Over the past few weeks, governments across the Pacific have been sitting down with the PACER Plus Implementation Unit to talk about what the next few years of this trade deal should look like. Meetings started in early February 2026 with visits to countries like Tonga and Kiribati, and they are now happening in places like Solomon Islands and Vanuatu. The idea is to work out what problems countries face, what help they need, and how they can make PACER Plus useful in the real world for the next five years. These talks are meant to shape the plan for 2026–2030, not just plans on paper but things that can actually help people trade and grow their economies.
PACER Plus was first made official in December 2020 as a trade and development agreement among several Pacific Island states plus Australia and New Zealand. The deal is meant to help countries trade goods and services, attract investment, support movement of workers, and provide development help where needed. Unlike older trade deals, it includes a broader development focus so that smaller island states could increase their ability to join bigger markets.
When PACER Plus was first set up, many people hoped it would help boost trade between Pacific island countries things like food, manufactured goods, services, tourism support, and more. But in the years since, it hasn’t produced the strong results many people expected.
One reason is that the two biggest economies in the region Papua New Guinea and Fiji did not join the agreement. Together these two account for most of the region’s economic activity, so their absence makes the agreement less effective at building real trade links across the Pacific.
Papua New Guinea’s government has been open about why it chose not to become part of PACER Plus. In statements to the public, the Hon. Richard Maru, who is PNG’s Minister for International Trade and Investment, said that the trade patterns with Australia, one of the key partners in PACER Plus, are very uneven. He pointed out that PNG mostly exports raw commodities such as gold, while importing a wide range of manufactured goods from Australia. In 2022, PNG’s exports to Australia were valued at AU$1.6 billion, mostly gold and other precious metals, but Australia’s exports to Papua New Guinea were only AUu$95.9 million. Because of that imbalance, Maru said PNG saw no value in signing the agreement under its current conditions, and that it would rather focus on deals that better match PNG’s own development needs.
Because PACER Plus did not include PNG and Fiji, and because the agreement still mostly links Pacific small states with Australia and New Zealand, the trade between Pacific islands themselves has not grown much.
Compared with the total size of PNG’s exports, which reached K15.3 billion in the first quarter of 2025 with a trade surplus of K9.1 billion, these intra-Pacific flows are tiny. Most of PNG’s trade goes to Australia, Asia, and other global markets, not to neighbouring Pacific islands. This shows that trade between Pacific countries is still limited, making agreements like PACER Plus important in theory but still weak in practice for regional trade growth.
Part of the reason for this is that trade costs in the Pacific are still high. Shipping goods between islands can be very expensive and slow because of limited port facilities, small shipping schedules, and lack of freight options. The customs process in many places is also slow because systems are still being modernised. Until these costs come down, it will be hard for businesses in the Pacific to benefit fully from any trade agreement.
Another issue is that most Pacific island countries do not make very many finished products that other countries want to buy. Many economies depend on raw materials, services like tourism, or agriculture products rather than processed goods that can be traded widely. In Southeast Asia, for example, trade deals make a big difference because countries produce lots of different goods and trade actively with each other. The Pacific doesn’t have the same volume or variety of goods, so the trade impact of agreements like PACER Plus is smaller.
Despite these challenges, there are signs of real effort to make the agreement work better. In late 2025, member countries met in Honiara, Solomon Islands, at a PACER Plus ministers’ meeting where they signed a second phase of the implementation plan under the Development and Economic Cooperation framework. During that meeting, Australia and New Zealand announced renewed and increased support for the next cycle of cooperation. Australia committed new funds, and New Zealand pledged NZ$10 million over five years to help member countries build their export ability, grow trade in goods and services, attract more investment, and get more benefit from worker mobility.
New Zealand’s Minister of State for Trade and Investment, Nicola Grigg, said this support was meant to help countries get the best out of PACER Plus and make their economies stronger and more resilient. Her comments show that at least some leaders in the region still believe the deal has value and can be improved if countries work together and focus on results.
Still, on the ground, many businesses are unsure about how the deal can help them right now. Some small business owners say they know about PACER Plus in theory but don’t yet see how it helps them sell more products or find new markets. Others point to the lack of finance, the cost of transport, and the difficulty of meeting standards and certification as problems that stand in the way of using trade agreements effectively. These are practical matters that affect growth more than the rules in a trade pact.
Another thing that makes PACER Plus different from bigger deals in places like Southeast Asia is the size of the markets involved. In Southeast Asia, countries trade a lot with each other because they produce many kinds of goods and have strong supply llins, for example, parts for machinery, electronics, and food processing move across borders daily. The Pacific’s markets are smaller and produce fewer manufactured goods, so even with an agreement like PACER Plus, the volume of trade between Pacific islands remains low compared with external trade.
But the fact that consultations are happening now and that they involve all member countries of PACER Plus visiting each country to hear their concerns and needs shows that the agreement hasn’t been forgotten. These meetings, which will run through March 2026, are meant to make the next work plan more useful and practical for national priorities instead of just being high‑level talk. By developing clear goals and understanding what each country needs most, the hope is that the next phase of PACER Plus can produce real results for people and businesses.
What will help PACER Plus work better is if countries invest in the basics that make trade easier. That includes improving ports so ships can load and unload faster and cheaper, building better roads and digital systems so paperwork and customs can be processed quickly, and providing training and finance support to small and medium businesses so they can grow and sell more products. Many people in the Pacific that if these basic challenges are fixed, it will be easier for local businesses to trade more, both inside the region and outside.
Another important part is making sure the agreements countries enter into reflect what their economies actually need. PNG’s approach, for example, shows the value of being careful about how treaties fit a country’s economic profile. By choosing not to join PACER Plus, the government signaled that it wants to pursue partnerships that bring direct benefits to its own industries and workers rather than joining a broad agreement that might create more costs than gains.
PACER Plus has been called a good start towards regional cooperation, but it is still a work in progress. The agreement’s supporters say it has laid a foundation for dialogue, cooperation, and support and now the focus is shifting toward real actions that can help economies grow. The next years, from 2026 to 2030, will be an important test of whether this agreement can lead to real trade growth, stronger businesses, and better lives for people in the Pacific.
