The successive drafts of the plan have addressed culture essentially as a technical issue to be addressed through initiatives proposed under two of the four areas of economic growth, sustainable development, good governance and security. In the first draft, written in December 2004, culture appeared only as a component of sustainable development (in the medium-term benefit column) under the enigmatic description: ‘Development of a regional plan to maintain and strengthen Pacific cultural identity through regional agencies, including relevant studies.’ The draft gave no place to culture in the other priority areas. It was not mentioned as an asset either under economic growth or security. Under the good governance goal, reference to culture was made only indirectly in the proposed ‘development of a regional approach to, and training in alternative dispute/conflict resolution as a cost effective alternative to the adversarial system’.

The plan identifies the strategic objective ‘Recognise and protect cultural values, identities and traditional knowledge’ under the sustainable development goal and proposes two specific initiatives for the first three years (2006–08): 1) ‘Develop a strategy to maintain and strengthen Pacific cultural identity’ (which appears under the ‘agree in principle’ category), and 2) ‘Create an institution to advocate for and protect traditional knowledge and intellectual property rights’ (under the ‘further analysis’ category). It also lists the following initiative under the good governance goal: ‘Enhance governance mechanisms, including in resource management, and in the harmonization of traditional and modern values and structures.’ This is listed in the implementation phase and the activity consists of ‘support [for] the close coordination of existing initiatives including the USP’s Pacific Institute of Advanced Studies in Development and Governance’ (Final Draft 2005: 17).

According to an Issues Paper on ‘Culture and the Pacific Plan’ drafted by the Pacific Plan Office at the Forum Secretariat, culture is also earmarked to be considered in other plan initiatives, including in the assessment of the impacts of PACER and Free Trade Agreements for the region; support for the private sector; formulation and implementation of National Sustainable Development Strategies; upgrading of statistical information systems and databases; and implementation of a regional tourism marketing and investment plan.

Although this might appear to address the ‘issue’ of culture, it does not answer the question of formulating a ‘practical definition of a Pacific regional approach’. The plan does not say what a Pacific regional approach is; it merely suggests what different forms of regionalism are possible (cooperation, regional provision of public goods and services and integration) and presents a list of initiatives to achieve further integration. In other words, it does not say anything about what is ‘Pacific’ about the plan other than its geographic focus.