Photo: European Values
What is happening?
Mainstream models of development cooperation can sometimes be incompatible with the local context of beneficiary countries due to issues such as ethnic fragmentation, weak coordination between central and local authorities, and complex land ownership structures. All these concerns are currently at play in Fiji, where residents of Navunikabi village on Viti Levu – the nation’s largest island – are protesting the Wainikoroiluva Hydro Dam project, supported by the Australian High Commission in Suva. As the largest contributor to the Fiji Rural Electrification Fund (FREF), Australia is one of the key players seeking to help Fiji decarbonize its economy. Nevertheless, the residents of Navunikabi, located less than one kilometer from the proposed hydro dam construction site, criticized the project for excessive impact on their culture, environment, and livelihood.
The case of the controversial Australian project might also be instructive to European stakeholders, as the European Union seeks to expand its engagement with the Pacific Island countries through its Global Gateway initiative. It highlights the importance of close cooperation with local authorities and expanding the socio-cultural literacy of development partners operating in the South Pacific.
What is the broader picture?
A high level of inequality along geographic faultlines characterizes the energy production landscape in Fiji. While almost 60 percent of Fiji’s electricity generation is derived from hydropower, rural areas and outer islands remain dependent on imported fossil fuels. In 2024, the coalition government in Suva launched its National Energy Policy, which sets a target of 100 percent renewable energy production by 2030. Consequently, FREF is one of the most significant development initiatives in the country, aiming to replace over 2,500 diesel village community generators with financial backing from the Asian Development Bank (ADB) and the governments of Australia, Aotearoa New Zealand, Japan, and the United Kingdom.
The EU is also an active player in the energy sector in Fiji. The construction of the Qaliwana dam and hydropower plant, as well as the Vatutokotoko hydropower plant, has been designated as a flagship project of the Global Gateway, the EU’s key infrastructure investment initiative.
Nevertheless, the expansion of hydroelectric power plants in Fiji has important social consequences as it often requires the relocation of villages. Due to its vulnerability to the effects of the climate crisis, many low-lying villages in Fiji have to be relocated. At the same time, local residents, including those in Navunikabi, reject forced relocation for infrastructure construction. While the 2024 impact assessment carried out by Energy Fiji Limited demonstrated that no populated or culturally sensitive areas would be affected by the Wainikoroiluva Hydro Dam project, villagers question its validity.
“This place gets flooded even during a normal rainy day, so imagine if they close the lower end of the river; our village will definitely get flooded. That is the reason we are not agreeing to this project,” a local resident told the Fiji Broadcasting Corporation.
The issue of land ownership is extremely sensitive in Fiji. Ethnic tensions between the Indigenous iTaukei people of Fiji and Indo-Fijians, descendants of indentured laborers brought to the islands by the British colonizers, have been a major source of political instability in the republic, including the four coups d’état that occurred in Fiji since it achieved independence in the 1970s. Safeguarding iTaukei land and cultural rights has been a key concern in the drafting of a new constitution for the country. Promulgated in 2013, the current constitution rejected multiculturalism in favor of Fijian dominance.
Why does it matter?
The tensions between implementers of the hydro power project in Navunikabi and the local villagers demonstrate the importance of culturally sensitive strategic communication between stakeholders involved in development projects and local communities. The lack of trust of local authority figures, like Mareta Naiadi, a respected elder and matriarch of Navunikabi Village, in impact assessments and other studies carried out by the project implementers, can result in serious negative reputational externalities for development partners such as Australia.
While stakeholders from the Global North often fail to effectively engage with the labyrinthine traditional leadership structures, authoritarian actors such as China effectively exploit these communication gaps. For example, Beijing is pursuing active engagement with entities such as Bose Levu Vakaturaga, also known as the Great Council of Chiefs. Consequently, the EU and its like-minded partners should significantly increase their outreach to local and traditional authorities to build trust amid their development cooperation efforts.
