Between tinkering and transformation: A contemporary appraisal of climate change adaptation research on the world's islands

Abstract

Islands are at the center of discourses on climate change. Yet despite extensive work on diverse island systems in a changing climate, we still lack an understanding of climate change-related responses amongst islands and what shifting from what might be called “tinkering” (perhaps heat warnings) to “transformational” adaptation (perhaps relocation) means for these vastly different landmasses which are often grouped together by default. Through a systematic review of the climate change adaptation scientific literature, this paper critically reflects on how considering islands as a homogenous ensemble and the use of buzzwords such as “transformational adaptation” may be problematic for diverse island realities under climate change. Our findings show that the adaptation evidence base actually provides literature on contrasting island types and cultural and political contexts, including Small Island Developing States as well as other island territories. This study finds research gaps with respect to regions (e.g., South America, Africa, and Mediterranean) and that there is overall both little evidence of and a lack of context-specific definitions of transformational adaptation in island contexts. The adaptation literature does not yet fully reflect the experiences or needs of islands regarding transitions and transformations throughout history.

Full text

TYPE Systematic Review
PUBLISHED 12 January 2023
DOI 10.3389/fclim.2022.1072231
OPEN ACCESS
EDITED BY
Ayyoob Sharifi,
Hiroshima University, Japan
REVIEWED BY
Paul Blaschke,
Victoria University of Wellington,
New Zealand
Corrine Noel Knapp,
University of Wyoming, United States
*CORRESPONDENCE
Jan Petzold
jan.petzold@lmu.de
SPECIALTY SECTION
This article was submitted to
Climate Adaptation,
a section of the journal
Frontiers in Climate
RECEIVED 17 October 2022
ACCEPTED 23 December 2022
PUBLISHED 12 January 2023
CITATION
Petzold J, Joe ET, Kelman I,
Magnan AK, Mirbach C, Nagle
Alverio G, Nunn PD, Ratter BMW and
The Global Adaptation Mapping
Initiative Team (2023) Between
tinkering and transformation: A
contemporary appraisal of climate
change adaptation research on the
world’s islands. Front. Clim. 4:1072231.
doi: 10.3389/fclim.2022.1072231
COPYRIGHT
©2023 Petzold, Joe, Kelman, Magnan,
Mirbach, Nagle Alverio, Nunn, Ratter
and The Global Adaptation Mapping
Initiative Team. This is an open-access
article distributed under the terms of
the Creative Commons Attribution
License (CC BY). The use, distribution
or reproduction in other forums is
permitted, provided the original
author(s) and the copyright owner(s)
are credited and that the original
publication in this journal is cited, in
accordance with accepted academic
practice. No use, distribution or
reproduction is permitted which does
not comply with these terms.
Between tinkering and
transformation: A contemporary
appraisal of climate change
adaptation research on the
world’s islands
Jan Petzold1*, Elphin T. Joe2, Ilan Kelman3,4,
Alexandre K. Magnan5, Charlotta Mirbach1,6,
Gabriela Nagle Alverio7, Patrick D. Nunn8, Beate M. W. Ratter9,10
and The Global Adaptation Mapping Initiative Team
1Department of Geography, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Munich, Germany,
2Department of Civil Engineering, Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA, United States,
3Institute for Risk and Disaster Reduction and Institute for Global Health, University College London,
London, United Kingdom, 4University of Agder, Kristiansand, Norway, 5Institute for Sustainable
Development and International Relations, Sciences Po, Paris, France, 6Center for Earth System
Research and Sustainability, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany, 7Sanford School of Public
Policy, Nicholas School of the Environment, School of Law, Duke University, Durham, NC,
United States, 8School of Law and Society, University of the Sunshine Coast, Maroochydore, QLD,
Australia, 9Institute of Geography, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany, 10Institute of Coastal
Systems Analysis and Modeling, Helmholtz-Zentrum Hereon, Geesthacht, Germany
Islands are at the center of discourses on climate change. Yet despite
extensive work on diverse island systems in a changing climate, we still lack
an understanding of climate change-related responses amongst islands and
what shifting from what might be called “tinkering” (perhaps heat warnings)
to “transformational” adaptation (perhaps relocation) means for these vastly
dierent landmasses which are often grouped together by default. Through
a systematic review of the climate change adaptation scientific literature,
this paper critically reflects on how considering islands as a homogenous
ensemble and the use of buzzwords such as “transformational adaptation”
may be problematic for diverse island realities under climate change. Our
findings show that the adaptation evidence base actually provides literature
on contrasting island types and cultural and political contexts, including
Small Island Developing States as well as other island territories. This study
finds research gaps with respect to regions (e.g., South America, Africa, and
Mediterranean) and that there is overall both little evidence of and a lack of
context-specific definitions of transformational adaptation in island contexts.
The adaptation literature does not yet fully reflect the experiences or needs of
islands regarding transitions and transformations throughout history.
KEYWORDS
global warming, small island developing states, subnational island jurisdictions,
transformational adaptation, evidence synthesis
Frontiers in Climate 01 frontiersin.org

Petzold et al. 10.3389/fclim.2022.1072231
1. Introduction
Recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
assessments indicate climate change is likely to push some low-
lying islands beyond adaptation limits (Magnan et al., 2022;
Mycoo et al., 2022). Popular discourses on climate change
impacts and adaptation for islands are often dominated by
narratives around allegedly “sinking” islands, whose inhabitants
are “vulnerable” and “lack resilience” (Farbotko, 2010;Kelman,
2018). In addition, Small Island Developing States (SIDS)
are commonly highlighted as representative of small islands
in general (Pelling and Uitto, 2001;Hay, 2013;Klöck and
Nunn, 2019;Robinson, 2020;Thomas et al., 2020;Moncada
et al., 2021), leaving aside non-independent island territories.
Such a narrow perspective obscures the reality of diverse
island contexts experiencing different climate change impacts,
including throughout human history, due to contrasting
characteristics (e.g., urban-rural, mountainous-low-lying, and
tropical-temperate-high latitudes) (Petzold and Ratter, 2019;
Mycoo et al., 2022). These differences can mean that an
adaptation action on one island could be infeasible or
maladaptive on another. For instance, building greenhouses for
local food in high-latitude islands (Bamsey et al., 2009) might
be counterproductive in isolated, tropical atolls which would do
better through improved open-air agricultural land use, such as
moving away from cash crops. Yet any solid social perspective
on island adaptation requires acknowledging the role of differing
geographic, demographic, historical, political, participatory and
institutional contexts—specifically across islands with varying
degrees of political autonomy between and within island
territories (Nunn et al., 2014;Petzold and Magnan, 2019).
Adaptation for the SIDS of Haiti cannot be successful without
understanding the roots of current governance problems and
vulnerabilities through colonialism, neo-colonialism, and post-
colonialism (Mika, 2020). This lens does not fully apply to
non-sovereign islands that have long been part of a country
such as the Isles of Scilly, UK, without neglecting aspects of
marginalization that still influence the location (Petzold, 2016).
While many island communities are already experiencing
the impacts of climate change, there is growing evidence of
adaptation-related responses taking place, often drawing on
their previous experience throughout history of adapting to
major environmental and social changes (Klöck and Nunn,
2019;Magnan et al., 2019;Duvat et al., 2020;Thomas et al.,
2020). However, many responses in SIDS still follow short-
term and hard defense approaches, despite evidence of their
potential maladaptive outcomes and ineffectiveness in the
long term (Klöck and Nunn, 2019;Nunn and McNamara,
2019). Therefore, besides referring to different kinds of
adaptation, which are already difficult to delineate (e.g.,
“planned adaptation,” “autonomous adaptation,” “community-
based adaptation,” or “ecosystem-based adaptation”) or separate
from other forms of action that are not explicitly called
adaptation (IPCC, 2022, p. 3), climate change scholars
increasingly debate the need for “transformational” adaptation
on islands (Nunn and McNamara, 2019;Filho et al., 2022).
The definition of transformational adaptation suggests
the possibility of breaking up existing power structures and
overcoming development-related path dependencies, which
in many island states can be traced back to their colonial
past (Kelman, 2014;Baldacchino, 2018;Ratter, 2018). In
the literature, transformational adaptation describes changing
“the fundamental attributes of a social-ecological system in
anticipation of climate change and its impacts” and is usually
contrasted with “incremental adaptation” which refers to
maintaining “the essence and integrity of a system or process
at a given scale” (IPCC, 2022, p.3)—and so is, in effect,
tinkering which can be suitable and important, but which is
not a fundamental change. One example of transformational
adaptation that is increasingly discussed in island contexts is
settlement relocation, for example, adapting to the risk of marine
flooding due to both sea level rise and changes in extreme sea
levels (Duvat et al., 2022). An ongoing discussion regarding
adaptation is whether or not settlement relocation is a form
of (transformational) adaptation, a failure to adapt, or both
(Mycoo et al., 2022). One example of “incremental adaptation,”
or tinkering, is improving warning systems to cover hazards in
combination and to make them inclusive.
As demonstrated by islanders’ long history of relocation
for many environmental and social reasons ranging from
conflict to volcanic eruptions, it requires strong collaboration
among actors and across jurisdictions (Nunn and McNamara,
2019) and the inclusion of diverse local perspectives and
knowledge systems (Farbotko et al., 2020) to avoid fundamental
problems around land tenure, political participation and
cultural conflicts between local communities (Kelman, 2014;
Donner, 2015). Addressing these requirements is complex
as relocation is intrinsically context-specific, meaning that
generalization of action or policy at even a whole-island or
sub-national scale often fails to satisfy all local conditions.
Relocation, therefore, does not go without trade-offs. As
evidenced by the inherent challenges, how to define context-
specific combinations for transformational adaptation remains
an open question.
This paper systematically compares adaptation patterns
(hazards considered, types of responses, actors, inclusiveness
of indigenous/traditional and local knowledge, limits to
adaptation) across all islands that have been the focus
of academic literature on climate change adaptation,
including but not limited to SIDS. In an explorative
manner, the paper aims to identify the context-specific
patterns of island adaptation, including potentially
transformational adaptation. Specifically, this paper asks
(1) How does the peer-reviewed adaptation literature
Frontiers in Climate 02 frontiersin.org

Petzold et al. 10.3389/fclim.2022.1072231
cover different types of islands? (2) Does the literature
show different adaptation patterns across island types?
(3) How is transformational adaptation conceived in
island-specific literature?
2. Methods
This paper builds on a systematic review of island
case studies included in the Global Adaptation Mapping
Initiative (GAMI) database,1which includes in total more
than 1,600 articles published between 2013 and 2019 that
document evidence for observed and implemented climate-
related responses (Berrang-Ford et al., 2021b). Systematic
reviews serve as an evidence-based method to analyse a
large body of literature by assessing the current state of
knowledge on a specific topic in a transparent, reproducible,
and comprehensive manner (Berrang-Ford et al., 2015,2020).
They are gaining increasing attention in adaptation research
due to the exponentially growing literature base. The GAMI
review is the first global systematic mapping exercise of peer-
reviewed literature on climate change adaptation. It draws
mainly on English-language literature included in three large
scientific databases [Web of Science, Scopus, and Medline; see
Supplementary material 1 and Berrang-Ford et al. (2021a) for
more details on the GAMI database and methodology]. This
bias of “Anglophone squint” has been described as narrowing
perspectives, weaking arguments, and delegitimising approaches
not expressed well in English (Aalbers, 2004;Chowdhury et al.,
2022).
For this paper, we use the online platform sysrev (Bozada
et al., 2021) to screen the GAMI database for island case studies.
For the initial screening, we include any papers dealing with an
inhabited island2case study. These include, for example, articles
dealing with SIDS or islands which are part of SIDS, island case
studies in island states that are not SIDS (e.g., Indonesia, Japan,
Philippines, Sri Lanka, and the United Kingdom), case studies
of islands that are part of a continental state (e.g., Bangladesh,
Germany, and the United States), and case studies of islands
within coastal cities (e.g., Mombasa Island). We include only
papers with an explicit island case study and information
about “on-the-ground” adaptation. We exclude all such papers
without case studies of inhabited islands or articles that do
not deal with empirical evidence on climate change adaptation
(including articles reviewing planning documents or national
communications), literature reviews, conference papers, and
even entire books. Articles potentially dealing with island case
1 See https://globaladaptation.github.io/ for the full documentation of
the GAMI project.
2 Any area of land smaller than a continent and entirely surrounded by
water (Encyclopedia Britannica, n.d.).
studies but lacking sufficient information to identify the island
are excluded.3
All included articles are coded according to the study type,
political status and island type of the case study (see Table 1).
For the category of political status, we build on Petzold and
Magnan’s (2019) classification. The category of island type builds
on Grydehøj et al. (2015) and Nunn and Kumar (2018). While
features such as geomorphology and elevation are certainly
relevant for influencing risk levels in terms of impacts and
exposure (Nunn et al., 2016), in this review, we focus on the
above-mentioned island-related features that may affect the
vulnerability and adaptive capacity of diverse islands.
The coded dataset was exported from sysrev into an
Excel spreadsheet and merged with the GAMI dataset for
descriptive analysis (see Supplementary material 2 for the full
review database). Data cleaning and analysis were performed
in R (R Core Team, 2021). After merging the GAMI database
with our additional coding, we selected various variables of
interest and performed chi-square tests of independence and
calculated residuals. This analysis covered the main variables
defined in the GAMI approach (Berrang-Ford et al., 2021b;
Lesnikowski et al., 2021), which are of relevance to our
research questions concerning geographic distribution and
potentially differing patterns of responses across island types
to weather-related hazards influenced by climate change,
including actors involved in adaptation, the inclusion of
indigenous/traditional and local knowledge, how far limits
to adaptation are challenged, and the depth of responses4
(see Supplementary material 1 for the list of variables and
labels). In a second analytical step, we extracted the island
case studies that were marked according to indicators of
high transformational adaptation in the GAMI database, i.e.,
those including high “depth” and defined as “adaptations
reflect[ing] entirely new practices that involve deep structural
reform, complete change in mindset, major shifts in perceptions
or values and changing institutional or behavioral norms”
(Berrang-Ford et al., 2021b, p.993). Finally, we used an
explorative qualitative approach to review the case studies
and identify the island-specific aspects of transformational
adaptation by carefully reading through each extracted article
to understand what transformational adaptation means in the
particular contexts.
3 The additional screening of the GAMI database for island case studies
was done through title and abstract screening, and, in case of doubt, a
full text screening.
4 The “depth” of adaptation-related responses describes “the novelty
of an action” (Berrang-Ford et al., 2021b, p. 993), besides its “scope”
(geographical or sectoral breadth) and “speed” (the time taken to
implement).
Frontiers in Climate 03 frontiersin.org

Petzold et al. 10.3389/fclim.2022.1072231
TABLE 1 Coding scheme.
Category Label Definition/example
Study type Single island case study An article with a case study of one or more settlements on a single island
Multiple case studies including islands An article including more than one case study including islands, for example, comparing
two or more islands
Island and mainland case studies An article including island and mainland case studies
Whole archipelago An article with a whole archipelago or generalized island state as a case study
Political status Small island developing state (SIDS) Islands of the 38 UN Member States with the designation as SIDS (see UN-OHRLLS, n.d.).
Sub-national island jurisdiction (SNIJ) According to Watts (2009): “Islands or sets of islands [that] are involved in some
combination of autonomous self-government combined with formal collaboration in a
wider political partnership” (see also Stuart, 2008)
Island of a non-SIDS island state or
archipelago country
Islands that belong to a non-SIDS island state (not continental state)
Dependent island of a continental state Islands that belong to a continental state, but do not have any evident SNIJ status
Island type Central/core island Central or core island of an archipelago, hosting the capital of the island state (e.g., New
Providence and The Bahamas) or SNIJ (e.g., Baffin Island, Nunavut, and Canada), or
single oceanic island that is not part of an archipelago (e.g., Montserrat or Nauru)
Peripheral island Peripheral island of an archipelago (e.g., Fuvahmulah and Maldives) or a continental state
(e.g., Sylt and Germany)
City island Island within a city (e.g., Manhattan in New York or Mombasa Island)
Ambiguous Islands that are not central/core islands of a whole island state but of an archipelago within
an island state [e.g., Borneo (Indonesia) or Kyushu (Japan)] or central/core islands of
archipelagos that are part of a continental state [e.g., Vancouver Island (Canada) or
Zhoushan Island (China)]
3. Results
3.1. Island evidence
The review of the GAMI database for evidence on island
case studies resulted in 186 articles dealing with islands. Among
these articles, we identified 261 case studies on 134 islands (see
Figure 1).
Most of the articles that include islands in the GAMI
database deal with single island case studies (59%), followed
by articles that include or compare multiple islands (either
within the same archipelago or across different regions) (17%),
and those that include island and mainland case studies within
the same article (17%). Seven percent of the articles deal with
archipelagos as a whole, not targeting precise islands (Figure 2).
Most island case studies involve islands of a non-SIDS island
state or archipelago country (40%), followed by SIDS (25%),
dependent islands of a continental state (21%), and finally, sub-
national island jurisdictions (SNIJs), which effectively equate to
non-sovereign territories (14%; Figure 3).
While the review includes a wide range of islands from
low to high latitudes, the evidence for island adaptation is not
uniformly distributed across the globe (Figure 4). Case studies
from non-SIDS island states are mostly found in Indonesia,
followed by the Philippines, United Kingdom, Sri Lanka, New
Zealand, Japan, and Madagascar. Case studies from SIDS are
well represented, especially in the Caribbean and the Pacific
Ocean, as well as the Maldives in the Indian Ocean. Articles
dealing with SNIJs include cases from across various parts of the
globe, including multiple islands in Nunavut (Baffin Island and
others), overseas territories in the Caribbean, several European
islands (Faroe Islands, Åland, Lofoten, and Canary Islands),
Unguja (Zanzibar) in the Indian Ocean, as well as Taiwan
(China), Mindanao (Philippines), and Tasmania (Australia). The
continental countries hosting most case studies on dependent
islands represented in GAMI are Bangladesh, the USA, and
Canada, although a few case studies on dependent islands can
also be found in northern Europe, Africa, South and Southeast
Asia, Australia, and South America (Brazil).
With respect to the relative island type, most studies are
located on central/core islands (46%), followed by peripheral
islands (36%), and ambiguous cases (8%). Five percent of
the studies deal with city islands and whole archipelagos,
respectively. Compared to the overall distribution of island
types, the patterns are different across islands of different
political status (Figure 5 and Supplementary Figure SM1.2).
Studies on dependent islands of a continental state are mostly
about peripheral islands, as these are generally islands located
off the coastlines of larger continental states. Also the studies
on city islands are mostly found on dependent islands, with
one exception being a SIDS (Singapore). Studies on islands of a
non-SIDS island state and SNIJs are mostly on central islands.
Frontiers in Climate 04 frontiersin.org

Petzold et al. 10.3389/fclim.2022.1072231
FIGURE 1
Systematic review diagram (adapted, after Haddaway et al., 2018).
FIGURE 2
Distribution of articles per study types.
In the former case, many studies are located, for example,
on the largest islands of Indonesia (Java), the Philippines
(Luzon), or the United Kingdom (Great Britain). In the latter
case, many studies are on SNIJs that are not part of a larger
archipelago, such as Tasmania (Australia) or Unguja (Tanzania).
In addition, many studies have been conducted on Baffin Island,
Frontiers in Climate 05 frontiersin.org

Petzold et al. 10.3389/fclim.2022.1072231
FIGURE 3
Distribution of island case studies per political status.
FIGURE 4
The global distribution of island case studies in the GAMI database. Colors refer to dierent island types and the size of circles to the number of
studies on the same island.
the central island of the SNIJ Nunavut (Canada). In SIDS, the
majority of studies are located on peripheral islands. Many
of the SIDS studied are larger archipelagos, such as Fiji and
the Maldives, and therefore include many peripheral islands;
almost a third of SIDS case studies are located in central/
core islands.
Frontiers in Climate 06 frontiersin.org

Petzold et al. 10.3389/fclim.2022.1072231
FIGURE 5
Distribution of island types across island case studies.
FIGURE 6
Distribution of hazards reported in island case studies compared to the whole GAMI database.
3.2. Global climate change adaptation
patterns in islands
The documented hazards in the island climate change
literature show similar patterns with slight differences between
islands and the globally available evidence in the whole GAMI
database (Figure 6). After general climate change impacts, the
most often reported hazard in GAMI is drought (19%) while on
islands, it is extreme precipitation and inland flooding (20%).
This is followed on islands by sea level rise (15%), which
is reported in only 5% of the articles in the whole GAMI
database. In the GAMI database, in turn, increased frequency
and intensity of extreme heat is reported in 16% of the articles,
while on islands only 7% of studies report this hazard. A
noteworthy difference between island types is that drought is
often documented in studies on islands of non-SIDS island
states (17%), while sea level rise is most commonly reported
on dependent islands (22%). SNIJs are most associated with
loss of Arctic sea ice, compared to other island types (see also
Supplementary Figure SM1.1). The “other” category, which is
more often used in island case studies compared to the whole
GAMI dataset refers, for example, to tsunamis and earthquakes.
The response types documented in the literature
show overall very similar patterns (Figure 7 and
Supplementary Figure SM1.5). The most commonly
documented response type is behavioral/cultural (overall
33%, on islands 38%), followed by technological/infrastructural,
ecosystem-based, and finally, institutional responses. Also
Frontiers in Climate 07 frontiersin.org

Petzold et al. 10.3389/fclim.2022.1072231
FIGURE 7
Distribution of response types reported in island case studies compared to the whole GAMI database.
between different island types there are hardly any differences
in the order of reported response types, apart from institutional
responses being the second most reported in SNIJs instead of
technological/infrastructural. In many cases, studies in GAMI
were coded as reporting many of the four response types, which
explains the lack in statistically significant differences and a
seemingly homogeneous picture.
Whereas there are only negligible differences between the
types of actors involved in adaptation on islands overall and
the GAMI database, distinguishing between islands of different
political status reveals different patterns (Figure 8). Individuals
or households, the overall most common actors, are associated
mostly with studies in SNIJs. Civil society actors (e.g., formal
community associations or non-governmental organizations)
are reported less often in the studies in SNIJs compared to other
island types, and more often in SIDS. The roles of different
government actors also vary. While national governments are
reported frequently in SIDS, sub-national governments are
reported relatively more often especially in dependent islands.
International or multinational governance institutions (e.g.,
organizations under the United Nations) are reported most often
in SIDS case studies compared to other island types or the whole
GAMI dataset. Overall, private sector actors (e.g., small and
medium enterprises or larger corporations) are relatively less
common compared to other actors yet most common on islands
of non-SIDS island states and SNIJs.
While in the GAMI dataset, only a quarter of articles
includes aspects related to indigenous/traditional and local
knowledge, almost a third of the studies on islands include such
knowledge. This ratio differs between island types. The majority
of studies include indigenous/traditional and local knowledge in
the analysis of climate change adaptation only on SIDS, while
around a third of the studies in SNIJs, a quarter of studies on
dependent islands, and only 17% of those on islands of non-SIDS
islands states include such knowledge (Figure 9).
Across island types, between 38 and 59% of studies report
low evidence of known adaptation limits being overcome, and
between 3 and 15% report medium evidence (only in SNIJs do
more than half of the studies report low evidence; Figure 10).
In almost half of the island case studies (47%), there was
no/uncertain evidence of whether adaptation limits had been
exceeded. In the whole GAMI database there is only one island
article with high evidence of adaptation limits being overcome,
which is in a SIDS case study [see Otoara Ha’apio et al. (2018),
described below].
3.3. Transformational adaptation in
islands
Paradoxically, while island representatives usually
describe climate change as an “existential threat” involving
unprecedented challenges to development and historical
socioeconomic patterns, the scientific literature remains sparse
on discussing what transformational adaptation (could) look
like in various island contexts (e.g., relocation of settlements and
infrastructure or changes in livelihoods) (Nunn and McNamara,
2019).
The review of the GAMI database for evidence on
transformational adaptation on islands resulted in six articles
coded as adaptation with high “depth” and accordingly no
significant patterns (see Supplementary Table SM1.1 and
Supplementary Figure SM1.4). Yet three of those were excluded
Frontiers in Climate 08 frontiersin.org

Petzold et al. 10.3389/fclim.2022.1072231
FIGURE 8
Political status of islands related to actors. Results of the chi-square test calculating the residuals, that is, the dierence between the observed
and the expected frequency of each combination of political status and actor type, are shown. Residuals below −2 and above 2 can be
considered significant. Positive residuals (blue) indicate a higher observed frequency of an actor-role combination, and negative residuals (red)
indicate a lower than expected frequency. The size of the circles corresponds to the value of the residuals. X-squared =84.366, df =27, p-value
=8.097e−08.
from further analysis since they deal with transformation
unrelated to responses to climate change (Moulton and Popke,
2017), insufficient information on the transformational
character of the responses (Jamero et al., 2018), and
transformational responses on a continental mainland and
not the overseas/continental island (Scholten et al., 2015). The
three remaining articles include evidence on transformational
adaptation in the form of relocation and all include studies
on islands that are part of Pacific SIDS. Due to the limited
results using the “depth” variable from GAMI for assessing
potentially transformational adaptation on islands, we focus
on the characteristics of the responses reported in the case
studies with high depth in an explorative way. We use the case
of relocation as a vehicle to highlight some transformational
adaptation patterns in different island cases.
The communities on the peripheral Ranongga Island
(Solomon Islands) in Otoara Ha’apio et al.’s (2018) study
face rising sea level and precipitation variability. Yet the
transformational response described in the study was triggered
by an earthquake and is the proactive relocation of a village to
a new location at higher altitude beyond the reach of tsunami
waves. The relocation was driven by households, community
chiefs, civil society organizations, and the local government.
In addition, factors such as the collaboration of stakeholders,
traditional land ownership and intergenerational exchanges,
where the younger convinced the older generation to relocate,
facilitated overcoming several limits to adaptation, including
social, cultural, economic, financial and physical limits.
Similarly, the study by McMichael and Katonivualiku (2020)
on three peripheral islands of Fiji, deals with responses to
sea level rise. The study describes the planned relocation
of several indigenous iTaukei villages and households, which
in some cases have already been implemented, while in
others they are underway or in planning. Besides the island
communities, national government actors are involved in the
planned relocations. Local knowledge on observed climate
change was included in the study and villagers were informed
about scientific scenarios and could relate how projected climate
change impacts would aggravate their situation. The main limits
to adaptation that needed to be overcome in this case study are of
social/cultural nature due to the strong place attachment, which
is also reflected in people returning to their former villages for
fishing, farming, or visiting burial grounds.
Finally, Allgood and McNamara (2017) analyse how local
communities on the central/core islands of South Tarawa atoll,
Kiribati, respond to various hazards influenced by climate
change, but especially the impacts of sea level rise. The
communities respond through the construction of physical
Frontiers in Climate 09 frontiersin.org

Petzold et al. 10.3389/fclim.2022.1072231
FIGURE 9
Percentage of island case studies including indigenous/traditional and local knowledge, compared to the whole GAMI database.
FIGURE 10
Evidence of challenging limits to adaptation reported in island case studies compared to the whole GAMI database.
Frontiers in Climate 10 frontiersin.org

Petzold et al. 10.3389/fclim.2022.1072231
sea defenses as well as temporary and permanent relocation.
While the hard measures were implemented mainly by
households, national government also supported education
and capacity-building campaigns. Temporary and permanent
relocation is reported as a common livelihood strategy. Due
to increasing environmental pressures, relocation is considered
a “distressing but necessary aspect of their future” (Allgood
and McNamara, 2017, p.12). The reported adaptation limits to
overcome are socio-cultural—the loss of connection to the home
country, traditions and culture—and economic due to uncertain
livelihood/employment opportunities.
All three examples share some patterns of potentially
transformational adaptation in that they build on multi-actor
collaboration and local institutions. They are all examples of
responses to sea level rise in the form of relocation. The
most important actors involved are individuals or households
and local or national governments. The private sector or
international stakeholders are not described as playing an
active role in these relocation processes. The two examples
of planned relocation stress the importance of including
local knowledge and traditional customs and institutions in
overcoming social and cultural adaptation limits. Notably, the
focus on relocation is not meant to suggest that migration is
the only or preferred method of transformational adaptation but
rather that it embodies the critical aspects of transformational
adaptation and is currently reported as ongoing in various
island contexts.
4. Discussion
Our findings show that climate change adaptation in
island contexts remains comparatively under-documented.
Most island-focused assessments miss a major subset of islands
(e.g., high-latitude islands, dependent islands, and islands of
non-SIDS island states). This occurs despite many initiatives that
could and should feed into these analyses, also providing much-
needed perspectives from beyond a narrow, disciplinary climate
change focus. For high-latitude islands, the University of the
Arctic has a Thematic Network on Northern and Arctic Island
Studies Research. Many uninhabited islands in the Antarctic
Treaty System zone (south of 60◦S) are the subject of climate
change adaptation discussions for research and action through
the Scientific Committee for Antarctic Research’s programme
Integrated Science To Inform Antarctic And Southern Ocean
Conservation (Ant-ICON). For islands of non-SIDS island
states such as the Philippines and Indonesia, transformative
approaches are being adopted to deal with the major changes
through community consultations using Participatory Three-
Dimension Mapping (P3DM) (Gaillard and Maceda, 2009;
Cadag and Gaillard, 2012).
At the same time, there is a regional gap in the evidence
base of scientific peer-reviewed literature with few studies of
islands from South America, Africa, and the Mediterranean
[examples of exceptions are Leon et al. (2022) for Sicily and
Harvey et al. (2014) for Madagascar]. The literature includes
case studies from various peripheral and central islands, but
mostly case studies of single islands, as well as work aggregating
findings from various islands at the archipelago level or from
island and mainland study sites. The clear bias toward central
islands in the research on non-SIDS island states (e.g., Java,
Luzon, and Great Britain) stresses the need for further research
on peripheral islands as well as archipelagic constellations. Such
constellations become relevant, for example, with respect to
avoiding conflict between relocating and hosting communities
within archipelagos following relocation after disasters involving
weather, or longer-term mobility patterns attributable to climate
change (Campbell, 2010). Similarly, research on archipelagic
constellations addresses aspects of core-periphery relationships,
such as top-down vs. bottom-up governance (Nunn et al., 2014),
autonomous coping vs. dependency (Nunn and Kumar, 2019;
Korovulavula et al., 2020), and access to specific adaptation
funding schemes between central vs. peripheral and rural vs.
urban islands (Atteridge and Canales, 2017). Further work
should seek ways of comparing case studies horizontally (across
islands and island collectives) and vertically (across difference
governance levels) through (i) aggregating case studies for
comparative analysis and (ii) disaggregating scales to understand
differences and similarities in a specific place (at any scale)
of influences from global to highly local. For instance for the
latter, how is household adaptation (which would typically be
presumed to be more tinkering than transformational) in a
specific island village influenced by the UNFCCC climate change
meetings or how does a specific SIDS national government’s
climate change adaptation policy account for family needs across
the archipelago?
There are few differences in reported patterns of
response types across island types and they tend to stress
behavioral/cultural adaptation. On the one hand, in most
cases, behavioral adaptation would not be transformational
although often is more substantive than mere tinkering. On
the other hand, cultural aspects may be an important factor
influencing the adoption of more transformational responses
to climate change (Neef et al., 2018;Oakes, 2019). Similar
to the global perspective by Berrang-Ford et al. (2021b), our
findings also demonstrate the relative lack of research on
institutional responses and partly also on ecosystem-based
adaptation. Together with the comparative lack of research
on local knowledge, especially on non-SIDS islands, this
presents a significant shortcoming, especially given evidence
of how important different knowledge and adaptation types
are for islands across different geographic contexts (Mercer
et al., 2012;Hills et al., 2013;Nalau et al., 2018;Pearson
et al., 2020). Knowledges include local, Indigenous/traditional,
vernacular, community, scientific, and external policy.
Phrases for adaptation types include the IPCC categories,
Frontiers in Climate 11 frontiersin.org

Petzold et al. 10.3389/fclim.2022.1072231
ecosystem-based, nature-based, and community-based
(IPCC, 2022).
Actors and institutions involved in adaptation differ across
island types. As also found in GAMI, adaptation by individuals
and households is most common on islands, raising questions
around responsibility for climate change-related action (Reckien
and Petkova, 2019). It also raises questions about contrasting
tinkering and transformation. A few individuals or households
might relocate through their own choices or be relocated
because their dwellings were disproportionately hazard-exposed
(transformation), while the rest of the community stays,
continuing short-term adaptation strategies (voluntary or
involuntary tinkering); documented examples include the Fijian
relocations at Denimanu (Yadua Island) and Navunievu (Vanua
Levu Island) (Martin et al., 2018;Fink et al., 2021). The
strategy can be considered both transformational and tinkering,
depending who is being considered.
Meanwhile, the bigger role of international or multinational
governance institutions in SIDS relates to differences in
access to international funding for adaptation compared to
non-SIDS islands (Robinson and Dornan, 2017). Especially
on islands of non-SIDS island states and SNIJs, the roles
of sub-national versus national governments are more
evident, indicating similar to patterns and discussions
around local responsibility for adaptation in continental
areas (Nalau et al., 2015;Mees, 2017) and the lack of
awareness of island matters in supranational governance
systems (Moncada et al., 2010). Yet increasing attention
should also be paid to civil society actors, and especially
when they partner with government actors (Petzold and
Ratter, 2015). So are any UNFCCC agreements actually
transformational or merely tinkering with an inequitable
system that inevitably downplays island matters, especially for
non-SIDS islands?
A lack of local community involvement in adaptation
projects on the one hand and the typical lack of public
funding for community-driven initiatives on the other
hand, and as reported by Jamero et al. (2018) in peripheral
islands of the Philippines, confirm the need for multi-
actor and cross-scale approaches on islands. Similarly,
synthesizing evidence from rural communities in the Pacific,
McNamara et al. (2020) found that adaptation is most
effective when it is community-driven, involving non-
governmental organizations, and with governmental and
external stakeholders as facilitators. Research from Scotland
shows the relevance of “third sector organisations,” for
example regarding health services, to fill the gap of private
sector and national government presence in rural islands,
while at the same time building on local communities’
sense of self-reliance (Macaulay, 2016). In contrast to SIDS
contexts, where the real estate and insurance sectors, for
example, do not play a critical role in residential building
dynamics, the role of the private sector on islands of the
global north requires further attention in research on climate
change adaptation.
Although the literature identifies adaptation limits and
the need for transformational adaptation (Robinson, 2018;
Nunn and McNamara, 2019;Filho et al., 2022), there is little
empirical evidence of transformational adaptation occurring
on islands (also globally, see Berrang-Ford et al., 2021b),
except early signs from relocation studies. This prevents
conceptualizing features of transformational adaptation across
various island contexts. Nevertheless, the above examples
discussing relocation highlight the importance of addressing
socio-cultural adaptation limits such as traditional land tenure
patterns and place attachment, besides the technical and
infrastructural limits (Thomas et al., 2021). Different forms
of relocation in response to environmental changes have
long been observed across islands, especially in the Pacific
(Barnett and McMichael, 2018)—where the three identified case
studies with potentially transformational adaptation included in
GAMI are located. Moreover, while internal relocation within
an archipelago is considered “feasible” in an example from
French Polynesia (Duvat et al., 2022), other examples show
the problems with such approaches for local communities
(Perumal, 2018), often related to social, institutional and legal
concerns (Piggott-McKellar and McMichael, 2021). Evidence
from beyond SIDS and the Pacific confirms that socio-cultural
as well as institutional concerns, including local leadership,
are critical factors for managed retreat (Dannenberg et al.,
2019).
While this review builds on the most comprehensive
database of climate change adaptation literature, it is limited
in terms of time span covered (2013–2019). It therefore misses
potential evidence on island adaptation and transformation
from past/historical experiences, as well as relevant evidence
published in non-English languages. Many other languages
do not have terms or phrases that directly mean “adaptation”
or “transformation.” The database, therefore, suffers from
and perpetuates “Anglophone squint” (Aalbers, 2004). One
consequence is that cultural or world view lenses that
are seen as requiring an adaptation- or transformation-
related response would be excluded, not merely because
they do not use these specific words, but also because the
notion might be absent from their understandings of the
world. Even in science in English, not all disciplines or
authors adopt climate change jargon, such as adaptation and
transformation, even though their work covers similar ideas
and actions. The bias in GAMI including the “Anglophone
squint” could explain the earlier mentioned result about
the under-representation of different knowledges within
the papers.
Coverage of further scientific databases, vocabulary, gray
literature and non-English language literature may help fill
the gaps in recent assessments and reviews (Haddaway and
Bayliss, 2015;Chowdhury et al., 2022). By relying mainly on
Frontiers in Climate 12 frontiersin.org

Petzold et al. 10.3389/fclim.2022.1072231
the GAMI evidence for identifying potentially transformational
adaptation, we limit ourselves to the rather generalized
coding of low-to-high depth, without further specifying the
nature of climate change-related responses, especially in terms
of transformation.
5. Conclusions
This review critically reflects on the research on island
climate change adaptation by distinguishing different island
geographies, going beyond the current focus on SIDS, and
highlighting the opaque nature of generalizations about climate
change concerns for islands of different political statuses and
geographies globally. The work here highlights island-related
research biases and gaps in global assessments such as the IPCC
and reviews that draw on mainstream adaptation literature,
relying on GAMI in our case. Despite the truism that not all
islands are the same, so generalizing across islands is often not
reflective of reality, concatenating islands into a single category
dominates published work. Filling regional research gaps as
well as broadening the scope of island-related climate change
adaptation research beyond SIDS would provide an opportunity
for experience sharing across island types. Key questions for
further work and for sharing experiences are:
•Could the tinkering-transformation continuum be better
articulated, notably to determine how to differentiate
transformational from non-transformational and
tinkering from non-tinkering? Are these exercises
useful and is differentiating different types of adaptation
helpful practically?
•Other than some relocation, what else could
be transformational adaptation on islands?
While land raising and reclamation might be
environmentally transformational, are they necessarily
socially transformational?
•How much would different forms of transformational
adaptation really be desired?
•How useful is the term “transformational adaptation” for
islands, given their long experience of adapting to and
transforming with social and environmental changes?
•How could this long island history be applied now
and in the future, for informing all islands and non-
island locations?
•What current and future possible changes are not captured
in island historical experience?
Hence, we offer a new lens for global assessments of island
climate change adaptation research, including an evidence map
for further research differentiating islands (SIDS, SNIJs, non-
SIDS islands states, and dependent islands) against response
types especially.
Given the diversity of island contexts, we also stress
the need for more in-depth research on the roles and
responsibilities of diverse actors and matters of agency
concerning climate change adaptation. Key instances are the
relative lack of drawing on Indigenous, traditional, vernacular,
and local knowledges in non-SIDS contexts, the limited
evidence base and explanatory power of global assessments,
and the linguistic and regional publication biases. The latter
stresses the need to draw on different knowledge sources and
types for learning from islands, notably different types of
islands, for different types of climate change adaptation. In
particular, comparatively few island perspectives are present in
the so-called transformational adaptation discussions. Instead,
learning from past and recent island experiences of many
forms of changes and adjustments to changes, of which
tinkering forms an important component, can inform other
geographies about potentially transformational adaptation and
help avoid its degeneration into a buzzword and becoming an
empty slogan.
Data availability statement
The original contributions presented in the study are
included in the article/Supplementary material, further inquiries
can be directed to the corresponding author.
Author contributions
All authors contributed to the conception and drafting of the
manuscript.
Acknowledgments
A previous draft of this manuscript was presented at the
ISISA 18th ‘Islands of the World’ Conference in Zadar, Croatia,
13–17 June 2022. The authors would like to thank Pauline
Metzinger and Eléonore Otto for their support in data collection
and analysis.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the
absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could
be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those
of the authors and do not necessarily represent those
Frontiers in Climate 13 frontiersin.org

Petzold et al. 10.3389/fclim.2022.1072231
of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher,
the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be
evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by
its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the
publisher.
Supplementary material
The Supplementary Material for this article can be
found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/
fclim.2022.1072231/full#supplementary-material
References
Aalbers, M. B. (2004). Creative destruction through the Anglo-American
hegemony: a non-Anglo-American view on publications, referees and language.
Area 36, 319–322. doi: 10.1111/j.0004-0894.2004.00229.x
Allgood, L., and McNamara, K. E. (2017). Climate-induced migration: exploring
local perspectives in Kiribati: climate-induced migration. Singap. J. Trop. Geogr. 38,
370–385. doi: 10.1111/sjtg.12202
Atteridge, A., and Canales, N. (2017). Climate Finance in the Pacific: An Overview
of Flows to the Region’s Small Island Developing States (Stockholm Environment
Institute, Working Paper 2017-04). Stockholm Environment Institute. Available
online at: https://nab.vu/sites/default/files/documents/SEI-WP-2017- 04-Pacific-
climate-finance- flows.pdf (accessed December 29, 2022).
Baldacchino, G. (2018). Seizing history: development and non-climate change in
small island developing states. Int. J. Clim. Change Strateg. Manag. 10, 217–228.
doi: 10.1108/IJCCSM-02-2017-0037
Bamsey, M., Berinstain, A., Graham, T., Neron, P., Giroux, R., Braham, S.,
et al. (2009). Developing strategies for automated remote plant production
systems: environmental control and monitoring of the Arthur Clarke Mars
Greenhouse in the Canadian high arctic. Adv. Space Res. 44, 1367–1381.
doi: 10.1016/j.asr.2009.08.012
Barnett, J., and McMichael, C. (2018). The effects of climate change on
the geography and timing of human mobility. Popul. Environ. 39, 339–356.
doi: 10.1007/s11111-018-0295-5
Berrang-Ford, L., Döbbe, F., Garside, R., Haddaway, N., Lamb, W. F., Minx, J.
C., et al. (2020). Editorial: evidence synthesis for accelerated learning on climate
solutions. Campbell Syst. Rev. 16, e1128. doi: 10.1002/cl2.1128
Berrang-Ford, L., Lesnikowski, A., Fischer, A. P., Siders, A. R., Mach,
K. J., Thomas, A., et al. (2021a). The global adaptation mapping initiative
(GAMI): part 1 – introduction and overview of methods. Protoc. Exch.
doi: 10.21203/rs.3.pex-1240/v1. [Epub ahead of print].
Berrang-Ford, L., Pearce, T., and Ford, J. D. (2015). Systematic review
approaches for climate change adaptation research. Reg. Environ. Change 15,
755–769. doi: 10.1007/s10113-014-0708-7
Berrang-Ford, L., Siders, A. R., Lesnikowski, A., Fischer, A. P., Callaghan,
M. W., Haddaway, N. R., et al. (2021b). A systematic global stocktake of
evidence on human adaptation to climate change. Nat. Clim. Change 11,
989–1000. doi: 10.1038/s41558-021-01170-y
Bozada, T., Borden, J., Workman, J., Del Cid, M., Malinowski, J., and Luechtefeld,
T. (2021). Sysrev: a FAIR platform for data curation and systematic evidence
review. Front. Artif. Intell. 4, 685298. doi: 10.3389/frai.2021.685298
Cadag, J. R. D., and Gaillard, J. (2012). Integrating knowledge and
actions in disaster risk reduction: the contribution of participatory mapping:
integrating knowledge and actions in disaster risk reduction. Area 44, 100–109.
doi: 10.1111/j.1475-4762.2011.01065.x
Campbell, J. (2010). “Climate change and population movement in pacific
island countries,” in Climate Change and Migration: South Pacific Perspectives,
ed. B. Burson (Wellington, NZ: Institute of Policy Studies, Victora University of
Wellington), 29–50.
Chowdhury, S., Gonzalez, K., Aytekin, M. Ç. K., Baek, S.-Y., Bełcik, M.,
Bertolino, S., et al. (2022). Growth of non-English-language literature on
biodiversity conservation. Conserv. Biol. 36, e13883. doi: 10.1111/cobi.13883
Dannenberg, A. L., Frumkin, H., Hess, J. J., and Ebi, K. L. (2019). Managed retreat
as a strategy for climate change adaptation in small communities: public health
implications. Clim. Change 153, 1–14. doi: 10.1007/s10584-019-02382-0
Donner, S. D. (2015). The legacy of migration in response to climate stress:
learning from the Gilbertese resettlement in the Solomon Islands. Nat. Resour.
Forum 39, 191–201. doi: 10.1111/1477-8947.12082
Duvat, V. K. E., Anisimov, A., and Magnan, A. K. (2020). Assessment of coastal
risk reduction and adaptation-labelled responses in Mauritius Island (Indian
Ocean). Reg. Environ. Change 20, 110. doi: 10.1007/s10113-020-01699-2
Duvat, V. K. E., Magnan, A. K., Goeldner-Gianella, L., Grancher, D., Costa,
S., Maquaire, O., et al. (2022). Internal relocation as a relevant and feasible
adaptation strategy in Rangiroa Atoll, French Polynesia. Sci. Rep. 12, 14183.
doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-18109-8
Encyclopedia Britannica (n.d.). Island. Available online at: https://www.
britannica.com/science/island (accessed December 29, 2022).
Farbotko, C. (2010). Wishful sinking: disappearing islands, climate
refugees and cosmopolitan experimentation. Asia Pac. Viewp. 51, 47–60.
doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8373.2010.001413.x
Farbotko, C., Dun, O., Thornton, F., McNamara, K. E., and McMichael, C.
(2020). Relocation planning must address voluntary immobility. Nat. Clim. Chang.
10, 702–704. doi: 10.1038/s41558-020-0829-6
Filho, W. L., Wolf, F., Moncada, S., Salvia, A. L., Balogun, A.-L. B., Skanavis,
C., et al. (2022). Transformative adaptation as a sustainable response to climate
change: insights from large-scale case studies. Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Change
27, 20. doi: 10.1007/s11027-022-09997-2
Fink, M., Klöck, C., and Nunn, P. D. (2021). “Community participation, situated
knowledge and climate change (mal-)adaptation in rural island communities:
evidence from artificial shoreline-protection structures in Fiji,” in Small Island
Developing States: Vulnerability and Resilience under Climate Change, eds S.
Moncada, L. Briguglio, H. Bambrick, I. Kelman, C. Iorns, and L. Nurse (Berlin:
Springer), 57–79. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-82774-8_4
Gaillard, J. C., and Maceda, E. A. (2009). Participatory three-dimensional
mapping for disaster risk reduction. Participat. Learn. Act. 60, 109–118. Available
online at: https://www.iied.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/migrate/G02818.pdf
Grydehøj, A., Pinya, X. B., Cooke, G., Doratli, N., Elewa, A., Kelman, I., et al.
(2015). Returning from the horizon: introducing urban island studies. Urban Island
Stud. 1, 1–19. doi: 10.20958/uis.2015.1
Haddaway, N. R., and Bayliss, H. R. (2015). Shades of grey: two forms of grey
literature important for reviews in conservation. Biol. Conserv. 191, 827–829.
doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2015.08.018
Haddaway, N. R., Macura, B., Whaley, P., and Pullin, A. S. (2018). ROSES
RepOrting standards for systematic evidence syntheses: pro forma, flow-diagram
and descriptive summary of the plan and conduct of environmental systematic
reviews and systematic maps. Environ. Evid. 7, 7. doi: 10.1186/s13750-018-0121-7
Harvey, C. A., Rakotobe, Z. L., Rao, N. S., Dave, R., Razafimahatratra, H.,
Rabarijohn, R. H., et al. (2014). Extreme vulnerability of smallholder farmers to
agricultural risks and climate change in Madagascar. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 369,
20130089. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2013.0089
Hay, J. E. (2013). Small island developing states: coastal systems, global change
and sustainability. Sustain. Sci. 8, 309–326. doi: 10.1007/s11625-013-0214-8
Hills, T., Carruthers, T. J. B., Chape, S., and Donohoe, P. (2013). A
social and ecological imperative for ecosystem-based adaptation to climate
change in the Pacific Islands. Sustain. Sci. 8, 455–467. doi: 10.1007/s11625-013-
0217-5
IPCC (2022). “Annex II: glossary,” in Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation,
and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report
of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, eds. H. O. Pörtner, D. C.
Roberts, M. Tignor,E. S. Poloczanska, K. Mintenbeck, A. Alegría, et al. (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press), 2897–2930.
Jamero, M. L., Onuki, M., Esteban, M., and Tan, N. (2018). Community-based
adaptation in low-lying islands in the Philippines: challenges and lessons learned.
Reg. Environ. Change 18, 2249–2260. doi: 10.1007/s10113-018-1332-8
Frontiers in Climate 14 frontiersin.org

Petzold et al. 10.3389/fclim.2022.1072231
Kelman, I. (2014). No change from climate change: vulnerability and small island
developing states. Geogr. J. 180, 120–129. doi: 10.1111/geoj.12019
Kelman, I. (2018). Islandness within climate change narratives of small island
developing states (SIDS). Island Stud. J. 13, 149–166. doi: 10.24043/isj.52
Klöck, C., and Nunn, P. D. (2019). Adaptation to climate change in small island
developing states: a systematic literature review of academic research. J. Environ.
Dev. 28, 107049651983589. doi: 10.1177/1070496519835895
Korovulavula, I., Nunn, P. D., Kumar, R., and Fong, T. (2020). Peripherality as
key to understanding opportunities and needs for effective and sustainable climate-
change adaptation: a case study from Viti Levu Island, Fiji. Clim. Dev. 12, 888–898.
doi: 10.1080/17565529.2019.1701972
Leon, C. J., Lam González, Y. E., Ruggieri, G., and Calò, P. (2022). Assessing
climate change adaptation and risk management programmes: stakeholder
participation process and policy implications for transport, energy and tourism
sectors on the island of sicily. Land 11, 1206. doi: 10.3390/land11081206
Lesnikowski, A., Berrang-Ford, L., Siders, A. R., Haddaway, N., Biesbroek, R.,
Harper, S., et al. (2021). The global adaptation mapping initiative (GAMI): part 3
– coding protocol. Protoc. Exch. doi: 10.21203/rs.3.pex-1242/v1. [Epub ahead of
print].
Macaulay, B. (2016). Considering social enterprise involvement in the
commissioning of health services in Shetland. Local Econ. 31, 650–659.
doi: 10.1177/0269094216655405
Magnan, A. K., Garschagen, M., Gattuso, J.-P., Hay, J. E., Hilmi, N., Holland,
E., et al. (2019). “Cross-chapter box 9: integrative cross-chapter box on low-
lying islands and coasts,” in IPCC Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere
in a Changing Climate, eds H.-O. Pörtner, D. C. Roberts, V. Masson-Delmotte,
P. Zhai, M. Tignor, E. Poloczanska, et al. (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press), 657–674.
Magnan, A. K., Oppenheimer, M., Garschagen, M., Buchanan, M. K., Duvat, V.
K. E., Forbes, D. L., et al. (2022). Sea level rise risks and societal adaptation benefits
in low-lying coastal areas. Sci. Rep. 12, 10677. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-14303-w
Martin, P. C. M., Nunn, P., Leon, J., and Tindale, N. (2018). Responding to
multiple climate-linked stressors in a remote island context: the example of Yadua
Island, Fiji. Clim. Risk Manag. 21, 7–15. doi: 10.1016/j.crm.2018.04.003
McMichael, C., and Katonivualiku, M. (2020). Thick temporalities of planned
relocation in Fiji. Geoforum 108, 286–294. doi: 10.1016/j.geoforum.2019.06.012
McNamara, K. E., Clissold, R., Westoby, R., Piggott-McKellar, A. E.,
Kumar, R., Clarke, T., et al. (2020). An assessment of community-based
adaptation initiatives in the Pacific Islands. Nat. Clim. Chang. 10, 628–639.
doi: 10.1038/s41558-020-0813-1
Mees, H. (2017). Local governments in the driving seat? A comparative
analysis of public and private responsibilities for adaptation to climate change
in European and North-American cities. J. Environ. Policy Plann. 19, 374–390.
doi: 10.1080/1523908X.2016.1223540
Mercer, J., Kelman, I., Alfthan, B., and Kurvits, T. (2012). Ecosystem-
based adaptation to climate change in caribbean small island developing
states: integrating local and external knowledge. Sustainability 4, 1908–1932.
doi: 10.3390/su4081908
Mika, K. (2020). Disasters, Vulnerability, and Nattarives: Writing Haiti’s Futures.
London: Routledge.
Moncada, S., Briguglio, L., Bambrick, H., Kelman, I., Iorns, C., and Nurse, L.,
(eds). (2021). Small Island Developing States:Vulnerability and Resilience under
Climate Change. Cham, Switzerland: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-82774-8
Moncada, S., Camilleri, M., and Formosa, S. (2010). From incremental to
comprehensive: towards island-friendly european union policymaking. Island
Stud. J. 5, 61–88. doi: 10.24043/isj.240
Moulton, A. A., and Popke, J. (2017). Greenhouse governmentality: protected
agriculture and the changing biopolitical management of agrarian life in Jamaica.
Environ. Plan. D 35, 714–732. doi: 10.1177/0263775816679669
Mycoo, M., Wairiu, M., Campbell, D., Duvat, V., Golbuu, Y., Maharaj, S.,
et al. (2022). “Small islands,” in Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation, and
Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report
of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, eds. H. O. Pörtner, D. C.
Roberts, M. Tignor,E. S. Poloczanska, K. Mintenbeck, A. Alegría, et al. (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press), 2043–2121.
Nalau, J., Becken, S., Schliephack, J., Parsons, M., Brown, C., and Mackey, B.
(2018). The role of indigenous and traditional knowledge in ecosystem-based
adaptation: a review of the literature and case studies from the pacific islands.
Weather Clim. Soc. 10, 851–865. doi: 10.1175/WCAS-D-18-0032.1
Nalau, J., Preston, B. L., and Maloney, M. C. (2015). Is adaptation a local
responsibility? Environ. Sci. Policy 48, 89–98. doi: 10.1016/j.envsci.2014.12.011
Neef, A., Benge, L., Boruff, B., Pauli, N., Weber, E., and Varea, R. (2018). Climate
adaptation strategies in Fiji: the role of social norms and cultural values. World
Dev. 107, 125–137. doi: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2018.02.029
Nunn, P., and Kumar, R. (2018). Understanding climate-human
interactions in Small Island Developing States (SIDS): implications for future
livelihood sustainability. Int. J. Clim. Change Strateg. Manag. 10, 245–271.
doi: 10.1108/IJCCSM-01-2017-0012
Nunn, P., and Kumar, R. (2019). Measuring peripherality as a proxy for
autonomous community coping capacity: a case study from bua province,
Fiji islands, for improving climate change adaptation. Soc. Sci. 8, 225.
doi: 10.3390/socsci8080225
Nunn, P. D., Aalbersberg, W., Lata, S., and Gwilliam, M. (2014). Beyond the
core: community governance for climate-change adaptation in peripheral
parts of Pacific Island countries. Reg. Environ. Change 14, 221–235.
doi: 10.1007/s10113-013-0486-7
Nunn, P. D., Kumar, L., Eliot, I., and McLean, R. F. (2016). Classifying Pacific
islands. Geosci. Lett. 3, 7. doi: 10.1186/s40562-016-0041-8
Nunn, P. D., and McNamara, K. E. (2019). “Failing adaptation in island contexts:
the growing need for transformational change,” in Dealing with Climate Change On
small Islands: Towards Effective and Sustainable Adaptation? eds C. Klöck, and M.
Fink (Göttingen: Göttingen University Pres), 19–44. doi: 10.17875/gup2019-1210
Oakes, R. (2019). Culture, climate change and mobility decisions
in Pacific small island developing states. Popul. Environ. 40, 480–503.
doi: 10.1007/s11111-019-00321-w
Otoara Ha’apio, M., Wairiu, M., Gonzalez, R., and Morrison, K. (2018).
Transformation of rural communities: lessons from a local self-initiative for
building resilience in the Solomon Islands. Int. J. Justice Sustain. 23, 352–365.
doi: 10.1080/13549839.2017.1420640
Pearson, J., McNamara, K. E., and Nunn, P. D. (2020). “iTaukei ways
of knowing and managing mangroves for ecosystem-based adaptation,” in
Managing Climate Change Adaptation in the Pacific Region Climate Change
Management, ed. W. Leal Filho (Cham: Springer International Publishing),
105–127. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-40552-6_6
Pelling, M., and Uitto, J. I. (2001). Small island developing states:
natural disaster vulnerability and global change. Environ. Hazards 3, 49–62.
doi: 10.3763/ehaz.2001.0306
Perumal, N. (2018). “The place where i live is where i belong”: the question of
climate-related migration in Vanuatu.Island Stud. J. 13, 45–64. doi: 10.24043/isj.50
Petzold, J. (2016). Limitations and opportunities of social capital for adaptation
to climate change: a case study on the Isles of Scilly. Geogr. J. 182, 123–134.
doi: 10.1111/geoj.12154
Petzold, J., and Magnan, A. K. (2019). Climate change: thinking small islands
beyond Small Island Developing States (SIDS). Clim. Change 152, 145–165.
doi: 10.1007/s10584-018-2363-3
Petzold, J., and Ratter, B. (2019). More than just SIDS: local solutions for global
problems on small islands. Island Stud. J. 14, 3–8. doi: 10.24043/isj.77
Petzold, J., and Ratter, B. M. W. (2015). Climate change adaptation under a social
capital approach – an analytical framework for small islands. Ocean Coast. Manag.
112, 36–43. doi: 10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2015.05.003
Piggott-McKellar, A. E., and McMichael, C. (2021). The immobility-relocation
continuum: diverse responses to coastal change in a small island state. Environ. Sci.
Policy 125, 105–115. doi: 10.1016/j.envsci.2021.08.019
R Core Team. (2021). R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing.
Available online at: https://www.R- project.org/ (accessed December 29, 2022).
Ratter, B. M. W. (2018). Geography of Small Islands. Outposts of Globalisation.
Cham: Springer International Publishing. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-63869-0
Reckien, D., and Petkova, E. P. (2019). Who is responsible for climate change
adaptation? Environ. Res. Lett 14, 014010. doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/aaf07a
Robinson, S. (2018). “Climate change adaptation limits in small island
developing states,” in Limits to Climate Change Adaptation, eds W. Leal
Filho, and J. Nalau (Cham: Springer International Publishing), 263–281.
doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-64599-5_15
Robinson, S. (2020). Climate change adaptation in SIDS: a systematic review of
the literature pre and post the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report. WIREs Clim. Change
11, e653. doi: 10.1002/wcc.653
Robinson, S., and Dornan, M. (2017). International financing for climate change
adaptation in small island developing states. Reg. Environ. Change 17, 1103–1115.
doi: 10.1007/s10113-016-1085-1
Scholten, P., Keskitalo, E., and Meijerink, S. (2015). Bottom-up initiatives
toward climate change adaptation in cases in the Netherlands and the UK: a
Frontiers in Climate 15 frontiersin.org

Petzold et al. 10.3389/fclim.2022.1072231
complexity leadership perspective. Environ. Plann. C Gov. Policy 33, 1024–1038.
doi: 10.1177/0263774X15605929
Stuart, K. (2008). “A global listing of sub-national island jurisdictions,” in Pulling
Strings. Policy Insights for Prince Edward Island from other Sub-National Island
Jurisdictions, eds G. Baldacchino, and K. Stuart (University of Prince Edward
Island), 173–185.
Thomas, A., Baptiste, A., Martyr-Koller, R., Pringle, P., and Rhiney,
K. (2020). Climate change and Small Island developing states. Annu.
Rev. Environ. Resour. 45, 1–27. doi: 10.1146/annurev-environ-012320-08
3355
Thomas, A., Theokritoff, E., Lesnikowski, A., Reckien, D., Jagannathan, K.,
Cremades, R., et al. (2021). Global evidence of constraints and limits to human
adaptation. Reg. Environ. Change 21, 85. doi: 10.1007/s10113-021-01808-9
UN-OHRLLS. (n.d.). About the Small Island Developing States. Available online
at: https://www.un.org/ohrlls/content/about-small-island-developing- states
(accessed December 29, 2022).
Watts, R. L. (2009). “Island jurisdictions in comparative constitutional
perspective,” in The Case for Non-Sovereignty. Lessons from Sub-National Island
Jurisdictions, eds G. Baldacchino, and D. Milne (London and New York:
Routledge), 21–39.
Frontiers in Climate 16 frontiersin.org