Kiribati’s first year in Australia’s Pacific Engagement Visa (PEV) scheme has produced early wins for a small group of successful applicants, but also exposed stark gaps between demand and the program’s limited capacity and support systems, a new Australian National University (ANU) survey shows.
The ANU’s PEV survey, supplemented by information from the PEV support office in Tarawa, found that 29 primary applicants from Kiribati were drawn in the ballot this round, with a further 71 partners and dependants attached to that cohort. Those primary applicants were selected from about 2,523 people who entered the ballot; when partners and dependants are counted, 10,145 people registered interest in the scheme — for just 100 visas allocated to Kiribati. That means the pathway could accommodate roughly 1 per cent of those who registered, underlining a striking mismatch between demand and opportunity.
Despite the narrow intake, early outcomes have been promising for many of the selected applicants. Of the 29 primary winners, 19 — about 65 per cent — have secured formal job offers and have progressed on their visa approvals, according to the survey. Employment has been concentrated in agriculture and aged care, with two successful applicants taking consulting roles in areas such as land surveying and administrative services. Seven of those who received jobs are already engaged in Australia’s PALM (Pacific Australia Labour Mobility) scheme, and at least half of that subgroup were already in Australia when they were offered PEV roles.
The high conversion of selections to job offers is one of the clearest new findings from the ANU analysis, but it sits alongside persistent systemic barriers. First-time migrants in Kiribati faced inconsistent internet access, limited familiarity with online application platforms and communication obstacles that caused delays in completing documentation and responding to employer requests. Migration costs and a lack of tailored, locally grounded support also featured in survey responses as constraints on applicants’ ability to capitalise on opportunities.
Another notable change revealed by the survey is a major shift in the gender profile of applicants. More than 75 per cent of selected primary applicants were women — a departure from Kiribati’s traditional migration pattern, historically dominated by male seafarers. ANU researchers say the PEV appears to be accelerating trends already visible in other programs, including New Zealand’s Recognised Seasonal Employer scheme and the PALM program, where increasing numbers of I-Kiribati women are taking up overseas work. The ballot being random, the gender imbalance also implies a large majority of registrants were women.
Climate-related factors emerged as an influential motive for migration alongside employment and the prospect of improved living standards. Respondents cited coastal erosion, sea-level rise and water security concerns as components of their decision to pursue pathways to Australia. The ANU report notes that how these climate stressors translate into long-term mobility patterns and policy responses remains to be seen, but the PEV results already complicate the narrative of labour migration as solely economic.
The ANU survey stresses that it is still early to draw definitive conclusions: Papua New Guinea has now completed a second year in the scheme and offers more longitudinal data, while Kiribati’s participation is in its initial year and live data collection was ongoing at the time of the research. Nevertheless, the initial Kiribati findings raise immediate policy questions for both Canberra and Tarawa about scaling support, addressing digital and cost barriers, and how labour mobility programs intersect with climate-driven displacement pressures and family reunification priorities.