Background Paper

For the Special Event of the 69th Session of the

United Nations General Assembly Second Committee

E-Government for Promoting

Sustainable Development
in Small Island Developing States
(SIDS)

Young Bum Lee, Ph.D.

Disclaimer: The information and views set out in this publication are those of
the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of UNDESA and
it does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this study. Neither
UNDESA nor any person acting on UNDESA's behalf may be held responsible
for the use which may be made of the information contained therein.
Acknowledgment

I would like to express my sincere gratitude to the people who contributed to this
research by providing their time and attention. I am especially grateful to Mr.
Byungyoul JUNG at Konkuk University in Korea, and Dr. Ador TORNEO at De La
Salle University in the Philippines, for their help in shaping this report. I also want to
thank Professor Anand DESAI and Mr. Michael GEORGE at The Ohio State
University, USA, for their helpful advice and criticism.

During the field trips to Fiji and Timor-Leste, I could hear vivid voices on the current
challenges that SIDS face from the interviewees across the public and private sectors.
I would like to thank the interviewees in Fiji: Ms. Linda KAUA, Economic Reform
Officer, Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat, Ms. Litiana BAINIMARMA, Senior Admin.
Officer, Fiji National Disaster Management Office, Mr. Craig SMITH, Head of
Business Solutions, Digicel Fiji, Mr. Nisa ALI, Manager, Fiji ITCS, Government Data
Center, Mr. Timothy WILCOX, Coordinator, UNISDR Sub-Regional Office (Pacific).

Thanks are also due to the interviewees in Timor-Leste: Mr. Eugenio Joao Amado de
Maria SOARES, Director-General, Ministry of Social Solidarity (MSS), Mr. Francisco
F. M. Do ROSÁRIO, Director, National Directorate of Disaster Management of MSS,
Ms. Victoria Kianpour ATABAKI, Chief Technical Advisor of Strengthening Disaster
Risk Management, UNDP, Mr. Flávio Cardoso NEVES, Vice-Minister, Ministry of
Transport and Communications (MTC), Ms. Elizabeth BAPTISTA, National Advisor,
Ministry of State and Presidency of the Council of Ministers (MSPCM), Mr. David
MONTALRAO, IT staff, Ministry of Finance (MoF), Ms. Jinjoo HYUN, KOICA
Timor-Leste Representative, Korea International Cooperation Agency, Ms. Soonae
YANG, KOICA Adviser at MSPCM, Korea International Cooperation Agency, Mr.
Manuel Carceres da COSTA, Institutional Relations Director, Timor Telecom, and Mr.
GERARDO, Engineering Operations Director, Timor Telecom.

To seek for an explanation on the divergent success of e-government development

among SIDS, we conducted a survey and the survey respondents well deserve my
sincere thanks for their valuable inputs: Dr. Zakareya Ahmed Al-Khajah (Bahrain),
Mr. Taoufiki Mbae (Comoros), Mr. Nisar ALI (Fiji), Mr. Teakai B. TUNE (Kiribati), Mr.
Mohamed SHAREEF (Maldives), Mr. Geoffrey HARRIS (Nauru), Mr. Tua'imalo
Asamu AH SAM (Samoa), Mr. Orland de Assuncion FERNANDES (Sao Tome &
Principe), Ms. Lanka DORBY (Seychelles), Mr. Chan Cheow HOE (Singapore), Ms.

ii
Elizabeth BAPTISTA (Timor-Leste), Mr. Paula Pouvalu MA'U (Tonga), Mr. Atufenua
MAUI (Tuvalu), Mr. Fred SAMUEL (Vanuatu).

This report benefited from the wise and wonderful comments on my earlier
presentation at the 2014 UN Public Service Forum: Mr. Jonas RABINOVITCH, Senior
Advisor, EGB/DPADM, Mr. Mohamed SHAREEF, Chief Information Officer,
National Center for Information Technology, Maldives, Mr. Nisar ALI, Manager,
Information Technology and Computing Services (ITCS), Ministry of Finance, Fiji,
Ms. Lanka DORBY, Director General, Information Technology, Technology
Department, Seychelles, Mr. Andre GRIFFITH, e-government Advisor, Barbados,
Caribbean Center for Development Administration (CARICAD), and others at the
“SIDS table”.

Finally, this year is the International Year of Small Island Developing States
designated by the UN, and it was a great opportunity and an excellent experience for
me to extend my research into the sustainable development issues in SIDS. I want to
thank UNPOG and Director LIM, Jae-hong for providing me with the opportunity to
conduct this research. Mr. Keping YAO and Ms. Hyunjung KIM at UNPOG have
been excellent advisors and, at the same time, supporters of the research that I have
ever had. I owed them much through the whole research process: conducting a
survey, collecting data, and having feedback on the manuscript.

- Young Bum Lee

iii
Table of Contents
List of Figures .................................................................................................................. ⅶ
List of Tables.................................................................................................................... ⅸ
Abbreviations and Acronyms ......................................................................................... xi
Executive Summary........................................................................................................ xiv
1. Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background and Context.......................................................................................... 1
1.1.1 Why do SIDS matter? ......................................................................................... 1
1.1.2 The international commitment for sustainable development in SIDS ........... 3
1.1.3 Importance of e-government in addressing multiple challenges in SIDS ..... 6
1.2 Overview of Research ............................................................................................. 12
1.2.1 Objectives .......................................................................................................... 12
1.2.2 Target Countries ............................................................................................... 12
1.2.3 Methodology..................................................................................................... 13
1.2.4 Conceptual modeling ....................................................................................... 13
2. Sustainable Development in SIDS ........................................................................... 23
2.1 Economic Trends and Challenges ......................................................................... 23
2.1.1 Economic Trends .............................................................................................. 23
2.1.2 Economic Development Challenges ............................................................... 38
2.2 Social Trends and Challenges ................................................................................ 32
2.2.1 Social Trends ..................................................................................................... 32
2.2.2 Social Development Challenges ...................................................................... 38
2.3 Trends and Challenges of Environment and Disaster Management.................. 43
2.3.1 Coastal and Marine Resources ........................................................................ 43
2.3.2 Rising Sea Levels .............................................................................................. 43
2.3.3 Disaster Risks .................................................................................................... 45
2.3.4 Green House Gas Emissions and Clean Energy ............................................ 53
iv
 2.3.5 Waste Management .......................................................................................... 53
2.3.6 Biodiversity Preservation ................................................................................ 53
2.4 Governance Trends and Challenges...................................................................... 54
3. E-government for Sustainable Development in SIDS ........................................... 59
3.1 Regional Trends of E-government in SIDS ........................................................... 59
3.1.1 E-government Development Index (EGDI) ................................................... 59
3.1.2 E-Participation Index (EPI) .............................................................................. 71
3.2 E-government Policy and Strategies in SIDS ........................................................ 73
3.2.1 General Trends on ICT and E-government Policy and Strategies in SIDS .. 73
3.2.2 ICT and E-government Policy in Individual Countries ................................ 77
3.3 Major Barriers of E-government Development in SIDS .................................... 108
3.3.1 Weak or Limited ICT Infrastructure ............................................................. 108
3.3.2 Expensive Rates Due to High Investment Costs and Monopolies ............. 108
3.3.3 Lack of Skilled ICT Professionals .................................................................. 109
3.3.4 Lack of Political Commitment of the Top Level Politicians ....................... 109
3.3.5 Insufficient E-government Training among Public Employees ................. 110
4. Empirical Analyses.................................................................................................... 111
4.1 Statistical Analysis of the Relationship between E-government and Sustainable
Development ............................................................................................................... 111
4.1.1 Correlation Analysis ...................................................................................... 111
4.1.2 Regression Analysis ....................................................................................... 114
4.1.3 Mediation Effect Analysis.............................................................................. 119
4.2 Comparative Analysis among SIDS .................................................................... 120
4.2.1 Country Grouping .......................................................................................... 120
4.2.2 Standards for the Comparison ...................................................................... 125
4.2.3 Comparative Analysis: What accounts for the divergent success of
e-government development among the two groups? .......................................... 131
4.3 Key Findings.......................................................................................................... 135
v
 4.3.1 Key Findings from Regression Analysis ...................................................... 135
4.3.2 Key Findings from Comparative Analysis................................................... 136
5. Way forward: Policy Recommendations ................................................................ 137
5.1 Continuous Political Commitment to E-government Development .............. 137
5.2 The Importance of the Seven Key Success Factors ........................................... 139
5.3 ICT/E-government Infrastructures for Sustainable Development .................. 142
5.4 International Cooperation and SIDS Platform of E-government Development
...................................................................................................................................... 143
6. References .................................................................................................................. 147
Annex A. Individual Country Profiles of Pacific & AIMS SIDS ............................ 153
Annex B. Survey Questionnaire .................................................................................. 183
Annex C. Field Trip Report: Fiji and Timor-Leste .................................................... 189

vi
List of Figures
<Figure 1.1> The Goal of e-government ........................................................................... 7

<Figure 1.2> Importance of e-government for SIDS ...................................................... 12

<Figure 1.3> Research Framework .................................................................................. 13

<Figure 1.4> Measures on E-government Development ............................................... 15

<Figure 1.5> Measures on Good Governance ................................................................ 16

<Figure 1.6> Measures on Economic & Social Development........................................ 17

<Figure 1.7.1> Measures on Environment Management .............................................. 19

<Figure 1.7.2> Measures on Natural Disaster Management ......................................... 20

<Figure 1.8> Measures on Control Variables ................................................................. 21

<Figure 2.1> GDP per capita ............................................................................................ 25

<Figure 2.2> Inflation Rate (GDP deflator)..................................................................... 25

<Figure 2.3> Net ODA received per capita..................................................................... 27

<Figure 2.4> Imports of goods and services (% of GDP) .............................................. 27

<Figure 2.5> Top tourism destinations relative to population (2007) .......................... 30

<Figure 2.6> Fuel imports (percent of merchandise imports) ...................................... 31

<Figure 2.7> Urban population ratio .............................................................................. 34

<Figure 2.8> Age distribution .......................................................................................... 35

<Figure 2.9> Life expectancy at birth .............................................................................. 37

<Figure 2.10> Social indicators on governance .............................................................. 38

<Figure 2.11> Children under 5 mortality rate per 1,000 live birth .............................. 40

<Figure 2.12> Proportion of population using an improved drinking water source . 41

<Figure 2.13> Proportion of population using an improved sanitation facility.......... 42

<Figure 2.14> Countries with largest population shares in the Low Elevation Coastal
Zone (LECZ) ..................................................................................................................... 44
vii
<Figure 2.15> Top 10 countries in terms of AAL (left) and probable maximum loss
(right) from earthquake as a percentage of urban produced capital ........................... 46

<Figure 2.16> Top 10 countries with highest AAL (left) and PML (right) from cyclonic
winds ................................................................................................................................. 47

<Figure 2.17> Absolute and relative urban produced capital (top) and population
(bottom) exposed to tsunamis in SIDS ........................................................................... 48

<Figure 2.18> Capital accumulation in Samoa, Saint Lucia and Grenada from 1970 to
2006, in relative terms ...................................................................................................... 51

<Figure 2.19> Institutional capacity and transparency of government sector ............ 55

<Figure 2.20> Government effectiveness ........................................................................ 55

<Figure 2.21> Regulatory quality .................................................................................... 56

<Figure 2.22> Control of corruption ............................................................................... 57

<Figure 3.1> Regional comparison of EGDI ................................................................... 59

<Figure 3.2> ICT goods imports (% total goods imports) ............................................. 65

<Figure 3.3> Bahrain e-government Authority Organizational Chart ......................... 78

<Figure 3.4> Mauritius’ e-government services of the e-government strategy 2013-

2017 .................................................................................................................................... 90

<Figure 4.1> Scatter plot of EGDI and GDP per capita ............................................... 122

<Figure 4.4> Scatter plot of EGDI and the number of good performances in good
governance and sustainable development ................................................................... 125

<Figure 4.3> SWIFT Framework for E-governance Development ............................. 126

<Figure 4.4> Success factors and activity priority flow chart of e-government project
......................................................................................................................................... 130

<Figure 5.1> Seven key success factors for e-government development ................... 140

<Figure 5.2> An example of e-government infrastructures and systems for SIDS ... 143

viii
List of Tables
<Table 2.1> Income group ................................................................................................ 23

<Table 2.2> Average GDP................................................................................................. 24

<Table 2.3> Real GDP growth .......................................................................................... 26

<Table 2.4> Ease of doing business (best and worst results)......................................... 29

<Table 2.5> SIDS with the highest share of population living under $1.25 a day ....... 30

<Table 2.6> Indicators on population in 2012................................................................. 32

<Table 2.7> Population density........................................................................................ 33

<Table 2.8> Population growth (annual %) .................................................................... 35

<Table 2.9> Age dependency ratio as of 2012 ................................................................. 36

<Table 2.10> Top ten countries in the Asia Pacific region based on absolute and
relative physical exposure to storms and impact on GDP (between 1998 and 2009) . 45

<Table 2.11> PML from one-in-250 year earthquakes and cyclones winds damage as a
percentage of gross fixed capital formation ................................................................... 49

<Table 2.12> AAL from earthquakes compared with gross fixed capital formation .. 49

<Table 2.13> AAL from cyclonic winds compared with gross fixed capital formation
........................................................................................................................................... 50

<Table 2.14> World Risk Index of SIDS in the Pacific and AIMS.................................. 52

<Table 2.15> Institutional capacity and government transparency as of 2012 ............ 57

<Table 3.1> EGDI of the Pacific and AIMS SIDS ............................................................ 61

<Table 3.2> HCI of the Pacific and AIMS SIDS .............................................................. 62

<Table 3.3> Subscriptions and users of major ICT infrastructures ............................... 63

<Table 3.4> Recent status of TII in the Pacific and AIMS SIDS ..................................... 66

<Table 3.5> TII of the Pacific and AIMS SIDS ................................................................. 67

<Table 3.6> Online Service Index and its Components ................................................. 69

ix
<Table 3.7> OSI of the Pacific and AIMS SIDS ............................................................... 70

<Table 3.8> EPI of the Pacific and AIMS SIDS ................................................................ 72

<Table 3.9> Bahrain’s e-government initiatives for sustainable development ............ 80

<Table 4.1> Correlation between E-government development and Good governance

......................................................................................................................................... 111

<Table 4.2> Correlation between Good governance and Economic & Social
development and Environment & Disaster Management .......................................... 112

<Table 4.3> Correlation between E-government development and Economic & Social
development and Environment & Disaster Management .......................................... 113

<Table 4.4> Effects of E-government development on Good governance ................. 116

<Table 4.5> Effects of Good governance on Economic & Social development and
Environment & Disaster Management ......................................................................... 117

<Table 4.6> Effects of E-government development on Economic & Social

development and Environment & Disaster Management .......................................... 108

<Table 4.7> Mediation effects of Good governance on Sustainable development .... 119

<Table 4.8> Classification of the Pacific and AIMS SIDS by the EGDI ....................... 121

<Table 4.9> EGDI and the performances in good governance and sustainable
development ................................................................................................................... 123

<Table 4.10> Criteria and the way of scoring ............................................................... 132

<Table 4.11> Survey result of individual countries ..................................................... 134

<Table 4.12> Comparison between Group A and B ..................................................... 135

<Table 5.1> ODA for SIDS from the ADB from 2000 to 2012 ...................................... 144

x
Abbreviations and Acronyms
AAL Annual Average Losses
ADB Asian Development Bank
ADSL Asymmetric Digital Subscriber Line
AIMS Africa, Indian Ocean, Mediterranean, and South China Sea
ARTEL Autoridade Reguladora de Telecomunicaҫões
BLIS Business Licensing System
BPO Business Process Outsourcing
BPOA Barbados Programme of Action for the Sustainable Development of
Small Island Developing States
CIB Central Informatics Bureau
CIESIN Center for International Earth Science Information Network
CIISI Inter-Ministerial Commission for Innovation and Information Society
CIO Chief Information Officer
CSME Caribbean Single Market Economy
CTO Chief Technology Officer
DCs Data Centres
DRR Disaster Risk Reduction
EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone
EGAP Electronic Government Action Plan
EGDI E-government Development Index
EIU Economist Intelligence Unit
EMIS Education Management Information System
EPI E-Participation Index
FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
FGLS Feasible Generalized Least Squares
G2B Government-to-Business
G2C Government-to-Citizen
G2G Government-to-Government
GBN Government Broadband Network
GDP Gross Domestic Product
GNI Gross National Income
GNM Government Network of Maldives
GSM Global System for Mobile Communications
xi
HCI Human Capital Index
HF High Frequency
ICB4PAC ITU-EC Joint Project for Capacity Building and ICT Policy, Regulatory
and Legislative Frameworks Support for Pacific Island Countries
ICCC Independent Consumer and Competition Commission
ICT Information and Communications Technology
IDI ICT Development Index
IIMS Integrated Information Management Systems
IMD International Institute for Management Development
ISP Internet Service Provider
ISSP Information Society Strategic Program
ITU International Telecommunication Union
JICA Japan International Cooperation Agency
LAN Local Area Network
LDC Least Developed Countries
LECZ Low Elevation Coastal Zone
MCIT Ministry of Communications and Information Technology
MDGs Millennium Development Goals
MICT Ministry of Information and Communication Technology
MINTA Marshall Islands National Telecommunications Authority
MSI Mauritius Strategy for the Further Implementation of the BPOA
NAPAs National Adaptation Programs of Action
NCDs Non-Communicable Diseases
NCIT National Centre for Information Technology
NCRA National Coalition for Rural Advancement
NICTA National Information Communication and Technology Act
NICTP National ICT Policy
NICTSP National ICT Strategic Plans
NOSi Núcleo Operacional para a Sociedade de Informação
(Operational Nucleus for the Information Society)
NPM New Public Management
NSSD National Strategy for Sustainable Development
ODA Official Development Assistance
OGCIO Office of the Government Chief Information Officer
OSI Online Service Index
xii
PACRIS Pacific Rural Internet Connectivity System
PANGTEL Papua New Guinea Telecommunications Authority
PDN Pacific Disaster Net
PICTA Pacific Island Countries Trade Agreement
PICTs Pacific Island Countries and Territories
PML Probable Maximum Losses
PNCC Palau National Communications Corporation
PSTN Public Switched Telephone Network
RAFE Reforma da Administração Financiera do Estado
(Public Finance Management Reform Group)
SCICT Supreme Committee for Information and Communication Technology
SDP Strategic Development Plan
SIDS Small Island Developing States
SOE State-Owned Enterprise
SPC Secretariat of the Pacific Community
TCSI Telecommunication Commission of the Solomon Islands
TII Telecommunication Infrastructure Index
TISIP Tuvalu Infrastructure Strategy and Investment Plan
TRR Telecommunications and Radiocommunications Regulator
UAS Universal Access Scheme
UN United Nations
UNFCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
UNPOG United Nations Project Office on Governance
UNU-EHS UN University Institute for Environment and Human Security
WGI Worldwide Governance Indicators
WSSD World Summit on Sustainable Development
YCELP Yale Center for Environmental Law & Policy

xiii
Executive Summary

The 2014 UN conference on Small Island Developing States reaffirmed the

international determination and commitment to sustainable development in SIDS
embodied in the Declaration of Barbados and the Programme of Action for the
Sustainable Development of Small Island Developing States (BPOA) in 1994, the
Mauritius Strategy for the further Implementation of the BPOA (MSI) in 2005, and
the UN Conference on Sustainable Development in 2012. However, Small Island
Developing States (SIDS) are still facing several sustainable development challenges,
expressed in the Samoa Pathway as “their unique and particular vulnerabilities”, and
“they remain constrained in meeting their goals in all three dimensions of sustainable
development”. These challenges are not limited to economic development; addressing
social development and environmental challenges, such as the protection of the
environment, climate change, and natural disasters, is also crucial for sustainable
development.

This report is intended to improve understanding of the sustainable development

challenges faced by SIDS. Specifically, the report is the first empirical analysis to
elucidate how information and communications technology (ICT) and e-government
can be instrumental in addressing sustainable development challenges, particularly
those in the Pacific and the Africa, Indian Ocean, Mediterranean and South China
Sea (AIMS). The purpose of this report is twofold. One is to examine the effects of
e-government development on good governance and sustainable development in
SIDS. The other is to identify the determinants of successful e-government
development among SIDS.

Theories suggest that e-government is a useful instrument for enhancing

government transparency, effectiveness, efficiency, democracy, and economic growth.
E-government and ICT in general offer much potential in addressing many of the
development challenges that SIDS face. Indeed, the use of ICT-based systems has the
potential to help SIDS overcome their geographic isolation as well as social, political,
cultural, environmental, and economic development hurdles. Investment in
ICT/e-government capacity and infrastructure can thus provide a powerful lever to
help address a broad array of the development challenges faced by SIDS.

At the social level, ICT-based systems can improve access to education and health
services. For example, students and professionals who may have difficulties
physically accessing education facilities may be able to benefit from tele-education
and tele-training. Telemedicine systems can help provide citizens and communities
xiv
with easier and faster access to medical information, advice and other health services.
This type of access can be especially useful in emergencies.

At the political level, democratic processes can be improved by making government

information and services more accessible, especially to residents in remote islands.
Easier contact with public officials and online platforms for discussions can improve
public participation. Public services including tax-filing, business registration and
requests for official documents can be facilitated by such systems. Electronic voting
systems can also improve electoral integrity and citizen engagement.

At the economic level, ICT-based systems can contribute to island economies in a

variety of ways. Improved speed and convenience of public services such as tax-
filing, business registration, and other regulatory services will lower barriers to entry.
Public ICT-based systems play an important role in advancing the tourism industry,
facilitating critical market-driven connections and information-gathering, and
providing transportation infrastructure that makes domestic logistics operations
more efficient and competitive. They can also help improve agriculture by linking
farmers to professional advice, markets, product databases, and distribution
channels, among others. It can also help those living in island communities access
modern methods of finance and banking. E-government/ICT-based systems provide
important support for growth over a broad range of industries, including tourism,
agriculture, and financial services.

At the environmental level, ICT-based systems can reduce the need for
transportation and movement, thus aiding in the conservation of energy and
reducing negative impacts on the environment. ICT-based systems also aid in
disaster risk reduction and management by providing a platform for sharing and
timely dissemination of information as well as disaster planning, response, and
recovery.

With these potential applications in mind, this report also provides a statistical
examination of the relationship between e-government development and sustainable
development of the 22 SIDS in the Pacific and AIMS regions. This research considers
the key areas of sustainable development, namely economic development, social
development, and the management of the environment and of natural disasters.
Moreover, this research examines the mediating effects of good governance
(government transparency, government effectiveness, and regulatory quality)
between e-government development and sustainable development. The result of the
empirical analysis reveals that e-government development has statistically
significant positive influences on the management of the environment and natural

xv
disasters as well as on economic and social development, either directly or via good
governance.

Despite its potential, many SIDS show low levels of e-government development
compared to the rest of the world and to other small countries. This might be
partially due to lack of human and financial resources, political commitment, poor or
narrow e-government strategy, among other factors. Some SIDS have relatively
higher levels of e-government development and higher performance in terms of
good governance, economy, social development, the protection of environment, and
mitigation of the loss and damage from natural disasters. Many others have low
levels of e-government development with poor performance in the aforementioned
areas.

In order to identify the cause of these differences among SIDS, we conducted a

comparative analysis of the Pacific and AIMS SIDS, based on a review of the
literature and a survey conducted with the help from the United Nations Project
Office on Governance (UNPOG). The literature review helped identify several
factors that contribute to effective deployment of ICT and e-government practices for
sustainable development. Seven key factors were identified: 1) Existence and type of
a national e-government policy or strategy, 2) existence of a coordinating
organization for e-government development, 3) political commitment, 4) legal
framework for ICT and e-government development, 5) financial feasibility, 6) linkage
between e-government and government reform, and 7) e-awareness policy such as
promotion and training programmes for public and private sector employees,
citizens, and students.

These seven success factors can be used to identify high-performers. Findings from
the questionnaire survey show that the more standards a country meets in
developing e-government, the higher its performance in economic and social
development and management of the environment and of natural disaster. Bigger
gaps between high- and low-performers lie in the existence of a national
e-government strategy and a legal framework for e-government development, in
financial feasibility, and in the existence of e-awareness programmes, among others.

In conclusion, the analysis yields the following policy recommendations:

First, this study suggests that continuous political commitment is a necessary

condition for development of e-government, and for sustainable development in
SIDS. It argues that successful e-government development requires e-government
champions at the highest levels, and that there is reason to ground continuous
commitment in the firm conviction that e-government is an effective and efficient

xvi
instrument for sustainable development. Not only does this study argue for the
importance of e-government in SIDS from a theoretical point of view, but it also
shows empirically that e-government development has statistically significant and
positive effects on good governance and sustainable development of SIDS. Based on
this finding, this report emphasizes the importance of continuous political
commitment for the successful implementation of e-government projects in SIDS.

Second, this study has found that high-performers in terms of sustainable

development show higher scores on all seven key success factors of e-government
development. Based on this finding, the study strongly recommends that SIDS
actively pursue a comprehensive, integrated e-government development strategy
incorporating the seven key success factors rather than rely on partial planning
and/or implementation of individual e-government projects.

The first step of a comprehensive strategy would be to secure political commitment.

Political commitment of top political leaders is necessary for overcoming the
reluctance to invest money in a policy whose benefits only accrue in the long term,
and which cannot be fully implemented by any single ministry.

The second step is the establishment of a legal framework for ICT and e-government,
and of a coordinating agency with scope over the entire government. Many private
companies as well as international investors often hesitate to invest in developing
countries because there is no legally binding assurance of the security of their
investment. Thus, the legal framework of e-government development will support
the national e-government policy while simultaneously serving as a trigger for
investment in the ICT and e-government fields in SIDS.

The third step is to secure a sufficient budget to implement e-government projects.

The costs associated with ICT infrastructure would be burdensome for many SIDS.
This study recommends that SIDS pursue a variety of innovative cost-sharing
mechanisms, including public-private partnerships and official development
assistance funding from international partnerships. Also, a rearrangement of the tax
system, enhanced by e-government projects, would benefit SIDS in collecting more
taxes to finance governmental projects.

The fourth step is the establishment of a national e-government policy that guides
the whole process of prioritizing and timing e-government projects. Because of the
long-term cost-benefit structure of e-government investments and short-sighted
political pressures, e-government is likely to be de-prioritized unless it is
safeguarded by a firm national e-government policy. This report also suggests the
government should systematically link e-government development with broader

xvii
government reform and make a deliberate effort to promote awareness of the
benefits of ICT and e-government among public employees and the general public.

Fifth, this research suggests that SIDS focus their efforts for e-government
development on the installation of ICT/e-government infrastructure first, because of
the profound effects of ICT infrastructure on good governance and sustainable
development. While each individual state may have a different demand for ICT
infrastructure, as essential e-government infrastructures this study suggests
investments in the following infrastructure areas as essential for e-government:
Enterprise architecture, a broadband communication network, government data
repositories, diffusion of PCs and Internet, and Public Key Infrastructure.

Finally, we recommend that SIDS actively develop international partnerships and

cooperation so that they can benefit from the resources, expertise, and experiences of
more developed e-government countries and overcome their current human
resource, financial, and technical limitations. Also, we suggest establishing the SIDS
platform for e-government development. Currently, the UN-OHRLLS, AOSIS, APF,
and other agencies are the main advocates for the sustainable development of SIDS,
encompassing challenging issues such as sea-level rise, climate change, natural
disaster, and economic and social development. However, there is no strong and
concrete advocate for e-government development as an effective means of
addressing those challenges. This study confirms that e-government can be a
powerful and concrete tool for good governance and sustainable development for
SIDS. A SIDS platform for e-government development will serve as an open space in
promoting exchange of experiences, ideas and best practices concerning
e-government in order to contribute to sustainable development of SIDS.

xviii
1. Introduction

1.1 Background and Context

1.1.1 Why do SIDS matter?

The General Assembly of the United Nations (UN) designated 2014 as the
International Year of Small Island Developing States (SIDS), “to share the many reasons
why the global family of nations can and must act to support, protect, preserve and ensure
the sustainable development of SIDS”.1 There are currently 52 Small Island Developing
States (SIDS) in three geographic regions: the Caribbean, the Pacific, and the Africa,
Indian Ocean, and South China Sea region. These are diverse regions with varying
land sizes, populations, cultures, and unique challenges for sustainable development.

SIDS are some of the countries where the perspectives for sustainable development
are most severely threatened, “in view of their unique and particular vulnerabilities and
that they remain constrained in meeting their goals in all three dimensions of sustainable
development.”2 The remoteness and insularity of SIDS, susceptibility to natural and
environmental disasters such as climate change and sea-level rise, limited
institutional capacities, the fragile ecologies, and small populations and resource
bases make SIDS inherently vulnerable with respect to sustainable development. For
instance, the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon addressed the climate change
challenge that SIDS are facing in a post on LinkedIn, “a 1-metre rise would make the
Maldives disappear underwater completely, while a 50-centimetre sea rise will result in
Grenada losing 60 per cent of its beaches.”3

At the third International Conference on SIDS held in Apia, Samoa, from 1 to 4

1 Speech by Mr. John Ashe, the 68th UN General Assembly President, in the launching ceremony of
the International Year of SIDS on Monday 24 February 2014, at UN Headquarters in New York.

2 Excerpt from the outcome document of the third international conference on SIDS, SIDS
Accelerated Modalities of Action – Samoa Pathway.

3 https://www.linkedin.com/today/post/article/20140304191246-204317422-what-we-can-all-learn-
from-small-islands; published 4 March 2014, last accessed 6 November 2014.

1
September 2014, the importance of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights4 was
reaffirmed, including the right to development, the right to an adequate standard of
living, the right to food, the rule of law, gender equality, women’s empowerment,
reducing inequalities, and the overall commitment to just and democratic societies
for development. The outcome document of said conference, the Samoa Pathway5,
also reaffirmed the commitments made at United Nations conferences and summits
on sustainable development in general6 and for SIDS more specifically7. The average
share of the population living on under USD 1.25 a day is 26.5% in SIDS, and nearly
30% of the total population in SIDS live at altitudes of 5 meters above sea level or less
(UN DESA, 2014a). To meet the goals embodied in many international commitments
including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the MDGs, continuous
attention to SIDS and their particular challenges is called for.

The challenges that SIDS are faced with are not exclusively SIDS-specific problems.
For example, the dangerous consequences of climate change affect not only SIDS but
also the geological, biological, and ecological systems of the world at large. Many
scholars opine that the World Health Organization’s estimate of 160,000 deaths
directly attributable to climate change since 1950 is very conservative (McMichae,
Woodruff, and Hales, 2006). SIDS themselves have made innovative efforts and
contributions in mitigating climate change and its effects, protecting the world’s
oceans and biodiversity, and coping with their unique challenges. However,
overcoming these challenges requires international cooperation and partnerships as
well as the leadership and resilience of all SID States. Most challenges that SIDS face

4 UN General Assembly resolution 217A(III).

5 Small Island Developing States Accelerated Modalities of Action (Samoa Pathway), cf.
http://undocs.org/A/CONF.223/3 , last accessed 6 November 2014.

6 These include the United Nations Millennium Declaration, the 2005 World Summit Outcome, the
Monterrey Consensus of the International Conference on Financing for Development, the Doha
Declaration on Financing for Development: outcome document of the Follow-up International
Conference on Financing for Development to Review the Implementation of the Monterrey
Consensus, the outcome document of the high-level plenary meeting of the General Assembly on the
Millennium Development Goals, the Programme of Action of the International Conference on
Population and Development, the key actions for the further implementation of the Programme of
Action of the International Conference on Population and Development and the Beijing Declaration
and Platform for Action.

7 The international commitment on sustainable development for SIDS will be introduced in detail in
the following section.

2
today will confront us tomorrow, requiring our immediate action.

International cooperation and partnerships will assist SIDS in coping with the
challenges, and thus in advancing the sustainable development of SIDS in a more
efficient and effective way.

1.1.2 The international commitment for sustainable development in SIDS

The United Nations (UN) has shown its continuous commitments to the sustainable
development of SIDS. The UN Conference on Environment and Development
(UNCED), also known as the Earth Summit, held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil in 1992,
first aroused international interest in SIDS and in the special challenges that SIDS are
facing. The conference adopted Agenda 21 – the programme of action for sustainable
development, and Chapter 17 of Agenda 21 pays special attention to the unfavorable
conditions of SIDS.

Agenda 21: 17.123. Small island developing States, and islands supporting small
communities are a special case both for environment and development. They are
ecologically fragile and vulnerable. Their small size, limited resources, geographic
dispersion and isolation from markets, place them at a disadvantage economically
and prevent economies of scale.

Agenda 21 requested a global conference on the sustainable development of SIDS,

and the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) was
established by the UN General Assembly in December 1992 to ensure effective
follow-up to UNCED.

Following the Earth Summit’s determination, the first UN Global Conference on the
Sustainable Development of SIDS was held in Barbados from 25 April to 6 May 1994.
The conference acknowledged the principles and commitments of the Earth Summit
and adopted the Declaration of Barbados and the Programme of Action for the
Sustainable Development of Small Island Developing States (BPOA). BPOA
identifies priority areas and lays out specific strategies at national, regional and
international levels over the short, medium, and long terms to facilitate sustainable
development of SIDS. The priority areas confirmed in the BPOA are climate change
and sea- level rise, natural and environmental disasters, management of wastes,
coastal and marine resources, freshwater resources, land resources, energy resources,
tourism resources, biodiversity resources, national institutions and administrative
capacity, regional institutions and technical cooperation, transport and
communication, science and technology, and human resource development.
3
A comprehensive review on the implementation of the BPOA was conducted at the
22nd Special Session of the UN General Assembly in September 1999. The Special
Session adopted a review document, “State of Progress and Initiatives for the Future
Implementation of the Programme of Action for the Sustainable Development of
SIDS”, and identified the following six priority areas requiring urgent action:

Climate change: adapting to climate change and rising sea levels, which could
submerge some low-lying island nations;

Natural and environmental disasters and climate variability: improving

preparedness for and recovery from natural and environmental disasters;

Freshwater resources: preventing worsening shortages of freshwater as demand

grows;

Coastal and marine resources: protecting coastal ecosystems and coral reefs from
pollution and over-fishing;

Energy: developing solar and renewable energy to lessen dependence on

expensive imported oil;

Tourism: managing tourism growth to protect the environment and cultural

integrity.

The document also made recommendations on means of implementation such as the

following: sustainable development strategies; capacity building; resource
mobilization and finance; globalization and trade liberalization; transfer of
environmentally sound technology; a vulnerability index; information management
through strengthening the SIDS Network; and international cooperation and
partnership.

In September 2002, the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD)

convened in Johannesburg, South Africa, reaffirmed the resolutions in Agenda 21,
the BPOA, and the decisions adopted at the 22nd Special Session of the UN General
Assembly. The WSSD adopted the Johannesburg Declaration on Sustainable
Development and recommended to the General Assembly that it endorse the
Johannesburg Declaration on Sustainable Development as adopted by the Summit.
In Article 24 of the Johannesburg Declaration and Chapter VII of the accompanying
Plan of Implementation, the WSSD paid special attention to sustainable development
of SIDS, requesting to support the availability of adequate, affordable, and
environmentally sound energy services for sustainable development of SIDS,
support for SIDS to develop capacity, and to “undertake a full and comprehensive review
of the implementation of the [BPOA] in 2004, in accordance with the provisions set forth in
4
General Assembly resolution S-22/2, and in this context request[ed] the General Assembly at
its fifty-seventh session to consider convening an international meeting on the sustainable
development of small island developing States.”8

According to General Assembly Resolution A/57/262 following up on the WSSD, a

10-year comprehensive review of the BPOA was to be held in Mauritius in January
2005. After reviewing the progress and new challenges on the implementation of the
BPOA, the Mauritius Strategy for the further Implementation of the BPOA (MSI) was
adopted. The convention recognized the limited financial resources as a major
hurdle in implementing the BPOA. The MSI also presented actions and strategies in
19 priority areas, based on the 14 thematic areas laid out in the BPOA. New
additional thematic areas in the MSI include graduation from least developed
country status, trade, sustainable production and consumption, health, knowledge
management, and culture. Also, in line with the Millennium Development Goals
(MDGs), the MSI framework puts measures in place to build resilience in SIDS.

A 5-year review of the MSI was conducted during the high-level segment of the 65th
Session of the UN General Assembly in September 2010, pursuant to UN General
Assembly Resolutions 63/213 and 64/199. For the first time, SIDS member states were
requested to submit National Assessment Reports, which review the progress and
challenges in implementing the MSI actions and strategies. Following the national
assessments, three regional meetings (Pacific, Caribbean, and AIMS) and an inter-
regional meeting were held before delivering a review at the UN 65th General
Assembly. The overall development progress of SIDS was reviewed in terms of
macroeconomic developments, the MDGs, and special vulnerability of SIDS. The
progress, lessons learned, and continuing challenges were identified in the fields of
economy, environment, and social systems and institutions. The review
subsequently set out key issues in sustainable development of SIDS, including
strengthening support for national development planning focused on building
resilience to external shocks, vulnerability-resilience profiling of SIDS, further focus
on key thematic areas, supporting partnership initiatives for the further
implementation of the BPOA, strengthening access to and provision of financial
resources for SIDS, and institutionalizing special support for SIDS as a special
category in the UN.

In June 2012, the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (known as

Rio+20) was held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, to mark the 20th anniversary of the 1992
UNCED in Rio de Janeiro, and the 10th anniversary of the 2002 WSSD in

8 Plan of Implementation of the WSSD, Article 61.

5
Johannesburg. Even though the foci of the conference were on a green economy for
sustainable development, on poverty eradication, and on the institutional framework
for sustainable development, the outcome document of the conference, the zero draft
for sustainable development goals, also mentioned sustainability issues in SIDS. The
conference reaffirmed that SIDS find themselves in particular circumstances with
respect to sustainable development, and called for continued efforts to assist SIDS in
implementing the BPOA and the MSI. Also, the conference called for a third
international conference on SIDS in 2014, recognizing the need for integrated actions,
and asked the 67th General Assembly Session to determine the modalities of the
conference.

Most recently, according to the resolution from Rio+ 20, the third UN conference on
SIDS under the theme of “The sustainable development of SIDS through genuine
and durable partnership” was held in Apia, Samoa in September 2014. The outcome
document of the conference, the Small Island Developing States Accelerated
Modalities of Action (Samoa Pathway), first reaffirmed the commitments made at the
previous UN conferences and summits on sustainable development and the special
case for sustainable development of SIDS. In line with the conference theme, the
conference fully emphasized the need for international cooperation and partnerships
to implement the sustainable development of SIDS.

SIDS expressed their concerns on financial feasibility that can facilitate the
implementation of the BPOA and the MSI, despite the recent Green Climate Fund
Board decision to aim for a floor of 50 per cent of the adaptation allocation for
particularly vulnerable countries including SIDS. In this regard, the Samoa Pathway
underscores the need for adequate and coordinated support from the United
Nations system and the importance of accessible and transparent support from the
international financial institutions calling for a renewed dedication of United
Nations system support for cooperation among SIDS as well as national, regional
and inter-regional coordination.

The Samoa Pathway presents a basis for action in the agreed priority areas: sustained
and sustainable, inclusive and equitable economic growth with decent work for all,
climate change, sustainable energy, disaster risk reduction, oceans and seas, food
security and nutrition, water and sanitation, sustainable transportation, sustainable
consumption and production, management of chemicals and waste including
hazardous waste, health and non-communicable diseases, gender equality and
women’s empowerment, social development, biodiversity, and invasive alien species.
As means of implementation, the Samoa Pathway emphasized all forms of
partnership with SIDS, human and institutional capacity building, appropriate,
reliable, affordable, modern and environmentally sound technologies, data and
6
statistics in development planning, and institutional support for SIDS including
international and regional financial institutions and other multilateral development
partners.

These commitments emphasized a more integrated approach to the sustainable

development of SIDS, with the support of the international community and all
stakeholders.

1.1.3 Importance of e-government in addressing multiple challenges in SIDS

The Samoa Pathway emphasizes:

110. We recognize that access by small island developing States to appropriate

reliable, affordable, modern and environmentally sound technologies is critical to
achieving their sustainable development objectives and in fostering an environment
that provides incentives for innovation and entrepreneurship and that science,
technology and innovation are essential enablers and drivers for sustainable
development.

111. In this regard, we reaffirm our commitment to support the efforts of small
island developing States to gain access, on mutually agreed terms, to appropriate,
reliable, affordable, modern and environmentally sound technologies and know-how
and to increase connectivity and the use of information and communications
technology through improved infrastructure, training and national legislation, as
well as public and private sector involvement.

The research at hand argues that e-government can be an essential enabler and
driver for sustainable development of SIDS. E-government is the application of IT
(information technology) tools and techniques to provide governmental services for
citizens, businesses and other governmental agencies efficiently (Seifer, 2003). It
adopts a holistic approach towards governance and aims for an inclusive and
participatory form of development that is people-centric. Furthermore, it creates
“institutional linkages between and among the tiered government structures”
leading to “synergy for inclusive sustainable development” (UNPAN, 2012). The
ultimate goal of e-government is to promote national development by establishing
“good governance.”

Governance can be defined as “the manner in which power is exercised in the

management of a country’s economic and social resources for development” (World
Bank, 1992). Good governance will be realized through improving the level of
transparency, democracy, and government capability. Also, as <Figure 1.1> shows,
e-government is a suitable means to improve effectiveness, efficiency, and

7
transparency of government, to elevate the quality of public services, and to promote
active public participation in governance (Lee, 2012).

<Figure 1.1> The Goal of e-government

As information and communications technologies (ICTs), such as computers and the

internet, developed rapidly after 1980s, many countries made conscious efforts to
utilize ICT for government reform, and positioned these projects high on their
national priority agenda. With the 2015 deadline for the Millennium Development
Goals (MDGs) approaching, a paradigm shift is taking place which tries to “focus on
pivotal linkages among public institutions, such that development challenges can be
met…” (UNPAN, 2012). E-government systems are being adopted around the globe
to improve administrative efficiency and establish systems of good governance.

E-government is also seen to have direct effects on national development. Aside

from being “the core of building a strategic sustainable development framework,” its
key function is seen as providing “integrated framework of policies, laws, and
regulations” and developing “institutions and processes that allow the private sector
to provide – and the people to partake of the benefits of newer technologies.”
(UNPAN, 2012). It has had direct effects on the development of economy, society,
environment management, and disaster management of a nation as well.

E-government makes administrative services more efficient, fosters a favorable

business environment, and subsequently contributes to economic growth. This is
seen as a result of the reduction of financial costs and transaction times, which
“enables effective resource utilization across the various public sector agencies…”
(UNPAN, 2012). From a socio-cultural point of view, it cultivates educated citizens
and strengthens social solidarity by “ameliorating the adverse impact of the digital
divide that excludes vulnerable groups in society” (UNPAN, 2012). Social equity and
inclusion become possible when “institutional barriers to citizen inclusion are
removed and opportunities for their participation through ICTs are equitably
8
distributed” (UNPAN, 2012). Lastly, e-government helps to manage environmental
issues more efficiently, since it employs modern technologies for coordination
among different institutions within the state for development outcomes while also
“safeguarding resource conservation” (UNPAN, 2012).

Recently, Ming, Awan, and Somani (2013) emphasized the importance of

e-governance in addressing the challenges in small states. According to them, small
states can overcome the barriers associated with their small size and isolation by
modernizing government and enhancing the ability of the public sector. Poorly
governed countries show low administrative capacity in control of corruption, voice
and accountability, government effectiveness, and regulatory quality, all of which
adversely affect development of the economy, of society, of environment
management, and of natural disaster management. As a result, low GDP growth, a
high rate of child mortality, health, gender inequality, and education are affected by
the government. Therefore, e-government profoundly affects the sustainable
development of a country.

More specifically, Awan (2013) notes that small island states are normally
characterized by the following qualities: isolation from major markets, susceptibility
to natural disasters, environmental change, and income volatility. They are also
geographically isolated and have open economies, which are also an issue of concern.
Most have populations below 1.5 million with handful exceptions.

The 2012 UN E-Government Survey revealed that more than half of Commonwealth
small states ranked in the bottom half of the online public services ranking. This data
is worrisome, considering how ICTs have evolved, and that their effectiveness in
public service delivery has been proven. Access to and use of ICTs are clearly in the
formative stage in many small states, leaving millions of citizens excluded from the
benefits of technological development.

While SIDS form a heterogeneous group with respect to their historical, cultural, and
social contexts, there also remain areas of similarity especially on development
issues which can be improved on through e-governance initiatives. One major
development challenge prevalent in many SIDS is of a physical nature: geographical
isolation and the resulting distance from major markets. This issue negatively
impacts SIDS since the distance increases transport costs and prevents them from
compensating for the small and limited capacity of their own local markets.
Businesses and investors are also discouraged to enter their markets, given the
"geographical and physical access barriers for information and government
processes (Awan, 2013).

9
In addition to the isolation of SIDS vis-à-vis the global economy, local economies
within SIDS are isolated from each other and from their central government. This
intra–country and inter-community isolation hinders the flow of information which
also negatively impacts the bargaining capabilities of local economic interests.
Furthermore, this type of isolation restricts citizen participation in government
processes as well. ICTs are becoming critically valuable for SIDS, especially in
governance structures. With e-commerce and e-trade becoming inevitable in the age
of globalization, "government's online presence" has almost become a must.

Awan (2013) argues that in the age of globalization, SIDS cannot survive without
maximizing the benefits of the digital economy. The governments’ online presence
especially in the areas of investment and tourism can help boost the competitive
advantage of SIDS in global markets by addressing the geographical and physical
barriers which are caused by isolation. On the other hand, ICTs are also crucial in
improving access of public services to isolated communities within SIDS. They have
"the potential of cost-effectively and efficiently" reaching and tailoring services to the
different and changing needs of communities that are hard to reach.

With the increasing number of environmental disasters, to which SIDS have been
particularly prone, the link between income volatility and environmental calamities
has become more evident in their sustainable economic development. SIDS have
been especially vulnerable to environmental hazards such as earthquakes, volcanic
eruptions, hurricanes, cyclones, drought, and environmental change, which
normally impact the entire population and economy. Environmental disasters have
the tendency of quickly reversing "hard-won economic gains" in the context of SIDS.
Their impacts are estimated to lead to losses corresponding to 10-15 percent of GDP.
Thus, adopting ICT-enabled governance initiatives has become imperative for SIDS
in order to tackle these environmental calamities.

E-governance services that are effective incorporate a wide range of ICTs in order to
provide support for citizens at all the different stages of disaster risk reduction
(DRR). These innovations can help develop efficient environmental early-warning
systems and also help citizens during response initiatives to natural disasters. ICT
systems can provide real-time information to citizens to help them address the
different problems that confront them. During the 2010 Haiti Earthquake, for
example, open-source crisis-mapping software enabled the collection of real-time
information through ICTs and social media, which an international group of
volunteers used to assist recovery efforts.

ICT systems also have valuable applications that can expand and diversify the
industry portfolio of SIDS, mitigate income volatility, and improve access to capital

10
markets. Economies in SIDS face several challenges that leave them vulnerable to
price shocks and income volatility. First, they tend to have a relatively limited
natural resource base, meaning they are characterized by a relatively inflexible
reliance on certain imports. Second, they tend to have a relatively concentrated
portfolio of industries. Third, undeveloped domestic markets mean that
international trade constitutes a relatively large portion of their economic output.
This dependence on the global market leaves SIDS exposed to erratic changes and
vulnerable to economic shocks. The resulting volatility implies that private markets
are often reluctant to invest in SIDS, making access to global capital markets more
challenging and costly. Therefore, e-governance initiatives are useful to strengthen
the ICT sector, increase business opportunities and position SIDS to better endure
external shocks (Awan, 2013).

E-governance can also be a solution to what Awan (2013) has identified as limited
institutional capacity. In the case of SIDS, the cost of many public services tends to be
higher per person because SIDS are not able to take advantage of returns to scale to
the degree that larger states can. ICT infrastructure and solutions can become a
significant source of cost-savings for SIDS, lowering the per-capita cost of many
services. By significantly improving the cost-effectiveness of public services, ICT
strategies developed specifically for the SIDS context can help SIDS overcome their
limited institutional capacity.

E-governance also has the capacity to improve the transparency, accountability and
trust in government, outcomes which have important indirect benefits related to a
government’s fiscal position. There are several applications of ICT systems that can
improve transparency, accountability, and participation in government. Such
systems can be especially beneficial for SIDS, whose position in the global economy
means they regularly must deal with high levels of public debt and borrowing from
foreign institutions.

Increased transparency aids investors in their decisions and reassures markets of

government's fiscal targets. Transparency is especially important in the case of SIDS
which are more open and reliant on foreign capital. SIDS are at an informational
disadvantage vis-à-vis larger states, which foreign investors tend to know more
about (Awan, 2013). Improved trust and accountability can help SIDS sustain their
public debt with lower borrowing costs and without the recurring threat of debt
crisis. Evidence also suggests that improved institutional governance in emerging
markets is associated with prudent borrowing and more sound fiscal policy
responses.

Overall, e-governance structures can lead to outcome of increased participatory

11
government, transparency and accountability, which can help SIDS achieve better
governance. Good governance is crucial for SIDS since they are especially vulnerable
to high public and external debt. SIDS are more likely to achieve sustainable
economic development when high-quality institutions are in place, and there have
been claims that lower-income small states which have improved governance
structures are able to sustain their public debt safely without experiencing debt
crises.

Finally, good governance with increased transparency fosters citizen participation,

aids investors to make well-informed decisions, and reassures markets of
government's fiscal targets. With globalization playing an increasingly significant
role in achieving sustainable economic development, SIDS must stand up to the
challenge of competing with larger states that investors are more familiar with, that
enjoy the benefits of economies of scale more widely, and that don’t face the issue of
isolation.

<Figure 1.2> Importance of e-government for SIDS

12
1.2 Overview of research

1.2.1 Objectives

This research has four key purposes: first, to empirically test the effectiveness of
e-government on good governance and sustainable development of SIDS; second, to
explain the differences in the e-government development among SIDS; third, to
determine the key success factors of e-government development; and finally fourth,
to present policy recommendations for sustainable development of SIDS.

1.2.2 Target countries

SIDS consists of 9 states in AIMS, 20 states in the Pacific region, and 23 states in the
Caribbean region. This research mainly deals with the SIDS in the Pacific and AIMS
regions. Among 28 Pacific and AIMS SIDS, only 22 states have UN membership. In
many parts of this report, 9 non-UN member states could not be included due to a
lack of available data.

1.2.3 Methodology

In order to achieve the objectives of the study, the researcher conducted a literature
review in order to arrive at a better understanding of the SIDS’ economic and social
conditions as well as their environment and disaster risk management. Also, for the
statistical test of significance among the effects of e-government on good governance
and sustainable development of SIDS, the researchers conducted panel regression
analysis including mediation effect testing, covering the data of 22 Pacific and AIMS
SIDS from 2003 to 2014. In addition, for the comparative analysis among the Pacific
and AIMS SIDS, the researchers conducted a questionnaire survey, targeting the
national CIOs or e-government officers.

1.2.4 Conceptual modeling

1.2.4.1 Research Framework

This study investigates how the development of e-government affects the sustainable
development of the SIDS in the Pacific and AIMS regions. This report is organized by
the following broad aspects of development: economy, society, environment
management, and disaster management.

<Figure 1.3> Research Framework

13
E-government impacts on national development both directly and indirectly, as
shown in <Figure 1.3>. First, the development of e-government has direct effects on
the development of economy, society, environment management, and disaster
management of a state. Second, e-government development facilitates a set of public
sector practices which this report refers to as “good governance”, which, in turn,
positively influence national development.

1.2.4.2 Measurement

Measurement of e-government development

This research adopts the e-government development indices of the UN

E-Government Surveys as independent variables. According to the UN
E-Government Surveys, the level of e-government development can be assessed in
four areas: (1) ICT infrastructure (TII), (2) ability to use e-government (HCI), (3) e-
service (OSI), and (4) e-participation (EPI). The first three areas constitute the EGDI
(E-Government Development Index). All indices are standardized as Z-scores.

The first component index of e-government development is a telecommunication

infrastructure index which is based on the International Telecommunication Union
(ITU)’s ICT Development Index (IDI). The telecommunication infrastructure factor
consists of measures for internet users, main fixed-phone lines, mobile subscribers,
fixed broadband subscriptions, and wireless broadband subscriptions. A personal
14
computer index has been replaced by an index of fixed internet subscriptions for the
2012 edition of the UN E-Government Survey, and this component in turn was
exchanged for an index of wireless broadband subscriptions in the UN
E-Government Survey 2014.

The second component index of e-government development is the ability to use

e-government. Unfortunately, there is no worldwide e-awareness index that directly
measures the ability to use e-government. Instead, this research uses adult literacy
and the gross enrollment of primary, secondary, and tertiary schools as a proxy
indicator in line with the UN E-Government Survey. In the UN E-Government
Survey 2014, expected years of education and mean years of schooling are included
in the human capital index.

The third component of e-government development is an index based on the breadth

of online services available on national websites such as government portals and
websites of ministries for education, labour, social services, health, finance, and
environment.

The fourth factor of e-government development is an e-participation index. This

factor is the same as the United Nations’ e-participation index (EPI). The index
includes three dimensions: e-information sharing, e-consultation, and e-decision
making. E-information sharing means the use of the Internet to facilitate provision of
information by governments to citizens. E-consultation refers to the government’s
interaction with stakeholders, while e-decision making means engagement in
decision-making processes.

<Figure 1.4> Measures on e-government development

15
The UN added a new environmental index to the UN E-Government Survey
beginning in 2012. This index is a metric for how a government deploys ICT systems
and e-government in addressing environmental problems. Specifically, the index
measures the dissemination of environmental information, institutional integration
with respect to environmental matters, and opportunities for citizen engagement on
environmental issues (UNPAN, 2012).

Measurement of good governance

A variety of metrics to gauge good governance have been developed along several
dimensions of governance. This research examines three broad dimensions of
governance among the six broad dimensions of governance used by the World Bank
as good governance factors. This research examines the following three broad
dimensions of governance, selected from six broad dimensions of governance used
by the World Bank: control of corruption, government effectiveness, and regulatory
quality. These broad dimensions were chosen because they are the most important
dimensions as mediating factors for development.9 Each of these good governance

9 Worldwide Governance Indicators are constructed by aggregating indicators of six broad

dimensions of governance for over 200 countries and territories combined from several sources,
16
factors has been constructed by aggregating several indicators within their
respective broad dimensions. This research adopts the control-of-corruption
indicator to gauge government transparency, while it regards the government
effectiveness and regulatory quality measurements as an indication of government
capability.

<Figure 1.5> Measures on Good Governance

Government transparency is affected by the control of corruption. The World Bank

defines control of corruption as the extent to which government authority is
exercised for personal benefits, and to which elites and private interests capture the
state.

As a component of government capability, government effectiveness covers the quality

of the public service and its independence from political pressure. It considers the
quality of policy formulation and implementation, particularly for the delivery of
public goods as well as the credibility of government commitment to policies.

As the other component of government capability, regulatory quality gauges the

ability of the government to formulate and implement sound policies that create an
environment conducive to private sector development. Relaxation of excessive
regulation on trade and private business can be conceptualized as the formation and
implementation of the policy and regulation to support the development of the

including EIU, IMD, ADB, Freedom House, and so on. The range of each indicator is from -2.5 to +2.5
(www.govindicators.org).

17
private sector, emphasizing market-friendly government policies.

Measurement of social and economic development

Gross domestic product (GDP) per capita is used in this report to indicate a country’s
level of economic development. The data is sourced from the World Bank. GDP per
capita reflects GDP divided by midyear population.

<Figure 1.6> Measures on economic & social development

Social development may be gauged by the level of rule of law, social stability, public
health, gender equality, and so forth. This report adopts several indicators which are
aggregated to create an index of social development. This report adopts two World
Bank government indicators, the Rule of Law and the Political Stability & Absence of
Violence/Terrorism, as the measurement of rule of law and social stability. Also, the
UNDP’s under-five mortality rate, and the health index are used as measurements of
the level of public health. Unfortunately, the UNDP’s gender inequality data has not
been collected every year and was limited to only eight of twenty SIDS in the Pacific
and AIMS regions. Gender inequality data is therefore not included as a component
of the social development index.

The rule of law reflects perceptions of the extent to which agents have confidence in
and abide by the rules of the society, and in particular, the quality of contract
enforcement, property rights, the police, and the courts, as well as the likelihood of
crime and violence. Political stability and absence of violence-terrorism reflects

18
perceptions of the likelihood that the government will be destabilized or overthrown
by unconstitutional or violent means, including politically-motivated violence and
terrorism. Under-five mortality rate reflects rates of death among children between
birth and exactly five years of age expressed per 1,000 live births. The health index
reflects life expectancy at birth (i.e., the number of years newborn children are
expected to live).

Measurement of environment and disaster management

In addition to economic and social development, environment and disaster

management are also crucial components in assessing sustainable development. This
report uses an Ecosystem Vitality index, an aggregate of several other indicators, as a
metric of environment management. As outlined below, Ecosystem Vitality is
calculated from back-cast data from 2002 to 2012 released by the Yale Center for
Environmental Law & Policy (YCELP) and the Center for International Earth Science
Information Network (CIESIN).10

YCELP’s Environmental Performance Index seeks to express two overarching

‘objectives’, Environmental Health and Ecosystem Vitality, which are operationalized as
20 different indicators, grouped into 9 ‘issue categories’. The Ecosystem Vitality
sphere is comprised of the following six issue categories: (1) Water Resources, (2)
Agriculture, (3) Forests, (4) Fisheries, (5) Biodiversity & Habitat, and (6) Climate & Energy.
The score for the aggregated Ecosystem Vitality index, as well as for each individual
indicator, ranges from 0 to 100.

The category of (1) Water Resources only comprises the indicator Wastewater Treatment,
a sub-factor that reflects the wastewater treatment rate. (2) Agriculture is a category
that comprises two indicators, Agricultural Subsidies and Pesticide Regulation:
Agricultural Subsidies are expressed in price of their product in the domestic market
less its price at the border, and expressed as a percentage of the border price,
adjusting for transportation costs and quality differences. Pesticide Regulation scores
countries’ efforts towards banning the ‘dirty dozen’ Persistent Organic Pollutants
(POP) in the Stockholm convention. (3) Forests pertain to change in forest cover (i.e.,
forest loss or forest gain). (4) Fisheries is an index that comprises two sub-indicators:
Coastal Shelf Fishing Pressure and Fish Stocks. Coastal Shelf Fishing Pressure is an
indicator that reflects the annual catch in metric tons from trawling and dredging
gears, mostly bottom trawls within a nation’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). Fish
Stocks is an indicator that reflects the percentage of fishing stocks overexploited and

10 www.epi.yale.edu, last accessed 12 November 2014.

19
collapsed within the EEZ. (5) Biodiversity & Habitat is a category that comprises four
indicators: Terrestrial Protected Areas on National Biome Weights, Terrestrial Protected
Areas on Global Biome Weights, Marine Protected Areas, and Critical Habitat Protection. (6)
Climate and Energy is a sub-factor that comprises three indicators: Trend in Carbon
Intensity, Change of Trend in Carbon Intensity, and Trend in CO2 Emissions per Kilowatt
hour (kWh). The Trend in Carbon Intensity reflects the change in CO2 emissions per
unit GDP from 1990 to 2010. The Change of Trend in Carbon Intensity reflects the
change in trend of CO2 emissions per unit GDP from 1990 to 2000; 2000 to 2010. The
Trend in CO2 Emissions per kWh reflects the change in CO2 emissions from electricity
and heat production.

<Figure 1.7.1> Measures on Environment Management

The level of disaster management can be measured by the Vulnerability to Natural

Disasters index, a composite index released in the World Risk Index Reports of the
Alliance Development Works and the UN University Institute for Environment and
Human Security (UNU-EHS) since 2011. Vulnerability to Natural Disasters is
comprised of three sub-factors: Susceptibility, Coping Capacities, and Adaptive
Capacities. The range of values of each of these sub-factors is 0 to 100 percent.

Susceptibility is a composite variable designed to gauge the possibility of harm, loss

20
and disruption by a natural hazard. The Susceptibility sub-factor comprises four
indicators: public infrastructure, nutrition, poverty and dependencies. Natural
disasters sometimes threaten the water distribution and sanitation systems of many
SIDS and increase the risk of contamination of drinking water.

Coping Capacities is a sub-factor that comprises several indicators the short-term

capacity to respond in the immediate aftermath of a natural disaster to mitigate
damage. The three indicators that compose of coping capacities are (1) the
government and authorities, (2) medical services, and (3) material coverage with the
indicators using their weighting factors.

Adaptive Capacities is a sub-factor composed of processes, structural changes, and

strategies in to address the negative impacts of natural hazards and climate change
in the on a long-term, ongoing basis, as opposed to reacting to a specific event. Four
indicators compose Adaptive Capacities: (1) education & research, (2) gender equity, (3)
environmental status & ecosystem protection, (4) investment. These four indicators
are constructed from eleven sub-indicators.

<Figure 1.7.2> Measures on Natural Disaster Management

Measurement of control variables

21
This research controls for the following four variables: the level of democracy, size of
population, whether a state is extraordinary (outlier), and whether a set of index
values in a certain year is obviously distinct from the same set of index values in the
other years.

<Figure 1.8> Measures on Control Variables

First, the level of democracy can be represented by a World Bank’s governance

indicator, Voice and Accountability. The Voice and Accountability indicator comprises
indicators on the extent to which citizens are able to participate in government as
well as indicators on the political process, rights, and civil liberties. The reason we do
not incorporate this variable into a single good governance component is that this
research focus on the internal features when it comes to good governance. The
democracy measured as Voice and Accountability indicator does not represent the
democracy of bureaucracy but represents the relationship between citizens and
government. Moreover, we assume that the level of democracy functions as a
moderator between the level of e-participation and the independent variables.

Second, the overall size of the population can affect economic and social conditions
such as economies of scale and incentives for political participation. The size of the
population among the Pacific and AIMS SIDS ranges from tens of thousands to 7.2
million. This research employs log-transformed data, taking the range of values into
account.

Third, although the 29 SIDS in the Pacific and AIMS regions are classified as a group,
22
each state has its own characteristics. Specifically, Bahrain and Singapore have
several features that distinguish their economies from the other SIDS in the study,
including their proximity to mainland continents and their high levels of economic
development and e-government development. For these reasons, we regard Bahrain
and Singapore as outliers and distinguish them from the other SIDS in the statistical
analysis by including dummy variables.

Fourth, the UN E-government Survey 2014 changed the components of the human
capital index by adding expected years of education and mean years of schooling to
the index. As a result, it would be reasonable to distinguish the data of the human
capital index in 2014 from the previous data.

23
2. Sustainable Development in SIDS
2.1 Economic trends and challenges

2.1.1 Economic trends

Income levels vary greatly among the SIDS, as shown in the table below.11 Pacific
and AIMS SIDS are relatively evenly distributed across the four income groups,
whereas the Caribbean states are mainly distributed over high-income and upper-
middle-income groups. Fortunately, Fiji, the Marshall Islands, and Tonga as well as
Belize moved from lower-middle-income to upper-middle-income, while Antigua
and Barbuda moved from upper-middle-income to high-income in recent years.

<Table 2.1> Income group

High-income Upper-middle- Lower-middle- Low-income

(14) income (18) income (10) (3)
Antigua & Barbuda American Samoa Cape Verde Comoros
Aruba Belize Guyana Guinea-Bissau
Bahamas, The Cuba Kiribati Haiti
Bahrain Dominica Micronesia, Fed. Sts.
Barbados Dominican Republic Papua New Guinea
French Polynesia Fiji Samoa
Guam Grenada S. Tomé & Principe
New Caledonia Jamaica Solomon Islands
Northern Mariana
Maldives Timor-Leste
Islands
Puerto Rico Marshall Islands Vanuatu
Singapore Mauritius
St. Kitts and Nevis Palau
Trinidad & Tobago Seychelles
Virgin Islands (U.S.) St. Lucia

11 The World Bank has divided 214 nations into four groups based on the gross national income (GNI)
per capita, calculated using the World Bank Atlas method. The groups are: low-income – $1,025 or
less; lower-middle-income – $1,026 to $4,035; upper-middle-income – $4,036 to $12,475; and high-
income – $12,476 or more.

24
 St. Vincent and the
Grenadines
Suriname
Tonga
Tuvalu
Note: Colored countries are the Pacific & AIMS SIDS.
Source: World Bank (http://data.worldbank.org/about/country-classifications)

The average GDP of the Pacific and AIMS SIDS surpassed those of the Caribbean
SIDS and LDCs as of 2012. However, the average GDP of the Pacific & AIMS is
merely 2.35 percent even compared to that of low-income countries. In addition, it
decreases to nearly 2.2 million USD (current) if Singapore and Bahrain are excluded.
In sum, not only is the average GDP of the Pacific & AIMS low but also its variations
is wide.

<Table 2.2> Average GDP

Group 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Pacific & AIMS 11.8 11.5 13.8 15.9 16.6
Caribbean 15.3 15.0 15.6 16.5 15.5
LDC 13.4 13.1 14.7 16.2 16.1
Low income 529.8 522.8 587.3 667.5 705.1
Middle income 364.6 379.5 415.2 466.9 505.8
OECD 3,324.2 3,406.2 4,294.9 4,865.1 5,037.9
World 11,792.8 11,667.9 14,004.1 16,445.9 17,416.0
Unit: billion USD (current)
Note: Data does not include all SIDS. Notably, Anguilla, American Samoa, the British
Virgin Islands, the Cook Islands, French Polynesia, Guam, Montserrat, Nauru, the
Netherlands Antilles, New Caledonia, Niue, the Northern Marianas, and the U.S. Virgin
Islands are excluded.
Source: World Bank (http://data.worldbank.org)

<Figure 2.1> shows that the nominal GDP per capita of the Pacific and AIMS is on a
par with the average GDP per capita of countries classified by the World Bank as
upper-middle-income, and less than the world average and the Caribbean SIDS as of
2012. However, excluding the outliers of Singapore and Bahrain reduces the GDP
per capita from 7,297 USD to 4,113 USD, which is less than the upper-middle-income
countries’ average.

25
 <Figure 2.1> GDP per capita

High Income 38,284

Caribbean SIDS 10,380
World 10,318
SIDS 8,631
Pacific & AIMS SIDS 7,297
Upper Middle Income 7,285
Pacific & AIMS SIDS… 4,113 (excluding Bahrain & Singapore)
Lower Middle Income 2,010
LDC 803
Low Income 598

0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 40,000

Unit: USD (current), as of 2012

Note: Data is not weighted by population. Data does not include all SIDS. Notably,
American Samoa, Anguilla, Aruba, the British Virgin Islands, the Cook Islands, French
Polynesia, Guam, Nauru, New Caledonia, Niue, the Northern Mariana Islands, Montserrat,
the Netherlands Antilles, and the U.S. Virgin Islands are excluded.
Source: World Bank (http://data.worldbank.org)

<Figure 2.2> shows that the inflation rate (GDP deflator) of the Pacific & AIMS SIDS
has been relatively stable since 2008, when the inflation rate peaked due to
stagflation. The inflation rate of the Pacific & AIMS SIDS ranged from 2.89 percent to
4.85 percent for the last four years.

<Figure 2.2> Inflation Rate (GDP deflator)

26
 8%

6%
Pacific & AIMS
4% Caribbean
World
2%

0%
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Unit: annual percent

Note: Data does not include all SIDS. Notably, American Samoa, Anguilla, Aruba, the
British Virgin Islands, the Cook Islands, Cuba, French Polynesia, Guam, Montserrat, Nauru,
the Netherlands Antilles, New Caledonia, Niue, the Northern Mariana Islands, and the U.S.
Virgin Islands are excluded.
Source: World Bank (http://data.worldbank.org)

<Table 2.3> shows the average annual real GDP growth of the SIDS in the Pacific and
AIMS regions for the last five years. Compared to other countries, the SIDS in the
Pacific and AIMS regions achieved a higher level of growth than that of the world,
high-income countries, and the Caribbean SIDS. They achieved lower average
annual real GDP growth rates compared to the upper- and lower-middle-income
countries.

<Table 2.3> Real GDP growth

Group 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Pacific & AIMS 4.43 0.49 3.92 4.80 2.30
Caribbean 1.81 -1.79 0.30 1.73 2.22
All SIDS 3.22 -0.57 2.30 3.42 2.27
LDC 6.49 4.55 5.54 4.01 4.80
Low income 5.50 5.23 6.25 6.07 6.37
Lower middle income 4.49 5.00 7.65 5.49 4.71
Upper middle income 5.88 2.56 7.69 6.48 4.95
High income 0.36 -3.57 3.00 1.84 1.55
World 1.45 -2.11 4.06 2.88 2.37
Unit: annual percent
Note: Data is not weighted by population. Data does not include all SIDS. Notably,

27
American Samoa, Anguilla, Aruba, the British Virgin Islands, the Cook Islands, Cuba,
French Polynesia, Guam, Montserrat, Nauru, the Netherlands Antilles, New Caledonia,
Niue, the Northern Mariana Islands, and the U.S. Virgin Islands are excluded.
Source: World Bank (http://data.worldbank.org)

Official Development Assistance (ODA) from developed countries and international

organizations provides helpful resources not only to LDC and low-income countries
but also to SIDS in general. <Figure 2.3> shows that SIDS have received more net
ODA per capita than either LDC or the low-income countries on average. The SIDS
annually received between 342 and 475 USD per capita from 2008 to 2012. Each year
during the same period, the Pacific and AIMS states received between 2.6 and 4.7
times as much net ODA as the Caribbean states.

<Figure 2.3> Net ODA received per capita

700
600
Pacific & AIMS
500
400 Caribbean
300 All SIDS
200 LDC
100 Low income
0
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Unit: USD (current)

Note: Data is not weighted by population. Data does not include all SIDS. Notably,
American Samoa, Anguilla, Aruba, the Bahamas, Bahrain, the British Virgin Islands, the
Cook Islands, French Polynesia, Guam, Nauru, New Caledonia, Niue, the Netherlands
Antilles, the Northern Mariana Islands, Montserrat, Puerto Rico, Singapore, and the U.S.
Virgin Islands are excluded.
Source: World Bank (http://data.worldbank.org)

<Figure 2.4> demonstrates to what extent SIDS rely on trade, especially on imports.
Many SIDS need to import goods and services due to the lack of natural resources,
financial resources, human resources, and a poor industrial base. The Pacific and
AIMS SIDS imported about twice the value of goods and services as a percentage of
GDP as other low-income countries.

<Figure 2.4> Imports of goods and services (% of GDP)

28
 80

70 Pacific & AIMS

Caribbean
60
All SIDS
50
LDC
40 Low income

30 Lower middle income

World
20
2008 2009 2010 2011

Note: Data does not include all SIDS. Notably, American Samoa, Anguilla, the British
Virgin Islands, the Cook Islands, French Polynesia, Guam, Guyana, the Marshall Islands,
Micronesia, Montserrat, Nauru, the Netherlands Antilles, New Caledonia, Niue, the
Northern Mariana Islands, Papua New Guinea, Suriname, Tuvalu, and the U.S. Virgin
Islands are excluded.
Source: World Bank (http://data.worldbank.org)

2.1.2 Economic development challenges

Economic development among SIDS varies widely. Nevertheless, the challenges that
SIDS encounter in terms of sustainable economic development are similar. For one,
SIDS economies are very exposed to external shocks due to their strong dependence
on a few markets and the erosion of trade preferences with these markets in the face
of globalization (UN DESA, 2010). The economies of SIDS are also characterized by
high dependency on international trade, limited economies of scale, limited product
and market diversification, and fairly narrow economic bases (UN DESA, 2014c). 81
percent of all SIDS have GDPs lower than $13.7 billion, and 54 percent have GDPs
lower than $1 billion.

The remoteness and insularity of SIDS, coupled with other characteristics such as
susceptibility to natural disasters, limited institutional capacities, fragile ecologies,
limited ability to diversify, dependence on a narrow range of exports, and high
import requirements of strategic goods like fuel and food, make them inherently
vulnerable from an economic standpoint (UN DESA, 2010). Few SIDS economies are
resource-based. The main industries of many SIDS are based on service industries
(travel and tourism in particular), ICT-enabled business process outsourcing (BPO),
and financial services (UN DESA, 2014c).

2.1.2.1 Vulnerability to International Economic Shocks

29
The effects of the recent global economic and financial crisis, the uneven integration
into global trade and development processes, and the structural vulnerabilities of
SIDS have had adverse consequences for SIDS economies. Declining labor
remittances and increasing logistics expenditures have also amplified the adverse
impacts of the recent financial crisis. Over the last decade, many SIDS have
experienced rapid growth in their debt burden as well as an increase in their trade
deficits (UN DESA, 2010).

Global trade liberalization and globalization are posing new challenges and elicit
new responses from SIDS economies. Among Caribbean SIDS, these challenges
include the erosion of trade preferences and a loss of market share to trade
competitors. In response, there has been a push to collaborate and achieve regional
integration through the Caribbean Single Market Economy (CSME), but progress has
been limited. Pacific Island states have initiated similar agreements, including the
Pacific Island Countries Trade Agreement (PICTA) and trade agreements with the
EU, but progress has also been slow (UN DESA, 2010).

<Table 2.4> Ease of doing business (best and worst results)

Country Rank
Singapore 1
Mauritius 23
Bahrain 38
Puerto Rico 43
St. Lucia 52
SIDS Average 94
Suriname 158
São Tomé and Principe 163
Timor-Leste 168
Haiti 174
Guinea-Bissau 176
Source: UN-OHRLLS, 2013. Small Island Developing States Factsheet 2013.

2.1.2.2 Dependence on Tourism

Many SIDS have beautiful natural environments that give SIDS a competitive
advantage in the tourism industry. Tourism is a substantial contributor to
development and the main source for GDP growth in many SIDS. Their
governments generally exert great efforts in developing this industry because

30
tourism helps them solve the problem of unemployment. However, such high
dependence on tourism can lead to economic and social challenges. First, a poorly
planned tourism industry can cause a negative side effect on traditional economic
activities, such as fishing and farming, by destabilizing land prices through
alternative land development. Second, the high level of foreign ownership and
vertical integration in tourism industry can bring about economic leakage such as
repatriated profits. Moreover, many SIDS need to import raw materials and goods
for foreign tourists due to their insufficient production capacities, which may
dampen the overall positive multiplier effects of the tourism sector (Bishop, 2010).
Third, large inflows of tourists can put pressure on ecosystems through large scale
development for tourism, particularly in coastal and marine areas (UN DESA, 2010).

<Figure 2.5> Top tourism destinations relative to population (2007)

Source: UNWTO, 2010 (as cited in UN DESA, 2010)

2.1.2.3 Physical and geographical challenges to reducing poverty

SIDS face a great challenge in reducing poverty and achieving sustainable

development. They are vulnerable to economic crises and natural disasters. The
countries and their constituent communities are often geographically isolated,
placing them at a physical disadvantage with respect to transportation and
infrastructure costs. SIDS are also exposed to price shocks on strategic commodities
due to limited natural resource base and heavy reliance on imports. Often SIDS rely
heavily on imports due to low population sizes and geographic dispersion.

The total population of SIDS is about 65 million, which is only one percent of the
world’s population. Most SIDS have rates of only one to two percent population
growth per annum. There is reason to believe that the largest share of population
living in poverty generally can be found in SIDS. In Haiti, we see that almost 55

31
percent of the population is living on under $1.25 a day. However, for 35 out of 52
SIDS, there is no complete data on population living in poverty.

<Table 2.5> SIDS with the highest share of population living under $1.25 a day

Country Ratio
Haiti 54.90%
Guinea-Bissau 48.80%
Comoros 46.10%
Timor-Leste 37.40%
Papua New Guinea 35.80%
SIDS Average 26.50%
Dominican Republic 4.30%
Trinidad and Tobago 4.20%
Jamaica <2.0%
Maldives <2.0%
Seychelles <2.0%
Source: UN-OHRLLS, 2013. Small Island Developing States Factsheet 2013.

2.1.2.4 Dependence on imported fuels

SIDS are heavily dependent on imported oil and fossil fuels for electricity generation
and for their industrial, commercial and transportation sectors. Reliance on imported
oil causes a heavy strain on the economy. Most of the SIDS have adopted or are
developing renewable energy sources, such as solar, wind, ocean, wave, geothermal,
biomass and hydro power. However, SIDS have made limited progress in reducing
their dependence on imported fuel.

<Figure 2.6> Fuel imports (percent of merchandise imports)

32
Note: Data does not include all SIDS. Notably, Singapore is excluded.
Source: World Bank, World Development Indicators, 2009 (as cited in UN DESA, 2010)

2.1.2.5 Difficulty of transportation and logistics

Transportation is not just important for trade, but also for people’s access to schools,
to the workplace, and to healthcare. The geographic distribution and physical
features of SIDS pose great challenges in transportation and logistics.

Often SIDS are comprised of diffuse islands and coral atolls dispersed up to
hundreds of kilometers apart. Many island communities have difficulty accessing
basic facilities and services because of their distance from the capital or other major
population centers. Businesses and trade development are also hampered by the
high costs of logistics and transport. Remote islands or areas with relatively low
population densities are at a competitive disadvantage for attracting investment and
infrastructure.

Thanks to the improvement in ICT systems, many SIDS governments are improving
service delivery in areas such as health and education. Some SIDS have also made
incipient investments in science and technology to improve their economic
performance. For example, The Papua New Guinea NAR has taken advantage of its
rich biodiversity and benefited from biological research dollars in this strategic
industry. Moreover, science and technology are contributes to education at all levels
leading to build its human resource capacity.

2.2 Social trends and challenges

2.1.1 Social trends

<Table 2.6> shows that the population status of 26 of the 29 SIDS in the Pacific and
AIMS regions, excluding the Cook Islands, Nauru, and Niue. The population density
of the 26 SIDS is higher than the world average. The ratio of both urban population
and females to the total population are both similar to the world average.

<Table 2.6> Indicators on population in 2012

Pop. Density Urban Female

Region No. Country
(1,000) (per km2) (%) (%)
1 American Samoa 55 275.6 93.4 n/a
Pacific
2 Fiji 875 47.9 52.6 49.0

33
 3 French Polynesia 274 74.8 51.5 48.9
4 Guam 163 301.5 93.2 49.2
5 Kiribati 101 124.4 44.1 50.3
6 Marshall Islands 53 292.0 72.2 n/a
7 Micronesia 103 147.7 22.7 48.9
8 New Caledonia 258 14.1 61.6 49.3
9 Northern Marianas 53 115.9 91.6 n/a
10 Palau 21 45.1 84.9 n/a
11 Papua New Guinea 7,167 15.8 12.6 49.0
12 Samoa 189 66.8 19.7 48.4
13 Solomon Islands 550 19.6 20.9 49.3
14 Timor-Leste 1,210 81.4 28.7 49.2
15 Tonga 105 145.8 23.6 49.9
16 Tuvalu 10 328.7 51.0 n/a
17 Vanuatu 247 20.3 25.2 49.3
18 Bahrain 1,318 1734.0 88.8 37.7
19 Cape Verde 494 122.7 63.3 50.3
20 Comoros 718 385.6 28.2 49.6
21 Guinea-Bissau 1,664 59.2 44.6 50.3
AIMS 22 Maldives 338 1128.1 42.2 49.6
23 Mauritius 1,292 636.2 41.8 50.6
24 S. Tomé & Principe 188 195.9 63.3 50.6
25 Seychelles 88 192.0 54.0 49.0
26 Singapore 5,312 7589.1 100.0 50.7
Pacific & AIMS 879 544.6 52.9 49.0
World 7,043,902 54.3 52.6 49.6
Note: Data is not weighted by population
Source: World Bank (http://data.worldbank.org)

The average population density of all SIDS is 416.7 per square kilometer as of 2012.
By contrast, the density of rest of the world is estimated at a much lower 54.3 per
square kilometer. The population density and population growth rate of the Pacific
and AIMS SIDS are greater than those of the Caribbean SIDS. The population density
in the Pacific and AIMS SIDS is more than nine times the global average. In addition,

34
the Pacific and AIMS SIDS showed a higher population growth rate compared to the
world average for the last five years. The population density and growth trends of
the Pacific and AIMS SIDS are similar to those of the least developed countries
(LDCs) and low income countries.

<Table 2.7> Population density

Growth rate
Group 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
for 5 years
Pacific & AIMS 501.3 514.8 524.5 534.2 544.6 8.6%
Caribbean 237.3 238.4 239.5 240.5 241.6 1.8%
All SIDS 389.8 398.1 404.2 410.2 416.7 6.9%
LDC 39.7 40.7 41.6 42.6 43.5 9.6%
Low income 51.5 52.6 53.8 55.0 56.3 9.2%
Middle income 73.9 74.7 75.6 76.5 77.3 4.6%
High income 24.8 24.9 25.1 25.2 25.3 2.2%
World 51.9 52.5 53.1 53.7 54.3 4.7%
Unit: people per km of land area
2

Note: Data does not include all SIDS. Notably, Anguilla, the British Virgin Islands, the Cook
Islands, Montserrat, Nauru, the Netherlands Antilles, and Niue are excluded.
Source: World Bank (http://data.worldbank.org)

The average urban population ratio of the Pacific and AIMS SIDS is practically the
same as those of Caribbean and the world, while it is higher than that of lower-
middle-income countries, LDCs, and low income countries.

<Figure 2.7> Urban population ratio

35
 Low income 28.2
LDC 29.0
Lower middle income 38.9
World 52.5
Pacific & AIMS 52.9
All SIDS 53.1
Caribbean 53.5
Upper middle income 60.7
High income 80.2

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Unit: people per km2 of land area, as of 2012

Note: Data is not weighted by population. Data does not include all SIDS. Notably, Anguilla,
the British Virgin Islands, the Cook Islands, Montserrat, Nauru, the Netherlands Antilles,
and Niue are excluded.
Source: World Bank (http://data.worldbank.org)

<Table 2.8> shows that annual population growth among the SIDS has been higher
compared to the world, high-income countries, and upper-middle-income countries,
but lower compared to lower-middle-income countries, low-income countries, and
LDCs in general. The annual population growth ratio of the SIDS in the Pacific and
AIMS regions from 2008-2012 ranged from 1.11 to 1.38 percent whereas that of the
Caribbean SIDS ranged from 0.6 to 0.7.

<Table 2.8> Population growth (annual %)

Group 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Pacific & AIMS 1.4 1.2 1.3 1.1 1.3
Caribbean 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.6
All SIDS 1.1 1.0 1.0 0.9 1.0
LDC 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3
Low income 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.3
Lower middle income 1.6 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Upper middle income 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8
High income 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.3
World 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.1
36
Note: Data is not weighted by population. Data does not include all SIDS. Notably, Anguilla,
the British Virgin Islands, the Cook Islands, Montserrat, Nauru, the Netherlands Antilles,
and Niue are excluded.
Source: World Bank (http://data.worldbank.org)

<Figure 2.8> shows the age distribution of the Pacific and AIMS SIDS. The
proportion of the economically productive population (aged 15-64 years) is
increasing year after year. Persons aged 15-64 years accounted for 62.8 percent of the
population as of 2012. The proportion of children and young people (aged under 15)
is increasing while that of elderly population (aged 65 and over) is decreasing. These
trends imply that a period of demographic bonus to economic output will last quite
a while.

<Figure 2.8> Age distribution

70
60 62.83
61.76 62.08 62.37 62.62
50
40 0-14
30 33.33 32.92 32.55 32.22 31.93 15-64
20 65 and above
10 4.90 4.99 5.08 5.16
5.24
0
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Note: Data is not weighted by population. Data does not include all SIDS. Notably,
American Samoa, the Cook Islands, the Marshall Islands, Nauru, Niue, the Northern
Mariana Islands, Palau, and Tuvalu are excluded.
Source: World Bank (http://data.worldbank.org)

<Table 2.9> shows that the higher level of income a country has, the higher old-age
dependency and the lower young-age dependency it tends to mark. Compared to
the Caribbean SIDS, the Pacific and AIMS SIDS have a higher young-age
dependency and a lower old-age dependency on average. The age-dependency ratio
of the Pacific and AIMS SIDS is higher than the age-dependency ratios of the world,
upper-middle-income countries, lower-middle-income countries, and high-income
countries. However, the age dependency of the Pacific and AIMS SIDS is mostly
attributable to the high young-age dependency, whereas that of developed countries
is due to the high old-age dependency. For the SIDS, the relatively young
constitution of the population may facilitate the penetration rate of ICT systems,
given that younger people can more easily be trained on and accustomed to
37
employing cutting edge technology.

<Table 2.9> Age dependency ratio as of 2012

65 and Age dependency ratio

Group 0-14 15-64
above Total Old Young
Pacific & AIMS 31.9 62.8 5.2 61.2 8.2 53.0
Caribbean 25.5 66.2 8.3 51.5 12.5 39.0
All SIDS 29.0 64.3 6.6 56.9 10.1 46.7
LDC 40.3 56.2 3.5 80.0 6.2 71.7
Low income 39.4 56.9 3.7 78.0 6.5 69.3
Lower-middle income 31.5 63.5 5.0 58.3 7.9 49.6
Upper-middle income 21.5 70.5 8.0 42.5 11.4 30.6
High income 17.0 67.3 15.7 49.0 23.4 25.2
World 26.4 65.8 7.8 53.6 11.9 40.2
Note: Data is not weighted by population. Data does not include all SIDS. Notably,
American Samoa, Anguilla, the British Virgin Islands, the Cook Islands, Dominica, the
Marshall Islands, Montserrat, Nauru, the Netherlands Antilles, Niue, the Northern Mariana
Islands, Palau, Tuvalu, and St. Kitts and Nevis are excluded.
Source: World Bank (http://data.worldbank.org)

The life expectancy at birth of SIDS was 72.03 years as of 2012, which was higher
than either that of the world or that of the lower-middle-income countries, but lower
than that of the upper-middle-income countries. The Caribbean SIDS have had a
higher life expectancy at birth than the Pacific and AIMS SIDS. The life expectancy at
birth of the Pacific and AIMS states is close to the global average.

Life expectancy for women is longer than that of men globally and within every
category of states, including SIDS and excluding the lower- and upper-middle-
income groups. As of 2012, within the Caribbean SIDS, women are likely to live 5.5
years longer than the men. As of 2012 within the Pacific and AIMS SIDS, women are
likely to live 4.7 years longer than the men.

<Figure 2.9> Life expectancy at birth

38
 High income 79.3
Upper middle income 74.2
Lower middle income 73.4
Caribbean 73.4
Pacific & AIMS 70.9
World 70.8
Low income 61.6
LDC 61.1

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Unit: Years
Note: As of 2012. Data is not weighted by population. Data does not include all SIDS.
Notably, American Samoa, Anguilla, the British Virgin Islands, the Cook Islands, Dominica,
the Marshall Islands, Montserrat, Nauru, Niue, the Netherlands Antilles, the Northern
Mariana Islands, Palau, Tuvalu, and St. Kitts and Nevis are excluded.
Source: World Bank (http://data.worldbank.org)

<Figure 2.10> shows the trend of three social indicators on governance during the
last nine years, including Social Stability, Democracy Level, and Rule of Law. The
indicators each range from -2.5 to 2.5 points. The social stability indicator is
composed of the indicators of Political Stability and Absence of Violence and Terrorism,
while the democracy level is derived from the Voice and Accountability indicator.

The indicator for Rule of Law trended downward during the period between 2006
and 2010. The Rule of Law indicator among the Pacific and AIMS SIDS is barely above
the global average since 2009. On the other hand, the social stability level has
hovered above the global average, between 0.464 and 0.64, over the last decade. The
Pacific and AIMS SIDS’ average level on the democracy indicator has also hovered
modestly above the global average, around 0.227 to 0.351, over the last decade. This
indicator is relatively stable compared to the other indicators during the same period.

<Figure 2.10> Social indicators on governance

39
 0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Social Stability Democracy Rule of Law

Note: Range of values is -2.5 to 2.5. The global average is zero. Data does not include all
SIDS. Notably, the Cook Islands, French Polynesia, and the Northern Marianas are excluded
in the three indicators; New Caledonia is excluded in democracy and rule of law.
Source: World Bank's Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI)

2.2.2 Social development challenges

SIDS are diverse with respect to population size, GDP, and the median age of their
populations. The Pacific and AIMS SIDS (excluding Singapore and Mauritius) have
relatively young populations. Timor-Leste and Guinea-Bissau have the youngest
median population age of 17.4 years and 18.7 years, respectively, as of 2010. There
appears to be a correlation between the GDP and the median population age among
SIDS. Lower life expectancy, higher fertility rates, and high rates of emigration of the
working-age population contribute to this trend. (UN DESA, 2010)

2.2.2.1 Education

Primary education participation among Pacific SIDS is relatively high, partially as a

result of government programs. For example, the government of Samoa made
primary education compulsory and free. As a result, the number of children and the
transition to secondary schooling increased. UN ESCAP (2010) notes that overall, net
enrollment rates in primary education among Pacific and AIMS SIDS range from 63%
to 98%. However, for completion rates, no clear trend emerges: Completion rates are
improving in Samoa and Tonga, but declining most significantly in Papua New
Guinea and Vanuatu, and to a lesser extent in Fiji.

Gender inequality still remains a key challenge in the SIDS and is manifested in a
gender gap in primary education attainment. Gender parity in primary schools
slightly declined in Papua New Guinea and Tonga, but increased in Tuvalu, Samoa,
40
Niue, Kiribati and Solomon Islands between 1999 and 2004. One interesting thing to
note is that recent studies found that girls are staying longer and are more successful
in school than their male counterparts, particularly in external examinations.

Education has important implications for long-term economic growth. General

literacy rates in SIDS are high, but illiteracy remains a problem (UN DESA, 2010).
There is also great need to educate students to participate in tertiary education for
sustainable development, such as science, education, medicine, fisheries, agriculture,
statistics, and many others. Data on adult literacy in the Pacific SIDS is scarce.
Among those with available data, adult literacy rates vary from 57% in Vanuatu to 99%
in Tonga and Samoa.

2.2.2.2 Health

SIDS face several challenges with regards to health and mortality. In particular,
progress has been fairly intermittent in health-related MDG measures, including
sexual and reproductive health, maternal, child and adolescent health, and
improvement in health systems. Common health challenges in SIDS include low
adoption of modern family planning methods, high rates of teenage pregnancies,
high levels of sexually transmitted diseases, communicable diseases, and non-
communicable diseases (NCDs) (UN DESA, 2014b).

Increasingly common NCDs include obesity, diabetes, heart diseases and other
associated medical complications. Increasing tobacco use, unhealthy diet, excessive
alcohol consumption, and physical inactivity is also creating high NCD risk. NCDs
present a serious threat to SIDS. Premature morbidity and premature mortality are
increasingly linked to NCDs. These can potentially reach epidemic proportions and
become the major cause of premature deaths in the Pacific region, resulting in
‘human, social and economic crisis’ (UN DESA, 2014b).

HIV/AIDS incidence is generally low in many Pacific SIDS, with the number of
estimated cases between 50 000 and 150 000, but the figures are increasing.
HIV/AIDS prevention is well-established in countries such as Kiribati, where many
men work as seafarers in foreign vessels. Developments in scaling-up health service
provision, including anti-retroviral treatments, care and support arrangements, and
mapping of risk and infection are being undertaken in some Pacific SIDS. HIV/AIDS
has reached epidemic rates in Papua New Guinea (UN ESCAP, 2010).

The average under-five mortality rate for SIDS is high. According to the UN MDG
Indicators Database, the rate is 29.4 deaths per 1,000 births. Even though many SIDS
have tried to reduce the child mortality rate, it still remains a significant challenge
for most countries. <Figure 2.10> shows the trend of under-five mortality rates
41
among various country categories from 1990 to 2012. As of 2012, the under-five
mortality rate among SIDS was 29.4, which was higher than that of upper-middle-
income countries, but less than that of the world. The under-five mortality rate of the
Pacific SIDS was similar to that of upper-middle-income countries before 1997, but
upper-middle-income countries have reduced their rate faster, on average, than the
SIDS since 1998. The Caribbean SIDS have maintained an under-five mortality rate
significantly lower than that of the Pacific and AIMS SIDS. The Pacific and AIMS
SIDS also have reduced their under-five mortality rate from 53.6 to 21.1 and from
79.6 to 40.5 over the last 22 years, respectively. Despite the progress, the Pacific and
AIMS SIDS have higher under-five mortality rates than that of the upper-middle-
income countries.

<Figure 2.11> Children under 5 mortality rate per 1,000 live birth

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2012

World AIMS SIDS Pacific SIDS

Caribbean SIDS Upper middle income High income

Note: Data is not weighted by population. Data does not include all SIDS. Notably,
American Samoa, Anguilla, Aruba, the British Virgin Islands, French Polynesia, Guam, the
Netherlands Antilles, New Caledonia, the Northern Mariana Islands, Montserrat, Puerto
Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands are excluded.
Source: World Bank (http://data.worldbank.org) and UNICEF (http://data.unicef.org/child-
mortality/under-five)

2.2.2.3 Drinking water and sanitation facilities

42
Access to drinking water and sanitation facilities is also important for social
development, especially with regards to public health, child mortality, and life-
expectancy. On average, 92.2 percent of population of SIDS can drink improved
water, while 76 percent of the population can use improved sanitation facilities.
However, there is significant disparity among the regions. The Caribbean SIDS have
reached the highest level, while the Pacific SIDS remain at the lowest level among
the three regions (UN ESCAP, 2010). Papua New Guinea is the only country where
the data show that less than 40 percent of population is able to access to improved
drinking water. In some countries, such as Comoros, Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, Kiribati,
Papua New Guinea, São Tomé and Principe, the Solomon Islands, and Timor-Leste,
less than 40 percent of the population has access to improved sanitation facilities.

The fragile and sometimes over-burdened water distribution and sanitation systems
of many SIDS are further threatened by natural disasters. Following hurricanes,
there is often a heightened risk of contamination of these systems due to service
interruption, with the increased probability of water-borne disease outbreaks (UN
ESCAP, 2010).

<Figure 2.12> Proportion of population using an improved drinking water source

96

94

92

AIMS
90
Pacific
88 Caribbean
SIDS
86

84

82
1995 2000 2005 2010 2012

Note: Data is not weighted by population

Source: UN MDG Indicators Database, 2014

<Figure 2.13> Proportion of population using an improved sanitation facility

43
 90
85
80
75 AIMS

70 Pacific

65 Caribbean

60 SIDS

55
50
1995 2000 2005 2010

Note: Data is not weighted by population

Source: UN MDG Indicators Database, 2014

2.2.2.4 Gender inequality

Gender inequality is a pervasive sustainable development issue among SIDS. UN

DESA (2014b) notes that gender inequalities in SIDS are present in economic, social
and cultural life. Gender inequalities and empowerment issues are apparent in a
variety of limits for women in economic opportunity, including obstacles to decent
jobs, restricted access to finance, restricted access to land ownership, limited access
to technology and related training, and a gender wage gap. Beyond these economic
inequalities, women in SIDS often face lower rates of participation in decision-
making, limited social protection, domestic violence, and restrictions on women’s
health.

Among Pacific SIDS, women remain under-represented in technical and professional

education, and are over-represented in low-paid informal sectors, despite the
relatively equal gender representation in attainment of lower education levels.
Pacific and AIMS SIDS tend to have some of the most disproportionately low
numbers of women represented in decision-making bodies and high-level positions
in the world. Rates of physical and/or sexual violence against women are also
relatively high. Also, laws in the Pacific and AIMS SIDS provide unequal protection
between genders, particularly as it applies to sex discrimination, domestic violence,
marital rape, legal and safe abortion, legal age of marriage, and property rights (UN
ESCAP, 2010).

2.2.2.5 Human resources

44
UNEP, UN DESA, and FAO (2012) note that SIDS economies face a steady headwind
of human resource loss due to relatively high levels of emigration among residents
of the highest educational attainment, a phenomenon colloquially referred to as
“brain drain.” The contribution of income from remittances sent by such emigrants
is only a paltry offset for the losses associated with human resources, which pose a
significant social development challenge. The data suggests that SIDS tend to lose
more of their skilled labor and qualified, trained professionals as more young people
emigrate to find higher wages and better career prospects in the mainland.

A related problem is population ageing. Although this is a global phenomenon, the

limited population size of SIDS means that ageing has higher impacts and leads to
more serious implications to their governments and societies. As such, appropriate
policy adjustments are necessary in areas such as welfare, social insurance schemes,
and social assistance.

2.3 Trends and Challenges of Environment and Disaster Management

SIDS are especially vulnerable to climate change due to their small size, limited
resource base, and susceptibility to natural hazards. Their “low economic resilience
and limited human and technological capacity for mitigating and adapting to the
effects of climate change” makes them even more vulnerable (UN DESA, 2010: 5).
However, it is also this group of countries where disaster risk reduction and climate
change adaptation have the highest potential for investments. The ability of SIDS to
cope with climate change will depend critically on strategic investments in climate
adaption technology. Moreover, alleviating current risks from natural disasters could
open up more opportunities to attract foreign capital, to improve resiliency and to
promote sustainable economic development (UNISDR, 2013).

2.3.1 Coastal and marine resources

Coastal and marine resources, such as ocean fisheries, coastal fisheries and
aquaculture, and deep sea minerals are great resources that provide livelihoods and
sustain the regional economy among many SIDS. However, SIDS are facing some
serious threats to their coastal and marine resources: invasive and alien species,
deforestation, overexploitation of land, pollution, natural disasters, coral reef
deterioration, and habitat degradation. These threats may affect island biodiversity
and fishery, a main source of livelihood. Fishery production levels are increasing, but
overfishing, often attributable to illegal fishing and environmentally destructive
fishing practices, are damaging fish stocks. For example, trawlers drag large nets

45
across the seafloor, damaging coral reefs that support the fish population.
Furthermore, climate change and sea-level rise results in loss of coral reefs, ocean
warming, and acidification with concomitant negative impacts on fisheries in the
SIDS (UN DESA, 2010).

2.3.2 Rising sea levels

Rising sea-levels are a critical concern for SIDS, since a significant proportion of their
populations live in low elevation coastal zones (LECZ). These zones are defined as
the “contiguous area along the coast that is less than 10 meters above sea level” (UN
DESA 2010: 5). Settlements located in these areas are extremely vulnerable to storm
surges and floods. Based on 2007 IPCC estimates, sea levels could rise by 180 to
590 mm by the year 2100. Recent studies suggest that the actual rise could be at least
twice as large as these estimates. Low-lying atoll nations could eventually become
uninhabitable if such scenarios materialize.

Populations in many other SIDS would be adversely impacted as entire communities

and valuable assets would be displaced. Low-lying atoll states like Kiribati, Maldives,
Marshall Islands and Tuvalu are particularly threatened by rising sea-level due to
climate change. On average, only 30 percent of the populations in SIDS live at
elevations of 5 meters or more above sea level (UN DESA 2014a). 25 percent of SIDS’
land area is situated at an elevation of 5 meters or less above sea level. The Maldives
and Tuvalu have 100 percent of their land area under 5 meters above sea level.

<Figure 2.14> Countries with largest population shares in the Low Elevation
Coastal Zone (LECZ)

Note: Countries with less than 100,000 people living in the LECZ are excluded in the
methodology used in the source report. Fifteen small island states that are excluded have
population shares greater than 39 percent in the LECZ.

46
Source: McGranahan, 2006. (as cited in UN DESA, 2010)

2.3.3 Disaster risks

SIDS, in contrast to other states, are disproportionally affected by extreme hydro-

meteorological events, as can be seen in the impact it has on the percentage of their
losses in population and GDP. Many SIDS rank in the Asia-Pacific region as most at
risk for extreme hydro-meteorological events, both in terms of the proportion of the
population exposed and of loss as a percentage of GDP, as shown in <Table 2.10>.
SIDS are seasonally affected by extreme weather, such as tropical storms, cyclones
and hurricanes (UNISDR, 2013). The risks of damage and associated losses are
expected to continue to increase with the phenomenon of climate change (IPCC,
2014).

<Table 2.10> Top ten countries in the Asia Pacific region based on absolute and
relative physical exposure to storms and impact on GDP (between 1998 and 2009)

Relative exposure Absolute GDP

Absolute exposure Loss
Rank (% of the population loss (USD
(millions affected) (as % of GDP)
affected) billions)
North Mariana North Mariana
1 Japan (30.9) Japan (1,226.7)
Islands (58.2) Islands (59.4)
2 Philippines Niue (25.4) Korea (35.6) Vanuatu (27.1)
3 China (11.1) Japan (24.2) China (28.5) Niue (24.9)
4 India (10.7) Philippines (23.6) Philippines (24.3) Fiji (24.1)
5 Bangladesh (7.5) Fiji (23.1) Hong Kong (13.3) Japan (23.9)
6 Korea (2.4) Samoa (21.4) India (8.0) Philippines (23.9)
New Caledonia New Caledonia
7 Myanmar (1.2) Bangladesh (3.9)
(20.7) (22.4)
North Mariana
8 Viet Nam (0.8) Vanuatu (18.3) Samoa (19.2)
Islands (1.5)
9 Hong Kong (0.4) Tonga (18.1) Australia (0.8) Tonga (17.4)
New Caledonia
10 Pakistan (0.3) Cook Islands (10.5) Bangladesh (5.9)
(0.7)
Note: Small islands are highlighted in bold
Source: IPCC, 2014 (after ESCAP and UNISDR, 2010)

<Table 2.10> above demonstrates that in the Asia Pacific in the decade preceding 2009,
eight of the top ten countries which have the highest physical exposure to storms
relative to their population size are SIDS. The North Mariana Islands lead the pack,

47
with nearly six in ten (58.2 percent) of its population having been affected by a
hydro-meteorological disaster, followed by Niue at over one in four (25.4 percent).
Also, in Fiji, Samoa, and New Caledonia, more than one in five citizens have been
affected. Seven of the top ten countries ranked by most losses to hydro-
meteorological disaster relative to GDP are Pacific SIDS, including the top four. The
North Mariana Islands have lost a devastating 59.4 percent of their annual GDP in
this period, followed by Vanuatu at 27.1 percent, and Niue and Fiji at almost 25
percent.

An unusually large proportion of physical capital in SIDS is at risk of destruction

from earthquakes, cyclones, or tsunamis. The UN Global Assessment Report on
Disaster Risk Reduction has developed a global risk model which calculates an
estimation of annual average losses (AAL) and probable maximum losses as a result
of earthquakes and tropical cyclones. It is estimated that SIDS such as the Solomon
Islands, Dominica and Vanuatu could face losses of between 30 to 50 percent of the
value of their urban produced capital in the case of a one-in-250 year earthquake
(UNISDR, 2013). <Figure 2.14> below reveals that eight out of ten countries who
would lose the largest proportion of urban produced capital in the case of a one-in-
250 year earthquake are SIDS.

<Figure 2.15> Top 10 countries in terms of AAL (left) and probable maximum loss
(right) from earthquake as a percentage of urban produced capital

Source: GAR global risk model (as cited in UNISDR, 2013)

<Figure 2.15> below shows what the urban produced capital loss would be in the

48
case of a one-in-250 year cyclone. As can be seen in the figure, six of the top 10
countries are SIDS (UNISDR, 2013). UNISDR estimates that more than 20 percent of
value from urban produced capital would be lost in a one-in-250-year in the
following locations: the US Virgin Islands, the British Virgin Islands, Tonga, Samoa,
and Belize. Furthermore, UNISDR (2013) notes that wind damage from a one-in-250-
year tropical cyclone in 14 of the 16 SIDS in the Pacific could affect more than 60
percent of their annual capital formation.

<Figure 2.16> Top 10 countries with highest AAL (left) and PML (right) from
cyclonic winds

Source: GAR global risk model (as cited in UNISDR, 2013)

Extreme tsunamis will also have significant impacts on physical capital and a
significant proportion of populations residing in SIDS. A recent example is the 2009
tsunami that affected Samoa, American Samoa, and Tonga. <Figure 2.16> shows the
estimated impacts of a catastrophic one-in-500 year tsunami. The Maldives and the
Solomon Islands are estimated to both have more than 25 percent of their urban
produced capital destroyed by such a calamity. Also, close to 10 percent of the
population in the Maldives would be exposed to such an event (UNISDR, 2013).

Flooding is another major concern for SIDS. SIDS on volcanic islands also tend to
have a relatively large, steep river catchment system which exposes surrounding
areas to flash flooding and debris flows. Historically, Samoa has suffered the most
from coastal flooding, and in 2008 Samoa’s estimated annual average losses from
flooding totaled at least 25 million USD (UNISDR, 2013). Among four different types
of flooding: flash floods, river floods, coastal floods, and ponding floods, the latter
two mostly affect SIDS.

49
 <Figure 2.17> Absolute and relative urban produced capital (top)
and population (bottom) exposed to tsunamis in SIDS

Source: GAR global risk model (as cited in UNISDR, 2013)

<Table 2.11> below highlights the possible maximum losses (PML) of earthquakes
and cyclones winds with a 250-year return period. In the event of a one-in-250 year
earthquake, 13 countries in the world would experience losses of more than 60
percent of their annual capital formation to earthquakes; 10 of these are SIDS. In case
of a one-in-250-year cyclone, 16 countries in the world would experience losses of
more than 60 percent of their annual capital formation; 13 of these are SIDS.

50
 <Table 2.11> PML from one-in-250 year earthquakes and cyclones winds damage
as a percentage of gross fixed capital formation

PML Earthquakes Cyclones winds

Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas,
Dominica, Grenada, Puerto Rico, Belize, Barbados, Samoa,
More than 80%
Solomon Islands, Trinidad and French Polynesia, Micronesia,
Tobago Puerto Rico
Dominican Republic, Tonga Aruba, Comoros, Jamaica,
60~80%
St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Mauritius, Tonga
Dominica, Fiji, Grenada, Palau,
40~60% Aruba
St. Vincent and the Grenadines
British Virgin Islands, Jamaica,
British Virgin Islands, Dominican
20~40% New Caledonia, Palau, Vanuatu,
Republic, Trinidad and Tobago
Samoa
10~20% Fiji, Papua New Guinea, St. Lucia Cuba, St. Lucia
Note: Pacific & AIMS SIDS are highlighted in bold
Source: GAR global risk model (as cited in UNISDR, 2013)

<Table 2.12> and <Table 2.13> give us a glimpse of how countries with high levels of
AAL, coupled with low levels of investment, will be less able to absorb losses from
more frequent yet less severe events in the long run. These tables show the
significant ongoing risks to capital investment in SIDS, and the sustained drag on
economic development posed by earthquakes and cyclonic winds. The two tables
also demonstrate that many SIDS have an astounding AAL of their capital formation
from both earthquakes and cyclones. Especially alarming are the cases of the
Solomon Islands, Tonga, and Trinidad and Tobago, whose losses from earthquakes
are above one-tenth of their annual capital production (UNISDR, 2013).

<Table 2.12> AAL from earthquakes compared with gross fixed capital formation

Annual Average Losses Earthquakes

10~30% Solomon Islands, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago
Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, British Virgin Islands,
Dominica, Dominican Republic, Grenada, New Caledonia,
1~10%
Papua New Guinea, Puerto Rico, St. Vincent and the
Grenadines, Samoa, Vanuatu
Aruba, Bahrain, Belize, Comoros, Cuba, Fiji, Jamaica, Palau,
0.1~1%
St. Lucia, Singapore
Note: Pacific and AIMS SIDS are highlighted in bold
Source: GAR global risk model (as cited in UNISDR, 2013)

51
 <Table 2.13> AAL from cyclonic winds compared with gross fixed capital
formation

Annual Average Losses Cyclones winds

Antigua and Barbuda, Aruba, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize,
1~10% Comoros, Dominica, Fiji, French Polynesia, Jamaica,
Mauritius, Micronesia, , Palau, Puerto Rico, Samoa, Tonga
British Virgin Islands, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Grenada,
0.1~1% New Caledonia, St. Lucia, St. Vincent and the Grenadines,
Seychelles, Solomon Islands, Trinidad and Tobago, Vanuatu
Guyana, Haiti, Papua New Guinea, Suriname
0.01~0.1%

Note: Pacific & AIMS SIDS are highlighted in bold

Source: GAR global risk model (as cited in UNISDR, 2013)

Natural disasters are a major impediment to economic development in SIDS. The

costly devastation sustained in the average year in SIDS highlights their
vulnerability to climate change. The climate science community predicts that climate
change will increase both the intensity and frequency of extreme weather events,
which will further test the coping capacity of SIDS.

The intensity and frequency of storms and floods has already increased over the past
few decades. Hydro-meteorological disasters, including cyclones and tropical storms,
happen frequently, and 45 percent result in devastation sufficient to be deemed
natural disasters. Natural disasters put a strain on coping capacity, and contribute to
increased urbanization and environmental degradation. Worst of all, environmental
catastrophes further hamper SIDS’ ability to recover between extreme events (UN
DESA, 2010).

The significant impact of natural disasters affects economies and societies in SIDS
because most of the population who live in coastal areas is vulnerable. Intense
storms cause damage to local ecosystems. Some cyclones have destroyed coral reefs,
which are the main source of SIDS’s economies. When the temperature of the sea
surface rises, coral reef ecosystems are seriously affected. For example, Samoa had a
tropical storm and a forest fire in 1983, as well as three tropical storms consecutively
in 1989 to 1990. As a result, the capital stock may have been set back more than 35
years, as shown in <Figure 2.12>. As such, SIDS continue to put their resources on
post-disaster activities instead of disaster risk reduction and other coping
mechanisms (UN DESA, 2014a).

The economies of many SIDS are not resilient to losses from natural disaster, due to
limited diversification and their small market size. The “estimated and observed
52
losses represent a high proportion of annual capital formation,” (UNISDR, 2013)
which leads to slow long-term economic growth on the part of many SIDS. Worse,
given the small size of SIDS, calamities may affect their entire economy and territory,
since often their economies are concentrated in only one or two sectors (UNISDR,
2013).

<Figure 2.18> Capital accumulation in Samoa, Saint Lucia and Grenada

from 1970 to 2006, in relative terms

Note: Capital accumulation is described in relative terms for trend comparison purposes.
Source: Baritto, 2008. (as cited in UN DESA, 2010)

<Table 2.14> below gives a sense of the overall developmental burden of natural
disasters in SIDS relative to the rest of the world and each other. The table shows the
World Risk Index rankings of 16 Pacific and AIMS SIDS. The World Risk Index is a
metric developed by the Alliance Development Works, comprising two components:
Exposure and Vulnerability. Exposure refers to entities (population, built-up area,
infrastructure component, environmental areas) being exposed to the effects of one
or more natural hazards (Alliance Development Works and UNU-EHS, 2012). The
world map of exposure gives the population’s exposure to the natural hazard of
earthquakes, cyclones, floods and droughts and to a rise in seal level of one meter.
Vulnerability consists of three sub-factors: susceptibility, coping capacities, and
adaptive capacities.

Compared to the world and the Caribbean SIDS, many of the Pacific and AIMS SIDS
show higher world risk indices as well as higher exposure and vulnerability levels.
Furthermore, their exposure and vulnerability levels increase if Bahrain and
Singapore are excluded. On the other hand, the Caribbean SIDS’ world risk index is
similar to the world average.

As indicated in <Table 2.14>, the Pacific and AIMS SIDS are highly exposed to the

53
natural hazards that the World Risk Index accounts for, including earthquakes,
cyclones, flooding, drought, and sea level rise. Most Pacific and AIMS SIDS within
the top 40 are characterized not only by a high Exposure level, but also by a high
Vulnerability level. As the World Risk Index is an interaction of Exposure and
Vulnerability, the SIDS can lower their disaster risk levels by decreasing their
Vulnerability levels. For instance, Mauritius’ World Risk Index is lower than the ones
of the Solomon Islands, Timor-Leste, and Papua New Guinea, owing to Mauritius’
lower Vulnerability vis-à-vis the other three countries, even though Mauritius is more
highly exposed to the natural hazards than them.

<Table 2.14> World Risk Index of SIDS in the Pacific and AIMS

Country World Risk Index Exposure Vulnerability

Vanuatu 36.43 (1) 63.66 (1) 57.23 (55)
Tonga 28.23 (2) 55.27 (2) 51.07 (73)
Solomon Islands 18.11 (6) 29.98 (13) 60.40 (46)
Timor-Leste 16.37 (10) 25.73 (18) 63.61 (34)
Papua New Guinea 15.90 (11) 24.94 (20) 63.77 (32)
Mauritius 15.18 (13) 37.35 (7) 40.64 (123)
Fiji 13.56 (16) 27.71 (14) 48.93 (86)
Guinea-Bissau 13.09 (17) 19.65 (27) 66.58 (19)
Cape Verde 10.80 (32) 20.26 (25) 53.31 (68)
Comoros 7.52 (66) 10.97 (112) 68.56 (15)
Samoa 4.51 (120) 9.1 (141) 49.58 (83)
São Tomé and Principe 3.35 (144) 5.81 (164) 57.71 (53)
Seychelles 2.58 (157) 5.99 (162) 43.14 (114)
Singapore 2.49 (159) 7.82 (153) 31.84 (156)
Bahrain 1.81 (166) 4.27 (167) 42.37 (117)
Kiribati 1.78 (167) 3.05 (170) 58.48 (52)
World 7.40 14.73 49.50
Caribbean SIDS 7.53 15.62 46.76
Pacific & AIMS SIDS 11.98 21.97 53.58
Pacific & AIMS SIDS
13.39 24.25 55.93
(excluding outliers)

Note: (Rank), out of 173 countries. Outlier states are Bahrain and Singapore.
World Risk Index = Exposure * Vulnerability
54
Source: Alliance Development Works and UNU-EHS (2013). World Risk Report 2013

2.3.4 Greenhouse gas emissions and clean energy

Although SIDS are not a major contributor to the problem of climate change, their
greenhouse gas emissions have been on the rise. The total annual CO2 output of SIDS
is a negligible contribution to global CO2 emissions, constituting less than one
percent. Nevertheless, from 1990 to 2006, emissions have increased by an average
annual rate of 2.3 percent. SIDS, like other states, face significant difficulties in
reducing their emissions and moving to clean energy.

Given the increasingly imminent threat to their development prospects, many SIDS
have made climate change adaptation a top priority (UN DESA, 2014a). In 2001, the
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC) decided to
assist a number of LDCs, eleven out of twelve of which were SIDS, in drafting
National Adaptation Programs of Action (NAPAs) to address adaptation issues
arising from the adverse effects of climate change. In these NAPAs, water resources,
agriculture and food security, and the protection of coastal zones have been
identified as areas of concern.

2.3.5 Waste management

Management of waste is another major challenge that will have to be addressed as

SIDS progress along their development trajectory. Waste management is becoming
more urgent as a result of population growth and increasing urbanization in these
countries. Delicate island ecosystems are susceptible to damage from improperly
managed waste, partly because their small size limits their capacity to naturally
disperse and process waste. Sanitation infrastructure is also deficiently developed in
many areas. Most waste from households in SIDS is either recyclable or organic
waste, but recycling operators are few, and the market for recyclable products is
virtually non-existent. Moreover, land allocated for landfill sites is limited and
insufficient for the current volume of discarded waste. As a result, waste is regularly
burned or dumped into the water or in mangrove areas. (UN ESCAP, 2010).

Insufficient waste management can exacerbate water sanitation issues, contributing

to costly water shortages and contamination alerts. The development of some SIDS
can be constrained by the difficulty to access high-quality water for domestic,
agricultural and industrial usages. In addition to direct constraints on industrial
productivity, waste management issues can indirectly constrain economic
development through environmental costs and public health consequences.

2.3.6 Biodiversity preservation

55
One significant strategic asset for the economic development of many SIDS is their
local biodiversity. Many island species in SIDS are endemic to the respective local
region. For example, Papua New Guinea is one of the “mega-diversity countries”
that hosts 8 percent of the world’s biodiversity. 50 percent of all higher plants,
mammals, birds, reptiles, and amphibians in Mauritius are endemic. Indeed, a
disproportionate number of the world’s threatened species are endemic to SIDS (UN
ESCAP, 2010).

Governments, both local and throughout the rest of the world, thus have a shared
responsibility for and interest in protecting such rich biodiversity. Protection of
habitats and ecosystems will require a joint effort, coordinated between the public
and non-governmental sectors, to design and implement the right measures as these
nations seek to increase their standard of living. The same problems that affect
coastal and marine resources (e.g., invasive and alien species, deforestation,
overexploitation of land, pollution, natural disasters, coral reef deterioration, and
habitat degradation) also threaten island biodiversity. Likewise, the negative impacts
of climate change and sea-level rise that result in loss of coral reefs, ocean warming,
and acidification, also have detrimental effects on biodiversity. Though revenues
from research and tourism could be seen as valuable economic assets for these
countries, short-sighted development incentives may threaten these assets for future
generations.

2.4 Governance trends and challenges

<Figure 2.13> shows the trends for institutional capacity (comprising the Government
Effectiveness and Regulatory Quality Indicators) and transparency (represented as
Control of Corruption Indicator) of the government sector among the Pacific and AIMS
SIDS. According to the World Bank, the averages of these three indicators among the
Pacific and AIMS SIDS have been negative, which indicate that the levels of
government effectiveness, regulatory quality, and control of corruption of the Pacific
and AIMS SIDS have been less than the world average, given that the world average
is normalized to zero. The three indicators’ values declined jointly from 2005 to 2009.
Even though it seems that government effectiveness, regulatory quality, and control
of corruption have gotten better since 2009 or 2010, governments should still strive to
elevate competitiveness in the public sector. Government Effectiveness, Regulatory
Quality, and Control of Corruption have all marginally improved since 2009, but none
of these indicators has rebounded to reach their peak levels of 2004 and 2005.

56
 <Figure 2.19> Institutional capacity and transparency of government sector

0.0
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
-0.2

-0.4

-0.6

Government Effectiveness Regulatory Quality Control of Corruption

Note: Range of values is -2.5 to 2.5. The global average is zero. Data does not include all
SIDS. Notably, the Cook Islands, French Polynesia, New Caledonia, Niue, and the Northern
Marianas are excluded in the three indicators.
Source: World Bank's Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI)

In comparison with other income groups, the level of government effectiveness of

the Pacific and AIMS SIDS has been between those of the upper-middle-income
group and the lower-middle-income group. However, the level gets closer to that of
the lower-middle-income group if the outliers (Bahrain and Singapore) are excluded.
Among all groups, only the high-income group and the Caribbean SIDS have
achieved positive values.

<Figure 2.20> Government effectiveness

57
 0.9

0.4

-0.1
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

-0.6

High-income Caribbean SIDS

Upper-middle-income Pacific & AIMS
Pacific & AIMS (excluding outliers) Lower-middle-income

Note: Range of values is -2.5 to 2.5. The global average is zero. Data does not include all
SIDS. Notably, the Cook Islands, French Polynesia, New Caledonia, Niue, and the Northern
Marianas are excluded.
Source: World Bank's Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI)

Like the government effectiveness indicator, the regulatory quality indicator of the
Pacific and AIMS SIDS is located between those of the upper-middle-income group
and the lower-middle-income group. More precisely, it is closer to the lower-middle-
income group. However, the value decreases from -0.546 to -0.631 as of 2012 if the
outliers (Bahrain and Singapore) are excluded, which means that their average level
of regulatory quality falls behind the lower-middle-income group.

<Figure 2.21> Regulatory quality

58
 1.2
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
-0.2 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

-0.4
-0.6
-0.8

High-income Caribbean SIDS

Upper-middle-income Pacific & AIMS
Lower-middle-income Pacific & AIMS (excluding outliers)

Note: Range of values is -2.5 to 2.5. The global average is zero. Data does not include all
SIDS. Notably, the Cook Islands, French Polynesia, New Caledonia, Niue, and the Northern
Marianas are excluded.
Source: World Bank's Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI)

In contrast to the two institutional capacity indicators, not only is the transparency
level of public sector close to the global average but also it is greater than those of the
upper middle income group and the lower middle income group even if Bahrain and
Singapore are excluded.

<Figure 2.22> Control of corruption

59
 1.2
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
-0.2 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

-0.4
-0.6
-0.8

High-income Caribbean SIDS

Pacific & AIMS Pacific & AIMS (excluding outliers)
Upper-middle-income Lower-middle-income

Note: Range of values is -2.5 to 2.5. The global average is zero. Data does not include all
SIDS. Notably, the Cook Islands, French Polynesia, New Caledonia, Niue, and the Northern
Marianas are excluded.
Source: World Bank's Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI)

<Table 2.15> shows individual countries’ institutional capacity and government

transparency as of 2012. Singapore stands out as a leader in the three areas.
Mauritius, Bahrain, Guam, American Samoa, Cape Verde, and the Seychelles are
better than the other Pacific and AIMS SIDS. Only seven out of twenty-four states
have a positive value in Government Effectiveness, while only six states have a positive
value in Regulatory Quality. In Control of Corruption, eleven states accomplished a
positive value.

<Table 2.15> Institutional capacity and government transparency as of 2012

Government Regulatory Control of

Country
Effectiveness Quality Corruption
American Samoa 0.477 0.355 0.350
Bahrain 0.540 0.687 0.394
Cape Verde 0.099 0.040 0.806
Comoros -1.546 -1.420 -0.725

60
 Fiji -0.899 -0.601 -0.435
Guam -0.042 0.594 0.822
Guinea-Bissau -1.244 -1.239 -1.225
Kiribati -0.834 -1.360 0.004
Maldives -0.160 -0.347 -0.443
Marshall Islands -1.649 -1.015 -0.142
Mauritius 0.934 0.984 0.334
Micronesia -0.632 -0.984 -0.109
Nauru -0.558 -1.202 0.047
Palau -0.558 -1.010 -0.284
Papua New Guinea -0.769 -0.522 -1.037
Samoa 0.090 -0.339 0.153
S. Tomé & Principe -0.717 -0.803 -0.393
Seychelles 0.376 -0.310 0.334
Singapore 2.152 1.961 2.154
Solomon Islands -0.824 -1.071 -0.444
Timor-Leste -1.193 -1.024 -0.979
Tonga -0.194 -0.599 -0.072
Tuvalu -0.687 -1.250 -0.296
Vanuatu -0.223 -0.767 0.446
Average -0.336 -0.468 -0.031
Source: World Bank's Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI)

61
3. E-government for sustainable development in SIDS
3.1 Regional trends of e-government in SIDS

3.1.1 E-Government Development Index (EGDI)

The UN E-Government Survey classifies countries into groups by income level and
measures each country’s development of e-government practices in the
E-Government Development Index (EGDI). Since the first edition of the UN
E-Government Survey was published in 2003, the disparities in the E-Government
Development Index (EGDI) among country groups classified by income level have
not narrowed, although all groups’ scores on the index have increased during the
last eleven years.

<Figure 3.1> Regional comparison of EGDI

0.8
High Income

0.7
Upper Middle Income

0.6
Carribbean SIDS

0.5
SIDS

0.4
Pacific & AIMS SIDS

0.3
Lower Middle Income

0.2 Pacific & AIMS SIDS

(excluding outliers)
0.1 Low Income
2003 2004 2005 2008 2010 2012 2014

Source: UNPAN (2003, 2004, 2005, 2008, 2010, 2012, 2014). UN E-Government Surveys

For the Pacific and AIMS SIDS, the EGDI increased marginally (0.0604 points) from
2003 to 2014.12 <Figure 3.1> shows that there were two periods of noticeable growth

12 The UN E-Government Surveys contains only 38 UN member states’ data out of 52 SIDS: 22 of
62
in the EGDI for the Pacific and AIMS SIDS: between 2005 and 2008 and between 2010
and 2012. Both periods of growth are concurrent with a global trend. However, there
was a decline in the EGDI between 2012 and 2014 in all regions including Africa, the
Americas, Asia, Europe, and Oceania. This decline may be a function of
methodological changes to the component indices, the Human Capital Index and the
Telecommunication Infrastructure Index.

According to the E-Government Survey 2014, the average EGDI of 38 SIDS is 0.4069.
The EGDI of the Pacific and AIMS SIDS is 0.3800, which is lower than the world
average (0.4712) and lower than that of Caribbean SIDS (0.4439). The average EGDI
of all SIDS (0.469) is fairly close to the average of upper-middle-income countries
(0.4828). By contrast, the average EGDI of the Pacific and AIMS SIDS (.3800) is in line
with that of lower-middle-income countries (0.3723).

<Table 3.1> presents the EGDI of the Pacific and AIMS SIDS from 2003 to 2014. As of
2014, Singapore (0.9076) and Bahrain (0.8089) show exceptionally greater EGDI
values than the other states among the Pacific and AIMS SIDS. Mauritius, the
Seychelles, and Fiji show outstanding performance in the EGDI, with scores of more
than 0.5. If the two outliers (Singapore and Bahrain) are excluded, the average EGDI
among Pacific and AIMS SIDS decreases from 0.3800 to 0.3321. Guinea-Bissau
(0.1609) and Papua New Guinea (0.1203) are at the bottom of the rankings. Fourteen
states show increases in the EGDI during the last eleven years. Palau has made the
largest leap, moving up 0.4328 points, from the bottom of the rankings in 2003 to the
8th highest-ranked state in 2014. In contrast, the EGDI scores of Micronesia (-0.1928),
Papua New Guinea (-0.1300), the Solomon Islands (-0.0749), São Tomé and Principe
(-0.0505), and Nauru (-0.0157) have declined over the last eleven years. The changes
in EGDI over the last two years (2012-2014) have been mixed among Pacific and
AIMS SIDS. During this period, eight states raised their EGDI by an average of .0389
points, while fourteen states lost ground on their EGDI by an average of .0505 points.
Some of the decrease may partially attributable to changes in components of the
EGDI.

Divergence in e-government performance is reflected in increasing disparities on the

EGDI among the Pacific and AIMS SIDS from 2003 to 2014; the standard deviation of
the EGDI increased from 0.184 to 0.197 even though variation decreased between
2005 and 2008. However, if the two outliers (Singapore and Bahrain) are excluded,
the standard deviation turns out to decrease slightly (-0.025) from 0.152 in 2003 to
0.127 in 2014. The disparity in e-government development among the Pacific and

those are situated in the Pacific and AIMS, while 16 are in the Caribbean.

63
AIMS SIDS is an indication that factors beyond mere physical geography are
determining investment in e-government. Leading states can provide a useful model
and implications for latecomers’ e-government development.

<Table 3.1> EGDI of the Pacific and AIMS SIDS

Country 2003 2004 2005 2008 2010 2012 2014

Bahrain 0.5097 0.5323 0.5282 0.5723 0.7363 0.6946 0.8089
Cape Verde 0.3223 0.3442 0.3346 0.4158 0.4054 0.4297 0.3551
Comoros 0.1758 0.1826 0.1974 0.1896 0.2327 0.2358 0.1808
Fiji 0.4251 0.3912 0.4081 0.4156 0.3925 0.4672 0.5044
Guinea-Bissau - - - 0.1521 0.1561 0.1945 0.1609
Kiribati - - - - - 0.2998 0.3201
Maldives 0.4103 0.4106 0.4321 0.4491 0.4392 0.4994 0.4813
Marshall Islands 0.0382 0.0447 0.0440 - - 0.3129 0.2851
Mauritius 0.4711 0.5055 0.5317 0.5086 0.4645 0.5066 0.5338
Micronesia 0.5265 0.0456 0.0532 - - 0.3812 0.3337
Nauru 0.2932 0.0351 0.0357 - - 0.3242 0.2776
Palau 0.0087 0.0425 0.0564 - 0.4189 0.4359 0.4415
Papua New Guinea 0.2503 0.2406 0.2539 0.2078 0.2043 0.2147 0.1203
Samoa 0.2993 0.3793 0.3977 0.3761 0.3742 0.4358 0.4204
S. Tomé & Principe 0.2723 0.2774 0.2837 0.3215 0.3258 0.3327 0.2218
Seychelles 0.4197 0.4259 0.4884 0.4942 0.4179 0.5192 0.5113
Singapore 0.7463 0.8340 0.8503 0.7009 0.7476 0.8474 0.9076
Solomon Islands 0.2836 0.2700 0.2669 0.2748 0.2445 0.2416 0.2087
Timor-Leste 0.0873 0.0463 0.2512 0.2462 0.2273 0.2365 0.2528
Tonga 0.3906 0.3781 0.3680 0.3950 0.3697 0.4405 0.4706
Tuvalu - - 0.0370 - - 0.3539 0.3059
Vanuatu 0.1417 0.1618 0.1664 0.2510 0.2521 0.3512 0.2571
Pacific & AIMS 0.3196 0.2920 0.2992 0.3732 0.3770 0.3980 0.3800
Standard deviation 0.184 0.211 0.211 0.151 0.166 0.157 0.197
Caribbean 0.4045 0.4076 0.4176 0.4387 0.4303 0.4971 0.4439
All SIDS 0.3541 0.3430 0.3500 0.4059 0.4028 0.4397 0.4069
World 0.4024 0.4127 0.4267 0.4514 0.4406 0.4882 0.4712

64
Source: UNPAN (2003, 2004, 2005, 2008, 2010, 2012, 2014). UN E-government Surveys

3.1.1.1 Human Capital Index (HCI)

The average Human Capital Index (HCI) among Pacific and AIMS SIDS has
decreased from 0.778 to 0.641 over the last eleven years. The decrease reflects
stagnant progress and even deterioration in the various metrics of human capital
that compose the index. Despite the decline in recent years, the gap relative to the
world average on the HCI (0.0156) is narrower than is the gap on the TII (0.1113 less
than the world average) and OSI (0.1467 less than the world average). In 2014, three
countries’ HCI are greater than 0.8 points: Singapore, Fiji, and Tonga, while six
countries’ HCI are higher than 0.7 points: Palau, Bahrain, São Tomé and Principe, the
Seychelles, Micronesia, Tuvalu, and the Marshall Islands. However, five countries’
HCI are less than 0.5: Timor-Leste (0.4831), the Solomon Islands (0.4702), Comoros
(0.4662), Guinea-Bissau (0.3869), and Papua New Guinea (0.30).

<Table 3.2> HCI of the Pacific and AIMS SIDS

Country 2003 2004 2005 2008 2010 2012 2014

Bahrain 0.85 0.86 0.85 0.86 0.89 0.80 0.78
Cape Verde 0.75 0.77 0.75 0.76 0.79 0.62 0.60
Comoros 0.49 0.51 0.53 0.53 0.66 0.59 0.47
Fiji 0.90 0.88 0.86 0.88 0.86 0.80 0.83
Guinea-Bissau 0.38 0.41 0.39 0.42 0.42 0.43 0.39
Kiribati - - - - - 0.79 0.68
Maldives 0.90 0.91 0.91 0.86 0.88 0.81 0.69
Marshall Islands - - - - - 0.76 0.70
Mauritius 0.77 0.80 0.79 0.81 0.84 0.76 0.69
Micronesia 1.42 - - - - 0.83 0.70
Nauru 0.81 - - - - 0.70 0.56
Palau - - - - 0.96 0.84 0.80
Papua New Guinea 0.55 0.57 0.57 0.52 0.52 0.37 0.30
Samoa 0.75 0.89 0.89 0.90 0.90 0.83 0.52
S. Tomé & Principe 0.75 0.75 0.76 0.78 0.81 0.74 0.75
Seychelles 0.83 0.87 0.90 0.89 0.90 0.82 0.73
Singapore 0.87 0.87 0.91 0.91 0.92 0.85 0.85

65
 Solomon Islands 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.67 0.68 0.57 0.47
Timor-Leste - - 0.64 0.57 0.54 0.43 0.48
Tonga 0.92 0.92 0.93 0.93 0.92 0.87 0.83
Tuvalu 1.03 - - - - 0.82 0.70
Vanuatu 0.35 0.41 0.42 0.70 0.71 0.65 0.57
Pacific & AIMS 0.778 0.740 0.736 0.750 0.777 0.714 0.641
Caribbean 0.831 0.846 0.833 0.847 0.858 0.781 0.699
All SIDS 0.803 0.795 0.785 0.799 0.816 0.742 0.665
Source: UNPAN (2003, 2004, 2005, 2008, 2010, 2012, 2014). UN E-government Surveys

3.1.1.2 Telecommunication Infrastructure Index (TII)

<Table 3.3> shows the latest status of the subscription and usage rates of major ICT
infrastructures of the 28 states in the Pacific and AIMS regions. Among the Pacific
and AIMS SIDS per 100 residents, 33.37 use the internet, 19.12 use a fixed phone,
79.91 use a mobile phone, 6.26 subscribe to fixed broadband, and 18.12 use wireless
broadband. Across all five ICT infrastructures, the Pacific and AIMS SIDS have
achieved lower usage rates than the global averages. In line with the world trend,
the mobile-phone usage rate is higher than the fixed-phone usage rate in the Pacific
and AIMS SIDS.

However, there is wide variation in the subscription and usage rates among the
Pacific and AIMS SIDS. For example, the standard deviation of the mobile-phone
subscriber rate among these states is 43.59. Also, excluding the outliers of Singapore
and Bahrain reduces the rate of mobile-phone subscribers from 79.91 to 72.23 per 100
residents, and reduces the rate of wireless-broadband subscribers from 18.12 to 9.83
per 100 residents. This means that only 13.6 percent of mobile phone subscribers in
the Pacific and AIMS SIDS, excluding Singapore and Bahrain, have high speed
internet access, whereas 23.5 percent of mobile-phone subscribers can access high
speed internet worldwide.

<Table 3.3> Subscriptions and users of major ICT infrastructures

Fixed Mobile Internet Fixed Wireless

Country
phone phone users broadband broadband*
American Samoa 18.14 n/a n/a n/a n/a
Bahrain 22.72 161.17 88 13.2 78.4
Cape Verde 14.2 86.03 34.74 4.02 23.0

66
 Comoros 3.34 39.51 5.98 0.17 0
Fiji 10.11 98.18 33.74 1.55 23.4
French Polynesia 20.09 82.54 52.88 14.68 n/a
Guam 41.15 n/a 61.53 n/a n/a
Guinea-Bissau 0.3 63.07 2.89 n/a 0
Kiribati 8.93 15.88 10.75 0.99 0
Maldives 6.84 165.63 38.93 5.28 20.6
Marshall Islands n/a n/a 10 n/a 0
Mauritius 28.16 119.87 41.39 11.21 22.9
Micronesia 8.12 30.19 n/a n/a 0
Nauru n/a 67.78 n/a n/a 10.0
New Caledonia 31.6 91.25 58 18.92 n/a
Niue 72.25 n/a 82.22 n/a n/a
Northern Marianas 43.15 n/a n/a n/a n/a
Palau 35.29 82.64 n/a 4.41 32.3
Papua New Guinea 1.94 37.8 2.3 0.13 0
Samoa n/a n/a 12.92 n/a 40.4
S. Tomé & Principe 4.27 64.95 21.57 0.41 0
Seychelles 22.69 147.8 47.08 11.03 8.6
Singapore 37.48 152.13 74.18 25.44 123.8
Solomon Islands 1.47 54.98 7 0.39 6.5
Timor-Leste 0.27 55.74 0.91 0.05 0.4
Tonga 28.59 53.36 34.86 1.43 0.1
Tuvalu 14.71 28.4 35 5.58 0
Vanuatu 2.16 59.08 10.6 0.13 8.3
Pacific & AIMS 19.12 79.91 33.37 6.26 18.12
Std. Dev. 19.42 43.59 24.83 7.77 30.26
World 21.22 100.09 41.8 11.07 23.57
Note: per 100 inhabitants. Data is not weighted by population.
Source: ITU statistics (http://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/Pages/stat/default.aspx)
* UN E-government Survey 2014

<Figure 3.2> shows that the ratio of ICT goods imports to total goods imports of SIDS
has been lower than that of the other groups. This situation implies that the SIDS’

67
priority among the imported goods is not ICT goods, but more basic goods such as
energy resources, groceries, and daily necessaries. Moreover, such lower priority
may be in line with the lower TII of SIDS, compared to the world average.

<Figure 3.2> ICT goods imports (% total goods imports)

18%

16%

14%
Pacific & AIMS
12% Lower middle income
Upper middle income
10%
High income
8% World

6%

4%
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Source: World Bank (http://data.worldbank.org)

Based on the subscription and usage indicators of the ITU, the UNPAN constructs
the Telecommunication Infrastructure Index (TII). The TII in 2014 is constructed
based on the status of the subscriptions and users in 2012, while the TII 2012 is based
on data from 2010. According to the UN E-Government Survey 2014, only six states
out of twenty-two Pacific and AIMS SIDS are in the world’s top 100 with respect to
telecommunication infrastructure. In addition, the exclusion of Bahrain and
Singapore from analysis decreases the average TII from 0.2537 to 0.1999.

Every one of the Pacific and AIMS SIDS elevated their TII from 2012-2014, except for
Tuvalu and Vanuatu. The vast majority of Pacific and AIMS states also raised their
TII rank over the same period. Exceptions include Maldives, Micronesia, São Tomé
and Principe, Timor-Leste, Tuvalu, and Vanuatu. Remarkably, Bahrain raised its TII
by 0.2872 points even though it had already reached more than 0.4. Singapore also
shows a similar increase. Bahrain and Singapore, already the highest-ranked among
the Pacific and AIMS SIDS, raised their TII by the greatest margin from 2012-2014.
On the strength of these performances, the Pacific and AIMS SIDS narrowed the gap

68
to the Caribbean SIDS, although they have not been able to narrow the gap to the
rest of the world.

<Table 3.4> Recent status of TII in the Pacific and AIMS SIDS

Country Rank (Change) TII 2014 TII 2012 2014–2012

Bahrain 26 (↑42) 0.7055 0.4183 0.2872
Cape Verde 103 (↑7) 0.2966 0.2268 0.0698
Comoros 175 (↑9) 0.0604 0.0436 0.0168
Fiji 106 (↑1) 0.2872 0.2434 0.0438
Guinea-Bissau 166 (↑10) 0.0878 0.0511 0.0367
Kiribati 174 (↑7) 0.0665 0.0469 0.0197
Maldives 79 (-) 0.3952 0.3599 0.0352
Marshall Islands 182 (↑3) 0.0448 0.0425 0.0023
Mauritius 69 (↑18) 0.4406 0.3296 0.1110
Micronesia 158 (↓5) 0.1099 0.1013 0.0086
Nauru 127 (↑3) 0.2159 0.1700 0.0459
Palau 87 (↑9) 0.3592 0.2802 0.0790
Papua New Guinea 178 (↑8) 0.0530 0.0411 0.0119
Samoa 113 (↑7) 0.2672 0.1927 0.0745
S. Tomé & Principe 147 (↓12) 0.1398 0.1374 0.0024
Seychelles 59 (↑12) 0.4721 0.4037 0.0684
Singapore 4 (↑19) 0.8793 0.6923 0.1870
Solomon Islands 160 (↑32) 0.1008 0.0198 0.0810
Timor-Leste 173 (↓6) 0.0704 0.0649 0.0056
Tonga 116 (↑1) 0.2348 0.2069 0.0279
Tuvalu 134 (↓9) 0.1761 0.1866 -0.0105
Vanuatu 155 (↓27) 0.1188 0.1783 -0.0594
Pacific & AIMS - 0.2537 0.2017 0.0520
Caribbean - 0.3714 0.3866 -0.0151
All SIDS - 0.3033 0.2795 0.0237
World - 0.3650 0.3245 0.0405

69
Source: UNPAN (2012, 2014). UN E-Government Survey 2012 and 2014

From a longer perspective, the TIIs from 2003 to 2014 show that telecommunications
infrastructure in SIDS is improving, albeit slowly. On average, the Pacific and AIMS
SIDS raised their TII by 0.151 points, from 0.103 to 0.254, during the last eleven years.
However, the Pacific and AIMS countries’ TII in 2014 (0.2537) is lower than the
world average (0.3650) and lower than that of the Caribbean SIDS (0.3714). The
Pacific and AIMS countries’ average TII falls between the average of upper-middle-
income countries (0.3522) and lower-middle-income countries (0.2307).

In 2014, Singapore (0.879), Bahrain (0.706), the Seychelles (0.472), Mauritius (0.441),
and the Maldives (0.395) show better performances than other Pacific and AIMS
SIDS. The TII scores of Singapore and Bahrain are higher than the average of high-
income countries (0.6845). At the ‘low-development’ extreme, there are six states
among the Pacific and AIMS SIDS which score less than 0.1: Guinea-Bissau (0.088),
Timor-Leste (0.070), Kiribati (0.067), Comoros (0.060), Papua New Guinea (0.053),
and the Marshall Islands (0.045).

Bahrain (0.358), the Maldives (0.326), Mauritius (0.245), Samoa (0.233), the Seychelles
(0.231), Singapore (0.213), Fiji (0.213), and Cape Verde (0.211) raised their TII by
more than 0.2 points during the last eleven years. Several countries showed more
modest advances of less than one-tenth of a point during the same period, including
Vanuatu, São Tomé and Principe, Guinea-Bissau, the Solomon Islands, Micronesia,
Comoros, Kiribati, Papua New Guinea, and the Marshall Islands. Notably,
Micronesia, Timor-Leste, São Tomé and Principe, the Marshall Islands, Tuvalu, and
Vanuatu raised their TII by less than 0.1 for the last two years. Notably, Tuvalu
(-0.011) and Vanuatu (-0.059) have recorded negative growth over the last two years.

<Table 3.5> TII of the Pacific and AIMS SIDS

Country 2003 2004 2005 2008 2010 2012 2014

Bahrain 0.347 0.332 0.315 0.335 0.586 0.418 0.706
Cape Verde 0.086 0.081 0.081 0.097 0.165 0.227 0.297
Comoros 0.007 0.007 0.008 0.014 0.020 0.044 0.060
Fiji 0.074 0.081 0.084 0.098 0.140 0.243 0.287
Guinea-Bissau 0.004 0.008 0.011 0.016 0.036 0.051 0.088
Kiribati 0.026 0.026 0.025 0.018 0.015 0.047 0.067
Maldives 0.069 0.079 0.075 0.196 0.289 0.360 0.395
Marshall Islands 0.040 0.041 0.042 0.045 0.042 0.042 0.045

70
 Mauritius 0.196 0.172 0.176 0.242 0.265 0.330 0.441
Micronesia 0.040 0.040 0.052 0.084 0.081 0.101 0.110
Nauru 0.035 0.051 0.049 0.056 - 0.170 0.216
Palau - - - - 0.255 0.280 0.359
Papua New Guinea 0.031 0.032 0.030 0.022 0.023 0.041 0.053
Samoa 0.034 0.032 0.038 0.054 0.082 0.193 0.267
S. Tomé & Principe 0.054 0.071 0.080 0.074 0.083 0.137 0.140
Seychelles 0.241 0.245 0.234 0.301 0.304 0.404 0.472
Singapore 0.666 0.663 0.645 0.585 0.639 0.692 0.879
Solomon Islands 0.022 0.022 0.021 0.019 0.019 0.020 0.101
Timor-Leste - - - 0.007 0.007 0.065 0.070
Tonga 0.051 0.048 0.047 0.091 0.127 0.207 0.235
Tuvalu 0.015 0.054 0.084 0.089 0.172 0.187 0.176
Vanuatu 0.023 0.029 0.029 0.025 0.038 0.178 0.119
Pacific & AIMS 0.103 0.106 0.106 0.118 0.161 0.202 0.254
Caribbean 0.152 0.159 0.170 0.226 0.273 0.387 0.371
All SIDS 0.125 0.129 0.135 0.164 0.210 0.280 0.303
Source: UNPAN (2003, 2004, 2005, 2008, 2010, 2012, 2014). UN E-Government Surveys

3.1.1.3 Online Service Index (OSI)

The UN has defined four stages of development of online services. In particular,

information on public policy, governance, laws, regulations, relevant documentation,
and types of public services (Stage 1 of development) is offered relatively widely
throughout the world. However, governments rarely engage in two-way
communication with their citizens (Stage 2), insufficiently offer transactional services
(Stage 3), and inadequately provide connected services (Stage 4). Based on the
availability of various online services at each of the four stages, the UNPAN
calculates the Online Service Index (OSI).

The OSI is the most direct and unmediated metric of e-government development
among the sub-indices of EGDI. However, most governments of the Pacific and
AIMS SIDS provide insufficient information on public policy, and have limited
communication with their citizens through their websites. The average among the
Pacific and AIMS SIDS lags behind the global average by 0.1467 points, a gap which
is more than the corresponding gap on the TII (0.1113) and the HCI (0.0156).
Moreover, excluding Bahrain and Singapore reduces the average OSI of the Pacific
71
and AIMS SIDS from 0.2452 to 0.1732. As with the TII and HCI, the average OSI of
the Pacific and AIMS SIDS (0.2452) is lower than that of the Caribbean SIDS (0.2613).

In the E-Government Survey 2014, Singapore and Bahrain received exceptional

scores of 0.992 and 0.937, respectively. If these outliers are excluded, the average
2014 OSI among the remaining Pacific and AIMS SIDS is only 0.173, a score which
constitutes a mere 0.045 point improvement over 2003. Beyond the two exceptional
cases of Singapore and Bahrain, Mauritius (0.4724) and Fiji (0.3937) achieve relatively
high scores on the OSI. Eight countries scored less than 0.1 point on the OSI:
Vanuatu (0.0787), Nauru (0.0551), the Solomon Islands (0.0551), Tuvalu (0.0394),
Comoros (0.0157), Guinea-Bissau (0.0079), Papua New Guinea (0.0079), and São
Tomé and Principe (0.0079).

<Table 3.6> Online Service Index and its Components

County Rank OSI Stage1 Stage2 Stage3 Stage4 Total

Bahrain 7 0.9370 94% 80% 84% 74% 82%
Cape Verde 145 0.1654 34% 16% 12% 15% 18%
Comoros 183 0.0157 19% 7% 0% 0% 6%
Fiji 85 0.3937 75% 36% 21% 24% 37%
Guinea-Bissau 187 0.0079 9% 7% 2% 3% 5%
Kiribati 134 0.2126 44% 27% 12% 9% 22%
Maldives 94 0.3622 66% 48% 14% 15% 35%
Marshall Islands 160 0.1102 47% 14% 0% 0% 14%
Mauritius 69 0.4724 88% 64% 9% 21% 44%
Micronesia 139 0.1890 56% 23% 2% 6% 20%
Nauru 173 0.0551 22% 11% 2% 3% 9%
Palau 145 0.1654 53% 16% 2% 9% 18%
Papua New Guinea 187 0.0079 9% 11% 0% 0% 5%
Samoa 123 0.2441 75% 20% 0% 15% 25%
S. Tomé & Principe 187 0.0079 6% 14% 0% 0% 5%
Seychelles 102 0.3307 53% 30% 7% 47% 32%
Singapore 2 0.9921 100% 89% 88% 71% 87%
Solomon Islands 173 0.0551 19% 14% 2% 3% 9%
Timor-Leste 135 0.2047 47% 25% 7% 12% 22%

72
 Tonga 98 0.3465 69% 41% 12% 18% 33%
Tuvalu 179 0.0394 25% 9% 0% 0% 8%
Vanuatu 168 0.0787 34% 5% 5% 6% 11%
Pacific & AIMS - 0.2452 47.4% 27.5% 12.8% 15.8% 24.9%
Caribbean - 0.2613 53.5% 30.4% 9.7% 16.2% 26.3%
All SIDS - 0.2520 50.0% 28.7% 11.5% 15.9% 25.5%
World - 0.3919 64.5% 40.0% 22.0% 26.9% 37.1%
Source: INPAN (2013). UN E-Government Survey 2014

Progress on the OSI among the Pacific and AIMS SIDS can be characterized as
stagnant to modest. On average, the Pacific and AIMS SIDS raised their OSI by 0.081
points over the last eleven years, reflecting slower progress than their growth on the
TII (0.151) during the same period. Over the last eleven years, eight states raised
their OSI by more than 0.1 point: Bahrain (0.605), Singapore (0.289), Kiribati (0.213),
Tonga (0.146), the Seychelles (0.143), Palau (0.139), Samoa (0.131), and the Maldives
(0.100). However, five states show negative growth in the OSI: São Tomé and
Principe (-0.005), Comoros (-0.015), Timor-Leste (-0.057), the Solomon Islands (-0.093),
and Papua New Guinea (-0.162). Only six states showed any growth since 2012:
Kiribati, Tonga, Bahrain, Mauritius, the Maldives, and Fiji, whereas the other sixteen
states show negative growth. Cape Verde had the most dramatic drop in the OSI
from 0.438 to 0.165, while Kiribati on the other hand witnessed the greatest
improvement, raising its OSI by 0.147 points in the last two years, from 0.065 to 0.213.

<Table 3.7> OSI of the Pacific and AIMS SIDS

Country 2003 2004 2005 2008 2010 2012 2014

Bahrain 0.332 0.405 0.419 0.520 0.730 0.863 0.937
Cape Verde 0.131 0.181 0.173 0.388 0.270 0.438 0.165
Comoros 0.031 0.031 0.054 0.027 0.029 0.078 0.016
Fiji 0.301 0.212 0.281 0.274 0.184 0.359 0.394
Guinea-Bissau 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.023 0.016 0.105 0.008
Kiribati 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.067 0.029 0.065 0.213
Maldives 0.262 0.243 0.312 0.294 0.162 0.327 0.362
Marshall Islands 0.074 0.093 0.090 0.070 0.025 0.137 0.110
Mauritius 0.448 0.544 0.629 0.472 0.295 0.431 0.472
Micronesia 0.118 0.097 0.108 0.080 0.127 0.209 0.189

73
 Nauru 0.035 0.054 0.058 0.010 0.013 0.098 0.055
Palau 0.026 0.127 0.169 0.177 0.054 0.183 0.165
Papua New Guinea 0.170 0.120 0.162 0.087 0.073 0.229 0.008
Samoa 0.114 0.216 0.265 0.177 0.143 0.281 0.244
S. Tomé & Principe 0.013 0.012 0.012 0.114 0.089 0.118 0.008
Seychelles 0.188 0.162 0.331 0.301 0.057 0.333 0.331
Singapore 0.703 0.969 0.996 0.612 0.686 1.000 0.992
Solomon Islands 0.148 0.108 0.100 0.140 0.044 0.131 0.055
Timor-Leste 0.262 0.139 0.113 0.161 0.133 0.216 0.205
Tonga 0.201 0.166 0.127 0.174 0.070 0.242 0.346
Tuvalu 0.000 0.000 0.027 0.040 0.013 0.052 0.039
Vanuatu 0.052 0.046 0.050 0.030 0.013 0.222 0.079
Pacific & AIMS 0.164 0.178 0.203 0.193 0.148 0.278 0.245
Caribbean 0.164 0.174 0.205 0.249 0.168 0.324 0.261
All SIDS 0.164 0.177 0.204 0.216 0.156 0.297 0.252
Source: UNPAN (2003, 2004, 2005, 2008, 2010, 2012, 2014). UN E-Government Surveys

3.1.2 E-Participation Index (EPI)

In 2014, the average E-Participation Index (EPI) of the Pacific and AIMS SIDS was
0.2665, which is an increase of 0.2163 points since 2003. For the most part, the
increase is attributable to the growth in the last two years (0.1588). The EPI is the
only EGDI sub-index in which the average index of the Pacific & AIMS SIDS is
higher than that of the Caribbean SIDS (0.250). However, the average among Pacific
and AIMS SIDS drops to 0.207 points if Singapore (0.902) and Bahrain (0.824) are
excluded. Other countries with relatively high scores on the EPI include Mauritius,
which ranks third among the Pacific and AIMS SIDS at 0.529, and Samoa, Fiji, and
Tonga, each of which scored at least 0.3. Seven countries scored at less than 0.1: Cape
Verde, Nauru, the Solomon Islands, Comoros, Guinea-Bissau, São Tomé and
Principe, and Papua New Guinea.

With an increase of 0.7718 points, Bahrain has shown the most dramatic
improvement in the EPI over the last eleven years. Mauritius, Singapore, Samoa, Fiji,
and Tonga also have raised their EPI significantly; each of these countries has
improved by at least 0.3333 points. Several countries have seen dramatic
improvements of at least 0.3 points on their EPI in the last two years alone, including

74
Mauritius, Samoa, Fiji, and Tonga. Papua New Guinea and Comoros are the only
states among the Pacific and AIMS SIDS that failed to achieve at least some
improvement in their EPI. During the last two years, Papua New Guinea, São Tomé
and Principe, Guinea-Bissau, Singapore, and Cape Verde have failed to show
improvement in the EPI.

<Table 3.8> EPI of the Pacific and AIMS SIDS

Country 2003 2004 2005 2008 2010 2012 2014

Bahrain 0.052 0.049 0.048 0.341 0.671 0.658 0.824
Cape Verde 0.069 0.115 0.079 0.159 0.171 0.237 0.098
Comoros 0.086 0.066 0.016 0.068 0.057 0 0.039
Fiji 0.052 0.033 0.016 0.068 0.029 0.079 0.392
Guinea-Bissau 0 0 0 0 0.071 0.053 0.020
Kiribati 0 0 0 0.023 0.014 0.026 0.294
Maldives 0.034 0.033 0.032 0.023 0.071 0.026 0.275
Marshall Islands 0.017 0.016 0 0 0.029 0 0.255
Mauritius 0.086 0.148 0.127 0.114 0.057 0.079 0.529
Micronesia 0.017 0 0 0.023 0.014 0.026 0.255
Nauru 0.017 0 0 0 0.014 0 0.078
Palau 0 0 0 0.068 0.014 0.026 0.235
Papua New Guinea 0 0.016 0.032 0.045 0.014 0 0.000
Samoa 0.017 0.016 0.016 0.068 0.014 0 0.392
S. Tomé & Principe 0 0 0 0.068 0.014 0.026 0.020
Seychelles 0.069 0.049 0.048 0.114 0.043 0.079 0.255
Singapore 0.466 0.836 0.984 0.636 0.686 0.947 0.902
Solomon Islands 0 0 0 0.023 0.014 0.026 0.078
Timor-Leste 0.086 0.016 0.016 0 0.014 0 0.294
Tonga 0 0 0.016 0.045 0.014 0.026 0.333
Tuvalu 0 0 0 0 - 0 0.118
Vanuatu 0.034 0.016 0.016 0.023 0.014 0.053 0.176
Pacific & AIMS 0.050 0.064 0.066 0.087 0.097 0.108 0.266
Caribbean 0.068 0.032 0.038 0.097 0.090 0.095 0.250
All SIDS 0.058 0.050 0.054 0.091 0.094 0.102 0.260
Source: UNPAN (2003, 2004, 2005, 2008, 2010, 2012, 2014). UN E-Government Surveys

75
3.2 E-government policy and strategies in SIDS

3.2.1 General trends on ICT and e-government policy and strategies in SIDS

3.2.1.1 Early stages of ICT and e-government policy development

It is clear that in most of the Pacific SIDS, e-government is still at a very early stage of
development. While most SIDS have working websites, their capabilities are limited
to basic information dissemination rather than more advanced service delivery. A
review of individual ICT and e-government policies reveals that a majority of SIDS
have not begun or are currently in the process of drafting e-government policies and
plans. Many SIDS have either recently drafted or are still in the process of drafting
comprehensive national ICT policies, a precursor of e-government systems.

Many SIDS are still in the early stages of developing ICT systems, including setting
standards, reengineering business processes, and setting up systems for inter-agency
information-sharing and communication. These back-office systems typically
precede frontline e-government services.

ICT systems are the backbone of e-government. In most SIDS however, ICT
infrastructure is still relatively underdeveloped, investments in ICT systems are low,
and ICT services are still expensive. ICT infrastructure and services tend to be more
readily available and accessible around the state capital and areas of high population
density. Remote islands and rural areas, however, tend to have very limited
infrastructure and access to services. Internet penetration, especially in terms of
broadband and fixed-line services, is quite low. Nevertheless, the last decade has
seen some major improvements in connectivity, especially in mobile
communications. While fixed-line and wired-internet services penetration is still low,
mobile connectivity is steadily increasing.

3.2.1.2 Mobile revolution

E-government commonly evokes images of personal computers linked to fixed

broadband internet. However, current developments suggest that the immediate
direction of ICT development in SIDS, especially in the Pacific, is concentrated on
mobile technologies. While broadband internet availability is still quite limited, at
least 60 percent of people living in Pacific Island communities have access to mobile
phones as of 2012. Mobile internet, operating on 3G and 4G cellular technologies, has
spread rapidly and has overtaken fixed computer platforms in terms of usage.

76
Mobile internet connections are portable and convenient for islanders outside urban
centers, whereas using fixed or wireless internet connections with a computer is
expensive, not widely available, and requires expensive hardware such as laptops,
desktop computers, modems, routers and/or network switches. Pacific Islanders are
using mobile phones to access the Internet, receive SMS and use text information
services, take and send photos and video, access social networking sites, download
music, listen to radio, as well as to watch television (Cave, 2012).

A few SIDS from the Pacific region have adopted a strategy of capitalizing on the
growing number of mobile phone users in their countries. In Papua New Guinea in
2011, the Bank of South Pacific came out with a new initiative on rural banking
which aimed at reaching the 'unbanked' by the use of phone-banking and wireless-
enabled branches (Cave, 2012).

The implication is that e-government planning should not be limited to traditional

computer-based ICT platforms, but should instead be designed to be accessible for
the majority of users whose connectivity is primarily achieved through mobile
phones. E-government sites and services, therefore, should be designed to include
mobile platforms. E-government sites and services should also be compatible with
SMS and voice services for maximum accessibility.

3.2.1.3 Adoption of universal access policies

The majority of SIDS have declared connectivity of their territories to be a policy

priority. In their national policies and plans, all Pacific SIDS have overtly or
implicitly adopted a universal access policy as a priority, with the intent of making
ICT services widely accessible and affordable for their constituencies. There is a
general emphasis on strategies intended to lower the cost of subscription and
services. SIDS governments have also prioritized the interconnection of all
government offices, wherever they are located. Such connectivity is an important
early stage of e-government development.

Many SIDS policy documents have placed an emphasis on interconnectedness and

on extending services to outlying islands and remote areas. Several SIDS have
devised programs and projects to provide internet and communication access points
in remote areas. In conjunction with measures to facilitate widespread availability of
private ICT infrastructure and services, several SIDS have also sought to provide
access through public offices and government-sponsored tele-centers (e.g., Kiribati,
Vanuatu). The most common strategy towards ensuring universal access, however,
is by promoting investment and competition in the telecommunications sector.

77
3.2.1.4 Promotion of investment and competition in the telecommunications industry

The majority of SIDS governments recognize that a lack of investment and the lack
of competition in the telecommunications sector are major factors in the limited
development, accessibility, and affordability of ICT services. For the past few
decades, the telecommunications sector in the majority of Pacific SIDS has been
dominated by state-owned, state-controlled, and/or state-protected monopolies.
While such arrangements have sometimes been instrumental in ensuring that
telecommunication infrastructure services would be available in areas that are
otherwise unattractive to investors, the lack of competition has also limited the
development of ICT in SIDS overall.

The recent policy response of governments is similar across many SIDS. The majority
of SIDS have adopted policies to end telecom monopolies, promote the entry of new
investors, and promote healthy competition in the hopes that such measures will
improve the reach, quality, and affordability of services. Many have either privatized
and divested state-ownership and/or corporatized state-owned and/or controlled
telecoms. There are some encouraging early signs as the flow of new investment has
increased, especially investment in mobile communications. New investment has
translated into substantial reductions in the cost of services for consumers, and into
an increase in mobile-phone ownership and mobile internet access in many SIDS.

The rapid increase of mobile phone penetration in some Pacific SIDS in the last few
years is a result of the telecommunication regulatory reforms, deregulation, and the
end of monopolies in Tonga, Fiji, and Papua New Guinea, among others. Market
competition has pushed down prices, making mobile services much more affordable.
SIDS that have fostered a more competitive market have seen rapid increases in
mobile subscriber numbers and marked improvement in connectivity on mobile
devices (Cave, 2012)

3.2.1.5 Legal and regulatory reforms

Despite these developments, several SIDS governments are also realizing that
privatization and deregulation are by themselves not enough to ensure new
investment and fair competition in the telecommunications industry. In several
instances, many new private investors have mostly focused their investments, their
infrastructure and services on the high-density areas, which are the most profitable
segments of the market (e.g., in Palau). Even as markets have begun to mature with
strong competition in higher-density areas, investment lagged in the lower-density,
remote areas.

78
In some cases, SIDS have opted to maintain limited state ownership of telecoms.
These arrangements have resulted in biased competition where private telecoms
take the most profitable segments, while state-owned and state-controlled telecoms
are left with the least profitable segments of the market. The result is that the state-
run telecoms struggle to be profitable enough to survive, and thus continue to
depend on subsidies from the government.

Several SIDS are adopting legal and regulatory mechanisms that will correct this
imbalance in investment. Policy-makers recognize that outlying, low-density areas
that are unattractive to private investments may require some form of state-provided
incentives or subsidies. Others are considering rules that require private telecoms to
establish infrastructure and service in these areas. In light of these changes, many
SIDS in the Pacific have established new telecommunication regulation agencies in
the last decade and are building their capacity to monitor and regulate the
telecommunications sector in this new context.

3.2.1.6 Emphasis on capacity development

Beyond a lack of hardware and physical infrastructure, which are a necessary

foundation for e-government development, the SIDS challenges are exacerbated by
the lack of human resource capacity in ICT systems and software infrastructure.
There is not only a dearth of skilled and experienced ICT and e-government
professionals in many SIDS, but there is also limited availability of related skills and
knowledge among elected officials, civil servants, and the general public. At present,
the vast majority of SIDS are dependent on external technical assistance in assessing,
planning, and drafting their ICT and e-government policies and plans.

Most SIDS have declared in their ICT policies the “development of a knowledge
society” to be paramount to their success and sustainable development. This entails
not only making ICTs accessible, but also popularizing ICT usage and developing
ICT competencies of broad cross-sections of society. Several SIDS are integrating
ICT-related topics into their school curriculums. Others are seeking to expand e-
learning as well as programs and opportunities for lifelong education. By
popularizing and propagating ICT competencies, SIDS governments hope that they
will be able to develop the local talents and the social infrastructure needed to
support their ICT initiatives.

79
 Pacific Disaster Net

The Pacific Disaster Net (PDN) is an exemplary e-government initiative that fosters
collaboration among Pacific SIDS, NGOs, and development organizations. The
PDN was launched in September 2008 to serve as the new portal and information
resource for all organizations working in the Pacific region, including government
agencies, regional bodies, non-governmental organizations and international
agencies.

The PDN serves two functions according to May (2013: 9): First, to “support
disaster risk management activities by national and regional governments and
organizations at all levels in order to build communities and nations resilient to
disasters.” Second, it “forms a solid knowledge foundation on which the safe and
secure future of Pacific nations can be built, by bringing together the widest
selection of information sources available and supplying tools that the disaster risk
management community needs.”

The PDN portal provided support in the 2009 tsunami that affected Samoa and
Tonga by providing information about ongoing discussions, guidelines, and
procedures. It also provided information, including published scientific and
technical reports on the cause of the tsunami, statistical and locational data on
affected people, situation reports, and updates on affected areas and ongoing relief
efforts.

The PDN portal provides regional and national information, including contacts,
alerts, documents, disaster details, calendars, contacts, and audio and visual files,
and comprises around 10,000 documents as of 2013. It has an offline version on a
DVD and is accessible via mobile phone. It provides a forum to discuss various
topics and issues related to disaster management, including, but not limited to,
disaster risk reduction, early warning systems, preparedness, response and
recovery, risk assessment, and training and tools.

3.2.2 ICT and e-government policy in individual countries

3.2.2.1 Bahrain

The Bahraini government has passed national policies in support and promotion of
e-government development, including the e-Transaction Law in 2002, followed by

80
the Cyber Crime Law in 2013. The government has demonstrated a firm
commitment to e-government development, with significant funding from the
national budget allocated specifically to e-government initiatives. According to the
Bahrain eGovernment Authority’s Director for Strategy & BPR Nezar Maroof,
Bahrain has an active e-government policy and strategic plan, the Bahrain
eGovernment Strategy 2016, independent of the SIDS’ national ICT development
plans (Nezar Maroof, survey, 2014).

E-governance is regulated by the Bahrain eGovernment Authority, which is headed

by a CEO (see Figure 3.3). This public institution is in charge of e-government
development and consists of the Supreme Committee for Information and
Communication Technology as its governing body, main members (prime minister,
deputy ministers and ministers), and an inter-agency coordination
mechanism/scheme (Nezar Maroof, survey, 2014).

<Figure 3.3> Bahrain e-government Authority Organizational Chart

Source: Nezar Maroof, survey, 2014

The CEO of the Bahrain eGovernment Authority and high-ranking political leaders
coordinate in developing the overall ICT system. “Regular Supreme Committee for
Information and Communication Technology (SCICT) meetings, follow up
one-government Program KPIs and projects, and the allocation of an annual budget”
all testify to the support that Bahraini political leaders have for e-government
initiatives and the growth of the ICT sector (Nezar Maroof, survey, 2014). Nezar
Maroof highlights Bahrain’s Government Business Process Reengineering program,
which has reengineered about 320 interactive public services as an example of the
positive impact ICT systems can have with respect to government reform.

Aside from reform of interactive public services, the Bahrain eGovernment Strategy
2016 has impacted the state’s natural disaster risk management. The government

81
utilizes the Business Continuity Plan to “minimize the impact of an unforeseen
disruption or disaster” as well as build a Government Business Continuity
Management Framework Operating Model and Implementation Plan (Nezar Maroof,
survey, 2014). Nezar Maroof states that the business continuity planning framework
aims “to enable successful eGov service delivery for core critical functions in the case
of a disaster” (Nezar Maroof, survey, 2014).

In order to build human resource capacity and participation in e-government, the

Bahraini government has initiated a panoply of training and public awareness
programs. First, Bahrain has launched e-service awareness programs to promote
awareness among public and private sector employees, students, and Bahraini
citizens in general. Second, an ICT training program was created, the Qudrat
Capacity Building Programme, which aims to train government and private sector
employees as well as citizens and students in using the interactive e-services. Third,
annual e-government forums are planned by public, private and civil society sectors
for e-awareness and development of e-government programs.

The government of Bahrain recognizes the importance of ICT and e-government for
sustainable development, including the realization of 2015 MDGs. Nezar Maroof
lists specific Bahraini e-government projects that contribute significantly to the
achievement of objectives from the national e-government strategy as of July 23, 2014,
namely: 1) National Portal, 2) Mobile Channel, 3) National Contact Center, 4)
National Gateway Infrastructure, 5) National Authentication Framework, 6)
National Enterprise Architecture, 7) National Suggestions & Complaints System, 8)
National Payments Aggregator, and the 9) Cabinet e-Meeting System (Nezar Maroof,
survey, 2014).

First, for social sustainability, there are: 1) e-services and m-services being presented
and made available in a number of sectors, 2) ICT capacity building programs
gradually filling the digital gaps in the kingdom, 3) national online services for
suggestions and complaints and delivery of e-services through channels, centers and
portals, and 4) the establishment of an e-participation policy. Second, environmental
sustainability initiatives include the Green ICT Strategy and the e-government
strategy to increase dissemination of e-network service delivery. Lastly, initiatives
for economic sustainability have been established, such as: 1) a business licensing
system, 2) high-performance broadband infrastructure, and 3) open data solutions,
platforms and e-government innovation programs.

The following table depicts the e-government initiatives and achievements

supporting the sustainable development initiatives.

82
 <Table 3.9> Bahrain’s e-government initiatives for sustainable development

Sustainable
Development eGov Initiatives Achievements as of July 2014
Perspectives
1. Introduction of eServices & 1. 320+ eServices & 10+ mobile
mServices supporting apps; I-Seha electronic health
various sections of the record implemented
society. throughout hospitals under
Ministry of Health

2. ICT Capacity Building 2. 10,000+ citizens trained on

Programs bridging the ICT and over 500 Govt.
digital divide among employees trained on
citizens advanced ICT topics.

3. Establishment of National 3. Rollout of National

Suggestions & Complaint Suggestions & Complaint
System and delivery of System (Tawasul) to 21
eServices through various ministries, facilitating the
Social
service delivery channels receipt of suggestions,
Sustainability
(National Contact Center, enquiries, complaints of
National Portal, Mobile public about public services;
Portal, eService Centers, A 24/7 National Contact
eKiosks) Center is fully operational;
Establishment of National
Portal (Bahrain.bh);
eight eService Centers and
30+ eKiosks across the
Kingdom

4. E-Participation Policy 4. eGov Authority, through e-

Participation program, has
built a consultation
mechanism for understanding
the needs and views of a wide

83
Sustainable
Development eGov Initiatives Achievements as of July 2014
Perspectives
range of stakeholders,
including citizens, investors,
and the regulated entities. e-
Participation program also
encourages participation of
the public and stakeholder
groups in development of
new regulation.
1. Development of Green ICT 1. eGov Authority has initiated
Strategy development of entity IT
strategies which also focus on
opportunities to Green IT,
transformation of existing
business processes to
‘greener’- IT based
alternatives, and Green IT
Governance
Environmental
Sustainability
2. The eGov strategy 2. Efforts are undertaken to
emphasizes investigate reducing the environmental
solutions such as Smart- footprint of IT equipment
Grids, for transmission which includes data center
and distribution networks, consolidation, advanced
distributed computers, cooling, and server
smart meters and virtualization
increased power efficiency
/ safety
1. eGov Program has 1. eGov Program has
conceptualized and implemented Business
implemented a Licensing System (BLIS)
Technology-enabled which is designed to optimize
Economic
information and service the investment climate in
Sustainability
platform for business and Bahrain by using technology
people to encourage to make the country more
interaction and growth competitive in attracting
foreign investment.

84
 Sustainable
Development eGov Initiatives Achievements as of July 2014
Perspectives

2. Deployed and widely 2. Bahrain is one of a handful of

adopted high-performance countries that has already
broadband infrastructure achieved the Broadband
Commission target for
affordable broadband service
– which is below 5% of GNI
per capita13.

3. Open Data Program 3. eGov Authority, through its

consisting of open data initiatives (open
1) Open Data Solution data solution), develops
2) Open Data Platform business rules for the open
3) eGov Innovation data platform and decide on
Program data to publish. In addition to
the open data solution
business rules and data, eGA
through its eGov innovation
program encourages the
government entities and the
citizens / businesses to
leverage the readily available
open data to develop
solutions benefiting the
society.

3.2.2.2 Cape Verde

Cape Verde has formulated a strategic program to develop the ICT and Electronic
Governance in their country known as the Information Society Strategic Program
(ISSP) and the Electronic Government Action Plan (EGAP). The formulation of the
ISSP and the EGAP will help the country in achieving overall development.

13 http://www.itu.int/en/newsroom/gsr-14/Documents/bahrain-ict-market.pdf, last accessed 6

November 2014.

85
Cape Verde used an analysis of a Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats
(SWOT) to construct its ISSP. The development of the ISSP has evolved into three
operational institutions. First, the Interministerial Commission for Innovation and
Information Society (CIISI) is at the core of the operation. Secondly, the CIISI
branched into the Núcleo Operacional para a Sociedade de Informação (Operational
Nucleus for the Information Society, NOSi). Thirdly, ISSP developed the Public
Finance Management Reform Group (RAFE) as a body for managing finances to
advance efficiency and efficacy within Cape Verde public administrations. Four
documents guided the development of ISSP, including Cape Verde’s development
strategy, the Relevant International Framework for Information Society, National
documents on Information Society, and Budget Framework.

The Cape Verde government has endorsed five development challenges in the ISSP
(2005): (1) good governance, state reform, democracy, citizenship, (2) entrepreneurial
capacity, competitiveness, growth, (3) development of human capital, improved
educational system, (4) social development, fight against poverty, cohesion and
solidarity, (5) basic and economic infrastructures and balanced development. The
government plans to address these challenges by implementing the following seven
action vectors: (1) connectivity/accessibility, (2) electronic governance, (3) digital
economy, (4) social interventions, (5) new competencies, (6) enabling environment,
(7) financial and organizational architecture. The ISSP (2005) also includes an
endorsement of nine “Pillars,” each comprising specific goals, including the
following: Pillar 1 – Provide Access for All; Pillar 2 – Bring Government Closer to
Citizens; Pillar 3 – Create New Business Opportunities; Pillar 4 – Increase the Quality
of Life; Pillar 5 – Build New Competencies; Pillar 6 – Promote a Stimulating
Environment; Pillar 7 – Reinforce Leadership; Pillar 8 – Invest to Grow; Pillar 9 –
Measure to Develop.

The ISSP and EGAP provide strategies and means to make ICT open to all citizens of
Cape Verde. One example is the Resolution of the Council of Ministers nr. 5/2005 of
April 25, which replaces the public telecommunications monopoly with regulated
competition. The hope is that regulated liberalization will better ensure widespread
service and accessibility. The resolution is designed to promote competition and
transparency in the telecommunications industry.

3.2.2.3 Fiji

Fiji’s ICT and e-government initiatives are meant to support its 20-year Development
Plan (2001-2020). In 2003, it entered into a bilateral agreement with the government
of China. The arrangement is for the latter to provide a RMB 165 million loan to Fiji

86
to develop its e-government, including a “Master Plan” as well as ICT infrastructure
and services in high-priority service areas.

The E-Government Master Plan of the Republic of Fiji Islands (2007) restates that the
primary objectives of the 20-year Development Plan (2001-2020) are: to raise and
sustain GDP growth to at least 5% annually; to create employment and income-
generating opportunities and reduce unemployment; to build competencies; to
alleviate poverty; and to maintain effective law and order. In its e-government
readiness assessment, Fiji has been found to have relatively low levels of readiness in
the areas of e-government vision, government business processes, ICT governance,
ICT culture, ICT infrastructure and systems.

The Fiji government sees e-government development as crucial to improving its

competitiveness and to addressing several major concerns. The following have been
identified as e-government strategic initiatives: Implementation of financially
sustainable service delivery models; reinventing the service delivery model to
provide citizen-centric outcomes; enhancing operational efficiency within and across
government agencies; and enhancing ICT skills competency of government
employees at all levels.

The Fiji government intends to reduce its dependence on external funding assistance,
work toward self-sufficiency, and to build capacity to respond quickly to the needs
of its constituents. With these goals in mind, the Fiji government conceived of
“implementing financially sustainable service delivery models.” Fiji officials view
Singapore’s TradeNet as a model of a service delivery system that is financially
viable and self-sustainable. Like Singapore, it hopes to develop systems that will
allow it to recover capital investment and operating costs associated with
e-government systems.

The influence of New Public Management (NPM) and reinventing government is

apparent in the Fiji government’s second strategic initiative: “Reinvent the service
delivery model to provide citizen-centric outcomes.” The intent is to focus on the
needs of major stakeholders, including citizens, businesses, and government
employees. The implication is a change in government approach to include priorities
in sound governance and leadership, business process redesign and reintegration,
cooperation amongst government agencies, public-private sector collaboration, and
adoption of a customer-centric mindset among public officials and civil servants.

As in other e-government initiatives, efficiency is a key goal of the government of Fiji.

The first step towards this is improving interconnections and interoperability among
government agencies. The third strategic initiative is the following: “Enhancing
87
operational efficiencies within and across government agencies.” The idea is to
streamline business processes, reduce work duplication, facilitate sharing and
exchange of documents and data, and drastically reduce the number of physical
trips to government offices, a key concern in SIDS characterized by geographic
isolation and substantial physical distance from each other.

The final strategic initiative is: “Enhancing ICT skills competency of government
employees at all levels.” This initiative is especially important, given the lack of ICT-
trained professionals among government officials and civil servants in SIDS. The Fiji
government recognizes that its own personnel and officials need have the necessary
skill-base before it can expand the scope and popularize its e-government initiatives.

Fiji’s “Roadmap for Democracy and Sustainable Socio-Economic Development 2010-

2014” identifies “Universal access to information and competitive
telecommunication services” as a key policy goal. Specifically, it aims to promote
“Responsible media and greater coverage given by media to Government
programmes.” Specifically, Fiji’s government aims to allow “People and businesses
to enjoy improved ICT services in terms of coverage, quality and price.”

Key components of Fiji’s strategy include creating a strategic partnership with media,
aligning broadcast and media standards to industry standards, increasing coverage
of telecommunication services, reducing telecom rates by inviting more investors,
establishing the necessary framework for e-commerce, providing appropriate
resources for ICT infrastructure, and introducing e-government.

Mobile Health (mHealth) in Fiji

Some of the SIDS’ greatest e-government potential lies in mobile health applications.
Fiji is currently using various ICT platforms to make healthcare more accessible. Fiji
health providers use social media, through its Fiji Medic Home Run page, to share
and discuss medical information to respond to medical inquiries. They also created a
mobile health service called “Dr SMS” to allow citizens to communicate with doctors
directly. Inquiries are handled via SMS by a team of 20 medical doctors from the Fiji
Medical Council and Fiji College of General Practitioners within 24 hours and, if
necessary, referred to the nearest facility. They also use the service to issue health
notices and to respond to natural disasters (Cave 2012).

3.2.2.4 Kiribati

88
Kiribati is a remote and geographically dispersed country of over 33 coral atolls,
which are spread over approximately 3.5 million km² of ocean. It has a population of
about 112,000 people, living on 22 coral atolls and one volcanic island. Like most
other SIDS, it has low levels of ICT development. The affordability of basic ICT
services from voice calls to internet services in Kiribati is a major issue. The rates of
penetration for fixed telephones, mobile and internet services are low (e.g., fixed-line:
4.14%, mobile: 1.04%, internet-user: 2.07%, as of 2012).

Like other SIDS, the low penetration and expensive rates of ICT services is partially
due to the monopoly of the telecommunications market by a single provider: the
Telecom Services Kiribati Ltd (TSKL). In 2004, the government adopted a new
Telecom Act to liberalize the telecom sector, but regulatory and legal constraints
have hindered the entry of competition into the market. In 2011, an ICT Sector Policy
was adopted by the Kiribati government, funded by the World Bank. This funding
provided for the review of the Telecom Act of 2004. The funding also allowed for the
drafting of an access policy and implementation plan that includes access for outer
islands, a regulatory capacity development plan, and a plan to achieve universal ICT
access.

One of the policy priorities of the Kiribati government is the promotion and
deployment of a national broadband system. In 2012, the TSKL expanded its mobile
and Internet broadband services to 4 outer islands. The government deployed the
Pacific Rural Internet Connectivity System (PACRIS) to 10 secondary schools on
outer islands and also used it to establish 9 telecenters in island councils.

As of 2014, the Kiribati government has completed the enactment of a New

Communications Act, which establishes a program to build the capacity of ministries,
especially those involved in ICT regulation. The act is designed to effect the
privatization of the national telecommunication company, TSKL, and generate an
open competitive market. In order to ensure access to ICT services and connectivity
of outer islands, the act provides subsidy support for 15 outer islands where the
provision of ICT services may not be commercially viable.

ICT and Development in the Maldives

The Maldives provide a very interesting case as one of the few island nations that
has recently graduated from the least developing county (LDC) status into a lower-
middle-income country. The International Telecommunication Union (ITU)
partially credits its development to its success in improving ICT connectivity. Like
other SIDS, the Maldives are geographically isolated, low in elevation, and

89
 vulnerable to natural disasters, weather, and the effects of climate change. The
Maldives government has adopted several ICT policies to help adapt to and
mitigate the consequences of global warming.

Historically, internet and telecommunication connectivity in the Maldives has been

low relative to other LDCs. For decades, the government had been involved in
running the telecommunications industry. In the early 2000s, the Maldives
government made connectivity a key policy priority. A key component of the
strategy was to privatize and deregulate the telecommunications industry in order
to promote competition and lower the cost of ICT services. The Maldives also
adopted ICT systems to improve public service delivery within its National
Development Plans. ICT systems are now common within ministries, and internet
access is available to all public offices and workers. Most agencies in Malé are
connected via a Local Area Network (LAN).

A comprehensive e-government system, the Government Network of Maldives

(GNM), connects the Maldives government and related agencies in Malé and on 23
other islands. The system deploys fiber, ADSL and satellite network technologies,
enabling the agencies to link government offices and public agencies, share
information electronically, communicate securely, and enjoy minimal disruption to
services. The system has five main elements: the Metropolitan Area Network , the
Islands Access Network, Federating Core, the Internet Access Facilities Network,
and the National Centre for Information Technology (NCIT) Network. The latter is
used for supervision, monitoring, commissioning and trouble-shooting (ST
Electronics, n.d.).

3.2.2.5 Marshall Islands

Economically, the Marshall Islands rely heavily on their association with the United
States under the Compact of Free Association. Funding from the U.S. is
supplemented by grant assistance from other diplomatic partners, including Japan,
Taiwan, Australia, European Union, South Korea, and foreign investors. The laws of
Marshall Islands provide for the Marshall Islands National Telecommunications
Authority (MINTA) as the sole telecom service provider. MINTA offers a range of
ICT services, including PSTN, GSM, Telecenters, TV, HF, and ISP, on the various
islands and atolls, depending on location.

90
Telecommunications and media infrastructure are quite limited in the Marshall
Islands. Radio is the most important and widely used communication platform in
the Marshall Islands. Most media outlets serve only the Majuro Atoll. The only
media outlet that has full national coverage is the AM radio station operated by the
government: WUTML. Blackouts are common, and access to broadcasting services is
limited due to a lack of infrastructure.

Like the other SIDS, ICT systems are underdeveloped. Unsurprisingly, given the low
development of ICT systems and a monopoly in the telecommunications industry,
rates are expensive and penetration of mobile and internet services is low. Internet
use in the Marshall Islands is a paltry 3.6 percent, and mobile subscription rates are
only 7 per 100 people. Nevertheless, there is a minority that is active in online
activities in the form of youth blogs, online forums, websites, and social media
(PACMAS, 2013).

Relevant ICT policies include the Radio Communication Act of 1993 (Marshall
Islands Revised Code 2004, Title 40, Chapter 3); the Marshall Islands National
Telecommunications Authority Act of 1990 (Marshall Islands Revised Code 2004,
Title 40, Chapter 1); and the Political Broadcast Access Act of 1966 (Marshall Islands
Revised Code 2004, Title 40, Chapter 2). The Ministry of Transportation and
Communication registers radio and TV stations but is not involved in further
regulation.

Legislation gives MINTA, a privately-owned but government-controlled company, a

monopoly on telecom services. The government holds a 65 percent share in MINTA.
Nevertheless, the government has agreed to open up the telecom sector to new
entrants and competition with the help of the World Bank (PACMAS, 2013).

3.2.2.6 Mauritius

According to the UN E-Government Survey 2014, Mauritius is a regional

e-government leader in that it scores second-best in Africa and best in Sub-Saharan
Africa on the EGDI (Hawabhay, 2014b). Mauritius made significant investments in
ICT systems during the 1990s that have since had a major impact on Mauritius’
government and public service delivery. ICT policies have evolved that suit the
needs of the government and citizens and enhance the state’s connectivity to other
nations. These policies include Statistic Mauritius’ Open Government Data, Data
Sharing Policy and Open Source Software Policy. ICT systems have impacted various
sectors in need of e-government services and communication tools, including health,
education, and agriculture.

91
The Republic of Mauritius is in the process of implementing its e-government
strategy over the next several years (2013-2017). The strategy is being implemented
under the auspices of the Central Informatics Bureau (CIB), which is housed within
the Ministry of Information and Communication Technology (MICT). The strategy is
based on the 2011-2014 National ICT Strategic Plans (NICTSP), a policy framework
which promotes public-citizen-centered governance through e-services delivery. The
e-government strategy aims to achieve several national goals with regards to public
service. To these ends, Mauritius plans to increase the capacity of ministerial and
departmental service delivery through the development of e-government policies
(CIB, 2013).

The e-government strategy aims to achieve the following: 1) enhance Mauritian

quality of life, 2) achieve expedience and 24/7 availability of public services, 3) a
“reduction in the provision of counter services,” 4) increase Mauritian citizen
involvement in public proceedings, 5) enhance access to public information and
documents, 6) promote technological integration of public services and 7) streamline
business support services to increase productivity and efficiency. The e-government
services have been divided into three main clusters: government-to-business (G2B),
government-to-citizen (G2C), and government-to-government (G2G).

Hawabhay (2014a) has documented the current implementation status and

achievements of the e-government strategy in E-government Strategy 2013-2017
Implementation. First, the implementation of G2B services has begun. Administrators
are in the process of promoting various services and analyzing service delivery
systems to determine opportunities for integration. Initiatives in the cluster of G2B
services in Mauritius include the following: Open Government Data (under the
Open Government Data Policy), Open Government Data portals, e-Payment and m-
Payment facilities, electronic authentication and digital signature services, re-
engineering of e-Services for business facilitation, Building and Land Permit e-
payment facility, LMIS enhancement, Statistics Mauritius (an online database of
companies), and the Single Window. Additional services such as the eWork permit
plan and the e-Procurement contract have been planned for October 2014 and mid-
2015 respectively (Hawabhay, 2014a).

The majority of G2C services have also reached the stage of implementation.
Initiatives in the cluster of G2C include e-services awareness programs, e-services
help desks for citizens, a one-stop shop, e-participation and mobile services, a data
sharing policy, a government service platform, enhancement of current
e-government master plans, an open source software policy, Green ICT for paperless
government, and an evaluation of the current e-government legal and regulatory

92
framework. Also, a need to merge and “extend Government Cloud to parasternal
bodies” has been recognized (Hawabhay, 2014a).

Several G2C (practically including G2B) services have already been implemented
and are now live. Available e-payment services include driving licensing, police
duties fees, leasing of state land for housing, fees for requests for
availability/reservation of a company name, fees for incorporation of a company,
payment of companies’ yearly fees, fees for application for an individual business,
payment for online business search, and parking fines imposed by the National
Transport Authority (Hawabhay, 2014b).

Lastly, the G2G services are at a pre-implementation stage. Mauritania could benefit
from the capacity of ICT systems to augment training and human resource
development. Hawabhay recommends that the Reforms Steering Council should
approve funding to assess the latest studies on ICT systems best practices and e-
governance. (Hawabhay, 2014a).

<Figure 3.4> Mauritius’ e-government services of the e-government strategy 2013-

2017

Source: Hawabhay, 2014b. Trends in e-government

3.2.2.7 Micronesia

93
The vision statement of the Micronesia’s National ICT and Telecommunications
Policy is to develop a “Secure, Efficient, and Affordable ICT to achieve equitable
communication for the People of the FSM.” As a policy statement, Micronesia’s
President Emannuel Mori has declared that the government aims to provide safe,
reliable, and affordable ICT for its citizens. The Micronesian government also views
ICT as a tool to empower citizens, enhance democratic values and promote social
and economic sustainable development. Micronesian officials expect that ICT will
provide enhanced opportunities for education, health and emergency management
services.

ICT and e-government are viewed as key to the development of a knowledge society,
and to the promotion of good governance and a transparent, responsive and
accountable government. Micronesia understands the importance of ICT systems for
improving its human resource base and for enhancing social equity. The
Micronesian government also intends to use public-private partnerships to aid in the
cost-effective delivery of ICT services.

The National ICT Policy include the following broad goals: Goal 1 is to achieve
accessible, secure and affordable broadband communications for all. Goal 2 is to
strengthen ICT-related human resources and to increase human resource
development opportunities through the use of ICT. Goal 3 is to improve economic
growth and sustainable development through ICT. Goal 4 is to utilize ICT for good
governance. Finally, Goal 5 is to create a dynamic and healthy ICT sector through
policy reform and improvements in legal frameworks.

The Goal 1 of Micronesia’s National ICT Policy is intended to develop ICT

infrastructure. Underdevelopment of ICT infrastructure means that ICT services are
expensive, limited, or non-existent in many locations. The government intends to
take the leading role in building a networked society. The government intends to
take the initial step of sharing ICT access in public locations, including local
government offices, post offices, health centers, and schools.

Goal 2 of the policy involves a broad and comprehensive set of initiatives aimed at
strengthening the ICT-related human resource base through skills development and
training. Micronesia is striving to provide training in ICT systems for all political
leaders, policy makers, and regulators. Micronesia also aims to expand and develop
its domestic ICT workforce. Leaders envision an array of e-learning opportunities
and ICT-related educational opportunities. These initiatives will be geared towards
general education and skills development for broad cross-sections of society,
including youth, adults, and professionals in both the public and the private sector.

94
Goal 3 of the National ICT policy is to use ICT development to promote sustainable
economic growth. The strategy for attaining Goal 3 entails promotion of ICT use by
both the public and the private sector. The idea is to stimulate e-commerce and the
use of ICTs to improve productivity, especially in small and medium enterprises.
Micronesia also envisions applications of ICT systems to improve tourism marketing,
transportation systems, energy systems, agricultural productivity, and food security.
Micronesia also plans to support and utilize ICT systems in a number of public-
sector applications, including health, education, public safety, maintenance of
languages and cultures, and environmental protection. Micronesia also plans on
diversifying, expanding, and bolstering the national ICT industry.

Goal 4 of the National ICT policy is to apply ICT systems to support better
governance. Micronesian officials envision attaining this goal through a variety of
tools designed to facilitate interaction with external stakeholders, including one-stop
service counters, e-help-desks and e-services. Internally, ICT will be used to develop
decision support systems, promote and standardize best practices, and to enable
sharing of data and information across various agencies and locations. ICT-systems
will also facilitate access to services such as financial services, land registration,
business license registration, and others. Micronesia also understands the
importance of maintaining cyber-security with the expansion of ICT-systems in
order to protect citizens’ rights and prevent cyber-crime.

Goal 5 is to reform policies and regulatory framework to facilitate a dynamic and

healthy ICT sector. Micronesian officials recognize that certain ICT laws and pieces
of the regulatory framework need to be updated in order to fully support and
promote healthy ICT market in a technology-neutral way.

Micronesian officials have expressed support for the principles of fair competition
and independent regulation of the telecommunications market. Such principles are
expected to help bring down service costs and improve access.

Micronesian officials have endorsed a universal access policy, which will likely
entail subsidies or other incentives to build ICT infrastructure in remote and less
densely populated areas. Officials plan to promulgate policies that will encourage
use of the internet to provide public services in the areas of health, education, and
emergency management.

3.2.2.8 Nauru

The Republic of Nauru’s National Sustainable Development Strategy 2005-2025

identifies as one of its priority goals the “Provision of universal and reliable access to

95
internationally competitive communication media.” In terms of ICT, Nauru’s
strategy is to develop an ICT sector that delivers a range of services to subscribers at
reasonable cost, and is responsive to changes in technology and consumer
expectations (Republic of Nauru, 2009: 51).

Nauru’s aim is to improve access as measured by an array of official metrics,

including number of cellular subscribers, internet users, access to local content, and
even local newspapers. A key component of Nauru’s strategy is the creation of a
competitive telecommunications market by opening the domestic market to
competitors.

Currently, Nauru’s telecommunications market is dominated by one licensed data

and mobile service provider, Digicel. Nauru has radio, phone service, television and
Internet service providers. In 2011, approximately one-quarter of Nauru households
had an Internet connection; 40% owned a radio; approximately 75% three-quarters
owned a TV; mobile phone ownership was almost 90%. Despite these, its National
Assembly recognizes that plenty of gaps remain as far as ICT is concerned. ICT
infrastructure is limited and not yet very affordable. ICT has not yet been effectively
adopted in public services, including in the area of disaster risk reduction.
Knowledge and expertise in ICT is also quite limited, and laws that will protect
people’s privacy and security have yet to be developed (Government of Nauru,
2013).

The Telecommunications Act of 2002 originally served as the policy framework for
telecommunications in Nauru. Towards the end of 2011, the government prepared a
draft National ICT policy during the ITU-EC joint project for Capacity Building and
ICT Policy, Regulatory and Legislative Frameworks support for Pacific Island
Countries (ICB4PAC) funded by the European Commission (EC) and the ITU.

Nauru’s National ICT policy has a vision of “ICT for all.” Towards this end, it
identified 5 broad policy goals. These include: Goal 1 – achieve accessible and
affordable communications for all; Goal 2 – strengthen ICT human resources and
increase human resource development opportunities through the use of ICT; Goal 3
– improve economic growth and sustainable development through ICT; Goal 4 –
utilize ICT for good governance; and Goal 5 – create an enabling environment for the
development and adoption of ICT through policy reform and improvements in legal
frameworks.

3.2.2.9 Palau

96
The Government of Palau recognizes ICT as a key enabler in achieving national
development goals. Like many other Pacific SIDS, Palau is still in the early stages of
developing ICT policy, regulations and e-government. Originally, the
telecommunications market in Palau has been served only by the Palau National
Communications Corporation (PNCC), which operates landline, cellular, internet
and cable TV services on a national and international basis. Nevertheless, the
government has corporatized PNCC and opened the telecom market to limited
competition in the latter part of the 2000s.

PNCC now competes with the Palau Mobile Corporation, under Taiwanese
ownership, and Palau Telecommunications, under Palauan ownership. The limited
competition has recently brought down the prices of telecommunication services and
expanded access to ICT services. This change in policy, however, is not exclusively
beneficial to all parties: While PNCCs competitors also established ICT
infrastructure, they focused mostly on the high-density areas. The result is that
PNCC, which has been established through a loan and is under pressure to generate
profit, has had little return on assets as it is left to service low-density areas, thus
requiring support in the form of subsidies (Government of Palau, 2009).

In order to bolster the ICT sector, Palau identified three medium term goals: The first
is introducing competitive neutrality, with no single service provider being
advantaged or disadvantaged. The second is ensuring that PNCC remains
sustainable and fully self-financing. The third is making PNCC attractive to private
sector investors, in order to attract future capital investments and upgrades in
technology. Broadly, these proposals and strategies are intended to level the playing
field, which is necessary for both public and private enterprises to compete
successfully in the ICT market (Government of Palau, 2009).

Palau also works with the Secretariat of the Pacific Community (SPC) in order to
improve ICT. Joint programs between Palau and SPC include projects that seek to
improve rural internet connectivity, improve ICT policy regulations, and a project
piloting a one-laptop-per-child project (Secretariat of the Pacific Community, 2009).

3.2.2.10 Papua New Guinea

Papua New Guinea’s government’s framework and long-term strategy is embodied

in “The Papua New Guinea Vision 2050.” This document identifies seven pillars or
strategic focus areas as follows: Human capital development, gender, youth and
people empowerment; wealth creation; institutional development and service
delivery; security and international relations; environmental sustainability and

97
climate change; spiritual, cultural and community development; and strategic
planning, integration and control.

The prioritization of ICT and e-government is not readily apparent in the major
themes of “Papua New Guinea Vision 2050.” ICT is referred to under the section on
education, which states as a goal: “Promote and establish the use of Information and
communications technology (ICT) for sustainable education” (p. 6).

The section on Oceans and Coastal Environments, on the other hand states that “The
implementation of information communication technology (ICT) infrastructure
would contribute significantly to developing vital facilities for the coastal
communities” (p. 50). Other than these two passages, there is no overt mention of
ICT or e-government policy in PNGs long-term vision.

Up until 2007, ICT in PNG was regulated under a dual system led by the Papua New
Guinea Telecommunications Authority (PANGTEL) and the Independent Consumer
and Competition Commission (ICCC). Low penetration rates, high costs of ICT
services, and overlapping functions of the two bodies, however, were seen as an
obstacle to growth of the media and ICT industry. As such, amendments to the
Telecom Act of 1996 were made, and the National ICT Policy (NICTP) was
established in 2008.

The reform of ICT regulation opened the industry to two new mobile companies.
The second phase of the NICT Policy introduced a competitive approach to policy
development. Finally, the National Information Communication and Technology Act
(NICTA) was enacted in in 2009. It created a new agency, the National Information
and Communications Technology Authority (NICTA), which was mandated to
engage in ICT and broadcast regulation.

The 2012-2017 Strategic Plan of PNG’s NICTA reveals the important role of ICT and
e-government in the Vision 2050 of the national government. NICTA was tasked
with ensuring access to safe and affordable ICT Services for all. It has the mission of
ensuring that the ICT industry contributes to the greatest extent possible to the long-
term economic and social development of PNG. As such, it is mandated to support
Vision 2050 by facilitating an enabling environment that promotes competition,
equitable access to resources, the protection of consumer welfare, and the delivery of
innovative ICT services and solutions in PNG. It sets the regulatory framework,
standards, and safeguards for ICT.

A key strategic thrust of NICTA is promoting universal access to ICT services

through its Universal Access Scheme (UAS). The key result areas include rural

98
communications, UAS fund management, UAS project management, UAS strategy,
and UAS policy and governance. Essentially, these tasks call for measures to create a
policy and regulatory environment conducive to investment in, and expansion of,
ICT infrastructure, to enable universal access to ICT in all areas, to identify ICT
needs and concerns, to use ICT to support social and economic development
through various projects, and to set and enforce standards of services and protect the
interests of and citizens, among other measures.

3.2.2.11 Samoa

The government of Samoa aligns its ICT policy to support the Strategy for the
Development of Samoa, which sets out Samoa’s national social and economic goals.
It seeks to integrate its national ICT policy direction with the goals and initiatives of
key industry sectors and government ministries. The National ICT Policy 2012-2017
provides an overarching framework for harmonizing and aligning the national ICT
priorities of various industry sectors and government ministries.

The vision of the Samoan government is “ICT for all.” The main agency tasked with
implementing ICT in policy strategies in Samoa is the Ministry of Communications
and Information Technology (MCIT). Its expressed mission is “To ensure all sectors
of the community and Government have access to high quality, affordable, and safe
ICTs to help reduce hardship and poverty and ultimately achieve and sustain a high
standard of living.”

For the period of 2012-2017, Samoa’s National ICT Policy sets out to accomplish five
goals based on the key themes of accessibility, capacity, and community. These are:
Goal 1 – achieve accessible and affordable communications for all; Goal 2 – create an
enabling environment for the development and adoption of ICT through policy
reform and improvements in legal frameworks; Goal 3 – strengthen ICT human
resources and increase human resource development opportunities through ICT.
Goal 4 – improve economic growth and facilitate socio-improvements and their
sustainability; Goal 5 – utilize ICT for good governance.

The key strategies for attaining Goal 1 include, among others: Raising awareness of
ICT benefits, implementing programs to support education, training and
development of technical systems for people with special needs, encouraging public
private partnerships in the deployment of ICT networks, establishing multipurpose
communication telecenters for underserved communities, and waiving levy,
customs duty, or other taxes on ICT equipment for underserved communities and
public service sectors such as health, education, and emergency management.

99
The strategies for attaining Goal 2 include, among others: Promoting a level playing
field for competitors in ICT markets through appropriate regulation and
intervention where necessary; reviewing and updating legislation that governs the
ICT sector to ensure that it is fit for its purpose and draws on international
experience; putting in place suitable laws, policies and practices to ensure that access
to ICT infrastructure, services, and training is equitable and non-discriminatory; and
coordinating the identification of other legislative priorities—including laws in new
areas that may be required and amendments to existing laws that may be prudent—
and helping to secure the necessary support and technical assistance.

Strategies towards attaining Goal 3 include: Ensuring schools and universities have
affordable and sustainable access to computers and broadband connections;
integrating the use of ICT into school curricula; ensuring teachers receive
appropriate training, so that they have the skills and confidence to incorporate the
use of ICT into lessons; supporting e-learning programs for vocational and ‘lifelong
education’ opportunities for youth and adults to develop updated and relevant skills
needed to be competitive in the current workforce; making opportunities available
to people in rural or disadvantaged communities to acquire the skills and confidence
to use ICT to access and share information and further their education; and
coordinating local and regional opportunities for ICT policy training for government
decision-makers and policy staff in all sectors.

Strategies for attaining Goal 4 include: Identifying ways to lower the costs for
businesses to utilize ICT to improve their productivity and the marketing and
distribution of local goods and services; working with financial institutions to
establish e-commerce systems that facilitate financial transactions using ICT;
developing and implementing an ICT plan for the health sector that focuses on
utilizing ICT to improve the delivery of health services and the recording and
exchange of health related information; dissemination of required agricultural
information; integrating ICT into disaster management and recovery systems,
particularly to enhance predictive capabilities and the management of disaster and
post-disaster situations through access to real time information by government
officials; and supporting activities to promote the efficient disposal of waste.

Goal 5 will be attained through the following strategies: Developing an

e-government strategy to improve government processes and the delivery of public
services through the use of ICT; delivering public services to citizens through
creative uses of ICT such as one-stop service counters, helpdesks and e-services;
utilizing ICT to improve the way public institutions conduct public affairs and
manage public resources (e.g., putting information and forms online for public use);

100
using ICT to facilitate sharing of relevant data and information between government
ministries and between different providers of public services; improving the ICT
resources and capabilities of the government by examining the potential to
consolidate the purchase of IT equipment, software, and support services across the
government.

3.2.2.12 Seychelles

According to the National ICT Policy, the Government of the Seychelles “has
recognized the fundamental importance of ICT in any policy for stimulation of
national development” (p. 2). With this policy, the government aims to spread
connectivity locally and internationally, and to enhance the Seychelles’ ICT sector for
sustainable development. The policy is divided into five focus areas: 1) achieving
maximum quality of Seychelles ICT Infrastructure, 2) establishment of a legal and
regulatory framework to develop the ICT sector, 3) human resource development in
ICT knowledge, training, and capacity building, 4) utilization of ICT in the industry
for economic growth, and 5) provision of government public service delivery
through ICT initiatives (Government of Seychelles, n.d.).

There is a need for an improved government public service delivery that leads to a
“connected government” (Choppy, n.d.). A connected government has 5 major
forms: horizontal, vertical, infrastructure, G2C (government-to-citizen), and
stakeholder connections. Horizontal connections are the business transactions within
government institutes, while transactions between the national and local levels
instantiate vertical connections. Infrastructure connections refer to the unity of
infrastructure and data, while G2C and stakeholder connections mean “multichannel
service delivery” (Choppy, n.d.).

What people prefer is sufficient availability of e-government services, a “seamless &

integrated service”, and faster service delivery (Choppy, n.d.). To achieve this,
collaborative models of service delivery are proposed. They comprise “catalyzing
integration” within the government to unify reforms and e-government
development as well as establishment of a partnership with the private sector for
support (Choppy, n.d).

Currently enacted policies and laws include the Electronic Transaction Act, Data
Protection Act, Computer Misuse Act, National ICT Policy, E-government
Framework, E-government 5 Year Strategy and the Cyber Security Policy and Bill.
Along with the current policies and laws, individual projects are being implemented,
such as digital signatures in all line of business applications, e-payment gateways,
biometric features and digital signatures on national identification cards, biometric
101
or e-passports, kiosks per district for e-government services, and expansion of
government fiber network or the Wimax network to districts (Dorby, 2014).

The Department of Information and Communications Technology states three

e-government thrusts: connectivity, transformation, and e/m-service delivery. First,
connectivity captures dissemination and magnification of government network
capabilities. The challenge in this, however, is that there is limited funding in
developing fiber networks, network provider leases are expensive, and the
geographical situation in the Seychelles makes it difficult to expand connectivity.
Second, enhancement through transformation and re-engineering of government
business facilities is essential. Transformation must target conflicts resulting from
apathy and negligence of certain government institutions. The last goal is to broaden
the range of e-government service delivery. However, there is a problem in
supplying maximum e-governance capacity, as the Seychelles lack a sufficient
number of people specializing in the field. This last issue extends throughout all
three e-government thrusts (Dorby, 2014).

3.2.2.13 Singapore

The use of ICT has long been adopted by the Singaporean Government for e-
governance. The iGov2010 Masterplan of Singapore provided new ways for citizens
to communicate better with the Government by accessing REACH (“Reaching
Everyone for Active Citizenry @Home”, the lead government agency to engage
citizens), new services like OneMap for the people to inquire for directions, and
many others. These services were widely accepted by the people of Singapore, and
the people have gained greater appreciation for e-government and e-services.

In addition, Singapore has devised a new plan to further improve their e-governance
in the form of the Singapore e-government masterplan 2011-2015 (eGov2015). The
difference between the iGov2010 and the eGov2015 is that the Singaporean
government will pursue a different approach in delivering their e-services. Instead
of just giving and providing services, the eGov2015 extends their initiative to
allowing or paving way for the citizens to collaborate with the government.

eGov2015 envisions collaboration between the government and the people in

creation and connection. There are three strategies for this to be attained: (1) co-
creating for greater value, (2) connecting for active participation, and (3) catalysing
whole-of government transformation. In these strategies, collaboration, innovation,
and enhancement are key features (Singapore eGov, 2011).

102
The first strategy, co-creating for greater value, aims to empower the people. The
Mobile Government (mGov) programme is a new channel for the citizens to access
information and perform transactions with the Government. Another method to
empower the people is to provide a platform where the citizens can access
government data. For this, the government is creating an online database where
people can easily access information, which can be used for research purposes or
innovation, empowering the people through information (Singapore eGov, 2011).

The second strategy, connecting for active participation, aims for the citizens to
know about, and be involved in, policy making. The government sees the
importance of consulting the public in forming a policy. With this, the government
will further develop the REACH portal and transform it to be an official window for
all government news and announcements for consultation events. Other than this,
the government would also explore other means for citizens to be able to share their
ideas with the government.

Through the third strategy, catalyzing for whole-of-government transformation, the

government seeks to develop further collaboration through innovative and
sustainable technologies. Here, the government aspires to transform their ICT,
building on previous e-government initiatives, and to foster stronger links between
government agencies. Developing new technologies is also part of the change in
e-government. The government will invest in G-cloud, which plans for future
delivery of services envision as a window for change, making service provision more
secure and less costly. Aside from this, capabilities of public sector employees will
also be enhanced, with an emphasis on more coordinated work, empowerment of
public officials, sharing of knowledge, and smarter and faster customer service
(Singapore eGov, 2011).

Best practices of Singapore

Green Data Centre Standard

Data centres (DCs) are extremely energy-intensive facilities, with electricity

accounting for more than 50% of the operating expenditure in a typical DC in
Singapore. The Green Data Centre Standard has been established to help reduce the
energy consumption and operating costs of Data Centres and enhance their
competitiveness. The Infocomm Development Authority of Singapore has
partnered with other government agencies and industry to develop a Singapore
Standard for Green DCs. The Singapore Standard SS 564 Green Data Centres - Energy
and environmental management systems was first published in January 2011. It was

103
 subsequently revised as SS 564: Part 1 in 2013 (Info-communications Development
Authority of Singapore14).

BCA-IDA Green Mark for Data Centres

The BCA-IDA Green Mark for Data Centres has been devised to provide
recognition to data centre operators that have successfully deployed Green Data
Centre best practices and demonstrated superior energy and environmental
performance.

Government Sustainable ICT programme

The Government Sustainable ICT programme was developed to help government

agencies implement sustainable ICT practices in their organisations. The
Sustainable ICT Framework includes a maturity assessment tool, best practices and
guidelines, and a scorecard template that agencies could adopt. This framework
was launched and shared with all government agencies in January 2014.

3.2.2.14 Solomon Islands

The Solomon Islands has yet to promulgate a national ICT policy. The government’s
policy for telecommunications has two overarching objectives, according to the
Telecommunications Act of 2009. The first is “to achieve rapid expansion of
telecommunications infrastructure and services in the Solomon Islands and make
available to the population the widest possible range of efficient, reliable and
affordable telecommunications services competitively provided in a fairly regulated
market.” The second objective is “to enhance the national economic and social
development by promoting ongoing development and effective utilization of
telecommunications in the Solomon Islands” (TCSI, 2010).

The Solomon Islands established the Telecommunication Commission of the

Solomon Islands (TCSI) in 2009 to regulate and monitor the market and competition.
This commission is an industry-specific regulator, responsible for both economic and
technical regulation of telecommunications. In the same year 2009, it established and

14 http://www.ida.gov.sg/Collaboration-and-Initiatives/Initiatives/Store/Green-Data-Centre-Standard,
last accessed 6 November 2014.

104
adopted the Universal Access Fund Policy provided for under the
Telecommunication Act of 2009.

So far, the existing telecommunication providers, Telekom and Bemobile, have

expanded their infrastructure and services to expand coverage to rural areas, but
there are still areas that need servicing. The National Coalition for Rural
Advancement (NCRA)’s Government Telecommunication Development Policy is
another strategic ICT policy of the Solomon Islands.

The goals of the NCRA are: 1) to ensure reliable and efficient telecommunication
networks in the rural areas, and 2) to promote socio-economic development. To
attain these goals, the Solomon Islands embarked on the strategies of i) establishing
appropriate telecommunication infrastructure throughout the country from 2010 to
2014, and ii) a process of reviewing existing legislation to allow further competition
in the telecommunications market.

3.2.2.15 Timor-Leste

Due to political unrest, the Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste has struggled in its
pursuit of national development. It is notable that what initiated improvements of
the nation’s different sectors was the United Nations transitional administration’s
intervention from 1999-2002, resulting in Timor-Leste’s independence in 2002. With
that, the shift in governance paved the way for “focusing on institution building and
the development of legislative and regulatory frameworks to organize the new
nation state” (UNDP, 2012).

For many years, internal political conflict has been plaguing Timor-Leste, constantly
interrupting the government’s efforts to restore, improve and modernize its
telecommunication sector, even after independence. The government aims to build
its telecommunication capabilities with the assistance of foreign partners.

The Timor-Leste Strategic Development Plan (SDP) 2011-2030 states under the
Telecommunications component, its vision is to have a modern telecommunications
network that will foster connectivity within the nation and with the rest of the world
by 2015. The following goals are keys to attaining this vision: 1) Allowing market
competition in telecommunication; 2) creating a new independent regulatory body,
and 3) establishing a Universal Service Policy to enhance access to affordable,
reliable and modern telecommunications services (Government of Timor-Leste,
2011).

105
Along with resolving political issues, Timor-Leste aims to tap into the benefits of ICT
to address social needs, particularly in health and education. Its economic goals
include increasing economic growth and telecommunication capacity through open
market competition and, more globally, to develop a Timor-Leste that is connected
nationwide and with the world at large (Government of Timor-Leste, 2011).

Goal 1 was achieved through changes in the private sector telecommunication

market. In 2002, the government allowed Timor Telecom to monopolize the
telecommunication industry until 2017. This decision was later overturned, ending
Timor Telecom’s monopoly as the nation’s primary source of telecommunication
services (da Silva, 2009; Baptista, 2013). The government opened the market and
licensed competitors, which include PT Telekomunikasi Indonesia International
(Telin) and Viettel Global Investment JSC (Viettel) (Government of Timor-Leste,
2012).

According to the SDP, the Autoridade Reguladora de Telecomunicaҫões (ARTEL) is set to

function as the autonomous body regulating the country’s telecommunication
market, thus addressing Goal 2 (Government of Timor-Leste, 2011). Currently,
however, Timor-Leste is still undergoing the process of institutionalizing policies
and regulations (Baptista, 2013).

Lastly, the government aims to establish a Universal Service Policy to achieve Goal 3,
striving to obtain heightened telecommunication through mobile phone and
broadband Internet services within reach of all Timorese. By utilizing undersea fiber-
optic cable connections, the government is hoping to lessen reliance on satellites for
interconnectivity (Government of Timor-Leste, 2011).

At present, Timor-Leste is still in the process of setting up IT infrastructures in new

government ministries, and enhancing the ones in present ministries. Certain
government websites and applications are still underway, but there are accessible
e-government service portals (e.g. Web Portal of the Government of Timor-Leste,
Timor-Leste Transparency Portal) and back-office information systems (e.g. IFMI of
the Ministry of Finance, PMIS of the State Administration, EMIS of the Ministry of
Education, IIMS of the Justice Sectors) currently in place (Baptista, 2013).

3.2.2.16 Tonga

The government of Tonga recognizes the vital role of ICT in attaining its eight
national development goals. Briefly, these eight goals include the following: 1)
Creating a better governance environment; 2) ensuring macroeconomic stability; 3)
promoting sustained private-sector led growth; 4) ensuring equitable distribution of

106
the benefits of growth; 5) improving education standards; 6) improving health
standards; 7) ensuring environment sustainability and disaster risk education; and 8)
maintaining law and order, social cohesion and cultural identity. The government
sees ICT as a key enabler of these goals. As such, it has laid out its strategies in the
National Information and Communications Technology Policy, promulgated in 2009.

The policy states among its visions: the creation of a knowledge-based society,
increasing innovation, accelerating the development and improving the quality of
life for all Tongans, active participation in the networked economy, and prospering
of local companies as well as creation of new jobs. There is also a clear intent to use
ICT to preserve Tongan culture and values. In sum, it aims to build a “Connected
Kingdom” or an ICT fale.

Six ICT pous or pillars have been identified in Tonga’s national ICT programme: 1)
provision of ICTs in homes and communities; 2) education and skills development; 3)
e-government; 4) industry growth and economic development; 5) an enabling
technical infrastructure; and 6) ICT-related legislation. The Department of
Communications within Tonga’s Prime Minister’s Office has been tasked with
coordinating the development of a National ICT Strategic Plan, with six working
groups established to cover one of the identified key areas each.

3.2.2.17 Tuvalu

Tuvalu is part of the Pacific Island Countries and Territories (PICTs). As a member,
it adopted the common Pacific Islands Information and Communication
Technologies Policy and Strategic Plan in April 2012, with the vision of “Information
and Communication Technologies for every Pacific Islander” (PIIPP, 2002). This
strategic plan has 4 guiding principles: human resources, infrastructure
development, cooperation between stakeholders, and appropriate policy and
regulation. Under each principle, policies and regulations are laid out that the PICTs
are required to achieve by their target dates, designed with both general and specific
goals (PIIPP, 2002).

Tuvalu is expected to benefit from the partnership with the other PICTs in
implementing the Pacific Islands ICT Policy. However, like many other SIDS, the
country still faces difficulties in attaining sustainable ICT. Reasons include a lack of
much-needed funds and human resources to develop devices and infrastructure.
This hinders integration of advanced ICTs into the social, economic and political
sectors.

107
According to the UNESCO Meta-Survey on the Use of Technologies in Education
(n.d.), there are limits to Tuvalu’s use of ICT for education because the IT
departments are understaffed. There is a shortage of qualified Tuvaluan ICT
personnel as well as of training prospects, so that well-educated, qualified
Tuvaluans prefer to migrate abroad for better opportunities. There are also other
constraints in funding and support to improve ICT in schools, including limited
institutional ICT capacity, costly ICT systems, equipment, and services, and the
geographic disadvantage of Tuvalu’s islands being so dispersed from one another
(Vaa, n.d.).

The Ministry of Finance aims to address ICT concerns through the Te Kakeega II,
Tuvalu’s National Strategy for Sustainable Development (NSSD) for 2005-2015. One
of the priorities among infrastructure and support services (Chapter 12) is “to
improve ICT services and extend ICT service nationwide especially to schools,
clinics and Kaupule” (Ministry of Finance, 2005). This national strategy is also in line
with the UN Millennium Development Goals.

As of the time of the report, Tuvalu’s assessment in Goal 8 (“Develop a Global

Partnership for Development”), Target 18 (“In co-operation with the private sector,
make available the benefits of new technologies, especially information and
communication”), showed small progress. For instance, Internet was only available
in Funafuti, with upgrades far apart (i.e., in 2001 and then again only in 2004)
despite improvements in information and communication services. However, efforts
to enhance domestic and government computer networks show some progress. In
2004, mobile networks became available in Tuvalu.

The government acknowledges the importance of ICT in the 2012 Tuvalu

Infrastructure Strategy and Investment Plan (TISIP). Measured outlined therein are
aiming to improve the efficiency of operations and to consider increasing
privatization and competition, where viable, to enhance their ICT capabilities
(Government of Tuvalu, 2012).

The ICT sector is supervised by Tuvalu’s Ministry of Communications and

Transport. The main provider is the Tuvalu Telecom Corporation (TTC), a state-
owned enterprise (SOE) established in 1994 with the aid of the ADB through the
Government’s Public Enterprises (Performance and Accountability) Act of 2010.
However, economic growth in the ICT sector is still limited, and attempts to open
Tuvalu’s communications market have yet to proceed because of concerns that
additional network providers cannot yet be afforded (Government of Tuvalu, 2012).

108
Tuvalu relies on assistance from foreign agencies such as JICA and ADB. Recently,
JICA replaced the TTC FM radio station and provided the Media Department at
Funafuti with an AM transmitter to free the satellite bandwidth for mobile services.
In its technical assistance, ADB included the provision that TTC should improve its
corporate governance and operations, with the end view of attaining financial
independence by 2013 (Government of Tuvalu, 2012).

Under the NSSD and TTC’s corporate plans and strategy, the government identifies
current and proposed ICT projects. First, the Tuvalu government aims to shift ICT
units to solar power (T1), maintained by the TEC-run REEEU. Second, the goal was
set to disseminate ICT connectivity (T2) to surrounding islands for online education
and accessibility of services. Lastly, it is envisioned to begin using submarine cables
(T3) to enhance ICT coverage (Government of Tuvalu, 2012).

3.2.2.18 Vanuatu

The ICT sector in Vanuatu underwent major changes over the years, opening the
market for competition under the governance of the Telecommunications and Radio
communications Regulator (TRR) (Republic of Vanuatu, 2013). The country has
several telecommunications providers, including: Telecom Vanuatu Limited (TVL),
its first provider, followed by Digicel, Telsat and Can’L. There was an increase in
Vanuatu’s ICT capacity initiatives, but the country faced various social, economic
and environmental issues that stunted the growth of its ICT sector. The government
seeks to address these factors through essential ICT policies and strategic
development (Republic of Vanuatu, 2012).

The National ICT (Services) Policy, in line with the government’s adoption of a
Universal Access Policy, should “address all main paradigms” and be incorporated
into Vanuatu’s ministerial structure, branching out into the other sectors, improving
ICT capacity to support local Nu-Vanuatu capacity and organizational structures.
The policy must be implementable for long-term, sustainable development.

The Office of the Government Chief Information Officer (OGCIO) is mandated to

improve the quality of Vanuatu’s ICT, “including policy and strategy development
as well as interagency and cross-level coordination,” as per the 2012 National ICT
Policy Development Approach and Work Plan (Lamanauskas, 2012; Republic of
Vanuatu, 2013).

The government aims for ICT to be a ground for multi-stakeholder and multi-sector
coordination and collaboration. The Prime Minister heads the National ICT

109
Development Committee. Under the Prime Minister’s supervision, the following
ICT-related legal measures were adopted:

1) Laws governing the telecommunications sector—specifically:

2) Telecommunications and Radiocommunications Regulation Act No. 30 of
2009;
3) Telecommunications Act [CAP 206]; and
4) Wireless Telegraph (Ships) Act [CAP 5];
5) Electronic Transactions Act No. 24 of 2000 (as amended by the Statute Law
(Miscellaneous) Provisions Act No. 2 of 2010);
6) E-Business Act No. 25 of 2000 (as amended by the E-Business (Amendment)
Act No. 17 of 2007);
7) Broadcasting and Television Act [CAP 214]

Source: Republic of Vanuatu, 2013

Vanuatu aims to tap into the benefits of ICT for good governance, and to attain
sustainable and inclusive economic and social development. In order to do this, the
OGCIO implemented their 2013 Portfolio, Program and Project Management (PPPM)
plan that tracked the progress and issues of OGCIO’s efforts in the early 2000s for
ICT development. Some target goals were not achieved, as 1) ICT strategic planning
experience is limited within the OGCIO technical staff, and there remain 2) a lack of
in-house capacity and human resources, and 3) evident gaps in the plan’s stages. The
Office is undergoing changes in order to address the issues to fulfill their mandate in
developing Vanuatu’s information and communication technologies (OGCIO, 2013).

Efforts have been made to promote ICT development in Vanuatu through the
National ICT Policy. In 2013, that main goal was updated to include “enhanced
social and economic sustainable development, good governance and security
through better access and use of ICT.” The aim is to advance all sectors in the
integration of ICT access to achieve nation’s vision of “a just, educated, healthy and
wealthy Vanuatu” (Republic of Vanuatu, 2013).

The government of Vanuatu established several ICT related priorities. These include
increasing the availability and function of ICT infrastructure and devices, and
increasing access to content significant to Vanuatu’s local and international
interactions. Through private and public sector stakeholders, several projects aimed
towards expanding connectivity have been completed. These include enhancement
of ICT infrastructure and of the national internet exchange point. Ongoing projects
include setting up a Vanuatu submarine cable that will improve its connection to
international networks (Republic of Vanuatu, 2013).
110
The government also aims to foster ICT connections between government and
stakeholders through e-government, and to incorporate ICT in sectoral policies for
socio-economic development and risk management. The government has achieved
the former sub-goal with the Integrated Government (iGov) and E-government
Strategic Roadmap. The Government Broadband Network (GBN) was established
and functions as a pathway to connect Vanuatu’s provinces. The Ministry of Health
and other government agencies, such as the Vanuatu Meteorology and Geohazards
Department, also enhanced their public service and their inter-sectoral connectivity
through ICT development (Republic of Vanuatu, 2013).

Communities and the education sector also benefited from the government and
private sector ventures prioritizing incorporation of ICT for communities and
schools. These ventures have enhanced internet connectivity to branch out to low-
income/remote communities; facilities such as the Rensarie Telecenter and public
internet points located at Lakatoro (Malakula), Loltong (North Pentecost), have been
built, among others (Republic of Vanuatu, 2013).

3.3 Major barriers to e-government development in SIDS

Based on the e-governance initiatives survey conducted in 2008 by the

Commonwealth Telecommunications Organization (CTO), the status of
e-government initiatives did not fare very well in developing/transitional countries.
Data revealed that 35 percent of e-government initiatives were considered total
failures, 50 percent partial failures, while only 15 percent were recorded as
successful (Awan, 2013).

Among the factors that contributed to the failure of these initiatives were "unrealistic
project goals, inaccurate assessments of resources, poor reporting of the project's
status, unmanaged risks, poor communication among stakeholders and poor project
management" (Awan, 2013: 31). Other major constraints that hinder e-government
development in SIDS include remoteness, lack of standard infrastructure, high costs
of investments, and limited local capacity and governance capability.

3.3.1 Weak or limited ICT infrastructure

ICT is the backbone of e-government, but in many SIDS, ICT infrastructure and
services are very limited. SIDS have some of the lowest internet penetration rates in
the world. May (2013) notes that broadband subscriptions and internet usage in the
Pacific region vary widely. Cave (2012) notes that internet penetration rates in most

111
Pacific SIDS are dismally low. As of 2011, they remain below ten percent in, for
example, the Solomon Islands, Samoa, Vanuatu, and Papua New Guinea. Mobile
phone networks are the most developed component of ICT infrastructure.

Penetration of broadband internet facilities is especially sparse and still relatively

expensive. According to the ITU, the averages of broadband subscription rates are
4.7 (fixed) and 9.8 (mobile) per 100 inhabitants, excluding Bahrain and Singapore.
These rates are not only far behind the more developed countries, but also behind
the world average of 11.1 (fixed) and 23.6 (mobile).

3.3.2 Expensive rates due to high investment costs and monopolies

Several factors make ICT infrastructure investments less attractive to private

investors. In the less developed markets, there is uncertainty in projecting public and
private sector demand for ICT services. In many instances, especially in more remote
parts of these islands, sparse population puts a limit on economies of scale and thus
yields higher per-unit costs of service. There are also physical, geographical, and
logistical challenges that drive up costs of infrastructure development and
maintenance. The costs of all of these factors make the ICT industry less competitive
and more costly in SIDS compared to ICT industry in other non-SIDS. As such, ICT
services (e.g., local and international calls, internet, etc.) in SIDS tend to be several
times more expensive than in non-SIDS.

Another barrier to ICT industry growth in SIDS is monopolistic power and limited
competition (Ming, 2013). ICT monopolies can still be found in SIDS like Kiribati, the
Marshall Islands, New Caledonia, French Polynesia, the Cook Islands and the
Federated States of Micronesia as of 2012. Until new players enter the ICT market
and competition is improved, monopolies have every incentive to keep service costs
high for the consumer, and have few incentives to make further infrastructure
investment, especially on projects considered more risky or less profitable (Cave,
2012). Monopolistic competition means that companies look to cherry-pick only the
most profitable and risk-free projects for development. Firms with monopolistic
power are also able to charge higher rates than would be possible in a competitive
market, an outcome which has an especially significant negative impact in a price-
sensitive, low-income market. Thus these firms retain more of the economic surplus
of their investment for themselves while under-investing relative to the societal
optimum. Considering that poverty rates are high and incomes in many SIDS are
low, monopolies can make ICT services even more unaffordable.

3.3.3 Lack of skilled ICT professionals

112
The lack of skilled ICT professionals is another significant challenge for Pacific SIDS
(May, 2013). UNEP, UN DESA, and FAO (2012) noted that SIDS tend to lose
significant numbers of qualified, trained professionals, as young people emigrate to
find higher wages and better careers overseas. Emigration of ICT professionals
leaves SIDS with a very limited pool of professionals that can support the planning,
development, and operations of ICT and e-government systems.

As a result, many SIDS rely on external experts and foreign assistance in planning
and implementing their ICT and e-government programs and projects. The reliance
on foreign expertise renders the long-term sustainability of these projects uncertain.
SIDS must therefore actively promote ICT education and training to develop an
adequate ICT professional base.

3.3.4 Lack of political commitment from top-level politicians

E-government development will require the sustained commitment of top-level

politicians. However, other issues that are considered more pressing or more
politically salient are liable to preempt e-government among national priorities.
Even within the economic development agenda, other issues such as agriculture,
fishery, energy, and construction take precedence. Many public sector organizations
charged with oversight of e-government development have not established a
national e-government strategic plan or have not received requisite approval from
the relevant political authorities.

3.3.5 Insufficient e-government training among public employees

Many public employees share a superficial understanding of the potential

transformative capacity of e-government systems. Many view e-government as
merely the installation of computers linked to the internet in public offices. The
value of e-government lies within its potential to bring about innovation in
management and the workflow within public organizations, and to thus raise the
efficiency and quality of public services. Limited education of public employees on
the potential benefits of e-government is itself an obstacle. There is no critical mass
of support and activism within the ranks of public employees pushing for
e-government development and reform.

113
4. Empirical Analyses
4.1 Statistical analysis of the relationship between e-government and
sustainable development

4.1.1 Correlation Analysis

4.1.1.1 Correlation between e-government development and good governance

All e-government development indices are shown to have high positive correlations
with measures of good governance. However, among the indicators that make up
the E-Government Development Index, the human capital index has the least
correlation with the good governance indices, compared to the other EGDI
components..

<Table 4.1> Correlation between e-government development and good governance

Control of Government Regulatory

Variable
corruption effectiveness quality
Coef. 0.658*** 0.742*** 0.675***
EGDI
N 126 126 126

Coef. 0.397*** 0.447*** 0.329***

HCI
N 117 117 117

Coef. 0.735*** 0.788*** 0.734***

TII
N 125 125 125

Coef. 0.722*** 0.794*** 0.800***

OSI
N 126 126 126

Coef. 0.696*** 0.687*** 0.675***

EPI
N 126 126 126

Coef. 0.298*** 0.351*** 0.270***

EPI(log) 15

N 126 126 126

15 As the telecommunication infrastructure index (0.834***) and online service index (0.853***) are
highly correlated with the e-participation index and some regression analyses show nearly 10 points
of VIF (variance inflation factor) values, the values of e-participation index are converted to their
natural log values to mitigate the multicollinearity problem. After the conversion, the correlation
coefficient values decline to 0.3446*** and 0.3564***.

114
 V&A× Coef. -0.160* -0.180** -0.225**
CEPI16 N 126 126 126
* p<0.1, ** p<0.05, ***p<0.01

4.1.1.2 Correlation between good governance, economic & social development, and
environment & disaster management

Overall, the good governance indicators are found to have high correlations with the
economic and social development as well as environment and disaster management.
The coefficient values of GDP per capita (log), rule of law, health index, and
vulnerability to natural disaster are greater than those of social stability, under-five
mortality ratio, and ecosystem vitality.

<Table 4.2> Correlation between Good governance and Economic & Social
development and Environment & Disaster Management

GDP / Vulnera-
Rule of PS& Under-5 Health Ecosystem
Variable Capita bility
law AVT mortality index vitality
(log) to ND

Control of Coef. 0.746*** 0.774*** 0.535*** -0.570*** 0.748*** 0.484*** -0.827***

corruption N 123 126 121 126 97 87 48

Government Coef. 0.784*** 0.739*** 0.366*** -0.583*** 0.759*** 0.567*** -0.915***

effectiveness N 123 126 121 126 97 87 48

Regulatory Coef. 0.751*** 0.676*** 0.258*** -0.505*** 0.690*** 0.480*** -0.872***

quality N 123 126 121 126 97 87 48

Coef. 0.786*** 0.724*** 0.319*** -0.557*** 0.740*** 0.531*** -0.906***

Government
capability17 N 123 126 121 126 97 87 48

* p<0.1, ** p<0.05, ***p<0.01

16 As we guessed above, the level of democracy may moderate the effect of e-participation. For this
reason, the interaction term between the democracy variable (voice and accountability) and the e-
participation index. The e-participation values has been mean-centered because the interaction term
can cause a multicollinearity problem.

17 The correlation coefficient value between government effectiveness and regulatory quality is 0.9***;
moreover the VIF values are greater than 10 if the two variables are included in the same models. As a
measure to reduce the VIF, they are transformed to the government capability factor which is the
average of government effectiveness and regulatory quality (Government effectiveness + Regulatory
quality)/2).

115
4.1.1.3 Correlation between e-government development, economic & social
development, and environment & disaster management

By and large, the e-government development indices exhibit a strong correlation,

whether positive or negative, with economic and social development indices as well
as environment and disaster management indices. In the case of Vulnerability to ND,
one would anticipate a negative correlation with e-government indices. In particular,
the correlation coefficient values between the e-government development indices
and the GDP per capita (log), health index, and vulnerability to natural disaster are
higher than the correlation coefficient values between the e-government
development indices and the other dependent variables. The E-Government
Development indices show the highest magnitude of correlation with the following
indicators: GDP per capita (log), Health index, and Vulnerability to ND. However,
the overall e-government development index (EGDI), the online service index, and
the e-participation indices do not show any significant correlation with the political
stability & absence of violence/terrorism indices. The human capital index has less
correlation with the indices of the development of economy, society, environment
management, and disaster management than the other e-government development
indices. In addition, the correlation value of the e-natural environment index and the
ecosystem vitality index is 0.739 despite the cross-sectional data of fifteen countries.

<Table 4.3> Correlation between e-government development, economic & social

development, and environment & disaster management

GDP / Vulnera-
Rule of PS& Under-5 Health Ecosystem
Variable Capita bility
law AVT mortality index vitality
(log) to ND

Coef. 0.704*** 0.327*** 0.066 -0.568*** 0.690*** 0.355*** -0.892***

EGDI
N 145 132 125 154 100 90 48

Coef. 0.450*** 0.214** 0.245*** -0.439*** 0.480*** 0.258** -0.751***

HCI
N 136 121 114 143 95 87 47

Coef. 0.828*** 0.510*** 0.166* -0.533*** 0.704*** 0.427*** -0.888***

TII
N 144 130 123 152 99 89 48

Coef. 0.724*** 0.448*** 0.067 -0.509*** 0.674*** 0.401*** -0.791***

OSI
N 145 132 125 154 100 90 48

Coef. 0.605*** 0.404*** 0.076 -0.356 *** 0.561 *** 0.472 *** -0.703***
EPI
N 145 132 125 154 100 90 48

116
 EPI(log) Coef. 0.331*** 0.074 0.042 -0.306*** 0.298*** 0.103 -0.293**

N 145 132 125 154 100 90 48

V&A× Coef. -0.314*** -0.218** 0.060 0.233*** -0.290*** -0.030 0.318**

CEPI N 124 132 125 132 100 90 48

Coef. - - - - - 0.739*** -
EEI
N - - - - - 15 -
* p<0.1, ** p<0.05, ***p<0.01

4.1.2 Regression analysis

4.1.2.1 Analytic methods

For this analysis we used panel data, which is likely to involve autocorrelation (serial
correlation) and heteroskedasticity. We therefore examined every model with the
Wooldridge test for autocorrelation and with the Breusch–Pagan test and the White's
test for heteroscedasticity. Several of our models indeed showed autocorrelation and
heteroskedasticity. We applied a statistical correction technique known as Feasible
Generalized Least Squares (FGLS) to correct the autocorrelation (serial correlation)
and heteroskedasticity.

For panel data analysis, it is recommended to consider the traits of individual by

using random model or fixed model. However, the fixed model can be inefficient if
the time range of data set has a short term period. For this reason, we tried to control
for the traits of individual states by including the control variables into our models.
As we mentioned above in the first chapter, we included the level of democracy
(voice and accountability), population size, outliers (Singapore and Bahrain), and the
difference of human capital index in 2014 as control variables.

4.1.2.2 Effects of e-government development on good governance

In examining the effects of e-government development on good governance, we

adopted two models. The first model is designed to identify the effects of the overall
e-government development (EGDI) on good governance; the second model is
designed to identify the effects of the e-government development sub-indices
(human capital, infrastructure, and online service) on good governance.

117
[Model 1]

 
 ௜,௧
= α + ଵ 
௜,௧ + ଶ ln ()௜,௧ + ଷ &௜,௧ ௜,௧ + ସ &௜,௧
+ ହ ln ( )௜,௧ + + ଺ ௜,௧ + ௜,௧

[Model 2]

 
 ௜,௧
= α + ଵ ௜,௧ + ଶ ௜,௧ + ଷ ௜,௧ + ସ ln ()௜,௧ + ହ &௜,௧ ௜,௧
+ ଺ &௜,௧ + ଻ ln ( )௜,௧ + ଼ ௜,௧ + ଽ 2014௜,௧ + ௜,௧

For the model 1, the overall E-Government Development (EGDI) has a significant
influence on the good governance indicators. For model 1, the coefficient on
E-Government Development indicates that the sub-indices that compose Good
Governance are all sensitive to E-Government Development. In model one, for instance,
Government Effectiveness increases by 1.24 points on average for every 1 point
increase in E-Government Development. However, the E-Participation Level does not
show a considerable influence in relation to government transparency and
regulatory quality.

By contrast, the Good Governance sub-indices do not appear to be sensitive to E-

Participation in Model 1. The coefficient on E-Participation indicates that it does not
have statistically significant explanatory power, holding the other variables in model
1 constant, for either Government Transparency or Regulatory Quality. E-Participation
does appear to be correlated with Government Effectivenss at the .1 significance level.
We can predict that the level of government effectiveness would rise by 0.002 when
the e-participation level rises by 1 percent. In addition, the moderating effect of
democracy is not significant.

For model 2, we subdivided the EGDI into its three components to specify which
component has a significant influence on the good governance indicators. In model 2,
we treat all three components of the E-Government Development Index as distinct
variables in order to examine their individual effects on Good Governance indicators.
In general, all three E-Government Development indices are positively correlated with
at least some sub-indices of Good Governance. In particular, the telecommunication
infrastructure level is found to have significant impacts on the all good governance
indicators. The human capital level has a positive influence on government
transparency, while the online service level has positive effects on government
effectiveness and regulatory quality. In contrast to model 1, the democracy level
turns out to be a moderator between e-participation and regulatory quality as well as
government effectiveness.

118
 <Table 4.4> Effects of e-government development on good governance

Control of Government Regulatory

Variable
corruption effectiveness quality
*** *** ***
EGDI 0.879 1.244 0.902
*
EPI(log) 0.001 0.002 0.000
V&A×CEPI 0.243 0.269 0.156
*** *** ***
Model Voice & Accountability 0.426 0.276 0.384
1 Population(log) 0.010 0.058 0.123
***

*** *** ***

Outlier(dummy) 1.651 1.399 1.650
*** ***
Constant -0.831 -1.674 -2.564
N 123 123 123
***
HCI 0.380 0.196 -0.224
*** *** ***
TII 1.304 2.424 1.574
* ***
OSI 0.255 0.710 1.716
*
EPI(log) 0.000 0.002 0.001
* **
V&A×CEPI 0.327 0.619 0.827
Model *** *** **
Voice & Accountability 0.454 0.310 0.196
2
*
Population(log) 0.030 0.067 0.028
*** * *
Outlier(dummy) 1.116 0.487 0.549
*** ***
HCI_2014(dummy) -0.015 -0.472 -0.611
** *** **
Constant -1.243 -1.889 -1.291
N 115 115 115
* p<0.1, ** p<0.05, ***p<0.01

4.1.2.3 Effects of good governance on economic & social development and

environment & disaster management

As the Good Governance sub-indices are found to have significant impacts on the
economic and social development as well as environment and disaster management.
In particular, the government capability is shown to affect all sustainable
development indicators. For example, GDP per capita would rise by 12.7% if the
value of government transparency rises by 1 unit. The government transparency is
also shows significant causal relationships with the economic and social

119
development. However, it is not found to have any significant effect on the level of
environment and disaster management.

<Table 4.5> Effects of good governance on economic & social development and
environment & disaster management

GDP / Vulnera-
Rule of PS& Under-5 Health Ecosystem
Variable Capita bility
law AVT mortality index vitality
(log) to ND
Control of ** ** *** *** ***
0.127 0.130 0.455 -5.62 0.022 -0.954 1.19
Corruption
Government *** *** *** * *** * ***
Capability1) 0.245 0.676 0.178 -3.72 0.040 0.991 -12.98
Voice & ** *** *** *** **
0.161 0.324 0.340 0.27 0.019 0.526 2.79
Accountability
Population *** *** *** *** *** ** ***
(log) -0.184 -0.223 -0.224 5.112 -0.021 0.750 3.007
Outlier *** *** ** *** *** **
2.296 0.367 -0.294 -26.95 0.100 10.943 0.25
(dummy)
*** *** *** ** *** *** ***
Constant 9.975 3.048 3.457 -28.26 1.040 28.642 9.88

N 123 123 118 123 96 87 48

1)(Government effectiveness + Regulatory quality)/2
* p<0.1, ** p<0.05, ***p<0.01

4.1.2.4 Effects of e-government development on economic & social development and

environment & disaster management

The results of model 1 demonstrate a strong correlation of higher levels of

E-Government Development Index with beneficial outcomes in the sub-indices of
Economic and Social Development as well as sub-indices of Environment and Disaster
Management. Also, E-Participation is found to have statistically significant correlation
with higher GDP per capita and a lower under-five mortality rate. Moreover, the
interaction term of E-Participation with Voice and Accountability is correlated with a
higher score on Rule of Law and Social Stability and a lower score on the index of
Vulnerability to Natural Disaster. Therefore, the results for model 1 indicate positive
effect from E-Participation on each of the sustainable development sub-indices except
for Ecosystem Vitality. The elements of E-Participation appear to operate both directly
and in conjunction with the elements of Voice and Accountability to impact the various
sub-indices measuring sustainable development. In model 2, we parse EGDI into its
three constituent components. The results of model 2 demonstrate that each of the

120
three components of EGDI is statistically significantly correlated with several sub-
indices of sustainable development. In particular, each tenth of a unit (.1) increase in
ICT Infrastructure is associated, on average, with a 29.7 percent increase in GDP per
capita, a 0.106 increase in Rule of Law, a 0.016 point increase in Health Index, a 4.14
point decrease in Under-5 Mortality and a 4.15 point decrease in Vulnerability to
Natural Disaster. Model 2 also indicates influence of the elements measured by E-
Participation and the joint influence of elements measured by E-Participation and Voice
and Accountability on GDP/capita, Rule of Law, and Social Stability.

<Table 4.6> Effects of e-government development on economic & social

development and environment & disaster management

GDP / Vulnera-
Rule of PS& Under-5 Health Ecosystem
Variable Capita bility
law AVT mortality index vitality
(log) to ND
*** *** *** *** *** ** ***
EGDI 1.239 1.690 0.776 -47.53 0.193 2.857 -48.5

* * *
EPI(log) 0.001 0.000 0.001 -0.041 0.000 0.006 0.006

V&A× *** ** **
0.119 0.429 0.617 -1.45 0.016 -0.356 -6.29
CEPI
** *** * *** **
V&A 0.181 0.713 0.658 -5.94 0.035 0.173 -2.35
Model
1 Population *** *** *** *** *** **
-0.219 -0.132 -0.215 4.01 -0.016 1.016 0.750
(log)
Outlier *** *** *** *** *** *
2.492 1.336 0.632 -20.94 0.119 9.042 -2.11
(dummy)
*** *** *** *** *** ***
Constant 9.913 0.833 2.803 1.56 0.885 24.00 63.01

N 123 123 118 123 96 87 48

* ** *** *** * ***

HCI 0.305 0.442 0.326 -16.98 0.060 1.925 -23.46

*** *** *** *** ***

TII 2.971 1.057 0.304 -41.38 0.157 0.537 -41.52

*** ** ** **
OSI 0.390 1.036 0.851 -14.60 0.073 1.026 -0.60
Model
2 *
EPI(log) 0.002 0.000 0.002 -0.025 0.000 0.006 0.003

V&A× *** ***

0.312 0.673 1.313 3.143 0.000 0.372 1.29
CEPI
* *** *** *** *** ***
V&A 0.203 0.635 0.585 -9.08 0.040 0.266 -2.56

121
 Population *** *** *** *** *** *
-0.209 -0.116 -0.238 3.34 -0.016 1.633 -0.877
(log)
Outlier *** *** ** *** *
1.399 0.880 0.501 -10.927 0.090 8.625 5.95
(dummy)
HCI_2014 **
-0.273 -0.201 -0.247 -0.110 0.004 0.065 1.15
(dummy)
*** *** *** ***
Constant 9.584 0.566 2.956 16.451 0.869 14.584 90.09

N 115 115 110 115 92 85 47

* p<0.1, ** p<0.05, ***p<0.01

4.1.3 Mediation effect analysis

This research adopts the test method suggested by Baron and Kenny (1986) to
analyze the mediation effect. The results of the mediation effect analysis indicate that
each of the three indices of good governance, including government control of
corruption, effectiveness, and regulatory quality, mediate the effects of the
e-government development indices on the sustainable development indices. As
shown in <Table 4.13> below, both government effectiveness and regulatory quality
directly mediate between the online service level and the rule of law, social stability,
and health index. The ICT infrastructure, as measured by the TII, affects GDP per
capita, rule of law, under-five mortality rate, health, and the vulnerability to natural
disaster indices mainly in an indirect way. Similarly, e-participation and the
interaction term between e-participation and democracy affect economic and social
development via government effectiveness and regulatory quality. The mediation
analysis also indicates that the influence of the human capital level on GDP per
capita, rule of law, under-five mortality rate, and health index is mediated by
government transparency, as measured by Control of Corruption. All in all, these
results support our research framework presented in chapter 1.

<Table 4.7> Mediation effects of good governance on sustainable development

GDP / Vulnera-
Rule of Under-5 Health Ecosystem
Variable Capita PS&AVT bility
law mortality index vitality
(log) to ND

HCI CoC CoC CoC CoC

122
 CoC CoC CoC
CoC Gov’t Eff
TII Gov’t Eff Gov’t Eff Gov’t Eff
RQ RQ
RQ RQ RQ

Gov’t Eff Gov’t Eff Gov’t Eff

OSI
RQ RQ RQ

EPI(log) Gov’t Eff

V&A× Gov’t Eff Gov’t Eff

CEPI RQ RQ

Underlined & bold: Full mediation effect

4.2 Comparative analysis among SIDS

As mentioned above in this chapter, there is wide variation in the indices that
measure e-government development within the SIDS in the Pacific and AIMS
regions. The results of the statistical analyses show strong a strong correlation
between indices of e-government development and indices of sustainable
development (including both environment and disaster management and economic
and social development). The results support the hypothesis of a causal impact of
e-government development on sustainable development. In this section, we conduct
a comparative analysis of the SIDS in order to identify factors which contribute to
differences in e-government development among the SIDS.

4.2.1 Country grouping

It is useful for this comparative analysis to classify the Pacific and AIMS SIDS into
sub-groups based on their current level of e-government development, as measured
by the EGDI. <Table 4.8> shows that the Pacific and AIMS SIDS can be classified into
two distinct groups by the 2014 EGDI, apart from two outliers, Singapore and
Bahrain. Group A includes countries with a relatively high EGDI, more than the
Pacific and AIMS average, and consists of Mauritius, the Seychelles, Fiji, the
Maldives, Tonga, Palau, and Samoa. Group B consists of countries with a lower level
of EGDI than the average and consists of Cape Verde, Micronesia, Kiribati, Tuvalu,
the Marshall Islands, Nauru, Vanuatu, Timor-Leste, São Tomé and Principe, the
Solomon Islands, Comoros, Guinea-Bissau, and Papua New Guinea.

123
 <Table 4.8> Classification of the Pacific and AIMS SIDS by the EGDI

Group Country EGDI

Outlier Singapore 0.9076
(2) Bahrain 0.8089
Mauritius 0.5338
Seychelles 0.5113
Fiji 0.5044
Group A
Maldives 0.4813
(7)
Tonga 0.4706
Palau 0.4415
Samoa 0.4204
Cape Verde 0.3551
Micronesia 0.3337
Kiribati 0.3201
Tuvalu 0.3059
Marshall Islands 0.2851
Nauru 0.2776
Group B
Vanuatu 0.2571
(13)
Timor-Leste 0.2528
Sao Tome & Principe 0.2218
Solomon Islands 0.2087
Comoros 0.1808
Guinea-Bissau 0.1609
Papua New Guinea 0.1203
Average 0.3800
Source: E-Government Survey 2014 (UN)

<Figure 4.1> illustrates a positive relationship between GDP per capita and EGDI.
The two distinct groups of the Pacific and AIMS SIDS clearly emerge in <Figure 4.3>
as we classify in the <Table 4.8>. Group A is characterized by a relatively high EGDI

124
and GDP per capita, whereas Group B is characterized by a lower level of EGDI and
GDP per capita than group A.

<Figure 4.1> Scatter plot of EGDI and GDP per capita

Source: E-Government Survey 2014 (UN), World DataBank (World Bank)

Further, we hypothesize that higher levels of e-government development will have

positive effects on both good governance and sustainable development as well as on
economic growth. We evaluate this hypothesis by examining the performance of the
two EGDI-ranked groups of the Pacific and AIMS SIDS on the indices that measure
good governance and sustainable development. We use the same indices as metrics
for levels of good governance and sustainable development.

In <Table 4.9>, a colored cell indicates that we have designated that country as high-
performing on a given index. We designated a country as high-performing on a
given index if it met the following two criteria. First, the country performed higher
on the index than the average among the Pacific and AIMS SIDS. Second, the value
on that index was not negative. We then scored each country based on the count of
indices for which it was designated as high-performing. For example, the Seychelles
scored seven, which means that it is high-performing on seven of the ten indices
used to measure performance on good governance and sustainable development.

125
126
 <Table 4.9> EGDI and the performances in good governance and sustainable
development

Control of Government Regulatory GDP per

EGDI
Group Country corruption effectiveness quality capita*
(2014)
(2012) (2012) (2012) (2012)
Singapore 0.9076 2.154 2.152 1.961 33,989
Outlier
Bahrain 0.8089 0.394 0.540 0.687 16,765
Mauritius 0.5338 0.334 0.934 0.984 6,496
Seychelles 0.5113 0.334 0.376 -0.310 14,303

Group Fiji 0.5044 -0.435 -0.899 -0.601 3,612

A Maldives 0.4813 -0.443 -0.160 -0.347 4,968
(7) Tonga 0.4706 -0.072 -0.194 -0.599 2,658
Palau 0.4415 -0.284 -0.558 -1.010 9,281
Samoa 0.4204 0.153 0.090 -0.339 2,350
Cape Verde 0.3551 0.806 0.099 0.040 3,321
Micronesia 0.3337 -0.109 -0.632 -0.984 2,443
Kiribati 0.3201 0.004 -0.834 -1.360 1,160
Tuvalu 0.3059 -0.296 -0.687 -1.250 2,624
Marshall
0.2851 -0.142 -1.649 -1.015 2,879
Islands
Nauru 0.2776 0.047 -0.558 -1.202
Group Vanuatu 0.2571 0.446 -0.223 -0.767 2,112
B Timor-Leste 0.2528 -0.979 -1.193 -1.024 682
(13)
São Tomé
0.2218 -0.393 -0.717 -0.803 840
& Principe
Solomon
0.2087 -0.444 -0.824 -1.071 1,145
Islands
Comoros 0.1808 -0.725 -1.546 -1.420 606
Guinea-
0.1609 -1.225 -1.244 -1.239 397
Bissau
Papua New
0.1203 -1.037 -0.769 -0.522 1,076
Guinea
Average 0.3800 -0.087 -0.386 -0.554 5,415
Source: UNPAN (2014). E-government Survey 2014; World Bank (2013). WGI 2013;
UNDP (2013). HDI 2013; YCELP & CIESIN (2014). EPI 2014; Alliance Development
Works and UNU-EHS (2013). World Risk Report 2013
127
 Rule Under-5 Health Ecosystem Vulnera- Number of
PS&AVT**
of law mortality Index vitality bility to ND above-average
(2012)
(2012) (2012) (2013) (2012) (2013) performances
1.772 1.343 2.9 0.959 70.01 31.84 10
0.276 -1.132 9.6 0.871 30.90 42.37 8
0.935 0.965 15.1 0.825 39.11 40.64 10
-0.037 0.755 13.1 0.818 37.02 43.14 7
-0.801 -0.041 22.4 0.766 41.33 48.93 3
-0.500 -0.278 10.5 0.891 2
0.027 0.931 12.8 0.810 52.51 51.07 6
0.901 1.061 20.8 0.806 29.82 5
0.696 1.022 17.8 0.818 49.58 7
0.479 0.783 22.2 0.848 29.85 53.31 7
-0.022 1.161 38.5 0.754 1
0.111 1.325 59.9 0.752 58.73 58.48 4
0.460 1.325 29.7 0.721*** 3

0.077 1.061 37.9 0.809 3

0.694 1.061 37.1 0.920*** 4

0.244 1.181 17.9 0.794 38.39 57.23 5
-1.199 -0.270 56.7 0.731 35.74 63.61 0

-0.808 0.020 53.2 0.713 57.71 0

-0.601 0.250 31.1 0.733 21.56 60.40 1

-1.034 -0.387 77.6 0.629 20.72 58.56 0

-1.520 -0.926 129.1 0.528 39.52 66.58 1

-0.864 -0.643 63.0 0.653 41.17 63.77 1

-0.032 0.480 35.4 0.780 39.09 52.95 4.4

* constant 2005, USD ** PS&AVT: Political Stability & Absence of Violence/Terrorism
*** data in 2010

128
<Figure 4.2> shows the relationship between the level of EGDI and the number of
above-average performances (i.e. designated high-performance) on indices
measuring good governance and sustainable development. Group A’s average
number of above-average performances is 5.7, Group B’s average is 2.3. The group
with higher levels on the E-Government Development Index has a markedly higher
average number of high-performances on indices of good governance and
sustainable development. The pronounced correlation lends support to the
hypothesis that e-government development has positive impacts on good
governance and sustainable development.

<Figure 4.2> Scatter plot of EGDI and the number of good performances in good
governance and sustainable development

Source: UNPAN (2014). E-government Survey 2014; World Bank (2013). WGI 2013;
UNDP (2013). HDI 2013; YCELP & CIESIN (2014). EPI 2014; Alliance Development
Works and UNU-EHS (2013). World Risk Report 2013

Finally, we are faced with the question of what factors and barriers account for such
a difference in e-government development across the two groups. In order to answer
this question, the following framework will provide some criteria to form a basis for
comparing the two groups.

4.2.2 Standards for the comparison

4.2.2.1 The SWIFT Framework

While Awan, Amin, and Kirkby (2013) realize that the context and specific needs of
small states vary, their “SWIFT Framework” provides e-governance strategists with

129
a tool to plan and implement these projects. The SWIFT Framework, presented in
<Figure 4.3>, highlights the necessary pre-requisites for addressing the major
barriers to e-governance development.

<Figure 4.3> SWIFT Framework for e-governance development

Source: Awan, Amin, and Kirkby, 2013

Situational analysis and standardization

The first step in this framework requires e-governance initiatives to be sensitive to

the situational context and cultural conditions of the community. These factors are a
critical influence on how ICT is adopted and accepted in the community, hence
laying the ground-work for wider implementation of e-governance initiatives. A
‘suitability gap’ can emerge where certain individuals may wish to retain the
communal way of life, hence putting up protective barriers to shield themselves
from technological, social and economic influences (Kontakos, 2013). The digital
divide is not only a product of income disparity, but also of cultural attitudes
towards technology, and e-government project planners need to take cultural
constraints into account. Standardization is about designing e-governance projects in
such a way that they are well-coordinated, uniform, and easy to implement and
utilize. Previous studies have shown that many e-government programs in
developing countries fail because they lack direction and continued support from

130
the government agency responsible for them. On the other hand, most success
stories of e-governance initiatives note the importance of the ability of government
to monitor and evaluate projects swiftly. (Awan, Amin, and Kirkby, 2013).

Will (Political and Leadership)

Awan, Amin, and Kirkby (2013) argue that political will is necessary for government
reforms to succeed and be sustained. The political environment in many developing
countries creates incentives that make government officials prone to distrust
towards initiatives that they perceive as risks to their reputation. ICT reforms are
viewed by some government officials as threats to their personal status and power.
Moreover, the conventional bureaucratic system of government in some countries
involves certain interests that may be resistant to transparency or changes in
procedure.

Although ICT innovation is at times seen as an important and requisite tool for
economic growth, it is often considered less of a priority than other issues such as
poverty reduction, education, and climate change. Success of e-government projects
requires leaders who are willing to persevere through adversity in the pursuit of
reform.

Awan, Amin, and Kirkby (2013), points out that leaders in small states must ensure
that ICT structure is strategically linked to economic growth and national
development. An important component of such a strategy is support from the
private sector. Such support involves building a broad coalition of support from the
private sector, including consultants, suppliers, and contractors who will be
involved and have a financial stake in project implementation. Often such a coalition
will include consultants, including public and private entities, from other states who
are further along with project implementation. It is important to promote ownership
of ICT system development by involving all stakeholders throughout the process
from early planning through implementation.

Infrastructure

Aside from the technical work directly involved in developing ICT-systems, it is

paramount for SIDS to work on creating an environment conducive to e-government.
Often SIDS will need to work to eliminate any legal impediments to e-governance
initiatives, such as laws that prevent the placement of information and services
online. The pursuit of e-governance can be done simultaneously with “modifying or
removing laws intended for the non-digital world.” Furthermore, access to and user-

131
knowledge of citizens is equally important in realizing a successful e-governance
structure (Awan, Amin, and Kirkby, 2013).

Another environmental factor that is conducive to effective e-government is a

dependent and accessible communications infrastructure. Successful development of
infrastructure is in turn dependent on a modernized regulatory framework that is
up-to-date with current industry standards, and that facilitates competition and
private investment (Awan, Amin, and Kirkby, 2013). An investment-friendly
regulatory framework may entail dismantling regulations and laws that result in
entrenched monopolies.

Financial Viability

The digital divide between nations is wide. Although a 2006 UNCTAD report
reveals that ICT diffusion is becoming more equal, the divide is still stark. A person
from a high-income country is 22 times more likely to be an internet user than
someone who is from a low-income country (Awan, Amin, and Kirkby, 2013).

When initiating e-governance projects, governments should allot sufficient funds for
long-term viability and sustainability. As noted by Awan, Amin, and Kirkby (2013),
“the benefits of a countrywide project can never fully be reaped until it is made
accessible for every citizen.” Efforts to invest in e-governance may inadvertently
exacerbate the digital divide unless policy-makers make a concerted effort to ensure
that investment and the concomitant benefits of e-governance are widely diffused
across all income groups.

As outlined above, several market conditions common in SIDS, including low

economies of scale, diffuse population, and remoteness from major markets, make
them less attractive places for private investment. All of these factors add to the
investor risk and create higher borrowing costs (Kontakos, 2013). As such, SIDS
government needs to come up with strategies to facilitate private investment. Such
strategies may include public-private partnerships. SIDS can, for example, may
benefit form alliances with NGOs and private sector companies who can provide
financial and technical assistance and share in the costs. In order to overcome
resistance among leaders reluctant to put public money into ICT initiatives, such
coalitions may help to recast e-governance and ICT initiatives as income-generation
strategies. (Awan, Amin, and Kirkby, 2013).

132
Human capital investment

ICT literacy among government officials and the general public is a critical aspect of
human capital that is necessary to maximize the benefits of e-governance. Anecdotal
evidence suggests that ICT literacy is extremely deficient among public officials in
many SIDS. Even the term ICT itself confuses some individuals who only associate it
with hardware (Kontakos, 2013). Many SIDS have work to do to help a higher
percentage of their populations achieve secondary-level education, which is a
necessary prerequisite for the ICT labor market needs. SIDS need to expand the size
of their ICT-skilled labor force who will eventually implement ICT projects (Awan,
Amin, and Kirkby, 2013).

4.2.2.2 Success factors for e-government development

Lee (2012) suggested six success factors for e-government development based on a
case study of South Korea. The first success factor is the interest and support of top
political leaders in e-government development projects. For example, South Korean
presidents Chun Doo-hwan, Kim Dae-jung, and Roh Moo-hyun all showed
considerable support for ICT, regardless of their individual knowledge in this area.

The leadership of top political leaders enabled a second major factor, the
establishment of organizations charged with the responsibility of managing the
projects. In Korea, these organizations included the Computing Network Steering
Committee and the e-government Special Committee. The support of the top
political leaders confers authority on these organizations and provides them with the
ability to effectively manage these projects. Because of the multitude of interests and
sometimes disparate ministries involved in project implementation, it is crucial to
have a project structure in which authority and accountability is clearly designated.

Third, the Korean government developed e-government projects with a strategic

focus on re-engineering of business processes. All projects were designed with an
emphasis on improving efficiency and convenience for citizens. Especially, the First
and Second E-Government Projects reflected such efforts.

A fourth success factor in Korea was the political will to develop an appropriate
legal and regulatory framework for e-government development. Over time, the
Korean legislature responded to changes in the technological, political, and social
environment, and updated the legal framework in important ways. For instance, the
Korean government established the Computing Network Act (1986), the Framework
Act on Informatization Promotion (1995), and the E-Government Act (2001). The

133
government amended 14 laws, 325 presidential decrees, and 263 enforcement
regulations for the project during the Second E-Government Project.

Another, fifth, important success factor in Korea was their method of financing.
Korea employed what is known as the “invest first, settle later” strategy. They
established the Informatization Promotion Fund, a fund dedicated specifically to
e-government development. The Korean government could secure enough financial
resources and overcome the limitation of annual budgeting by taking the advantage
of such methods.

Finally, the sixth success factor was training, discussion, and persuasion of public
servants. This involved a systematic effort to train, acclimate, and win the support of
public servants for the development of e-government. Throughout the planning and
implementation of the First and Second E-Government Plans, project managers
made efforts to improve public officials’ understanding of the project and to allay
any resistance to change. Specifically, project managers conducted training programs
to familiarize public employees to the new e-government systems and their benefits.

<Figure 4.4> Success factors and activity priority flow chart

of the E-Government Projects

Source: Lee (2012)

134
4.2.2.3 Standards for comparison

For the following comparative analysis, we selected seven standards for comparison
based on the research of of Awan, Amin, and Kirkby (2013) and Lee (2012). 1)
Existence of a national e-government policy or strategy and its existence form, 2)
existence of a coordinating organization for e-government development, 3) political
commitment, 4) legal framework for ICT and e-government development, 5)
financial feasibility, 6) linkage between e-government and government reform, 7) e-
awareness policy, such as promotion and training programs for public employees,
citizens, private sector, and students.

4.2.3 Comparative analysis: What accounts for the divergent success of

e-government development among the two groups?

As a basis for comparative analysis, we solicited responses to a questionnaire to

examine to what extent the Pacific and AIMS SIDS met the selected criteria while
pursuing e-government development. With help from the UNPOG, we received
responses from fourteen countries, including the following: Singapore and Bahrain
in the outlier group; the Seychelles, Fiji, the Maldives, Tonga, and Samoa in the
group A; Kiribati, Tuvalu, Nauru, Vanuatu, Timor-Leste, São Tomé and Principe,
and Comoros in the group B. However, we excluded the case of Vanuatu because
their questionnaire responses incorporated very recent changes. Vanuatu developed
a National ICT Policy in late 2013, and the outcomes of this policy have not been
taken into account in the UN E-Government Survey of 2014. The questionnaire of
Vanuatu was filled in based on the recent e-government strategy included in the
National ICT Policy 2013 (passed in December 2013), and thereby the policy’s
outcomes may not have been taken into account in the UN E-Government Survey
2014.

As shown in <Table 4.10> below, we developed a seven-point scoring scale, with

points given to each country based on which and how many criteria for success the
respective country has met to date. A country could score a maximum of 1 point on
each criterion. A country could therefore receive a maximum of 7 points on this scale.
A state received 1 point if it had implemented a national e-government policy or
strategy apart from its national development plan or ICT policy; the state received
0.5 points if its national e-government policy or strategy was included in the national
development plan or ICT policy; and the state received 0 points if its national
e-government policy or strategy did not exist. Criterion 7 (existence of e-awareness
programme) includes eight sub-criteria, each worth 0.125 points on the scale,
regarding the existence of training and promotion of e-government programs among
various constituent groups.
135
 <Table 4.10> Criteria and the way of scoring

Criterion Way of scoring

Yes, Included in
No
C1. Existence of e-government strategy separately other plan
(0)
(1) (0.5)
C2. Existence of a coordinating
Yes (1) No (0)
organization for e-government
C3. Political commitment
C4. Legal framework To some
Significant Insignificant
C5. Financial feasibility extent
(1) (0)
C6. Linkage b/w e-government and (0.5)
government reform
Public Promotion
employees Training
C7. Promotion
Citizens Partially
Existence of Training
Yes (0.125) exists No (0)
e-awareness Private Promotion
(0.0625)
programme sector Training
Promotion
Students
Training

Singapore and Bahrain have pursued successful e-government master plans and
strategies separated from other plans with coordinating organizations, political
commitment, legal framework, and financial feasibility by connecting e-government
development with government reform and natural disaster risk reduction. In
Singapore, the Ministry of Finance, along with the Chief Information Officer, has
been given joint responsibility for e-government development. Singapore has also
created a permanent inter-agency coordinator for e-government development called
the E-Government Council. The members of the E-Government Council include the
permanent secretaries from the ministries of finance, manpower, health, transport,
social & family development, defense, communications and information, and
national development, as well as CEOs from key private agencies involved in the
public sector.

Singapore has the additional advantage of political commitment from top political
leaders, including the Minister of Finance, who also serves as Deputy Prime Minister.
136
The Deputy Prime Minister has shown strong support for Singapore’s e-government
development. For example, he was the keynote speaker at the biennial eGov Global
Exchange. The cabinet ministers are also regularly briefed on Singapore’s
e-government development and initiatives. The fact that the Ministry of Finance is in
charge of e-government also enables the Singapore government to secure a sufficient
budget for e-government development.

Singapore’s advanced e-government development has also been supported by the

legislature. Singapore’s legislature has been responsive to the needs of the ICT-sector
and the development of e-government. Singapore has passed or updated several
major pieces of legislation in recent years, including the Electronic Transaction Act
2010 (original enactment in 1998), Personal Data Protection Act 2012, and the
amended Computer Misuse and Cyber security Act 2013 (Chang, 2013).

As an example from Group A, the Seychelles have a strategic framework for

e-government and five-year e-government action plan as well as a national ICT
policy in place. Even though there is not any single coordinating organization, the
Department of ICT under the Office of the President is in charge of e-government
development, and thereby the department can secure political leadership and
support by presenting the 5-year action plan to the President. A progress report on
the projects has to be sent to the Office of the President quarterly. The CIO reports to
the Principal Secretary of the Department of ICT. The Principal Secretary reports to
the Vice President. Also, the government has legal frameworks such as the Electronic
Transaction Act, the Data Protection Act, and the Computer Misuse Act. The
government spends about 0.44 percent of the budget on e-government development.
In order to link e-government development with government innovation, the
government is focusing on delivering efficient and timely services to the citizens and
businesses in a transparent manner, minimizing wastage and corruption. In this case,
adequate connectivity and integrated e-services reflect and elaborate on the
e-government policies and strategies by introducing government process re-
engineering.

For Group B, all countries which responded to the survey do not have independent
e-government strategy, but Tuvalu has some relevant components in the
Infrastructure Strategy and Investment Plan and the National Strategies for
Sustainable Development 2005-2015. São Tomé and Principe has basic e-government
initiatives, and Comoros has some relevant contents in other national plans. Many of
them do not have coordinating organization, strong political commitment, adequate
legal framework, financial feasibility, and specific strategies to align e-government
with government reform.

137
In the case of Tuvalu, the Department of ICT of the Ministry of Communications and
Transport is in charge of e-government development. However, due to the non-
existence of an independent e-government plan and a coordinating organization, the
coverage on where e-government is introduced is restricted. The government mainly
adopts ICT to the outpatient system for hospitals and to the customs and tax system.

<Table 4.11> shows each country’s survey result. Bahrain scored highest, whereas
Kiribati scored lowest among the 13 respondents. Fiji and the Seychelles show
noticeable results even in Group A. São Tomé and Principe is at the top, whereas
Kiribati occupies the bottom position in Group B. The average scores of the three
groups are 6.69, 4.05, and 1.82, respectively.

<Table 4.11> Survey result of individual countries

Criterion
Group Country Avg.
C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 Sum
Singapore 1 1 1 1 1 0.5 0.875 6.375
Outlier 6.69
Bahrain 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7
Seychelles 1 0 1 1 0.5 1 1 5.5
Fiji 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.5 6.5
Group
Maldives 0.5 0 0.5 0 0 0 0.25 1.25 4.05
A
Tonga 0 1 1 0 0.5 0 0 2.5
Samoa 1 1 1 0.5 0.5 0.5 0 4.5
Kiribati 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1
Tuvalu 0.5 0 0.5 0.5 0 0 0.5 2
Nauru 0 0 0.5 0 0.5 0.5 0 1.5
Group Timor-
0 0.5 0.5 0 0 0 0.125 1.125 1.82
B Leste
São Tomé
0.5 1 0.5 0 0.5 1 0.313 3.813
& Principe
Comoros 0.5 0 0 0.5 0 0.5 0 1.5

<Table 4.12> shows the gaps between Groups A and B as well as between the outliers
and Group A in terms of each criterion. For Group B, there are gaps to Group A of
more than 1.5 times in all criteria. In particular, the gaps are up to three times greater
with regard to the existence of national e-government (Criterion 1), the

138
establishment of a legal framework for e-government (Criterion 4), and financial
feasibility (Criterion 5).

For Group A, they show the gaps with the outliers more than 1.3 times in all criteria
except for political commitment (Criterion 3). In particular, the disparities are
distinct by a factor of up to 2.7 in terms of the establishment of a legal framework for
e-government (Criterion 4), financial feasibility (Criterion 5), and e-awareness
programs (Criterion 7).

<Table 4.12> Comparison between Group A and B

Group Group Gap b/w (times)

Criterion Outlier
A B
Outlier & A A&B
National e-gov’t strategy
1 0.7 0.25 1.4 2.8
(1)
Coordinating
1 0.6 0.25 1.7 2.4
organization for e-gov’t (1)
Political commitment (1) 1 0.9 0.5 1.1 1.8

Legal framework (1) 1 0.5 0.17 2.0 3.0

Financial feasibility (1) 1 0.5 0.17 2.0 3.0

Linkage b/w e-gov’t &
0.75 0.5 0.33 1.5 1.5
gov’t reform (1)
E-awareness programme (1) 0.94 0.35 0.16 2.7 2.2

Sum (7) 6.69 4.05 1.82 1.7 2.2

4.3 Key findings

4.3.1 Key findings from regression analysis

For the Pacific and AIMS SIDS, e-government development has positive effects on
good governance. In particular, the impacts of ICT infrastructure are significant.
Good governance also has positive effects on sustainable development. Being a more
capable and transparent government is highly related to sustainable development of
the Pacific and AIMS SIDS. Therefore, we can say that not only does the
development of e-government have positive and direct effects on sustainable
development of the Pacific and AIMS SIDS, but also better governance enhanced by
139
e-government leads the Pacific and AIMS SIDS to sustainable development in terms
of economic and social development, and environment and disaster management.

4.3.2 Key findings from comparative analysis

Based on a clustering analysis, we can classify the 22 Pacific and AIMS SIDS into
three different groups: outlier, higher performer, and lower performer groups in
terms of their capabilities for e-government development and sustainable
development. The assignment of a country into a group is highly related to
individual country’s EGDI. The higher performers have shown distinguished
features in terms of the seven key success factors of e-government development.
They show higher scores across all the seven key success factors of e-government
development than those of the lower performers. Bigger gaps between the higher
performers and the lower performers lie in the existence of national e-government
strategy, legal framework, and financial feasibility. Moreover, there are gaps
between the outliers (Singapore and Bahrain) and the higher performers regarding
the status of legal framework, financial feasibility, and e-awareness programs. The
outliers show almost perfect scores on all key success factors of e-government
development (6.69 out of 7.00)

140
5. Way forward: Policy recommendations

The purpose of this research is to examine the effects of e-government on good

governance and sustainable development in SIDS, and to identify the main
determinants of successful e-government development among SIDS. The results
indicate that e-government development fosters a more capable and transparent
government and contribute to lead to sustainable development in terms of economic,
social, and environmental development. This study also identified the seven key
factors of successful e-government development in SIDS by a comparative analysis.
Among them, the results show that the existence of legal framework for
e-government development, financial feasibility, and the existence of e-awareness
programs play a main role in determining the success of e-government development.
Based on these findings, this research suggest the following policy recommendations
for sustainable development of SIDS thorough the advancement of e-government.

5.1 Continuous political commitment to e-government development

In the behind of every successful story on e-government development among

developing countries, there is continuous political commitment to the development
of e-government (Lee, 2012). For example, Korea’s e-government advancement was
not a product of a single program or policy. It began in the 1960s and 1970s when
Korea pursued electronics and later telecommunication technology development as
one pillar of its long-term sustained growth strategy. Regardless of changes of
government over the last 50 years, the government became the initiator, the first
customer, primary user, and demand maker for ICT and e-government. The
president has been the principal champion of e-government development, for
instance, the Korean government spent USD 5 billion between 1995-2000 for
e-government drive.

Successful e-government development requires e-government champions at highest

levels. E-government often cuts across agency jurisdictions and resistance,
competition, “turfing” and jurisdictional issues are to be expected. To solve these
problems, adequate resources and authority are needed by the champions of
e-government. The continuous commitment is often nested on the strong belief that
e-government is an effective and efficient instrument for sustainable development.

141
This study has found that e-government development has positive effects on better
governance and sustainable development in SIDS. Advancement on e-government is
not only a trait of developed countries but also serves as an enabler of sustainable
development of developing countries. E-government development is an effective
means to improve effectiveness, efficiency, and transparency, to promote active
public participation in governance. Transparent and capable government based on
e-government will also increase the economic, social, and environmental
development of SIDS.

SIDS are geographically isolated and small, thereby characterized by the following
economic and social problems: isolation from global major markets, isolation of local
economies from each other and their central government, small domestic markets
and resource bases, the absence of economies of scale in the provision of public
services, and exposure and vulnerability to natural disaster. Moreover, restricted
governance capacity can exacerbate such problems. These problems have made
many investors and entrepreneurs reluctant to run their business and invest in many
SIDS. Also, many citizens of SIDS can hardly access adequate public services and
information.

However, SIDS can mitigate the problems pertaining to the geographical and
physical conditions by deploying ICT in their government process. First, SIDS
governments can control corruption in the public sector through e-government.
Transparent government is a necessary condition to encourage entrepreneurs and
investors to enter their markets and transparently use their budget.

Second, SIDS governments can easily gather more accurate and detailed economic,
demographic, social, and environmental information if they utilize an ICT-based
statistics system. On the basis of the information collected, governments can
efficiently deduct the demand for water, electricity, health care, and education
services. Furthermore, they can provide tailored public services for their citizens,
including isolated communities within SIDS.

Third, SIDS can enhance citizens’ participation in their governments’ processes and
raise the bargaining capabilities of local economic interests if the governments share
the administrative information with their citizens and local businesses.

Fourth, SIDS governments can use e-government to offer support for citizens at all
the different stages of disaster risk reduction (DRR). It is possible for the
governments to warn the residents in danger areas in advance and offer real-time
information for citizens to help them address the different problems that confront
them.
142
Finally, mobile-based ICT and e-government in particular can remove the barriers to
information attributable to geographical features. Mobile-based ICT and
e-government can make it easier for the local governments to communicate with
each other as well as their central government and citizens.

Not only does this study theoretically argue the importance of e-government in SIDS,
but also it has empirically proved that e-government development has statistically
significant and positive effects on good governance and sustainable development of
SIDS. Continuous political commitment is a necessary condition for the successful
implementation of e-government projects in SIDS.

5.2 The importance of the seven key success factors

This study has found that high-performers in terms of sustainable development

show higher scores on all the seven key success factors of e-government
development. This finding empirically validates the existing argument for
developing e-government for sustainable development. A more integrated,
comprehensive approach to e-government development is needed for sustainable
development rather than just partial planning and/or implementation of individual
e-government projects. Thus, this research strongly recommends SIDS to actively
pursue a more integrated, comprehensive e-government development strategy
incorporating the seven key success factors.

<Figure 5.1> shows an exemplary relationship among the seven success factors. This
study recommends SIDS to consider the following comprehensive strategy to
implement the seven key success factors of e-government development. The three
factors with dotted lines represent those that the lower-performers in the
comparative analysis do not establish or secure.

Above all, the political commitment of top level politicians is a main starting point
because it is essential in establishing legal framework and coordinating body and
securing sufficient budget. The political commitment of top political leaders is
necessary to overcome the reluctance to invest money in a policy which has benefits
that only accrue over the long-term and to implement a policy that cannot be fully
implemented by any one single ministry. For example, the top political leaders of the
Maldives, Tuvalu, Nauru, Timor-Leste, São Tomé and Principe, and Comoros need
to re-enforce their strong political commitment to e-government development to
their public employees and citizens.

143
 <Figure 5.1> Seven key success factors for e-government development

Second, all governments should establish a legal framework for ICT and
e-government development to officially support the national e-government policy.
Of course, the legal framework is a necessary but not a sufficient condition for
successful promotion of e-government. The following steps cannot be carried out
without the proper legal framework in place.

Third, the government-wide scope of e-government implementation requires

coordination across all the ministries and agencies of government. A major success
factor will be the establishment of a coordinating body with the authority to assign
roles, allocate resources to relevant government agencies, manage performance, and
enforce a project timeline. The coordinating authority should report directly to top
political leaders, such as the prime minister or the president, in order to facilitate
accountability to the strong leadership of the highest office. E-government
development is a reform that affects all ministries in the government, and requires
the concerted effort of all ministries in order to integrate public services and fully
maximize all of the benefits of e-government.

Fourth, the government should secure a sufficient budget to implement the

e-government policy. The costs of installing ICT infrastructure and required
software would be burdensome for many SIDS. Where possible, multiple SIDS
should look to make joint purchases in order to take advantage of bulk purchasing.
SIDS should also pursue a variety of innovative cost-sharing mechanisms, such as

144
public-private partnerships, public subsidies, public guarantees, official
development assistance (ODA) funding, private-sector donors, and international
partnerships in order to garner the necessary funding.

The fifth success factor, reliant on and emanating from the previous factors, is the
establishment of a national e-government policy that is distinct from a national
development plan. Because of the long-term cost-benefit structure of e-government
investments, and because of short-sighted political pressures, e-government is liable
to be de-prioritized without the safeguard of a long-term oriented document such as
a national e-government policy. Such policies can help solidify benchmarks for
certain achievements in e-government development. Our analysis indicate that the
Maldives, Tuvalu, São Tomé and Principe, Comoros, Tonga, Kiribati, Nauru, and
Timor-Leste need to establish a separated national e-government policy from the
national development policy and the national ICT policy.

Sixth, the government should systematically link e-government development with

broader government reform, because e-government is not merely an end in itself, but
is part of a broader strategy to elevate the capacity of government. Similarly, the
adoption of ICT systems is only a component of e-government development and
does not automatically become integrated into a broader reform effort. The national
ICT strategy should include specific benchmarks and performance metrics that
encourage the government to share data among relevant agencies, to reach out to the
public, to elevate efficiency, and to increase transparency. E-government
investments and planning should be tailored to and promoted as a way to improve
the productivity and effectiveness of public employees and to improve public service
delivery. Such linkage tasks should be concretized in the Enterprise Architecture (EA)
in the <Figure 5.1>.

Last but not least, governments should make a deliberate effort to promote
awareness of the benefits of ICT and e-government among public employees and the
general public. Even after the physical ICT infrastructure and technical capacity has
been built, the full benefits of e-government only accrue when public employees,
citizens, and stakeholders are willing to make full use of the new capacity. For public
employees, the national CIO should make them understand the potential of an
e-government system and the reason they need to change the way they have been
working in order to accommodate the e-government processes. Also, the national
CIO should provide training programs for them regarding groupware and
e-government based policy process as well as spreadsheet and word processing
software. With respect to citizens, governments should anticipate some difficulty in
the process of engaging them to participate in e-government. Efforts should focus on

145
alleviating skepticism borne out of distrust in government, and combating apathy
borne out of unfamiliarity with the technology and its benefits. Promotion efforts
should include training programs for widespread use of computers, mobile ICT
devices, high-speed internet, and the e-government systems for citizens. SIDS
governments should take steps to ensure that e-awareness program is inclusive of
those on the ‘poor’ side of the proverbial Digital Divide. SIDS should make a
conscious effort to engage in ICT training the poor and vulnerable, who
disproportionally tend to be women, the elderly, and rural dwellers.

5.3 ICT/E-government infrastructures for sustainable development

This study has found that ICT infrastructures have significant positive effects on
good governance and sustainable development of SIDS. Despite this finding, the
current status of ICT infrastructure development of the Pacific & AIMS SIDS is
lagging far behind the average of the world. The EGDI in 2014 shows that the ICT
infrastructure index of the Pacific and AIMS SIDS (0.1999) is far below the world
average (0.3650), while the human capital index of the Pacific and AIMS SIDS (0.6233)
is very close to the world average (0.6566). Thus, this research strongly recommends
that the Pacific & AIMS SIDS focus their efforts on the establishment of
ICT/e-government infrastructures first. The essential ICT/e-government
infrastructures include Enterprise Architecture (EA), Broadband Communication
Networks (BCN), comprehensive government data centers, diffused PCs and
Internet access, and Public Key Infrastructure (PKI). In particular, Cape Verde, Fiji,
Samoa, Tonga, Nauru, Tuvalu, Sao Tomé and Principe, Vanuatu, Micronesia, the
Solomon Islands, Guinea-Bissau, Timor-Leste, Kiribati, Comoros, Papua New
Guinea, and the Marshall Islands, whose TIIs are less than the average of the Pacific
and AIMS SIDS, should make more efforts than other SIDS to develop ICT and
e-government infrastructures.

Aside from most SIDS, the Seychelles (0.4721) and Mauritius (0.4406) have achieved
more than the world average of TII (0.3650). These countries should additionally
improve their e-government service for citizen and online participation in their
policy process. These types of countries should advance their government intranet
for public employees, and their government portal sites for citizens, by developing
and adding various applied e-government subsystems. These systems may be able to
include resident registration systems, property management systems, business
registration systems, groupware for public employees, social welfare information

146
systems, education information systems, weather and disaster information systems,
e-tax systems, e-procurement systems, and so forth, as shown in the <Figure 5.2>.

<Figure 5.2> An example of e-government infrastructures and systems for SIDS

5.4 International cooperation and SIDS platform of e-government

development

This study has shown that the differences between high- and low-performing SIDS
are noticeably observed, especially in terms of the status of national e-government
policy, legal framework, and financial feasibility of e-government. These are main
barriers for many SIDS in establishing and implementing an integrated
e-government strategy as discussed above. Main reasons include a lack of experts
and experience in establishing a comprehensive strategy, and a lack of financial
resources, both which do not fall under immediate control of SIDS themselves. This
research suggests the following two schemes to help tear down the uncontrollable
barriers: enhancing international cooperation and establishing a SIDS platform of
e-government development.

First, SIDS need to make continuous efforts in expanding and managing the SIDS
partnership platform to advance their sustainable development. In particular, the
launch of new partnerships with various international organizations (e.g., UN, ITU),

147
regional development banks (e.g., WB, ADB), and individual developed countries
(and their ODA programs) is important in that the new partners can provide
financial resources and expertise in developing and implementing e-government
strategies for SIDS. Individual countries such as Australia, South Korea, and the
United States of America have various consultancy programs for developing
countries, and SIDS can utilize these opportunities in developing national
e-government strategy and legal frameworks of e-government. For instance, the ITU
has provided developing countries with consultations in filling out applications for
ODA programs based on their current status, and advised them on what they should
do to develop ICT and e-government. In addition, the Pacific and Asian SIDS
received more than 31 ODAs pertaining to ICT and e-government from the ADB
from 2000 to 2012.

<Table 5.1> ODA for SIDS from the ADB from 2000 to 2012

Funding
Country Area Approval Name
Type

Grant
2007 SchoolNet and Community
Samoa Technical
2003 Access Project
assistant
Education

Technical Education Sector Reform and

2004
Tuvalu assistant Development Project
Loan 2002 Maritime Training Project
Marshall Technical Reviewing the Health Management
Energy 2000
Islands assistant Information System (HMIS)
Papua
New Finance Grant 2010 Microfinance Expansion Project
Guinea
Timor- Technical Microfinance Information
Finance 2001
Leste assistant Technology Systems Development
Technical Expanding Access to Financial
Vanuatu Finance 2007
assistant Services
Inclusive Micro, Small, and
Industry and
Maldives Loan/Grant 2012 Medium-Sized Enterprise
Trade
Development Project
Cook Economic Recovery Support
Loan 2009
Islands Multisector Program - Subprogram 1
Fiji Technical 2006 Improving Infrastructure Services

148
 assistant (formerly Power Sector
Development Road Map)
Technical Strengthening Infrastructure
Micronesia 2011
assistant Planning and Implementation
Papua
Maritime and Waterways Safety
New Loan 2012
Project
Guinea
Economic Recovery Support
Samoa Loan 2010 Program
- Subprogram 1

Economic Recovery Support

Solomon 2010
Grant Program
Islands 2011
(subprogram 1 and 2)

Technical
2002 Revenue Diversification
assistant
Maldives Developing the Revenue
Technical
2001 Administration
Public Sector assistant
Management Information System
Management
Papua
Technical Support for Public Expenditure
New 2007
assistant Review and Rationalization
Guinea

Technical
Fiji 2003 Implementation of the ICT Strategy
assistant

Loan
2001 Information Technology
Maldives Technical
2000 Development
assistant

Transport Technical Regulating and Sustaining Road

and ICT 2012
Papua assistant Transport
New
Guinea PS 2011 Bemobile Expansion Project
Digicel Mobile Telecommunication
PS 2009
Expansion Project
Solomon Broadband for Development
Loan/Grant 2012
Islands Project
Timor- Technical Rehabilitation of the
2000
Leste assistant Telecommunications Sector

149
 2001 Postal Services Development
Grant
2011
Tonga Technical Tonga-Fiji Submarine Cable Project
2010
assistant
Water supply
and other Institutional Strengthening for
Technical
Samoa municipal 2003 Drainage
assistant
infrastructure and Wastewater Management
and services
Source: ADB, 2013. ICT-related projects by Sector/Country Complete List (2000-2012).
Retrieved from http://www.adb.org/sectors/ict/ict-in-key-sectors/telecommunications

Second, establishment of a SIDS development platform for e-government can serve

as an effective way of achieving e-government development, and thus, sustainable
development of SIDS. Currently, the UN-OHRLLS, AOSIS, APF, and other agencies
mainly advocate the sustainable development of SIDS, focusing on challenging
issues like sea-level rise, climate change, natural disaster, and economic and social
development.

However, there is no strong advocate for e-government development for SIDS. A

more innovative and concrete enabler is required to push SIDS forward towards
sustainable development. This research confirmed that e-government can be a main
driver for better governance and sustainable development. At the same time, this
study recognized the difficulties and limitations that individual SIDS encounter.

Thus, building a platform for SIDS’ e-government development can serve as an

effective way of promoting exchange of experiences, ideas, and best practices
concerning e-government, in order to contribute to social and economic
development as well as environment and disaster management in SIDS. For example,
the 2014 UN Public Service Day held in Seoul, South Korea, was organized on the
theme “Innovating Governance for Sustainable Development and Well-being of the
People”, and significantly contributed to enhancing the understanding of SIDS and
their sustainability issues.

With the suggested platform, SIDS are expected to be able to implement the
following: knowledge sharing in implementing e-government strategy, consultancy
for developing national e-government strategy, training programs for national and
regional CIOs, and purchase of ICT devices and software with greater bargaining
power.

150
6. References
ADB, 2013. ICT-related projects by Sector/Country Complete List (2000-2012).
Retrieved from: http://www.adb.org/sectors/ict/ict-in-key-
sectors/telecommunications

Alliance Development Works and UNU-EHS, 2012. World Risk Report 2012. Berlin,
Germany.

________________________________________, 2013. World Risk Report 2013. Berlin,

Germany.

____. Stringing pearls together – ST Electronics networks the Maldives. Retrieved

from: http://www.stee.stengg.com/pdf/eGov_Stringing_Pearls_Maldives.pdf

Awan [Chapter 1,], O., Amin, M., and Kirkby, K., 2013. E-Governance in Small States.
In A. Ming, O. Awan and N. Somani (Eds), E-Governance in Small States (pp.
17-19) London, UK: Commonwealth Secretariat.

Awan [Chapter 2,], O., 2013. E-Governance in Small States. In A. Ming, O. Awan and
N. Somani (Eds), E-Governance in Small States (pp. 25-41) London, UK:
Commonwealth Secretariat.

Baptista, E., 2013. Timor-Leste E-government Status. Seoul: Global E-government

Forum. PPT.

Bishop, M. L., 2010. Tourism as a small-state development strategy: pier pressure in

the Eastern Caribbean?. Progress in Development Studies, 10(2), 99-114.

Cave, D., 2012. Digital Islands: How the Pacific’s ICT Revolution is Transforming the
Region. Lowy Institute for International Policy: Sydney. Retrieved from:
http://www.lowyinstitute.org/publications/digital-islands-how-pacifics-ict-
revolution-transforming-region

Central Informatics Bureau (CIB), 2013. E-government Strategy 2013-2017. Mauritius:

Ministry of Information and Communication Technology. PDF.

Chang, W. (2013). Amendments to Singapore's Computer Misuse Act. E-Finance &

Payments Law & Policy, February 2013, 13-14. Retrieved October 23, 2014,
from the Colin Ng & Partners LLP (CNP) database.,
http://www.cnplaw.com/en/media/files/services/EFPLP.pdf.

151
Choppy, B. (N.d.) Connected Government – Partnerships & Collaboration for Enhanced
Service Delivery: The Seychelles Experience. Presented for the Vice President
Office, Department of Information & Communications Technology (DICT).

da Silva, A., 2009. Timor-Leste. Digital Review of Asia Pacific 2009-2010. Delhi: SAGE
Publications. PDF.

Dorby, L., 2014, June. Seychelles E-government Implementation: E-government for

Sustainable Development in Small Islands Developing States. Presented for the
Office of the President, Department of Information Communications
Technology (DICT).

Government of Seychelles. (N.d.). National ICT Policy. PDF.

Government of Timor-Leste, 2011. Telecommunications. Part 3 Infrastructure

Development. Timor-Leste Strategic Development Plan 2011 – 2030. PDF.

Government of Timor-Leste, 2012. Timor-Leste telecommunications licence to be

issued to Viettel. PDF.

Government of Tuvalu, 2012. E. Information and Communication Technology.

Infrastructure Needs. Tuvalu Infrastructure Strategy and Investment Plan. PDF.

Hawabhay, R., 2014a, February. E-government Strategy 2013-2017 Implementation.

Central Informatics Bureau, Ministry of Information and Communication
Technology of Mauritius. PPT. Retrieved from:
http://dataprotection.gov.mu/English/Documents/Workshop/Wrkshop19feb
14/Overview%20of%20Mauritis%20e-Govt%20Strategy.pdf

Hawabhay, R., 2014b, October. Trends in e-government. Central Informatics Bureau,

Ministry of Information and Communication Technology of Mauritius. PPT.
Retrieved from:
http://cib.telecomit.gov.mu/English/Documents/Downloads/e-government%
20Trends.pdf

Information Society Strategic Program (ISSP), 2005. New Opportunities for

Development. PDF.

IPCC, 2014. Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part B:
Regional Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment
Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Barros, V.R., C.B.
Field, D.J. Dokken, M.D. Mastrandrea, K.J. Mach, T.E. Bilir, M. Chatterjee,

152
 K.L. Ebi, Y.O. Estrada, R.C. Genova, B. Girma, E.S. Kissel, A.N. Levy, S.
MacCracken, P.R. Mastrandrea, and L.L. White (eds.)]. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA,
XXX pp.

Kontakos, I., 2013, April. An ICT-based development framework. ICT Update, 71, 10.
Retrieved from: http://ictupdate.cta.int

Lamanauskas, T., 2012. National ICT Policy Development: Approach and Work Plan.
Port Vila: OGCIO. PDF.

Lee, Y. B., 2012. The Introduction of e-government in Korea. Ministry of Public

Administration and Security of Korea. Retrieved from:
https://www.kdevelopedia.org/resource/view/04201210100122115.do?fldIds
=TP_IND|TP_IND_IT#.U6fW_5R_vBo

May, J., 2013, April. Disaster Risk Management. . ICT Update, 71, 9. Retrieved from:
http://ictupdate.cta.int

McMichae A. J., Woodruff, R., and Hales, S., 2006. "Climate Change and Human
Health: Present and Future Risks". Lancet 367 (9513): 859–69.

Ming. T., 2013, April. Adopting ICTs on small islands. ICT Update, 71, 13. Retrieved
from: http://ictupdate.cta.int

Ministry of Finance of Tuvalu, 2005. Te Kakeega II: National Strategy for Sustainable
Development 2005-2015. Fuji: Quality Print. PDF.

OGCIO, 2013. OGCIO Portfolio, Program and Project Management (PPPM) Plan.
Office of the Government Chief Information Officer. PDF.

Government of Nauru, 2013. Nauru National Assessment Report for the Thrid
International Conference on Small Island Developing States (SIDS).

Government of Palau, 2009. The Medium Term Development Strategy − Actions for
Palau’s Future 2009 to 2014.

Núcleo Operacional para a Sociedade de Informação (NOSi). (N.d.). Improving

Governance and Service Delivery through E-government: the case of Cape Verde.
PDF. Retrieved from:
http://www1.worldbank.org/publicsector/Apresentacao.pdf

153
PACMAS, 2013. State of Media and Communication Report 2013: Republic of the
Marshall Islands. PDF. Retrieved from: http://www.pacmas.org/wp-
content/uploads/2013/10/04.-PACMAS_Marshall-Islands-Country-
Report_FINAL.pdf

PIIPP, 2002. Information and Communication Technologies for every Pacific Islander:
Pacific Islands Information and Communication Technologies Policy and
Strategic Plan. PDF.

Republic of Nauru, 2009. National Sustainable Development Strategy 2005-2025.

PDF.

Republic of Vanuatu, 2013. National Information and Communication Technology

Policy. PDF.

Secretariat of the Pacific Community (SPC), 2009. Republic of Palau and the
Secretariat of the Pacific Community: joint country strategy 2009–2013.

Singapore eGov, 2011. E-government Masterplan 2011-2015 Collaborative Government.

Singapore: Info-communications Development Authority of Singapore. PDF.

ST Electronics. (N.d). E-government InfoCommunications & Enterprise Solutions.

Stringing pearls together - ST Electronics networks the Maldives. Retrieved
October 23, 2014, from
http://www.stee.stengg.com/pdf/eGov_Stringing_Pearls_Maldives.pdf

Telecommunications Commision of the Solomon Islands (TCSI). (2010, October 20).

Legislation. Telecommunications Commission of the Solomon Islands. Retrieved
October 23, 2014, from http://www.tcsi.org.sb/library/legislation

UN, 1992. Report of the United Nations Conference on Environment and

Development, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 3-14 June 1992, vol. I, Resolutions
Adopted by the Conference (United Nations publication, Sales No. E.93.I.8
and corrigendum), resolution 1, annex I.

UN, 1994. Report of the Global Conference on the Sustainable Development of Small
Island Developing States, Bridgetown, Barbados, 25 April-6 May
1994 (United Nations publication, Sales No. E.94.I.18 and corrigenda), chap.
I, resolution 1, annex II.

154
UN, 2002. Report of the World Summit on Sustainable Development, Johannesburg,
South Africa, 26 August-4 September 2002 (United Nations publication,
Sales No. E.03.II.A.1 and corrigendum), chap. I, resolution 2, annex.

UN, 2005. Report of the International Meeting to Review the Implementation of the
Programme of Action for the Sustainable Development of Small Island
Developing States, Port Louis, Mauritius, 10-14 January 2005 (United
Nations publication, Sales No. E.05.II.A.4 and corrigendum), chap. I,
resolution 1, annex II.

UN, 2010a. Five-year review of the Mauritius Strategy for the Further
Implementation of the Programme of Action for the Sustainable
Development of Small Island Developing States

UN, 2010b. Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 25 September 2010.

UN, 2014. Draft outcome document of the third International Conference on Small
Island Developing States.

UNDP, 2012. External Final Evaluation Report: Support to Civil Service Reform in
Timor Leste.

UN DESA, 2010. Trends in Sustainable Development: Small Island Developing States.

UN New York: UN.

UN DESA, 2014a. Partnerships Briefs for Small Island Developing States: Climate
Change & Disaster Risk Management. Retrieved from:
http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/1344SIDS_BRIEFS
_ClimateChange.pdf

UN DESA, 2014b. Partnerships Briefs for Small Island Developing States: Social
Development of SIDS, Health and NCDs, Youth and Women. Retrieved
from:
http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/1354SIDS_BRIEFS
_SocialDvpmt.pdf

UN DESA, 2014c. Partnerships Briefs for Small Island Developing States: Sustainable
Economic Development. Retrieved from:
http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/1359SIDS_BRIEFS
_SustEconomicDvpmt.pdf

155
UN ESCAP, 2010. Sustainable Development in the Pacific: Progress and Challenges.
Pacific Regional Report for the 5 Year Review of the Mauritius Strategy for
Further Implementation of the Barbados Programme of Action for
Sustainable Development of SIDS (MSI+5). Suva, Fiji: FESCAP Subregional
Office for the Pacific

UNEP, UN DESA, and FAO, 2012. SIDS-FOCUSED Green Economy: An Analysis of

Challenges and Opportunities. Retrieved from:
www.unep.org/greeneconomy and www.unep.org/regionalseas

UNISDR, 2013. From Shared Risk to Shared Value –The Business Case for Disaster
Risk Reduction. Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction.
Geneva, Switzerland: United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction
(UNISDR).

UNPAN (2003). UN Global E-government Survey 2003. New York: UNPAN.

UNPAN (2004). Global E-government Readiness Report 2004. Towards Access For
Opportunity. New York: UNPAN.

UNPAN (2005). Global E-government Readiness Report 2005. From E-government

To E-Inclusion. New York: UNPAN.

UNPAN (2008). UN e-government Survey 2008. From e-government to Connected

Governance. New York: UNPAN.

UNPAN (2010). UN e-government Survey 2010. Leveraging E-government at a Time

of Financial and Economic Crisis. New York: UNPAN.

UNPAN, 2012. UN E-government Survey 2012: E-government for the People. New
York: UNPAN.

UNPAN, 2014. UN E-government Survey 2014: E-government for the Future We

Want. New York: UNPAN.

Vaa, R. (N.d). Tuvalu ICT Use in Education. UNESCO Meta-survey on the Use of
Technologies in Education. N.p. PDF.

World Bank, 1992. Governance and development. Washington, DC: The World Bank.
Retrieved from:
http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/1992/04/440582/governance-
development

156
Annex A. Individual Country Profiles
of Pacific & AIMS SIDS

157
American Samoa
Region Pacific

UN member X / LDC X

Population 68,061 (July 2012 – CIA est.)

2
Surface area 199 km
GDP (current $) 462.2 million (2005)

Language Cantonese 4.1%, Teochew 3.2%, Malay (official) 1.2%

Religion Buddhist 33.9%, Muslim 14.3%, Taoist 11.3%, Catholic 7.1%, Hindu 5.2%

INDICATOR VALUE RANK INDICATOR VALUE RANK

St th
1 E-government 5 Environmental Development
1.1 EGDI………………………… n/a n/a 5.1 Ecosystem Vitality……. n/a n/a
1.1.1 ICT Infrastructure…..… n/a n/a 5.1.1 Water Resources.. n/a n/a
1.1.2 Human Capital……..… n/a n/a 5.1.2 Agriculture………. n/a n/a
1.1.3 Online Service……..…. n/a n/a 5.1.3 Forests….……..... n/a n/a
1.2 E-Participation……………… n/a n/a 5.1.4 Fisheries………… n/a n/a
5.1.5 Biodiversity & Habitat n/a n/a
2nd Good Governance 5.1.6 Climate & Energy.. n/a n/a
2.1 Control of Corruption………. 0.350 68/210 5.2 World Risk Index……... n/a n/a
2.2 Voice & Accountability…….. 1.058 38/212 5.2.1 Exposure………... n/a n/a
2.3 Gov’t Effectiveness………… 0.477 67/210 5.2.2 Vulnerability…….. n/a n/a
2.4 Regulatory Quality…………. 0.355 81/210 5.2.2.1 Susceptibility... n/a n/a
5.2.2.2 Lack of coping
rd
3 Economic Development capacities....... n/a n/a
3.1 GDP per capita……………... 8,000 (2007 est.) 5.2.2.3 Lack of adaptive
3.2 GDP growth (Annual %)…… n/a capacities…… n/a n/a

4th Social Development

4.1 Rule of Law…………………. 1.138 31/212
4.2 Political Stability & Absence
of Violence/Terrorism……... 0.987 43/212
4.3 Gender Inequality………….. n/a n/a
4.4 Under-five mortality………… n/a n/a
4.5 Health Index………………… n/a n/a
Source: UNPAN (2014). E-government Survey 2014; World Bank (2013). WGI 2013; UNDP (2013). HDI 2013; YCELP &
CIESIN (2014). EPI 2014; Alliance Development Works and UNU-EHS (2013). World Risk Report 2013

158
Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas
Region Pacific

UN member X / LDC X

Population 44,582 (July 2012 – CIA est.)

2
Surface area 477 km
GDP (current $) 733 million (2010 est.)

Language Philippine languages 32.8%, Chamorro (official) 24.1%,

Religion English (official) 17%, other Pacific island languages 10%

INDICATOR VALUE RANK INDICATOR VALUE RANK

1St E-government 5th Environmental Development

1.1 EGDI………………………… n/a n/a 5.1 Ecosystem Vitality……. n/a n/a
1.1.1 ICT Infrastructure…….. n/a n/a 5.1.1 Water Resources n/a n/a
1.1.2 Human Capital……….. n/a n/a 5.1.2 Agriculture…….... n/a n/a
1.1.3 Online Service………... n/a n/a 5.1.3 Forests….………. n/a n/a
1.2 E-Participation……………… n/a n/a 5.1.4 Fisheries………… n/a n/a
5.1.5 Biodiversity & Habitat n/a n/a
2nd Good Governance 5.1.6 Climate & Energy.. n/a n/a
2.1 Control of Corruption………. n/a n/a 5.2 World Risk Index……... n/a n/a
2.2 Voice & Accountability…….. n/a n/a 5.2.1 Exposure………... n/a n/a
2.3 Gov’t Effectiveness………… n/a n/a 5.2.2 Vulnerability…….. n/a n/a
2.4 Regulatory Quality…………. n/a n/a 5.2.2.1 Susceptibility... n/a n/a
5.2.2.2 Lack of coping
3rd Economic Development capacities....... n/a n/a
3.1 GDP per capita……………. 13,600 (2010 est.) 5.2.2.3 Lack of adaptive
3.2 GDP growth (Annual %)…. n/a capacities…… n/a n/a

4th Social Development

4.1 Rule of Law…………………. n/a n/a
4.2 Political Stability & Absence
of Violence/Terrorism……... n/a n/a
4.3 Gender Inequality………….. n/a n/a
4.4 Under-five mortality………… n/a n/a
4.5 Health Index………………… n/a n/a
Source: UNPAN (2014). E-government Survey 2014; World Bank (2013). WGI 2013; UNDP (2013). HDI 2013; YCELP &
CIESIN (2014). EPI 2014; Alliance Development Works and UNU-EHS (2013). World Risk Report 2013.

159
Cook Islands
Region Pacific

UN member X / LDC X

Population 10,777 (July 2012 –CIA est.)

2
Surface area 236.7 km
GDP (current $) 183.2 million (2005 est.)

Language English (official) 86%, Cook Islands Maori(official) 76%

Religion Protestant 62.8%, Roman Catholic 17%, Mormon 4.4%

INDICATOR VALUE RANK INDICATOR VALUE RANK

St th
1 E-government 5 Environmental Development
1.1 EGDI………………………… n/a n/a 5.1 Ecosystem Vitality……. n/a n/a
1.1.1 ICT Infrastructure…….. n/a n/a 5.1.1 Water Resources n/a n/a
1.1.2 Human Capital……….. n/a n/a 5.1.2 Agriculture…….... n/a n/a
1.1.3 Online Service………... n/a n/a 5.1.3 Forests….………. n/a n/a
1.2 E-Participation……………… n/a n/a 5.1.4 Fisheries………… n/a n/a
5.1.5 Biodiversity & Habitat n/a n/a
2nd Good Governance 5.1.6 Climate & Energy n/a n/a
2.1 Control of Corruption………. n/a n/a 5.2 World Risk Index……... n/a n/a
2.2 Voice & Accountability…….. n/a n/a 5.2.1 Exposure………... n/a n/a
2.3 Gov’t Effectiveness………… n/a n/a 5.2.2 Vulnerability…….. n/a n/a
2.4 Regulatory Quality…………. n/a n/a 5.2.2.1 Susceptibility... n/a n/a
5.2.2.2 Lack of coping
rd
3 Economic Development capacities....... n/a n/a
3.1 GDP per capita……………... 9,100 (2005 est.) 5.2.2.3 Lack of adaptive
3.2 GDP growth (Annual %)…… n/a capacities…… n/a n/a

4th Social Development

4.1 Rule of Law…………………. n/a n/a
4.2 Political Stability & Absence
of Violence/Terrorism……... n/a n/a
4.3 Gender Inequality………….. n/a n/a
4.4 Under-five mortality………… n/a n/a
4.5 Health Index………………… n/a n/a
Source: UNPAN (2014). E-government Survey 2014; World Bank (2013). WGI 2013; UNDP (2013). HDI 2013; YCELP &
CIESIN (2014). EPI 2014; Alliance Development Works and UNU-EHS (2013). World Risk Report 2013.

160
Fiji
Region Pacific

UN member O / LDC X

Population 868,400 (UNDP 2011)

2
Surface area 18,270 km
GDP (current $) 3,908 million

Language English (official), Fijian (official), Hindustani

Religion Protestant 55.4, Hindu 27.9%, Roman Catholic 9.1%,

INDICATOR VALUE RANK INDICATOR VALUE RANK

1St E-government 5th Environmental Development

1.1 EGDI………………………. 0.5044 85/190 5.1 Ecosystem Vitality……. 41.24 57/178
1.1.1 ICT Infrastructure…... 0.2872 106/193 5.1.1 Water Resources 3.9
1.1.2 Human Capital……… 0.8322 106/193 5.1.2 Agriculture…….... 94
1.1.3 Online Service……… 0.3937 85/190 5.1.3 Forests….………. 58.94
1.2 E-Participation……………. 0.3922 84/193 5.1.4 Fisheries………… 38.36
5.1.5 Biodiversity & Habitat 37.98
nd
2 Good Governance 5.1.6 Climate & Energy n/a
2.1 Control of Corruption…….. -0.435 124/210 5.2 World Risk Index……... 13.56 16/173
2.2 Voice & Accountability…… -0.875 163/212 5.2.1 Exposure………... 27.71 14/173
2.3 Gov’t Effectiveness………. -0.899 168/210 5.2.2 Vulnerability…….. 48.93 86/173
2.4 Regulatory Quality……….. -0.601 148/210 5.2.2.1 Susceptibility... 26.14 90/173
5.2.2.2 Lack of coping
3rd Economic Development capacities....... 75.30 79/173
3.1 GDP per capita……………... 3,612 (2012) 5.2.2.3 Lack of adaptive
3.2 GDP growth (Annual %)…… 2.307 capacities…… 45.35 98/173

th
4 Social Development
4.1 Rule of Law……………….. -0.801 159/212
4.2 Political Stability & Absence
of Violence/Terrorism…….. -0.041 122/212
4.3 Gender Inequality………... n/a n/a
4.4 Under-five mortality………. n/a n/a
4.5 Health Index………………. 0.779 121/194
Source: UNPAN (2014). E-government Survey 2014; World Bank (2013). WGI 2013; UNDP (2013). HDI 2013; YCELP
& CIESIN (2014). EPI 2014; Alliance Development Works and UNU-EHS (2013). World Risk Report 2013.

161
French Polynesia
Region Pacific

UN member X / LDC X

Population 274,512 (July 2012 –CIA est.)

2
Surface area 4,167 km
GDP (current $) 5,650 million (2006)

Language French (official) 61.1%, Polynesian (official) 31.4%

Religion Protestant 54%, Roman Catholic 30%

INDICATOR VALUE RANK INDICATOR VALUE RANK

1St E-government 5th Environmental Development

1.1 EGDI………………………… n/a n/a 5.1 Ecosystem Vitality……. n/a n/a
1.1.1 ICT Infrastructure…….. n/a n/a 5.1.1 Water Resources n/a n/a
1.1.2 Human Capital……….. n/a n/a 5.1.2 Agriculture…….... n/a n/a
1.1.3 Online Service………... n/a n/a 5.1.3 Forests….………. n/a n/a
1.2 E-Participation……………… n/a n/a 5.1.4 Fisheries………… n/a n/a
5.1.5 Biodiversity & Habitat n/a n/a
nd
2 Good Governance 5.1.6 Climate & Energy n/a n/a
2.1 Control of Corruption………. n/a n/a 5.2 World Risk Index……... n/a n/a
2.2 Voice & Accountability…….. n/a n/a 5.2.1 Exposure………... n/a n/a
2.3 Gov’t Effectiveness………… n/a n/a 5.2.2 Vulnerability…….. n/a n/a
2.4 Regulatory Quality…………. n/a n/a 5.2.2.1 Susceptibility... n/a n/a
5.2.2.2 Lack of coping
3rd Economic Development capacities...... n/a n/a
3.1 GDP per capita…………… 22,000(2006 est.) 5.2.5.3 Lack of adaptive
3.2 GDP growth (Annual %)…. n/a capacities…… n/a n/a

th
4 Social Development
4.1 Rule of Law…………………. n/a n/a
4.2 Political Stability & Absence
of Violence/Terrorism……... n/a n/a
4.3 Gender Inequality………….. n/a n/a
4.4 Under-five mortality………… n/a n/a
4.5 Health Index………………… n/a n/a
Source: UNPAN (2014). E-government Survey 2014; World Bank (2013). WGI 2013; UNDP (2013). HDI 2013; YCELP &
CIESIN (2014). EPI 2014; Alliance Development Works and UNU-EHS (2013). World Risk Report 2013.

162
Guam
Region Pacific

UN member X / LDC X

Population 159,358 (2010 BSP)

2
Surface area 549 km
GDP (current $) 4,600 million (2010 est.)

Language English 43.6%, Filipino 21.2%, Chamorro 17.8%

Religion Roman Catholic 85%, other 15%

INDICATOR VALUE RANK INDICATOR VALUE RANK

1St E-government 5th Environmental Development

1.1 EGDI………………………… n/a n/a 5.1 Ecosystem Vitality……. n/a n/a
1.1.1 ICT Infrastructure…….. n/a n/a 5.1.1 Water Resources.. n/a n/a
1.1.2 Human Capital……….. n/a n/a 5.1.2 Agriculture…….... n/a n/a
1.1.3 Online Service………... n/a n/a 5.1.3 Forests….………. n/a n/a
1.2 E-Participation……………… n/a n/a 5.1.4 Fisheries………… n/a n/a
5.1.5 Biodiversity & Habitat n/a n/a
nd
2 Good Governance 5.1.6 Climate & Energy.. n/a n/a
2.1 Control of Corruption………. n/a n/a 5.2 World Risk Index……... n/a n/a
2.2 Voice & Accountability…….. n/a n/a 5.2.1 Exposure………... n/a n/a
2.3 Gov’t Effectiveness………… n/a n/a 5.2.2 Vulnerability…….. n/a n/a
2.4 Regulatory Quality…………. n/a n/a 5.2.2.1 Susceptibility... n/a n/a
5.2.2.2 Lack of coping
3rd Economic Development capacities....... n/a n/a
3.1 GDP per capita…………… 37,700 (2008 est.) 5.2.5.3 Lack of adaptive
3.2 GDP growth (Annual %)…. n/a capacities…… n/a n/a

th
4 Social Development
4.1 Rule of Law…………………. n/a n/a
4.2 Political Stability & Absence
of Violence/Terrorism……... n/a n/a
4.3 Gender Inequality………….. n/a n/a
4.4 Under-five mortality………… n/a n/a
4.5 Health Index………………… n/a n/a
Source: UNPAN (2014). E-government Survey 2014; World Bank (2013). WGI 2013; UNDP (2013). HDI 2013; YCELP &
CIESIN (2014). EPI 2014; Alliance Development Works and UNU-EHS (2013). World Risk Report 2013.)

163
Kiribati
Region Pacific

UN member O / LDC O

Population 101,100 (UNDP 2011)

2
Surface area 811 km
GDP (current $) 175 million

Language I-Kiribati, English (official)

Religion Roman Catholic 56%, Kempsville Presbyterian Church 34%

INDICATOR VALUE RANK INDICATOR VALUE RANK

1St E-government 5th Environmental Development

1.1 EGDI………………………. 0.3201 132/190 5.1 Ecosystem Vitality……. 58.73 87/178
1.1.1 ICT Infrastructure…... 0.0665 174/193 5.1.1 Water Resources.. 27.06
1.1.2 Human Capital……… 0.6812 174/193 5.1.2 Agriculture…….... 56
1.1.3 Online Service……… 0.2126 134/190 5.1.3 Forests….………. n/a
1.2 E-Participation……………. 0.2941 110/193 5.1.4 Fisheries………… 36.08
5.1.5 Biodiversity & Habitat 100
nd
2 Good Governance 5.1.6 Climate & Energy.. n/a
2.1 Control of Corruption…….. 0.004 88/210 5.2 World Risk Index……... 1.78 167/173
2.2 Voice & Accountability…… 0.765 62/212 5.2.1 Exposure………... 3.05 170/173
2.3 Gov’t Effectiveness………. -0.834 165/210 5.2.2 Vulnerability…….. 58.48 52/173
2.4 Regulatory Quality……….. -1.360 192/210 5.2.2.1 Susceptibility... 42.90 46/173
5.2.2.2 Lack of coping
3rd Economic Development capacities....... 82.49 39/173
3.1 GDP per capita……………... 1,160 (2012) 5.2.5.3 Lack of adaptive
3.2 GDP growth (Annual %)…… 2.81 capacities…… 50.06 66/173

th
4 Social Development
4.1 Rule of Law…………………. 0.111 89/212
4.2 Political Stability & Absence
of Violence/Terrorism……... 1.325 12/212
4.3 Gender Inequality………….. n/a n/a
4.4 Under-five mortality………… 59.9 44/195
4.5 Health Index………………… n/a n/a
Source: UNPAN (2014). E-government Survey 2014; World Bank (2013). WGI 2013; UNDP (2013). HDI 2013; YCELP &
CIESIN (2014). EPI 2014; Alliance Development Works and UNU-EHS (2013). World Risk Report 2013.

164
Marshall Islands
Region Pacific

UN member O / LDC X

Population 68,480 (July 2011 CIA est.)

2
Surface area 181.3 km
GDP (current $) 182 million

Language Marshallese (official) 98.2%, other languages 1.8%

Religion Protestant 54.8%, Assembly of God 25.8

INDICATOR VALUE RANK INDICATOR VALUE RANK

1St E-government 5th Environmental Development

1.1 EGDI………………………. 0.2851 142/190 5.1 Ecosystem Vitality……. n/a n/a
1.1.1 ICT Infrastructure…... 0.0448 182/193 5.1.1 Water Resources.. n/a n/a
1.1.2 Human Capital……… 0.7002 182/193 5.1.2 Agriculture…….... n/a n/a
1.1.3 Online Service……… 0.1102 160/190 5.1.3 Forests….………. n/a n/a
1.2 E-Participation………........ 0.2549 122/193 5.1.4 Fisheries………… n/a n/a
5.1.5 Biodiversity & Habitat n/a n/a
nd
2 Good Governance 5.1.6 Climate & Energy.. n/a n/a
2.1 Control of Corruption……. -0.142 97/210 5.2 World Risk Index……... n/a n/a
2.2 Voice & Accountability….. 1.192 27/212 5.2.1 Exposure………... n/a n/a
2.3 Gov’t Effectiveness……… -1.649 206/210 5.2.2 Vulnerability…….. n/a n/a
2.4 Regulatory Quality………. -1.015 175/210 5.2.2.1 Susceptibility... n/a n/a
5.2.2.2 Lack of coping
3rd Economic Development capacities....... n/a n/a
3.1 GDP per capita……………... 2,879 (2012) 5.2.5.3 Lack of adaptive
3.2 GDP growth (Annual %)…… 1.9 capacities…… n/a n/a

th
4 Social Development
4.1 Rule of Law………………. 0.077 91/212
4.2 Political Stability & Absence
of Violence/Terrorism…….. 1.061 29/212
4.3 Gender Inequality………... n/a n/a
4.4 Under-five mortality……… 37.9 70/195
4.5 Health Index………………. 0.825 109/194
Source: UNPAN (2014). E-government Survey 2014; World Bank (2013). WGI 2013; UNDP (2013). HDI 2013; YCELP &
CIESIN (2014). EPI 2014; Alliance Development Works and UNU-EHS (2013). World Risk Report 2013.

165
Micronesia (Federated State of)
Region Pacific

UN member O / LDC X

Population 111,500 (UNDP 2011)

2
Surface area 702 km
GDP (current $) 326 million

Language English (official and common language)

Religion Roman Catholic 52.7%, Protestant 41.7%

INDICATOR VALUE RANK INDICATOR VALUE RANK

1St E-government 5th Environmental Development

1.1 EGDI……………….……… 0.3337 130/190 5.1 Ecosystem Vitality……. n/a n/a
1.1.1 ICT Infrastructure…... 0.1099 158/193 5.1.1 Water Resources.. n/a n/a
1.1.2 Human Capital……… 0.7023 158/193 5.1.2 Agriculture…….... n/a n/a
1.1.3 Online Service……… 0.1890 139/190 5.1.3 Forests….………. n/a n/a
1.2 E-Participation……………. 0.2549 122/193 5.1.4 Fisheries………… n/a n/a
5.1.5 Biodiversity & Habitat n/a n/a
nd
2 Good Governance 5.1.6 Climate & Energy.. n/a n/a
2.1 Control of Corruption……. -0.109 96/210 5.2 World Risk Index……... n/a n/a
2.2 Voice & Accountability….. 1.049 42/212 5.2.1 Exposure………... n/a n/a
2.3 Gov’t Effectiveness……… -0.632 145/210 5.2.2 Vulnerability…….. n/a n/a
2.4 Regulatory Quality………. -0.984 172/210 5.2.2.1 Susceptibility... n/a n/a
5.2.2.2 Lack of coping
3rd Economic Development capacities....... n/a n/a
3.1 GDP per capita…………… 1,160 5.2.5.3 Lack of adaptive
3.2 GDP growth (Annual %)…. 0.433 capacities…… n/a n/a

th
4 Social Development
4.1 Rule of Law………………. 0.077 91/212
4.2 Political Stability & Absence
of Violence/Terrorism…….. 1.061 29/212
4.3 Gender Inequality………… n/a n/a
4.4 Under-five mortality………. 37.9 70/195
4.5 Health Index………………. 0.825 109/194
Source: UNPAN (2014). E-government Survey 2014; World Bank (2013). WGI 2013; UNDP (2013). HDI 2013; YCELP &
CIESIN (2014). EPI 2014; Alliance Development Works and UNU-EHS (2013). World Risk Report 2013.

166
Nauru
Region Pacific

UN member O / LDC X

Population 10,300 (UNDP 2011)

2
Surface area 21 km
GDP (current $) n/a

Language Nauruan (official), English

Religion Protestant 45.8%, Roman Catholic 33%

INDICATOR VALUE RANK INDICATOR VALUE RANK

1St E-government 5th Environmental Development

1.1 EGDI…………………….… 0.2776 145/190 5.1 Ecosystem Vitality……. n/a n/a
1.1.1 ICT Infrastructure…... 0.2159 127/193 5.1.1 Water Resources.. n/a n/a
1.1.2 Human Capital……... 0.5617 127/193 5.1.2 Agriculture…….... n/a n/a
1.1.3 Online Service……… 0.0551 173/190 5.1.3 Forests….………. n/a n/a
1.2 E-Participation……………. 0.0784 172/193 5.1.4 Fisheries………… n/a n/a
5.1.5 Biodiversity & Habitat n/a n/a
nd
2 Good Governance 5.1.6 Climate & Energy.. n/a n/a
2.1 Control of Corruption……. 0.047 85/210 5.2 World Risk Index……... n/a n/a
2.2 Voice & Accountability….. 1.090 34/212 5.2.1 Exposure………... n/a n/a
2.3 Gov’t Effectiveness……… -0.558 140/210 5.2.2 Vulnerability…….. n/a n/a
2.4 Regulatory Quality………. -1.202 189/210 5.2.2.1 Susceptibility... n/a n/a
5.2.2.2 Lack of coping
3rd Economic Development capacities....... n/a n/a
3.1 GDP per capita……………... 5,000 (2005 est.) 5.2.5.3 Lack of adaptive
3.2 GDP growth (Annual %)…… n/a capacities…… n/a n/a

th
4 Social Development
4.1 Rule of Law………………. 0.694 63/212
4.2 Political Stability & Absence
of Violence/Terrorism…….. 1.061 30/212
4.3 Gender Inequality………… n/a n/a
4.4 Under-five mortality………. n/a n/a
4.5 Health Index………………. 0.947 26/194
Source: UNPAN (2014). E-government Survey 2014; World Bank (2013). WGI 2013; UNDP (2013). HDI 2013; YCELP &
CIESIN (2014). EPI 2014; Alliance Development Works and UNU-EHS (2013). World Risk Report 2013.

167
New Caledonia
Region Pacific

UN member X / LDC X

Population 260,166 (July 2012 –CIAest.)

2
Surface area 19,060 km
GDP (current $) 9,280 million (2008 est.)

Language French (official), 33 Melanesian-Polynesian dialects

Religion Roman Catholic 60%, Protestant 30%, other 10%

INDICATOR VALUE RANK INDICATOR VALUE RANK

1St E-government 5th Environmental Development

1.1 EGDI………………….…… n/a n/a 5.1 Ecosystem Vitality……. n/a n/a
1.1.1 ICT Infrastructure…... n/a n/a 5.1.1 Water Resources.. n/a n/a
1.1.2 Human Capital……… n/a n/a 5.1.2 Agriculture…….... n/a n/a
1.1.3 Online Service……… n/a n/a 5.1.3 Forests….………. n/a n/a
1.2 E-Participation……………. n/a n/a 5.1.4 Fisheries………… n/a n/a
5.1.5 Biodiversity & Habitat n/a n/a
nd
2 Good Governance 5.1.6 Climate & Energy.. n/a n/a
2.1 Control of Corruption……. n/a n/a 5.2 World Risk Index……... n/a n/a
2.2 Voice & Accountability….. n/a n/a 5.2.1 Exposure………... n/a n/a
2.3 Gov’t Effectiveness……… n/a n/a 5.2.2 Vulnerability…….. n/a n/a
2.4 Regulatory Quality……….. n/a n/a 5.2.2.1 Susceptibility... n/a n/a
5.2.2.2 Lack of coping
3rd Economic Development capacities....... n/a n/a
3.1 GDP per capita…………… 37,700 (2008 est.) 5.2.5.3 Lack of adaptive
3.2 GDP growth (Annual %)…. n/a capacities…… n/a n/a

th
4 Social Development
4.1 Rule of Law………………. n/a n/a
4.2 Political Stability & Absence
of Violence/Terrorism…….. n/a n/a
4.3 Gender Inequality………… n/a n/a
4.4 Under-five mortality………. n/a n/a
4.5 Health Index………………. n/a n/a
Source: UNPAN (2014). E-government Survey 2014; World Bank (2013). WGI 2013; UNDP (2013). HDI 2013; YCELP &
CIESIN (2014). EPI 2014; Alliance Development Works and UNU-EHS (2013). World Risk Report 2013.

168
Niue
Region Pacific

UN member X / LDC X

Population 1,269 (July 2012 – CIA est.)

2
Surface area 260 km
GDP (current $) 10.01 million (2003)

Language English (official), Niuean

Religion Ekalesia Niue 61.1%, Latter-Day Saints 8.8%, Roman Catholic 7.2%

INDICATOR VALUE RANK INDICATOR VALUE RANK

1St E-government 5th Environmental Development

1.1 EGDI……………….……… n/a n/a 5.1 Ecosystem Vitality……. n/a n/a
1.1.1 ICT Infrastructure…... n/a n/a 5.1.1 Water Resources n/a n/a
1.1.2 Human Capital……… n/a n/a 5.1.2 Agriculture…….... n/a n/a
1.1.3 Online Service……… n/a n/a 5.1.3 Forests….………. n/a n/a
1.2 E-Participation……………. n/a n/a 5.1.4 Fisheries………… n/a n/a
5.1.5 Biodiversity & Habitat n/a n/a
nd
2 Good Governance 5.1.6 Climate & Energy.. n/a n/a
2.1 Control of Corruption…….. n/a n/a 5.2 World Risk Index……... n/a n/a
2.2 Voice & Accountability…… n/a n/a 5.2.1 Exposure………... n/a n/a
2.3 Gov’t Effectiveness………. n/a n/a 5.2.2 Vulnerability…….. n/a n/a
2.4 Regulatory Quality…….…. n/a n/a 5.2.2.1 Susceptibility... n/a n/a
5.2.2.2 Lack of coping
3rd Economic Development capacities....... n/a n/a
3.1 GDP per capita……………... 5,800 (2003 est.) 5.2.5.3 Lack of adaptive
3.2 GDP growth (Annual %)…… n/a capacities…… n/a n/a

th
4 Social Development
4.1 Rule of Law………………. n/a n/a
4.2 Political Stability & Absence
of Violence/Terrorism…….. n/a n/a
4.3 Gender Inequality………… n/a n/a
4.4 Under-five mortality………. n/a n/a
4.5 Health Index………………. n/a n/a
Source: UNPAN (2014). E-government Survey 2014; World Bank (2013). WGI 2013; UNDP (2013). HDI 2013; YCELP &
CIESIN (2014). EPI 2014; Alliance Development Works and UNU-EHS (2013). World Risk Report 2013.

169
Palau
Region Pacific

UN member O / LDC X

Population 20,600 (UNDP 2011)

2
Surface area 458 km
GDP (current $) 228 million

Language Palauan (official on most islands) 64.7%, Filipino 13.5%, English (official) 9.4%

Religion Roman Catholic 41.6%, Protestant 23.3%

INDICATOR VALUE RANK INDICATOR VALUE RANK

1St E-government 5th Environmental Development

1.1 EGDI……………….……… 0.4415 108/190 5.1 Ecosystem Vitality……. 29.82 123/178
1.1.1 ICT Infrastructure…... 0.3592 87/193 5.1.1 Water Resources.. 40
1.1.2 Human Capital……… 0.7999 87/193 5.1.2 Agriculture…….... 12
1.1.3 Online Service……… 0.1654 145/190 5.1.3 Forests….………. n/a
1.2 E-Participation……………. 0.2353 129/193 5.1.4 Fisheries………… 50
5.1.5 Biodiversity & Habitat 43.95
nd
2 Good Governance 5.1.6 Climate & Energy.. n/a
2.1 Control of Corruption…….. -0.284 105/210 5.2 World Risk Index……... n/a n/a
2.2 Voice & Accountability…… 1.201 24/212 5.2.1 Exposure………... n/a n/a
2.3 Gov’t Effectiveness………. -0.558 141/210 5.2.2 Vulnerability…….. n/a n/a
2.4 Regulatory Quality..……… -1.010 174/210 5.2.2.1 Susceptibility... n/a n/a
5.2.2.2 Lack of coping
3rd Economic Development capacities....... n/a n/a
3.1 GDP per capita……………... 9,281 (2012) 5.2.5.3 Lack of adaptive
3.2 GDP growth (Annual %)…… 5.252 capacities…… n/a n/a

th
4 Social Development
4.1 Rule of Law………………. 0.901 49/212
4.2 Political Stability & Absence
of Violence/Terrorism…….. 1.061 31/212
4.3 Gender Inequality………… n/a n/a
4.4 Under-five mortality………. 20.8 92/195
4.5 Health Index………………. 0.822 110/194
Source: UNPAN (2014). E-government Survey 2014; World Bank (2013). WGI 2013; UNDP (2013). HDI 2013; YCELP &
CIESIN (2014). EPI 2014; Alliance Development Works and UNU-EHS (2013). World Risk Report 2013.

170
Papua New Guinea
Region Pacific

UN member O / LDC X

Population 7,013,800 (UNDP 2011)

2
Surface area 462,840 km
GDP (current $) 15,654 million

Language Tok Pisin (official), English (official), Hiri Motu (official)

Religion Roman Catholic 27%, Protestant 69.4%

INDICATOR VALUE RANK INDICATOR VALUE RANK

1St E-government 5th Environmental Development

1.1 EGDI…………….………… 0.1203 188/190 5.1 Ecosystem Vitality……. 41.17 125/178
1.1.1 ICT Infrastructure…... 0.0530 178/193 5.1.1 Water Resources.. 0
1.1.2 Human Capital……... 0.3000 178/193 5.1.2 Agriculture…….... 56
1.1.3 Online Service……… 0.0079 187/190 5.1.3 Forests….………. 45.05
1.2 E-Participation……………. 0 192/193 5.1.4 Fisheries………… 49.51
5.1.5 Biodiversity & Habitat 25.68
nd
2 Good Governance 5.1.6 Climate & Energy.. n/a
2.1 Control of Corruption……. -1.037 178/210 5.2 World Risk Index……... 15.90 11/173
2.2 Voice & Accountability….. -0.045 112/212 5.2.1 Exposure………... 24.94 20/173
2.3 Gov’t Effectiveness……… -0.769 158/210 5.2.2 Vulnerability…….. 63.77 32/173
2.4 Regulatory Quality…….…. -0.522 143/210 5.2.2.1 Susceptibility... 51.22 32/173
5.2.2.2 Lack of coping
3rd Economic Development capacities....... 83.99 31/173
3.1 GDP per capita…………… 1,076 (2012) 5.2.5.3 Lack of adaptive
3.2 GDP growth (Annual %)…. 8 capacities…… 56.10 40/173

th
4 Social Development
4.1 Rule of Law………………. -0.864 164/212
4.2 Political Stability & Absence
of Violence/Terrorism…….. -0.643 158/212
4.3 Gender Inequality………… n/a n/a
4.4 Under-five mortality………. 63 41/195
4.5 Health Index………………. 0.681 149/194
Source: UNPAN (2014). E-government Survey 2014; World Bank (2013). WGI 2013; UNDP (2013). HDI 2013; YCELP &
CIESIN (2014). EPI 2014; Alliance Development Works and UNU-EHS (2013). World Risk Report 2013.

171
Samoa
Region Pacific

UN member O / LDC O

Population 183,900 (UNDP 2011)

2
Surface area 2,944 km
GDP (current $) 684 million

Language Samoan (Polynesian) (official), English

Religion Protestant 59.9%, Roman Catholic 19.6%, Mormon 12.7%

INDICATOR VALUE RANK INDICATOR VALUE RANK

1St E-government 5th Environmental Development

1.1 EGDI……………….……… 0.4204 111/190 5.1 Ecosystem Vitality……. n/a n/a
1.1.1 ICT Infrastructure…... 0.2672 113/193 5.1.1 Water Resources.. n/a n/a
1.1.2 Human Capital……… 0.7499 113/193 5.1.2 Agriculture…….... n/a n/a
1.1.3 Online Service……… 0.2441 123/190 5.1.3 Forests….………. n/a n/a
1.2 E-Participation……………. 0.3922 84/193 5.1.4 Fisheries………… n/a n/a
5.1.5 Biodiversity & Habitat n/a n/a
nd
2 Good Governance 5.1.6 Climate & Energy.. n/a n/a
2.1 Control of Corruption……. 0.153 85/210 5.2 World Risk Index……... 4.51 120/173
2.2 Voice & Accountability….. 0.470 79/212 5.2.1 Exposure………... 9.10 141/173
2.3 Gov’t Effectiveness……… 0.090 88/210 5.2.2 Vulnerability…….. 49.58 83/173
2.4 Regulatory Quality…….…. -0.339 125/210 5.2.2.1 Susceptibility... 27.77 83/173
5.2.2.2 Lack of coping
3rd Economic Development capacities....... 73.12 88/173
3.1 GDP per capita………....... 2,350 5.2.5.3 Lack of adaptive
3.2 GDP growth (Annual %)…. 2.894 capacities…… 47.84 78/173

th
4 Social Development
4.1 Rule of Law………………. 0.696 62/212
4.2 Political Stability & Absence
of Violence/Terrorism…….. 1.022 37/212
4.3 Gender Inequality………… n/a n/a
4.4 Under-five mortality………. n/a n/a
4.5 Health Index………………. 0.831 102/194
Source: UNPAN (2014). E-government Survey 2014; World Bank (2013). WGI 2013; UNDP (2013). HDI 2013; YCELP &
CIESIN (2014). EPI 2014; Alliance Development Works and UNU-EHS (2013). World Risk Report 2013.

172
Solomon Islands
Region Pacific

UN member O / LDC O

Population 552,300 (UNDP 2011)

2
Surface area 28,450 km
GDP (current $) 1,008 million

Language Melanesian pidgin, 120 indigenous languages, English (official but spoken by1~2%)

Religion Protestant 73.4%, Roman Catholic 19.6%

INDICATOR VALUE RANK INDICATOR VALUE RANK

1St E-government 5th Environmental Development

1.1 EGDI…………….………… 0.2087 170/190 5.1 Ecosystem Vitality……. 21.56 143/178
1.1.1 ICT Infrastructure…... 0.1008 160/193 5.1.1 Water Resources.. 0
1.1.2 Human Capital……… 0.4702 160/193 5.1.2 Agriculture…….... 56
1.1.3 Online Service……… 0.0551 173/190 5.1.3 Forests….………. 35.07
1.2 E-Participation……………. 0.0784 172/193 5.1.4 Fisheries………… 54.67
5.1.5 Biodiversity & Habitat 17.58
nd
2 Good Governance 5.1.6 Climate & Energy.. n/a
2.1 Control of Corruption…….. -0.444 126/210 5.2 World Risk Index……... 18.11 6/173
2.2 Voice & Accountability…… -0.018 110/212 5.2.1 Exposure………... 29.98 13/173
2.3 Gov’t Effectiveness………. -0.824 162/210 5.2.2 Vulnerability…….. 60.40 46/173
2.4 Regulatory Quality…….…. -1.071 181/210 5.2.2.1 Susceptibility... 43.96 42/173
5.2.2.2 Lack of coping
3rd Economic Development capacities....... 84.15 30/173
3.1 GDP per capita…………… 1,145 (2012) 5.2.5.3 Lack of adaptive
3.2 GDP growth (Annual %)…. 3.9 capacities…… 53.09 54/173

th
4 Social Development
4.1 Rule of Law………………. -0.601 142/212
4.2 Political Stability & Absence
of Violence/Terrorism…….. 0.250 95/212
4.3 Gender Inequality………… n/a n/a
4.4 Under-five mortality………. 31.1 76/195
4.5 Health Index………………. n/a n/a
Source: UNPAN (2014). E-government Survey 2014; World Bank (2013). WGI 2013; UNDP (2013). HDI 2013; YCELP &
CIESIN (2014). EPI 2014; Alliance Development Works and UNU-EHS (2013). World Risk Report 2013.

173
Timor-Leste
Region Pacific

UN member O / LDC O

Population 1,153,800 (UNDP 2011)

2
Surface area 15,007 km
GDP (current $) 1,293 million

Language Tetum (official), Portuguese (official), Indonesian

Religion Roman Catholic 98%, Muslim 1%, Protestant 1%

INDICATOR VALUE RANK INDICATOR VALUE RANK

1St E-government 5th Environmental Development

1.1 EGDI…………….………… 0.2528 161/190 5.1 Ecosystem Vitality……. 35.74 159/178
1.1.1 ICT Infrastructure…... 0.0704 173/193 5.1.1 Water Resources.. 0.3
1.1.2 Human Capital……… 0.4831 173/193 5.1.2 Agriculture…….... 50
1.1.3 Online Service……… 0.2047 135/190 5.1.3 Forests….………. 31.35
1.2 E-Participation……………. 0.2941 110/193 5.1.4 Fisheries………… 59.87
5.1.5 Biodiversity & Habitat 60.43
nd
2 Good Governance 5.1.6 Climate & Energy.. n/a
2.1 Control of Corruption……. -0.979 174/210 5.2 World Risk Index……... 16.37 10/173
2.2 Voice & Accountability….. 0.047 102/212 5.2.1 Exposure………... 25.73 18/173
2.3 Gov’t Effectiveness……… -1.193 185/210 5.2.2 Vulnerability…….. 63.61 34/173
2.4 Regulatory Quality………. -1.024 177/210 5.2.2.1 Susceptibility... 52.16 30/173
5.2.2.2 Lack of coping
3rd Economic Development capacities....... 79.36 59/173
3.1 GDP per capita…………… 682 (2012) 5.2.5.3 Lack of adaptive
3.2 GDP growth (Annual %)…. 0.592 capacities…… 59.31 26/173

th
4 Social Development
4.1 Rule of Law………………. -1.199 191/212
4.2 Political Stability & Absence
of Violence/Terrorism…….. -0.270 133/212
4.3 Gender Inequality………… n/a n/a
4.4 Under-five mortality………. 56.7 49/195
4.5 Health Index………………. 0.677 151/194
Source: UNPAN (2014). E-government Survey 2014; World Bank (2013). WGI 2013; UNDP (2013). HDI 2013; YCELP &
CIESIN (2014). EPI 2014; Alliance Development Works and UNU-EHS (2013). World Risk Report 2013.

174
Tonga
Region Pacific

UN member O / LDC X

Population 104,500 (UNDP 2011)

2
Surface area 748 km
GDP (current $) 472 million

Language Tongan (official), English (official)

Religion Christian (Free Wesleyan Church claims over 30,000 adherents)

INDICATOR VALUE RANK INDICATOR VALUE RANK

1St E-government 5th Environmental Development

1.1 EGDI…….………………… 0.4806 98/190 5.1 Ecosystem Vitality……. 52.51 161/178
1.1.1 ICT Infrastructure… 0.2348 116/193 5.1.1 Water Resources.. 27.06
1.1.2 Human Capital……… 0.8304 116/193 5.1.2 Agriculture…….... 56
1.1.3 Online Service……… 0.3465 98/190 5.1.3 Forests….………. n/a
1.2 E-Participation……………. 0.3333 97/193 5.1.4 Fisheries………… 41.85
5.1.5 Biodiversity & Habitat 92.16
nd
2 Good Governance 5.1.6 Climate & Energy.. n/a
2.1 Control of Corruption…….. -0.072 93/210 5.2 World Risk Index……... 28.23 2/173
2.2 Voice & Accountability…… 0.437 82/212 5.2.1 Exposure………... 55.27 2/173
2.3 Gov’t Effectiveness………. -0.194 112/210 5.2.2 Vulnerability…….. 51.07 73/173
2.4 Regulatory Quality…….…. -0.599 147/210 5.2.2.1 Susceptibility... 27.72 84/173
5.2.2.2 Lack of coping
3rd Economic Development capacities....... 80.56 53/173
3.1 GDP per capita…………… 2,658 (2012) 5.2.5.3 Lack of adaptive
3.2 GDP growth (Annual %)…. 0.846 Capacities……. 44.94 100/173

th
4 Social Development
4.1 Rule of Law………………. 0.027 93/212
4.2 Political Stability & Absence
of Violence/Terrorism…….. 0.931 48/212
4.3 Gender Inequality………… n/a n/a
4.4 Under-five mortality………. 12.8 127/191
4.5 Health Index………………. 0.827 105/194
Source: UNPAN (2014). E-government Survey 2014; World Bank (2013). WGI 2013; UNDP (2013). HDI 2013; YCELP &
CIESIN (2014). EPI 2014; Alliance Development Works and UNU-EHS (2013). World Risk Report 2013.

175
Tuvalu
Region Pacific

UN member O / LDC X

Population 104,500 (UNDP 2011)

2
Surface area 748 km
GDP (current $) 472 million

Language Tongan (official), English (official)

Religion Christian (Free Wesleyan Church claims over 30,000 adherents)

INDICATOR VALUE RANK INDICATOR VALUE RANK

1St E-government 5th Environmental Development

1.1 EGDI………….…………… 0.3059 137/190 5.1 Ecosystem Vitality……. n/a n/a
1.1.1 ICT Infrastructure…... 0.1761 134/193 5.1.1 Water Resources.. n/a n/a
1.1.2 Human Capital……… 0.7002 134/193 5.1.2 Agriculture…….... n/a n/a
1.1.3 Online Service……… 0.0394 179/190 5.1.3 Forests….………. n/a n/a
1.2 E-Participation……………. 0.3333 158/193 5.1.4 Fisheries………… n/a n/a
5.1.5 Biodiversity & Habitat n/a n/a
nd
2 Good Governance 5.1.6 Climate & Energy.. n/a n/a
2.1 Control of Corruption…….. 0.296 108/210 5.2 World Risk Index……... n/a n/a
2.2 Voice & Accountability…… 0.687 67/212 5.2.1 Exposure………... n/a n/a
2.3 Gov’t Effectiveness………. -0.687 150/210 5.2.2 Vulnerability…….. n/a n/a
2.4 Regulatory Quality….……. -1.250 189/210 5.2.2.1 Susceptibility... n/a n/a
5.2.2.2 Lack of coping
3rd Economic Development capacities....... n/a n/a
3.1 GDP per capita…………… 2,624 (2012) 5.2.5.3 Lack of adaptive
3.2 GDP growth (Annual %)…. 0.174 Capacities…... n/a n/a

th
4 Social Development
4.1 Rule of Law………………. 0.460 76/212
4.2 Political Stability & Absence
of Violence/Terrorism…….. 1.325 13/212
4.3 Gender Inequality………… n/a n/a
4.4 Under-five mortality………. 29.7 79/195
4.5 Health Index………………. 0.749 137/194
Source: UNPAN (2014). E-government Survey 2014; World Bank (2013). WGI 2013; UNDP (2013). HDI 2013; YCELP &
CIESIN (2014). EPI 2014; Alliance Development Works and UNU-EHS (2013). World Risk Report 2013.

176
Vanuatu
Region Pacific

UN member O / LDC O

Population 245,600 (UNDP 2011)

2
Surface area 12,200 km
GDP (current $) 787 million

Language local languages 63.2%, Bislama (official; creole) 33.7%, English (official) 2%

Religion Protestant 70%, other 12.6%

INDICATOR VALUE RANK INDICATOR VALUE RANK

1St E-government 5th Environmental Development

1.1 EGDI……………….……… 0.2571 159/190 5.1 Ecosystem Vitality……. 38.39 173/178
1.1.1 ICT Infrastructure…... 0.1188 155/193 5.1.1 Water Resources.. 27.06
1.1.2 Human Capital……… 0.5736 155/193 5.1.2 Agriculture…….... 56
1.1.3 Online Service……… 0.0787 168/190 5.1.3 Forests….………. 74.82
1.2 E-Participation……………. 0.1765 143/193 5.1.4 Fisheries………… 48.81
5.1.5 Biodiversity & Habitat 27.46
nd
2 Good Governance 5.1.6 Climate & Energy.. n/a
2.1 Control of Corruption…….. 0.446 108/210 5.2 World Risk Index……... 36.43 1/173
2.2 Voice & Accountability…… 0.508 76/212 5.2.1 Exposure………... 63.66 1/173
2.3 Gov’t Effectiveness………. -0.223 113/210 5.2.2 Vulnerability…….. 57.23 55/173
2.4 Regulatory Quality…….…. -0.767 159/210 5.2.2.1 Susceptibility... 34.66 62/173
5.2.2.2 Lack of coping
3rd Economic Development capacities....... 81.27 50/173
3.1 GDP per capita…………… 2,112 (2012) 5.2.5.3 Lack of adaptive
3.2 GDP growth (Annual %)…. 2.25 Capacities…... 55.77 42/173

th
4 Social Development
4.1 Rule of Law………………. 0.244 83/212
4.2 Political Stability & Absence
of Violence/Terrorism…….. 1.181 19/212
4.3 Gender Inequality………… n/a n/a
4.4 Under-five mortality………. 29.7 103/195
4.5 Health Index………………. 0.809 112/194
Source: UNPAN (2014). E-government Survey 2014; World Bank (2013). WGI 2013; UNDP (2013). HDI 2013; YCELP &
CIESIN (2014). EPI 2014; Alliance Development Works and UNU-EHS (2013). World Risk Report 2013.

177
Bahrain
Region AIMS

UN member O / LDC X

Population 1,248,348 (July 2012 CIA est.)

2
Surface area 665Km
GDP (current $) 30,362 million

Language Arabic (official), English, Farsi, Urdu

Religion Muslim 70.3%, Christian 14.5%, Hindu 9.8%

INDICATOR VALUE RANK INDICATOR VALUE RANK

1St E-government 5th Environmental Development

1.1 EGDI………………………. 0.8089 18/190 5.1 Ecosystem Vitality……. 30.9 12/178
1.1.1 ICT Infrastructure…... 0.7055 26/193 5.1.1 Water Resources.. 64.27
1.1.2 Human Capital……… 0.7840 26/193 5.1.2 Agriculture…….... 12
1.1.3 Online Service……… 0.9370 7/190 5.1.3 Forests….………. n/a
1.2 E-Participation……………. 0.8235 14/193 5.1.4 Fisheries………… 0
5.1.5 Biodiversity & Habitat 4.99
nd
2 Good Governance 5.1.6 Climate & Energy.. n/a
2.1 Control of Corruption…….. n/a n/a 5.2 World Risk Index……... 1.81 166/173
2.2 Voice & Accountability…… n/a n/a 5.2.1 Exposure………... 4.27 167/173
2.3 Gov’t Effectiveness………. n/a n/a 5.2.2 Vulnerability…….. 42.37 117/173
2.4 Regulatory Quality…….…. n/a n/a 5.2.2.1 Susceptibility... 13.91 165/173
5.2.2.2 Lack of coping
3rd Economic Development capacities....... 64.81 115/173
3.1 GDP per capita…………… 16,765 (2012) 5.2.5.3 Lack of adaptive
3.2 GDP growth (Annual %)…. 3.3 capacities…… 48.39 74/173

th
4 Social Development
4.1 Rule of Law………………. n/a n/a
4.2 Political Stability & Absence
of Violence/Terrorism…….. n/a n/a
4.3 Gender Inequality………… n/a n/a
4.4 Under-five mortality………. 9.6 138/195
4.5 Health Index………………. 0.870 61/194
Source: UNPAN (2014). E-government Survey 2014; World Bank (2013). WGI 2013; UNDP (2013). HDI 2013; YCELP &
CIESIN (2014). EPI 2014; Alliance Development Works and UNU-EHS (2013). World Risk Report 2013.

178
Cape Verde
Region AIMS

UN member O / LDC X

Population 500,600 (UNDP 2011)

2
Surface area 4,033 km
GDP (current $) 1,827 million

Language Portuguese (official), Crioulo (a blend of Portuguese and West African words)

Religion Roman Catholic 77.3%, Protestant 3.7%

INDICATOR VALUE RANK INDICATOR VALUE RANK

1St E-government 5th Environmental Development

1.1 EGDI………………………. 0.3551 127/190 5.1 Ecosystem Vitality……. 29.85 31/178
1.1.1 ICT Infrastructure…... 0.2966 103/193 5.1.1 Water Resources.. 19.4
1.1.2 Human Capital……… 0.6032 103/193 5.1.2 Agriculture…….... 92
1.1.3 Online Service……… 0.1654 145/190 5.1.3 Forests….………. n/a
1.2 E-Participation……………. 0.0980 164/193 5.1.4 Fisheries………… 43.26
5.1.5 Biodiversity & Habitat 7.32
nd
2 Good Governance 5.1.6 Climate & Energy n/a
2.1 Control of Corruption…….. 0.806 55/210 5.2 World Risk Index……... 10.80 32/173
2.2 Voice & Accountability…… 0.954 52/212 5.2.1 Exposure………... 20.26 25/173
2.3 Gov’t Effectiveness………. 0.099 87/210 5.2.2 Vulnerability…….. 53.31 68/173
2.4 Regulatory Quality……….. 0.040 98/210 5.2.2.1 Susceptibility... 35.53 60/173
5.2.2.2 Lack of coping
3rd Economic Development capacities....... 69.98 99/173
3.1 GDP per capita…………… 3,321 (2012) 5.2.5.3 Lack of adaptive
3.2 GDP growth (Annual %)…. 2.5 capacities…… 54.41 44/173

th
4 Social Development
4.1 Rule of Law………………. 0.479 74/212
4.2 Political Stability & Absence
of Violence/Terrorism…….. 0.783 60/212
4.3 Gender Inequality………… n/a n/a
4.4 Under-five mortality………. n/a n/a
4.5 Health Index………………. 0.856 75/194
Source: UNPAN (2014). E-government Survey 2014; World Bank (2013). WGI 2013; UNDP (2013). HDI 2013; YCELP &
CIESIN (2014). EPI 2014; Alliance Development Works and UNU-EHS (2013). World Risk Report 2013.

179
Comoros
Region AIMS

UN member O / LDC O

Population 753,900 (UNDP 2011)

2
Surface area 2,170 km
GDP (current $) 596 million

Language Arabic (official), French (official), Shikomoro (a blend of Swahili and Arabic)

Religion Sunni Muslim 98%, Roman Catholic 2%

INDICATOR VALUE RANK INDICATOR VALUE RANK

1St E-government 5th Environmental Development

1.1 EGDI………………………. 0.1808 177/190 5.1 Ecosystem Vitality……. 20.72 37/178
1.1.1 ICT Infrastructure…... 0.0604 175/193 5.1.1 Water Resources.. 3.96
1.1.2 Human Capital……… 0.4662 175/193 5.1.2 Agriculture…….... 58
1.1.3 Online Service……… 0.0157 183/190 5.1.3 Forests….………. 68.23
1.2 E-Participation……………. 0.0392 183/193 5.1.4 Fisheries………… 48.26
5.1.5 Biodiversity & Habitat 0
nd
2 Good Governance 5.1.6 Climate & Energy.. n/a
2.1 Control of Corruption…….. -0.725 155/210 5.2 World Risk Index……... 7.52 66/173
2.2 Voice & Accountability…… -0.532 146/212 5.2.1 Exposure………... 10.97 112/173
2.3 Gov’t Effectiveness………. -1.546 203/210 5.2.2 Vulnerability…….. 68.56 15/173
2.4 Regulatory Quality……….. -1.420 194/210 5.2.2.1 Susceptibility... 59.98 13/173
5.2.2.2 Lack of coping
3rd Economic Development capacities....... 82.70 36/173
3.1 GDP per capita…………… 606 (2012) 5.2.5.3 Lack of adaptive
3.2 GDP growth (Annual %)…. 2.961 capacities…… 63.00 15/173

th
4 Social Development
4.1 Rule of Law………………. -1.034 178/212
4.2 Political Stability & Absence
of Violence/Terrorism…….. -0.387 138/212
4.3 Gender Inequality………… n/a n/a
4.4 Under-five mortality………. 77.6 30/195
4.5 Health Index………………. 0.654 156/194
Source: UNPAN (2014). E-government Survey 2014; World Bank (2013). WGI 2013; UNDP (2013). HDI 2013; YCELP &
CIESIN (2014). EPI 2014; Alliance Development Works and UNU-EHS (2013). World Risk Report 2013.

180
Guinea-Bissau
Region AIMS

UN member O / LDC O

Population 1,547,100 (UNDP 2011)

2
Surface area 36,120 km
GDP (current $) 822 million

Language Portuguese (official), Crioulo, African languages

Religion Muslim 50%, indigenous beliefs 40%, Christian 10%

INDICATOR VALUE RANK INDICATOR VALUE RANK

1St E-government 5th Environmental Development

1.1 EGDI………………………. 0.1609 182/190 5.1 Ecosystem Vitality……. 39.52 69/178
1.1.1 ICT Infrastructure… 0.0878 166/193 5.1.1 Water Resources.. 0
1.1.2 Human Capital……… 0.3869 166/193 5.1.2 Agriculture…….... 56
1.1.3 Online Service……… 0.0079 187/190 5.1.3 Forests….………. 13.81
1.2 E-Participation……………. 0.0196 186/193 5.1.4 Fisheries………… 29.9
5.1.5 Biodiversity & Habitat 89.87
nd
2 Good Governance 5.1.6 Climate & Energy.. n/a
2.1 Control of Corruption…….. -1.225 191/210 5.2 World Risk Index……... 13.09 17/173
2.2 Voice & Accountability…… -1.408 194/212 5.2.1 Exposure………... 19.65 27/173
2.3 Gov’t Effectiveness………. -1.244 190/210 5.2.2 Vulnerability…….. 66.58 19/173
2.4 Regulatory Quality…….…. -1.239 188/210 5.2.2.1 Susceptibility... 53.39 27/173
5.2.2.2 Lack of coping
3rd Economic Development capacities....... 87.99 12/173
3.1 GDP per capita…………… 397 (2012) 5.2.5.3 Lack of adaptive
3.2 GDP growth (Annual %)…. -6.712 capacities…… 58.36 28/173

th
4 Social Development
4.1 Rule of Law………………. -1.520 207/212
4.2 Political Stability & Absence
of Violence/Terrorism…….. -0.926 173/212
4.3 Gender Inequality………… n/a n/a
4.4 Under-five mortality………. n/a n/a
4.5 Health Index………………. n/a n/a
Source: UNPAN (2014). E-government Survey 2014; World Bank (2013). WGI 2013; UNDP (2013). HDI 2013; YCELP &
CIESIN (2014). EPI 2014; Alliance Development Works and UNU-EHS (2013). World Risk Report 2013.

181
Maldives
Region AIMS

UN member O / LDC X

Population 320,100 (UNDP 2011)

2
Surface area 300 km
GDP (current $) 2,222 million

Language Dhivehi (official, dialect of Sinhala), English (spoken by most gov’t officials)

Religion Sunni Muslim (official)

INDICATOR VALUE RANK INDICATOR VALUE RANK

1St E-government 5th Environmental Development

1.1 EGDI………………………. 0.4813 94/190 5.1 Ecosystem Vitality……. n/a n/a
1.1.1 ICT Infrastructure…... 0.3952 79/193 5.1.1 Water Resources.. n/a n/a
1.1.2 Human Capital……… 0.6865 79/193 5.1.2 Agriculture…….... n/a n/a
1.1.3 Online Service……… 0.3622 94/190 5.1.3 Forests….………. n/a n/a
1.2 E-Participation……………. 0.2745 117/193 5.1.4 Fisheries………… n/a n/a
5.1.5 Biodiversity & Habitat n/a n/a
nd
2 Good Governance 5.1.6 Climate & Energy.. n/a n/a
2.1 Control of Corruption…….. -0.443 125/210 5.2 World Risk Index……... n/a n/a
2.2 Voice & Accountability…… -0.519 144/212 5.2.1 Exposure………... n/a n/a
2.3 Gov’t Effectiveness………. -0.160 109/210 5.2.2 Vulnerability…….. n/a n/a
2.4 Regulatory Quality……….. -0.347 127/210 5.2.2.1 Susceptibility... n/a n/a
5.2.2.2 Lack of coping
3rd Economic Development capacities....... n/a n/a
3.1 GDP per capita…………… 4,968 (2012) 5.2.5.3 Lack of adaptive
3.2 GDP growth (Annual %)…. 3.420 capacities….... n/a n/a

th
4 Social Development
4.1 Rule of Law………………. -0.500 131/212
4.2 Political Stability & Absence
of Violence/Terrorism…….. -0.278 134/212
4.3 Gender Inequality………… n/a n/a
4.4 Under-five mortality………. 10.5 134/195
4.5 Health Index………………. 0.901 44/194
Source: UNPAN (2014). E-government Survey 2014; World Bank (2013). WGI 2013; UNDP (2013). HDI 2013; YCELP &
CIESIN (2014). EPI 2014; Alliance Development Works and UNU-EHS (2013). World Risk Report 2013.

182
Mauritius
Region AIMS

UN member O / LDC X

Population 1,306,600 (UNDP 2011)

2
Surface area 2,040 km
GDP (current $) 10,486 million

Language Creole 86.5%, Bhojpuri 5.3%, French 4.1%

Religion Hindu 48.5%, Roman Catholic 26.3%, Muslim 17.3%, other Christian 6.4%

INDICATOR VALUE RANK INDICATOR VALUE RANK

1St E-government 5th Environmental Development

1.1 EGDI………………………. 0.5338 76/190 5.1 Ecosystem Vitality……. 39.11 105/178
1.1.1 ICT Infrastructure…... 0.4406 69/193 5.1.1 Water Resources.. 5.44
1.1.2 Human Capital……... 0.6882 69/193 5.1.2 Agriculture…….... 92
1.1.3 Online Service……… 0.4724 94/190 5.1.3 Forests….………. 100
1.2 E-Participation……………. 0.5294 117/193 5.1.4 Fisheries………… 47.5
5.1.5 Biodiversity & Habitat 43.7
nd
2 Good Governance 5.1.6 Climate & Energy.. n/a
2.1 Control of Corruption….…. 0.334 70/210 5.2 World Risk Index……... 15.18 13/173
2.2 Voice & Accountability…... 0.855 168/212 5.2.1 Exposure………... 37.35 7/173
2.3 Gov’t Effectiveness…….… 0.934 49/210 5.2.2 Vulnerability…….. 40.64 123/173
2.4 Regulatory Quality…….…. 0.984 44/210 5.2.2.1 Susceptibility... 18.96 123/173
5.2.2.2 Lack of coping
3rd Economic Development capacities....... 60.61 126/173
3.1 GDP per capita…………… 6,496 (2012) 5.2.5.3 Lack of adaptive
3.2 GDP growth (Annual %)…. 3.228 capacities…… 42.35 118/173

th
4 Social Development
4.1 Rule of Law………………. 0.935 47/212
4.2 Political Stability & Absence
of Violence/Terrorism…….. 0.965 45/212
4.3 Gender Inequality………… n/a n/a
4.4 Under-five mortality………. 15.1 118/195
4.5 Health Index………………. 0.844 90/194
Source: UNPAN (2014). E-government Survey 2014; World Bank (2013). WGI 2013; UNDP (2013). HDI 2013; YCELP &
CIESIN (2014). EPI 2014; Alliance Development Works and UNU-EHS (2013). World Risk Report 2013.

183
São Tomé & Principe
Region AIMS

UN member O / LDC O

Population 168,000 (UNDP 2011)

2
Surface area 1,001 km
GDP (current $) 263 million

Language Portuguese (official)

Religion Catholic 55.7%, Evangelical 5.7%, Adventist 4.1%, New Apostolic 2.9%

INDICATOR VALUE RANK INDICATOR VALUE RANK

1St E-government 5th Environmental Development

1.1 EGDI………………………. 0.2218 169/190 5.1 Ecosystem Vitality……. n/a n/a
1.1.1 ICT Infrastructure…... 0.1398 147/193 5.1.1 Water Resources n/a n/a
1.1.2 Human Capital……… 0.5177 147/193 5.1.2 Agriculture…….. n/a n/a
1.1.3 Online Service……… 0.0079 187/190 5.1.3 Forests………... n/a n/a
1.2 E-Participation……………. 0.0196 186/193 5.1.4 Fisheries………. n/a n/a
5.1.5 Biodiversity&Habitat n/a n/a
nd
2 Good Governance 5.1.6 Climate & Energy n/a n/a
2.1 Control of Corruption……. -0.393 119/210 5.2 World Risk Index……... 3.35 144/173
2.2 Voice & Accountability….. 0.128 95/212 5.2.1 Exposure………... 5.81 164/173
2.3 Gov’t Effectiveness……… -0.717 153/210 5.2.2 Vulnerability…….. 57.71 53/173
2.4 Regulatory Quality……….. -0.803 161/210 5.2.2.1 Susceptibility... 46.09 39/173
5.2.2.2 Lack of coping
3rd Economic Development capacities....... 75.04 81/173
3.1 GDP per capita…………… 840 (2012) 5.2.5.3 Lack of adaptive
3.2 GDP growth (Annual %)…. 4 capacities…… 51.99 57/173

th
4 Social Development
4.1 Rule of Law………………. -0.808 161/212
4.2 Political Stability & Absence
of Violence/Terrorism…….. 0.020 116/212
4.3 Gender Inequality………… n/a n/a
4.4 Under-five mortality………. n/a n/a
4.5 Health Index………………. 0.708 146/194
Source: UNPAN (2014). E-government Survey 2014; World Bank (2013). WGI 2013; UNDP (2013). HDI 2013; YCELP &
CIESIN (2014). EPI 2014; Alliance Development Works and UNU-EHS (2013). World Risk Report 2013.

184
Seychelles
Region AIMS

UN member O / LDC X

Population 86,900 (UNDP 2011)

2
Surface area 455 km
GDP (current $) 1,129 million

Language Seychellois Creole (official) 89.1%, English (official) 5.1%, French (official)

Religion Catholic 76.2%, Protestant 10.6

INDICATOR VALUE RANK INDICATOR VALUE RANK

1St E-government 5th Environmental Development

1.1 EGDI………………………. 0.5113 81/190 5.1 Ecosystem Vitality……. 37.02 138//178
1.1.1 ICT Infrastructure…... 0.4721 59/193 5.1.1 Water Resources 3.96
1.1.2 Human Capital……… 0.7310 59/193 5.1.2 Agriculture…….. 48
1.1.3 Online Service……… 0.3307 102/190 5.1.3 Forests……….... n/a
1.2 E-Participation……………. 0.2549 122/193 5.1.4 Fisheries………. 51.16
5.1.5 Biodiversity&Habitat 72.42
nd
2 Good Governance 5.1.6 Climate & Energy n/a
2.1 Control of Corruption…….. 0.334 69/210 5.2 World Risk Index……... 2.58 157/173
2.2 Voice & Accountability…… 0.085 97/212 5.2.1 Exposure………... 5.99 162/173
2.3 Gov’t Effectiveness………. 0.376 76/210 5.2.2 Vulnerability…….. 43.14 114/173
2.4 Regulatory Quality…….…. -0.310 122/210 5.2.2.1 Susceptibility... 20.74 109/173
5.2.2.2 Lack of coping
3rd Economic Development capacities....... 63.06 121/173
3.1 GDP per capita…………… 14,303 (2012) 5.2.5.3 Lack of adaptive
3.2 GDP growth (Annual %)…. 2.806 capacities…… 45.62 96/173

th
4 Social Development
4.1 Rule of Law………………. -0.037 99/212
4.2 Political Stability & Absence
of Violence/Terrorism…….. 0.755 63/212
4.3 Gender Inequality………… n/a n/a
4.4 Under-five mortality………. 13.1 126/195
4.5 Health Index………………. 0.848 85/194
Source: UNPAN (2014). E-government Survey 2014; World Bank (2013). WGI 2013; UNDP (2013). HDI 2013; YCELP &
CIESIN (2014). EPI 2014; Alliance Development Works and UNU-EHS (2013). World Risk Report 2013.

185
Singapore
Region AIMS

UN member O / LDC X

Population 5,187,900 (UNDP 2011)

2
Surface area 692.7 km
GDP (current $) 276,520 million

Language Mandarin (official) 36.3%, English (official) 29.8%, Buddhist 33.9%, Muslim 14.3%

Religion Taoist 11.3%, Catholic 7.1%, Hindu 5.2%

INDICATOR VALUE RANK INDICATOR VALUE RANK

1St E-government 5th Environmental Development

1.1 EGDI………………………. 0.9076 3/190 5.1 Ecosystem Vitality……. 70.01 140/178
1.1.1 ICT Infrastructure…... 0.8793 4/193 5.1.1 Water Resources.. 99.65
1.1.2 Human Capital……… 0.8515 4/193 5.1.2 Agriculture…….... 96
1.1.3 Online Service……… 0.9921 2/190 5.1.3 Forests….………. n/a
1.2 E-Participation……………. 0.9020 10/193 5.1.4 Fisheries………… 0
5.1.5 Biodiversity & Habitat 46.33
nd
2 Good Governance 5.1.6 Climate & Energy.. n/a
2.1 Control of Corruption…….. 2.154 7/210 5.2 World Risk Index……... 2.49 159/173
2.2 Voice & Accountability…… 0.082 98/212 5.2.1 Exposure………... 7.82 153/173
2.3 Gov’t Effectiveness………. 2.152 2/210 5.2.2 Vulnerability…….. 31.84 156/173
2.4 Regulatory Quality…….…. 1.961 1/210 5.2.2.1 Susceptibility... 14.01 163/173
5.2.2.2 Lack of coping
3rd Economic Development capacities....... 48.47 154/173
3.1 GDP per capita…………… 33,989 (2012) 5.2.2.3 Lack of adaptive
3.2 GDP growth (Annual %)…. 1.319 capacities…… 33.04 158/173

th
4 Social Development
4.1 Rule of Law……………….. 1.772 10/212
4.2 Political Stability & Absence
of Violence/Terrorism…….. 1.343 8/212
4.3 Gender Inequality………… n/a n/a
4.4 Under-five mortality………. 2.9 191/195
4.5 Health Index………………. 0.966 13/194
Source: UNPAN (2014). E-government Survey 2014; World Bank (2013). WGI 2013; UNDP (2013). HDI 2013; YCELP &
CIESIN (2014). EPI 2014; Alliance Development Works and UNU-EHS (2013). World Risk Report 2013.

186
Annex B. Survey Questionnaire

187
 Survey for the Research on E-government for Promoting
Sustainable Development in Small Island Developing States

0. Responder’s Basic Information

0.1 Name of Institution/organization

( )

0.2 Responder’s name & email

( )

0.3 Years of experience in ICT and E-government

( ) years

1. E-government Policy/Strategy

1.1 Does your country have a national e-government policy or strategy?

( ) Yes ( ) No

If yes, what is the name of the policy or strategy? When was it established?

( )

1.2 Is it included in national development plan or an ICT development plan, or a

separate plan of action?

( ) It is included in a national development plan or an ICT development plan.

( ) It is a separate plan of action.

1.3 To what extent, do current e-government projects/programs fulfill the general

188
objectives of national e-government strategy? If possible, specify the most
accomplished e-government project(s).

( ) significantly ( ) to some extent ( ) insignificant

Name of the most accomplished e-government project:

2. E-government Organization

2.1 Which government institution is in charge of e-government?

2.2 Does your country have a CIO or equivalent who is responsible for e-government
development?

2.3 Does your country have a governing body that coordinates e-government
development, including formulating and implementing the e-government
policy/strategy?

( ) Yes ( ) Non-existent

If yes, please provide further information of the governing body.

Name of the governing body:

Main members:

Inter-agency coordination mechanism/scheme:

3. Political Commitment & Leadership

3.1 To what extent, does the top level political leadership commit and support the
e-government initiatives?

( ) significantly ( ) to some extent ( ) insignificant

189
3.2 What are the specific actions that have been taken by the top level leadership to
support the e-government initiatives?

3.3 Does the CIO or equivalent have a direct channel for a dialogue with the top level
leadership so to facilitate the cross-sector collaboration and overall e-government
development?

4. Legal Framework

4.1 What kinds of legal framework does your country have for e-government
development? When did your country establish the legal framework?

4.2 To what extent, does the legal framework promote your country’s e-government
development?

( ) significantly ( ) to some extent ( ) insignificant

5. Financial Feasibility

5.1 To what extent, does government budget secure the e-government development?

( ) significantly ( ) to some extent ( ) insignificant

5.2 Please provide a rough estimate on the percentage of annual budget assigned for
e-government development versus total government budget.

5.3 Does your country have legal and regulatory arrangement to secure financial
feasibility for the e-government development?

190
6. Linking the e-government policy with the government reform and natural
disaster risk reduction

6.1 To what extent, does the e-government policy/strategy relate to the government
reform

( ) significantly ( ) to some extent ( ) insignificant

6.2 How is government reform reflected and elaborated in the e-government

policy/strategy (e.g. government process reengineering)?

6.3 To what extent, does the e-government policy/strategy relate to natural disaster
risk reduction?

( ) significantly ( ) to some extent ( ) insignificant

6.4 How natural disaster risk management is reflected and elaborated in the
e-government policy/strategy?

7. e-awareness for promoting user take-up

7.1 Does your government have promotion programme(s) for government

employees, citizens and the private sector, especially vulnerable groups and small-
sized enterprises, to increase their awareness of e-services?

( ) Yes ( ) No

If yes, please specify the programme.

Promotion programme for government employees

191

Promotion programme for citizens

Promotion programme for the private sector

7.2 Does your government have ICT training programme(s) for public employees,
citizens, and the private sector to enhance their capacity to utilize e-services? If yes,
please specify the program.

( ) Yes ( ) No

If yes, please specify the programme.

ICT training programme for public employees:

ICT training programme for citizens:

ICT training programme for the private sector:

7.3 Does your government have cooperation with private sector and civil society to
enhance e-awareness of e-government programs?

8. Outcome

8.1 Please provide us a list of e-government initiatives and achievements (including

best practices) for promoting sustainable development in your country.

192
Annex C. Field Trip Report:
Fiji and Timor-Leste

193
1. Reason for the country selection

Fiji is a high performer among the Pacific and AIMS SIDS in e-government
development. Along with Mauritius and the Seychelles, Fiji is one of the only three
states scored more than 0.5 point of EGDI, excluding Bahrain and Singapore.
Moreover, Fiji raised its EGDI more than 0.03 point from 2012 to 2014 which is
considerable achievement in that Fiji is the third country, behind Bahrain and
Singapore, among the Pacific and AIMS SIDS in terms of the increase in EGDI for the
same period.

On the other hand, Timor-Leste belongs to the low performer among the Pacific
and AIMS SIDS. Among the low performers, Timor-Leste (0.2528) is the median
country in that Cape Verde’s EGDI is 0.3551 point (the highest among the low
performers) and Papua New Guinea’s EGDI is 0.1203 (the lowest among the low
performers). The author wanted to see the reality of SIDS’s ICT and e-government
development and its contribution to sustainable development including disaster risk
management by visiting the two sample countries.

2. Fiji

2.1 Travel Dates: 20 April 2014 to 25 April 2014

2.2 Traveler: Dr. Young Bum Lee (Konkuk University) and Mr. Keping Yao (UNPOG)

2.3 Major Interviewees

No. Name Organization Position

Ms. Linda Economic Reform
1 Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat
Kaua Officer
Ms. Litiana Fiji National Disaster Management Senior Admin.
2
Bainimarma Office Officer
Mr. Craig Head of Business
3 Digicel Fiji
Smith Solutions
4 Mr. Nisa Ali Fiji ITCS, Government Data Center Manager
Mr. Timothy UNISDR Sub-Regional Office
5 Coordinator
Wilcox (Pacific)

194
2.4 Interview results

2.4.1 Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat

2.4.1.1 Date: April 22, 2014 (Tue) 14:00

2.4.1.2 Interviewee: Ms. Linda Kaua, Economic Reform Officer

We arrived on Monday afternoon and the first agency we visited on Tuesday is

Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat, which is mainly funded by Australia, New
Zealand and EU. Their work center around 4 pillars, with good governance as one
pillar. The economic reform officer briefed unique vulnerabilities for SIDS to pursue
development goals, plus social tension and political instability. She particularly
mentioned that internet connectivity issues highly depending on political will, citing
contrasting cases in the region such as Tonga, Vanuatu and Solomon Islands
introducing completion and deregulating telecommunications market to improve
affordability. She said that the Outcome Document acknowledged the special
situation of SIDS and SIDS have recognized their own responsibilities in pursuing
sustainable development, but things will be difficult in the absence of internet
connectivity. She emphasized that financing has become constraint for implementing
the Pacific Plan, especially in mitigation of climate change, and urged developed
partners to fulfill their obligations. She reiterated that due to the increase in
frequency and intensity of natural disasters, there is great uncertainty in designing
long-term development effort.

During the talk, she introduced the green growth framework of the Melanesian
Spearhead Group, in cooperation with UNEP and UNESCAP, including strategy for
disaster reduction and climate change in pursuing low carbon growth. She especially
mentioned that the weak ICT sector and underdeveloped transport infrastructure
have constrained economic growth. With regard to e-government, she indicated that
though connectivity is improving, the internet use is much lower due to low
affordability and lack of training for users. She also briefed us about their intention
to strengthen cooperation and development partnership with Asian countries.

She also recommended us to visit South Pacific University, which is a lead agency in
the region for ICT framework, but unfortunately the recommended professor is out

195
of town and could not meet us. We have requested his kind cooperation to answer
some of our questions, pending his response.

2.4.2 National Disaster Management Office

2.4.2.1 Date: April 2d, 2014 (Wed) 09:00

2.4.2.2 Interviewee: Ms. Litiana Bainimarma, Senior Administration Officer

On Wednesday morning, we visited National Disaster Management Center. The

senior admin officer received us and briefed us about their operations in emergency
and major challenges in mitigation efforts, in large part due to lack of coordination
and communication among agencies. She informed us about the support from
Pacific Tsunami Warning Center in Hawaii and how do they disseminate such
warning signals. They also received technical support from World Bank in Post
Disaster Needs Assessment.

She particularly mentioned that her agency has not set up fixed/systematic
arrangement with IT companies to assist them in issuing early warning signals, and
most importantly no business continuity plan has been established. Finally, she
briefed us the role of local communities in dealing with natural disasters.

2.4.3 Digicel Fiji

2.4.3.1 Date: April 2d, 2014 (Wed) 09:00

2.4.3.2 Interviewee: Mr. Craig Smith, Head of Business Solutions

On Wednesday afternoon, we visited Digicel, which is a 100% private, munitions-

national IT company focusing on those under-serviced markets characterized by
poor coverage and high pricing. The head of business solutions provided an
overview of Fiji telecommunications market, blaming monopoly as the main
governance issue in ICT development and complained about high operational cost
including high VAT taxes, import duties on equipment, license and spectrum fees.
He mentioned about the hybrid infrastructure with wireless and fiber combined to

196
address the connectivity issues. He also told us about the duplicated IT investment
by different ministries, which sometimes are based on backward technology due to
lack of inter-agency coordination and no skilled human resources are available to
implement government plans. He particularly mentioned about brain drainage and
the outdated IT education in university, which severely hindered the development of
IT sector.

He also introduced the importance of cloud-based data storage services to ensure

that government agencies could still be operation in emergencies, and that resilience
is of utmost concern for such data services, in addition to data sovereignty.

Lastly, he urged the ITC Services at Ministry of Finance could design a good strategy
for ICT4D and stem the trend of brain drainage. With good IT skills, Fiji could
become good candidate global call centers as it is situated in the time zone that links
well East and West globe, with English language as their mother tongue.

2.5 Findings

Firstly, we could better understand the major challenges, especially the natural
disasters Fiji and other SIDS are faced with, in pursuing sustainable development.
Considering the geographical features, SIDS need mobile-based internet connection
to effectively response the natural disasters. However, the disaster management
office is not highly ranked in the government hierarchy. This positional limitation
can cause problems in coordinating cross-governmental activities and securing
reliable personals.

Second, we gained the first-hand information about the current status of

e-government development in Fiji including its ongoing e-government programme
and ICT strategy. Fortunately, the Prime Minister’s office has fully supported Fiji’s
e-government development. However, there are two main problems in terms of
coordination and human resource. A considerable investment in ICT has been
overlapped by different ministries while the government cannot allocate skilled
human resources in implementing the programme and strategy. As often the case in
SIDS, the outflow of human resources occurs in ICT field, which impedes the ICT
development.

197
Third, according to Digicel Fiji, the imperfectly competitive market brings about the
low affordability of internet access. Digicel Fiji suggested a hybrid infrastructure of
wireless and optical fibre to raise the connectivity.

3. Timor-Leste

3.1 Travel Dates: 3 May 2014 to 8 May 2014

3.2 Traveler: Dr. Young Bum Lee and Mr. Byungyoul Jung (Konkuk University)

3.3 Major Interviewees

No. Name Organization Position

Mr. Eugenio
Ministry of Social Solidarity
1 Joao Amado de Director-General
(MSS)
Maria Soares
Mr. Francisco F. National Directorate of
2 Director
M. Do Rosário Disaster Management of MSS
Chief technical advisor
Ms. Victoria
of Strengthening
3 Kianpour UNDP
Disaster Risk
Atabaki
Management

Mr. Flávio Ministry of Transport and

4 Vice-Minister
Cardoso Neves Communications (MTC)

Ministry of State and

Ms. Elizabeth
5 Presidency of the Council of National Advisor
Baptista
Ministers (MSPCM)
Mr. David
6 Ministry of Finance (MoF) IT staff
Montalrao
KOICA
Ms. Jinjoo
7 Korea International Timor-Leste
Hyun
Cooperation Agency Representative
Ms. Soonae (KOICA) KOICA Adviser in
8
Yang MSPCM
Mr. Manuel Institutional Relations
9 Timor Telecom
Carceres da Director

198
 Costa
Engineering
10 Mr. Gerardo
Operations Director

3.4 Interview results

3.4.1 Ministry of Social Solidarity (MSS)

3.4.1.1 Date: May 5, 2014 (Mon) 10:00~11:30

3.4.1.2 Interviewee

1) Mr. Eugenio Joao Amado de Maria SOARES, Director-General of MSS

2) Mr. Francisco F. M. Do Rosário, Director of National Directorate of Disaster

Management of MSS

3) Ms. Victoria Kianpour Atabaki, Chief technical advisor of Strengthening

Disaster Risk Management dispatched from UNDP

Mr. Rosário said that the structure of national disaster management in the National
Disaster Risk Management Policy 2008 has three levels: national, district, and village
(suco). At the national level, the Vice-Prime Minister is the national coordinator and
the minister of MSS is the vice-coordinator. There is the Inter-ministerial
Commission for Disaster Management (CIGD) under the coordinator, and National
Disaster Management Directorate (NDMD) and National Disaster Operation Centre
(DOC) are working groups. The working groups are linked to the district level
(district administrators, district disaster management coordinators, district disaster
management commissions, and sub-district disaster management commissions)
which is linked to the village level (suco disaster management commissions).

Victoria said that the most serious natural disasters in Timor-Leste are floods,
droughts, high winds and landslides. Three contingency plans are in place for floods,
droughts and conflict. National Adaptation Programme of Action (NAPA 2011) has
adapted DRR as its forth priority project area. Timor-Leste has the national
information portal for disaster risk management (www.drm.tl) where the
Comprehensive National Hazard, Vulnerability and Risk Assessment and Mapping
reports are accessible. The major efforts and outcomes in managing disaster risks are
199
the adaptation of the National DRM Policy as well as National Security and Defense
Laws (2010) and the Decree Law of the National Red Cross Society (CVTL). Some
roles and responsibilities for DRM were assumed by the national police, army and
CVTL according to these laws.

As the ICT infrastructures for disaster management, Timor-Leste uses fixed and
mobile telecommunication network. National Police and MSS-NDMD use HF radio
communication. Web-based Information Portal for DRM is up and running with
more than 50 users from more than 20 entities. Mobile phones are extensively used
for communication of information on disaster alerts between national and sub-
national levels (and with community leaders). Disaster alerts and three-day weather
forecasts are uploaded by the MSS-NDMD on the National Information Portal for
DRM. MSS-NDMD and national directorate of meteorology is connected to the
oceanographic, weather and disaster risks observation, monitoring and early
warning systems of regional centers / neighboring countries (Australia, Japan,
Indonesia, RIMES etc) for Tsunami and multiple hazards.

The major barriers in utilizing ICT and e-government to manage disaster risks are
the low rate of access to computer and its literacy among the people and the low rate
of access to computer and internet by the government staffs at sub-national level.

3.4.2 Ministry of Transport and Communications (MTC)

3.4.2.1 Date: May 5, 2014 (Mon) 15:10~17:00

3.4.2.2 Interviewee

1) Mr. Flávio Cardoso NEVES, Vice-Minister of Transport and Communication

2) Mr. Nicolau Santos Celestino, IT Director of MTC

3) Mr. Faulo da Costa, Senior staff of MTC

We met the Vice-Minister of MTC at first. He briefly explained the recent

liberalization of telecommunication market in 2012 and the new regulator, National
Communications Authority (ANC). Before the liberalization, the sole operator,
Timor Telecom (Portugal-based company), was granted a concession contract for 15

200
years. In 2011, the telecommunication market liberalization initiative was launched
and the stakeholders reached an agreement in 2012.

Also, He said that the MTC is concentrating on internet connection while the
implementation of e-government is in charge of each ministry. However, he agreed
on the importance of the collaboration between ministries and integrated project. He
confessed that the Timor-Leste government still has no idea about what
e-government should be and the egoism of ministries and separated budget and
plans are problems. He said that the MTC is preparing for the ICT plan in technical
aspect but political commitment is more required for the ICT and e-government
development. In addition, he is interested in the UNPSA and the third international
conference on SIDS in Samoa in September and wants to be invited.

The Vice-Minister introduced two officers (Mr. Nicolau and Mr. Faulo) to us to
specifically explain the current status of ICT and e-government. The MTC
established two data centers with UPS in 2008. They showed us the data center in the
MCT and its facilities. The size of server room was as small as three square meters.
The levels of security and air cleanliness of the server room do not look high. The
MTC does not have comprehensive e-government policy yet. Not only is the MTC
not ready to offer e-public service, but also the capacity of MTC seemed so limited in
supporting the e-government of other ministries in that it cannot provide ICT
education programme, e-government work frame, and basic services such as email
address and e-signature for other ministries and their government employees. The
MTC still focuses on the national connectivity. For now, All national and district
governments are connected together. However, the ministries in capital, Dili, are
connected by optical fiber cable where the districts are not. They also agreed on the
importance of the political support for the ICT and e-government development
because at the prime minister level’s officers more interested in education, military,
and agriculture affairs than ICT and e-government.

3.4.3 Ministry of State and Presidency of the Council of Ministers (MSPCM)

3.4.3.1 Date: May 6, 2014 (Tue) 10:20~11:35

3.4.3.2 Interviewee

201
 1) Mr. David Montalrao, Information System Unit of the Ministry of Finance

2) Ms. Elizabeth Baptista, National Advisor to the Minister of MSPCM

3) Ms. Soonae Yang, KOICA Adviser in the MSPCM

We met Mr. David and Ms. Elizabeth Baptista separately. David studied in Australia
and worked for a bank as an IT security officer. He looks intense about ICT-based
national development as he is in charge of the e-government of the MoF. The
Information System Unit of the MOF has 35 employees. The MoF deploys ICT
system for procurement (e-Procurement), budgeting and paying civil servants
(FreeBalance and Government Resource Planning (GRP)). GRP is suitable to make
government’s spending transparent. Back-office budget, accounting and e-
procurement systems can automatically drive transparency portals with expenditure
breakdowns as operated. This unified front-office/back-office approach means that
published data has not been manipulated. Documents such as budget plans and
statutory reports can also be automatically published.

According to him, the adoption of ICT helps the taxation affairs of the MoF and tax
offices in districts. However, he said that the connectivity level of Timor-Leste is low
in rural area and the local people’s usage rate of the government’s websites is also
low due to the low quality of the websites, the low connectivity and e-awareness. He
argues that Timor-Leste needs a realistic ICT and e-government master plan based
on the current status. In specific, he thinks that the government should raise the e-
awareness of citizens by make ICT courses mandatory in school. However, it
requires the approval of the Prime minister. Also, He was making an effort to
prepare an ICT master plan to report to the Prime minister.

Soon after we met David, we met Soonae Yang and she brought us to Elizabeth
Baptista. Elizabeth Baptista said that there are four directors and five secretaries in
the MSPCM. According to her, there is a general national development plan, but a
specific e-government strategy does not exist. She told us that the ICT infrastructure
is still under development and the government does not fully utilize e-government
for the human resource management and the communication between ministries yet.
There are gaps between ministries in utilizing e-government. She thinks the MTC is
poor in resources to meet the demands of other ministries. The result of a survey
targeting seven ministries’ employees conducted by the MSPCM last year shows that
202
the major problem of e-government development in Timor-Leste is the e-awareness
of the government employees. The MSPCM plans to hold a seminar on
e-government targeting the government employees. At the end of the interview, we
briefly introduced the UNPSA to her.

3.4.4 Korea International Cooperation Agency (KOICA)

3.4.4.1 Date: May 6, 2014 (Tue) 14:00~15:20

3.4.4.2 Interviewee

1) Ms. Jinjoo Hyun, Representative of KOICA in Timor-Leste

2) Ms. Soonae Yang, KOICA Adviser in the MSPCM

Jinjoo Hyun explained the current status of national development, the previous
ODAs for Timor-Leste, and the lack of human resources. There is not significant
domestic industry in Timor-Leste. Many Korean ODAs focused on building up
infrastructures. However, it was not enough in that the local people’s capacities are
limited in maintaining and operating the infrastructures. Even the local people
including public servants often do not know that they need and where there are
among the development phases. Timor-Leste does not have enough highly skilled or
educated human resources due to the brain drainage to Indonesia and Australia
during the colonial period under Indonesia. As a result, much of money received
from ODA gets out of the country. The existing ICT human resources are mainly
educated in Indonesia, Australia or other countries. Compared to other least
developed countries, the financial dependency of Timor-Leste on ODA is not heavy
as the ratio of the amount of ODA to the government’s budget.

Fortunately, in recent, the basic infrastructures such as administration system and

road are developing after the Strategic Development Plan 2011-2030 (SDP) was
established by the government. Also, the main focus of the SDP is to educating and
training the local people. Soonae Yang said that a few ICT education centers were
built for the last three years. Now, there are six ICT education centers in Timor-Leste.
However, it is not easy to establish an ICT labor supply plan since there is not
significant demand of ICT-skilled human resources.

203
In terms of ICT development, the government and telecom companies are trying to
provide the local people with the internet service through wifi, considering the low
income level of average local people (under 200~300 USD). In recent, the wifi service
started operating in the airport and major cities’ hotels. Also, the government is
considering connecting an additional sub-marine cable.

In terms of e-government, it is recent for the majority of public employees to use

email for their work. Soonae Yang regarded the FreeBalance of MoF as the most
advanced application in Timor-Leste, and guessed that Timor-Leste may follow a
different development path distinguished from other developing countries’ path,
considering its geographic, historical, and economic characteristics. Jinjoo Hyun
mentioned that the government also knows that they should reduce the
independency of the national development on petroleum because the level of
contribution to economic growth decreases to half if the contribution of petroleum
area is excluded.

In addition, Jinjoo Hyun told us that the Timor-Leste’s corruption level is high. For
this reason, the government raised the salary of government officers at higher
positions last year.

3.4.5 Timor Telecom

3.4.5.1 Date: May 6, 2014 (Tue) 16:30~17:30

3.4.5.2 Interviewee

1) Mr. Manuel Carceres da Costa, Institutional Relations Director of Timor

Telecom

2) Mr. Gerardo, Engineering Operations Director of Timor Telecom

The head office of Timor Telecom is in the Timor Plaza which was built in recent and
the newest market with the up-to-date facilities in Timor-Leste. We could easily see
young people using the internet through mobile phone and tablet PC in the building.
Manuel Carceres da Costa said Timor Telecom was launched in 2001 and the
monopoly provider until 2012. Their business coverage ranges from fixed line to
mobile service with 2G and 3G mainly in Dili and districts. The total mobile
204
subscribers in Timor-Leste are around 600,000 (population is 1.2 millions) by the end
of 2013 and the number is still increasing. After the telecom market liberalization,
Telkomcel (Indonesia-based company) and Telemor (Vietnam-based company) were
entered. The only sub-marine cable is linked from Indonesia to Kupang in Indonesia
and to Timor-Leste, and the broadband network using the sub-marine cable is
dominated by Telkomcel. For this reason, Timor Telecom considers satellite-based
service or another sub-marine cable from Australia (not constructed yet) alternative.
Also, Timor Telecom is not satisfied with the market liberalization, and Gerardo
argues that the Telkomcel-dominating sub-marine cable brings about unfair contract
in providing broadband service and the ANC intervene this unfair situation.

3.5 Findings

Regarding the natural disaster management of Timor-Leste, the major natural

disasters are floods, droughts, high winds and landslides. The national director of
disaster management thinks that there was not a serious natural disaster such as
tsunami and earthquake in recent. However, Timor-Leste does not seem to have
enough meteorological observatories to notice such natural disasters. In case of
emergent natural disaster, most local people hardly receive real-time information
from the disaster risk management agency due to the low penetration rate of internet
in rural areas and the absence of the government’s disaster response system.

Second, there are major obstacles in pursuing sustainable development. The natural
environmental obstacles are long dry season and long rainy season which cause
water shortage and floods. Also, ICT-skilled human resources are not enough as well
as highly educated human resources to build up comprehensive ICT or
e-government strategy, to operate ICT and e-government system, and to teach
students ICT skills. Moreover, the local people use different languages, Portuguese,
Tetum or Indonesian, which makes their communication inefficient.

Third, with regards to the current status of ICT and e-government development,
compared to Fiji, Timor-Leste seems to need more political commitment (national
leaders’ interest, will, and support) in order to concentrate national capabilities on
establishing and implementing its ICT and e-government development strategy.
Some officers of the MSPCM and the MoF educated abroad have tried to convince
205
the political leaders and to come up with an ICT and e-government development
strategy.

Fourth, the Ministry of Transport and Communications (MTC) seems have

limitations to meet the other ministries’ demand for e-government services. There is
not a comprehensive e-government system to link major national agencies’ tasks one
another even though some ministries seem have their own system separately. Even
some public employees of the MTC does not seem fully understand the way of
utilizing e-government and do not use their governmental email address.

The fifth finding is about the current status of Timor-Leste’s national development
from the KOICA’s point of view. The staffs make a comment that fortunately, Timor-
Leste has shown rapid restoration and development in several areas. However, they
also say that its current status may differ from other SIDS with high level education
and income and familiar with ICT and other technologies. They emphasizes that a
lot of patience would be required in supporting Timor-Leste’s e-government and
sustainable development.

Finally, Timor-Leste’s telecommunication market was recently liberalized. After the

liberalization, the number of telecommunication companies increased from one to
three. As a result, the quality of telecommunication service increased and the price
decreased even though it is still unaffordable to many local people. However, the
number one company, Timor Telecom, thinks that three companies are too much
considering the market size of Timor-Leste.

206