This dissertation examines the climate change narratives of the Pacific small island states of Kiribati and Tuvalu. As two of the lowest lying states in the world, Kiribati and Tuvalu face existential threats resultant from a range of climate change impacts, notably rising sea levels (Nurse et al., 2014). Nonetheless, in the 21st Century, the governments of the two states have projected climate change narratives on the international stage that appear to diverge significantly from one another. In the period from 2003-2016, the Government of Kiribati frequently spoke of a policy of ‘migration with dignity’ as one possible response to the impacts of climate change. At the same time, the Government of Tuvalu became known for suggesting that international discussions of climate-induced relocations were irresponsible (Smith & McNamara, 2014). This dissertation seeks to understand both how and why the climate change narratives of Kiribati and Tuvalu diverged from each other, particularly in the 2003-2016 period.

In mainstream international relations (IR) literature, small states are often treated as marginal actors with very few foreign policy options open to them (Keohane, 1969). In answering the questions of how and why Kiribati and Tuvalu’s narratives have diverged, this dissertation develops a new theoretical framework through which to analyse the foreign policy behaviour of small states. This framework understands narratives as key tools of foreign policy and it contends that effective analysis of small state foreign policy issues demands analysis across multiple political levels, from the level of the international system to the level of individual politicians. This new framework challenges and extends dominant theoretical explanations of small state issues within the field of IR, and it provides a lens through which to analyse case studies of Kiribati and Tuvalu’s foreign policy histories, which make up the bulk of this dissertation.

Ultimately, this dissertation finds that Kiribati and Tuvalu’s climate change narratives cannot be understood without reference to domestic political dynamics and the outlooks of political leaders in each state. More broadly, it finds that small states are not the peripheral actors in international politics that IR often assumes. Rather, they are active, and even influential, players on the global stage whose narratives can help to shape the perceptions of other, more materially powerful, states.