The lokua is a small fish that lives in reef ponds cut off from the surrounding waters during low tides, but when the tides are high, they are periodically replenished by ocean waters. For people living in the Pacific islands, the issues are much the same as those faced by the lokua: whether to be an integral part of the larger ocean or to remain in our own little ponds, nurtured mainly by our own resources, but having them replenished from time to time by the regional and global environments.
If we want to become more and more a part of the global society, how much of the sheltering walls of our ponds do we want to knock down, in order to allow for a greater flow of ocean both at low tide and high tide? Can we be ourselves in a bigger world? What is our future among the bigger fish of the world’s ocean? What resources will there be to allow us to live and participate in the global society? Questions of identity, culture, security and resources take on different dimension. Sustainability of both culture and development becomes paramount. Conversely, if each of us remains in our pond what would that mean? Could we survive?
No bystanders are allowed. The choice has to be made. The most challenging choices to be made concern cultural and environmental factors, social and physical resources. And we must face the ramifications of our past choices as well as the new ones arising from the global currents of the present.
Can we say that sustainable development, or indeed any sort of development, has no need to take into account the cultural dimension? In this regard I am reminded of the story of the tourist who went to a restaurant in a rather remote area. The restaurant had an impressive menu listing over a hundred dishes. After the tourist had made two orders and found that the restaurant in fact had neither of them, he asked the waiter to tell him what could be provided, and the waiter told him the two dishes they had. After he had ordered one of them he asked the waiter why they had such a menu when they could only produce two dishes. The waiter told him that the menu was planned and agreed in the capital, without regard for what was available locally. They were told it was the menu restaurant owners would have if they were running proper establishments which were both profitable and sustainable.
The experts and decision-makers agree on the formula. But is this really the way it should be? Is there any other way for a developing nation with limited resources to avoid being relegated to the bottom of the class because it hasn’t got all the items required by the formula to be considered a success?
The question of what to do if you have limited resources is rarely touched on in discussions of culture and sustainable development. What standard of living and quality of life should you aim for? What sort of society? Who and what do you want to be? What pathways of development should many of us consider even with our being nurtured by the ocean of the global society. Asking these questions reminds me of a statement by Perez de Cuellar to the effect that development embraces not only access to goods and services but also the opportunity to choose a full, satisfying, valuable and valued way of living together, the flowering of human existence in all forms and as a whole. The choice can also be for a different style of development, a different path based on assessed resources and different values from those of the highest income countries. Different paths of development should be informed by a recognition of how cultural factors shaped the way in which societies conceive their own future and choose the means to achieve those futures.
Jacques Delors, the former President of the European Commission, stated that all-out economic growth can no longer be viewed as the ideal way of reconciling material progress with equity, respect for human conditions and respect for natural assets.
In fact we have choices and we face challenges that require a fundamental shift in our view on culture and sustainable development in order to be realistic in our objective and at the same time develop a life-style which each and every one will live with pride. The issue is not just the importance of culture in development but the issue of sustainability of our future in a global situation.
It is also necessary to keep in mind that both culture and sustainable development are dynamic processes. They are both instruments of change and the end results of change. What we are today is different in many ways from what we were 25 years ago and different from what our societies were 50 years ago. We should not be troubled by the lifestyle and livelihood changes all around us. We must make decisions about future directions and the goals. That is also why culture is a critical factor in development—sustainable or otherwise.
The challenge of choices will also be in development of ways and means of enlarging resources. In the same way that Israel and the Jews outside of Israel are interdependent, remittances are becoming increasingly important in the Pacific island countries and consequently the cultural dimension becomes significant. The Pacific island countries own, or have some control, over 3 million square miles of ocean and its resources. Why is it not possible for us to come together and work together in order to enlarge resources for ourselves? Is it because of cultural differences? Is it politics?
The world is rapidly reconfiguring itself into competing regional blocs, based on economic grounds. The European Union is expanding. North America now has NAFTA and the Organisation of American States. ASEAN is becoming a major player especially with the momentum of the new bloc, APEC, a reality recognised by Australia and New Zealand. This is an issue which the island states must address—sooner rather than later. The currents of the global ocean are shifting from the Atlantic to the Pacific Rim, and especially Asia. What do these shifting currents mean for us in the islands? What does it mean to be in the midst of the Pacific, yet forgotten?
I have raised these general issues because in my view they will affect us all. Do we in the islands take on these developments individually? Why is regionalism and regional cooperation a difficulty? Is it because of our cultures? Is it possible to build a regional identity to facilitate not only the development of regional cooperation but also of shared resources and allow island states, individually or together, to participate more fully in the global society? Perhaps our concern in islands should be more about the regional society in order for us to be better able to participate in and benefit from the global society. If we are successful, we may also give hope to youth and the population at large. The issues are social and cultural, as well as moral, political and economic. They also have intellectual dimensions, not only for the élite but also for Pacific people in general. Questions of development, regional cooperation, natural and human resources, gender issues, reaching the unreached (our youth) must also be considered by ordinary men and women. Perhaps after all there is a case for culture and sustainable development.
There is a Tongan saying, Taumulivalea, which roughly translated means that if you do not know where you come from, how can you hope to know where you are going? This proverb highlights the reasons why culture is important in any discussion of development and any hope for the future.
However, ‘taking account of cultural dimensions’ in sustainable development is not a panacea for all our problems. It is only a small but important part of the formula, which is all too often implied but not treated vigorously or seriously. It is a part of the process of development as well as the objective of that development. We need economic development in order to live. We need to consider the environment in order to be able to hand over with a clear conscience to future generations. We need to consider other social, political and intellectual dimensions in order to enhance our lifestyles and standards of living. We need to consider culture not only to achieve our objectives but also to achieve a quality of life befitting the integrity of each and all of us as human beings who are also Pacific islanders, as well as Fijians, Samoans, Nauruans and so on.
As the Director-General of UNESCO stated that we must be able to assimilate the best of the past in order to be able to better share the future with the help of a judicious application of knowledge. Cultural development is an instrument and an objective of sustainable development.