To discover his/her position on the controversy as well as the methods he/she uses, place the mouse over an actor.
You can also place your mouse on the position to see all the actors that hold this viewpoint.
Author Archives: anais.aghezzaf
The stakes
International environmental responsibility.
If a consensus is reached by international organizations such as IPCC and the UN, over the intermingling of human induced climate change and the disappearance of Tuvalu, the impact on global environmental politics will be unprecedented. In that case countries that are not compliant with environment protection protocols, would have to take the lead in funding and implementing solutions to alleviate their negative impact on the environment and therefore provide vulnerable countries such as Tuvalu the help they need from the international community.
Local development to face climate change.
The challenge for the Tuvaluans is two folded, as they must combine adaptation to climate change with local development planning in order to better their home environment. It has been said that Tuvalu has become “a site for competing views not only on what the effects of climate change might be, but also on how to respond to them” and it struck us that local issues such as clean water access, proper sanitation and overcrowding could be dealt simultaneously with contingency planning due to climate change (seawall, food safety).
Resilience vs. Resettlement.
Tuvalu faces climate-induced displacement of its population and it could be on an even greater scale in years to come. In fact the whole population may have to be relocated thus posing great threats to the Tuvaluan people unity and the Tuvaluan government sovereignty. For now, the government has favoured “adaptation” solutions over migration to preserve the Tuvaluan way of life and to have more options on how to overcome land and property right issues for the future in case the Tuvaluans were to be relocated in neighbouring countries such as New Zealand or Fiji. Nonetheless many Tuvaluans have already planned their resettlement in case the most severe events come to pass.
The causes
The methods
The controversy
What is the Tuvalu Controversy about?
The Controversy revolving around the future of Tuvalu is built around two core questions:
- Is Tuvalu sinking into the Pacific Ocean?
- What causes the islands to sink?
If most actors agree nowadays that Tuvalu is indeed in danger, they still disagree on the nature of this very danger. There are two main types of positioning toward the first question. Some think that Tuvalu is actually sinking progressively into the Ocean and will completely disappear in the next few decades. Others believe that if the islands will not sink, it might soon become inhabitable, change shape or move away from the reef edge. Whatever of those hypotheses happens to realise in the future, their consequences will be similar for the Tuvaluans as it will force them to abandon their country.
Because it has direct consequences on the management, answers to the second core question are more split and numerous.
Four main positions exist within the debate over the causes of Tuvalu’s sinking:
- Sea-level rise due to Global Warming
- Other Global Warming induced adverse effects such as more frequent flooding and the increasing intensity of El Nino and El Nina episodes.
- Poor local management of the fragility of the territory of the island
- Natural evolution that can make islands appear and disappear
The answers of the actors to these questions, and the related sub-questions, frame the controversy in a way that can be mapped using adequate tools. This map provides us with information and insights on the way actors position themselves and so on the framework of the controversy.
If positioning themselves around the same object, Tuvalu’s future and the causes responsible for it, actors are nonetheless not debating directly. Actors with different positions tend to confront in an indirect fashion, developing their own media space in the web or publishing and writing in media supportive to their positions.
What first makes Tuvalu’s future a controversy and not a mere debate is this lack of communication between actors advocating different positions.
How a scientific debate turned into a controversy?
Two main reasons led to the turning of the scientific debate into a controversy.
First, mainstream media took over the issue notably after Ian Fry’s broadcasted intervention at the 2009 Copenhagen conference on climate, making the Tuvaluans the announced first victims of Global Warming and Tuvalu a symbol of the emergency to act globally to reduce carbon emission.
Second, Tuvalu has become a place of experiment in every fields: legal, political, economic, scientific… because of its small size making the crisis management relatively easy and because being the first state directly subjected to the supposed adverse effects of Global Warming.
It is so often seen both as a symbol, of Global Warming adverse effects or of the Global Warming conspiracy depending on the actors, and a laboratory which explains why it turned despite its small size and importance a major sub-controversy of the larger Global Warming one.
Tuvalu
Tuvalu is an island state located in the Pacific Ocean, south of the equator. The archipelago is made of nine islands, for a total area of approx. 26m2 for 11 000 inhabitants. The average height of the islands is 3 meters above sea level. The main island is Funafuti, not for its size but as it is considered the capital of the island state. Tuvalu is independent since 1978, after two centuries of British domination. The state is a member of the Commonwealth, and the head of state is Elizabeth II.
History
If signs of an early life tracing back to 8000 years were found in a cave underwater, the first signs of the Tuvaluan language appeared 2000 years ago. The islands were colonized in 1861 by Great Britain and were a strategic place for the American during the war against Japan in 1942. Thus, blocs were built on the beaches, and sand removed to build landing strips.
Population
The Tuvaluans speak English and Tuvaluan, and mainly came from the surrounding islands, many years ago.
Economy
The Tuvaluan economy is mainly based on importations, as they have nothing to export. The land cannot be cultivated. They import a lot of water, as the water that exists on the island cannot be drunk because of the infiltration of salty water. The main resource of the Tuvaluan economy is the financial aid they receive, tourism and fishing. Their currency is the Australian dollar.
Tuvalu is famous for two things. First, in 1998 it was given the title of nation “above reproach for human rights violations”. Secondly, and sadly, because some consider it might disappear under the sea. That is what we are going to talk about in our controversy.
Interview with John Connell of Sydney University
John Connell kindly answered to our questions by mail.
“What makes you think it is disappearing? I don’t believe it is”
Why did you first become interested in studying the impact of sea level rise on Tuvalu?
In 1981, I first went to Tuvalu and was fascinated by the country (and I was then involved in a large project on migration on the Pacific) and simply its economic struggle for existence, and became interested in sea level rise in 1991 when it was becoming an issue in the Pacific and SPREP (Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme) were beginning to publish material on it.
What types of analysis/methods did you use in your study of Tuvalu?
I have never done ‘scientific’ analysis in Tuvalu (ie measures of sea level rise, geomorphology, climate etc) but have focused on the economy and migration – and collected just about anything I could find on the country.
In your opinion, why is Tuvalu disappearing and what kind of evidence supports your conclusion?
What makes you think that it is disappearing? I don’t believe it is – see Kench and Webb that you refer to below. Some parts of all atolls are eroding and some parts are accreting/growing – normal wear and tear and the impact of cyclones etc – and of course the impact of humans. As Kench and Webb show, the worst erosion is where humans have made changes which also means that there are more people in those areas to see the changes .. Again, as Kench and Webb show, flooding was also significant a century ago.
Can we put blame on a single cause and/or group of people?
Erosion can be blamed on many people and many events – as I suggested in the APV article in 2003 by events such as causeway construction, deforestation, sand mining etc (all most evident in the capital Funafuti that has grown massively since independence) – such changes have made physical events such as cyclones more damaging .. Global warming of course has multiple causes – and none are based in Tuvalu ..
“Global warming of course has multiple causes- and none are based in Tuvalu…”
Is the data collected on sea-level rise consistent with geological data (in reference to Paul Kench’s work on Tuvalu)?
Yes – I believe so – the data for the areas closest to Tuvalu where records exist, and for the few points in Tuvalu itself, show a very tiny, almost imperceptible sea level rise over recent decades – enough obviously for concern over a future where this accelerates but not in itself enough to account for significant contemporary physical changes. What has mainly caused problems in Tuvalu recently has been high (king) tides in association with El Nino events.
Has enough data been collected to come to a definitive conclusion concerning the future of Tuvalu?
No – but then where has such data been collected? As you know there is massive debate about the speed and causes of global warming – from deniers to doomsayers…and on the speed of that hinges PART of the future of Tuvalu.
But only part of it – Tuvalu is in a sense behaving like other small Polynesian countries (Niue is the best, although the most extreme, example –no problem with sea level rise there but 1200 left in Niue and 18,000 who live in New Zealand) – where economic prospects are very limited and good job opportunities are scarce.
The future of Tuvalu hinges on political and economic issues and the many decisions of individual Tuvaluan families choosing to migrate (or not) alongside environmental change.
The future can never be certain= what if a cyclone like Katrina went straight over Tuvalu? But what if oil was discovered in nearby waters?
In your opinion, who are the main actors in the debate surrounding the future of Tuvalu?
We all are in some way – given the significance of environmental change – but the main actors are the government of Tuvalu (and other Pacific states who work together through the Pacific Forum) and the governments of nearby states especially New Zealand and Australia.
Which types of communities have the most legitimacy when weighing in on this debate? (The scientific community? Journalists? The local residents? Politicians?)
Everyone has a role to play but the scientists are important in defining the nature of changing contexts – though even they are unlikely to be in agreement, given the limited amount of data. The rest must interpret all this as best they can – in a context where personal opinions are important and there are complex politics – linked to aid, economic development, migration, and, of course, power. Local residents will make their own decisions – stay or go – build a larger house etc …
Do you think that the media distorts the scientific reality of the situation in Tuvalu?
Of course – see my APV 2003 article and the various papers of Carol Farbotko. The media need a story – a disappearing country is a good one; business as usual is no story at all.. And, indeed, all journalism (and most academic studies too!) distort whatever it is they focus on simply because no study can ever be holistic.
“The media need a story- a disappearing country is a good one”
Immerse yourself in the controversy
By following this defined path, you will discover the main points of this controversy, in 7 steps:
1- A presentation of Tuvalu
2- The controversy
3- The methods
4- The causes
5-The stakes
6- An interactive mapping of the actors
7- Conclusion and going further
Ian Fry
Who is he/she?
Ian Fry is the chief climate change negotiator for Tuvalu. His impassioned speech on behalf of Tuvalu at the 2009 United Nations climate summit in Copenhagen garnered major media attention. During the conference’s plenary sessions, he pleaded or consideration of the “Tuvalu Protocol” calling for strengthening of the Kyoto Protocol and sharply limiting greenhouse gas emissions in hopes of containing global temperature rise to within 1.5 degrees Celsius – far more than developed nations were proposing. Mr. Fry is the spokesperson for the Alliance of Small Island States on matters relating to land use, land use change and forestry and more generally on issues relating to mitigation in the consideration of future climate change regimes.
Did we speak with him/her?
No
Profession:
International Environmental Officer for the Environment Department of the Government of Tuvalu
Nationality:
Australian
Important Publications/Articles on Tuvalu:
Interview for the World Watch Institute, here.
Fry’s emotional plea for Tuvalu at the Copenhagen Conference (2009), here.
How did he get involved in Tuvalu?
Ian Fry has held his current position as international environmental officer for the government of Tuvalu for the past 11 years. Before, he worked for the Earth Negotiations Bulletin and Greenpeace, when he met the Prime Minister of Tuvalu and was asked to brief him on climate change. Following this meeting, Mr. Fry was invited to join the Tuvalu delegation at the 1997 climate negotiations in Kyoto and has endeavored on behalf of Tuvalu ever since.
(What methods does he use?)
His take on the controversy:
Tuvalu and other low-lying island states have been put in grave danger as a result of the adverse effects of climate change. He believes that binding agreements need to be made by world leaders in order to save Tuvalu from disappearing.
Quotations:
“The fate of my country rests in your hands”
“It is an irony of the modern world that the fate of the world is being determined by some senators in the US Congress.”
Interview with Fanny Héros of Alofa Tuvalu
Fanny Héros kindly answered to our questions by phone. This interview is in French. 
« Tuvalu, symbole de ce qui nous attend tous si nous n’y faisons rien »
Considérez-vous qu’il y ait un responsable dans la disparition prochaine de Tuvalu ?
Disparition prochaine ou pas, on n’en sait rien. Il n’y a pas de date évidemment. Nous savons que si nous ne bougeons pas, la disparition du territoire est un risque bien réel pour Tuvalu, de même que celle de la nation, en l’état actuel de la législation internationale.
Le grand responsable c’est l’être humain, nous et notre mode de vie. La montée des eaux, est un des impacts des dérèglements climatiques. L’île est inondée pendant plusieurs jours pratiquement tous les mois depuis la fin du dernier millénaire, d’après l’ingénieure météo. Le changement climatique est multifactoriel et multi-effets : souvent il exacerbe des phénomènes naturels: fortes pluies, grands vents, il accentue l’érosion (les arbres aux racines détrempées tombent), et cause des épisodes de sécheresses prolongées comme cela a été le cas pendant plusieurs mois à Tuvalu en 2011. Est-ce que l’homme participe à cela ? Oui et pas seulement à Tuvalu. Nous scions tous la branche qui nous porte. Tuvalu est très isolée, c’est une pastille, un territoire qui prend l’eau par le dessous. Les gens ne peuvent plus cultiver les tubercules traditionnels. A la suite de la dernière sécheresse, il y a eu moins de fruits (noix, fruits d’arbre à pain), et des fruits plus petits. Tuvalu est en situation de vulnérabilité accrue avec les changements climatiques. Il fait entre 30 et 35°C en permanence et les conditions de vie ne sont pas évidentes. Les habitants dépendent de plus en plus des importations.
“Tuvalu est en situation de vulnérabilité accrue avec les changements climatiques”
Est-ce que les trous creusés pendant la deuxième guerre mondiale sont aussi une cause ?
Il est probable que les trous creusés par les américains en guerre contre le Japon en 1942 et jamais rebouchés ont fragilisé la structure des deux îles sur lesquelles cela a été fait. L’île principale fait 2,5km2, c’est tout petit.
Quels sont les acteurs sur place avec lesquels vous travaillez ?
Nous travaillons avec tout le monde : des enfants aux vieillards, le gouvernement et ses différents ministères et départements, l’énergie et de l’environnement, éducation, gestion des déchets… les communautés des 9 îles, les associations (de femmes, de jardiniers, la croix rouge qui est très active etc.) Nous travaillons avec les médias, les petits business, les compagnies électriques, toutes les églises…
A Tuvalu, les médias, sont-ils une aide ou un ennemi ? Et pour le travail de l’association ?
Les membres fondateurs d’Alofa Tuvalu sont majoritairement journalistes. « Small is beautiful » est un plan de communication. Nos actions ne peuvent avoir un impact au niveau global que si les solutions que l’on propose sont reproduites et promues, nous travaillons donc avec les médias. Les communiqués de presse à la radio tuvaluenne permettent de toucher l’ensemble de la population disséminée sur les 9 îles. Les médias locaux sont des alliés. Pour les médias internationaux c’est aussi majoritairement le cas. Ensuite cela dépend, parfois il y a de très bons sujets, et parfois certains viennent trois jours sur place et veulent que tout le monde soit prêt à les recevoir, des habitants aux ministres. Mais ils ne réalisent pas qu’en face il n’y a qu’une poignée de gens pour leur répondre. On est très attentifs au fait que les journalistes qui demandent notre assistance fassent aussi passer des copies de leur sujet à remettre aux interviewés.
“Nos actions ne peuvent avoir un impact au niveau global que si les solutions que l’on propose sont reproduites et promues”
Qu’en est-il des scientifiques qui étudient Tuvalu?
La question que vous me posiez portait sur la légitimité d’un scientifique qui tire des conclusions du fond de son labo versus celui qui se rend investiguer sur le terrain. Je vous ai répondu que le second a plus de chance d’approcher d’une vérité, mais que le fait de s’y rendre n’est pas non plus l’assurance absolue de conclusions justes. Il en va de même pour les journalistes et n’importe quel visiteur. Pour vous donner un exemple de décalage qu’on ne peut pas deviner : les tuvaluens répondent systématiquement « oui » aux questions interro-négatives, car la formule n’existe pas en tuvaluen. Comme partout il faut s’imprégner de la culture. Nous, ça fait 10 ans qu’on travaille là-bas et qu’on reste 5-6 mois sur place et bien pourtant parfois on a l’impression qu’on ne les connaît toujours pas (les habitants).
Quelle sources et sites web consultez-vous ?
Notre Bible, c’est le site de l’IPCC/GIEC. Mais après on se concentre surtout sur les solutions pour réduire nos impacts à tous sur l’effet de serre, les technologies en matière d’énergie renouvelables notamment. Nous n’avons pas besoin de nous persuader de ce qui arrive, on sait que ça arrive. Nous devons tous agir vite.
“Nous n’avons pas besoin de nous persuader de ce qui arrive, on sait que ça arrive”
Quelles sont les actions concrètes d’Alofa Tuvalu pour faire de l’archipel un exemple avant sa disparition ?
Nous déployons à Tuvalu une gamme de solutions concrètes et reproductibles pour réduire nos impacts sur l’environnement, les énergies renouvelables issues de la biomasse (déchets organiques) notamment.
A la suite d’un audit énergétique réalisé à sa demande en 2005, Le gouvernement nous a demandé de poursuivre avec la mise en place des recommandations de nos experts, à savoir, pour réduire la dépendance au pétrole du pays, la mise en place d’un centre de formation aux énergies renouvelables qui valorisent les ressources locales avec formation de la population à leurs usages : il s’agit de technologies existantes et éprouvées, que nos spécialistes adaptent aux conditions locales lorsque nécessaire. Nous avons commencé par la production de biogaz de lisier de porc pour cuisiner, avec la construction d’un digesteur en briques et d’une porcherie attenante. La digestion du lisier produit du gaz, le méthane qui brûlé devient inerte pour l’atmosphère et un très bon compost ce qui est utile dans un territoire où il y a peu de terre. Nous avons aussi formé la population à la gazéification des cosses et bourres de noix de coco pour produire du gaz, un autre substitut à l’usage du pétrole, et à la production d’agrocarburants issus du cocotier : un biodiesel pour les bateaux inter-îles et les générateurs et une essence pour les mobylettes et les barques de pêche.
Depuis 2006, nous avons formé des ingénieurs, des spécialistes et sensibilisé plusieurs centaines de Tuvaluens à l’usage et à la maintenance de ces technologies. Le but est de réduire la facture de la circulation entre les îles et de réduire les importations de pétrole, d’étendre l’usage des technologies aux îles lointaines et d’encourager les reproductions dans le monde entier. La communication a porté, le gouvernement s’est approprié cette idée d’un Tuvalu 100% renouvelable au point de l’envisager à l’horizon 2020. Et la direction de l’énergie souhaite organiser des formations dans les îles lointaines avec le matériel fourni et les ingénieurs que nous avons formés.
Nous terminons l’installation de 4 digesteurs plastiques familiaux sur une des îles lointaines. nous faisons aussi des campagnes de communication sur la réduction des déchets, parce que tout déchet importé reste sur place pour l’instant. Sur la réutilisation des déchets, les Tuvaluens sont très doués. Nous intervenons aussi auprès des jeunes par des actions pédagogiques et de sensibilisation. Et puis on termine un inventaire de la biodiversité marine réalisé avec les spécialistes locaux et le service des pêches. Nous assurons la promotion de toutes ces actions pour inciter les reproductions dans le monde entier.
“Nous déployons à Tuvalu une gamme de solutions concrètes et reproductibles pour réduire nos impacts sur l’environnement”
Quels ont été les impacts de la conférence de Copenhague sur la cause de Tuvalu ?
Tuvalu n’a pas attendu Copenhague pour devenir un symbole. « Tuvalu symbole de ce qui nous attend tous si nous n’y faisons rien » est notre leitmotiv depuis 2003, avec le tournage du film « Nuages au paradis » par la réalisatrice Gilliane Le Gallic, qui est aujourd’hui Présidente d’Alofa Tuvalu et le co-réalisateur Christopher Horner, relais de l’association aux Etats-Unis. Avec Copenhague, tout le travail de mise en avant a porté ses fruits. Et les prises de position très fortes des délégués tuvaluens ont renforcé la dimension de symbole. Nous avons été sollicités pour piloter la communication, gérer le stand du pays les interviews. Pour juguler un peu le flux de journalistes du monde entier qui convergeait sur la petite délégation, nous avons organisé une conférence de presse pour le Premier Ministre… Au niveau des impacts en terme de résultats concrets, Copenhague a fait perdre beaucoup de temps et d’émissions de gaz à effet de serre à tout le monde, pour un bout de papier qui n’engage personne à rien, et auquel Tuvalu s’est du reste opposé. Il y avait beaucoup d’espoir du côté de la population civile. Après la conférence, toute l’attention sur le climat est retombée comme un soufflet.
Pouvez-vous déjà constater des impacts de cette disparition prochaine sur la culture Tuvaluenne ?
L’ancien premier ministre, Apisai Lelemia (2006-2010), a dit que la culture tuvaluenne ne survivrait pas à un déplacement. On peut effectivement penser que des problèmes de dilution de la culture se posent chez ceux qui émigrent (avec un visa de travailleurs saisonniers, car il n’y a pas d’accord relatif à une émigration liée aux changements climatiques). La transmission des savoirs est principalement orale, la culture tuvaluenne est à l’image de son territoire, très vulnérable. Mais comme il faut toujours une note d’espoir : Tuvalu a survécu à deux siècles de colonisation britannique, elle n’en est pas ressortie à l’identique bien sûr, la religion est passée par là, mais l’attachement à la famille, à l’île de naissance, à la nation, les fêtes communautaires, l’humour tout ça a survécu.