Papua New Guinea's Development Strategic Plan for 2010-2030 undermines the principles in our Constitution and will lead to further inequality and poverty if government departments continue its implementation.

That is the conclusion drawn in a study undertaken by University of Papua New Guinea academic, Patrick Kaiku on behalf of the community advocacy group ACT NOW!

The study findings are published in a report that assesses the consistencies and core assumptions of the DSP in relation to the Constitution and our National Goals.

The DSP, published in 2010, was designed to be the main development blueprint for PNG under the umbrella of Vision 2050. Although the government ordered a review of the DSP in 2012 and NEC approved the adoption of the Strategy for Responsible Sustainable Development (StaRS) in October 2013, the DSP is still being followed and implemented by many government departments.

The DSP sets the ambitious target of making PNG a middle-income country by 2030, but Kaiku's study finds its economic growth orientated approach to development completely fails to comprehend the social and environmental costs which inevitably undermine its noble aims.

Endlessly pursuing economic growth as an end in itself is not a model for development at all as the growth comes at the expense of our collective well-being and human development. This was something the Constitutional Planning Committee foresaw and which framed the development of our National Goals and the support for our own PNG Ways. But rather than following the guidelines in our Constitution, Kaiku's report says the DSP pursues a radically different path that actually undermines the work of the CPC.

As we have all seen over the past 40 years, economic growth and a concentration on large-scale extractive industries is very beneficial for a small elite who have grown very rich and now live in small enclaves protected by razor wire and armed security guards. But the majority of our people are suffering from the loss of their land, culture and declining public services like health and education.

The DSP pursues economic growth and raising other economic indicators with the assumption this will achieve a higher quality of life for us all but in achieving those economic ends it actually destroys the things that ensure our survival - our land, culture and communities.

“The blind faith in the growth model will generate unintended costs. The degree to which such a model affects the social and cultural fabric of PNG society is not calculated or understood in the structure of the DSP”, says the report.

By actively promoting greater alienation of customary land on top of further resource extraction, the DSP actually threatens to make things worse than they are now. As the report states: 

'further loss of land “will compromise Papua New Guinean’s control of their food security and subsistence manner of living in an agrarian society. There are real benefits in Papua New Guinean’s having access to their customary land and using it for their collective benefit. It is an expressive element of the sense of control we have over our own life and destiny”.

The report is critical of the role played by foreign governments and institutions in framing the approach used in the DSP.

“The obsession with the economic model of growth is very much reflective of the uniformity and perceived universalism of neo-liberal economic ideas, and one that is part of a complex web of intellectual and policy exchange at the multilateral and bilateral level. The DSP simply restate economic policies that are driven and supported by multilateral institutions such as the World Bank, International Monetary Fund and the World Trade Organization”.

Ironically, it is these same economic principles that have so negatively impacted developing countries such as PNG over the last forty years!

The report says the authors of the DSP failed to understand and relate to the fundamental question, ‘what kind of society do we want?’ which was asked by the Constitutional Planning Committee over 40-years ago. The CPC was intent on ensuring the communal well-being of society whereas the DSP blatantly promotes individual profit. The CPC wanted development to be a wholesome communal-process and this was the intention behind the framing of the National Goals. In contrast the DSP will not lead to a humane society where social and environmental conditions are preserved and improved.

The DSP is also criticised for reinforcing the centralised and hierarchical system of government which the CPC warned against. The CPC said people should actively participate in their own government and we should avoid predetermined or pre-packaged development options that are then universally applied across the whole country in a ‘one-size fits all’ approach.

“The DSP maintains the entrenched Port Moresby-based power of government, much to the detriment of the majority of Papua New Guineans in the rural areas. And the fact that the Department of National Planning and Monitoring is solely responsible for managing the development budget and coordinates the DSP is illustrative of this concentration of the powers of resource and information in the hands of elitist and rigid structures”.

The DSP also fails to acknowledge the debilitating impact corruption is already having across the country or propose any effective strategies to deal with it. This is another serious oversight which undermines the effectiveness of the plan.

The report on the DSP is a follow up to the Critical Analysis of Papua New Guinea’s Vision 2050 which was published by ACT NOW! in 2015.