Global warming's threat to Pacific island nations and their exclusive economic zones

Residual Effects of Global Warming and the Loss of the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf Island nations such as Tuvalu, the Marshall Islands and the Seychelles all face uncertain futures due to climate change that could one day threaten their very existence. – Morgan O’Rourke (2012)

Introduction The vast majority of climatologists agree that the evidence indicates the earth is warming, and the process is taking place faster than most experts thought possible. While some countries such as Russia will benefit from a warming climate by making vast areas more suitable for agriculture, the global warming picture is much grimmer for others, including coastal regions of the United States. Moreover, the residual effects of global warming such as rising sea levels threaten the survival of several Pacific islands, including Tuvalu, a West Pacific nation whose peak height rises just 5 meters over sea level, could be uninhabitable within 50 years. A similar fate could also await the Maldives, the Marshall Islands and the Kiribati islands, perhaps as early as mid-century. While the debate over the precise cause continues, a direct potential consequence of global warming will also be the loss of the valuable exclusive economic zone (EEZ) and the Continental Shelf. To determine the current facts, this paper reviews the literature to provide a brief overview of global warming followed by an analysis concerning its effects on low-lying island nations such as the Kiribati islands, the Maldives, and the Marshall Islands. Finally, a summary of the research and important findings concerning the residual effects of global warming and their future implications for the 5 million people living on these islands are presented in the conclusion. Review and Analysis Overview of global warming While it remains unclear whether natural or anthropogenic sources are the primary cause of global warming, most scientists believe that humans are largely responsible for the increase in the earth’s surface temperature since the dawn of the Industrial Age as shown in Figure 1 below.

Figure 1. Global surface temperatures: 1880 to 2000 Source: https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/GISSTemperature/Images/giss_ temperature.gif

What is known for certain is that sea levels are rising and low-lying coastal regions and islands are vulnerable today. In this regard, O’Rourke emphasizes that, “Regardless of the cause, however, ice melt and the expansion of warming oceans, coupled with increased storm surge flooding, could put anyone who lives within four feet of high tide underwater by 2030.”[footnoteRef:2] Some of the findings from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s \\\"State of the Climate in 2016\\\" report also make the severity of the threat clear, including most especially the following: [2: Morgan O’Rourke (2012, May). “Rising Seas, Rising Threat.” Risk Management, vol. 59, no. 4, p. 12.]

· Global land surface temperatures in 2016 were the highest in 137 years of record keeping; · Sea surface temperatures were also at their highest; · Sea levels were at record highs in the 24 years that satellite record keeping has been used; and, · Greenhouse gas marks rose faster than any year and carbon dioxide readings were above a 400 parts per million average for the year for the first time.[footnoteRef:3] [3: Steve Almasy (2017, August 10). “Climate report: Hottest year, highest greenhouse gas marks, record sea levels.” CNN. [online] available: http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/10/us/noaa-2016-climate-change-report/index.html, p. 3.]

These findings are supported by scientific evidence that clearly shows sustained increases in the globally averaged carbon dioxide concentration levels in the earth’s atmosphere as shown in Figure 2 below.

Figure 2. Globally averaged carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere: 1980-2010 Source: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DG4kPkQW0AA2GQv.jpg

Although some researchers believe that the residual effects of global warming will not have this dire effect until mid-21st century or perhaps even later, there is a virtual consensus among the scientific community that sea levels are rising and it is only a matter of when the tipping point will be reached when these regions become uninhabitable.[footnoteRef:4] These effects have already been detected by climatologists who report that sea levels in 2016 were the highest in recorded history as shown in Figure 3 below. [4: Richard S. Lindzen (2016, June). “Global Warming: The Science in Three Nut Shells.” New Criterion, vol. 34, no. 10, p. 12.]

Figure 3. 2016 average sea level compared to 1981-2010 averages Source: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DG4mEVSXcAAhhSo.jpg

During his tenure, President Barack Obama consistently cited global warming as the biggest threat facing the United States today, but in a press conference on August 10, 2017, President Donald Trump discounted this threat, citing instead the saber-rattling by North Korea as the most urgent threat facing the country and even withdrew American support from the Paris climate accord. In this regard, Shear reports that, “President Trump announced that the United States would withdraw from the Paris climate accord, weakening efforts to combat global warming and embracing isolationist voices in his White House who argued that the agreement was a pernicious threat to the economy and American sovereignty.”[footnoteRef:5] [5: Michael D. Shear (2017, June 1). “Trump will withdraw U.S. from Paris climate accord.” The New York Times. [online] available: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/01/climate/trump-paris-climate-agreement.html, p. 3.]

Nevertheless, President Obama and like-minded authorities suggest that “hiding your head in the sand” is not a viable response to global warming and that, “Climate change is the greatest long-term threat facing the world, as well as a danger already manifesting itself as droughts, storms, heat waves and flooding.”[footnoteRef:6] As noted in the introduction, some countries such as Russia and Greenland expect to actually benefit from the effects of global warming, but the implications for other areas of the globe are far less rosy as discussed further below. [6: As cited in Julie Hirschfield (2016, September 6). “Obama on climate change: The trends are terrifying.” The New York Times. [online] available: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/08/us/politics/obama-climate-change.html, p. 4.]

Effects of global warming on the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continent Shelf Global warming and rising sea levels threaten the valuable U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and Continent Shelf.[footnoteRef:7] According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, “The EEZ extends no more than 200 nautical miles from the territorial sea baseline and is adjacent to the 12 nautical mile territorial sea of the U.S., including the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, the U.S. Virgin Islands, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and any other territory or possession over which the United States exercises sovereignty.”[footnoteRef:8] The United States currently enjoys the following rights and benefits within the EEZ: [7: “What is the EEZ?” (2017). National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. [online] available: https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/eez.html., p. 2.] [8: “What is the EEZ?,” p. 2.]

· Jurisdiction as provided for in international and domestic laws with regard to the establishment and use of artificial islands, installations, and structures, marine scientific research, and the protection and preservation of the marine environment; · Sovereign rights for the purpose of exploring, exploiting, conserving and managing natural resources, whether living and nonliving, of the seabed and subsoil and the superjacent waters and with regard to other activities for the economic exploitation and exploration of the zone, such as the production of energy from the water, currents and winds; and, · Other rights and duties provided for under international and domestic laws.[footnoteRef:9] [9: Note: Under certain U.S. fisheries laws, such as the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, the term \\\"exclusive economic zone\\\" is defined as having an inner boundary that is coterminous with the seaward (or outer) boundary of each of the coastal states. While its outer limit is the same as the EEZ on NOAA charts, its inner limit is coterminous with the coastal states\\\' boundary at 3 nautical miles, except for Texas, western Florida, and Puerto Rico, which claim a 9 nautical mile belt. “What is the EEZ?,” p. 2.]

The geographic limits of the EEZ are depicted in Figure 4 below.

Figure 4. The U.S. exclusive economic zone Source: https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/eez.jpg

As can be readily discerned from the map in Figure 4 above, many low-lying Pacific islands and coastal regions will be adversely affected from the rising sea levels associated with global warming. In sum, as sea levels rise, there is the potential for territories in the EEZ in the South China Sea including the Maldives, Tuvalu and the Solomon Islands to become submerged, essentially disappearing from the face of the earth.[footnoteRef:10] Likewise, the Kiribati, the Maldives, and the Marshall Islands are similarly threatened.[footnoteRef:11] As Schmidt points out, “Island nations may be beautiful, but their isolation makes them vulnerable to outside forces that increasingly threaten their survival. Rising sea levels linked to global warming could submerge some altogether.”[footnoteRef:12] Indeed, Tuvalu island, located in the West Pacific, is just around 16 feet above sea level at present, and rising sea levels could make the island uninhabitable within the foreseeable future, an outcome that also awaits other Pacific islands such as the Maldives, the Marshall Islands, Kiribati, and Tokelau.[footnoteRef:13] [10: Venkat Lokanthan (2013, January-March). “Imagining Asia in 2030: Trends, Scenarios and Alternatives.” Indian Foreign Affairs Journal, vol. 8, no. 1, p. 122.] [11: Kennedy Warne (2015, February 13). Will Pacific Island Nations Disappear as Seas Rise? Maybe Not.” National Geographic. [online] available: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2015/02/150213-tuvalu-sopoaga-kench-kiribati-maldives-cyclone-marshall-islands/, p. 2.] [12: Charles W. Schmidt (2005, September). “Keeping Afloat: A Strategy for Small Island Nations.” Environmental Health Perspectives, vol. 113, no. 9, p. 606.] [13: Schmidt,p. 606.]

Not surprisingly, the populations of these threatened islands are vociferous in their criticisms of major carbon producing countries such as China and the United States and argue that not enough is being done to address climate change at present. For instance, Warne reports that, “Officials in Tuvalu, 600 miles north of Fiji, have been some of the most vocal critics of the world\\\'s large greenhouse gas emitters—industrialized nations such as the United States and China—which they accuse of not doing enough to curb emissions, contributing to the melting of ice sheets and rising seas.”[footnoteRef:14] [14: Warne, p. 3.]

While rising sea levels may appear to be an abstract threat that will only take place – if ever – in the distant future to many people, rising sea levels are a very harsh reality for many people living in these low-lying areas today. For example, Ma reports that, “The usual statistics that describe global warming\\\'s devastating effects on low=lying nations give a number that is fractional and of little consequence; or, even worse, tell of an effect so far down the line that it seems unnecessary to current discussions.”[footnoteRef:15] The situation, though, is certainly not abstract for the people currently living on the Kiribati and Marshall Islands who are already experiencing the effects of rising sea levels which destroy homes, businesses, agricultural crops and make water undrinkable.[footnoteRef:16] Some indication of the severity of the problem at present can be discerned from the pictures shown in Figures 5 and 6 below. [15: Andrew Ma (2014, Summer). “Washed Away: The Threat of Global Warming.” Harvard International Review, vol. 38, no. 1, p. 7.] [16: Remi Chauvin (2015, March 11). Climate change in the Marshall Islands and Kiribati, before and after. The Guardian. [online] available: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/ng-interactive/2015/mar/11/climate-change-in-the-marshall-islands-and-kiribati-before-and-after-interactive.]

Figure 2. Marshallese capital Majuro during high tides in 2008 Source: https://i.guim.co.uk/static/w-940/h--/q-95/sys-images/Environment/Pix/pictures/2015 /3/3/1425395550936/Kiribati-Marshall-Islands-001.jpg

Figure 3. Downtown Majuro during high tides in 2008 Source: https://i.guim.co.uk/static/w-940/h--/q-95/sys-images/Environment/Pix/pictures/2015/ 3/3/1425396085865/Kiribati-Marshall-Islands-001.jpg

Researchers at the University of Auckland in collaboration with scientists from Fiji and Australia have determined that the Maldives, Tuvalu and Kiribati are most vulnerable to rising sea levels due to their developed infrastructures, but other, less inhabited islands may “weather the storm” better and some may even grow larger as sea levels rise.[footnoteRef:17] For instance, Warne points out that, “This growing body of evidence indicates that about 80 percent of the islands have remained stable or increased in size (roughly 40 percent in each category). Only 20 percent have shown the net reduction that\\\'s widely assumed to be a typical island\\\'s fate when sea level rises. Some islands grew by as much as 14 acres in a single decade, and Tuvalu\\\'s main atoll, Funafuti—33 islands distributed around the rim of a large lagoon—has gained 75 acres of land during the past 115 years.”[footnoteRef:18] By very sharp contrast, however, while Tuvalu has numerous islands and atolls within its territory, it is still one of world’s smallest countries with just 10 square miles of dry land available for human habitation. In fact, more than 50% of the tiny nation’s population of 12,000 citizens reside on one island only (i.e., Fongafale) situated on the eastern portion of the Funafuti atoll.[footnoteRef:19] [17: Warne, p. 5.] [18: Warne, p. 6.] [19: Warne, p. 6.]

Given the abundant resources provided by the world’s seas, it is little wonder that the majority of island residents tend to congregate along low-lying coastal regions and it has been this historic practice that has contributed to the severity of the problem today. This is certainly the case with the Southern Pacific island of Nauru where the vast majority of the population lives in the low-lying coastal regions of the island. For example, Ma emphasizes that the potential for Nauru to become inundated by mid-21st century is great, and rising sea levels have already caused destruction of homes and businesses.[footnoteRef:20] In this regard, Ma points out that, “Although its highest point is 200 feet above sea level, virtually all of the Nauruan population lives along the low-lying coast due to the country\\\'s uninhabitable interior, ravaged by years of phosphate mining.”[footnoteRef:21] [20: Ma, p. 7.] [21: Ma, p. 7.]

The implications of these trends for the near future are multifaceted, complex and challenging. One of the most urgent issues that must be addressed in order to prevent truly catastrophic outcomes from rising sea levels is identifying alternative places for the 5 million people who inhabit low-lying Pacific islands, a process that is further complicated by a wide array of political constraints that have added further urgency to the situation. In this regard, Ma notes that, “Mainly, the looming diplomatic challenge of accommodating the disappearance or the uninhabitability of a nation brings with it the complications of moving entire populations to surrounding countries, requiring international agreements that account for shifting citizenship, immigration influx, and cultural changes.”[footnoteRef:22] [22: Ma, p. 8.]

In 2013, a study by Forbes determined that the Solomon Island comprised of more than 1,100 low-lying atolls is quickly “approaching extinction” due to rising sea levels and the political leaders of other islands such as the Maldives and Kiribati have begun calls for the relocation of their citizens from coastal regions to other, more inhabitable regions including other countries less threatened by rising sea levels. The threat, however, extends to all countries with low-lying coastal regions and there will be fewer places that are safe from these threats in the future to accommodate these 5 million displaced persons. Besides the sheer logistical problems that are associated with mass movements of people, there are other legal, political and social issues that must be taken into account as well. As Ma points out, “The problem, however, of internal displacement by no means eclipses the question of the removal of an entire internationally-recognized state, as well as the additional amnesty concerns that come with the emigration of an entire population.”[footnoteRef:23] A less-discussed but still significant issue involved in the mass relocation of island populations is the loss of their unique cultural histories and traditions, an outcome that may be inevitable given the current trends in sea levels. [23: Ma, p. 8.]

In response to rising sea levels, Nauru, the Marshall Islands and other nations that are threatened have solicited assistance from the United Nation’s International Court of Justice for the future relocation of their residents. The lack of progress in this area has compelled the leadership of other low-lying Pacific nations to assume active responsibility for relocating their populations.[footnoteRef:24] For example, Ma notes that, “Kiribati has proceeded with a land deal with Fiji that will allocate areas for inhabitants required to relocate, while leaders in the Maldives have instead looked to constructing artificial islands in an attempt to slow down the natural rising of the tide and to boost tourism for the small nation.”[footnoteRef:25] Likewise, O’Rourke cites the case of Kiribati and reports, “Recently, the island nation of Kiribati, which stands only a few feet above sea level, made headlines after its president announced a plan to buy 6,000 acres of land in Fiji [but] relocation was only a ‘last resort.’\\\" [footnoteRef:26] [24: Ma, p. 8.] [25: Ma, p. 8.] [26: O’Rourke, p. 12.]