In the vast expanse of the Pacific Ocean lies the little rock island of Nauru. It is the third-smallest country in the world, after Monaco and Vatican City. It was a phosphate-rich island that attracted the interest of colonial world powers like Australia, Japan, Germany, and Britain. However, Nauru suffered due to habitat loss brought by extensive mining in almost the entirety of the country, making it unsuitable for agriculture. The island was stripped of its vegetation, soil, and wildlife, leaving behind a barren and jagged landscape. The phosphate industry also brought wealth and corruption, creating a dependency on foreign aid and imports. Today, Nauru is struggling to restore its environment, diversify its income sources, and improve its living standards. Let us explore and dive deeper into how Nauru became a dilapidated country after being a fertile phosphate powerhouse.
Exploration and Exploitation
Nauru’s phosphate deposits were discovered by Australian prospector Albert Ellis in 1900, who noticed a strange-looking rock that was phosphate ore of the richest quality. He realized that the island had a strategic location in the migratory path of several bird species and no native land mammals to present a threat. The accumulation of bird droppings, or guano, was rich in phosphates and other nutrients, such as potassium and nitrogen, that are essential for plant growth. That is why guano is primarily used in fertilizers, and in fact, Nauru’s guano was used to fertilize pastures in Australia and New Zealand for a long time.
Ellis’ discovery of phosphate excited John T. Arundel of the Pacific Islands Company, and the company decided to pursue rights and access to Nauru’s lucrative resource. The negotiations to pursue rights to the phosphate involved four parties: the British and German governments, the newly reorganized Pacific Phosphate Company, and Jaluit-Gesellschaft (a German mining company that had been exploiting phosphates on Nauru since the late 19th century). In 1906, an agreement was established whereby Jaluit-Gesellschaft’s rights were transferred into the Pacific Phosphate Company, for “a cash payment of 2,000 pounds sterling (British), 12,500 pounds sterling (British) worth of shares in the Pacific Phosphate Company, and royalty payments for every ton of phosphate exported.” In the first year of mining alone, 11,000 pounds (5,000 kg) of phosphate were shipped to Australia
Phosphate mining in Nauru involved scraping off the surface soil and excavating the phosphate from between the walls and columns of ancient coral. What remained after mining were tall columns of coral and irregular depressions between them that were useless for habitation, farming, or anything else. The mining operation also interrupted the natural water cycle, creating droughts and floods, and polluted the groundwater with chemicals and salt. The mining operations also damaged the biodiversity of the island, since many local plants and animals were lost or endangered. For example, the unique Nauru reed warbler, a tiny songbird, was reduced to a population of less than 100 individuals by 1980.
Phosphate mining also had social and political ramifications for the Nauruan people, who were generally excluded from the benefits of the enterprise. The Nauruans were initially given a tiny amount of rent for their land, but eventually they were forced to resettle along a narrow coastal strip, where they experienced overpopulation, inadequate sanitation, and sickness. The Nauruans also suffered from the colonial oppression and exploitation of the foreign powers, who controlled the island’s administration and legal system. During World War I, Nauru was captured by the Australian Army, who took over the phosphate activities from the Germans. After the war, Nauru became a League of Nations mandate, managed by Australia, Britain, and New Zealand, who formed the British Phosphate Commissioners (BPC) to handle the phosphate industry. During World War II, Nauru was invaded by the Japanese, who enslaved and slaughtered many Nauruans and deported over 1,200 of them to work as slaves in the Chuuk islands, where most of them died. After the war, Nauru was returned to the BPC, which restarted phosphate mining with little regard for the Nauruans’ welfare or ecology.
The Independence and Decline
In the 1960s, the Nauruans began to seek more autonomy and recompense from the BPC, which had been paying them only a fraction of the phosphate revenues. The Nauruans also attempted to restore their land and culture, which had been destroyed by colonial authority and mining activity. In 1964, the Nauru Island Agreement was signed, which provided the Nauruans 50% of the phosphate royalties and the right to purchase the remaining assets of the BPC by 19702. In 1968, Nauru became an independent republic, with Hammer DeRoburt as its first president. Nauru also established the Nauru Phosphate Corporation (NPC) to take over the phosphate activities from the BPC.
Nauru’s independence coincided with a boom in the global market for phosphate, which led to an increase in the island’s wealth and living standards. Nauru became one of the richest countries in the world in terms of per capita income, reaching a peak of $50,000 in 1975. The Nauruan government used the phosphate income to provide free health care, education, housing, and other social services to its residents. The government also invested in numerous outside companies, such as hotels, airlines, banks, and real estate, in an attempt to diversify its economy and safeguard its future. However, many of these investments turned out to be unsuccessful or fraudulent, and the government lost millions of dollars in the process.
The phosphate wealth also brought some negative effects to the Nauruan society, such as corruption, nepotism, and mismanagement. The political system became dominated by a few powerful families, who controlled the government and the NPC. The Nauruan people became dependent on the phosphate income and the imported goods and lost their traditional skills and values. The Nauruans also adopted a sedentary and unhealthy lifestyle, which led to high rates of obesity, diabetes, and other chronic diseases. Nauru has the highest prevalence of type 2 diabetes in the world, affecting 40% of its adult population.
By the late 1980s, Nauru’s phosphate reserves were nearing exhaustion, and the island’s economy began to deteriorate. The NPC was unable to pay its financial responsibilities and defaulted on its loans. The administration also faced legal objections from its former colonial overlords, who requested compensation for the damage caused by the mining. In 1989, Nauru sued Australia in the International Court of Justice, accusing it of breaching its fiduciary obligation and infringing the Nauruans’ human rights. The issue was settled out of court in 1993, with Australia agreeing to pay $107 million to Nauru and to assist in the rehabilitation of the mined-out regions.
Nauru’s environmental degradation has serious implications for its health and food security, as well as its exposure to climate change risks. Nauruans face high rates of obesity, diabetes, and other chronic diseases, partly due to the lack of arable land and the reliance on imported processed foods. According to the FAO, over 90% of the food consumed in Nauru is imported, and most of it is low in nutritional value and high in fat, sugar, and salt. Nauru also suffers from water scarcity and poor sanitation, which affect the quality and quantity of drinking water and increase the risk of waterborne diseases. Nauru is also highly vulnerable to the effects of climate change, such as rising sea levels, coral bleaching, and extreme weather events, which threaten its survival and sovereignty. Nauru has a low elevation and a narrow coastal strip, which makes it susceptible to coastal erosion, flooding, and saltwater intrusion. Nauru’s coral reefs, which provide food, income, and protection from waves, are also at risk from ocean acidification and warming, which cause coral bleaching and mortality. Nauru also faces the challenge of adapting to the variability and unpredictability of rainfall, which affects its water supply and agriculture.
To cope with these challenges, Nauru has adopted some strategies to diversify its economy and improve its environment, such as hosting a refugee processing center for Australia, developing renewable energy sources, and participating in regional and global initiatives for environmental protection. Nauru has been hosting a refugee processing center for Australia since 2001, which provides a significant source of income and employment for the island, as well as financial and other assistance from Australia. However, this arrangement has also been criticized by human rights groups and the United Nations for its poor conditions and treatment of the refugees and has sparked protests and riots among the detainees and the Nauruan locals. Nauru has also been investing in renewable energy sources, such as solar and wind, to reduce its dependence on imported diesel and lower its greenhouse gas emissions. Nauru aims to achieve 50% renewable energy by 2020 and 100% by 2030. Nauru is also an active participant in regional and global initiatives for environmental protection, such as the Pacific Islands Framework for Action on Climate Change, the Pacific Islands Regional Ocean Policy, and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Nauru has also developed its National Sustainable Development Strategy, which outlines its vision, goals, and priorities for social, economic, and environmental development until 2030.
Possible solutions
Nauru’s environmental crisis is not an isolated case but a reflection of the global challenges of balancing economic development and environmental protection. Many other countries, especially small island developing states (SIDS), are facing similar or even worse threats from climate change, such as Kiribati and Tuvalu, which are at risk of disappearing due to sea level rise. On the other hand, some countries, such as Australia and China, are contributing to the problem by emitting large amounts of greenhouse gases and exploiting natural resources, often at the expense of the rights and interests of the local and indigenous communities. Therefore, the international community has a moral and legal obligation to address Nauru’s environmental problems and support its recovery, as well as to prevent and mitigate the impacts of climate change and environmental degradation on other vulnerable countries and populations. This requires collective and coordinated action based on the principles of environmental justice and sustainable development, which recognize the interdependence and intergenerational responsibility of all human beings and the environment.
Some of the possible solutions and recommendations that could help Nauru and other countries achieve environmental justice and sustainable development are:
- Reducing greenhouse gas emissions and enhancing the resilience and adaptation capacity of SIDS and other countries most affected by climate change, in line with the Paris Agreement and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.
- Promoting green technology and innovation, such as renewable energy, waste management, and ecosystem restoration, to reduce the dependence on fossil fuels and imported goods and to create new opportunities for income generation and employment.
- Respecting the rights and interests of the local and indigenous communities and ensuring their meaningful participation and consultation in the decision-making and implementation of environmental policies and projects in accordance with the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and other relevant instruments
- Strengthening the legal and institutional frameworks and mechanisms for environmental governance and justice, such as access to information, public participation, and access to justice in environmental matters, as well as the recognition and enforcement of the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment
- Enhancing the cooperation and solidarity among SIDS and other countries facing similar environmental challenges, as well as the support and assistance from the international community, especially the former colonial powers and the major polluters, through financial, technical, and capacity-building measures.
Nauru’s environmental crisis is a tragic example of how human greed and ignorance can destroy a natural paradise and jeopardize a nation’s future. However, Nauru’s story is not only a warning but also a hope for the world. By learning from its mistakes and successes, we can work together to protect our planet and its people. We can reduce our greenhouse gas emissions and enhance our resilience and adaptation capacity to climate change. We can promote green technology and innovation to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels and imported goods and to create new opportunities for income generation and employment. We can respect the rights and interests of the local and indigenous communities and ensure their meaningful participation and consultation in the environmental policies and projects that affect them. We can strengthen our legal and institutional frameworks and mechanisms for environmental governance and justice, and we can recognize and enforce the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment. We can enhance our cooperation and solidarity among countries facing similar environmental challenges, as well as our support and assistance from the international community, especially the former colonial powers and the major polluters. Nauru’s story is a reminder that we are all interconnected and interdependent, and that we have a shared responsibility and opportunity to make a positive difference for ourselves and future generations.
Sources:
unep.org
theconversation.com
lawanddevelopment.org
reliefweb.int
ourworld.unu.edu
republicofnauru.com
climateknowledgeportal.worldbank.org
link.springer.com
undp.org
cambridge.org
19january2021snapshot.epa.gov