GeoJournal (2014) 79:705–719 DOI 10.1007/s10708-014-9548-8
Perceptions of environmental change in Moorea, French Polynesia: the importance of temporal, spatial, and scalar contexts Barbara Louise Endeman˜o Walker • David Lo´pez-Carr • Cheryl Chen • Kitty Currier
Published online: 23 March 2014 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014
Abstract Pacific Islands are considered among the most vulnerable geographies and societies to the effects of climate change and variability (CCV). This study addresses the mismatch between global climate change narratives and local perceptions of environmental change in Moorea, French Polynesia. This study builds on CCV risk perception and adaptation research by analyzing how temporal and historical socio-economic, cultural, political, and ecological contexts shape local perceptions of environmental change among a sample of environmental stakeholders in Moorea. The data were collected prior to the widespread global narrative and social amplification of climate change risk and its particular impact on islands. As such, they offer an important portrait of environmental perceptions in French Polynesia prior to the influence of a circumscribed climate change narrative, which has since come to shape government and NGO responses to environmental change in the Pacific Island Countries and Territories. The data presented in this paper illustrate that perceptions of
B. L. E. Walker (&) Institute for Social, Behavioral, and Economic Research, 2201 North Hall, University of California, Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, CA 93106-2150, USA e-mail:
[email protected] D. Lo´pez-Carr C. Chen K. Currier Geography Department, 3611 Ellison Hall, University of California, Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, CA 93106-4060, USA
drivers and effects of environmental change and risk in Moorea are embedded in larger social processes of political economy and ecology, particularly related to contemporary environmental politics, contextualized within the histories of colonialism and tourism-led economic development. Integrating the complexity of local environmental risk perceptions into CCV policy will help to avoid maladaptation, social movements against CCV planning, and may help maximize government and donor investments. Keywords Climate change Risk perception Adaptation Political ecology Pacific Islands Moorea
Introduction It is difficult to think of Pacific Islands without conjuring images of sea level rise, tsunamis, cyclones and other natural disasters, many of which are increasingly associated with climate change and variability (CCV). It is widely agreed that Pacific Island Countries and Territories (PICTs) are among the most vulnerable geographies and societies in the world to the effects CCV. In response, several studies and interventions have been initiated to understand and address national and regional perceptions, vulnerability, resilience, and adaptation to climate effects in the PICTs (Kaly et al. 1999; Nakalevu 2006; Nunn 2010; Pelesikoti et al. 2013). At the same time, a
123
706
growing number of studies in the under-developed world emphasize that the effects of, and adaptation to, CCV must be analyzed and addressed within the context of ongoing systems of local, national, and global political economies that create and enforce social and economic inequities (Nielsen and Vigh 2012). Yet, there is sometimes a mismatch between governmental and NGO emphases on adaptation to predicted CCV, and local everyday concerns about current environmental conditions and livelihoods (Mertz et al. 2010; Guariguata et al. 2012). It has been found that CCV often magnifies existing inequities, and that new CCV-related policies and programs should incorporate or be a sub-set of broader policies that promote equitable social, economic, and political well-being (Fazey et al. 2011). As such, CCV policies can have a negative effect on the participation of individual, household, and community buy-into governmental policies and programs, thereby undermining intended outcomes of these substantial investments (Barnett and O’Neill 2012), and detracting from local cultural values, meanings, and integrity (Nielsen and Reenberg 2010; Adger et al. 2013). Moreover, some adaptation measures can in fact increase CCV vulnerability (Barnett and O’Neill 2012). This study builds on CCV risk perception and adaptation research by analyzing how temporal and historical socio-economic, cultural, political, and ecological contexts shape local perceptions of environmental change among a sample of environmental stakeholders in Moorea, French Polynesia. The data were collected between 1999 and 2002, prior to the widespread global narrative and social amplification of climate change risk and its particular impact on islands. The data therefore offer an important snapshot of environmental perceptions in French Polynesia prior to the influence of a circumscribed climate change narrative, which has since come to shape local perceptions and government and NGO responses to environmental change in the PICTs (Parry et al. 2007; Jasperse et al. 2014). The data presented in this paper illustrate that perceptions of drivers and effects of environmental change and risk in Moorea are embedded in larger social processes of political economy and ecology, particularly related to contemporary environmental politics, contextualized within the histories of colonialism and tourism-led economic development (Walker 2001). The paper is organized into five parts: First we describe the methodology. Second, we provide
123
GeoJournal (2014) 79:705–719
background to the case study by examining the history and political ecology of economic development in Moorea. Third, we review the relevant theoretical literature on environmental risk perception and CCV adaptation in the PICTs. Fourth, we present the data on local perceptions of environmental change. Fifth, we discuss the results, exploring how the historical record of environmental use, conservation, and conflict in French Polynesia has precipitated multiple and overlapping perceptions of contemporary environmental change and risk.
Methodology The fieldwork for this project was carried out in Moorea during the summers of 1999, 2001 and 2002. In 1999 and 2001, a snowball sample of 30 key environmental stakeholders was interviewed. These people were chosen to be interviewed because they were consistently identified by multiple stakeholders as having the most experience in environmental policy, environmental community organizing, and/or environmental knowledge/use. In 2002, interviews were conducted with a random sample of 70 informants in three neighborhoods to assess perceptions about environment change and community reaction to new environmental management and decision-making. These informants ranged in age from 18 to 84, with an average age of 41. 54 % of the sample was women. These semi-structured, ethnographic interviews covered (a) demographic information including age, gender, economic indicators, and household composition; and (b) environmental perceptions and lagoon uses, including how and why the environment has changed over time; how, when, and where informants used the lagoon; and conflicts that they’ve experienced over lagoon resources. The questionnaires included short answer and open-ended questions, and each interview was conducted jointly by the lead author (fluent in English and French) and a field assistant (fluent in English, French, and Tahitian).
Historical background: environmental history and the political ecology of development in Moorea This project is informed by the theoretical field of political ecology and its focus on temporal and spatial
GeoJournal (2014) 79:705–719
specificity and social differentiation. Political ecology approaches offer a framework to analyze environmental degradation from a multi-layered actor-oriented perspective in the context of unequal power relations. In particular, the environmental use, access, and control of individual resource users is emphasized, within the context of, and shaped by, local, national, and international political and economic influences, in addition to local and regional histories (Blaikie and Brookfield 1987; Bryant and Bailey 1997). Additionally, political ecology focuses on struggles over the meanings and representations of nature and resources, among local resource users, and between resource users and institutions such as management agencies and the state (Carney and Watts 1990; Robbins 2003). This approach provides a conceptual framework to analyze multiple, interrelated scales, and to take higher-resolution, local, social differentiation into consideration in assessing climate change vulnerability, resilience, and risk perception, including gender, race, ethnicity, class, age, etc. (O’Brien et al. 2004; Hogan and Marandola 2005; Demetriades and Esplen 2008). As such, this paper contributes to a handful of political ecology studies that focus on Pacific Islands (Parks and Roberts 2006; Reenberg et al. 2008; Walker and Robinson 2009). Colonial Polynesia and nuclear testing The Island of Moorea is located in the center of the Pacific Ocean in the Society Islands, among the five archipelagos that constitute French Polynesia. Moorea lies 16 km northwest of the island of Tahiti, home to French Polynesia’s capital, Papeete. It has a land area of 12,520 ha, 61 km of coastline, and a population of over 12,000. Moorea is encircled by a barrier reef that forms a 44 km2 lagoon ranging from 100 to 1,500 m in width. Tahiti and Moorea became protectorates of France in 1843, and Polyne´sie Franc¸aise was established as a territoire d’outre-mer (overseas territory) in 1946. In 2004 the islands were given political status as a pays d’outre-mer au sein de la Re´publique (overseas land of the Republic of France), which expanded their autonomy. Prior to the 1960s, French Polynesia had traded on international markets with exports of copra, vanilla, coffee, and phosphate. After Algeria gained its independence in 1962, France shifted its nuclear testing program from the Saharan Desert to French
707
Polynesia, which marked a surge in economic development in French Polynesia, particularly in the Society Islands. An airport and shipping ports were built at Papeete on reclaimed reefs to handle the transfer of people and equipment for the nuclear testing sites and headquarters. The construction of this infrastructure also opened the gates for tourism to enter the region (Henningham 1992). The structure of French Polynesia’s economy was altered dramatically over the following decade. Between 1960 and 1966, military spending in the area increased from 4 % of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) to 76 %, and leveled out in the 1970s at around 30 %. In addition to military spending, social transfer payments from France are the main source of income by which French Polynesia pays for its large trade imbalances. These payments—which are disbursed through public sector jobs and well-subsidized social services—along with steep import taxes, have kept both the standard and cost of living high, such that the per capita GDP is around US $26,000 (United Nations 2012). The military-based economy encouraged migration to the island of Tahiti, where by 1992, over 70 % of French Polynesia’s population resided (Henningham 1992:130). Because of its proximity to Tahiti, Moorea was transformed by the expanding military and tourism economies. As a majority of adults left subsistence activities to participate in the cash economy, the production of local food supplies declined sharply (Robineau 1984). Small-scale, local agriculture was the dominant economic sector in the history of Moorea and is increasingly being replaced by expanding tourism and service sectors, in addition to concentrated export-agricultural operations, such as pineapple plantations. Post-colonial development and le pact de progres In 1993 the government of French Polynesia launched Le Pact de Progres (The Pact of Progress), a 10-year economic development plan that aimed to promote local economic self-sufficiency based on tourism, pearl farming, agriculture, and fishing. This plan was introduced slightly ahead of France’s final nuclear test in the territory in 1995, the last of 179 detonations over 37 years (CDPESC 1995:6; Osman 2000:8). Le Pact de Progres consisted of a series of development contracts from France totaling over $US 2.1 billion. In
123
708
October of 2002, a ‘‘Reconversion Fund’’ was established, guaranteeing indefinitely an additional $US 175 million per annum. According to Osman, France does not expect French Polynesia to become entirely independent economically, but is helping to make it as self-sufficient as possible (2000:3). Development projects and contracts undertaken through Le Pact de Progres on Moorea were largely related to tourism, with less funding to agricultural development. These included the construction of a new resort hotel, improvements and additions to existing hotels, loans to tour companies for the purchase of new vehicles and boats, and loans to expand agricultural operations for export and local consumption. The number of tourists to visit French Polynesia almost doubled in the 1990s, increasing from 132,361 in 1990, to a peak of 233,326 in 2000, since declining to 162,776 in 2011. Over the past 5 years, approximately 45 % of all tourists in French Polynesia visit Moorea, down from around 80 % in the 1990s (ITSTAT 1998, 2000; STT 2001; Ministe`re du Tourisme 2011; Le Pre´sident de la Polyne´sie Franc¸aise 2012). There are currently 58 hotels and pensions on Moorea, up from 31 in 2001 (STT 2001; Ministe`re du Tourisme 2011). The fragility of an economy heavily reliant on tourism became apparent when revenues fell after the 2001 terrorist attacks in the United States, and again in the wake of the global recession in 2008. Climate events have had negative impacts on tourism as well. Tropical cyclone Oli for example, in February 2010, brought almost all tourism to a halt for several days. The 7 m high waves and 210 km/h wind gusts, along with a concomitant outbreak of coral-eating starfish, destroyed much of Moorea’s outer coral reef, a major attraction for French Polynesia’s tourists. Despite these vulnerabilities, tourism is one of the few industries that make sense for French Polynesia’s economy given its location and available resources. Yet, development undertaken since the Pact de Progres has likely exacerbated the human impacts on Moorea’s environment. Studies have documented the effects of land-based sources of degradation in the lagoon from sediment runoff (London and Tucker 1992), agricultural chemicals (Gabrie et al. 1988:10–14), coastal construction (Aubanel et al. 1999), and sewage (Ibid:6; MSRDS (Ministe`re de la Sante´ et de la Recherche Direction de la Sante´) 1998); coral, sand, and shell extraction (Porcher and Gabrie
123
GeoJournal (2014) 79:705–719
1987); and damage to the fringing reef from tourist activities such as diving and boat anchoring (Gabrie et al. 1988:16). Development and environmental regulation Le Pacte de Progres was accompanied by new marine management regulations that also played a prominent role in shaping perceptions and attitudes about environmental change. The Plan de Gestion de l’Espace Maritime (PGEM) is a legal code for lagoon zoning and use in Moorea, and was mandated by Moorea’s Municipal Council and the Territorial Assembly in 1992. After a lengthy and sometimes contentious process, the PGEM ultimately restricted fishing and other activities in eight marine protected area (MPA) zones covering approximately 20 % of the lagoon (Walker 2001; Walker and Robinson 2009) (see Fig. 1). This political process of mapping Moorea’s lagoon revealed and sometimes reinforced multiple and oppositional meanings, uses, and values associated with lagoon spaces and species among and within multiple and overlapping stakeholder groups, including government officials, scientists, tourists, commercial fishers, subsistence fishers, recreational fishers, and so forth (Walker 2001; Walker and Robinson 2009). For instance, many fishers felt that the noneconomic value and the spiritual meanings associated with certain areas could not be identified, quantified, or mapped within the confines of an analog map or a digital database of lagoon uses. The public mapping of the lagoon during the PGEM process opened an arena for new debates over access to environmental resources, understandings of local ecological processes, and identifying the sources of environmental degradation. Climate change and variability in French Polynesia Climate change and variability are implicated in the increasingly frequent and intense patterns of natural disasters in the PICTs. In particular, year-to-year climate and weather events, such as El Nin˜o-Southern Oscillation, droughts, and cyclones, as well as longterm climate change events, such as global warming, sea level rise, ocean acidification, and a rise in sea surface temperature, have led to the collapse of marine populations, coral bleaching, shoreline erosion, and destruction of coastal infrastructure (PIRAG 2001;
GeoJournal (2014) 79:705–719
709
Fig. 1 Map of Moorea and PGEM marine protected areas
Hughes et al. 2003; Adger et al. 2005; Barton and Casey 2005; Harley et al. 2006; Avagliano and Petit 2009). Between 1950 and 2004, extreme natural disasters, such as cyclones, droughts, and tsunamis, accounted for 65 % of the total economic impact from disasters on the region’s economies (Bettencourt et al. 2006). CCV is expected to continue to have catastrophic impacts on the foundations of PICT economies and social well-being: subsistence fishing, tourism, aquaculture, agriculture, freshwater availability and quality, human settlements, government and financial services, human health, and cultural identity (PIRAG 2001; Barnett and Adger 2003; Uyarra et al. 2005; Barnett 2011; Scott et al. 2012). French Polynesia has experienced more frequent occurrences of extreme weather and climate-related events, including several memorable cyclones in the past few decades (Orama, Reva, and Veena in 1983,
Wasa in 1991, Martin in 1997, and Oli in 2010), as well as seven climate-related episodes of coral bleaching since 1980, and two outbreaks of crown of thorns starfish (Acanthaster planci) that prey on coral (Adjeroud et al. 2009). Yet unlike many coral reef and island ecosystems, Moorea’s coral reef has an unusual capacity to return to coral dominance after disturbances (Adam et al. 2011). In spite of French Polynesia’s high vulnerability, there are limited data on the local impacts of global climate change in Moorea, and existing knowledge is very fragmented (with the exception of Natural Disaster Risk Plans which are out of date). The Ministry of the Environment completed a baseline study on climate change in 2009 that inventories the main regional ecological, economic, and social vulnerabilities due to climate change, and proposes policy recommendations for potential adaptive responses
123
710
(Avagliano and Petit 2009). The main CCV threats identified for the region are: ocean warming, cyclones, ocean acidification, and sea level rise. The risks posed by these threats are floods, landslides, increased sediment and nutrient runoff from land, physical destruction and degradation of coral reef habitat, coral bleaching (exacerbated by El Nin˜o), and coastal and beach erosion. These risks put French Polynesia’s economic base in jeopardy: tourism, sericulture, agriculture, and subsistence and small-scale fishing. More importantly, French Polynesia’s cultural and spiritual identities—often times embedded in environmental uses and themes—are at risk. The report recommends in particular that local participation, knowledge, and culture are thoroughly integrated into CCV adaptation policies (Ibid).
Theoretical orientation: situating environmental risk perception and adaption in place and time The fieldwork for this paper was conducted within a particular economic, political, and environmental milieu described in the preceding sections of this paper; a period of intensified government-led economic development and new environmental regulations that shaped perceptions of environmental change and conflicts over access to lagoon resources. More broadly, this moment is contextualized within a long history of changing colonial and post-colonial approaches to environmental use and conservation in French Polynesia. This history is punctuated by a series of recent memorable climate events, including cyclones, El Nin˜o events, and ecological disturbances to the coral reef (Vincent et al. 2011). To understand how place-based temporal and historical conditions can have a strong influence on overall perceptions of environmental change, this study builds on the literatures related to political ecology, environmental risk perception, and climate change adaptation. It is increasingly recognized that disasters and the effects of climate change are not isolated events, but rather longitudinal processes with multiple, dynamic causes and consequences involving complex interrelationships between human and natural systems (Oliver-Smith 2004; Eakin and Luers 2006; Smit and Wandell 2006; Eakin and Bojo´rquez-Tapia 2008). This has created new emphases in climate change and disaster research, particularly (a) the reduction of
123
GeoJournal (2014) 79:705–719
social and ecological vulnerability and enhancing resilience of diverse groups and environments; (b) a shift from a focus only on needs and vulnerabilities towards a focus on assessing and building resilience, especially at the local level (Walter 2004; Nelson et al. 2007), and c) incorporating development and sustainability into climate adaptation, resiliency assessments, and disaster reconstruction programs (National Research Council 1999; Berkes et al. 2002; Wisner et al. 2004; Walter 2004; Eakin and Luers 2006; Bizikova et al. 2007; Metz and Kok 2008; Adger et al. 2009; Adger 2010). Earlier models to understand social vulnerability and resilience to climate change, such as those designed by the UN and the IPCC among others (Benioff et al. 1996; McCarthy et al. 2001; UNFCCC 2007), focused on top-down, one-size-fits-all assessments. More recently, a multitude of national and higher resolution (local and household levels) vulnerability/resilience indices have been developed, and significant strides have been made in understanding vulnerability and resilience related to climate change and disasters around the world (Bohle et al. 1994; Kasperson et al. 1995; O’Brien and Leichenko 2003; Adger et al. 2004; Eakin and Luers 2006; Barnett et al. 2008). These studies have emphasized the need for integrating various scales in the analysis of CCV, particularly: social/cultural, geopolitical, spatial, ecosystem, and temporal (Wisner et al. 2004; Turner et al. 2003; Eakin et al. 2009). Local perceptions of the environment and CCV mediate vulnerability, resilience, and adaptation, and understanding these perceptions is key to developing effective CCV and environmental policies (Tucker et al. 2010; Hartter et al. 2012; Ruddell et al. 2012; Vignola et al. 2013). In turn, perceptions of the environment and CCV are shaped by ‘‘biography and people’s everyday lives’’ (Henwood et al. 2008) embedded in historic, social, political, economic, and cultural contexts. Yet, current models for understanding environmental and CCV risk perceptions focus on national-level analyses and developed countries, and do not adequately account for societies and scenarios in the under-developed world. Studies of environmental and CCV risk perception in the United States and Europe have focused on understanding how to foster increased conservation efforts and policy support for climate change initiatives (e.g., O’Connor et al. 1999; Leiserowitz 2006; Sundblad et al. 2007).
GeoJournal (2014) 79:705–719
Risk perception research frequently illustrates a gap between scientific assessments of environmental change (among other risks) and aggregate public perceptions. While these patterns have been validated by multiple studies in the developed world, less is known about perceptions of risk between and among local communities, and the contexts and characteristics of people and places, particularly in underdeveloped countries, that shape convergence and divergence between scientific ‘‘facts’’ and multiple public perceptions of climate change. Whereas understanding public perceptions of climate change in the developed world is focused on reducing the behaviors that create global warming, the focus for under-developed countries is adapting to the effects of climate change. In PICTs in particular, adaptation discourse and policy has become in many cases preoccupied with the trope of climate refugees and relocation, regardless of local geographies, political ecologies, and the identities and desires of local peoples (McNamara and Gibson 2009; Nunn 2010; Bettini 2013). For example, a growing number of studies illustrate how resettlement planning in anticipation of sea level rise and storm-related destruction has resulted in maladaptation, local rejection of relocation plans and climate refugee branding, and wasted opportunities and funding to develop more effective locally-focused solutions (Bravo 2009; Mortreux and Barnett 2009; Farbotko 2010; Farbotko and Lazrus 2012; Lata and Nunn 2012; Lazrus 2012; Barnett and O’Neill 2012; Adams and Adger 2013). Likewise, national-scale assessments of environmental and CCV perceptions are considered unrealistic in that they do not account for local and temporal contexts that strongly influence everyday perceptions and human-environment relationships (Zube 1991). Thus, a political ecology approach that emphasizes the spatial and historical context of human-environment relationships is a useful contribution to the current body of interdisciplinary literature that attempts to understand and plan for adaptation to environmental and climate change. In particular, understanding the recent and longer-term historical context of human-environment relationships in Moorea helps illuminate current perceptions of environmental and climate change among Moorea’s citizens. As such, this paper builds on recent studies that focus on spatial and temporal scales of environmental and CCV perceptions. Several studies focus on the spatial
711
and scalar implications of environmental risk perceptions (Uzzell 2000; Bickerstaff and Walker 2003; November 2004; Baxter and Greenlaw 2005; Bickerstaff et al. 2006; Masuda and Garvin 2006; Zahran et al. 2006; Birkmann 2007; Day 2007; November 2008; Bickerstaff and Simmons 2009; Holifield 2012; Saitta 2012). Place and proximity mediate environmental risk perceptions in multiple ways, and in turn, risk perceptions also shape conceptions of place. Several studies have illustrated that people with a strong sense of place identity are less likely to acknowledge proximate environmental risks (Bickerstaff 2004; Venables et al. 2012), particularly with respect to established risks (Greenberg 2009). On the other hand, proximity to environmental risk may attenuate perceptions of risk, particularly in the face of new threats (Lima and Marques 2005). Aside from place identity, physical vulnerability also shapes perception of environmental risk. Brody et al. 2008, for example, found that there is a strong correlation between physical vulnerability indicators (e.g., living adjacent to the coastline and/or in areas of low elevation) and a heightened sense of personal risk from potential global climate change (2008). These studies illustrate the complex relationship between human-environment relationships on the one hand and perceptions of environmental change and risk on the other. They also emphasize that local analysis is key to understanding the formation of risk perceptions. Similarly, several studies contextualize environmental risk perception in time. Nielsen and Reenberg (2010), for example, show how villagers in Burkina Faso are ‘‘beyond climate’’ in their perceptions of, and adaptations to, environmental change because both climate indicators (especially rainfall), and politicaleconomic conditions that shape livelihood strategies have been in constant multi-directional flux since the 1950s. It is also found that ‘‘temporal discounting’’ is common in perceptions of climate change, whereby perception of an environmental risk diminishes relative to the distance in the future that the threat will occur (Nicolaij and Hendrickx 2003; Ruddell et al. 2012). Bickerstaff and Simmons (2009) provide an important contribution here in understanding both the spatial and temporal shaping of risk subjectivities, experiences, and perceptions in their conceptual approach of ‘‘absencing and presencing’’. Beyond objective measures of space and time proximity, they illustrate how risks become ‘‘experientially salient’’
123
712
through a variety of discursive practices including specific ways that people talk about, remember, and relate local risks to near and distant places and histories (see also Thrift 1999; November 2004; Henwood et al. 2008; Bickerstaff 2012). Understanding these complex spatial and temporal patterns will assist communities and planners in assessing current informal and individual adaptations to climate change and designing effective policies that account for local people and places (Barnett and Adger 2003; Moser 2010; Eakin and Patt 2011; Frank et al. 2011). This project makes a further contribution to environmental and CCV risk perception research by focusing on the marine resources/fisheries sectors (Allison et al. 2009), as opposed to more common case studies on agricultural and terrestrial resources. The next section of the paper follows these overlapping theoretical threads in an explanation of how perceptions of environmental change are mediated by complicated historical human-environment relations.
Data analysis The data presented here were collected between 1999 and 2002, prior to widespread climate change narratives, both in the Pacific Islands and globally. The release of the film An Inconvenient Truth in 2006 is widely considered a turning point in the global discourse of climate change. Although the same types of environmental change were occurring in Moorea before and after 2006, climate change narratives had not yet framed and influenced the ways people in Moorea conceived of environmental change, conservation, and degradation. Instead, these data suggest that historical and contemporary political and economic struggles over environmental use and resources were influential in framing their perceptions of environmental change. In fact, climate change was rarely mentioned, and did not surface as the focus of predominant risk subjectivities and perceptions discussed in the interviews and surveys. As described in the Historical Background section above, the fieldwork for this study took place during the establishment of Le Pacte de Progres economic development initiative, and the related Plan de Gestion de l’Espace Maritime (PGEM) that created new marine management regulations.
123
GeoJournal (2014) 79:705–719
Key informant interviews Qualitative, open-ended interviews were conducted with 30 key environmental stakeholders (seven fishers, seven lagoon tour operators, seven hotel managers, four leaders of community associations, and five personnel from the various agencies involved in the MPA designation process). In response to open-ended interview questions about environmental change,1 these informants identified twelve causes of contemporary environmental problems in Moorea (see Table 1). The relative importance of the causes varied over the five stakeholder groups, but overall, CCV and other natural events were not seen as primary drivers of recent environmental changes by any cohort. Three people (10 %) identified El Nin˜o, and two people (7 %) identified cyclones. None of the key informants identified ‘‘climate change,’’ ‘‘global warming,’’ or ‘‘sea-level rise’’ by name in the interview discussions. Instead, other anthropogenic causes of environmental change were considered the most serious problems. In particular, nuclear testing was the top reason cited for causing contemporary environmental problems, by 43 % of the informants. Overfishing (40 %) and Littering/Trash (37 %) were the second and third most important problems identified overall. Responses varied notably by sub-cohort. Those composed primarily of local Moorean people (tour guides, commercial fishermen, and community group members) overwhelmingly believed that nuclear testing was the primary cause of environmental degradation (86 % of tour guides, 67 % of commercial fishermen, and 50 % of community group members). Other causes cited more frequently by these subcohorts were pesticide and soil runoff from agriculture and hotels (by 75 % of community groups), overfishing (by 50 % of community groups), hotel construction (by 50 % of commercial fishermen), and people from Papeete (by 50 % of community groups) who were blamed for overfishing on the weekends, a surge in home construction on Moorea, and generally not caring as much about Moorea’s environment as local people.
1
Such as ‘‘What have been the biggest changes to the environment in the last 50 years?’’ ‘‘Do you experience any conflicts over lagoon and/or land use?’’, and ‘‘What are the biggest environmental problems in Moorea today?’’.
GeoJournal (2014) 79:705–719
713
Table 1 Causes of environmental problems identified by key informant sub-groups Cause
Nuclear testing
Agencies (n = 5) (%)
Hotel owners (n = 7) (%)
Tour guides (n = 7) (%)
community groups (n = 4) (%)
Commercial fishermen (n = 7) (%)
All (n = 30) (%)
0
14
86
50
67
43
100
29
14
50
33
40
0
57
57
25
33
37
Sewage
20
29
43
0
33
27
Agriculture/pesticides
20
0
14
75
33
23
0
14
0
0
50
13
20
14
0
50
0
13
Overfishing Littering/trash
Hotel construction Papeete people Tourists El Nin˜o
0
0
14
0
33
10
0
14
29
0
0
7
French people
0
0
14
0
17
7
0 20
14 0
14 0
0 0
0 17
7 7
Cyclones Population
Agency personnel and hotel owners who tended to be foreigners (from France or the island of Tahiti) were more likely to identify local practices of overfishing (by 100 % of agency personnel) and littering and trash (by 57 % of hotel owners) as the primary causes of environmental problems. These perceptions were contextualized in the political friction surrounding the implementation of the PGEM. The PGEM process created marine zoning for several activities (fishing, boat mooring, tourism activities, etc.) with the proposed regulations over fishing being the most contested (Walker 2001). Thus, an informant’s perception of environmental problems may have been formed in relation to these contemporaneous public disputes over the causes of environmental problems and how to address them through regulating access to lagoon resources.2 In this context it is not surprising that government agency personnel identified overfishing as the most important problem, as this was in synch with the government’s highly publicized attempts to regulate overfishing through the PGEM. Yet, the agency employees also recognized that there were multiple environmental, economic, and political issues involved. For example one agency
2
It is also possible that informant’s responses to the interview questions were intended to ‘‘game the system’’ if an informant thought that the results of the study would have an effect on environmental policy. The study did not attempt to measure or control for possible gaming strategies.
employee stated: ‘‘(We know) that the lagoon is increasingly occupied by tourists and fishers. Economic development here is very important, and it is based on tourism. The visual experience in the lagoon is the most important priority since this is the base of Moorea’s economy… but the PGEM will not resolve the lagoon health problems because the problem also comes from the land (terracing, pesticides, fertilizers, and hotel sewage)’’. Conversely, local people who make their living from the lagoon as fishers or tour guides may have formed their perceptions of environmental problems in a way that removed blame from them and fishing, and placed it instead on other parties and causes such as nuclear testing, and hotel and agricultural development. In fact, responses to interview questions often played one cause of environmental change off of another. For example, in response to a question about the biggest changes to the environment in the last 50 years, a lagoon tour operator replied: ‘‘There are not many fish left compared to before because of the bomb testing, not because of overfishing. Why didn’t they do the bomb testing in France?’’ (Tour Operator 8/10/01). In another example, a hotel owner and recreational fisher explained that when they first moved to this island, they could see a lot of live coral near the beach, and they could fish right by the beach. ‘‘Now, all the coral is dead, and when we go fishing at night, there are less fish. The coral is dead because of
123
714
pollution from pineapple plantations’’. (Hotel Owner 8/10/01). Another local hotel owner stated ‘‘The hotel and tourists are not responsible for any problems with the environment. Local people pollute the lagoon with trash and that’s why there are less fish.’’ Among the few informants who identified CCV or other climate-related causes of environmental change (El Nin˜o or cyclones) these were never a primary answer, and were always combined with other more dominant causes. Thus, conversations in these qualitative interviews with key stakeholders illustrate that French Polynesia’s colonial and post-colonial political and economic history strongly shape current perceptions of environmental change. Random sample interviews Another set of interviews was conducted with a random sample of seventy residents of Moorea in three neighborhoods around the island. This random sample differed from the key informants in that few of these people were widely considered experts in environmental knowledge, policy, or use, and none were economically dependent on environmental resource extraction such as fishing or farming. However, the majority (90 %) of the random sample identified themselves as fishers, with 60 % stating that they at least partially subsist on fishing. The informants were asked ‘‘Have you noticed changes in the lagoon environment over the last 10–30 years?’’ along with further probes ‘‘What has become worse and why?’’ and ‘‘What has become better and why?’’ Among the 70 people interviewed, 18 environmental changes and/or causes were identified. The only cause identified by over 50 % of the informants was an increase in trash and littering (see Table 2). Other causes that were identified by around 25 % of the informants were the construction of overwater bungalows, sewage, soil erosion, and overfishing, but these results are statistically insignificant. Similar to the key informant interviews, CCV causes and effects were not identified as important drivers of environmental change. Global warming and El Nin˜o were only identified by 13 and 6 % of the informants respectively. Responses to questions about environmental change in these interviews focused on proximate (as opposed to global) human-induced effects on the environment. In these interviews, the actions of local
123
GeoJournal (2014) 79:705–719 Table 2 Causes of environmental problems identified by random sample informants Cause of environmental problems
Times identified n = 70
%
Increased trash and littering
38
54
Increased overwater bungalows
18
26
Increased sewage
17
24
Increased erosion
17
24
Overfishing
16
23
Increased pesticide/fertilizer
10
14
More fishers
9
13
Global warming
9
13
Increased oil
7
10
Papeete fishers
7
10
Increased sand/coral extraction Increased juice factory effluents El Nin˜o
6 4
9 6
4
6
Commercial fishers
3
4
Overuse of fishing nets
3
4
Boats, jet-skis, motor boats
3
4
Overuse of spearguns
1
1
Nuclear testing
1
1
people (littering and overfishing) and the results of recent economic development (hotel construction, sewage from hotels, and soil erosion from construction and agriculture) dominated perceptions of environmental change. These responses are similar to those of the key informants, except nuclear testing was only identified by \1 % of the random sample. As with the key informants, interviews with the random sample included discussions about the recent PGEM process and the need for environmental protection and conservation. 54 % of the random sample agreed that environmental conservation was necessary, but there was little agreement over what precisely needed to be conserved, and how to accomplish it. However, these discussions always revolved around local issues, as opposed to global issues, with blame and responsibility being assigned to local players within local economic, political and environmental histories. The discussions revealed contested understandings of Moorea’s ecology and the synergies within and between the land and sea, but were limited to local ecosystems and processes, with almost no attention to broader forces such as global warming and sea level rise.
GeoJournal (2014) 79:705–719
Throughout most of the interviews, the discussions of environmental change and risk merged with the topic of the PGEM and disagreements over the need for, and efficacy of, environmental regulations. Apart from economic and subsistence concerns of the informants, it was evident that Moorean culture and identity is inextricably linked to the environment, particularly the lagoon. This linkage emerged in the telling of creation myths about the island of Moorea, descriptions of lagoon landmarks that have spiritual and cultural meanings, as well as contemporary claims to lagoon access based on historical and sometimes ancient land and lagoon tenure regimes. Even for people who reported that they fish once or twice a year, they nevertheless claimed the identity of a fisher.
Conclusion Despite recent increases in the frequency of CCV events at the time this study was conducted, Moorean people identified environmental problems and causes that were associated with local people and local political–ecological processes. This case study in Moorea illustrates that the ‘‘everyday’’ considerations that shape environmental risk perceptions are both spatial/scalar and temporal. Local contemporary and historical social and politicaleconomic settings and relationships, and people’s lived experiences within these, have a strong influence on how local people perceive and understand environmental change and risk. Prior to the widespread narrative of Pacific Island risk subjectivities (climate change, global warming, and especially sea level rise), perceptions of environmental change and risk were inexorably intertwined in local everyday struggles over access to resources. In particular, the contentious PGEM process to implement new lagoon zoning was a major focal point around which perceptions of environmental change and risk were articulated. This study also reinforces the conclusions of Shisnaya and Khaysei, among others, who have found that proximate socio-economic threats, particularly in Third World scenarios, far outweigh the importance of climate threats when trying to gauge environmental risk perceptions and effective adaptation strategies (2007: 281). At the same time, this study illustrates that not only current, but historical local events and relationships were influential in shaping environmental risk
715
perceptions in Moorea. Particularly among key environmental stakeholders, nuclear testing that took place decades ago was identified as the principal cause of contemporary environmental concerns. The narratives about nuclear testing were embedded in local political–ecological processes and struggles, linked to current disputes over who is responsible for environmental degradation and how to ameliorate it. Attendant to the work of Bickerstaff, this project extends research on climate change risk ‘‘beyond the scalar hierarchies’’ that are prevalent in climate change risk analyses, to also consider temporal risk framing and subjectivity (2012: 2625). As such this project has implications for adaptation research and planning in Pacific Islands and beyond. While it may be prudent for governments and regional organizations to focus CCV adaptation policies on potential future climate scenarios, this research suggests that it is important to understand local and historical human-environment relationships in order to create effective CCV adaptation plans that resonate with citizens. Taking the time to put global climate processes in the context of local daily lives, histories, and struggles will help to avoid maladaptation, social movements against CCV planning, and wasted opportunities and funding. Acknowledgments The research for this paper was supported by two National Science Foundation Grants (SBR-9806256 and SES-0137458), and a grant from the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Program on Global Security and Sustainability (00-65195-GSS). We are grateful to Vaiatu Frogier, Tehea Tramier, Claude Carlson, Annie Aubanel, Christian Monier, and Mark Eddowes for fieldwork assistance. We also acknowledge the generosity of people too numerous to list from Moorea and Tahiti, as well as the Centre de Recherches et Observatoire de l’Environnement and the UC Berkeley Gump Biological Research Station in Moorea. This is Contribution #200 of the UC Berkeley Gump South Pacific Research Station.
References Adam, T. C., Schmitt, R., Holbrook, S., Brooks, A., Edmunds, P., et al. (2011). Herbivory, connectivity, and ecosystem resilience: Response of a coral reef to a large-scale Perturbation. PLoS ONE, 6(8), e23717. doi:10.1371/journal. pone.0023717. Adams, H., & Adger, W. N. (2013). Changing places: migration and adaptation to climate change. The Changing Environment for Human Security: New Agendas for Research, Policy, and Action. London: Routledge-Earthsan. Adger, W. N. (2010). Climate change, human well-being and insecurity. New Political Economy, 15(2), 275–292.
123
716 Adger, W. N., Barnett, J., Brown, K., Marshall, N., & O’Brien, K. (2013). Cultural dimensions of climate change impacts and adaptation. Nature Climate Change, 3(2), 112–117. Adger, W. N., Brooks, N., Bentham, G., Agnew, M., & Eriksen, S. (2004). New indicators of vulnerability and adaptive capacity. Norwich: Tyndall Center for Climate Change Research. Technical Report 7. Adger, W. N., Eakin, H., & Winkels, A. (2009). Nested and teleconnected vulnerabilities to environmental change. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 7(3), 150–157. Adger, W. N., Hughes, T. P., Folke, C., Carpenter, S. R., & Rockstro, J. (2005). Social ecological resilience to coastal disasters. Science, 309(5737), 1036–1039. Adjeroud, M., Michonneau, F., Edmunds, P. J., Chancerelle, Y., de Loma, T. L., Penin, L., et al. (2009). Recurrent disturbances, recovery trajectories, and resilience of coral assemblages on a South Central Pacific reef. Coral Reefs, 28(3), 775–780. Allison, E. H., Perry, A. L., Badjeck, M., Adger, W. N., Brown, K., Conway, D., et al. (2009). Vulnerability of national economies to the impacts of climate change on fisheries. Fish and Fisheries, 10(2), 173–196. Aubanel, A., Marquet, N., Colombani, J. M., & Salvat, B. (1999). Modifications of the shoreline in the Society Islands (French Polynesia). Ocean and Coastal Management, 42(5), 419–438. Avagliano, E., & Petit, J. N. (2009). Etat des Lieux sur les Enjeux du Changement Climatique en Polyne´sie Franc¸aise. Papeete, French Polynesia: Ministe`re de l’Environnement, Direction de l’Environnement et UC Berkeley, Station Gump. Barnett, J. (2011). Dangerous climate change in the Pacific Islands: Food production and food security. Regional Environmental Change, 11(Supplement 1), S229–S237. Barnett, J., & Adger, N. W. (2003). Climate dangers and atoll countries. Climate Change, 61(3), 321–337. Barnett, J., Lambert, S., & Fry, I. (2008). The hazards of indicators: Insights from the environmental vulnerability index. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 98(1), 102–119. Barnett, J., & O’Neill, S. (2012). Commentary: Islands, resettlement and adaptation. Nature Climate Change, 2(1), 8–10. Barton, A. D., & Casey, K. (2005). Climatological context for large-scale coral bleaching. Coral Reefs, 24(4), 536–554. Baxter, J., & Greenlaw, K. (2005). Explaining perceptions of a technological environmental hazard using comparative analysis. Canadian Geographer, 49(1), 61–80. Benioff, R., Guill, S., & Lee, J. (Eds.). (1996). Vulnerability and adaptation assessment: An international guidebook. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Berkes, F., Colding, J., & Folke, C. (Eds.). (2002). Navigating social-ecological systems: Building resilience for complexity and change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bettencourt, S., Croad, R., Freeman, P., Hay, J., Jones, R., King, P., et al. (2006). Not if but when: Adapting to natural hazards in the Pacific Islands region. Washington DC: The World Bank. Bettini, G. (2013). Climate Barbarians at the gate? A critique of apocalyptic narratives on ‘climate refugees’. Geoforum, 45, 65–74.
123
GeoJournal (2014) 79:705–719 Bickerstaff, K. (2004). Risk perception research: Socio-cultural perspectives on the public experience of air pollution. Environment International, 30(6), 827–840. Bickerstaff, K. (2012). ‘‘Because we’ve got history here’’: Nuclear waste, cooperative siting, and the relational geography of a complex issue. Environment and Planning A, 44(11), 2611–2628. Bickerstaff, K., & Simmons, P. (2009). Absencing/presencing risk: Rethinking proximity and the experience of living with major technological hazards. Geoforum, 40(5), 864–872. Bickerstaff, K., Simmons, P., & Pidgeon, N. (2006). Situating local experience of risk: Peripherality, marginality and place identity in the UK foot and mouth disease crisis. Geoforum, 37(5), 844–858. Bickerstaff, K., & Walker, G. (2003). The place(s) of matter: Matter out of place public—understandings of air pollution. Progress in Human Geography, 27(2), 45–67. Birkmann, J. (2007). Risk and vulnerability indicators at different scales: Applicability, usefulness and policy implications. Environmental Hazards, 7(1), 20–31. Bizikova, L., Robinson, J., & Cohen, S. (2007). Linking climate change and sustainable development at the local level. Climate Policy, 7(4), 271–277. Blaikie, P., & Brookfield, H. (1987). Land degradation and society. London; New York: Methuen. Bohle, H. T., Downing, T., & Watts, M. J. (1994). Climate change and social vulnerability: Toward a sociology and geography of food insecurity. Global Environmental Change, 4(1), 37–48. Bravo, M. T. (2009). Voices from the sea ice: The reception of climate impact narratives. Journal of Historical Geography, 35(2), 256–278. Brody, S., Zahran, S., Vedlitz, A., & Grover, H. (2008). Examining the relationship between physical vulnerability and public perceptions of global climate change in the United States. Environment and Behavior, 40(1), 72–95. Bryant, R., & Bailey, S. (1997). Third world political ecology. London, New York: Routledge. Carney, J., & Watts, M. J. (1990). Manufacturing dissent: Work, gender, and the politics of meaning in a peasant society. Africa, 60(2), 207–241. CDPESC (Charte du De´veloppement pour le Progre´s E´conomique, Social, et Culturel de la Polyne´sie Franc¸aise) (1995) Main Statistics of French Polynesia and Main Economic Goals of the Pact de Progres. Papeete, Tahiti: Charte du Developpement pour le Progre´s E´conomique, Social, et Culturel de la Polyne´sie Franc¸aise. Day, R. (2007). Place and the experience of air quality. Health and Place, 13(1), 249–260. Demetriades, J., & Esplen, E. (2008). The gender dimensions of poverty and climate change adaptation. IDS Bulletin, 39(4), 24–31. Eakin, H., & Bojo´rquez-Tapia, L. (2008). Insights into composition of household vulnerability from multicriteria decision analysis. Global Environmental Change, 18(1), 112–127. Eakin, H., & Luers, A. (2006). Assessing the vulnerability of social-environmental systems. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 31(1), 365–394.
GeoJournal (2014) 79:705–719 Eakin, H., & Patt, A. (2011). Are adaptation studies effective, and what can enhance their practical impact? Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Climate Change, 2(2), 141–153. Eakin, H., Winkels, A., & Sendzimir, J. (2009). Nested vulnerabilities: Exploring cross-scale linkages and vulnerability teleconnections in Mexican and Vietnamese coffee systems. Environmental Science and Policy, 12(3), 398–412. Farbotko, C. (2010). Wishful sinking: Disappearing islands, climate refugees and cosmopolitan experimentation. Asia Pacific Viewpoint, 51(1), 47–60. Farbotko, C., & Lazrus, H. (2012). The first climate refugees? Contesting global narratives of climate change in Tuvalu. Global Environmental Change: Human and Policy Dimensions, 22(2), 382–390. Fazey, I., Pettorelli, N., Kenter, J., Wagatora, D., & Schuett, D. (2011). Maladaptive trajectories of change in Makira, Solomon Islands. Global Environmental Change: Human and Policy Dimensions, 21(4), 1275–1289. Frank, E., Eakin, H., & Lo´pez-Carr, D. (2011). Social identity, perception and motivation in adaptation to climate risk in the coffee sector of Chiapas, Mexico. Global Environmental Change, 21(1), 66–76. Gabrie, C., Galzin, R., & Salvat, B. (1988). Activities humaines et recifs coraillien: Moorea. Papeete: Museum National d’Histoire Naturelle. Greenberg, M. (2009). Energy sources, public policy, and public preferences: analysis of US national and site-specific data. Energy Policy, 37(8), 3242–3249. Guariguata, M. R., Locatelli, B., & Haupt, F. (2012). Adapting tropical production forests to global climate change: Risk perceptions and actions. International Forestry Review, 14(1), 27–38. Harley, C. D., Randall Hughes, A., Hultgren, K. M., Miner, B. G., Sorte, C. J., Thornber, C. S., et al. (2006). The impacts of climate change in coastal marine systems. Ecology Letters, 9(2), 228–241. Hartter, J., Stampone, M. D., Ryan, S. J., Kirner, K., Chapman, C. A., & Goldman, A. (2012). Patterns and perceptions of climate change in a biodiversity conservation hotspot. PLoS ONE, 7(2), e32408. doi:10.1371/journal.pone. 0032408. Henningham, S. (1992). France and the South Pacific: A contemporary history. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Henwood, K., Pidgeon, N., Sarre, S., Simmons, P., & Smith, N. (2008). Risk framing and everyday life: Epistemological and methodological reflections from three socio-cultural projects. Health, Risk, and Society, 10(5), 421–438. Hogan, D., & Marandola, E. (2005). Towards an interdisciplinary conceptualisation of vulnerability. Population Space and Place, 11(6), 455–471. Holifield, R. (2012). Environmental justice as recognition and participation in risk assessment: Negotiating and translating health risk at a superfund site in Indian Country. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 102(3), 591–613. Hughes, T. P., Baird, A. H., Bellwood, D. R., Card, M., Connolly, S. R., Folke, C., et al. (2003). Climate change, human impacts, and the resilience of coral reefs. Science, 301, 929–933.
717 ITSTAT (Institut Territorial de la Statistique). (1998). Te a vei’a Iti, bulletin d’informations statistiques. Papeete, Tahiti: ITSTAT. ITSTAT (Institut Territorial de la Statistique). (2000). Les tableaux de l’economie Polyne´sienne. Papeete, Tahiti: ITSTAT. Jasperse, J. A., Buncle, A., Pelesikoti, N., Nakalevu, T., Aiavao, U., & Moorhead, A. (2014). Mainstreaming climate change adaptation in the Pacific: A practical guide. Apia, Samoa: SPREP/UNDP. Kaly, U. L., Briguglio, L., McLeod, H., Schmall, S., Pratt, C., & Pal, R. (1999). Environmental vulnerability index (EVI) to summarise national environmental vulnerability profiles. Suva, Fiji: SOPAC. SOPAC Report to NZODA, 38 pp. Kasperson, J., Kasperson, R., & Turner, B. (1995). Regions at risk: Comparisons of threatened environments. Tokyo: United Nations University Press. Lata, S., & Nunn, P. (2012). Misperceptions of climate-change risk as barriers to climate-change adaptation: A case study from the Rewa Delta Fiji. Climatic Change, 110(1–2), 169–186. Lazrus, H. (2012). Sea change: Island communities and climate change. Annual Review of Anthropology, 41, 285–301. Le Pre´sident de la Polyne´sie Franc¸aise. (2012). Rapport du Pre´sident de la Polynesie Franc¸aise a` L’assemblee de la Polynesie Franc¸aise. Papeete: Inspection Ge´ne´rale de l’Administration de la Polyne´sie Franc¸aise. Leiserowitz, A. (2006). Climate change risk perception and policy preferences: The role of affect, imagery, and values. Climatic Change, 77(1–2), 45–72. Lima, M. L., & Marques, S. (2005). Towards successful social impact assessment follow-up: A case study of psychosocial monitoring of a solid waste incinerator in the North of Portugal. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 23(3), 227–233. London, S., & Tucker, L. (1992). A comparison of the effects of agricultural and development at two bays on Moorea, French Polynesia and the effects of water outflow on a nearshore coral community, the ecology and geomorphology of tropical Islands course report. Berkeley: UC Berkeley Interdepartmental Studies. Masuda, J. R., & Garvin, T. (2006). Place, culture, and the social amplification of risk. Risk Analysis, 26(2), 437–454. McCarthy, J. J., Osvaldo, F., Canziani, O. F., Lear, N. A., Dokken, J. D., & White, K. S. (Eds.). (2001). Climate change 2001: Impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. McNamara, K. E., & Gibson, C. (2009). ‘We do not want to leave our land’: Pacific ambassadors at the United Nations resist the category of ‘climate refugees’. Geoforum, 40(3), 475–483. Mertz, O., Mbow, C., Ostergaard Nielsen, J., Maiga, J., A., Diallo, D., & Reenberg, A. (2010). Climate factors play a limited role for past adaptation strategies in West Africa. Ecology and Society, 15(4), Article Number: 25. http:// www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss4/art25/. Metz, B., & Kok, M. (2008). Integrating development and climate policies. Climate Policy, 8(2), 99–102. Ministe`re du Tourisme (2011). Les se´ries statistiques du tourisme en Polyne´sie franc¸aise, Deuxie`me e´dition: Mise a` jour 1. Papeete: Gouvernement de la Polyne´sie franc¸aise.
123
718 http://www.servicedutourisme.gov.pf/IMG/pdf/series_V2r1. pdf. 6 Sept 2012. Mortreux, C., & Barnett, J. (2009). Climate change, migration and adaptation in Funafuti, Tuvalu. Global Environmental Change: Human and Policy Dimensions, 19(1), 105–112. Moser, S. C. (2010). Now more than ever: The need for more societally relevant research on vulnerability and adaptation to climate change. Applied Geography, 30(4SI), 464–474. MSRDS (Ministe`re de la Sante´ et de la Recherche Direction de la Sante´). (1998). Qualite´ Bacteriologique des Eaux de Baignade a` Tahiti, Moorea, Bora Bora, Raiatea, et Huahine, Annee 1998. Papeete, Tahiti: Service d’Hygie`ne et de Salubrite´ Publique. Nakalevu, T. (2006). Capacity building for the development of adaptation measures in Pacific Island countries project. Apia, Samoa: Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Program (SPREP). National Research Council (NRC). (1999). Our common journey: A transition toward sustainability. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Nelson, D., Adger, N. W., & Brown, K. (2007). Adaptation to environmental change: Contributions of a resilience framework. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 32(1), 395–419. Nicolaij, S., & Hendrickx, L. (2003). The influence of temporal distance of negative consequences on the evaluation of environmental risks. Human decision making and environmental perception: Understanding and assisting human decision making in real-life situations, 47–67. Nielsen, O. J., & Reenberg, A. (2010). Cultural barriers to climate change adaptation: A case study from Northern Burkina Faso. Global Environmental Change: Human and Policy Dimensions, 20(1), 142–152. Nielsen, J. O., & Vigh, H. (2012). Adaptive lives: Navigating the global food crisis in a changing climate. Global Environmental Change, 22(3), 659–669. November, V. (2004). Being close to risk. From proximity to connexity. International Journal of Sustainable Development, 7(3), 273–286. November, V. (2008). Spatiality of risk. Environment and Planning A, 40(7), 1523–1527. Nunn, P. D. (2010). Bridging the gulf between science and society: Imperatives for minimizing societal disruption from climate change in the Pacific. In A. Sumi, K. Fukushi, & A. Hiramatsu (Eds.), Adaptation and mitigation strategies for climate change (pp. 233–248). Tokyo: Springer Verlag. O’Brien, K., Leichenko’, R., Kelkar’, U., Venema, H., Aandahl, G., Tompkins, H., et al. (2004). Mapping vulnerability to multiple stressors: climate change and globalization in India. Global Environmental Change: Human and Policy Dimensions, 14(4), 303–313. O’Connor, R. E., Bord, R. J., & Fisher, A. (1999). Risk perceptions, general environmental beliefs, and willingness to address climate change. Risk Analysis, 19(3), 461–471. O’Brien, K., & Leichenko, R. (2003). Winners and losers in the context of global change. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 93(1), 89–103. Oliver-Smith, A. (2004). Theorizing vulnerability in a globalized world: A political ecological perspective. In G. Bankoff, G. Frerks, & D. Hilhorst (Eds.), Mapping
123
GeoJournal (2014) 79:705–719 vulnerability: Disasters, development, and people (pp. 10–24). London: Earthscan. Osman, W. (2000). An update on French Polynesia. Honolulu: Bank of Hawaii. Parks, B., & Roberts, J. T. (2006). Globalization, vulnerability to climate change, and perceived injustice in the South. Society and Natural Resources, 19(4), 337–355. Parry, M. L., Canziani, O. F., Palutikof, J. P., van der Linden, P. J., & Hanson, C. E. (2007). Contribution of working group II to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change, 2007. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Pelesikoti, N., Ronneberg, E., Nakalevu, T., & Leavai, P. (2013). Report on adaptation challenges in Pacific Island countries. Apia, Samoa: Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Program (SPREP). PIRAG (Pacific Islands Regional Assessment Group). (2001). Preparing for a climate change. Washington DC: U.S. Global Change Research Program. Porcher, M., & Gabrie, C. (1987). Sche´ma ge´ne´ral d’exploitation de granulats et protection de l’environnement de Moorea et des Iˆles Sous le Vent: Les extractions en milieu coralline. Papeete, Tahiti: Antenne Museum. Reenberg, A., Birch-Thomsen, T., Mertz, O., Fog, B., & Christiansen, S. (2008). Adaptation of human coping strategies in a small island society in the SW Pacific: 50 years of change in the coupled human-environment system on Bellona Solomon Islands. Human Ecology, 36(6), 807–819. Robbins, P. (2003). Beyond ground truth: GIS and the environmental knowledge of herders, professional foresters, and other traditional communities. Human Ecology, 31(2), 233–253. Robineau, C. (1984). Du Coprah a` l’Atome. Paris: OSTROM. Ruddell, D., Harlan, S. L., Grossman-Clarke, S., & Chowell, G. (2012). Scales of perception: Public awareness of regional and neighborhood climates. Climatic Change, 111(3–4), 581–607. Saitta, P. (2012). History, space, and power: Theoretical and methodological problems in the research on areas at (industrial) risk. Journal of Risk Research, 15(10), 1299–1317. Scott, D., Gossling, S., & Michael Hall, C. (2012). International tourism and climate change. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 3(3), 213–232. Shisanya, C. A., & Khayesi, M. (2007). How is climate change perceived in relation to other socio-economic and environmental threats in Nairobi, Kenya? Climate Change, 85(3–4), 271–284. Smit, B., & Wandell, J. (2006). Adaptation, adaptive capacity, and vulnerability. Global Environmental Change, 16, 282–292. STT (Service Territorial du Tourisme). (2001). Frequentations touristiques 2000. Papeete, Tahiti: Ministe`re du Tourisme et de l’Environnement. Sundblad, E., Biel, A., & Garling, T. (2007). Cognitive and affective risk judgments related to climate change. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27(2), 97–106. Thrift, N. (1999). Steps to ecology of place. In J. Allen & D. Massey (Eds.), Human geography today (pp. 295–321). Cambridge: Polity Press.
GeoJournal (2014) 79:705–719 Tucker, C. M., Eakin, H., & Castellanos, E. J. (2010). Perceptions of risk and adaptation: Coffee producers, market shocks, and extreme weather in Central America and Mexico. Global Environmental Change: Human and Policy Dimensions, 20(1), 23–32. Turner, B. L., Kasperson, R. E., Matson, P. A., McCarthy, J. J., Corell, R. W., Christensen, L., et al. (2003). A framework for vulnerability analysis in sustainability science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 100(14), 8074–8079. United Nations (2012). National accounts statistics: Main aggregates database. http://unstats.un.org/unsd/snaama/ introduction.asp. 2 Oct 2013. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). (2007). Climate change: Impacts, vulnerabilities and adaptation in developing countries. Bonn, Germany: Information Services of the Climate Change Secretariat of the UNFCCC. Uyarra, M. C., Coˆte´, I. M., Gill, J. A., Tinch, R. T., Viner, D., & Watkinson, A. R. (2005). Island-specific preferences of tourists for environmental features: Implications of climate change for tourism-dependent states. Environmental Conservation, 32(1), 11–19. Uzzell, D. (2000). The psycho-spatial dimension of global environmental problems. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 20(4), 307–318. Venables, D., Pidgeon, N. F., Parkhill, K. A., Henwood, K. L., & Simmons, P. (2012). Living with nuclear power: Sense of place, proximity, and risk perceptions in local host communities. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 32(4), 371–383.
719 Vignola, R., Klinsky, S., Tam, J., & McDaniels, T. (2013). Public perception, knowledge and policy support for mitigation and adaption to climate change in Costa Rica: Comparisons with North American and European studies. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 18(3), 303–323. Vincent, E. M., Lengaigne, M., Menkes, C. E., Jourdain, N. C., Marchesiello, P., & Madec, G. (2011). Interannual variability of the South Pacific Convergence Zone and implications for tropical cyclone genesis. Climate Dynamics, 36(9–10), 1881–1896. Walker, B. L. E. (2001). Sisterhood and seine-nets: Engendering development and conservation in Ghana’s marine fishery. The Professional Geographer, 53(2), 160–177. Walker, B. L. E., & Robinson, M. A. (2009). Economic development, marine protected areas and gendered access to fishing resources in a Polynesian lagoon. Gender, Place and Culture, 16(4), 467–484. Walter, J. (Ed.) (2004). World disasters report 2004: Focus on community resilience. London: Kumarian Press: International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. Wisner, B., Blaikie, P., Cannon, T., & Davis, I. (2004). At risk: Natural hazards, people’s vulnerability and disasters (2nd ed.). London: Routledge. Zahran, S., Brody, S. D., Grover, H., & Vedlitz, A. (2006). Climate change vulnerability and policy support. Society and Natural Resources, 19(9), 771–789. Zube, E. H. (1991). Environmental psychology, global issues, and local landscape research. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 11(4), 321–334.
123
