Global Environmental Change 23 (2013) 40–50

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Global Environmental Change

journa l homepage: www.e lsev ier .com/ locate /g loenvcha

Globalization, Pacific Islands, and the paradox of resilience

Matthew Lauer a,*, Simon Albert b, Shankar Aswani c, Benjamin S. Halpern d,e, Luke Campanella a,Douglas La Rose a

a Department of Anthropology, San Diego State University, 5500 Campanile Dr., San Diego, CA 92182, USAb Centre for Water Futures, Civil Engineering, The University of Queensland, 4072, Australiac Department of Anthropology & Interdepartmental Graduate Program in Marine Science, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106, USAd National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis, 735 State St. Suite 300, Santa Barbara, CA 93101, USAe Center for Marine Assessment and Planning, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106, USA

A R T I C L E I N F O

Article history:

Received 13 February 2012

Received in revised form 18 July 2012

Accepted 5 October 2012

Available online 10 November 2012

Keywords:

Tsunami

Adaptive capacity

Resilience trade-offs

Globalization

Coral reef

Solomon Islands

A B S T R A C T

On April 2nd, 2007 a 12 m tsunami struck Simbo, a relatively remote island in Western Province, Solomon

Islands. Although Simbo’s population continues to depend on their own food production and small-scale

governance regimes regulate access to resources, the island’s way of life over the last century has

increasingly been affected by processes associated with globalization. In this context of a rapidly

globalizing world, this article examines the island’s resilience and vulnerability to the tsunami and the

adaptive capacities that enabled the response and recovery. The tsunami completely destroyed two

villages and damaged fringing coral reefs, but casualties were low and social–ecological rebound

relatively brisk. By combining social science methods (household surveys, focus group and ethnographic

interviews) and underwater reef surveys we identify a number of countervailing challenges and

opportunities presented by globalization that both nurture and suppress the island’s resilience to high

amplitude, low-frequency disturbances like tsunamis. Analysis suggests that certain adaptive capacities

that sustain general system resilience come at the cost of more vulnerability to low-probability hazards.

We discuss how communities undergoing increasingly complex processes of change must negotiate

these kinds of trade-offs as they manage resilience at multiple spatial and temporal scales.

Understanding the shifting dynamics of resilience may be critical for Pacific Island communities who

seek to leverage globalization in their favor as they adapt to current social–ecological change and prepare

for future large-scale ecological disturbances.

� 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

Some observers suggest that certain Pacific Island communitiesexhibit high levels of social–ecological resilience (Campbell, 2009;Gough et al., 2010; Hviding, 1996; Mercer et al., 2007), a conditiondefined as the ability to absorb disturbance without degradation ofessential processes and structures (Holling, 1973). Resilient social–ecological systems (SESs) have been shown to have adaptivecapacities that emerge from social factors such as in-depth localecological knowledge, flexible governance systems, and diverselivelihood strategies, combined with ecological factors such as highbiodiversity, greater abundance of key species, and a completecommunity structure (Berkes et al., 2003; Folke et al., 2005;Hughes et al., 2005). This is especially the case of more traditionalSESs in the Pacific where small-scale governance regimes

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 619 594 0978; fax: +1 619 594 1150.

E-mail address: mlauer@mail.sdsu.edu (M. Lauer).

0959-3780/$ – see front matter � 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2012.10.011

dominate. These communities have high levels of trust betweencommunity members and customary practices that structureresource use, characteristics that encourage sustainable manage-ment of local resources (Ostrom, 1990) and underpin robustresponse capacities. For example, the inhabitants of Tikopia,Solomon Islands demonstrated a high capacity to deal with amassive 2002 cyclone that destroyed the small island by relying ontraditional practices of thatch housing and fleeing to shelteredlocations under overhanging rocks as the cyclone hit (Anderson-Berry and Yates, 2003). Ecologically the island’s marine andterrestrial ecosystems absorbed the cyclones impact and recov-ered, evidence that resource use patterns have not undermined theregenerative capacity of local ecosystems (Mertz et al., 2010).These and other examples suggest that, in certain contexts, PacificIsland societies are able to confine the impact of ecologicaldisturbances to manageable levels.

However, many of the system characteristics of these local SESsare being altered by broader processes of globalization (Aswaniand Armagan, 2009; Janssen et al., 2007; Young et al., 2006). As

M. Lauer et al. / Global Environmental Change 23 (2013) 40–50 41

local SESs are enmeshed in larger-scale systems such as nationalgovernmental policies, international economic developmentprojects, and global markets they are exposed to novel circum-stances or disturbances outside the SES. Local adaptive capacitythat developed in response to local-scale ecological and socialchange may be rendered ineffective when faced with these newsources of variability. Slow, persistent changes in socioeconomicarrangements or technology associated with globalization havebeen shown to be particularly challenging to local SESs (Janssenet al., 2007). These kinds of changes alter resource use patternsover time that fundamentally transform the SES in response to newvariability at larger spatial and temporal scales, a process that mayenhance resilience at one scale but reduce it at another. Analyzingresilience tradeoffs and how they play out over temporal andspatial scales has increasingly become the focus of research(Gunderson, 2010; Janssen and Anderies, 2007; Nelson et al., 2007;Schoon et al., 2011; Walker et al., 2006).

Building on this intellectual backdrop, this article examines thesocial–ecological resilience, vulnerability, and adaptive capacity onSimbo, a small, relatively remote island in the western SolomonIslands, that on April 2nd 2007 was faced with a major ecologicaldisturbance its habitants had never previously experienced—amassive 12 m tsunami. The waves struck the island just minutesafter an 8.1 magnitude earthquake rattled the seafloor 30 km to thesoutheast (Taylor et al., 2008). The tsunami killed nine people onSimbo and completely destroyed two villages, while the entirenorthern half of the island subsided nearly 1 m (Fritz and Kalligeris,2008). As we detail below, indigenous ecological knowledge,customary land tenure, and sustainable resource use were keyadaptive capacities that buffered the island from the impact of thecatastrophe. However, Simbo, like many local SESs in the Pacific, isincreasingly under the influence of social and economic changesassociated with globalization, a context that has influenced localadaptive capacities and presented new challenges as well asopportunities. Below we assess Simbo’s resilience and ability tocope with the tsunami in an increasingly globalized world.

2. Social–ecological systems, resilience, and globalization

Our analysis is guided by the resilience framework, a systemsperspective that emphasizes the dynamic feedback and interplaybetween humans and the biophysical environment (Adger, 2000;Berkes et al., 1998; Gunderson and Holling, 2002; Gunderson et al.,1995; Holling, 1973). Resilience thinking conceptualizes theecological and social components as interpenetrating processes,hence the term socio-ecological system (SES) to describe theanalytical frame. SESs typically present complex interactions andchanges between processes at different spatial or temporal scalesand as a result are understood more broadly as complex adaptivesystems. Complexity produces emergent properties, non-linearchange, and unpredictable dynamics, all of which are importantareas of research (Holling, 2001; Liu et al., 2007).

Resilient SESs are defined as persistent, adaptable, andtransformable, a suite of properties that enable them to absorbshocks, avoid crossing thresholds into new states, and regenerateafter disturbances (Berkes et al., 1998; Folke, 2006; Gunderson andHolling, 2002; Walker and Salt, 2006). Resilience scholarsdistinguish ecological resilience from the more conventionalconcept known as engineering resilience. Engineering resiliencerefers to the speed at which a system returns to a stable,equilibrium state (Pimm, 1984) whereas ecological resilienceassumes that change rather than equilibrium are a system’s normalor natural state and that disturbances can transform a system intoanother regime of behavior. From the perspective of ecologicalresilience, all systems are vulnerable in that they are susceptibleto disturbances. What determines system vulnerability is its

exposure and sensitivity to perturbations and its capacity to adapt.Understanding adaptive capacities (also called adaptability) iscrucially important when assessing the resilience and vulnerabilityof an SES because they are the preconditions necessary to enableindividuals, households, or communities to adjust to current orfuture change (Nelson et al., 2007). In this way, resilience thinkingconceptually links the resilience, vulnerability, and adaptivecapacity of a system.

When an SES responds to perturbations, short-term adjust-ments will inevitably occur that may take the form of emergencyresponses or other measures that mitigate impact and facilitaterecovery. These short-term, coping strategies are analyticallyseparated from adaptive capacities since they normally occur atsmaller-spatial scales involving individuals or households and theyoccur over shorter temporal scales. Adaptive capacities, on theother hand, are generalized characteristics of larger social group-ings and grounded in cultural values, worldviews, or social–political arrangements. They also have a longer temporal horizonand change more slowly, although adaptive capacities maydevelop from shorter-term coping strategies.

Issues related to scale also demand attention when assessingthe effects of globalization on local SESs. Although the meaning ofglobalization remains contested, four of its most salient char-acteristics include: changing connectedness, increased speed,spatial stretching, and declining social and ecological diversity(Young et al., 2006). In some cases, globalization enables localcommunities to subsidize their livelihoods with inputs fromlarger-scale systems, but this typically involves significanttransformations of local social and economic arrangements, aprocess that can shift adaptive capacity to be more attuned tovariability at larger social and temporal scales. Some Polynesianislands, for example, have, in response to new opportunities,transitioned their economies from diversified, subsistence-basedsystems to monocultures for cash cropping (Colding et al., 2003).This provides a number of benefits including improved overallmaterial well-being, but when faced with large-scale ecologicaldisturbances (e.g., cyclones) these islands must depend on foreignaid and other subsidies from outside the region to buffer theimpact. Local adaptive capacity was, in effect, replaced by outsidehelp, a transformation that makes the SESs more dependent onexternal resources and presents new forms of larger-scalevulnerability.

The 2007 tsunami presents a unique situation to explore anumber of fundamental questions raised by resilience research.How do human societies cope with large-scale ecological distur-bance? What are the adaptive capacities that underpin response?How do the opportunities and constraints associated withglobalization influence resilience and vulnerability to distur-bances? To what extent are SESs like Simbo who are undergoingrapid social and economic change more or less resilient todisturbances now than in the past? What resilience trade-offsare most relevant when disasters strike? And how effectively docommunities negotiate resilience trade-offs that manifest them-selves at different spatial and temporal scales? Below we attemptto answer these questions by examining the initial social andecological impact of the tsunami, the ensuing coping strategies todeal with the catastrophe, and the underling adaptive capacities.

3. Methods

3.1. Study site

Six main islands constitute most of Solomon Island’s landmass,although in total there are hundreds of smaller islets in thearchipelago. It is one of the poorest countries in the Pacific witha GDP per capita of $2546 (United Nations Development

[(Fig._1)TD$FIG]

Fig. 1. The Solomon Islands with inset of study site and main Simbo villages.

M. Lauer et al. / Global Environmental Change 23 (2013) 40–5042

Programme, 2011) and the vast majority of Solomon Islanderscontinue to subsist directly from land and sea resources. Despite alow material standard of living, most of the country’s 500,000inhabitants enjoy a certain level of subsistence security relative topopulations in other parts of the developing world. Life expectancyis 63 years and malnourishment is rare.

On the south-western edge of the New Georgia Group, is thesmall island of Simbo (�10 km2), located 35 km across open-oceanfrom Gizo town, the administrative capital of the Western Province(Fig. 1). Simbo is in fact two islands, one islet know as Nusa Simboand a larger, high volcanic island dominated on the southern halfby two truncated volcanic cones. Collectively the two islands areknown traditionally as Mandegugusu, although Simbo is its officialname and its people use it to identify themselves and their island tooutsiders (Burman, 1981; Dureau, 1994; Hocart, 1922). Over thecenturies human habitation has transformed most of Simbo’sterrestrial ecology into an anthropogenic landscape, with activesemi-intensive agriculture, fallowed plots, and agroforest. Simbo’smarine environment has considerable variation. Vertical reef dropsand narrow intertidal zones dominate the southern half of theisland, while the northern half has fringing reef systems that createinner lagoons with myriad pools, shallow reefs, passages, andintertidal flats.

Currently, Simbo is home to approximately 1782 people(Solomon Islands Government, 2011) making it one of the moredensely populated islands in the Solomons. All of its inhabitantsspeak an Austronesia language unique to the island and most alsospeak the lingua franca, Solomon Islands Pijin. Local community

leaders on Simbo exercise governance and management over theuse and access to land and sea resources through a system ofcustomary tenure. The island is comprised of four customarydistricts, five main villages ranging from 30 to 100 households, anda number of smaller hamlets. Most villagers affiliate with theUnited Church of Melanesia although several denominations arepresent such as Seventh Day Adventists, the New Apostolic Church,and the Christian Fellowship Church. The island has no electricityor roads although there is a small clinic and each village has agovernment-run school. Simbo’s population relies heavily onfishing and gardening as the basis of their livelihood and coastalfisheries provide more than 70% of the protein intake (Schwarzet al., 2012). Cash generating enterprises supplement householdincome, but because of limited access to markets off the island,there is very little selling of fish or shellfish. When possible,households engage intermittently with the cash economy throughcommercial activities such as copra production, shell-diving, or themarketing of megapode eggs, fruits, and vegetables in the Gizomarket.

3.2. Data collection

This paper builds on two decades of long-term ethnographic,human ecological, and environmental science research in thewestern Solomons. Sixteen weeks of social science research wasconducted during yearly visits to Simbo from 2008 to 2012.Household interviews containing structured and semi-structuredinterviews were carried out in all of the Simbo settlements with

Table 2Answers to the question ‘‘Did you know that tsunami will come after a big

earthquake and that you had to escape’’? (n = 37).

Explanation Respondents

Yes 11 (30%)

No 21 (57%)

Knew about small waves

with earthquakes, but not such large waves

5 (13%)

M. Lauer et al. / Global Environmental Change 23 (2013) 40–50 43

special attention focused on Tapurai and Riquru, the two mostaffected villages. An island-wide survey was conducted duringMay–June 2009 in collaboration with local Simbo assistants. Forthe survey we interviewed approximately 18% (57 of 320 totalhouseholds) of Simbo household heads in the main villages ofLengana, Masuru, Nusa Simbo, Riquru, and Tapurai. Householdswere selected randomly from each village area to ensure an evendistribution of interviews across the island. The mean age of therespondents was 45 years. The 60–80 minute survey interviewswere conducted either in Solomon Islands Pijin or the Simbolanguage. Interviews involved a broad array of topics exploring thesocial and ecological impact of the tsunami and earthquake. Theseincluded basic demographic questions as well as questions aboutmigration, perceptions of marine and land ecological change,remittances, gardening practices, livelihoods, time allocation,consumption patterns, and household living standards. Thesestandardized questions allowed for later comparison, but we alsoinsured there were flexible and open-ended questions so that anyimportant issues, perceptions, or ideas could be raised anddiscussed.

We complemented the ethnographic interviews with partici-patory geo-spatial exercises. Focus groups were asked a range ofquestions about the spatio-temporal characteristics of ecologicalprocesses, historic settlement patterns, changes to shallow-waterbenthic habitats (grassbeds, reefs, etc.) and coastal habitats(mangroves), customary tenure regimes, as well as the dynamicsof community response, resettlement and recovery. Seven focusgroup interviews were conducted in all the main villages with fiveto seven representatives from each. Informants, both male andfemale, were selected with the aid of the Simbo DisasterManagement Committee. Interviews lasted 90–120 minutes andwere digitally-recorded.

In addition to the socially focused data collection techniques, in2009 we conducted underwater surveys of coral reef condition atfour sites adjacent to Lengana and Tapurai villages. At each of thefour sites three 50 m transects were surveyed along the reef edgein 2–3 m of water. At 2 m intervals along these transects a digitalphoto was taken of the benthos from a distance of 0.5 m. Usingphoto analysis software (Coral Point Count v. 3.6-NCRI) benthiccover was categorized at twenty random points on each photo.Thus at each site benthic cover was documented at 1560 points (3transects � 26 photos � 20 points). At one site adjacent to Lenganavillage the diameter of 100 randomly selected branching coralspecies (Acropora sp.) was quantified to provide insight intorecovery rates.

4. Results

4.1. Local response and indigenous knowledge

The 12 m waves that struck early in the morning on April 2ndcompletely washed away two villages, Tapurai and Riquru, killingnine people. A number of other villages were also affected butthere were no casualties (Table 1).

Table 1Main Simbo villages and effects of tsunami.

Village Households Deaths Damages

Living quarters Kitchens

Lengana 105 0 8 9

Masuru 39 0 13 14

Nusa Simbo 79 0 6 1

Riquru 34 2 12 13

Tapurai 63 7 44 44

The vast majority of villagers quickly fled to high ground afterthe earthquake. This response constituted the most important, life-saving coping strategy during the catastrophe. Our initial researchindicated the underling adaptive capacity that provoked thisresponse was local ecological knowledge. In order to assess localknowledge about tsunamis we asked survivors in Tapurai andRiquru (n = 37) a number of standardized questions such as: ‘‘Did

you know that a tsunami will come after a big earthquake and that you

had to escape?’’ and ‘‘If yes, how did you learn that tsunamis would

come after earthquakes and that you had to escape?’’ Theseinterviews revealed that 11 people (30% of total respondents)knew that a tsunami would be generated by an earthquake, 21(57%) people did not know, and five respondents (13%) thoughtonly small waves were created by earthquakes (Table 2). For thosewho had knowledge about the tsunamis 87% heard elders tell themstories about large waves associated with earthquakes, while onerespondent had learned about tsunamis on the radio and anotherhad seen a video of the Indonesian tsunami while visiting family inHoniara. For those that did not expect the tsunami, 52% ofrespondents explained that the first small surge that brought thesea level above the normal high-water mark, as well as the strangecurrents it created, frightened them and caused them to run inland,19% were told by others to run, 10% were told by others who sawthe wave coming, and another 10% said they ‘just ran for their lives’because they ‘sensed’ (mulongo) something was wrong with thesea.

Although only 30% of survey respondents had explicittraditional knowledge (e.g., oral history) about tsunamis, themajority of which was intergenerationally transmitted throughstorytelling, this was combined with experiential knowledge of themarine environment and some global knowledge (i.e., knowledgeabout tsunamis gained through awareness programs). That thisassemblage of knowledges provoked most Simboans to flee forcesus to reconsider what kinds of knowledge underlies an effectiveresponse. In this case, experiential and performative knowledgeplayed a larger role than pre-determined plans of action spelledout in culturally embedded myths or oral history. Elsewhere weargue that these kinds of situated practices and strategies shouldnot be underestimated when analyzing disaster response (Lauerand Aswani, 2009; Lauer, 2012).

That Simbo’s inhabitants retain an assemblage of knowledgesthat provoked an effective response is related to the larger-scaleprocess of globalization. The Solomon Islands remain relativelyisolated from the global economy and broader social and economicforces and thus have experienced a moderate level of culturalhomogenization and integration into the world system, a keyanalytic dimension of current globalization (Young et al., 2006).The degree to which regions of the Solomon Islands are isolatedfrom the global system is quite variable. Choisuel and Isabelprovinces, for example, are much more isolated than Simbo, withsparser populations, fewer communication links, and veryrestricted access to national or global markets. Simbo hassubstantially more access to markets because of its close proximityto Gizo, the regional capital and the third largest town in thecountry. Nevertheless, Simbo’s level of isolation has allowed (orforced) Simboans to sustain indigenous ecological knowledge.

M. Lauer et al. / Global Environmental Change 23 (2013) 40–5044

Subsistence fishing and agriculture dominate island livelihoodsand the cash economy remains relatively restricted.

4.2. Impact on marine environment

Although no data on reef condition exist prior to the tsunami, itis apparent from discussions with fishermen and divers that thecoral reefs surrounding Simbo were intact and productive prior toApril 2nd 2007. Specifically, the coral reefs on the north-westernside adjacent to Lengana and Tapurai where dominated by highcoral cover and a diverse fish community that provided anabundance of food to the Simbo people. The earthquake andtsunami are likely to have had separate yet compounding impactson the reef community. Firstly, the 8.1 magnitude earthquakewould have physically broken individual coral colonies andfractured the reef substrate (as was still evident in our 2009surveys). Secondly, the series of powerful waves would havecompletely destroyed fragile branching coral species (alreadyweakened and fractured by the earthquake) leaving a handful oflarger massive corals and a bare limestone substrate (Madin andConnolly, 2006).

There is little evidence that the tsunami had a direct effect onfish populations, although some villagers claim that the fish tastedstrange during the weeks following the tsunami. However, coralreef habitat loss can have indirect impacts on fish populations ifrecovery does not occur (Jones et al., 2004).

4.3. Relocation and customary practices

Immediately after the tsunami, villagers relocated to mountain-top gardens, a coping strategy that was predicated on the inherentflexibility and pragmatism of customary land-tenure arrange-ments. Survivors explained that their relocation to inland gardenswas improvised and ad hoc. There was no organized response.Spooked by strong aftershocks, villagers kept fleeing higher up thehills until they reached several recently cleared gardens. Thesebecame temporary camps. Except at Tapurai, most villagersremained camped in the gardens for three or four months afterthe tsunami. Temporary thatch shelters were built and within48 hours the Solomon Islands government began sending reliefsupplies such as tents, bottled water, and bags of rice.

Customary land-tenure is an important adaptive capacity thathas been noted throughout Melanesia (Crocombe, 1971; Ward andKingdon, 1995). Nearly all Simbo land is under customary landtenure where local kin groups hold overlapping land use rights.Rights to garden plots are conferred to households when they clearmature forest and plant subsistence crops or when they ask seniorclan members for usufruct or permanent user rights of a particulararea that is not disputed. Members of that household can thenclaim rights to the fruits of their labor for as long as they maintaincultivation. Because of the exceptionally fertile volcanic soilson Simbo, families have farmed the same plots for generationswithout a perceptible drop in crop yield. Consequently, householdshave maintained rights to specific garden plots through successivegenerations. However, even if a household or individual cultivatesa plot of land for many years it is not vested in them, it is always‘owned’ by the broader community.

On Simbo customary ownership practices continue to structureresource use and access. In general, households control access toroot crops or vegetables produced from their gardens or any usefultree crops (e.g., canarium nuts, fruits, etc.) or tree materials (e.g.,sago palm leaf). However, certain garden hope (restrictions) changeduring the life-cycle of the garden. Early in its life-cycle, when agarden has been recently cleared and planted, hope are mostintense and strict. This intensification of hope is based on therationale that gardens are easily disturbed and most fragile when

the cuttings and seedlings are freshly planted. This garden stage isknown as ukagore and it is strictly forbidden for non-owners to clipcuttings from sweet potato vines or to disturb the garden plot inany way. Non-owners are not even allowed to walk through thegarden. If a non-owner for some reason violates the hope anddisturbs an ukagore garden it is socially sanctioned for the owner todemand compensation for the infraction.

These principles of resource ownership intertwine with relatedsystems of exchange and the sharing of labor and resourcesbetween descent groups and the wider community. Village life onSimbo continues to revolve around notions of generosity andreciprocal obligations known as varivagana, although the growingneed for cash has progressively weakened these practices.Varivagana connotes love, a feeling of concern for other people,and maintaining community relationships. In the context ofvarivagana, relationships with kin and the wider community havepriority over self-centered activities such as profit-making orresource accumulation. Households are obligated to sharevegetables and other resources from their gardens whenrequested. Exchange enhances an individual’s social status whilealso indebting the receiver, ensuring future reciprocations of laboror resources.

In the wake of the tsunami customary land practices relaxedand sharing flourished. Each village on Simbo relocated to highelevation ukagore gardens. Freshly cleared and free of matureplants, the ukagore gardens were the most conducive plots of landto quickly establish temporary villages. Interestingly, the ownersof these sites allowed their ukagore gardens to be settled and theirnewly planted crops destroyed regardless of the strong hope

associated with gardens in this life-cycle stage.In addition to the relaxation of customary landholding practices

the ethic of reciprocal exchange and sharing (varivagana)strengthened. Villagers freely harvested food crops and collectedbuilding materials from any garden, regardless of ownership,without asking permission. Under normal circumstances theseacts would have generated disputes and conflicts. Shop ownerswere also generous and distributed packaged food from theirstores to needy community members. Rather than food hoardingand price spiking, the value of food effectively fell to zero. Clothing,machetes, cooking pots, and other coveted commodities werewidely shared between households. In addition, no looting orviolence of any kind was reported.

4.4. Land-based resources

The terrified villagers avoided harvesting marine resources forseveral months after the tsunami, but they were able to rely ontheir gardens and other land-based resources for food and otherneeds. Simbo gardens remain productive despite centuries ofcultivation. This stable and reliable garden productivity representsa key adaptive capacity. In our household survey, 66% of villagersresponded that over their lifetimes garden yields have notdeclined. To sustain this fertility farmers employ a number oftraditional and introduced practices. This includes mulching,terracing to control erosion, and intercropping nitrogen fixing treespecies (e.g. Lysiloma latisiliquum). In addition, several species ofintroduced, fast growing vines such as mile-a-minute (Mikania

micrantha) are allowed to cover gardens during fallow, providing arapidly growing layer of humus-generating foliage that can beeasily cleared by cutting and rolling up the thick mat of vines.

Since fish and shellfish provide the majority of protein in thelocal diet, protein intake was potentially the most affected by thetsunami. Canarium nuts, however, provided an important alterna-tive source of protein. Known locally as aoro njari (canarium

indicum) and aoro vino (canarium salomonense), these two varietiesof nuts were vitally important in pre-contact times both

Table 4Answers to the question: ‘‘What are the major resource problems on the island’’?

(n = 49).

Explanation Respondents

No major problems 19 (39%)

Lack of timber to build house 7 (14%)

Decreasing soil quality 6 (12%)

Land shortage to make gardens 6 (12%)

Very few megapod eggs 5 (10%)

Insects are killing crops 2 (4%)

No access to markets to sell products 2 (4%)

Fishing is not very productive 1 (2%)

Water supply too far away 1 (2%)

M. Lauer et al. / Global Environmental Change 23 (2013) 40–50 45

ritualistically and in terms of subsistence. Today, hundreds ofancient nut orchards are dispersed across the island landscape.Villagers frequently tend the trees, clearing underbrush andcollecting mature fruits that have dropped to the ground. Similar togardens, the rights to harvest orchards and even specific treeswithin orchards are formally recognized through customarytenure.

Canarium trees are a foundational species of the arboriculturalsystem of food production on Simbo. The two species of canariumfound on the island produce fruit at different times of the year,providing a near constant supply of nuts. Aoro vino fruit from Mayto October while aoro njari produce from October through April,marking the two major locally recognized seasons (Burman, 1981).Linguistically, the importance of canarium is expressed by the factthat aoro not only refers to a nut grove, but also means ‘year’.Although their ritualistic importance has waned with the rise ofChristianity, canarium nuts continue to be a significant food in thelocal diet. Our surveys showed that 64.5% of villagers eat canariumnuts on a daily basis and 33.3% eat them on a weekly basis. The nutsare typically eaten raw or are added to variety of cooked dishesranging from pudding (iamu) to slippery cabbage (neka). The nutsare not only delicious but also nutritious, containing 8–14% protein(Elevitch et al., 2006).

After the tsunami, access restrictions to the nut groves relaxedin similar ways as did access to garden products. Moreover, aoro

njari was at the tail end of the season when the tsunami hit andaoro vino provided fruit during the period when the mountain-top,relocation camps were occupied. The readily available supply ofnuts provided a steady flow of dietary protein during the recoveryprocess. Pressure on the groves, however, continues to mount as agrowing population has started to harvest more canarium trees fortheir lumber.

4.5. Demographics, migration, and remittances

Over the nineteenth and twentieth centuries Simbo’s popula-tion first declined and then increased dramatically. Evidence fromother regions in the Solomons suggests that populations werelarger at the beginning of the nineteenth century than at the endbecause of increasingly intense contact with Europeans thatintroduced devastating diseases (Bayliss-Smith, 2006). The firstrecorded census of Simbo, conducted in 1930, was probablyrecorded at a time when the population was at its lowest level inmany centuries. The 1930 census documented 376 residents.Subsequent censuses recorded a rapidly growing population asSimbo’s access to medical care increased and traditional fertilitylimiting measures were abandoned as islanders adopted Chris-tianity (Dureau, 1994). The censuses of 1986, 1999, and 2009record a 374% increase, from 376 residents in 1930 to 1782 in 2009(Table 3).

These numbers, however, do not include those who wereborn on Simbo and have moved, either permanently ortemporally, elsewhere. Absentee rates of 30% have beendocumented in other regions in the Solomons (Reenberget al., 2008) and the 1999 census indicates that 43% (725) ofpeople born on Simbo now reside in other parts of the Solomons.These census figures should be viewed with some caution as

able 3imbo population data.

Year Population Increase (%)

1930 376

1986 1328 253

1999 1672 26

2009 1782 7

TS

migration on Simbo is highly variable. Depending on the time ofyear villagers frequently leave the island to visit relatives,engage in temporary wage-labor activities, receive health care,or attend secondary school.

Assuming that a significant portion of Simbo’s population doeslive elsewhere, remittances appear to play a relatively minor rolein the household economy. Just over half (52%) of householdsreceive cash remittances at least once a year, with thosehouseholds receiving on average 4.6 remittances per year. Butwhen asked how dependent households were on this source ofcash 18% of household heads responded that it was very important,36% said it was somewhat important, and 43% said it was notimportant.

The massive increase in population over the last centuryundoubtedly has impacted marine and land resources, but,according to villagers, not to the extent that local resources arenow scarce. In our household survey we asked villagers if therewere more, less, or the same amount of resources compared towhen they were children. Seventy-eight percent responded thatthere were fewer marine resources and 72% thought there werefewer land resources. However, in a follow-up survey conducted in2012 we asked in a more open-ended survey question if there wereany major resource problems on the island. Thirty-nine percentresponded thought there were no major problems, 14% respondedthat there was a lack of timber on the island and only 12% thoughtthere were land shortages (Table 4). These results supportinformation gathered in the focus group and ethnographicinterviews. The general consensus on the island is that resourceswere more bountiful in the past but that currently resources arenot scarce and they adequately meet local household needs. Themost commonly reported problem (not related to naturalresources) is the lack of cash. Ninety percent of household headssaid their need for cash has increased over their lifetimes withschool fees cited as the most important reason the demand for cashhas increased.

Simbo’s demographic profile suggests that globalization hashad contradictory effects on overall system resilience. Populationgrowth on Simbo clearly reduces overall resilience as populationdensity increases and stress on resources mount. But globaliza-tion has also provided an outlet for population growth throughmigration. Before 1900, migration would have been minimal dueto inter-island hostilities (see Section 4.6 for more details). In thisway, globalization has both exacerbated resource stress andalleviated it. The net affect has clearly been increased scarcity oflocal resources, but not to the extent that the subsistence base hasbeen seriously undermined or where dependence on externalsources of cash has become a necessity.

4.6. Historic settlement patterns

Simbo’s changing settlement patterns exemplify how currentadaptive capacity and resilience are influenced by past decisions.All of Simbo’s largest settlements, including those destroyed by the

Table 5Benthic cover of four Simbo Island reefs surveyed in 2009.

Benthic cover (%) SE

SummaryLive coral 29.2 6.5

Dead coral 0.1 0.1

Rock 50.4 8.7

Macroalgae 0.6 0.3

Other 0.1 0.1

Sand/rubble 19.5 7.3

Coral compositionBranching coral 11.2 2.7

Encrusting coral 5.2 0.9

Massive coral 10.5 4.5

Soft coral 2.4 1.4

Rock algal communityCoralline on rock (RC COR) 38.8 4.6

Rock clean (RC CL) 1.4 0.8

Turf on rock (RC TURF) 10.2 4.4

M. Lauer et al. / Global Environmental Change 23 (2013) 40–5046

tsunami, occupy low-lying sites near the coast with direct access tothe sea. This, however, is a historically recent settlement pattern.Simbo oral history and an archeological survey indicate that pre-contact villages were located inland, tucked in small defensiblevalleys around the volcanoes with only traditional canoe houses(paile) built on the immediate coastline (Miller, 1978). Throughoutthe region, villages were established inland or on defensible coastalridges or bluffs prior to European contact. Scheffler (1965) arguesthat until about 1905 the inhabitants of Choiseul (north-westSolomons) ‘‘dwelled inland, dispersed in small hamlets on thenumerous ridges’’ (1965, p. 3). He considered this the ‘traditional’settlement pattern of the western Solomons (Scheffler, 1962).

Islanders occupied inaccessible inland village sites or highdefensible coastal sites because of warfare and predatory head-hunting. Chronic inter-island hostilities dominated the westernSolomons and the New Georgia Group prior to European contact(Aswani, 2000; Jackson, 1978). The motive for raiding was toacquire and collect an enemy groups’ severed heads. Trophy skullswere the primary marker of a group’s political status and militarymight. The occupation of defensible sites was a crucial adaptivecapacity that had developed over several millennia in response toregional socio-political arrangements. One unintended conse-quence to the local SES was high resilience to tsunamis.

At the turn of the 20th century the western Solomonsunderwent major social transformations as globalization intensi-fied and the region became more interconnected with the widersocial and economic processes. In response to new opportunitiespresented by these changes, villages were relocated from inlandand defensible coastal sites to open, coastal, foreshore locations.This process was driven by a number of factors. First, villages nolonger needed to be defended from violent attack. The rise of pax

britannica ended inter-island warfare quite abruptly in 1900 whena British police force, based at the newly established governmentstation in Gizo, forced their way onto the island and spent a weeksystematically destroying war canoes, communal houses, and pigs(Dureau, 1994; Jackson, 1978).

The arrival of missionaries and the establishment of theprotectorate government further influenced villagers to relocateto open, coastal sites. Missionaries and government officialsencouraged village relocation to facilitate schooling, proselytizing,administration, and access to health care. Western medicine was aparticularly important and vital reason to engage with the Britishoutpost on Gizo. The rise of the copra-based plantation economywas also a factor. Accessibility to the sea was crucial for theseactivities.

4.7. Self-organization

An important element of local governance that contributed toan effective recovery on Simbo was the spontaneous formation ofthe Simbo Disaster Management Central Committee (SDMCC).Voluntarily a group of local leaders self-organized the committeeand coordinated activities between local households and regionaland national government agencies and international NGOs.Resilience scholars have emphasized that these kinds of self-organizing and self-enforcing capabilities are crucial ingredientsfor effective response in complex social–ecological systems (Folkeet al., 2005).

The SDMCC was formed just hours after the tsunami by acommittee composed of three men, all of them educatedprofessionals with either college degrees or work experience inthe national government. None of the men were traditional leadersalthough they worked closely and had the support of most of thevillage chiefs and the church leadership.

In SDMCC’s fist meeting they selected representatives fromeach village who would report to the central committee. In

coordination with the village representatives, the committeeconducted a comprehensive island-wide disaster assessment thatdocumented the number of deaths, property damage, andcharacteristics of the relocation camps. They also coordinatedand regulated the distribution of relief supplies that were reachingthe island. A central office in Lengana was established where thecommittee received the majority of relief supplies, counted them,and organized their distribution to each household. SDMCC alsoorganized a provisional clinic on a hill above Lengana and installeda temporary high-frequency radio transmitter.

SDMCC’s rapid self-organization and their communication linkprecipitated a swift response from national authorities, local NGOs,and international relief agencies. Just two days after the tsunami,the first relief supplies reached the island. A ship with foodstuffs(mainly rice), bales of clothing, tents, mosquito nets, bottled water,medicine, canned tuna, cooking pots and utensils was sent by theDon Bosco Technical Institute in Honiara, a Roman Catholicorganization. Following this initial aid, World Vision, Save theChildren, and the Red Cross collaborated with the National DisasterManagement Office and the National Disaster Council in follow-upshipments and rehabilitation.

It is important to note that SDMCC’s leadership was notunanimously accepted. Tapurai, in particular, challenged SDMCC’sauthority and legitimacy. During focus group interviews in Tapuraithey argued that the SDMCC distributed relief supplies unfairly. Tocircumvent the SDMCC, Tapurai formed their own committee andsuccessfully made direct requests for relief supplies to the aidagencies and the national government. As a result, a significantamount of supplies was unloaded at Tapurai and distributed bytheir committee. This infuriated the SDMCC who accused Tapuraiof ‘developing a severe mania for hoarding’ and ‘acting like a cargocult’.

4.8. Recovery of marine environment

The four reefs adjacent to Tapurai and Lengana have recoveredvery well in the two years between the earthquake and thesurveys. Live coral cover ranged from 15 to 45%, with negligibledead coral and macroalgae (signs of stress) across all sites (Table 5).This indicates the reef structure and function is still intact and corallarval supply has been strong.

The coral community observed during the 2009 surveys wasprimarily branching and massive species. The majority of themassive colonies ranged between 50 and 200 cm diameter (20–100 years old) indicating they survived the tsunami. The branchingcoral however were all less than 30 cm in diameter and hencelikely new recruits after the tsunami. In fact the frequency of

[(Fig._2)TD$FIG]

Fig. 2. Frequency of branching coral diameters recording during 2009 Simbo reef

surveys.

[(Fig._3)TD$FIG]

Fig. 3. High resolution satellite images of Tapurai village site acquired before and

after the 2007 tsunami.

M. Lauer et al. / Global Environmental Change 23 (2013) 40–50 47

branching coral diameter indicates two recruitment cohortsbetween April 2007 and May 2009 with an average of 8 cm and21 cm diameter for each cohort (Fig. 2). In addition, observations inSeptember 2010 saw a third recruitment cohort, with the largestindividuals approaching 50 cm diameters (personal observation).

This rapid recovery of the coral reef ecosystem is likely afunction of high larval supply from strong prevailing currents andthe low local-scale human disturbance of the marine ecosystem.The reef surveys show the bare ‘‘rock’’ or limestone substrate weredominated by coralline algae with minimal algal turfs. Thesecoralline algae provide the preferred substrate for coral recruit-ment and hence would have contributed to the rapid recovery(Arnold et al., 2010; Birrell et al., 2005). The dominance of corallinealgae over algal turfs is driven by two local-scale processes: first,the maintenance of a high biomass of herbivorous fish such asscarids and acanthurids contributes to the top-down control ofalgal turfs; and second the high water quality limits the growth ofturf algae from a lack of terrestrially derived sediments andnutrients (Albert et al., 2008). Hence the relatively low humanpressures on the reefs surrounding Simbo prior to and after thetsunami provided the environmental conditions to allow for arapid recovery of hard coral which are the fundamental buildingblock of a healthy and productive reef ecosystem.

4.9. Social recovery and land disputes

Flexible customary-land practices accommodated the immedi-ate relocation of villages to temporary camps, but as the islandrecovered from the tsunami, land disputes began to emerge thatgenerated vulnerabilities to future tsunamis. Relocation campswere occupied for several months and then abandoned as villagersreturned to their coastal settlements. However, the two villagesites most severely impacted, Riquru and Tapurai, were notrepopulated. Most of Tapurai resettled to the small hamlets ofMagela, Georo, Rupe, and Patu Belama in the hills near thedevastated villages (Fig. 1). In many cases these villagers relocatednear their kinfolk who had established land rights. At Tapurai, 23 of44 households who did not have close relatives in nearby hamletsdecided en masse to move to the community of Rupe. This hamlethad the greatest area of level space, a characteristic that made it themost suitable relocation site for those households who did nothave close kin in any of the hamlets.

But soon after the arrival of these families to Rupe, tenuredisputes began to emerge over their resettlement. Villagers fromother parts of Simbo who had strong ownership rights to the Rupearea protested. In several cases these disgruntled landowners

paddled from other parts of the island, entered Rupe, anddestroyed the tent shelters of the settlers who had relocated fromTapurai.

Tenure disputes became even more heated when in 2010 theSolomon Islands government offered to build a new school forTapurai. This was part of an island-wide rehabilitation projectwhere schools across Simbo were being built. To decide where tolocate the new school building, Tapurai held a series of communitymeetings and workshops. The community agreed that the mostappropriate site was a flat area in Rupe. It was the only large, level,and accessible site, but it also was conveniently located near themost number of households. When Tapurai announced theirdecision, Simboans from other parts of the island who hadlandholding rights to the proposed school site rejected Tapurai’sdecision. A number of kin groups from Lengana and Nusa Simboclaimed rights to the Rupe area and demanded monetarycompensation from Tapurai. The groups also sent protest lettersto the government agency responsible for the school projectvoicing their discontent. These disputes delayed the project andcompelled Tapurai to hold several more meetings and select analternative site. During these meetings, a few other, less desirablesites were chosen, but landowners of those plots also protested.Eventually the Tapurai leadership directed the government tobuild the school on the old Tapurai site, the raised beach area thatwas wiped clean by the tsunami (Fig. 3). It was the only site thatwas acceptable to all Simbo landholders since it was a long-standing village site and any specific historic land right claims inthe past had weakened.

M. Lauer et al. / Global Environmental Change 23 (2013) 40–5048

The outcomes of these disputes reveal how the flexible systemof customary land tenure is both a source of resilience andvulnerability. It facilitated village relocation immediately after thedisaster but also spawned conflict and tension during therebuilding process, undermining Simbo’s ability to enhance theirresilience to future tsunamis and other impending oceanic changessuch as sea-level rise.

5. Discussion and conclusion

5.1. Countervailing forces of globalization

Globalization’s effect on settlement patterns has clearlydecreased Simbo’s resilience to tsunamis. Today Simbo villagesoccupy exposed coastal sites, a settlement pattern that emerged atthe turn of the 20th century when the western Solomons weredrawn into Great Britain’s colonial empire. Colonization endedchronic warfare, replacing it with amicable trading relations andgreater articulation with regional and international markets.Simbo adapted to this novel social–political reality by movingtheir villages from defensible inland or high coastal locations toexposed foreshore sites, a shift that facilitated access to amultitude of new trade-goods (e.g. metal implements), rapidlyexpanding trading opportunities, and western medicine. By thebeginning of the 20th century, inhabiting accessible coastal sitesbecame essential. Yet these village sites are extremely vulnerableto tsunamis.

The encapsulating forces of globalization have also resulted in adramatic increase in Simbo’s population, arguably one of the ‘‘keydrivers’’ of vulnerability (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment,2005). With pacification and the cessation of head-hunting,violence-related mortality decreased throughout the Solomons(Jackson, 1978). Moreover, access to modern medicine andsanitation expanded, lowering infant mortality rates. This wascoupled with the rise of Christianity and the abandonment oftraditional practices that controlled fertility (Dureau, 1994). Thesechanges translated into rapid population growth on Simbo over the20th century.

Globalization may also be eroding some of the adaptivecapacities that enabled Simbo to cope with the tsunami andmitigate its impact. Two key adaptive capacities, local ecologicalknowledge and flexible social institutions (i.e., customary tenure),are under threat worldwide (Young et al., 2006). Local ecologicalknowledge tends to be displaced with other forms of knowledge aslocal SESs shift from a subsistence livelihood to a marketdominated regime. This process has been documented in theSolomons (Furusawa, 2009; Thaman et al., 2011) and many otherregions of the world (Sillitoe et al., 2002). Local institutionaldiversity also has tended to decline as globalization intensifies. Inmany cases, this is a result of top-down entities such as nationalgovernments or international NGOs who, in the name ofdevelopment, environmental conservation and even disasterpreparedness, intervene and ‘regularize’ human–environmentinteractions (Scott, 1998). Take customary land tenure. Manyinternational development experts argue that this propertyarrangement is an impediment to economic development (Dei-ninger, 2003). Organizations like the World Bank encouragegovernments to institute well-defined, formalized land-rights,policies they see as critical for economic growth, povertyreduction, and disaster mitigation. Effective disaster mitigationand response is thought to be weakened by informal land tenuresystems. These policies have led to a widespread decline ofcustomary tenure across the Pacific.

Sustainable use of marine and land resources is anotherimportant adaptive capacity on Simbo, yet increased integrationinto the global economy and access to global markets could

intensify the island’s fishery, leading to overfishing and degrada-tion of the marine environment. Despite centuries of exploitation,the resilience of Simbo’s marine environment has not been eroded.That Simbo’s marine ecosystem regenerated after the tsunamisuggests that human impact on the local ecosystem has notundermined its basic functions and structures. This is due in largemeasure to the fact that Simbo continues to be a subsistence ratherthan a market-oriented fishery. Lack of refrigeration facilities onthe island and limited access to markets prevents intensification.Consequently, fishing is small-scale, subsistence-oriented, and thefishing gear used is relatively low impact, with no dynamite orpoison fishing reported. Without a regional or global market fortheir fish, Simbo fishers have little reason to intensify their effortsbeyond feeding their families.

Paradoxically globalization also boosted Simbo’s resilience tothe tsunami in a number of significant ways. Our results show howSimbo’s intermeshing with larger-scale processes provided edu-cational and professional opportunities to many Simboans. And itwas those villagers that were able to acquire experience andeducation off of the island that formed the core leadership of theSDMCC rather than the traditional leaders. SDMCC’s ability to buildtrust, effectively manage information, link local concerns tonational and international agencies, and mobilize the localpopulation were central to the broader recovery process. Thiskind of effective leadership in the time of crises has beenemphasized in the literature as fundamental to flexible governanceand overall social–ecological resilience (Berkes et al., 2003). Thetraditional leadership simply did not have the capacity to playthese multifaceted roles and communicate across institutions.

Simbo’s entanglement with broader economic and social forceshas also led to a rise in remittances and migration opportunities, aphenomenon that has been documented in many Pacific Islandnations (Bertram, 1999; Malm, 2007). These sources of incomeenable islanders to diversify their livelihoods and rely less onsubsistence foodstuffs. Likewise, migration relieves populationpressure and decreases stress on local resources.

The rapidity at which aid reached the island is anotherdimension of Simbo’s resilience that is related to globalization.Growing global interconnectedness has dramatically increased thevelocity at which information, ideas, people and in Simbo’s case,aid, circulate around the globe. It is a remarkable achievement ofthe international humanitarian network that aid began flowinginto a remote island like Simbo within days of the tsunami.

5.2. Resilience trade-offs

Simbo’s case not only reveals how globalization has presentedcountervailing forces that simultaneously undermine and boostresilience to tsunamis, it also exemplifies how communitiesinevitably must negotiate trade-offs as they manage resilience(Janssen and Anderies, 2007; Levin and Lubchenco, 2008). A centraltenant of the resilience perspective is that SESs are never resilientto all types of disturbances. Vulnerabilities are intrinsic aspects ofall dynamic systems as circumstances and perturbations change.Adaptation never fully removes vulnerabilities, rather they areshifted spatially, temporal, or to a different kind of perturbation.Two examples from Simbo illustrate resilience tradeoffs: changingsettlement patterns and customary land tenure practices.

Simbo’s new settlement pattern of locating villages on exposedcoastal sites increased its vulnerability to tsunamis, but we couldalso view this as a resilience trade-off between slower, loweramplitude disturbances and sudden, higher amplitude ones. Oneslowly evolving, yet devastating disturbance that accompaniedSimbo’s shift in settlement patterns was introduced Europeandiseases. Demographic evidence indicates that the island under-went severe population decline during the 19th century as contact

M. Lauer et al. / Global Environmental Change 23 (2013) 40–50 49

with outsiders intensified and their diseases decimated the localpopulation (Bayliss-Smith, 2006). Movement to the coasts could beseen as an adaptation to this new reality where access to westernmedicine became essential for survival. Tsunamis, on the otherhand, are infrequent in the western Solomons. There is no oralhistory of large tsunamis, only vague references to waves afterearthquakes, suggesting that a large tsunami has not struck theregion for several centuries. Seismic evidence also supports theidea that tsunamis are infrequent (Taylor et al., 2008). As Simboadapted to new circumstances, their vulnerability to tsunamis wasthe cost they paid for increased resilience to a slowly emerging,persistent disturbance—the introduction of European diseases.

Simbo’s case also suggests that customary land-tenure, a keyadaptive capacity, involves resilience trade-offs. But in thisexample the trade off is between specified resilience and general

system resilience (Carpenter et al., 2001). General resilience refersto the ability of the overall system to absorb unspecifieddisturbances, even those that are novel, unforeseen, or infrequent.Customary land-tenure practices, although minimizing vulnera-bility to the tsunami by spontaneously adjusting and accommo-dating the relocation camps, prevented the community of Tapuraifrom building a new school on a less vulnerable site. This could beinterpreted as a trade-off between specified resilience to tsunamisfor general system resilience.

General system resilience is thought to be enhanced by looselyorganized governance structures like customary tenure thatspontaneously adapt to changing social–ecological conditions(Folke et al., 2005; Young, 2002). Folke et al. (2005) stresses thatthese kinds of governance entities are effective alternatives to top-down government agencies or structured forms of governancebecause they are more apt to resolve ‘‘tensions betweeneffectiveness, participation, and legitimacy’’ (Folke et al., 2005:p.449). Customary tenure arrangements in Melanesia provide highlyflexible guides to political procedure and social behavior ratherthan fixed recipes or specific rules. The contextual flexibility ofthese social institutions provides wide-ranging channels for localresponses during times of ecological or social change (cf. Hviding,1998). As a result, despite centuries of contact with wider socialand political processes and ever diversifying internal and externalpressures such as growing populations, integration into cash-economies, and the rise of nation-state entities, customary tenurepractices have not succumbed to other kinds of social formations.

But flexibility and informality inherently involve resiliencetrade-offs. Since tsunamis are infrequent on Simbo, the communi-ties would rather endure the low-probability risk of a futuretsunami than transform their land-tenure system into a moreformalized, codified system. In other words, the Simbo communi-ties are embracing adaptive governance, a management strategythat fosters general system resilience but generates some level ofvulnerability to certain specific disturbances.

In sum, small-scale SESs in the Pacific have centuries ofexperience adapting to new social, economic, and ecologicalcircumstances. As the processes of globalization accelerate andbecome more complex, communities must be adept at identifyinghow their decisions may amplify or dampen social–ecologicalresilience. This will involve choices about which disturbances theircommunities will become resilient to and which vulnerabilities itwill accept as a consequence of those decisions. If our intention asresearchers who work with these communities is to reducevulnerability to future disaster risk and environmental change,then more research needs to identify and characterize thesecomplex dynamics. This article makes a step in that direction. Inthis way, communities in the Pacific and around the world will bebetter equipped to capitalize on the benefits of globalization andstrengthen adaptive capacities while mitigating globalization’smore detrimental characteristics.

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the support of the National ScienceFoundation Human Dimensions and Social Dynamics Program(NSF Award #0827022 and NSF Award# 0826947) and San DiegoState University. Many thanks to the Simbo people for supportingthis research. Thanks also to our Simbo research assistants NicksonSione and Samson Joi, and the Simbo community leaders GideonTuke and Samson Ely.

References

Adger, W.N., 2000. Social and ecological resilience: are they related? Progress inHuman Geography 3, 347–364.

Albert, S., Udy, J., Tibbetts, I.R., 2008. Responses of algal communities to gradients inherbivore biomass and water quality in Marovo Lagoon, Solomon Islands. CoralReefs 27, 73–82.

Anderson-Berry, L., Yates, L., 2003. The environmental and societal impacts ofcyclone Zoe and the effectiveness of the tropical cyclone warning systems inTikopia and Anuta. Report for the Centre for Disaster Studies. James CookUniversity, Cairns.

Arnold, S.N., Steneck, R.S., Mumby, P.J., 2010. Running the gauntlet: inhibitoryeffects of algal turfs on the process of coral recruitment. Marine EcologyProgress Series 414, 91–105.

Aswani, S., 2000. Changing identities: the ethnohistory of Roviana predatoryheadhunting. The Journal of the Polynesian Society 109, 39–70.

Aswani, S., Armagan, S., 2009. Implications of urbanization for artisanal parrotfishfisheries in the western Solomon Islands. Conservation Biology 24, 520–530.

Bayliss-Smith, T., 2006. Fertility and the depopulation of Melanesia: childlessness,abortion, and introduced disease in Simbo and Ontong, Java, Solomon Islands.In: Ulijaszek, S.J. (Ed.), Population, Reproduction, and Fertility in Melanesia.Berghahn Books, New York, pp. 12–52.

Berkes, F., Colding, J., Folke, C., 2003. Navigating Social–Ecological Systems: BuildingResilience for Complexity and Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Berkes, F., Folke, C., Colding, J., 1998. Linking Social and Ecological Systems:Management Practices and Social Mechanisms for Building Resilience. Cam-bridge University Press, Cambridge.

Bertram, G., 1999. The MIRAB model twelve years on. The Contemporary Pacific 11,105–138.

Birrell, C.L., McCook, L.J., Willis, B.L., 2005. Effects of algal turfs and sediment oncoral settlement. Marine Pollution Bulletin 51, 408–414.

Burman, R., 1981. Time and socioeconomic change on Simbo, Solomon Islands. Man16, 251–267.

Campbell, J., 2009. Islandness: vulnerability and resilience in Oceania. Shima: TheInternational Journal of Research into Island Cultures 3, 85–97.

Carpenter, S., Walker, B., Anderies, J.M., Abel, N., 2001. From metaphor to measure-ment: resilience of what to what? Ecosystems 4, 765–781.

Colding, J., Elmqvist, T., Olsson, P., 2003. Living with disturbance: building resiliencein social–ecological systems. In: Berkes, F., Colding, J., Folke, C. (Eds.), Navi-gating Social–Ecological Systems: Building Resilience for Complexity andChange. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 163–185.

Crocombe, R.G., 1971. Land Tenure in the Pacific. Oxford University Press, Mel-bourne.

Deininger, K.W., 2003. Land Policies for Growth and Poverty Reduction. World Bankand Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Dureau, C., 1994. Mixed blessings: Christianity and history in women’s lives onSimbo, Western Solomon Islands, Anthropology. Macquarie University.

Elevitch, C.R., Abbott, I.A., Leakey, R.R.B., 2006. Traditional Trees of Pacific Islands:Their Culture, Environment, and Use. Permanent Agriculture Resources, Holua-loa, Hawai‘i.

Folke, C., 2006. Resilience: the emergence of a perspective for social–ecologicalsystems analyses. Global Environmental Change 16, 253–267.

Folke, C., Hahn, T., Olsson, P., Norberg, J., 2005. Adaptive governance of social–ecological systems. Annual Review of Environment and Resources 30, 441–473.

Fritz, H.M., Kalligeris, N., 2008. Ancestral heritage saves tribes during 1 April 2007Solomon Islands tsunami. Geophysical Research Letters 35 , http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2007GL031654 L01607.

Furusawa, T., 2009. Changing ethnobotanical knowledge of the Roviana People,Solomon Islands: quantitative approaches to its correlation with moderniza-tion. Human Ecology 37, 147–159.

Gough, K.V., Bayliss-Smith, T., Connell, J., Mertz, O., 2010. Small island sustainabilityin the Pacific: introduction to the special issue. Singapore Journal of TropicalGeography 31, 1–9.

Gunderson, L.H., 2010. Ecological and human community resilience in response tonatural disasters. Ecology and Society 15, 18.

Gunderson, L.H., Holling, C.S., 2002. Panarchy: Understanding Transformations inHuman and Natural Systems. Island Press, Washington, DC.

Gunderson, L.H., Holling, C.S., Light, S.S., 1995. Barriers and Bridges to the Renewalof Ecosystems and Institutions. Columbia University Press, New York.

Hocart, A.M., 1922. The cult of the dead in Eddystone of the Solomons. The Journal ofthe Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland 52, 71–112.

Holling, C.S., 1973. Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annual Review ofEcology and Systematics 4, 1–23.

M. Lauer et al. / Global Environmental Change 23 (2013) 40–5050

Holling, C.S., 2001. Understanding the complexity of economic, ecological, andsocial systems. Ecosystems 4, 390–405.

Hughes, T.P., Bellwood, D.R., Folke, C., Steneck, R.S., Wilson, J., 2005. New paradigmsfor supporting the resilience of marine ecosystems. Trends in Ecology andEvolution 20, 380–386.

Hviding, E., 1996. Guardians of Marovo Lagoon: Practice, Place, and Politics inMaritime Melanesia. University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu, HI.

Hviding, E., 1998. Contextual flexibility: present status and future of customarymarine tenure in Solomon Islands. Ocean & Coastal Management 40, 253–269.

Jackson, K.B., 1978. Tie Hokara, Tie Vaka, Black Man, White Man: A History of theNew Georgia Group to 1925, Pacific History. Australian National University.

Janssen, M.A., Anderies, J.M., 2007. Robustness trade-offs in social–ecologicalsystems. International Journal of the Commons 1, 43–65.

Janssen, M.A., Anderies, J.M., Ostrom, E., 2007. Robustness of social–ecologicalsystems to spatial and temporal variability. Society and Natural Resources20, 307–322.

Jones, G.P., McCormick, M.I., Srinivasan, M., Eagle, J.V., 2004. Coral decline threatensfish biodiversity in marine reserves. Proceedings of the National Academy ofSciences of the United States of America 101, 8215–8253.

Lauer, M., Aswani, S., 2009. Indigenous ecological knowledge as situated practices:understanding fishers’ knowledge in the western Solomon Islands. AmericanAnthropologist 111, 317–329.

Lauer, M., 2012. Oral traditions or situated practices? Understanding how indige-nous communities respond to environmental disasters. Human Organization71, 176–187.

Levin, S.A., Lubchenco, J., 2008. Resilience, robustness, and marine ecosystem-basedmanagement. BioScience 58, 27–32.

Liu, J.G., Dietz, T., Carpenter, S.R., Alberti, M., Folke, C., Moran, E., Pell, A.N., Deadman,P., Kratz, T., Lubchenco, J., Ostrom, E., Ouyang, Z., Provencher, W., Redman, C.L.,Schneider, S.H., Taylor, W.W., 2007. Complexity of coupled human and naturalsystems. Science 317, 1513–1516.

Madin, J.S., Connolly, S.R., 2006. Ecological consequences of major hydrodynamicdisturbances on coral reefs. Nature 444, 477–480.

Malm, T., 2007. No island is an ‘island’: some perspectives on human ecology anddevelopment in Oceania. In: Hornborg, A., Crumley, C.L. (Eds.), The WorldSystem and the Earth System: Global Socioenvironmental Change and Sustain-ability Since the Neolithic. Left Coast Press Inc., Walnut Creek, CA, pp. 268–279.

Mercer, J., Dominey-Howes, D., Kelman, I., Lloyd, K., 2007. The potential forcombining indigenous and western knowledge in reducing vulnerability toenvironmental hazards in small island developing states. EnvironmentalHazards 7, 245–256.

Mertz, O., Bruun, T.B., Fog, B., Rasmussen, K., Agergaard, J., 2010. Sustainable landuse in Tikopia: food production and consumption in an isolated agriculturalsystem. Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography 31, 10–26.

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005. Ecosystems and Human Well-being:Synthesis. Island Press, Washington, DC.

Miller, D., 1978. Report of the National Sites Survey 1976–1978. National Museum,Honiara.

Nelson, D.R., Adger, W.N., Brown, K., 2007. Adaptation to environmental change:contributions of a resilience framework. Annual Review of Environment andResources 32, 395–419.

Ostrom, E., 1990. Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions forCollective Action. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Pimm, S.L., 1984. The complexity and stability of ecosystems. Nature 307, 321–326.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 yearsof change in the coupled human–environment system on Bellona, SolomonIslands. Human Ecology 36, 807–819.

Scheffler, H.W., 1962. Kindred and kin groups in Simbo Island social structure.Ethnology 1, 135–157.

Scheffler, H.W., 1965. Choiseul Island Social Structure. University of California Press,Berkeley.

Schoon, M., Fabricius, C., Anderies, J.M., Nelson, M., 2011. Synthesis: vulnerability,traps, and transformations—long-term perspectives from archaeology. Ecologyand Society 16, 24.

Schwarz, A.-M., Alexander, T., Bodo, D., 2012. Improving Resilience and AdaptiveCapacity of Fisheries-dependent Communities in Solomon Islands. AustralianCentre for International Agricultural Research (ACIAR), Canberra, Australia.

Scott, J.C., 1998. Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the HumanCondition Have Failed. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT.

Sillitoe, P., Bicker, A., Pottier, J., 2002. Participating in Development: Approaches toIndigenous Knowledge. Routledge, London.

Solomon Islands Government, 2011. Report on the 2009 Population and HousingCensus: Basic Tables and Census Description. Solomon Islands National Statis-tics Office, Honiara.

Taylor, F.W., Briggs, R.W., Frohlich, C., Brown, A., Hornbach, M., Papabatu, A.K.,Meltzner, A.J., Billy, D., 2008. Rupture across arc segment and plate boundariesin the 1 April 2007 Solomons earthquake. Nature Geoscience 1, 253–257.

Thaman, R.R., Puia, T., Tongabaea, W., Namona, A., Fong, T., 2011. Marine biodiver-sity and ethnobiodiversity of Bellona (Mungiki) Island, Solomon Islands.Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography 31, 70–84.

United Nations Development Programme, 2011. International Human Develop-ment Indicators. Palgrave Macmillan, New York.

Walker, B.H., Gunderson, L.H., Kinzig, A.P., Folke, C., Carpenter, S.R., Schultz, L., 2006.A handful of heuristics and some propositions for understanding resilience insocial–ecological systems. Ecology and Society 11, 13.

Walker, B.H., Salt, D., 2006. Resilience Thinking: Sustaining Ecosystems and Peoplein a Changing World. Island Press, Washington.

Ward, R.G., Kingdon, E., 1995. Land, Custom, and Practice in the South Pacific.Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Young, O.R., 2002. The Institutional Dimensions of Environmental Change: Fit,Interplay, and Scale. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

Young, O.R., Berkhout, F., Gallopin, G.C., Janssen, M.A., Ostrom, E., Leeuw, S.V.D.,2006. The globalization of socio-ecological systems: an agenda for scientificresearch. Global Environmental Change: Human and Policy Dimensions 16,304–316.