The State of SIDS report examines the means of implementation for SIDS to achieve their goals, primarily focusing on development partner support, and how this can be optimised in four key areas: financial, technical, political, and data and technology. The Report draws on findings from the SIDS Perception Survey, which assesses SIDS’ views of their development partners and types of support received.
The transition from symbolic support to structural solidarity was emphasised as an important next step for SIDS development partners. Moving beyond supportive statements and donor-led initiatives to substantial and structural reshapings that are SIDS-led.
Financial support
Financial support discussions focused on concerns around access to concessional finance, and growing debt crises in SIDS. Official Development Assistance (ODA) to SIDS is limited and decreasing, while at the same time needs are rising. Concessional finance is crucial, but many SIDS struggle to access it due to eligibility criteria based on gross national income and complex application processes.
Several priorities were proposed:
- Decolonising financing and disaster support, prioritising facilities and funds designed by SIDS for SIDS
- Operationalising the MVI for allocation and eligibility decisions, so that structural vulnerability conditions are reflected.
- Developing a SIDS‑sensitive sovereign debt architecture, including climate‑ and disaster‑linked instruments, debt pauses after shocks, and targeted debt reduction.
- Exploring carbon taxes, financial transaction taxes and solidarity levies that could create predictable funding streams.
- Simplifying and standardising access to climate and development funds
Innovative instruments such as blue bonds, debt‑for‑nature swaps and biodiversity credits were seen as promising but challenging. They often depend on high transaction capacity, complex structuring and significant external advisory input, which many SIDS cannot sustain. Participants stressed the need to share experiences – including failures – across SIDS and to build in‑house capacity so that SIDS can design and manage instruments on their own terms.
Technical support
Responsive technical support can help to reduce reliance on expensive, external experts; instead, creating SIDS experts with greater local knowledge.
Several concerns were raised with the way capacity support is currently delivered:
- A strong concentration of support for climate finance access, neglecting other important areas for technical support
- Marginalisation of Indigenous and local knowledge
- A workshop culture, created through the prioritisation of donor objectives, such as reporting and timelines, rather than genuine focus on SIDS needs
SIDS-SIDS cooperation was emphasised as an avenue for hope, decreasing reliance on external technical support, and allowing SIDS agenda prioritising.
Data and technology support
SIDS limited access to localised data restricts their ability to implement evidence-based policy planning. While many collect substantial amounts of data, they face gaps in standardisation, storage, analysis and policy use. The SIDS Centre of Excellence, and in particular its Global Data Hub, was identified as a key instrument for improving this landscape.
Participants proposed that the Centre should:
- Support SIDS in building interoperable national data systems aligned with global standards but tailored to local needs.
- Rapid operationalisation of the Centre, as well as seeking formal legal recognition as an international institution
- Provide shared analytical tools, including AI‑enabled platforms, that SIDS can use to plan investments, assess risks and monitor ABAS implementation.
- Facilitate training and peer‑learning for national statisticians, planners and innovators.
- Integrate qualitative and indigenous knowledge alongside quantitative data.
Digital transformation more broadly was seen as an opportunity to redesign economic and social systems. A need to improve climate-related data was also identified, both to predict climate impacts, and improve loss and damage tracking, particularly through capturing secondary losses or those from smaller scale disasters. Developing greater ocean research and governance initiatives across SIDS was highlighted as another important area. Improved data quality will allow SIDS to better show their progress, and attract outcome-based financing.
Political support
Discussions on political support focused on trade and finance, climate change, oceans, and biodiversity. SIDS recent diplomatic wins and moral leadership across these areas was emphasised. However, translation of these diplomatic wins into consistent, clear, and practical support remains a challenge. While SIDS have secured significant support and achievements in principle, the practical outcomes of these are lacking. These moral victories and innovations should also be emphasised to make clear the value SIDS provide to the rest of the world.
The need to strengthen SIDS voice in the international community was emphasised, through greater collaboration across geographical regions. This provides the opportunity for SIDS to set their own norms within the international system. Including institutions and the private sector will lay the foundation for this development. However, questions around balancing collective action and self-determination for SIDS were raised.
The “special circumstances of SIDS” must be more explicitly operationalised in global regimes, not just acknowledged rhetorically. This may require re‑branding, better evidence on the unique cost structures SIDS face, and a more strategic approach to coalition‑building within and beyond the G77 group. Questions were raised about how the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) and other SIDS platforms should evolve: whether to remain primarily advocacy‑focused or to develop more formal institutional roles, and how to avoid duplication with regional organisations. There was also interest in proposals for a permanent SIDS presence on the United Nations Security Council and for new political spaces, including outside New York, where SIDS can regularly coordinate on ABAS implementation.