Close, Stephen2026-08-242026-08-24https://hdl.handle.net/1885/733814565This doctoral research examines specific factors influencing two important employment policy areas differently in two Pacific states. Pacific Islanders prioritise better jobs and livelihoods for themselves and their families. However, employment in the Pacific has been described as a "wicked public policy problem" (Hassall, 2020, p. 124). Limited education, economic growth and jobs has impacts on poverty, under-development, and politics, including civil unrest. For decades overseas tertiary scholarships have been prioritised. Broader change has come from overseas labour opportunities in the last two decades. Pacific employment policy responses vary; with mixed impacts and unclear trends. External aid donors have been influential. How politics and societal interests shape Pacific employment policy in practice has been little researched. The research draws on interviews with policy stakeholders in both countries, and analyses policy documentation, academic material, budget and student data and media articles. Case studies trace policy-making from 2006/2007 to 2019 (Vanuatu Government Scholarships from 1997). Applying critical policy analysis and policy ethnography, this research identifies how politics shaped employment policy: who had power and how they used it. The case studies present multiple ways that politicians and officials responded to budget problems, political pressures and corruption, including varied approaches to distribute access. These included Solomon Islands' formalised 'Constituency Awards'; Vanuatu's enforced sanctions on personalised selection of scholarships; different results of attempted student loan schemes; and inception of two contrasting national universities. In Solomon Islands, emergent national leadership and significant donor substitution helped boost labour mobility numbers at the end of the case study period. In Vanuatu strong domestic policy leadership on labour mobility from early on led to broad participation but also policy contestation and 'problems of success'. In all four cases, significant donor influence raised questions about local policy ownership, and led to unintended consequences. Comparison of these cases reveals that important political and institutional differences shaped how and when politicians and officials were able to develop, deliver and reform policy. Different distributions of power, incentives, accountabilities, and societal interests, shaped policy decisions and pathways. Both broader and sectoral politics shaped two distinct patterns of employment policy-making in the two states. This thesis provides a rare, overdue, and contemporary understanding of the politics of policy-making on employment, a long-term, complex policy problem in Pacific states. It presents new insights into the agency of policy actors, and practical understanding of the operation and contestation of formal and informal institutions in Pacific policy-making. This research 'brings the politics back in' to build a better understanding of how public policy is developed, delivered and reformed in Pacific states, how politics affects education and employment, and how Pacific officials work across formal and informal institutions to meet demand for education and employment.en-AU2026