‘Sustainability as Maritime Security: A Small Island Developing State Perspective?’
| Published date | 01 May 2017 |
| Date | 01 May 2017 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12446 |
‘Sustainability as Maritime Security: A Small
Island Developing State Perspective?’
James A. Malcolm
Coventry University
Abstract
The article begins the process of outlining the way in which maritime security challenges are publicly articulated by Small
Island Developing States (SIDS) in order to better understand the backdrop against which security policy and practice emerge.
To do this the article discusses the results of an initial, exploratory content analysis of UN SIDS conference documents framed
by the central research question, ‘In the SIDS’public conceptualisation of sustainable development, how are maritime security
threats articulated?’The article argues that for SIDS their conceptualisation of maritime security is inextricably wrapped up in
concerns about sustainable development, with concern about challenges such as illegal fishing being pinpointed as threats to
food security. The article calls for more research on the extent to which SIDS’conceptualisation of maritime security differs
regionally; highlights a vulnerability straitjacket SIDS may find themselves wearing; and suggests that SIDS consider the devel-
opment of holistic sustainable blue growth strategies to bring multiple stakeholders together to enhance human wellbeing.
To conclude, the article argues that ultimately efforts to pursue enhanced maritime security by SIDS will be determined by
how they chart a path between emphasising their own vulnerability and the opportunities associated with their maritime
domain.
Policy Implications
•The relationship between sustainable development and maritime security thinking and practice should be explored in
greater detail if the global community is to meet the Sustainable Development Goals. Here SIDS represents valuable case
studies.
•It is necessary to understand in greater detail the way in which SIDS have articulated maritime security threats in their
public conceptualisation of sustainable development before we can consider what effective governance and capacity-
building initiatives may look like, and how they may be successfully implemented.
•There is a need for recognition that the maritime security concerns of SIDS go well beyond climate change, with maritime
crime posing particular challenges.
•SIDS should be acknowledged and treated as autonomous and capable partners in oceans governance and capacity-
building activities.
‘For us as small island developing states, however,
the question of sustainability is not an abstruse,
arcane concern. It is rather a matter that affects the
very nature of our existence. It is therefore crucial
for us to fully sensitize the international community
about the issues and to promote greater under-
standing of the vulnerabilities and special circum-
stances that apply to our countries’(Erskine
Sandiford, 1994).
‘Island issues affect us all. I see SIDS as a magnify-
ing glass. When we look through the SIDS lens
we see the vulnerabilities we all face. And by
addressing the issues facing SIDS we are develop-
ing the tools we need to promote sustainable
development across the entire world’(Ban Ki-
moon, 2014).
Small Island Developing States as special cases
for environment and development
At the 1992 Environment and Development Summit in Rio
de Janeiro, Small Island Developing States (SIDS) were for-
mally recognised as ‘a special case both for environment
and development’(UN 1992, p. 193). Highlighting the strate-
gic importance of the ocean and coastal environment for
SIDS, the Summit’s outcome document ‘Agenda 21’included
a specific section on these states (UN 1992), providing for-
mal acknowledgement that SIDS were a distinct category of
state worthy of further attention and support. Here, over the
course of the subsequent 25 years, the United Nations (UN)
has organised three global conferences on the sustainable
development of SIDS (UN, 1994, 2005, 2014), alongside a
series of periodic reviews (UN, 1999, 2010) of the associated
Programme of Action (PoA).
Global Policy (2017) 8:2 doi: 10.1111/1758-5899.12446 ©2017 University of Durham and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Global Policy Volume 8 . Issue 2 . May 2017 237
Special Section Article
To continue reading
Request your trial