Caicos  Islands.  In  the  Pacific:  New  Caledonia,  French  Polynesia,  Wallis  and 
Futuna,  Pitcairn.  In  the  Indian  Ocean:  Mayotte.  In  the  North  Atlantic:  Greenland,  Saint-Pierre  and 
Miquelon.  In  the  South  Atlantic:  Falkland  Islands,  Saint  Helena  and  dependencies.  The  OCTs  that 
currently  do  not  have  a  permanent  local  population  are:  French  Southern  and  Antarctic  Territories, 
South  Georgia  and  the  South  Sandwich  Islands,  British  Antarctic  Territory,  British  Indian  Ocean 
Territory. 

3 

   EN 

                                                 
Annex II 

The 20 OCTs covered by the Overseas Association Decision 

1. OVERVIEW PER OCT 

1.1. Greenland 

1.11. Cayman Islands 

1.2. New Caledonia and Dependencies 

1.12. Falkland islands 

1.3. French Polynesia 

1.13. South Georgia and South Sandwich Islands 

1.4. French Southern and Antarctic Territories 

1.14. Montserrat 

1.5. Wallis and Futuna Islands 

1.15. Pitcairn 

1.6. Mayotte 

1.16. Saint Helena and Dependencies 

1.7. Saint Pierre and Miquelon 

1.17. British Antarctic Territory 

1.8. Aruba 

1.18. British Indian Ocean Territory 

1.9. Netherlands Antilles 

1.19. Turks and Caicos Islands 

1.10. Anguilla 

1.1. Greenland 

1.20. British Virgin Islands 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
Constitutional 
relations 

Historical 
with Denmark 

ties 

An  extensive  form  of  self-government  (Home  Rule  Authority)  was 
established  by  the  Home  Rule  Act  No  577  of  29  November  1978  in 
Greenland. Under this act, sovereignty continues to rest with the central 
authorities  of  Denmark.  Some  matters  such  as  external  relations, 
defence and monetary policy also remain the exclusive province of the 
central authorities and may not be transferred to Greenland Home Rule. 
Specific  provisions  apply  to  the  mineral  resources  of  Greenland  (joint 
decision-making  power).  There  is  cooperation  on  external  relations  to 
ensure  Greenland’s  interests  are  taken  into  account  by  Denmark  in  its 
foreign  policy.  The  Danish  Government  must  thus  consult  the  Home 
Rule  authority  before  entering  into  treaties  that  particularly  affect 
Greenland’s interests. The Home Rule authority is likewise obliged to 
consult  the  central  authorities  before  adopting  measures  liable  to 
prejudice Denmark’s interests (e.g. fisheries regulation). Upon request, 
the  central  authorities  may  authorise  the  Home  Rule  authority  to 
conduct international negotiations on purely Greenland affairs (section 
16(3) of the Act). Moreover, since June 2005, Greenland may negotiate 
and  conclude  agreements  under  public  international  law  on  behalf  of 
Denmark  that  concern  areas  for  which  full  responsibility  has  been 
transferred to Greenland. The Home Rule Act of 1979 is expected to be 
revised in the near future following year-long consultations between the 
Danish and Greenlandic parliaments.  

Vikings reached the island in the 10th century but Danish colonisation 
only  began  in  the  18th  century,  and  Greenland  was  made  an  integral 
part  of  Denmark  in  1953.  Greenland  was  granted  self-government  in 
1979  by  the  Danish  parliament,  which  came  into  effect  the  following 
year.  Denmark  continues  to  exercise  control  of  Greenland’s  foreign 
affairs  in  consultation  with  Greenland’s  Home  Rule  Government. 
Greenland joined the European Community with Denmark in 1973, but 
withdrew in 1985 after a national referendum in 1982. 

Capital city 

Nuuk 

Geography 

Greenland, the largest island in the world, is located between the Arctic 
Ocean  and  the  North  Atlantic  Ocean,  northeast  of  Canada  and 
northwest of Iceland, and has an area of 2 166 086 km². 

Population 

56 648 (Jan. 2007) 

Financial 
assistance 

•  Not  eligible  for  Official  Development  Assistance  (2006,  source: 

www.oecd.org/dac)  

•  Community  financial  assistance  2007-2013:  EUR  25  million  (2006 
prices) per year for the sustainable development of Greenland (apart 
from fisheries). 

•  DK: EUR 411.39 million in 2007 as an annual direct subsidy to the 

Greenlandic budget.  

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
Per capita GDP 

EUR 32 030 (2005) 

Major industries 

Fishing, tourism and minerals.  

Major 
partners 

trading 

EU (Denmark, UK, Germany), US, Japan, China and Russia.  

of 

Membership 
regional 
integration 
organisations 

Greenland is a party to the Nordic Council and participates on an equal 
footing  in  its  work,  but  does  not  have  decision-making  powers.  The 
Nordic Atlantic Cooperation and the  West  Nordic  Foundation  provide 
the  basis  for  cooperation  with  Iceland  and  the  Faeroe  Islands.  As 
regards the environment, Greenland takes part in the Arctic Council. It 
is a member of the Inuit Circumpolar Conference, an NGO within the 
UN  which  is  active  in  the  area  of  cooperation  between  the  Inuit 
peoples.  

Main 
environmental 
challenges 

Greenland is particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects that climate 
change is expected to have, given its dependence on the temperature of 
the  sea  for  its  fishing  stocks.  Furthermore,  if  the  Greenland  ice  sheet 
were to completely melt away, sea levels would rise by more than 7 m 
and Greenland would most likely become an archipelago.  

1.2. New Caledonia and Dependencies 

Constitutional 
relations 

Historical  ties  with 
France 

The  French  Constitution  classifies  New  Caledonia  as  a  ‘sui  generis 
collectivity’ of the French Republic, i.e. it has a unique status. Some 
State  competences  have  been  progressively  and 
irreversibly 
transferred to New Caledonia, which is organised into three provinces 
(Province Nord, Province Sud, Province des Iles Loyauté), which are 
competent in all the matters in which the State, the territory and the 33 
districts  are  not  competent.  Executive  power  in  New  Caledonia  is 
exercised by a local government. The State is represented by the Haut-
commissaire of the French Republic. 

New Caledonia has been French since 1853, when Admiral Fébvrier-
Despointes took possession of the island in the name of France. It was 
a  penal  colony  from  1864  to  1897.  During  World  War  I,  New 
Caledonia provided the French Pacific Battalion with 2 170 soldiers, a 
quarter of whom died in battle. During World War II, the island joined 
the  Free  French  Forces  in  1940  and  the  Pacific  Battalion  was 
reconstituted  and  fought  in  North  Africa  and  Europe.  US  and  Allied 
forces  built  a  major  base  in  New  Caledonia  and  Nouméa  became  a 
military  headquarters  where  one  million  American  soldiers  passed 
through in the Pacific War. 

Capital city 

Nouméa 

Geography 

New  Caledonia  is  an  archipelago  of  18 575  sq  km  situated  in  the 
Pacific  Ocean,  which  comprises  the  Mainland,  Loyalty  islands  and 
dependencies:  the  isle  of  Pines,  Belep  archipelago  and  Chesterfield 
islands. The Mainland is the main island and its land area represents 

EN 

6 

   EN 

almost  90%  of  the  entire  teriitory.  Taking  into  account  the  inhabited 
islands, the Exclusive Economic Zone is 1 386 588 sq km.  

Population 

240 390 (estimation 2006)  

Financial assistance 

•  Not  eligible  for  Official  Development  Assistance  (2006,  source: 

www.oecd.org/dac) 

•  10th EDF: EUR 19.81 million  

•  FR: EUR 1 161 144 million in 2007  

Per capita GDP 

EUR 22 734 (est. 2006) 

Major industries 

Nickel, tourism.  

Major 
partners 

trading 

EU  (mostly  France),  Singapore,  Australia,  New  Zealand,  Japan, 
United States.  

Membership 
of 
regional integration 
organisations 

Member of the following regional organisations: 

Secretariat of Pacific Community (SPC), Pacific Islands Development 
Programme (PIDP) 

Main 
environmental 
challenges 

Associate member of the Pacific Islands Forum. 

New Caledonia faces three severe environmental challenges: 

-  Threats  to  the  rich  biodiversity:  New  Caledonia’s  very  high 
biodiversity,  which  includes  large  numbers  of  endemic  species,  is 
under  multiple  threats  from  e.g.  the  mining  industry,  habitat  loss, 
introduced predators and competing species, and illegal hunting.  

-  Pollution  and  sedimentation  of  rivers  and  lagoon:  open-cast  hilltop 
mining of nickel causes huge volumes of earth to be washed down to 
the lagoon with heavy tropical rains. Extensive logging and traditional 
agricultural  practices  also  pollute  and  sediment  the  lagoon.  Use  of 
sand and coral reefs for construction material also severe. 

- Climate change: New Caledonia and in particular the Loyalty islands 
(Ouvéa atoll) could suffer most from sea-level rises. Sea temperature 
rise  could  have  impact  on  corals  (coral  bleaching  on  outer  side  of 
reefs). Cyclones causing devastation (coastal erosion and retreat). 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
 
1.3. French Polynesia 

Constitutional 
relations 

Historical  ties  with 
France 

Having  been  autonomous  for  nearly  30  years,  French  Polynesia  saw 
its  statute  evolve  in  2004  towards  greater  responsibilities  and 
reinforcement  of  its  identity.  French  Polynesia  is  now  an  overseas 
country  within  the  French  Republic,  which  is  governed  freely  and 
democratically  by  its  elected  representatives  and  through  local 
referenda. French Polynesia is an ‘overseas collectivity’ under Article 
the  French  Constitution  and  benefits  from  ‘legislative 
74  of 
speciality’, i.e. French laws are applicable to French Polynesia only if 
they  explicitly  provide  for  this.  Furthermore,  French  Polynesia  is 
competent in numerous matters, although regal competences (defence, 
civil security, justice, money, diplomacy) are exercised by the French 
State. 

The  fight  for  influence  in  the  Pacific  between  France  and  England 
marked the history of French Polynesia. In 1843, the Tahitian Queen 
Pomare IV accepted the French Protectorate for all the islands, except 
the Marquesas, which were already considered as French islands since 
Admiral Marchand took possession of them in the name of France in 
1791.  In  1880,  the  islands  under  the  Protectorate  were  annexed  to 
France.  Polynesia  then  became  a  French  colony  under  the  name 
‘Etablissements français de l’Océanie’. During World War I, Papeete 
was  bombed  by  the  German  navy  and  many  Polynesian  men  joined 
the  French  Pacific  Battalion.  During  World  War  II,  Polynesian 
soldiers fought in the French Pacific Battalion and the US army built a 
military  base  in  Bora-Bora.  In  1946,  ‘les  Etablissements  français  de 
l’Océanie’ became a French overseas territory with a local assembly. 
They changed their name to ‘French Polynesia’ in 1958.  

Capital city 

Papeete 

Geography 

French  Polynesia  is  situated  in  the  South  Pacific.  It  is  composed  of 
118  islands  with  a  total  land  area  of  3 600  sq  km  scattered  over  a 
maritime area as vast as Europe (2.5 million sq km). The islands are 
grouped  in  5  archipelagos:  the  Society  Islands,  the  Tuamotu  Islands, 
the Marquesas Islands, the Gambier Islands and the Austral Islands.  

Population 

259 596 (2007 census)  

Financial assistance 

•  Not  eligible  for  Official  Development  Assistance  (2006,  source: 

www.oecd.org/dac) 

•  10th EDF: EUR 19.79 million  

•  FR: EUR 1 373 505 million in 2007  

Per capita GDP 

EUR 17 090 (2004) 

Major industries 

Tourism, pearls, fisheries, copra. 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
Major 
partners 

trading 

EU  (mostly  France),  Singapore,  United  States  of  America,  China, 
New Zealand, Australia, Thailand, Japan.  

Membership 
of 
regional integration 
organisations 

Member of the following regional organisations: 

Secretariat  of 
Development Programme (PIDP). 

the  Pacific  Community  (SPC),  Pacific  Islands 

Main 
environmental 
challenges 

Associate member of the Pacific Islands Forum.  

French Polynesia faces two severe environmental challenges: 

-  Climate  change:  French  Polynesia  is  one  of  the  Pacific  countries/ 
territories that will suffer most from sea-level rises as most islands are 
very low-lying or have infrastructure on the coast. The impact of sea 
temperature  rise  on  corals  is  already  evident.  Cyclones  can  cause 
devastation. 

- Degradation of coral reefs and pollution of lagoons: Coral harvesting 
for  use  e.g.  as  construction  material,  over-fishing,  invasive  species 
(starfish),  pollution  from  households  and  tourists,  black  pearl 
cultivation  and  pig  breeding  (causes  lagoon  pollution),  urban  sprawl 
(building of roads etc on coral reefs). 

Another challenge is waste management.  

1.4. French Southern and Antarctic Territories 

No permanent local population 

1.5. Wallis and Futuna Islands 

Constitutional 
relations 

Wallis and Futuna is an ‘overseas collectivity’ under Article 74 of the 
French  Constitution  and  benefits  from  ‘legislative  speciality’,  i.e. 
French laws are applicable to Wallis and Futuna only if they explicitly 
provide for this. A specific feature of Wallis and Futuna is that it is the 
only French territory where kings are legally recognised: they exercise 
customary law.  

Historical overview  The  Dutch  navigators  Schouten  and  Le  Maire  discovered  the  Futuna 
and  Alofi  islands  in  1616.  In  1767,  the  English  navigator  Wallis 
discovered  Uvea  (Wallis  island).  In  1842,  the  Wallis  and  Futuna 
islands  opted  separately  to  be  ‘free  and  independent  under  the 
protection  of  France’  and  signed  treaties  of  peace  and  friendship. 
Wallis  and  Futuna  were  placed  under  a  French  Protectorate  in  1886 
and 1887, respectively. A unified protectorate was established in 1888 
by a decision taken by the French minister for colonies. In 1942, the 
US  army  set  up  a  base  camp  in  Wallis.  In  the  referendum  on  27 
December  1959,  94.4%  of  the  electorate  voted  in  favour  of  the 
integration  of  Wallis  and  Futuna  within  the  French  Republic  as  an 
overseas territory. This was put into effect by the law of 27 July 1961. 

EN 

9 

   EN 

Since  the  revision  of  the  French  Constitution  of  28  March  2003, 
Wallis and Futuna has been an ‘overseas collectivity’. 

Capital city 

Mata-Utu 

Geography 

Wallis and Futuna is an archipelago situated in the South Pacific and 
composed  of  three  main  islands  (Wallis,  Futuna  and  Alofi).  Wallis 
island is 240 km from Futuna island. 

Population 

14 944 (2003 census)  

Financial assistance 

•  Lower  middle  income  territory  eligible  for  Official  Development 

Assistance (2006, source: www.oecd.org/dac) 

•  10th EDF: EUR 16.49 million  

•  FR: EUR 95 291 million in 2007  

Per capita GDP 

N/a 

Major industries 

Barter economy 

Major 
partners 

trading 

France,  Singapore,  Australia,  New  Zealand,  Fiji,  New  Caledonia, 
China.  

Membership 
of 
regional integration 
organisations 

Main 
environmental 
challenges 

Member of the following regional organisations: Secretariat of Pacific 
Community (SPC). 

Observer to the Pacific Islands Forum. 

Wallis and Futuna faces four severe environmental challenges: 

-  Soil  erosion  and  loss  of  fertility  due  to  poor  agricultural  practices: 
deforestation  and  stubble-burning  are  removing  surface  cover.  This 
causes soil erosion and loss of fertility. 

-  Pollution  and  sedimentation  of  the  lagoon  at  Wallis:  the  run-off  of 
soil  from  land  leads  to  turbidity  in  the  lagoon.  Excrement  from  pigs 
and  goats  also  washes  into  the  lagoon,  causing  bacteriological 
contamination and eutrophication. 

-  Degradation  of  coral  reefs:  25%  of  corals  are  at  risk  and  very 
degraded at Futuna. Coral harvesting for use as construction material. 
Over-fishing  and  use  of  destructive  fishing  methods.  Pollution  of 
lagoon by households, agriculture and pig farming. 

-  Climate  Change:  Temperature  rise  affects  coral  reefs.  Cyclones 
break and destroy coral cover and subsequent avalanches damage and 
stifle corals lower down the reef. 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
1.6. Mayotte 

Constitutional 
relations 

Historical overview 

Since  2001,  Mayotte  has  been  a  ‘collectivité  départementale’ 
(departmental  collectivity)  within  the  French  Republic.  Executive 
power was transferred in 2004 from the prefect to the president of the 
general council (local assembly elected by the inhabitants of Mayotte). 
After the local elections of March 2008, the general council requested 
for  Mayotte  the  status  of  ‘département  et  région  d’outre-mer’ 
(overseas  department  and  region).  The  local  representatives  are  in 
favour  and  also  wish  Mayotte  to  become  an  outermost  region  of  the 
European Union. 

In 1841, Sultan Andriantsouli gave the island of Mayotte to France in 
order  to  prevent  external  attacks,  in  particular  from  the  Comoros. 
Mayotte then became a French colony, where slavery was abolished in 
1846. From 1886 to 1892, France gathered the three other islands of 
the Comoros under a protectorate and in 1912 the colony, now called 
‘Mayotte  and  dependencies’,  was  annexed  to  the  French  colony  of 
Madagascar.  In  1946,  the  Comoros  archipelago  became  a  French 
overseas  territory.  In  December  1974,  a  referendum  was  held  on  the 
independence  of  the  Comoro  islands.  The  inhabitants  of  Mayotte 
(63.8% of the vote) voted against independence. They confirmed their 
choice in a new referendum in 1976 (99.4% of the vote). In December 
1976,  Mayotte  was  given  the  temporary  status  of  a  ‘territorial 
community’ of the French Republic. 

Capital city 

Dzaoudzi 

Geography 

Mayotte  is  located  at  the  entry  of  the  Channel  of  Mozambique.  It 
constitutes the eastern part of the archipelago of the Comoros. It  has 
two  principal  islands  and  about  thirty  small  islands  strewn  over  a 
lagoon of more than 1 500 km². 

Population 

186 452 (2007 census)  

Financial assistance 

•  Upper  middle  income  territory  eligible  for  Official  Development 

Assistance (2006, source: www.oecd.org/dac) 

•  10th EDF: EUR 22.92 million  

•  FR: EUR 402 271 million in 2007  

Per capita GDP 

EUR 3 960 (2001) 

Major industries 

Ylang-Ylang, aquaculture, vanilla, tourism. 

Major 
partners 

trading 

Imports: France, South Africa, Brazil, Thailand, China. 

Exports: France, Comoros, La Réunion, Madagascar, Mauritius. 

Membership 

of  None.  

EN 

11 

   EN 

 
regional integration 
organisations 

Main 
environmental 
challenges 

Mayotte faces two severe environmental challenges: 

-  Nature  conservation,  management  of  waste  and  water:  lagoon  and 
coasts  polluted  by  lack  of  waste  water  treatment.  Sedimentation  of 
lagoon  by  agricultural  practices  and  soil  runoff  due  to  deforestation. 
Current waste management practice is inadequate. 

- Climate change: sea water temperature rise has caused bleaching and 
death of corals. Coastal zones are narrow and populated. Sea-level rise 
would mean loss of infrastructure and relocation of population. 

1.7. Saint Pierre and Miquelon 

Constitutional 
relations 

Saint-Pierre  et  Miquelon  is  an  ‘overseas  collectivity’  of  the  French 
Republic under Article 74 of the French Constitution and Law No 85-
595 of 1985. It benefits from partial ‘legislative speciality’, i.e. French 
laws are applicable except in the fields where the Territorial Council 
has  specific  competences  (in  particular  customs,  taxes  and  urban 
development).  

Historical  ties  with 
France 

First  settled  by  the  French  in  the  early  17th  century,  the  islands 
represent  the  sole  remaining  vestige  of  France’s  once  vast  North 
American possessions 

Capital city 

Saint-Pierre 

Geography 

Located in the North Atlantic Ocean, south of Newfoundland, with an 
area of 242 km². There are eight small islands in the Saint Pierre and 
Miquelon group. 

Population 

6 125 (2006) 

Financial assistance 

•  Not  eligible  for  Official  Development  Assistance  (2006,  source: 

www.oecd.org/dac)  

•  10th EDF: EUR 20.74 million  

•  FR: EUR 61 144 million authorised for 2007 

Per capita GDP 

N/a 

Major industries 

Fish  and  fish  products,  soybeans,  animal  feed,  molluscs  and 
crustaceans, fox and mink pelts. 

Major 
partners 

trading 

Spain, Belgium, India, France, US (2006) 

of 
Membership 
regional integration 

N/a 

EN 

12 

   EN 

 
organisations 

Main 
environmental 
challenges 

1.8. Aruba 

Constitutional 
relations 

Climate change may have effects on the size and composition of fish 
stocks, very important for the economy and way of life. More frequent 
and powerful storms and rising sea levels may mean further erosion of 
coasts and the submergence of low-lying lands.  

Aruba is a country forming part of the Kingdom of the Netherlands. It 
promotes its own interests autonomously, while the common interests 
of  the  Kingdom  of  the  Netherlands  —  such  as  defence  and  foreign 
affairs  —  are  promoted  jointly  and  on  an  equal  footing  by  the 
countries that make up the Kingdom (i.e. the Netherlands, Aruba and 
the Netherlands Antilles).  

Historical  ties  with 
the Netherlands 

Aruba  was  acquired  by  the  Dutch  in  1636.  It  seceded  from  the 
Netherlands  Antilles  in  1986  and  became  a  separate,  autonomous 
member  of  the  Kingdom  of  the  Netherlands.  Movement  toward  full 
independence was halted at Aruba’s request in 1990. 

Capital city 

Oranjestad 

Geography 

193 sq km island located in the Caribbean, north of Venezuela. 

Population 

71 891 (2005)  

Financial assistance 

•  Not  eligible  for  Official  Development  Assistance  (2006,  source: 

www.oecd.org/dac)  

•  10th EDF: EUR 8.88 million  

•  NL:  EUR  154.82  million  in  2008  for  the  promotion  of  the 
autonomy  of  Aruba  and  the  Netherlands  Antilles  (for  Aruba,  the 
cooperation programme will cease in 2009).  

Per capita GDP 

US$22 434 (2005)  

Major industries 

Tourism, international financial services, oil refining and storage.  

Major 
partners 

trading 

USA,  Netherlands,  Panama,  Colombia,  Venezuela,  Netherlands 
Antilles 

Membership 
of 
regional integration 
organisations 

Main 
environmental 
challenges 

Observer to CARICOM  

Impact  of  tourism  industry,  oil  refining,  desalination,  waste  and 
sewage  on  Aruba’s  wealthy  natural  environment,  with  severe 
challenges  in  terms  of  air  and  water  pollution.  Aruba  is  particularly 
vulnerable  to  the  adverse  effects  that  climate  change  is  expected  to 

EN 

13 

   EN 

 
have, given its dependence on the tourist industry and its low altitude.  

Other environmental challenges in Aruba include the establishment of 
modern  legal  instruments  for  designating  and  managing  protected 
areas, the full implementation of the Ramsar Convention on wetlands, 
and participation in and implementation of the Cartagena Convention 
for the Protection and Development of the Marine Environment of the 
Wider Caribbean Region and its three protocols.  

1.9. Netherlands Antilles 

Constitutional 
relations 

Historical  ties  with 
the Netherlands 

The Netherlands Antilles is a country forming part of the Kingdom of 
the  Netherlands.  It  is  composed  of  five  islands:  Bonaire,  Curaçao, 
Saba, St Eustacius and St Maarten. The country Netherlands Antilles 
promotes its own interests autonomously, while the common interests 
of  the  Kingdom  of  the  Netherlands  —  such  as  defence  and  foreign 
affairs  —  are  promoted  jointly  and  on  an  equal  footing  by  the 
countries that make up the Kingdom (i.e. the Netherlands, Aruba and 
the Netherlands Antilles). Following ongoing constitutional evolution, 
the  country  Netherlands  Antilles  will  be  split  to  form  two  new 
countries, Curaçao and St Maarten, each forming part of the Kingdom 
of  the  Netherlands,  while  Bonaire,  Saba  and  St  Eustatius  are  to 
strengthen their ties with the Netherlands by becoming a sort of Dutch 
municipalities. 

In the first half of the 17th century, the islands were conquered by the 
Netherlands  from  Spain,  but  over  time  they  have  been  in  the 
possession  of  different  European  powers.  The  colonial  status  of  the 
Netherlands Antilles ended in 1954, when the Statute of the Kingdom 
of the Netherlands laid down new constitutional relations between the 
Netherlands,  Suriname  (until  1975)  and  the  Netherlands  Antilles.  In 
1986, Aruba — hitherto part of the Netherlands Antilles — obtained 
the  status  of  a  separate  country  within  the  Kingdom  of  the 
Netherlands. 

Capital city 

Willemstad, Curaçao 

Geography 

The  Netherlands  Antilles  comprise  800  sq  km  of  islands  in  the 
Caribbean  —  Leeward  islands,  located  off  the  coast  of  Venezuela: 
Bonaire (288 sq km), Curaçao (444 sq km); Windward islands: Saba 
(13 sq km), St Eustacius (21 sq km), St Maarten (34 sq km).  

Population 

Netherlands  Antilles:  191 780.  Bonaire:  11 537.  Curaçao:  137 094. 
Saba: 1 491. St Eustacius: 2 699. St Maarten: 38 959 (2007). 

Financial assistance 

•  Not  eligible  for  Official  Development  Assistance  (2006,  source: 

www.oecd.org/dac) 

•  10th EDF: EUR 24 million  

•  NL:  EUR  154.82  million  in  2008  for  the  promotion  of  the 

EN 

14 

   EN 

 
autonomy  of  the  Netherlands  Antilles  and  Aruba  (projected  to 
decrease gradually to EUR 97 200 in 2012).  

Per capita GNP 

US$17 474 (2004). 

Per  island:  Bonaire:  EUR  13  650  (2006);  Curaçao:  EUR  13  128 
(2006); Saba: EUR 11 489 (2004); St Eustacius: EUR 17 618 (2004); 
St Maarten EUR 13 778 (2006). 

Major industries 

Tourism, petroleum refining, international financial services.  

Major 
partners 

trading 

USA, EU.  

Membership 
of 
regional integration 
organisations 

Main 
environmental 
challenges 

Observer  to  CARICOM,  associate  member  of  the  Association  of 
Caribbean States (ACS). 

Impact  of  tourism,  hurricanes,  lack  of  sewage  and  waste  water 
treatment  in  many  areas,  poor  waste  management  and  pollution  in 
particular from oil refining. Overgrazing by goats, donkeys and sheep 
on Bonaire and Curaçao. Although the Netherlands Antilles are home 
to  many  endemic  species,  some  are  threatened  or  have  become 
practically  extinct.  The  Netherlands  Antilles  are  particularly 
vulnerable  to  the  adverse  effects  that  climate  change  is  expected  to 
have, given its dependence on the tourist industry, the low altitude of 
Bonaire  and  Curaçao  in  particular,  and  the  Windward  Islands’ 
exposure to hurricanes.  

1.10. Anguilla 

Constitutional 
relations 

Historical  ties  with 
the 
United 
Kingdom 

Anguilla  is  a  British  Overseas  Territory.  A  UK-appointed  Governor 
remains responsible for external affairs, offshore finance, defence and 
internal  security  (including  the  police  force)  and  the  public  service. 
All citizens of Anguilla automatically benefit from British citizenship, 
unless  they  renounce  it.  There  is  an  ongoing  debate  on  the  future  of 
Anguilla’s  status  in  relation  to  the  UK,  which  could  result  in  a  free 
association, i.e. complete autonomy internally, with the UK retaining 
only foreign affairs and defence.  

Colonised  by  British  and  Irish  settlers  in  1650,  Anguilla  was 
administered  as  a  single  federation  with  Saint  Kitts  and  Nevis  from 
1958  to  1962.  The  islanders,  believing  their  interests  were  being 
ignored  and  wishing  to  retain  their  direct  links  with  Britain,  sought 
separation from the federation in the 1960s. This disquiet culminated 
in  the  revolution  of  1967.  Anguilla  came  under  direct  British  rule  in 
the  1970s  and  eventually  became  a  separate  British  Dependent 
Territory in 1980. 

Capital city 

The Valley 

EN 

15 

   EN 

 
Geography 

90 sq km island located in the Caribbean. 

Population 

13 600 (2005 est.) 

Financial assistance  •  Upper  middle  income  territory  eligible  for  Official  Development 

Assistance (2006, source: www.oecd.org/dac) 

•  10th EDF: EUR 11.7 million  

•  UK: no direct bilateral development assistance 

Per capita GDP 

US$9 711 (2006) 

Major industries 

Tourism,  construction,  government  service,  international  financial 
services, banks and insurance. 

Major 
partners 

trading 

North  America  (mainly  USA),  Caribbean  Region  (CARICOM,  St 
Martin/St Maarten and other Caribbean countries). 

of 
Membership 
regional integration 
organisations 

Main 
environmental 
challenges 

1.11. Cayman Islands 

Constitutional 
relations 

Historical  ties  with 
United 
the 
Kingdom 

Associate  member  of  CARICOM  and  of  the  Organisation  of  Eastern 
Caribbean States (OECS). 

Impact of tourist industry on Anguilla’s environment, the richness of 
its  habitats  and  biodiversity.  Dependent  on  tourism  and  therefore  on 
the  quality  of  its  beaches,  its  coral  reefs,  its  fish  and  its  wildlife, 
Anguilla  is  vulnerable  to  the  effects  of  climate  change.  Tropical 
storms and hurricanes are common in this region.  

The  Cayman  Islands  are  a  British  Overseas  Territory  with  a  large 
measure  of  self-government.  A  UK-appointed  Governor  remains 
responsible for the civil service, defence, external affairs and internal 
security.  All  citizens  of  the  Cayman  Islands  automatically  benefit 
from British citizenship, unless they renounce it.  

In  1670,  Spain  ceded  the  Cayman  Islands  and  Jamaica  to  Britain  by 
the  Treaty  of  Madrid.  After  1863,  the  Caymans  formally  became  a 
dependency of Jamaica and the legislature of Jamaica had the final say 
over  the  locally  passed  laws  of  the  islands.  Cayman  Brac  and  Little 
Cayman were not settled until 1833, and it was not until 1887 that a 
formal  administrative  connection  between  them  and  Grand  Cayman 
was  established.  In  1959,  the  islands  ceased  to  be  a  dependency  of 
Jamaica and became a unit territory within the Federation of the West 
Indies.  When  the  Federation  was  dissolved  in  1962,  the  Cayman 
Islands chose to remain under the British Crown, thereupon receiving 
a  revised  constitution,  which  in  1972  was  modified  to  allow  for 
directly responsible government.  

Capital city 

George Town, Grand Cayman 

EN 

16 

   EN 

Geography 

260 sq km island located in the Caribbean. 

Population 

53 172 (2006 est.) 

Financial assistance 

•  Not  eligible  for  Official  Development  Assistance  (2006,  source: 

www.oecd.org/dac) 

•  10th EDF: no individual allocation  

•  UK: no direct bilateral development assistance 

Per capita GDP 

US$46 590 (2006 est.) 

Major industries 

Tourism,  international  financial  services,  real  estate  sales  and 
development. 

Major 
partners 

trading 

USA.  

of 
Membership 
regional integration 
organisations 

Main 
environmental 
challenges 

Associate member of CARICOM. 

Impact of economic and population growth and of the tourist industry 
on  the  ecologically  and  economically  important  marine  and  wetland 
systems  of  the  Cayman  Islands.  Besides  such  pressures  on  the 
Cayman  Islands’  habitats  and  biodiversity,  the  main  environmental 
challenges  are  invasive  species,  the  adverse  effects  that  climate 
change  is  expected  to  have,  the  islands’  vulnerability  to  natural  and 
environmental  disasters,  and  waste  management.  The  impact  of 
development on terrestrial systems is a serious concern: there is a lack 
of  protected  forest  and  shrubland  habitat  to  sustain  endemic  birds, 
plants, and the endangered Blue Iguana. Loss of this habitat will cause 
a critical loss of biodiversity. 

1.12. Falkland Islands 

Constitutional 
relations 

The  Falkland  Islands  are  a  United  Kingdom  Overseas  Territory  by 
choice. Supreme authority is vested in HM The Queen and exercised 
by  a  Governor  on  her  behalf,  with  the  advice  and  assistance  of  the 
Executive  and  Legislative  Councils,  and  in  accordance  with  the 
Falkland  Islands  Constitution.  The  present  constitution  dates  from 
October  1985  and  includes  the  Islanders’  right  of  self-determination. 
The  Governor  presides  over  an  Executive  Council  composed  of  five 
members:  three  elected  and  two  ex-officio  (the  Chief  Executive  and 
the  Financial  Secretary).  In  addition,  the  Attorney  General  and  the 
Commander  of  the  British  Forces  in  the  Falkland  Islands  attend  by 
invitation.  As  is  usual  in  British  Overseas  Territories,  the  elected 
Councillors  have  a  substantial  measure  of  responsibility  for  the 
conduct of their Territory’s affairs. The Governor is obliged to consult 
the  Executive  Council  in  the  exercise  of  his  functions  (except  in 

EN 

17 

   EN 

 
Historical  ties  with 
the 
United 
Kingdom 

specified  circumstances,  for  example  on  defence  and  security  issues, 
where he must consult and follow the advice of the Commander of the 
British  Forces  in  the  Islands).  A  review  of  the  Falkland  Islands 
Constitution is currently underway. 

Although navigators of several countries have been credited with first 
sighting  the  Falklands,  the  first  landing  (English)  did  not  occur  until 
almost  a  century  later  in  1690.  A  British  settlement  took  formal 
possession  of  ‘all  the  neighbouring  islands  for  King  George  III’  in 
1765.  This  settlement  was  withdrawn  on  economic  grounds  in  1774, 
but British sovereignty was never relinquished or abandoned. In 1833, 
exercising  Britain’s  rights  of  sovereignty,  a  British  warship  arrived. 
British  occupation  was  therefore  resumed  and  the  Islands  have  been 
continuously,  peacefully  and  effectively  inhabited  and  administered 
by  Britain  since  1833  (apart  from  2  months  of  illegal  and  forced 
occupation by Argentina in 1982). 

Capital city 

Stanley 

Geography 

The Falkland Islands are an archipelago of around 700 islands in the 
South  Atlantic,  the  largest  being  East  Falkland  and  West  Falkland. 
They are situated about 770 km (480 miles) north-east of Cape Horn 
and 480 km (300 miles) from the nearest point on the South American 
mainland. The Islands have a total land area of 12 173 sq km. 

Population 

2 955 (2006) 

Financial assistance 

•  Not  eligible  for  Official  Development  Assistance  (2006,  source: 

www.oecd.org/dac)  

•  10th EDF: EUR 4.66 million  

•  UK: no direct bilateral development assistance 

Per capita GDP 

£26 125 (2005) 

Major industries 

Fisheries, tourism, agriculture 

Major 
partners 

trading 

United Kingdom, Spain, Chile 

Membership 
of 
regional integration 
organisations 

N/a 

Main 
environmental 
challenges 

The  environmental  challenges  facing  the  islands  are  mainly  the 
conservation of declining populations of seabirds and other fauna and 
flora, but also solid and liquid waste. Although significant melting of 
the Antarctic ice-sheet could ultimately have very grave consequences 
for the entire planet, in this century climate change is not expected to 
be such a major issue to the Falklands Islands.  

EN 

18 

   EN 

 
1.13. South Georgia and South Sandwich Islands 

No permanent local population 

1.14. Montserrat 

Constitutional 
relations 

Montserrat  is  an  internally self-governing British Overseas Territory. 
A  UK-appointed  Governor  remains  responsible  for  internal  security 
(including the police), external affairs, defence, the public service and 
offshore finance. All citizens of Montserrat automatically benefit from 
British citizenship, unless they renounce it. 

Historical  ties  with 
the 
United 
Kingdom 

Montserrat became a British Colony in 1632 although the first settlers 
were  largely  Irish.  Montserrat  was  captured  by  the  French  twice  for 
short periods, but was finally restored to Britain in 1783. 

Soufriere 
volcano 

Hills 

In 1995, the Soufriere Hills volcano in the south of the island became 
active and by 1997 more than two thirds of the island were destroyed. 
Since  August  2005  there  has  been  renewed  dome  growth.  After 
heightened  volcanic  activity  between  December  2006  and  February 
2007,  growth  of  the  current  volcanic  dome  has  slowed  since  April 
2007 and the latest scientific advice is that the volcano is in a state of 
‘pause’, but with the danger of a large hot dome remaining.  

Capital city 

Plymouth (now destroyed by the volcano) 

Geography 

102 sq km island located in the Caribbean. 

Population 

4 655 (2006) 

Financial assistance 

•  Upper  middle  income  territory  eligible  for  Official  Development 

Assistance (2006, source: www.oecd.org/dac) 

•  10th EDF: EUR 15.66 million  

•  UK:  Direct  bilateral  development  assistance  of  £15.5  million  in 

2006/07 

Per capita GDP 

US$4 814 (2005) 

Major industries 

Limited  economic  activity 
including  mining  and  quarrying, 
construction, international financial services, professional services and 
tourism. 

Major 
partners 

trading 

USA, UK, Japan, Trinidad & Tobago, Puerto Rico. 

Membership 
of 
regional integration 
organisations 

Full  member  of  CARICOM  and  of  the  Organisation  of  Eastern 
Caribbean States (OECS). 

Main 

Montserrat  is  exposed  to  multiple  natural  hazards,  in  particular 

EN 

19 

   EN 

 
environmental 
challenges 

1.15. Pitcairn 

Constitutional 
relations 

Historical ties with 
the United 
Kingdom 

significant  vulcanism  and  seismicity.  The  volcanic  activity  that 
destroyed more than two thirds of the island in 1995 also had severe 
environmental effects. Moreover, the ensuing relocation of a large part 
of  the  population  to  the  northern  part  of  the  island  has  created 
pressures on natural habitats there.  

The Pitcairn Islands are a UK Overseas Territory. Its constitution was 
first  established  in  1838.  It  was  reformed  in  1904  with  additional 
reforms  in  1940.  It  was  further  refined  by  the  Local  Government 
Ordinance of 1964. 

Pitcairn  was  first  inhabited  by  the  British  mutineers  from  HMAV 
Bounty in 1790. The island became a British Colony in 1838. 

Main town 

Adamstown 

Geography 

Pitcairn  is  situated  in  the  South  Pacific,  mid-way  between  New 
Zealand and Panama. It is approximately 2 miles by 1 mile. There are 
three  other  (uninhabited)  islands  in  the  Pitcairn  group,  Oeno,  Ducie 
and Henderson. 

Population 

55 (2006) 

Financial assistance 

•  Not  eligible  for  Official  Development  Assistance  (2006,  source: 

www.oecd.org/dac). 

•  10th EDF — EUR 3 million 

•  UK: £1.8 million in 2006/07 

Per capita GDP 

£1 800 (2006) 

Major industries 

The  Territory  has  few  natural  resources.  Tourism  is  the  main 
economic activity. 

Major trading 
partners 

None.  Developing  low-level  market  garden  exports  to  French 
Polynesia. 

Membership of 
regional integration 
organisations 

Main 
environmental 
challenges 

Secretariat of the Pacific Community 

Pitcairn is developing an Environmental Management Plan. This will 
raise  environmental  awareness  of  existing  biodiversity  and  aid 
development of the island while integrating environmental protection. 
Henderson  Island  (one  of  the  four  Pitcairn  Islands)  is  a  World 
Heritage Site. 

1.16. Saint Helena and Dependencies 

EN 

20 

   EN 

 
Constitutional 
relations 

Historical  ties  with 
the 
United 
Kingdom 

Saint  Helena  and  Dependencies  are  a  UK  Overseas  Territory.  Its 
constitution  came  into  force  in  1989.  The  British  Government  is 
responsible  for  St  Helena’s  external  relations  and  defence.  A 
Governor exercises executive authority and is advised by an Executive 
Council  and  an  elected  Legislative  Council.  The  Executive  Council 
consists of the Governor, 3 ex-officio officers, and 5 elected members 
of the Legislative Council. 

St Helena was discovered on St Helena day (21 May) in 1502 by the 
Portuguese navigator Joan da Nova. In 1658, Richard, Lord Protector, 
authorised the British East India Company to colonise and fortify the 
island.  Napoleon  Bonaparte  was  exiled  to  St  Helena  in  1815  and 
remained  there  until  his  death  in  1821.  St  Helena  became  a  Crown 
Colony in 1834. The Zulu Chief, Dinizulu, was exiled to the island in 
1890 and up to 6000 Boer prisoners were held there between 1900 and 
1903. 

Capital city 

Jamestown 

Geography 

Saint Helena is situated in the South Atlantic about 1200 miles from 
the south west coast of Africa and has an area of 122 sq km.  

Population 

5 326 (2005) 

Financial assistance 

•  Upper  middle 

income 

territory  benefiting 

from  Official 

Development Assistance (2006, source: www.oecd.org/dac) 

•  10th EDF: EUR 16.63 million  

•  UK:  Direct  bilateral  development  assistance  of  £15.7  million  in 

2006/07 

Per capita GDP 

£3 453 (2006/07) 

Major industries 

The  territory  has  few  natural  resources.  Agriculture,  fishing  and 
tourism  are  the  main  economic  activities,  apart  from  retail  and 
construction. 

Major 
partners 

trading 

UK and South Africa. 

of 
Membership 
regional integration 
organisations 

N/a 

Main 
environmental 
challenges 

islands’  unique  biodiversity,  sustainable 
Conservation  of 
environmental  management,  lack  of  adequate  resources  (human, 
physical and financial). 

the 

1.17. British Antarctic Territory 

EN 

21 

   EN 

 
No permanent local population 

1.18. British Indian Ocean Territory 

No permanent local population 

1.19. Turks and Caicos Islands 

Constitutional 
relations 

Historical  ties  with 
the 
United 
Kingdom 

The  Turks  and  Caicos  Islands  are  an  internal  self-governing  British 
Overseas  Territory.  A  UK-appointed  Governor  remains  responsible 
for  external  affairs,  defence,  internal  security,  the  regulation  of 
international  financial  services  and  certain  other  matters,  but  is 
otherwise  normally  required  to  act  on  the  advice  of  the  Cabinet.  All 
citizens  of  the  Turks  and  Caicos  Islands  automatically  benefit  from 
British citizenship, unless they renounce it. 

The  islands  became  a  formal  part  of  the  Bahamas  in  1799.  In  1848, 
the  islanders  petitioned  for  and  were  granted  separate  colonial  status 
with an elected Legislative Board and an administrative President. In 
1872, the islands were annexed by Jamaica and remained tied to them 
until  Jamaica  became  independent  in  1962.  The  Turks  and  Caicos 
Islands  then  became  a  Crown  colony  with  an  Administrator  rather 
than a Governor. In 1965, the Governor of the Bahamas also became 
the  Governor  of  the  Turks  and  Caicos  Islands.  When  the  Bahamas 
became  independent  in  1973,  the  Turks  and  Caicos  Islands  got  their 
own Governor. 

Capital city 

Cockburn Town, Grand Turk 

Geography 

430  sq  km  island  located  in  the  Caribbean.  Main  permanently 
inhabited islands: Grand Turk, Salt Cay, South Caicos, Middle Caicos, 
North  Caicos  and  Providenciales  (where  the  majority  of  the  tourism 
development is). 

Population 

32 000 (2006 est.) 

Financial assistance 

•  Upper  middle  income  territory  eligible  for  Official  Development 

Assistance (2006, source: www.oecd.org/dac) 

•  10th EDF: EUR 11.85 million  

•  UK: no direct bilateral development assistance 

Per capita GDP 

US$15 683 (2005) 

Major industries 

Tourism,  property  development,  real  estate,  international  financial 
services and fishing. 

Major 
partners 

trading 

USA 

EN 

22 

   EN 

 
Membership 
of 
regional integration 
organisations 

Main 
environmental 
challenges 

Associate member of CARICOM. 

The importance of the tourist industry and the very low altitude of the 
land mean that climate change poses a critical threat to the Turks and 
Caicos Islands. Impact of the tourism industry on the environment on 
Providenciales.  Fresh  water  is  a  valued  resource  and  effective 
management will be an increasing challenge as the islands develop.  

1.20. British Virgin Islands 

Constitutional 
relations 

Historical  ties  with 
the 
United 
Kingdom 

The  British  Virgin  Islands  are  a  British  Overseas  Territory  with  a 
large measure of internal self-government. A UK-appointed Governor 
remains responsible for external affairs, defence and internal security 
(including the police), the public service and the administration of the 
courts. All citizens of the British Virgin Islands automatically benefit 
from British citizenship, unless they renounce it. 

The islands came into British possession in 1666 when planters took 
control from the original Dutch settlers. The islands were annexed by 
the  British  in  1672.  In  1872,  they  were  incorporated  into  the  British 
colony of the Leeward Islands. These islands were administered under 
a  federal  system  until  1956  when  the  Federation  was  dissolved.  The 
Governor of the Leeward  Islands  continued to  run the British Virgin 
Islands until 1960 when an appointed Administrator (later a Governor) 
assumed direct responsibility. 

Capital city 

Road Town, Tortola 

Geography 

Islands located in the Caribbean with an area of 153 sq km. 

Population 

27 000 (2005 est.) 

Financial assistance 

•  Not  eligible  for  Official  Development  Assistance  (2006,  source: 

www.oecd.org/dac) 

•  10th EDF: no individual allocation  

•  UK: no direct bilateral development assistance 

Per capita GDP 

US$41 700 (2006 est.) 

Major industries 

Tourism, international financial services. 

Major 
partners 

trading 

US Virgin Islands and the USA. 

Membership 
of 
regional integration 
organisations 

Associate  member  of  CARICOM  and  of  the  Organisation  of  Eastern 
Caribbean States (OECS). 

EN 

23 

   EN 

 
Main 
environmental 
challenges 

Particularly  rich  marine  habitats  are  under  multiple  threats  and  have 
undergone major losses as a result of development associated with an 
increasing  population  and  the  expansion  of  tourism.  Limited  natural 
fresh  water  resources.  Land  and  sea  pollution.  Subject  to  hurricanes 
and tropical storms. Earthquake and tsunami risk.  

EN 

24 

   EN 

2. KEY STATISTICAL TRADE DATA 

New 
Caledonia 

French 
Polynesia 

W & F 

Mayotte 

SPM 

Exports in goods (€m) 2005 or most recent year 

Imports in goods (€m) 2005 or most recent year 

871.9 

1 430 

169.6 

1 371.1 

0.04 

49.27 

5.21 

274.34 

5.46 

68.2 

Trade  balance  (goods):  exports-imports  (€m) 

-558.1 

-1201.5 

-49.23 

-269.13 

-62.74 

2005 

Goods coverage rate (%) 
Tourist revenues (€m) 2005 

Tourist revenues per inhabitant (€) 

Taxes on imports (€m) 2005 

Taxes on trade/imports (%) 

OCT  imports  from  ACP  Region  (€m)  2005 

including South Africa 

61.10 
154.2 

663.9 

290.8 

20.3 

5.2 

12.4 
421.1 

1665 

153.8 

11.2 

0.08 
Na 

Na 

8.18 

16.6 

Max 6.8 

Approx. 

2.7 

1.90 
10 

57 

81.9 

29.85 

42.13 

OCT exports to ACP Region (€m) 2005 including 

9.95 

0.14 

Unknown 

2.09 

South Africa 

8.10 
Na 

Na 

12.919 

21.59 

Na 

Na 

Trade  balance  with  ACP  Region  (€m)  2005 

4.73 

Na 

Approx.-

-40.04 

Na 

including South Africa 

Imports from ACP Region /total (%) 

Exports to ACP Region /total (%) 

OCT imports from EU (€m) 2007 

OCT exports to EU (€m) 2007 

2.7 

Max 0.5 

Max 9 

0.09 

607.9 

24.8 

8.9 

0.05 

0.36 

1.14 

863.1 

640.8 

15.36 

40.12 

249.1 

3.2 

Na 

Na 

22.1 

6.2 

1 euro = XFP 119.332 (XFP 1 = 0.00838 euro) 

Source: for the OTCS FR IEOM, territorial statistical institutes, except for tax data in St Pierre and Miquelon 
and Eurostat (2006) 

Anguilla  BVI 

Cayman  Montserra

TCI 

t 

Neth. 
Antilles 

Aruba 

Monetary unit used in the table 

US$ 

US$ 

US$ 

US$ 

US$ 

US$ 

US$ 

Exports  in  goods  (million)  2005  or  most 

15.02 

22.309 

1.625 

4.24 

10.80 

1 739 

101.79 

recent year 

Imports  in  goods  (million)  2005  or  most 

132.30 

270.783 

1238.0 

28.73 

303.85 

4 091.0 

1 028.51 

recent year 

Trade  balance  (goods):  exports-imports 

-117.28 

-248.474 

-1 236.375 

-24.49 

-293.05 

-2352 

-926.72 

(million) 2005 

Goods coverage rate (%) 

11.36 

8.24 

0.13 

14.76 

3.55 

42.51 

9.90 

Tourist revenues (million) 2005 

69.2 

461.703 

648.75 

8.99 

317.9 

765.00 

1 082.96 

Tourist revenues per inhabitant  

5 074 

21 676 

30 458 

1913 

10 388 

4124 

10 602 

EN 

25 

   EN 

 
 
 
Taxes on imports (million) 2005 

Taxes on trade/imports (%) 

14.53 

7.70 

15.72 

19.00 

14.06 

8.4  (excl. 

14.39 

OCT imports from ACP Region (million) 

Np 

7.435 

2.5 

3177 

2.5 

2005 including South Africa 

oil) 

Na 

15.62 

OCT  exports  to  ACP  Region  (million) 

Np 

4.902 

Na 

2193 

0.1 

Na 

1.12 

2005 including South Africa 

Trade balance with ACP Region (million) 

Np 

-2.533 

Na 

-984 

-2.4 

Na 

-14.50 

2005 including South Africa 

Imports from ACP Region/total (%) 

Exports to ACP Region/total (%) 

Np 

Np 

2.74 

0.20 

21.97 

Na 

11 

52 

1.44 

0.75 

Na 

Na 

1.52 

1.21 

OCT imports from EU (€m) 2007 

17.4 

489.2 

1169.2 

3.4 

40 

748.9 

211.1 

OCT exports to EU (€m) 2007 

0.2 

122.0 

599.2 

1.0 

4 

227.6 

223.8 

Source: 

For BVI: data provided by DPU. 

For Netherlands Antilles: ECLAC (2006). 

For Turks & Caicos: statistical office and CDB. 

For Montserrat: territorial authorities, CDB. 

For Cayma2n: territorial authorities, CDB. 

For Aruba: Eclac (2006), IMF (2005) and Aruba CBA: exports-imports and tariffs to imports ratio: excluding fuels. 

For Anguilla: Department of Statistics (Ministry of Finance), CDB. 

Eurostat 

Falklands 

St Helena 

Greenland 

Monetary unit used in the table 

€ 

Exports  in  goods  (million)  2005  or  most  recent 

125.0 

year 

€ 

0.36 

US$ 

346.86 

Imports  in  goods  (million)  2005  or  most  recent 

70.0 

9.6585 

460.10 

year 

Trade  balance  (goods):  exports-imports  (million) 

55 

-9.2985 

-113.24 

2005 

Goods coverage rate (%) 

178.57 

Tourist revenues (million) 2005 

3.73 

0.6465 

75.39 

EN 

26 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Tourist revenues per inhabitant  

153 

Taxes on imports (million) 2005 

Taxes on trade/imports (%) 

Unknown 

11.65 

27.21 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

24.2 

1.4 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

491.6 

316.3 

OCT  import  from  ACP  Region  (million)  2005 

- 

including South Africa 

OCT  exports  to  ACP  Region  (million)  2005 

- 

including South Africa 

Trade  balance  with  ACP  Region  (million)  2005 

- 

including South Africa 

Imports from ACP Region/total (%) 

Exports to ACP Region /total (%) 

OCT imports from EU (€m) 2007 

OCT exports to EU (€m) 2007 

Euro (£1 = €1.5)  

Source: 

- 

- 

47 

96 

For Falklands: UE-OCT database, official Falkland Islands portal. 

For Greenland: HRG statistics, EU-OCT database. 

For St Helena: territory’s authorities 

Eurostat 

EN 

27 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
Annex III 

The Overseas Association Decision of 27 November 2001 

1. 

INTRODUCTION 

The provisions of the Overseas Association Decision of 27 November 20013 can be divided 
into two main categories: provisions on development finance cooperation and provisions on 
economic and trade cooperation. 

In  addition,  the  2001  Overseas  Association  Decision  contains  general  provisions  on  the 
association  of  the  OCTs  with  the  Community,  which  include  provisions  on  dialogue  and 
partnership  for  a  broad-based  exchange  of  views  on  the  implementation  of  the  OCT-EC 
association. Given the constitutional links between the OCTs and the Member States to which 
they are related, such a dialogue has since 1991 been held systematically on a trilateral basis, 
i.e.  between  the  Community,  the  OCTs  and  the  related  Member  States.  In  this  respect,  the 
2001 Overseas Association Decision contains a number of further innovations, as a result of 
which  the  main  platforms  for  discussion  today  are  the  annual  OCT-EU  Forum  and  more 
individualised  Partnership  Working  Parties  on  specific  issues.  In  addition,  there  are  regular 
informal meetings between the Commission, the Member States to which the OCTs are linked 
and  the  OCTs  (represented  by  the  Brussels-based  ‘OCT  Association’,  which  has  no  formal 
role in the OCT-EC partnership). 

Whereas  the  current  Overseas  Association  Decision  was  initially  applicable  until  31 
December 2011, its duration has been extended until 31 December 2013 following technical 
amendments  made  in  2007,  in  order  to  coincide  with  the  duration  of  the  10th  European 
Development  Fund  (EDF)  covering  the  period  2008  to  2013  and  the  multiannual  financial 
framework  for  the  period  2007  to  2013.  However,  these  technical  amendments  remain 
without prejudice to later revision of the Decision before its expiry in 2013, in particular for 
the subsequent application of the principles set out in Articles 182 to 186 of the EC Treaty4. 

2. 

DEVELOPMENT FINANCE COOPERATION 

The Overseas Association Decision’s present provisions on development finance cooperation 
are  intended  to  promote  the  sustainable  development  of  the  OCTs,  with  a  focus  on  the 
reduction,  prevention  and,  eventually,  eradication  of  poverty.  Accordingly,  development 
finance cooperation with the OCTs has until now been financed from the EDF, which is the 
financing instrument also used for development finance cooperation with the ACP states. As a 
consequence, EDF procedures apply at present to development finance cooperation with the 
OCTs, even though the OCTs benefit from somewhat specific procedures in comparison with 

3 

4 

Decision 2001/822/EC of the Council of 27 November 2001 on the association of the overseas countries 
and  territories  with  the  European  Community,  OJ  L  314,  30.11.2001,  p.  1.  Decision  as  amended  by 
Decision 2007/249/EC (OJ L 109, 26.4.2007, p. 33). 
See Article 62 of the revised Overseas Association Decision, as well as recital 14 of Council Decision 
2007/249/EC. 

EN 

28 

   EN 

                                                 
the  ACP  states.  A  number  of  OCT-specific  simplifications  were  introduced  by  the  2001 
Overseas Association Decision and fine-tuned in 2007. 

Even  though  the  OCTs  are  not  part  of  the  ACP-EC  Partnership  Agreement  and  are,  strictly 
speaking, not covered by the Community’s development cooperation (given the structure of 
the EC Treaty), the classic development cooperation logic based on the fight against poverty 
has been applied to them, even though this approach is no longer suitable for the present-day 
OCTs.  This  parallelism  between  the  OCT-EC  association  and  ACP-EC  relations  can, 
however,  be  explained  historically,  given  the  common  origin  of  the  relations  of  both  the 
OCTs  and  the  ACP  states  with  the  Community.  In  fact,  the  list  of  OCTs  in  the  Treaty  of 
Rome  of  1957  included  Member  States’  colonies  that  have  in  the  meantime  become 
independent sovereign countries, most of them currently ACP states.  

Under  the  current  Overseas  Association  Decision,  only  OCTs  with  a  per  capita  GNP  not 
exceeding  the  Community  per  capita  GNP  benefit  from  a  territorial  EDF  allocation5.  Of  all 
the OCTs with a permanent local population, only the Cayman Islands and the British Virgin 
Islands — with levels of per capita GNP far above the Community average — do not qualify 
for a territorial allocation. In addition to support at territorial level, all the OCTs, regardless of 
the  level  of  per  capita  GNP  (and  thus  including  the  Cayman  Islands  and  British  Virgin 
Islands), are eligible for support given to regional cooperation and integration.  

It  should  also  be  mentioned  that  individuals  from  an  OCT  and,  where  applicable,  relevant 
public  and/or  private  bodies  and  institutions  in  an  OCT  are  eligible  to  the  same  extent  and 
under  the  same  conditions  as  legal  entities  from  the  member  States  to  which  the  OCTs  are 
linked  for  participation  in  and  funding  from  Community  programmes  such  as  the  Research 
Framework  Programme,  education  and  training  programmes,  the  Competitiveness  and 
Innovation  Framework  Programme,  cultural  and  audiovisual  programmes,  etc6.  In  fact,  the 
eligibility  of  entities  of  the  OCTs  for  horizontal  Community  programmes  has  been 
generalised  since  1  January  2007,  subject  to  the  rules  and  objectives  of  each  individual 
programme  and  the  arrangements  applicable  to  the  Member  States  to  which  the  OCTs  are 
linked. 

In  addition,  the  OCTs  have  access  to  a  number  of  actions  adopted  for  developing  countries 
within  the  general  budget  of  the  EU,  such  as  the  thematic  programmes  covered  by  the 
Instrument for Development Cooperation (DCI)7.  

3. 

ECONOMIC AND TRADE COOPERATION 

According  to  Part  Four  of  the  EC  Treaty,  the  establishment  of  close  economic  relations 
between the OCTs and the Community as a whole is part of the overall purpose of the OCT-
EC  association,  and  the  objectives  of  the  association  include  the  extension  by  the  Member 
States of the same treatment to their trade with the OCTs as that which they accord to each 
other,  as  well  as  the  extension  by  the  OCTs  of  the  same  treatment  to  their  trade  with  the 
Member States and the other OCTs as that which they apply to the Member State to which 

5 

6 
7 

The  amount  allocated  to  each  beneficiary  OCT  is  calculated  by  taking  into  account  the  size  of  the 
population,  the  level  of  GNP,  the  level  and  use  of  previous  EDF  allocations,  constraints  due  to 
geographical  isolation  and,  for  the  OCTs  listed  in  Annex  IB  to  the  Overseas  Association  Decision, 
structural and other obstacles. 
See Article 58 of and Annex II F to the Overseas Association Decision. 
See Annex II E to the Overseas Association Decision. 

EN 

29 

   EN 

                                                 
they are linked. The Overseas Association Decision furthermore specifies that the objectives 
of the OCT-EC association also have to be pursued by focusing on the gradual integration of 
the OCTs within the regional and world economies.  

Since  the  revision  of  the  Overseas  Association  Decision  in  1991,  the  OCTs  have  benefited 
from the most generous tariff regime granted by the Community, under which all ‘products 
originating in the OCTs’ can be imported into the Community free of duty and free of quota. 
Furthermore,  the  OCTs  are  allowed,  unlike  the  Community,  to  retain  or  introduce  customs 
duties or quantitative restrictions under specific conditions laid down in the EC Treaty and the 
Overseas  Association  Decision.  In  this  respect,  however,  the  resulting  trade  arrangements 
applied by an OCT to the Community may not be any less favourable than those it applies to 
third countries, in accordance with the most favoured nation principle, unless another OCT or 
developing country is involved. In addition, these one-sided arrangements may not give rise to 
any  discrimination  between  Member  States,  which  means  that  an  OCT  may  not  treat  the 
Member State to which it is linked more favourably than the other Member States.  

The  definition  of  ‘products  originating  in  the  OCTs’  (and  which  can  be  imported  into  the 
Community  free  of  import  duty  and  quota)  is  laid  down  in  Annex  III  to  the  Overseas 
Association  Decision,  which  contains  favourable  rules  of  origin.  These  also  provide  for  the 
possibility of cumulation of origin, which allows materials originating in the Community or 
the  ACP  states  to  be  considered  as  if  they  originated  in  an  OCT  when  incorporated  into  a 
product  obtained  in  that  OCT.  As  a  consequence,  such  products  acquire  OCT  originating 
status and thus benefit from the tariff regime applicable to OCTs8.  

In addition, transhipment enables products  not originating  in an OCT,  but  which  are in  free 
circulation in that OCT and are re-exported to the Community, to be accepted for import into 
the  Community  free  of  customs  duties  and  taxes  with  equivalent  effect9.  However,  the 
products  must  comply  with  the  conditions  laid  down  in  the  Overseas  Association  Decision 
and  must  in  principle  have  been  subject  to  a  change  in  the  means  of  transportation  in  the 
OCT, implying at least the unloading and reloading of the goods. The Overseas Association 
Decision specifies that, for these products, customs duties comparable to the customs duties 
applicable  in  the  Community  must  have  been  paid  in  the  OCT  concerned,  and  that  any 
refunding  of  such  payments  is  prohibited.  Nevertheless,  at  the  request  of  an  OCT,  the 
Commission  may  authorise  this  OCT  to  provide  public  financial  aid  to  those  using  the 
transhipment procedure.  

The  EC  Treaty  and  the  Overseas  Association  Decision  also  contain  provisions  relating  to 
services  and  investment.  More  precisely,  on  the  Community  side  the  OCTs  benefit  from  a 
comprehensive  liberal  regime  across  service  sectors  and  modes  of  supply,  including 
commercial  establishment.  The  OCTs  for  their  part  must  in  principle  grant  just  most-
favoured-nation  and  non-discriminatory  treatment  to  Member  States,  whereas  the  Overseas 
Association Decision allows them one-sidedly to adopt regulations to aid their inhabitants and 

8 

9 

However, there are annual limits on cumulation of origin for two sensitive products, rice and sugar (for 
sugar,  cumulation  possibilities  will  be  phased  out  by  2011).  These  annual  limits  were  introduced  in 
2001  as  a  consequence  of  safeguard  measures  adopted  by  the  Commission  in  response  to  a  massive 
influx of products obtained from ACP rice and sugar into the Community via the more favourable tariff 
applicable to OCTs (which constitutes a good illustration of the ‘OCT route’ which was very attractive 
for economic operators as it allowed them to avoid duties and quotas). 
The  transhipment  procedure  does  not  apply  to  agricultural  products  or  goods  resulting  from  the 
processing of agricultural products, with the exception of the potential import into the Community of a 
limited volume of specific fishery products from Greenland and Saint-Pierre-et-Miquelon. 

EN 

30 

   EN 

                                                 
local  activities.  With  regard  to  certain  health  care  professions,  a  list  of  professional 
qualifications specific to OCT inhabitants is to be recognised in the Member States.  

It  is  important  to  recall  that,  though  not  third  countries,  the  OCTs  do  not  form  part  of  the 
Community  single  market.  Therefore,  the  related  four  freedoms  (free  movement  of  people, 
goods,  services  and  capital)  that  apply  within  the  Community  do  not  cover  the  OCT-EC 
association,  although  this  does  not  affect  the  rights  conferred  upon  OCT  inhabitants  by 
citizenship of the Union within the meaning of the EC Treaty10. Instead, the above-mentioned 
arrangements  for  trade  in  goods,  establishment  and  the  provision  of  services  apply  to  trade 
and  economic  relations  between  the  Community  and  the  OCTs.  The  Overseas  Association 
Decision also contains provisions on current payments and capital movements. Furthermore, 
the free movement of workers between the OCTs and the Member States is mentioned in the 
EC Treaty, but this issue is to be governed by agreements to be concluded subsequently with 
the  unanimous  approval  of  the  Member  States.  However,  given  this  very  cumbersome 
procedure  laid  down  in  Article  186  of  the  EC  Treaty,  such  agreements  have  never  been 
adopted so far. In this respect, it should be noted that the Treaty of Lisbon of 13 December 
2007  makes  the  regulation  of  the  free  movement  of  workers  between  the  OCTs  and  the 
Member States subject to the common procedure of Article 187 of the EC Treaty for adopting 
the  detailed  rules  and  procedures  for  the  OCT-EC  association,  which  could  facilitate 
regulation of this issue.  

10 

EN 

With  regard  to  citizenship  of  the  Union,  see  section  3.1.1  of  the  Green  Paper  to  which  the  present 
Commission staff working document is attached. 

31 

   EN 

                                                 
Annex IV 

Working document on the trade arrangements between the Community and the OCTs 

No review of the present trade arrangements between the Community and the OCTs can take 
place  without  taking  into  account  the  changes  in  the  wider  world,  which  affect  the 
Community and the OCTs themselves, as well as the OCTs’ principal trading partners and in 
particular their ACP neighbours. The Community has for many years consistently supported 
regional economic integration as a priority for the ACP states, because integration regionally 
and  within  multilateral  trading  systems  offer  new  trade  opportunities  that  could  lead  to 
economic  growth  and  thus  a  path  out  of  poverty  for  these  countries.  This  is  also  the 
underlying  rationale  of  the  development  cooperation  logic  of  the  Economic  Partnership 
Agreements (EPAs) negotiated with the ACP states.  

It is also a fact that the theoretical benefits offered to the OCTs by the current OCT-EC trade 
regime  in  terms  of  preferential  access  to  the  Community  market  are  eroding  as  a  result  of 
progressive trade liberalisation on a global and regional scale. This is an inevitable process for 
which  the  OCTs  need  to  prepare,  in  particular  because  the  OCTs  already  benefit  from  the 
most generous tariff regime ever granted by the Community, which leaves no real room for 
improving the their preferential access to the EU market.  

In this context, the Commission has since 2003 invited the OCTs located in an ACP region 
and  the  Member  States  to  which  they  are  linked  to  examine  their  position  on  the  regional 
economic integration of these OCTs with their neighbouring ACP countries, and what these 
OCTs  stand  to  lose  or  gain  from  participating  in  such  regional  economic  integration.  As 
mentioned  above,  the  rationale  behind  the  EPAs  is  regional  economic  integration. 
Determining the added value for OCTs of greater regional integration and/or EPA-like trade 
arrangements  is  an  extremely  complex  task,  both  for  the  OCTs  and  the  Commission,  in 
particular  as  long  as  the  EPAs  have  not  entered  into  force.  In  any  case,  it  is  clear  that  the 
choice by an OCT (in conjunction with the related Member State) to join — fully or partly — 
regional  trade  arrangements  applicable  to  its  ACP  neighbours  cannot  be  imposed  by  the 
Community. The specific OCT-EC trade regime, whose basic principles are guaranteed by the 
EC Treaty, can continue to coexist with the EPAs, should an OCT not proceed towards more 
regional integration (or should it be unable to do so, for example because of its geographical 
isolation).  

It should, however, be noted that it is possible, following a formal request by an OCT (via the 
Member  State  to  which  it  is  linked),  to  broaden  or  supplement  the  scope  of  the  EPAs,  in 
accordance with the usual procedure for their revision, and in particular without prejudice to 
the  Commission’s  institutional  prerogatives  and  subject  to  the  agreement  of  the  ACP  states 
concerned, to bring an OCT within the scope of an EPA. Without prejudice to the details of 
each case and subject to the necessary modifications of the applicable legal framework, there 
appear to be three main possibilities, depending first and foremost on the choice to be made 
by each OCT and the Member State to which it is linked: 1) an OCT remains subject in full to 
the  OCT-EC  trade  regime,  based  on  the  principles  laid  down  in  the  EC  Treaty;  2)  an  OCT 
opts for full or partial regional integration, which would in principle entail the application of 
the related regional trade arrangements, but while maintaining the OCT-EC trade regime; 3) 
an OCT opts for full or partial regional integration and also becomes subject to the reciprocal 

EN 

32 

   EN 

EPA  arrangements  that  apply  to  trade  between  the  Community  and  the  ACP  states  in 
question, which would fully or partially replace the OCT-EC trade regime for that given OCT. 

With regard to trade in services and unlike the arrangements for trade in goods, the Overseas 
Association Decision does not provide for an exception to the most favoured nation clause for 
trade between an OCT and other OCTs or developing countries. However, it could be relevant 
to  examine  whether  this  constitutes  an  obstacle  to  OCT  regional  economic  integration  in 
certain cases. In this respect, one could refer as an example to the fact that the participation of 
Montserrat in the Caribbean Single Market and Economy would under the current rules entail 
an obligation for this OCT to apply to the Community trade arrangements for services that are 
not  less  favourable  than  those  applied  to  the  members  of  the  Caribbean  Single  Market  and 
Economy, which is seen as an obstacle to Montserrat’s participation in this initiative despite 
its membership of CARICOM. 

On  the  other  hand,  a  modernisation  of  the  rules  of  origin  (primarily  regarding  fisheries 
products),  tailored  to  the  OCTs’  specific  situation,  or  the  strengthening  of  the  OCTs’ 
capacities  to  comply  with  obligations  on  imports  of  goods  into  the  Community,  could  help 
maximise  the  benefits  that  the  OCTs  derive  from  the  OCT-EC  trade  regime  despite  the 
decreasing  theoretical  value  of  their  tariff  preferences.  In  the  same  vein,  the  current 
transhipment  procedure  should  be  subject  to  a  critical  assessment.  Last  but  not  least,  the 
Overseas Association Decision also provides for cooperation in "trade-related areas" that are 
becoming  increasingly  important  to  trade  in  general  but  also  between  the  EC  and  ACP 
neighbours of OCTs. 

1. 

RULES OF ORIGIN  

Some OCTs have suggested establishing a specific set of rules of origin for OCTs in order to 
facilitate  the  access  of  their  products  to  the  Community  market.  As  stated  in  a  2005 
Communication  on  the  future  rules  of  origin,  the  Commission  is  in  favour  of  a  possible 
modernisation  of  the  rules  for  both  ACP  states  and  OCTs  (e.g.  regarding  the  crewing  of 
vessels).  However,  establishing  a  specific  set  of  rules  of  origin  for  OCTs  might  impose 
administrative  and  operational  burdens  with  regard  to  OCT-ACP  cumulation,  which  would 
run  counter  to  the  objective  of  simplifying  the  current  rules  and  the  need  for  an  easy  to 
operate system. It is also clear that a modernisation of the rules of origin should contribute to 
the OCTs’ sustainable development and should thus avoid OCTs merely becoming a platform 
for products of other countries trying to reach the EU market under the OCT preferences, so 
as not to open the door to trade deflections. Furthermore, it is necessary to take into account 
the geographical range of the OCTs, which could make it interesting for some OCTs (those in 
an ACP region) but not for others (the most isolated OCTs and those whose interests lie in the 
European Economic Area) to engage in OCT-ACP cumulation activities. If a specific set of 
rules of origin is established for the OCTs, derogations from the rules of origin would, ideally, 
no longer be required. 

At the same time, it should be borne in mind that, if the possibility of OCT-ACP cumulation 
is to be maintained, the OCTs should, as a matter of policy, be subject to rules of origin that 
are  identical  to  those  applicable  to  the  ACP  states,  which  will  sometimes  vary  per  region 
depending  on  the  regimes  provided  for  in  the  different  EPAs.  In  addition,  administrative 
cooperation agreements between the OCT and ACP cumulating partners need to be in place. 
In  any  event,  the  present  provisions  of  Annex  III  to  the  Overseas  Association  Decision  on 
cumulation of origin between OCTs and ACPs need to be amended, as these provisions refer 

EN 

33 

   EN 

to  cumulation  using  materials  originating  in  the  ‘ACP  states’  in  general.  This  particular 
reference to the ‘ACP states’ is however not supported by a clear outline of the composition 
of  this  group  of  countries:  as  of  1  January  2008,  the  ACP  states  that  have  not  signed 
agreements  with  the  EU  establishing,  or  leading  to  the  establishment  of,  EPAs  only  benefit 
from the less favourable General System of Preferences (GSP) and its rules of origin, whereas 
those  who  benefit  from  the  Market Access Regulation11 come under the rules  of origin laid 
down in Annex II to that regulation. This not only means that ACP states are already subject 
to  different  rules  of  origin  than  those  applicable  to  OCTs,  but  also  means  that  some  ACP 
states apply different rules of origin than others, which seriously complicates cumulation of 
origin  between  the  OCTs  and  ACP  states,  and  will  make  cumulation  of  origin  between  the 
OCTs and all ACP states impossible once the EPA origin protocols enter into force. 

The  bottom  line  is  that  the  choice  is  between  either  OCT-specific  rules  or  maintaining  the 
possibility of cumulation by applying rules of origin identical to those applicable to the ACP 
states that an OCT would want to cumulate with. However, it is necessary to take into account 
the geographical diversity of the OCTs, which could make it interesting for some OCTs (those 
in an ACP region) but not for others (the most isolated OCTs and those whose interests lie in 
the European Economic Area) to maintain the possibility of OCT-ACP cumulation rather than 
become subject to OCT-specific rules. 

It is therefore up to an OCT to indicate if it would like 1) a specific set of rules of origin for 
the OCTs, which would be applicable to all the OCTs choosing this option and would rule out 
the possibility of cumulation of origin, or 2) a regional set of rules of origin compatible with 
the  rules  of  origin  applicable  to  the  ACP  states  of  the  region  in  question,  which  allow  for 
cumulation of origin with these ACP states. For example, the Caribbean OCTs could prefer to 
apply the same rules of origin as the 15 ACP states that participate in the EC-Cariforum EPA, 
whereas  OCTs  such  as  St  Pierre  and  Miquelon  and  Greenland  could  prefer  OCT-specific 
rules.  

Whereas  cumulation  of  origin  between  ACP  countries  and  OCTs  might  offer  certain 
possibilities  for  the  economic  development  of  some  OCTs  (for  example,  ACP-OCT 
cumulation in the Netherlands Antilles and Aruba with regard to rice and sugar products), the 
real  added  value  of  maintaining  cumulation  should  be  subject  to  a  critical  assessment,  in 
particular because cumulation carries the risk that products from ACP countries simply transit 
through  certain  OCTs  without  strengthening  the  OCTs’  economic  development  or  without 
contributing  to  ACP-OCT  economic  cooperation.  Moreover,  the  added  value  for  ACP 
countries to pass through an OCT will most probably decrease significantly or even disappear 
when the ACP countries obtain quota-free and duty-free access to the EU market, which will 
be the case with the entry into force of the EPAs or, pending that, is already the case for those 
ACP  countries  that  come  under  the  Market  Access  Regulation12.  Even  if  there  are  limited 
exceptions for imports into the EU of ACP sugar and rice, these will be phased out as well. 

11 

12 

Council  Regulation  (EC)  1528/2007  of  20  December  2007  applying  the  arrangements  for  products 
originating in certain states which are part of the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) Group of States 
provided  for  in  agreements  establishing,  or  leading  to  the  establishment  of,  Economic  Partnership 
Agreements, OJ L348, 31.12.2007, p. 1. 
Least Developed Countries (LDC) already have duty-free, quota-free access under the ‘Everything But 
Arms’ initiative, irrespective of what they do on EPAs.  

EN 

34 

   EN 

                                                 
2. 

TRADE-RELATED AREAS 

With the ongoing trade liberalisation of goods and services and the conclusion of the EPAs, 
increased  emphasis  is  being  put  on  ‘behind  the  border  measures’,  such  as  trade-related 
legislation  and  regulatory  reform  in  the  trade  field,  in  order  to  secure  more  effective 
participation,  under  the  most  favourable  conditions,  in  Community,  domestic,  sub-regional, 
regional  and  international  markets.  In  addition,  trade  facilitation  (including  customs  duty 
structures  and  customs  regimes  to  avoid  standards  being  set  arbitrarily  and  becoming 
obstacles to trade) and human resource development are of growing importance with a view 
to fully engaging in regional or international trade.  

The  Overseas  Association  Decision  already  identifies  support  for  trade-related  areas  as 
possible areas of cooperation between the Community and the OCTs. At the same time, these 
are  increasingly  becoming  areas  for  cooperation  between  the  Community  and  ACP 
neighbours  of  OCTs.  Today,  the  Community  is  available  to  help  reinforce,  within  the 
association  strategies  of  each  OCT,  the  capacity  of  the  OCTs  to  handle  all  areas  related  to 
trade,  including  where  necessary  improving  and  supporting  the  institutional  framework. 
However, not least because of the limited funds available for Community financial assistance, 
this  possibility  is  at  present  not  exploited  by  the  OCTs,  which  assume  the  primary 
responsibility for the formulation of their association strategies.  

At  the  same  time,  trade-related  cooperation  could  be  developed  in  a  number  of  areas.  For 
example,  harmonising  certain  parts  of  locally  applicable  legislation  in  the  OCTs  in  the 
sanitary  and  phytosanitary  field  with  Community  legislation  may  facilitate  trade  flows  into 
the  Community  for  economic  operators  within  the  OCTs.  This  can  be  illustrated  by  the 
Community's sanitary and phytosanitary system. It has evolved from a fragmented to a highly 
harmonised system, which now enables the movement of animals and products with minimum 
restrictions,  official  checks  and  paperwork.  There  is  a  harmonised  legislative  system  and 
strong capacity in the areas of animal and plant health and food safety, which allows avoiding 
possible  trade-barriers  arising  from  controls,  checks  and  certifications  at  border  inspection 
posts, while ensuring that the Community's high standards in his field are maintained. 

In fact, such an approach is currently being considered in Greenland, which has requested to 
be  allowed  to  trade  in  fishery  products,  live  bivalve  molluscs,  echinoderms,  tunicates  and 
marine  gastropods  and  certain  animal  by-products  of  fish  origin  with  the  Community  in 
accordance  with  intra-Community  rules.  Under  a  proposal  for  a  Council  Decision  laying 
down  trade  provisions  between  the  Community  and  Greenland,  the  latter  will  undertake  to 
transpose, adopt and comply with all the relevant Community provisions. The intention is to 
secure the free circulation of certain Greenlandic fishery products between Greenland and the 
Community.  

However,  this  also  requires  the  administrations  of  the  OCTs  concerned  to  be  capable  of 
conducting veterinary border controls on third country imports and to be authorised to do so, 
which might also require action on behalf of the Member State to which the OCT is linked. 
Under the Community's sanitary and phytosanitary system, the harmonised requirement for all 
checks to be carried out at external border inspection posts is essential for the free movement 
of the products concerned within the single market. Consequently, a third country or territory 
must prove that (1) adequate prevention and control measures are in place, as well as effective 
organisation and administration, competent authority and veterinary control systems; (2) it is 
able  to  provide  rapid  and  regular  data  on  the  existence  of  important  animal  diseases  on  its 
territory; (3) its legislation, rules and livestock health status satisfy Community requirements 

EN 

35 

   EN 

for  the  animals  or  products  in  question;  (4)  it  or  its  region  is  free  of  the  most  important 
diseases; (5) it has acceptable public health standards (e.g. an approved residues control plan). 
In  most  cases,  the  Commission's  Food  and  Veterinary  Office  first  carries  out  on-the-spot 
inspections to ascertain the respect of the above conditions. In addition, all live animals and 
products must be accompanied  by  a  health certificate and must enter via an external border 
inspection post, where checks are carried out. 

According to the assessment of a number of OCTs by the Food and Veterinary Office, a huge 
challenge  remains  for  them  to  upgrade  their  standards  and  to  improve  their  regulatory  and 
control  framework,  enabling  to  certify  the  above  steps  on  behalf  of  the  Community.  Many 
OCTs still lack the necessary capacities, sometimes due to infrastructural problems (e.g. the 
use of old facilities that do not meet modern structural and hygiene requirements to comply 
with  good  manufacturing  practice).  Major  investments  are  needed  in  structures,  equipment, 
water  quality,  sewage  and  hygiene  practices,  management  and  worker  training,  in  order  to 
strengthen food safety and quality management systems, such as the use of ‘hazard analysis 
and critical control point’ (HACCP). This represents a major challenge, in particular for small 
businesses, but is essential for a competitive and viable industry. 

Because  the  OCTs  are  not  part  of  the  Community's  single  market,  they  must  comply  with 
obligations on imports of goods into the Community concerning trade and sanitary measures. 
Thus, improved standards in the OCTs in the sanitary and phytosanitary field, inspired by the 
Community's  harmonisation  experience,  may  generate  mutual  benefits,  competitive  and 
flexible markets, economies of scale and improved consumer choice. 

Another area for trade-related cooperation could be tax and tariff regulation: first, to improve 
the institutional, administrative, regulatory and procedural matters relating to tax; second, to 
adapt the fiscal systems of certain OCTs, for instance by introducing a regionally coordinated 
system of value added tax, in order to facilitate regional economic integration. Furthermore, 
closer cooperation could be pursued on public procurement rules, intellectual property rights, 
effective enforcement measures both at an OCT’s borders and internally, and effective dispute 
settlement  provisions,  in  order  to  make  an  OCT’s  market  more  transparent,  accessible  for 
relevant  information  and  open  for  foreign  investment.  In  addition,  concrete  measures  to 
support  trade  development  in  general,  such  as  activities  aimed  at  improving  the  business 
climate  to  attract  foreign  investment,  access  to  trade  finance,  trade  promotion,  and  market 
development  in  the  productive  and  services  sectors,  including  at  institutional  and  enterprise 
levels, are areas where the Community could usefully assist OCTs in order to secure a more 
viable  private  sector  and  a  shift  from  a  predominant  public  sector  (seen  in  many  OCTs) 
towards  more  private  initiative.  Moreover,  with  reference  to  the  Community  acquis  in  the 
field  of  aviation  and  in  particular  the  Common  Aviation  Area,  strengthened  cooperation  in 
this field would also allow market access barriers to be lifted. 

3. 

TRANSHIPMENT 

Transhipment  is  only  theoretically  relevant  for  a  small  group  of  OCTs  and  is  only  one  of 
several  instruments  available  to  promote  the  OCTs’  economic  development.  Historically, 
transhipment  was  introduced  following  a  request  by  one  particular  OCT  (the  Netherlands 
Antilles)  with  developed  but  under-utilised  harbour  facilities,  based  on  the  loading  and 
unloading of goods. The original aim of the transhipment procedure was therefore to promote 
the  exploitation  of  existing  infrastructures  and  create  local  economic  growth.  This  has  not 
happened.  

EN 

36 

   EN 

The  regularity  of  some  early  transhipment  attempts  in  the  1990s  was  questioned,  namely 
because certain OCTs encouraged third-country economic operators to use this procedure by 
repaying them part of the customs duties they paid to the OCTs, in particular as compensation 
for  the  additional  transport  costs  involved  in passing  through  an  OCT  rather  than  exporting 
directly to the Community. However, notwithstanding the serious problems encountered, all 
four  Member  States  to  which  the  OCTs  are  linked  insisted  that  the  procedure  should  be 
maintained and improved. As a consequence, the Overseas Association Decision adopted in 
2001 did eventually maintain the possibility of transhipment, but also introduced conditions 
for granting OCT aid to economic operators to promote the use of transhipment. In particular, 
the possibility of OCT public financial aid to those using the transhipment procedure became 
subject to preliminary authorisation by the Commission on a case by case basis.  

However, despite the possibility of OCT public financial aid on a case by case basis to cover 
the additional costs generated by the re-routing of products via an OCT, the lack of requests 
by OCTs to grant such aid indicate that third-country economic operators do not make use of 
this  possibility  in  practice  (at  least  not  in  forms  eligible  for  authorised  public  aid),  and  the 
possibility of transhipment does not therefore seem to provide any impetus for the social and 
economic  development  of  the  OCTs.  Moreover,  apart  from  the  lack  of  success  of  the 
instrument  itself,  the  theoretical  attractiveness  of  transhipment  is  decreasing  as  a  result  of 
increasing fuel costs and the progressive liberalisation of trade between the Community and 
its trade partners (both ACP countries and other third countries).  

In view of the above, the Commission is of the opinion that transhipment has not yielded the 
expected results, because it implies purely artificial trade routes that present no added value 
for third-country economic operators to pass through an OCT.  

Some OCTs are of the opinion that transhipment could still be relevant, and have suggested 
that  the  procedure  should  be  made  more  operational.  In  particular,  they  have  asked  the 
Commission to drop its insistence that the transhipped products must in principle have been 
subject to a change in the means of transportation in the OCT. However, these suggestions fail 
to  take  into  account  that  such  an  approach  would  entail  serious  risks  for  certain  economic 
sectors of the Community or of one or more Member States, while the bulk of the financial 
benefits would go to third-country economic operators rather than the OCTs themselves (as 
illustrated  by  the  above-mentioned  transhipment  attempts  in  the  1990s).  Allowing  just  the 
transit of products through an OCT without any unloading and reloading would not only be 
difficult  to  reconcile  with  the  generally  accepted  definition  of  transhipment  (a  definition 
accepted  by  the  OCTs  themselves  in  their  relations  with  partners  other  than  the 
Community)13, but also with the original aim of the transhipment procedure (to promote the 
exploitation of developed but under-utilised harbour infrastructures).  

Moreover, several OCTs have asked the Commission to develop clear guidelines for the use 
of this instrument, namely as regards the authorisation of OCT public aid to those who use the 
procedure. However, it should be noted that the Commission has over several years already 
provided  guidance  to  OCTs  on  transhipment,  though  without  establishing  one-size-fits-all 
guidelines  that  would  apply  in  each  and  every  case.  It  is  indeed  not  possible  to  develop 
guidelines  to  determine,  ex  ante  and  once  and  for  all,  the  acceptable  level  of  OCT  public 
financial  aid  to  third-country  economic  operators,  as  the  risk  that  such  aid  would  provoke 

13 

It  should  also  be  stressed  that,  in  relation  to  fisheries  management  measures  agreed  in  the  context  of 
Regional Fisheries Organisations, transhipment of fish is subject to very strict conditions, and in some 
cases even prohibited. 

EN 

37 

   EN 

                                                 
serious  disturbances  or  difficulties  for  an  economic  sector  in  the  Community  or  in  one  or 
more Member States can only be examined on a case by case basis.  

Nevertheless,  the  Commission  acknowledges  that  the  aim  of  transhipment,  i.e.  to  make 
existing (or future) well-developed but under-utilised harbour infrastructure in the OCTs more 
competitive,  remains  relevant  for  OCTs  with  such  infrastructure.  It  could  therefore  be 
examined  how  this  objective  could  be  best  achieved,  taking  due  account  of  the  potential  in 
certain OCTs (but not in all of them) to provide safe and efficient transhipment or temporary 
warehousing in their harbours for products destined for the Community. 

EN 

38 

   EN 

Annex V 

Working document on the vulnerability and diversity of the OCTs 

On 2 October 1997, the Conference of the Heads of State and Government that adopted the 
Treaty of Amsterdam made a declaration on the OCTs in which it called for a review of the 
OCT-EC  association  arrangements  with  the  objective  of,  among  other  things,  taking  greater 
account of the diversity and specific characteristics of the individual OCTs14. Consequently, 
the 2001 Overseas Association Decision introduced a number of innovations in this respect. 
Whereas  until  the  8th  EDF,  programmable  aid  was  divided  among  the  French,  Dutch  and 
British  OCTs  as  a  group,  leaving  it  up  to  the  Member  States  concerned  to  allocate  these 
resources between  their own OCTs, the 2001 Overseas Association Decision introduced the 
allocation  of  Community  financial  assistance  directly  to  individual  OCTs  and  provided  for 
greater  subsidiarity  as  regards  the  management  of  the  financial  instrument.  It  also  included 
provisions on the needs of the most isolated and least developed OCTs. However, based on 
the  experience  acquired  since  then,  the  Green  Paper  to  which  the  present  Commission  staff 
working  document  is  attached  should  now  critically  assess  a  number  of  further  challenges 
concerning  the  OCTs'  vulnerability  and  diversity,  without  prejudice  to  the  other  questions 
raised in the Green Paper.  

1. 

THE VULNERABILITY OF THE OCTS 

Due to their geographical characteristics, the OCTs suffer from narrow-based markets, which 
prevent them from reaching a sufficient level of scale in order to develop diverse economic 
activities. Most products are imported at high transport costs whereas the local production that 
can  be  exported  is  insufficient  to  ensure  a  positive  trade  balance.  This  situation  makes  the 
OCTs  vulnerable  to  any  fluctuation  in  trade  exchanges.  This  dependency  on  external 
resources also applies to the provision of energy. 

Moreover,  the  insular  characteristics  of  the  OCTs  mean  they  are  particularly  exposed  to 
environmental shocks as well as natural disasters, whose frequency and force are increasing 
with global warming. The OCTs are particularly vulnerable to climatic, seismic and volcanic 
risks and to tsunamis. Such natural disasters can easily destroy the infrastructures and the few 
activities that are possible given the reduced size of the OCTs’ economies. Besides the risk of 
economic  paralysis,  these  phenomena  can  cause  a  heavy  human  toll  and  lead  to  the 
displacement  of  populations,  and  are  thus  likely  to  disrupt  the  economic  and  social 
organisation of the OCTs. 

Against  this  background,  the  OCTs  and  the  Member  States  to  which  they  are  linked  have 
consistently  indicated  that  the  Overseas  Association  Decision  should  be  improved  to  take 
better account of the OCTs’ vulnerability as micro-island economies and that specific criteria 
and instruments should be identified in line with their specific situation. In the context of the 
revision  of  the  Overseas  Association  Decision  in  2007,  the  Council  and  the  Commission 

14 

Declaration  No  36  on  the  Overseas  Countries  and  Territories  annexed  to  the  Final  Act  of  the 
Conference of the Heads of State and Government that adopted the Treaty of Amsterdam (OJ C 340, 
10.11.1997).  

EN 

39 

   EN 

                                                 
stressed  that  greater  coordination  between  support  at  regional  and  territorial  level  could 
contribute to enhancing the resilience of the OCTs towards the challenges that they are facing 
regardless of the level of per capita GNP or other elements used to determine the territorial 
allocations.  Nonetheless,  the  Commission  did  not  propose  a  fundamental  revision  of  the 
existing  criteria  and  instruments,  because  it  felt  that  such  issues  should  be  discussed  in  the 
context of a wider dialogue on the overall philosophy underpinning the OCT-EC association. 
Moreover,  if  it  were  accepted  that  allocation  criteria  should  be  more  vulnerability-oriented, 
the ancillary challenge of quantifying vulnerability in an objective way on the basis of other 
elements than those already taken into account today would require further reflection. 

2. 

THE DIVERSITY OF THE OCTS 

Besides examining whether and how the OCTs’ vulnerability should be taken into account in 
the context of the OCT-EC association, the Commission would also like to raise issues related 
to  the  diversity  of  OCTs.  Even  though  the  OCTs  have  common  characteristics  (small 
population  sizes,  islands,  biodiversity,  etc.),  there  are  huge  differences  between  them,  for 
example  in  terms  of  relative  wealth,  actual  population  size,  natural  resources,  geographical 
characteristics,  physical  isolation,  climate,  possibilities  for  economic  diversification,  etc. 
Nevertheless,  despite  the  innovations  introduced  in  2001,  the  current  Overseas  Association 
Decision and in particular the financial instrument continue to be based largely on a ‘one size 
fits  all’  approach.  For  example,  the  Community’s  development  finance  cooperation  is 
currently based on a common set of standards, treating OCTs like Anguilla and Mayotte in the 
same  way,  even  though  the  challenges  they  face  are  radically  different.  Similarly,  no 
distinction is made between OCTs that benefit from considerable financial transfers from the 
Member State to which they are linked and those for which the Community is in fact the only 
donor.  Even  the  provisions  for  the  most  isolated  OCTs  and  even  more  so  for  the  least 
developed OCTs15 are based on generalisations that do not reflect the differences between the 
OCTs concerned. 

On the other hand, and quite apart from the challenges set out above with regard to the trade 
regime  applicable  to  the  OCTs,  the  range  of  possible  areas  of  cooperation  identified  in  the 
current  Overseas  Association  Decision  is  very  wide  and,  according  to  the  principles  and 
procedures of the partnership between the OCTs and the Community, the authorities of each 
beneficiary  OCT  are  primarily  responsible  for  formulating  the  association  strategies, 
including  the  choice  of  focal  area  for  Community  financial  assistance.  In  this  respect,  it 
should also be noted that, because the funds available are limited, the Commission insists on 
funds  being  concentrated  in  one  sector,  following  a  comprehensive  approach  taking  into 
account  complementarity  with  other  actions  and  other  partners.  This  has  the  advantage  that 
Community  assistance  has  more  leverage  and  increased  efficiency,  while  at  the  same  time 
minimising the burden of managing these funds.  

On the basis of the experience acquired and in response to the dialogue with the OCTs and the 
Member  States  to  which  they  are  linked,  the  Commission  wishes  to  examine  whether  the 
individualised  approach  based  on  each  beneficiary  OCT’s  ownership  of  the  association 
strategies supported by the Community should be complemented by further action to take the 
specific  characteristics  of  the  individual  OCTs  into  account.  This  should  further  facilitate 

15 

The  OCTs  considered  the  least  developed  for  the  purpose  of  the  Overseas  Association  Decision  are 
listed in Annex IB to that Decision. The OCTs listed are Anguilla, Mayotte, Montserrat, Saint Helena 
and dependencies, Turks and Caicos Islands, Wallis and Futuna Islands, and Saint-Pierre and Miquelon. 

EN 

40 

   EN 

                                                 
targeting  the  particular  situation  in  a  given  OCT,  such  as  increasing  the  accessibility  of  an 
isolated  OCT,  reducing  the  development  gap  of  an  OCT  facing  real  development  needs, 
strengthening an OCT’s institutional and administrative capacities where relevant, improving 
the  competitiveness  of  an  OCT  in  areas  where  it  has  specific  potential,  or  strengthening  an 
OCT’s  resilience  to  cope  with  the  specific  challenges  it  faces,  such  as  natural  disasters  or 
environmental  sustainability.  At  the  same  time,  disproportionate  administrative  burdens  or 
fragmentation of the limited funds available should be avoided. 

EN 

41 

   EN