DOCSLIB.ORG

Natasha Kassam

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Natasha Kassam NATASHA KASSAM UNDERSTANDING AUSTRALIAN ATTITUDES TO THE WORLD PREFACE COVID reveals. It sees through what nations say Last November, Americans changed course and about themselves and reveals what they really are. elected a new president, Joe Biden. Australians are much more confident in President Biden than COVID has humbled great nations and raised up they were in his predecessor. Trust in the United small nations. Like an X-ray, COVID shows up the States has returned to an upward trajectory. Fewer healthy and unhealthy parts of the body politic. Australians now believe that President Donald Trump weakened Australia’s alliance with the It has shown the frailties of the United States — but United States, although this is still a majority view. also its resilience. It has shown both the capacities Support for the Australia-US alliance remains and weaknesses of China’s authoritarian system. strong. Compared to most countries, Australia has fared Australia is also looking with renewed purpose to very well over the past year. Our initial handling of partners and friends in our region. In the year that the pandemic was among the best in the world. The Quad leaders first met as a foursome, Australians’ Australian economy is humming along. However, trust in both Japan and India has increased. The in mid-2021, Australia — an open-minded nation of majority of Australians, traditionally sceptical of immigrants and travellers, with a long-held belief in foreign aid, want to help Pacific and Southeast globalisation — remains closed to the world. Asian countries to access COVID vaccines. The 2021 Lowy Institute Poll captures the mood of As well as the annual Lowy Institute Poll, this report the Australian public at this remarkable moment. incorporates Climate Poll 2021, a survey that asked Australians have a renewed sense of optimism Australians about their views on climate change about the world and their place in it. The country is policy. Ahead of the UN Climate Change Confer- rightly proud of its efforts to manage the pandemic. ence in Glasgow in November, the vast majority of Australians want to see further action taken on While Australians’ trust in many countries has climate change. They are also moving decisively increased in 2021, sentiment towards China is now away from coal. Most say Australia is doing too little quite bleak. For the first time, more Australians see to address climate change, but they are even more China’s economic growth as a negative rather than critical of perceived climate inaction by China, India a positive. The majority of Australians blame China and the United States. for the current tensions in the bilateral relationship. More Australians see China as a security threat than In this its seventeenth year, the Lowy Institute Poll an economic partner. Confidence in China’s Presi- continues to chart how Australians feel about the dent Xi Jinping, already declining, has fallen to a world and its challenges, including COVID, China new record low. and climate change. However, Australians do not want regional competi- Dr Michael Fullilove tion to slide into confrontation. Most still believe we Executive Director can maintain good relations with both superpow- June 2021 ers. A majority of Australians would prefer to stay neutral in the event of a military conflict between China and the United States. 2 CONTENTS Executive summary 4 Australia at home 20 Global powers and world leaders 6 Democracy 20 Trust in global powers 6 Australia’s reputation overseas 21 Confidence in world leaders 8 Australia’s place in the world 22 Relations with superpowers — the Coalition government report card 22 United States and China 10 Feelings towards other countries 22 Australia’s alliance with the United States 10 The COVID-19 pandemic 24 Views of China 12 Border and consular policies 24 Australia’s relationship with the superpowers 15 Global responses to COVID-19 24 Safety, security and threats to Foreign aid and COVID-19 25 Australia’s vital interests 16 Climate Poll 2021 26 Feelings of safety 16 Levels of concern about climate change 26 Threats to Australia’s vital interests 16 Australian government policies Foreign influence 18 on climate change 27 Economic outlook and International climate change policies 29 foreign investment 19 Tables of results 30 Optimism about Australia’s economic performance 19 About the Poll 45 Investment from foreign countries 19 Methodology 45 Acknowledgements 46 Figures 47 Notes 48 important’ to Australia’s security. Three-quarters of Australians EXECUTIVE (76%) agree that ‘Australians and Americans share many com- mon values and ideals. A strong alliance is a natural extension SUMMARY of this’. The same number (75%) say ‘the United States would come to Australia’s defence if Australia was under threat’. Fewer Australians this year (58%) agree that ‘Donald Trump has weak- Trust in global powers ened Australia’s alliance with the United States’ (down 8 points Trust in China has fallen to a new record low, with only 16% of since 2019). Only one-third (36%) say ‘the United States is in Australians saying that they trust China ‘a great deal’ or ‘some- decline relative to China and so the alliance is of decreasing what’ to act responsibly in the world. This represents a 7-point importance’, a view held by almost half the population (46%) in decline from 2020 and is now a third of the level in 2018 when a 2019. majority of Australians (52%) said they trusted China. Almost all Australians (92%) trust Australia to act responsibly in the world. When asked about a military conflict between China and the An overwhelming majority of Australians (87%) say they trust United States, more than half the population (57%) say ‘Australia Japan and the United Kingdom to act responsibly in the world. should remain neutral’. Four in ten Australians (41%) say ‘Aus- Six in ten Australians (61%) say they trust the United States, an tralia should support the United States’ and 1% say ‘Australia increase of 10 points from last year. The same number (61%) should support China’. say they trust India a great deal or somewhat, an increase of 16 points since 2020. Almost half (48%) say they trust Indonesia, Seven in ten Australians (72%) say it is possible for Australia to an increase of 12 points in the past year. Only 26% of Australians have good relations with the United States and China at the say they trust Russia, steady from 2020. same time, a 15-point drop since 2013. Confidence in world leaders China One in ten Australians (10%) say they have ‘some’ or ‘a lot’ of The majority of Australians (63%) now see China as ‘more of a confidence in China’s President Xi Jinping to ‘do the right thing security threat to Australia’, a substantial 22-point increase from regarding world affairs’, which has halved since 2020 (22%) and 2020. Only 34% say China is ‘more of an economic partner to fallen 33 points since 2018. US President Joe Biden inspires Australia’, 21 points lower than in 2020. More than half (56%) confidence in far more Australians than his predecessor. Seven say ‘China is more to blame’ than Australia for the tensions in the in ten (69%) have confidence in President Biden, a striking 39 Australia-China relationship. Four in ten (38%) say that Australia points higher than Australians’ confidence in former President and China are equally to blame. Almost none (4%) say ‘Australia Donald Trump in 2020 (30%). is more to blame’. Australians are split over participation in the Winter Olympics in China: 51% favour attending, while 45% say New Zealand’s Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern tops the list of Australia should not attend because of China’s human rights global leaders again, with 91% expressing confidence in her (up record. 4 points from 2020). Australians also hold high levels of confi- dence in German Chancellor Angela Merkel, with 67% saying Three-quarters of Australians (76%) say ‘Chinese people [they] they have confidence in her. Two-thirds (67%) express confi- have met’ have positively influenced their view of China (down dence in Prime Minister Scott Morrison, a 7-point increase from 9 points since 2016). Seven in ten Australians (68%) say China’s 2020. The number who are confident in Australia’s Opposition culture and history have a positive influence on their view of leader Anthony Albanese remains steady at 56%. More than China, an 11-point decline from 2016. Less than half the popula- half (59%) have confidence in UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson, tion (47%) say China’s economic growth has a positive influence 4 points higher than in 2020. on their view of China, a steep 28-point fall since 2016. Six in ten Australians (61%) have confidence in Japan’s Prime One in five Australians (20%) say that Chinese investment has a Minister Yoshihide Suga. Fewer Australians have confidence in positive influence on their view of China, a 17-point decline from other leaders in our region, with 38% expressing confidence in 2016. Only 17% of Australians say China’s environmental policies Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and 26% saying they have have a positive influence on their views of China, unchanged confidence in Indonesian President Joko Widodo. Only 16% from 2016. A mere 6% say China’s system of government has a of Australians say they have confidence in Russian President positive influence on their views of China, a 9-point decline from Vladimir Putin. Almost no Australians (5%) say they have confi- 2016. Almost no Australians (5%) see China’s military activities in dence in North Korea’s leader Kim Jong-un. our region as having a positive influence on their views of China.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Diversity Visa Program, DV 2019-2021: Number of Entries During Each Online Registration Period by Region and Country of Chargeability
    Diversity Visa Program, DV 2019-2021: Number of Entries During Each Online Registration Period by Region and Country of Chargeability The totals below DO NOT represent the number of diversity visas issued nor the number of selected entrants Countries marked with a "0" indicate that there were no entrants from that country or area. Countries marked with "N/A" were typically not eligible for that program year. FY 2019 FY 2020 FY 2021 Region Foreign State of Chargeabiliy Entrants Derivatives Total Entrants Derivatives Total Entrants Derivatives Total Africa Algeria 227,019 123,716 350,735 252,684 140,422 393,106 221,212 129,004 350,216 Africa Angola 17,707 25,543 43,250 14,866 20,037 34,903 14,676 18,086 32,762 Africa Benin 128,911 27,579 156,490 150,386 26,627 177,013 92,847 13,149 105,996 Africa Botswana 518 462 980 552 406 958 237 177 414 Africa Burkina Faso 37,065 7,374 44,439 30,102 5,877 35,979 6,318 2,591 8,909 Africa Burundi 20,680 16,295 36,975 22,049 19,168 41,217 12,287 11,023 23,310 Africa Cabo Verde 1,377 1,272 2,649 894 778 1,672 420 312 732 Africa Cameroon 310,373 147,979 458,352 310,802 165,676 476,478 150,970 93,151 244,121 Africa Central African Republic 1,359 893 2,252 1,242 636 1,878 906 424 1,330 Africa Chad 5,003 1,978 6,981 8,940 3,159 12,099 7,177 2,220 9,397 Africa Comoros 296 224 520 293 128 421 264 111 375 Africa Congo-Brazzaville 21,793 15,175 36,968 25,592 19,430 45,022 21,958 16,659 38,617 Africa Congo-Kinshasa 617,573 385,505 1,003,078 924,918 415,166 1,340,084 593,917 153,856 747,773 Africa Cote d'Ivoire 160,790
    [Show full text]
  • Shipping Operations Updated 6 April 2021
    Please note, although we endeavour to provide you with the most up to date information derived from various third parties and sources, we cannot be held accountable for any inaccuracies or changes to this information. Inclusion of company information in this matrix does not imply any business relationship between the supplier and WFP / Logistics Cluster, and is used solely as a determinant of services, and capacities. Logistics Cluster /WFP maintain complete impartiality and are not in a position to endorse, comment on any company's suitability as a reputable service provider. If you have any updates to share, please email them to: [email protected] Shipping Operations Updated 6 April 2021 This bulletin is compiled to give all stakeholders an overview of the current impact of COVID-19 on Pacific shipping activities. It draws on sources from government, commercial and humanitarian sectors. The bulletin will now be circulated monthly. Overview • UN Bodies call for seafarers and aviation workers to be given priority access to vaccines • Massive congestion in European and Asian ports anticipated due to resolved Suez Canal blockage State / Territory Date Source Details 26-Mar-21 https://info.swireshipping.com/shipping-schedules/oceania See link for Swire Shipping schedule. Kaimana Hila arrives on 4 March. Maunawili arrives on 11 March. Daniel K. Inouye arrives on 18 March. Manukai arrives 25 March. Maunawili departs 25-Feb-21 https://www.matson.com/fss/reports/guam_s.pdf Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands on 9 March. Daniel K. Inouye departs on 14 March. Manukai departs 21 March. https://www.pdl123.co.nz/common/downloads/images/sch 24-Feb-21 Neptune Pacific has vessels arriving on 7 & 21 March, 10 & 21 April, 5 & 24 May, 4 & 18 June, 7 & 18 July, 20 & 31 August and 14 September.
    [Show full text]
  • 2.6 Oceania 145 2.6 OCEANIA
    Regional Overview 2.6 Oceania 145 2.6 OCEANIA AUSTRALIA FIJI KIRIBATI MARSHALL ISLANDS MICRONESIA, FEDERATED STATES OF NAURU NEW ZEALAND PALAU PAPUA NEW GUINEA SAMOA SOLOMON ISLANDS TIMOR LESTE TONGA TUVALU VANUATU 146 Global State of Harm Reduction 2020 TABLE 2.6.1: Epidemiology of HIV and viral hepatitis, and harm reduction responses in Oceania Country/ People who HIV Hepatitis C Hepatitis B Harm reduction response territory with inject drugs prevalence (anti-HCV) (anti-HBsAg) reported among prevalence prevalence injecting drug people who among among 1 Peer use inject drugs people who people who 2 3 4 (%) inject drugs inject drugs NSP OAT distribution DCRs (%) (%) of naloxone (2,940)7 Australia 75,1785[2] 2.3[3] 45[4] 4.0[5] (4,182)6[2] [7,8] 2 (B,M)[6] Federated States nk nk nk nk x x x x of Micronesia Fiji nk nk nk nk x x x x Kiribati nk nk nk nk x x x x Marshall Islands nk nk nk nk x x x x New Zealand 18,0008[10] 0.2[10] 589[10] nk (185)10[11] (B,M)[11,12] 11[9] x Palau nk nk nk nk x x x x Papua New nk nk nk nk x x x x Guinea Samoa nk nk nk nk x x x x Solomon Islands nk nk nk nk x x x x Timor Leste nk nk nk nk x x x x Tonga nk nk nk nk x x x x Vanuatu nk nk nk nk x x x x nk = not known 1 Countries with reported injecting drug use according to Larney et al 2017.
    [Show full text]
  • Pacific Urban Development, Water, and Sanitation Sector Road Map 2021–2025
    Pacific Urban Development, Water, and Sanitation Sector Road Map 2021–2025 Urban development plays a key role in contributing to stronger, healthier, and more inclusive economies in the Pacific. This document lays out the 5-year vision and strategy of the Asian Development Bank (ADB) for urban programs, projects, and technical assistance in the Pacific region. It provides an overview of the key constraints to sustainable urban development and more livable cities, as well as opportunities for deepening and scaling up ADB support and engagement in its 14 Pacific developing member countries. The priority areas highlighted for ADB’s support are based on Pacific clients’ ongoing and emerging needs. About the Asian Development Bank ADB is committed to achieving a prosperous, inclusive, resilient, and sustainable Asia and the Pacific, while sustaining its efforts to eradicate extreme poverty. Established in 1966, it is owned by 68 members —49 from the region. Its main instruments for helping its developing member countries are policy dialogue, loans, equity investments, guarantees, grants, and technical assistance. PACIFIC URBAN DEVELOPMENT, WATER, AND SANITATION SECTOR ROAD MAP 2021–2025 APRIL 2021 AsiAn Development BAnk 6 ADB Avenue, Mandaluyong City 1550 Metro Manila, Philippines ASIAN DEVELOPMENT BANK www.adb.org PACIFIC URBAN DEVELOPMENT, WATER, AND SANITATION SECTOR ROAD MAP 2021–2025 APRIL 2021 ASIAN DEVELOPMENT BANK Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 IGO license (CC BY 3.0 IGO) © 2021 Asian Development Bank 6 ADB Avenue, Mandaluyong City, 1550 Metro Manila, Philippines Tel +63 2 8632 4444; Fax +63 2 8636 2444 www.adb.org Some rights reserved. Published in 2021.
    [Show full text]
  • Small Island Developing States Solutions Platform Concept Note
    SMALL ISLAND DEVELOPING STATES SOLUTIONS PLATFORM CONCEPT NOTE O A F © SMALL ISLAND DEVELOPING STATES SOLUTIONS PLATFORM CONCEPT NOTE Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Apia, 2021 Required citation: FAO. 2021. Small Island Developing States solutions platform: Concept note. Apia. The designations employed and the presentation of material in this information product do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) concerning the legal or development status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Dashed lines on maps represent approximate border lines for which there may not yet be full agreement. The mention of specific companies or products of manufacturers, whether or not these have been patented, does not imply that these have been endorsed or recommended by FAO in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. The views expressed in this information product are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of FAO. © FAO, 2021 Some rights reserved. This work is made available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial- ShareAlike 3.0 IGO licence (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO; https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/igo/legalcode). Under the terms of this licence, this work may be copied, redistributed and adapted for non-commercial purposes, provided that the work is appropriately cited. In any use of this work, there should be no suggestion that FAO endorses any specific organization, products or services.
    [Show full text]
  • Premiers League
    2021 Oceania (OWF) International League Email Weightlifting Tournament PREMIERS LEAGUE - FIXTURE Round 1 (June 4-5) Round 2 (July 2-3) Kiribati vs PNG Solomon Islands vs New Zealand Solomon Island vs Fiji PNG vs Nauru New Zealand vs Nauru Fiji vs Samoa Australia vs Samoa Kiribati vs Australia Round 3 (August 13-14) Round 4 (September 24-25) Samoa vs Kiribati Nauru vs Australia Nauru vs Fiji Fiji vs New Zealand New Zealand vs PNG Kiribati vs Solomon Islands Australia vs Solomon Islands Samoa vs PNG Round 5 (October 29-30) Round 6 ( November 26-27) PNG vs Solomon Islands New Zealand vs Australia New Zealand vs Kiribati Fiji vs PNG Australia vs Fiji Kiribati vs Nauru Samoa vs Nauru Solomon Islands vs Samoa Round 7 (December 17-18) PRIZE MONEY Nauru vs Solomon Islands 1st place AUD $10,000.00 Fiji vs Kiribati 2nd place AUD $ 8,000.00 PNG vs Australia 3rd place AUD $ 7,000.00 Samoa vs New Zealand 4th place AUD $ 6,000.00 5th place AUD $ 5,000.00 6th place AUD $ 4,000.00 7th place AUD $ 3,000.00 8th place AUD $ 2,000.00 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2021 Oceania (OWF) International League Email Weightlifting Tournament LEAGUE - A FIXTURE Round 1 (June 4-5) Round 2 (July 2-3) Tonga vs Cook Islands New Caledonia vs CNMI CNMI vs Tahiti Tahiti vs Tonga Guam vs New Caledonia Cook Islands vs Marshall Islands Bye: Marshall Islands Bye: Guam Round 3 (August 27-28) Round 4 (September 24-25) CNMI vs Marshall Islands Tahiti vs Guam Guam vs Cook
    [Show full text]
  • Biophysically Special, Unique Marine Areas of the Cook Islands
    Biophysically special, unique marine FINAL REPORT – 10 February 2021 areas of the Cook Islands Daniela M. Ceccarelli1, Kate Davey2, Keith Twyford2, Hayley Weeks2, Kelvin Passfield3, Michael White4, Hans Wendt5, Gander Wainiqolo5, John Kaitu’u5, Miriam Burrah5 Suggested citation: Ceccarelli DM, Davey K, Twyford K, Weeks H, Passfield K, White M, Wendt H, Wainiqolo G, Kaitu’u J, Burrah M (2021) Biophysically special, unique marine areas of the Cook Islands. Ridge to Reef Project, Rarotonga, Cook Islands. 1 ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies, James Cook University and Marine Ecology Consultant 2 Ridge to Reef (R2R) Project, Cook Islands National Environment Service (NES) 3 Te Ipukarea Society, PO Box 649, Rarotonga, Cook Islands 4 Honu Cook Islands, Omoka Village, Tongareva Atoll, Cook Islands 5 International Union for the Conservation of Nature – Oceania Regional Office (IUCN-ORO) 1 Table of Contents Acronyms ............................................................................................................................................ 8 Acknowledgements .......................................................................................................................... 9 Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................... 10 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 12 1.1 Project background ...................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Transnational Organized Crime in the Pacific
    Transnational Organized Crime in the Pacific: A Threat Assessment September 2016 Copyright © 2016, United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC). This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part and in any form for educational or non-profit purposes without special permission from the copyright holder, provided acknowledgement of the source is made. UNODC would appreciate receiving a copy of any publication that uses this publication as a source. Acknowledgements This study was conducted by the UNODC Regional Office for Southeast Asia and the Pacific (ROSEAP) at the Division for Operations (DO), with research support of the UNODC Studies and Threat Analysis Section (STAS), Division for Policy Analysis and Public Affairs (DPA). UNODC thanks the Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat (PIFS) for the support provided throughout the development of the report. The preparation of the report was financially supported by the Government of Australia and the Government of New Zealand. The preparation of this report would not have been possible without data and information reported by governments, the PIFS and other regional organizations to UNODC. UNODC is particularly thankful to government and law enforcement officials consulted during the development of the report. UNODC Team Jeremy Douglas (Regional Representative), Inshik Sim (Information Analyst), Brendan Quinn (Consultant), Brian Lee (Regional Programme Adviser), Tun Nay Soe (Regional Coordinator, Global SMART Programme), Giovanni Broussard (Regional Coordinator, Global Programme for Combating Wildlife and Forest Crime), Benjamin Smith (Regional Coordinator, Human Trafficking/Smuggling of Migrants) and Akara Umapornsakula (Graphic Designer). The study benefited from the valuable input of many UNODC staff members at headquarters who reviewed various sections of this report.
    [Show full text]
  • Climate Risk Country Profile: Cook Islands (2021): the World Bank Group and the Asian Development Bank
    CLIMATE RISK COUNTRY PROFILE COOK ISLANDS COPYRIGHT © 2021 by the World Bank Group 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433 Telephone: 202-473-1000; Internet: www.worldbank.org © 2021 Asian Development Bank 6 ADB Avenue, Mandaluyong City, 1550 Metro Manila, Philippines Tel +63 2 8632 4444; Fax +63 2 8636 2444 www.adb.org This work is a product of the staff of the World Bank Group (WBG) and the Asian Development Bank (ADB) and with external contributions. The opinions, findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work are those of the authors’ and do not necessarily reflect the views or the official policy or position of the WBG, its Board of Executive Directors, or the governments it represents or of ADB, its Board of Governors, or the governments they represent. The WBG and ADB do not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work and do not make any warranty, express or implied, nor assume any liability or responsibility for any consequence of their use. This publication follows the WBG’s practice in references to member designations, borders, and maps. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work, or the use of the term “country” do not imply any judgment on the part of the WBG or ADB, their respective Boards, or the governments they represent, concerning the legal status of any territory or geographic area or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. The mention of any specific companies or products of manufacturers does not imply that they are endorsed or recommended by either the WBG or ADB in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned.
    [Show full text]
  • Cultural Etiquette in the Pacific Guidelines for Staff Working in Pacific Communities Tropic of Cancer Tropique Du Cancer HAWAII NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS
    Cultural Etiquette in the Pacific Guidelines for staff working in Pacific communities Tropic of Cancer Tropique du Cancer HAWAII NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS GUAM MARSHALL PALAU ISLANDS BELAU Pacic Ocean FEDERATED STATES Océan Pacifique OF MICRONESIA PAPUA NEW GUINEA KIRIBATI NAURU KIRIBATI KIRIBATI TUVALU SOLOMON TOKELAU ISLANDS COOK WALLIS & SAMOA ISLANDS FUTUNA AMERICA SAMOA VANUATU NEW FRENCH CALEDONIA FIJI NIUE POLYNESIA TONGA PITCAIRN ISLANDS AUSTRALIA RAPA NUI/ NORFOLK EASTER ISLAND ISLAND Tasman Sea Mer De Tasman AOTEAROA/ NEW ZEALAND Tropic of Cancer Tropique du Cancer HAWAII NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS GUAM MARSHALL PALAU ISLANDS BELAU Pacic Ocean FEDERATED STATES Océan Pacifique OF MICRONESIA PAPUA NEW GUINEA KIRIBATI NAURU KIRIBATI KIRIBATI TUVALU SOLOMON TOKELAU ISLANDS COOK WALLIS & SAMOA ISLANDS FUTUNA AMERICA SAMOA VANUATU NEW FRENCH CALEDONIA FIJI NIUE POLYNESIA TONGA PITCAIRN ISLANDS AUSTRALIA RAPA NUI/ NORFOLK EASTER ISLAND ISLAND Tasman Sea Mer De Tasman AOTEAROA/ NEW ZEALAND Cultural Etiquette in the Pacific Guidelines for staff working in Pacific communities Noumea, New Caledonia, 2020 Look out for these symbols for quick identification of areas of interest. Leadership and Protocol Daily Life Background Religion Protocol Gender Ceremonies Dress Welcoming ceremonies In the home Farewell ceremonies Out and about Kava ceremonies Greetings Other ceremonies Meals © Pacific Community (SPC) 2020 All rights for commercial/for profit reproduction or translation, in any form, reserved. SPC authorises the partial reproduction or translation of this material for scientific, educational or research purposes, provided that SPC and the source document are properly acknowledged. Permission to reproduce the document and/or translate in whole, in any form, whether for commercial/for profit or non-profit purposes, must be requested in writing.
    [Show full text]
  • Cook Islands Marine Ecosystem Services Valuation
    Cook Islands Marine Ecosystem Services Valuation Prepared by Luke Brander1,2,3, Kelvin Passfield4, Kate McKessar4, Kate Davey5, Victoria Guisado2, Florian Eppink6, Nicholas Conner7, Hayley Weeks5,8 Author affiliations 1Brander Environmental Economics, Hong Kong SAR, China 2Institute for Environmental Studies, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands 3University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China 4Te Ipukarea Society, Cook Islands 5Cook Islands Ridge to Reef Project, Rarotonga, Cook Islands 6Institute for Biodiversity, Germany 7IUCN Commission on Environmental, Economic and Social Policy 8National Environment Service, Cook Islands Recommended citation: Brander, L.M., Passfield, K., McKessar, K., Davey, K., Guisado, V., Eppink, F., Conner, N. and Weeks, H. (2020). Cook Islands Marine Ecosystem Service Valuation. Report to the Cook Islands National Environment Service. Acknowledgements: The authors of this report wish to acknowledge and thank the individuals and organisations that supported the data gathering and production of this study, which include the following: The Cook Islanders that generously contributed their time to complete the household survey; The representatives of key Cook Islands Government agencies, Island Councils, organisations and businesses that participated in the stakeholder consultation questionnaire and provided additional much needed data, knowledge and information to facilitate and inform the report. In particular, we are grateful to Christopher Brown, Raymond Newnham, Alexis Wolfgramm, Sheena Vaetoru,
    [Show full text]
  • The Pacific Islands Forum Has Lost Five of Its Eighteen Members In
    Security Nexus Perspectives TIME FOR THE PACIFIC ISLANDS FORUM TO STEP-BACK AND HEAL By Deon Canyon * Australia, Cook Islands, Fiji, Nauru, New Zealand, Tonga and Samoa founded the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) as the South Pacific Forum in 1971 and it has come to be considered the primary agency for regionalism in Oceania (Fig 1). Up until recently, its membership comprised the 14 sovereign United Nations member states (Australia, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Kiribati, Nauru, New Zealand, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Republic of Marshall Islands, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu and Vanuatu); the 2 non- sovereign territories (French Polynesia and New Caledonia); and the 2 sovereign non-UN member states in association with New Zealand (Cook Islands and Niue). * Dr. Canyon is a professor at the Daniel K. Inouye Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies (DKI APCSS) in Honolulu, USA. The views expressed in this article are the author’s alone, and do not necessarily reflect the official position of the DKI APCSS or the United States Government. TIME FOR THE PACIFIC ISLANDS FORUM TO STEP-BACK AND HEAL Figure 1: Oceania with 28 inhabited island states and territories including 14 sovereign UN member states , 12 non-sovereign, non-UN territories , and 2 sovereign non-UN states in association with New Zealand . Twenty years later, in 1992, PIF held a summit for Smaller Island State Leaders from Cook Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Kiribati, Nauru, Niue, Palau, Republic of the Marshall Islands, and Tuvalu in recognition of their vulnerabilities, due to small size and lack of natural resources, and long-term sustainable development needs.
    [Show full text]