“The first climate resilient nation”: the meaning of big made-up words in real power struggles
This is a post about power and climate change, which is actually part of a small series. You can read the first post here. Synopsis: the small island developing state Dominica was hit badly by a hurricane in September 2017, pushing its Prime minister to embark on a campaign to become “the first climate resilient nation” in the world. What’s the chances of that claim making any real-world difference?
Short answer: potentially a great deal, but more people on and off the island need to be more strategic about their response.
The long answer:
Firstly, not the First
First of all, and this will be my only occasion to be so pedantic, let’s drop the “first” from this claim. Firstly because it assumes there is an agreed “finish line”, a standard of climate resilience everyone can adhere to, which there isn’t. And secondly because even if we just look at commonly understood factors such as the robustness of basic infrastructure, or the availability of capital and government plans to build that infrastructure, then Dominica is pretty obviously lagging behind many countries with higher GDPs. You can read more about the state of Dominica’s economy and infrastructure here.
Fine, so what about becoming a “climate resilient nation”?
Doubts
There are a lot of good reasons to doubt Skerrit’s proclamation, even a lot of reasons to dismiss it as purely related to the election campaign he is facing next year. And indeed, Dominicans have been doubting it loudly and publicly (see this article, and also comments here and here).
In addition, locals and international NGO workers I spoke to expressed with a shoulder-shrug that there was little activity observable on the government’s part outside of press releases. The much-heralded creation of CREAD (Climate Resilient Execution Agency of Dominica) has been muddled by lack of support within the domestic political spectrum, as well as the lack of clarity around its mandate. The 2018 budget statement here mentions every disaster resilience buzzword from “structure of our disaster management systems” to “robust business continuity measures”, as well as some concretely useful things such as putting the electricity grid underground and building hurricane shelters.
In sum: words are still the only manifestation of the “climate resilient nation” that we have to date.
However, these words may prove more powerful than even Skerrit or his critical opponents thought them to be.
The Power of Words
My background is in diplomacy, and I could bore you with a lot of good research on how words, “empty rhetoric” and practices such as endorsements by the UN don’t have any visible impact, but immense power. To make it short, the “talkers” shape the horizon of what is considered thinkable and worth achieving, and they therefore open up avenues for the “doers” to make things happen. Enough talk will put a problem on the societal and political agenda, which generates power and financial means for a cause and group of people that were previously not a priority. Just a few decades ago, climate change was basically a hippie belief — today, millions of dollars, euros, yen and pounds are invested in “climate change adaptation” and similar projects every year.
Here is a great book about how the kind of big change needed on Dominica happens in other cases. What’s required is, among other things, a shift in norms and power relations. The “doers” with the ideas for and interest in climate resilience solutions need the societal support and the resources to act. That can happen either in concrete terms (i.e. through grants and government programmes) or just by making it important enough in public sentiment (through the “talkers”). Actual change then happens through a “window of opportunity” — something that makes it attractive for people in power to support real change.
There are good reasons to believe Dominica’s window of opportunity is now.
The Window of Opportunity
The declaration to become “the first climate resilient nation” has been received and repeated in various forums at the United Nations, the World Bank, and regional bodies. Financial means have been made available by all of them for the resilience project. The impact these are going to have is a slightly different story — one related to government effectiveness and its ability to do the right thing with this window of opportunity.
In addition, visible in my own contacts as well as other reports, there is a clear sense of determination and creativity among Dominicans. There is a conviction that becoming “climate resilient” is not rhetoric or even a government programme, but a vital necessity for all Dominicans. Everyone knows hurricanes are going to become stronger and more frequent. If the island is to be at all inhabitable in the medium to long term, real climate resilience needs to happen — and local “doers” know it, and are acting on it.
Local NGOs such as REZ-DM, the local Red Cross Society, Rotary Club, and even new groups such as WildDominique and Survivor Mike’s Disaster Prep store are taking matters into their own hands. They are all building their version of climate resilience, and there are ears who listen to them.
The government has also proven itself as a “doer”: in July, the country hit an important milestone — banning all plastic and styrofoam by early 2019! Will that prevent a disaster when the next storm hits? No. But it sends the right kind of signal: Dominica takes climate change, its environment, and the future of its people seriously, and is prepared to take radical steps a lot quicker than rich big Western countries.
Jumping Through the Window
However, there is so much more to be done on the way to becoming “climate resilient”. Dominica’s window of opportunity remains open while a) the worst part of the post-Maria phase is over, b) there is a general dissatisfaction with progress to date and c) a public commitment from leading national and international figures to focus on climate resilience. But to make use of that window of opportunity before it closes, Dominicans and their allies abroad need to be strategic and collaborative about the change they want.
“Doers” in Dominica come in multiple shapes and sizes including large international NGOs, small grass roots organisations, and different segments of the government. All of these organisations may benefit from taking a systems approach to their work on Dominica — taking into account the different factors and stakeholders, and especially power relations between different actors. The question worth answering is “what are/could be the incentives for people in power to enact the change we want?”, as opposed to “how do we individually reach the goal we have set ourselves?” Small grassroots organisations in particular will do well to look at the actors involved with their issue, and find local and international partners to work with and learn from, and amplify each other’s impact.
There is evidence from both the international development and the humanitarian sector that local grassroots organisations are well positioned to solve their social problems due to their experiences and intimate knowledge of underlying causes. However, the major problem these organisations typically face is the lack of (financial) resources available to them. Post-hurricane Dominica does not have an abundance of disposable income and the island does not have a strong culture of supporting charities. “Doers” in the form of charities therefore cannot sustain themselves based on the model of donations prevalent in Western countries. Similarly, social businesses struggle because the infrastructure to support them does not exist. Funding vehicles common to other countries are not available on the island — including equity investments, microfinance instruments, crowdfunding and community shares.
“Doers” abroad, especially large international funding bodies, can really make a major impact here: there may be value in applying the systems approach to funding decisions. Based on all the knowledge available about actors and power relations in the system, who are the best actors to give money to? National or local government agencies, international or local NGOs, churches, community groups, the private sector…?
If you are a “talker”: Dominica needs “talkers” abroad at the moment, mainly to create a bigger stage than “talkers” on the island can access. As pointed out above, the majority of the resources to make Dominica climate resilient must come from abroad, but there is a different system at work there — a set of agencies and donors dominated by different power relations and agendas. We need to push Dominica’s climate resilience quest up on the international agenda. This is especially important since Dominica is no longer an immediate post-hurricane emergency and therefore requires the less sexy funding for long-term and complex interventions.
Summing Up
So, what are the chances of the campaign to “make Dominica the (not first) climate resilient nation” creating any real-world change? A great deal. If all the doers and talkers are strategic about how to tackle the system, and collaborative in their approach. That’s going to be neither easy nor quick. But hey, the urgency and the need is pretty obvious to all. And the talkers have opened the door to interventions that will increase climate resilience.
In my next post, I’ll give an indication of what systems thinking applied to Dominica’s problems might look like.
