Pacific Islands Development Forum – Emergence of the New Participant in the Pacific Regionalism Forum

Pacific Islands Development Forum (PIDF) was formally established through signing of an agreement in 2015. The two previous gatherings were informal and did not bring any legally binding documents. The 3rd summit, entitled “Building Climate Resilient Green Blue Pacific Economies” introduced not only the constituting agreement, being an international treaty, what in turn made PIDF an intergovernmental organization having its own legal personality, but also created the pivot for the new wave of the Pacific regionalism. The regional cooperation among the small island states is being made ineffectively and economically inefficiently due to many reasons. The most relevant of which are the over fragmentation of the existing regional organisations and constant creation of ad hoc institutions which have no personality, powers or sanctions for non-fulfilment of the jointly adapted agreements.


INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this article is to present the newest Pacific organisation, the Pacific Islands Development Forum (PIDF). It was formally established through signing of an agreement on 4 September 2015. South Pacific regionalism is weak, ineffective and economically inefficient due to many reasons. The most relevant of which are the over fragmentation of the existing regional organisations and constant creation ad hoc institutions which have no personality, powers or sanctions for non-fulfilment of agreements. This article also depicts the current state of the South Pacific regionalism, where a new player has just entered. The paper has an introduction and the seven following parts: the second portrays the historical background of the PIDF, the third shows the outcome of the 3 rd meeting of PIDF, the fourth focuses on membership, the fifth describes its structure, the sixth compares PIDF with some regional organisations in the Pacific, the seventh presents the features of PIDF with the previously the largest most active IGO in the region -Pacific Islands Forum, while the eight is the conclusion. The method used here is primarily the analysis of the content of legal regulations, mainly agreements establishing IGO, as well as political communiqués after the conferences or summits, explanatory notes as well as governmental declaration. As the Pacific organizations do not make legally binding norms, they do not issue any hard copy official gazettes, therefore the only source of information of their functioning are the websites and occasionally in daily newspapers' articles published in the Ocean region.

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF PIDF
The 3 rd summit of the Pacific Islands Development Forum was held at its headquarters in Suva, the capital of Fiji on 2-4 September 2015. The two previous gatherings were informal 1 . Since the inauguration of this regional organisation, there was no official request from the Pacific states for formal linkages. A draft of a constituent document was developed through many consultations involving regional stakeholders through discussions, written submissions and workshops 2 . The 2015 summit saw promulgation of the PIDF Charter. The Charter of the Pacific Islands Development Forum formally established the PIDF as an international organisation. The constitutional framework was adopted at the First Regional Workshop on the PIDF Establishment Agreement in May 2015 3 .
The name of this regional organisation is similar to that of the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF). For this and other reasons, PIDF is commonly perceived as a challenge to PIF 4 . The newly established organisation was welcomed by the South Pacific member countries as a hope for "engaging with the Pacific", free from the politics 79 of the PIF 5 . According to the website of the Pacific Islands Development Forum, the organisation is the "only platform" that meets the needs of the legal and political regionalisation process on the Pacific 6 .
In accordance with the PIDF's guidelines, sustainable development rests on three pillars: economic growth, social development, and environmental sustainability. As for the confirmation of those idealistic sounding values, PIDF recalls its successful role, for instance in "establishing the Pacific's first and truly representative and participatory platform on the Green Economy, […] giving value to voices never heard at this level of decision making in the Pacific, empowering the people of the Pacific to handle challenges" 7 .

THIRD, FUNDAMENTAL MEETING OF PIDF
The 3 rd summit was entitled "Building Climate Resilient Green Blue Pacific Economies". The theme is understood as the most timely and relevant to the Pacific Island Countries and Territories (PICT), as was underlined by the Deputy Prime Minister of the Kingdom of Thailand at the opening ceremony 8 . The term "green economy" was introduced by the United Nations as the main theme during the environment summit in Rio de Janeiro in 2012 9 . But there was an immediate response from the Small Island Developing States (SIDS), which started promoting the "blue economy", to reflect their marine environment 10 . The Pacific island countries are aware of the huge and, unfortunately, unexploited opportunities coming from the largest ocean on earth, the Pacific Ocean. In addition, they feel threatened by the greenhouse gas emissions, and by the rising sea level. Therefore, Josaia Voreqe 5 Mainly the political struggle over leadership in the region between Fiji and Papua-New Guinea. See J. Hayward-Jones, Pacific island leadership: PNG steps up, "The Lowy Interpreter", www.lowyinterpreter.org/post/2014/08/28/Pacific-island-leadership-PNG-steps-up.
Bainimarama, the Prime Minister of Fiji, took the opportunity of international publicity for PIDF and reprimanded Australia. He called on the Australian government on the first day of the summit to put the welfare and survival of Pacific island neighbours before the expansion of the coal industry 11 . Besides the green economy, the six "tracks" 12 were introduced to the public by the leaders at the September meeting: Health, Water and Sanitation; Marine Environment, Oceans and Fisheries; Energy and Transport; Agriculture and Forestry; Gender, Youth, Disabilities and Human Security; Technology, Finance and Capacity Building, Infrastructure and Built Environment 13 .
The main outcome of the 3 rd summit was the Suva Declaration 14 . Each state unanimously supported the authority of this document. It was adopted as the Pacific islands' input and own, regional proposition for the 21 st Conference of Parties (COP21) 15 taking place in Paris on 7-8 December 2015. The key premise of the Declaration signed on 4 September 2015 was a commitment "to limit global temperature increases to below 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels" 16 .

MEMBERSHIP
According to Article 1 (9) of the Charter of the Pacific Islands Development Forum: "Member State means a member of PIDF that is also a state to legally distinguish them from Pacific territories, regional civil society organisations and regional private sector organisations". Article 7 discusses membership, which is "open to Pacific Islands and Pacific Organisations able and willing to exercise the rights and assume the obligations of membership". The Charter enumerates 17 countries as foundation members along with 2 organisations, the Pacific Islands Association of Non-Governmental Organisations (PIANGO) 18 . In addition to Pacific states, there are some regional institutions engaged with PIDF. This creates a space of cooperation, as well as networking to implement common values within the Pacific 19 .
The countries that are "eligible" 20 to participate in the PIDF activities, but which are not yet members, are: American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Niue, the Republic of Palau, the Pitcairn Islands, and Samoa 21 . This shows the possibility for an entity to join or to cooperate with PIDF, regardless of its international law status (sovereign state, dependency or freely associated state). What is more, there is no fixed list of members. That can be explained by the very broad vision of this newly established organisation. On the one hand, it allows for working on and applying wide undertakings among the island states, but at the same time, such openness of this organisation might result in decisions being of a very general and, therefore, blurred nature. This kind of regional politics might in some cases lead to real problems and in the end, to the legal and political impossibility of solving any conflict 22 .

STRUCTURE OF THE PIDF
Nonetheless, the fundamental change brought by the 3 rd summit is undoubtedly the adoption of the constitutional document expressing the formal framework of cooperation. The Charter of the Pacific Islands Development Forum, in only 24 articles, regulates the basic components of an international organisation, such as purposes and functions, main institutions, financial provisions, international immunities and privileges, and membership. Therefore, PIDF can be called an international organisation due to fulfilment of the legal prerequisites in accordance with international law. Article 3 establishes the legal personality of the organisation in the international arena 23 . This can be seen as the formal transformation from a simple regional gathering to a regional organisation. Such transition, in turn, lays new foundations for Pacific regionalism. The minimalist approach used in the Charter was intentional. It leaves space for further deliberation and possible detailed legal documents being adopted by PIDF at future summits. There is also a lack of strict obligations on members or any sanctions. This might be the reason for slow regionalisation progress. However, strength of the document appears in the institutions that it established, all designed to achieve consensus and defer regulatory processes to the governance organs, not to member states themselves. Due to this, PIDF protects itself against possible political conflicts of interest, or in other words, against putting state interests over regional ones.

PIDF AND THE MAIN PACIFIC ORGANISATIONS
From the comparative point of view, it is worth distinguishing the Pacific Islands Development Forum from other regional organisations, by comparing their membership, legal bases, special internal organs, and financing. The more influential and well-established regional organisations are PIF, SPC, MSG and the Polynesian Leaders Group (PLG). PIDF is the newest (functioning from 2013). This regional entity has a long list of advantages and sets itself apart from those local organisations. The wished-for domination of PIDF in the Pacific over other local organisations is justified by the multi-level, multi-stakeholder, and multi-sector inclusivity and promotion of South-South cooperation amongst the Pacific Small Island Developing States (PSIDS) 24 . This statement explains why there is no closed membership in this organisation 25 . Every other Pacific institution consists of either founding countries or those of a secondary nature, while PIDF is open to a "broad alliance of public sector, private sector and civil society organisations" 26 .
The widely accepted way of establishing an international organisation in international law is by treaty. It usually occurs at the first meeting or conference of the interested parties. This happened in the case of both PLG (by the memorandum of understanding signed on 20 November 2011 in Apia, Samoa during the first meeting U M C S of the leaders and representatives of Polynesian countries) 27 and SPC (though the Canberra Agreement of 6 February 1947) 28 .
As for the Melanesian Spearhead Group and the Pacific Islands Forum, they did not elaborate any official document on the first meeting. PIF argued during the first communiqué that: "It was considered premature to institute a formalised arrangement, although this could emerge in due course as and when the need for it became apparent" 29 . MSG, in turn, recalled, in its establishing agreement, two previously signed documents (the Agreed Principles of Cooperation Among Independent States of Melanesia from 1988, as well as the Agreed Principles of Cooperation Among Independent States in Melanesia from 1996) 30 .
A secretariat plays a major administrative and representative role in most of the international organisations. PIF, PIDF, and MSG act through their special organs, having internal powers to manage the functioning of the whole institution and to implement agreed policy. Since the adoption of the PIDF Charter, the institutional structure of this organisation comprises the Conference, the Leaders' Summit, the Members' Representative Council, National/Local Sustainable Development Boards, and the Secretariat. The latter organ is the principal administrative body 31 . The first permanent Secretary General is François Martel from Samoa 32 .
By contrast, Article 3 of the Agreement Establishing the Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat 33 , states that the Secretariat of PIF was established "to facilitate, develop and maintain cooperation and consultation between member governments on economic development, trade, transport, tourism, energy, telecommunications, legal, political, security and such other matters as the Forum may direct". A unique feature of PIF is the absence of the elaborate structure. The Secretariat is the main organ of U M C S the organisation, in accordance with the establishing agreement. It is responsible for executing the common regional policy. The auxiliary organ is an executive committee, known as the Pacific Islands Forum Officials Committee. Its functions and powers can be delegated to the Secretary General 34 .
Finally, according to Article 8 (1) of the Agreement Establishing the Melanesian Spearhead Group, "the Secretariat is the administrative arm of the MSG". This organ has additional internal divisions, which are responsible for implementation certain regional policies 35 .
Financing of a regional organisation needs to be agreed among its members, which is usually done in some formal arrangement. The constituent treaties might have a special chapter with the organisational budget or include the financing issues in an additional annex. This latter situation occurs in PIF's case, where the scale of contribution to the common budget is set out. Australia and New Zealand pay 37.16% of the budget, whereas the other island states pay around 1% or 2% 36 .
A similar pattern, relying on the national economy, was used by the Secretariat of the Pacific Community. The SPC adopts an annual budget to cover its administrative expenses, however, the expenses will be allocated among the governments (Australia 30%, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the Netherlands 15%) 37 . The PIDF budget will, in contrast, be funded through voluntary gifts and contributions made by members 38 .

BRIEF COMPARISON WITH PIF
PIDF is perceived as a potential competitor for PIF in the region. Therefore, it is worth comparing these two regional entities. The founding members of both The functioning of the two Forums depends on documents, which differ from each other from the legal point of view too. The Pacific Islands Development Forum Charter launches the entity as an international organisation, stating its legal personality. The structure of the whole text is precise. The Charter enumerates institutional organs along with their competences.
The legal basis of the Pacific Islands Forum is currently the Agreement Establishing the Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat 40 . As the name of this document states, the constitutive treaty refers only to the main PIF organ -its Secretariat, while to the organization as a whole. Therefore, it is only the Secretariat, which enjoys a legal personality. In addition, that occurs only in the 16 member countries, not internationally. The PIF Secretariat is an administrative body, directly responsible to the Forum Leaders. Finally, the various arrangements on financing those two Forums can also be explained by different forms of membership. Relying on voluntary gifts and contributions to the PIDF budget is caused by its "open-ended" form of participation. PIF decided on fixed rates from its member countries, depending on their economy 41 .

CONCLUSION
The 3 rd summit of the Pacific Islands Development Forum formalised the institution by the establishment of its Charter. Since September 2015, the Pacific island countries are finally able to jointly act on the international arena through this organisation which represents their common interests. The latest 4 th summit took place in Honiara, the Solomon Islands on 12-13 July 2016 42 . There was, so far, no other summits of PIDF, but there was organize proudly called "1 st High Level Pacific Blue Economy Conference" under the title "Sustainable Oceans in a Changing Climate" (23-24 August 2017) 43 .
Professor Sandra Tarte, from the University of the South Pacific located in Fiji, emphasises that PIDF is a response to the need for new regionalism, new diplomatic strategies and new development approaches within the region. The 2015 gathering included an unconventional, for intergovernmental organisations, mix of participants: head of states, politicians, diplomats, business leaders, academics and civil 40 Ibidem. 41 44 . Secondly, the PIDF meeting in September 2015 resulted in an important document on climate change: the Suva Declaration 45 . It will was already taken as a common view of the small developing states by the rest of the UN members during COP21, but also as a Pacific response to the global (in)activity in the green blue matters. Finally, emergence of the new regional organization gives hope for more effectively and economically efficiently regionalism for the common benefit of the poor, slowly developing Pacific nations.