Patrick Nunn

We consider the effectiveness of mainstream climate change adaptation practices in two contrasting rural contexts. We demonstrate how gender, specifically the role of women, should be foregrounded in livelihood diversification discussions and actions, illustrated by two rural case studies from Australia and Fiji. The case study sites were selected to compare customary gender roles, livelihood diversification and opportunities, and differences in community governance and cash economies. The study employs a qualitative research design, deploying semi-structured interviews with 12 rural women entrepreneurs and community leaders in Australia, and a Fijian talanoa session with 15 women in leadership roles, recruited through purposive and snowball sampling via the village headman and women’s organisations. Data were analysed using inductive thematic analysis to identify themes and illustrate similarities and differences. Findings indicated livelihood diversification and economic uncertainty are evident in both contexts as rural women navigate cultural norms shaped by patriarchal systems. Differences emerge based on location in how women secure additional income to cope with climate change impacts. Case studies highlight distinct motivations driving livelihood diversification. Gender dynamics and adaptation to climate change shape participants’ responses in both countries. In Fiji, gender and adaptation issues empower women in family decision-making regarding whether to sustain or diversify household incomes. In Australia, evidence of a cultural shift towards women’s empowerment exists, raising vital questions about how to acknowledge their influence in business and community development. Across both nations, rural women play a pivotal role, creating opportunities and actively contributing to resilience and recovery amidst climate change challenges.

Policy highlights

Climate adaptation policies must centre on gender, recognising women’s key role in livelihood diversification and income security.

Rural women in Australia and Fiji adapt to climate change through entrepreneurship, a process shaped by their cultural and economic contexts.

Patriarchal cultural norms shape the extent and nature of women’s participation in adaptation practices, requiring targeted policy responses.

In Fiji, women’s involvement in adaptation increased their influence in household decision-making. In Australia, cultural shifts are expanding women’s leadership in business and community life through digital innovation.

Supporting rural women’s entrepreneurship strengthens local resilience and inclusive climate adaptation planning across diverse rural contexts.

KEYWORDS:

Climate changegendered adaptationentrepreneurshipAustraliaFiji
1. Introduction
Climate change can disrupt established ways of life through long-term unidirectional shifts or shorter-term variability. The multifarious threats posed by climate change force individuals and communities to rethink security and livelihoods and to strategise how best to adapt (IPCC Citation2023). Most nations utilise evidence-based scenarios to develop policies and adaptation strategies to manage or mitigate the expected impacts of climate change on national resources, most commonly food, water, and ecological security (Babela et al. Citation2020; Huang et al. Citation2020; Peña-Lévano, Taheripour, and Tyner Citation2019). These scenarios and policies typically address the needs of the majority based on caste/ethnicity, language, or location (Son and Kingsbury Citation2020; Thompson-Hall, Carr, and Pascual Citation2016) but may fail to meet the needs of diverse communities such as those living with disabilities (King et al. Citation2026). Indeed, according to Swanson (Citation2021, 287) adaptation planning frequently “favours certain privileged groups while simultaneously denying representation and resources to marginalised communities denying representation and resources to marginalised communities”.

Climate change policies and plans implicitly favour the understandings and activities of men over those of women (or other genders) (Arora-Jonsson Citation2011; McKune et al. Citation2015; Phuong et al. Citation2023). When referring to “other genders”, the study acknowledges that gender encompasses categories beyond the traditional man-woman binary. These categories include terms for non-binary or gender-diverse identities, such as agender (no gender), bigender (two genders), genderfluid (shifting genders), and non-binary (an umbrella term for any gender not exclusively man/woman). Following an intersectional approach (Crenshaw 1989), this study recognises that gender is neither binary nor uniform. Our empirical focus on rural women reflects the study’s situated contexts in Australia and Fiji, where patriarchal structures produce distinct and shared gendered experiences, without assuming women form a unified category. Studies also show that proposed adaptive solutions frequently depend on group actions rather than individual responses. Such solutions have been criticised for assuming that groups act as single, coordinated, and cohesive units and, conversely, that individual actions are unimportant in societal adaptation (Wamsler and Bristow Citation2022; Wamsler and Osberg Citation2022). Indeed, although collective or communal responses are widely advocated, diversity can increase resilience and pose challenges as communities with the highest vulnerability. These responses relate to the fact that the least-resourced and the fewest formal adaptation mechanisms are often the most heterogeneous (Wannewitz and Garschagen Citation2023).

Despite increasing recognition that climate change affects genders differently, gender equality has become a central focus in global and national discussions on climate change adaptation. However, how this emphasis translates into local adaptation practices remains insufficiently understood, resulting in tensions (Bertana and Blanton Citation2023). This paper examines entrepreneurship-driven livelihood diversification as a gender-responsive adaptive strategy that enables rural Australian and Fijian women to respond to climate change by enhancing economic resilience, reducing dependence on climate-sensitive sectors such as farming and subsistence fishing, and developing alternative income-generating opportunities. It interrogates ideas about the effectiveness of mainstream climate change approaches to gender adaptation strategies and actions by examining two contrasting rural contexts – Australia and Fiji. Accordingly, considers whether gender, specifically the role of women, should be foregrounded in policies and practices around livelihood diversification. We first survey the literature on the dependence of representative rural livelihoods on climate change through two rural case studies from Australia and Fiji. These research sites were selected because of similarities (i.e. customary gender roles and livelihood diversification and opportunities) and differences (i.e. community governance and cash economies). By applying a qualitative multi-methods research design, we demonstrate the central role of gender in livelihood diversification and entrepreneurship in rural contexts to facilitate sustainable responses to climate change.

2. Climate variability and rural livelihoods
In many modern economies, food production is the primary function of many rural areas. This food feeds producers and their dependents (including non-producers in local communities) and, invariably, others elsewhere. While the dependence of rural livelihood sustainability on weather, notably its predictability and infrequency of extremes (low variability), has long been acknowledged, as world climates have begun to change, especially since the 1970s, and climate variability has become less predictable (Jackson, McNamara, and Witt Citation2020; Lamb Citation2023; Lobell and Burke Citation2010; Lobell, Schlenker, and Costa-Roberts Citation2011), this dependency has been brought under greater scrutiny.

Rural livelihoods have evolved to accommodate climate variability, yet this rests on an assumption of an unchanging (yet not unvarying) climate (Griffiths and Evans Citation2015; Srivastava, Singh, and Verma Citation2022). In many long-established rural contexts, short-duration climate variability (such as drought or flood) is often managed through livelihood flexibility, including using backup resources, emergency supplies, and accessing local or indigenous/traditional knowledge (Nursey-Braya et al. Citation2020; Rarai et al. Citation2022).

Projected twenty-first-Century climate change is expected to reduce the sustainability of rural livelihoods, adding pressure to diversify income streams. A literature review by Msimanga and Mukwada (Citation2022) concluded that effective and sustainable rural livelihood responses to climate-induced events should acknowledge rural communities’ heterogeneity and formulate context-specific adaptation plans and policies rather than applying a broad-brush policy approach. In addition, the capacity of individual households to engage in multiple occupations (livelihood diversification) influences issues such as how people react to policy and the types of resource management systems they can access. Livelihood diversification is therefore a crucial approach for coping with economic and environmental disruptions while alleviating rural poverty (Habib, Ariyawardana, and Aziz Citation2023).

2.1. Rural women’s gender adaptation to climate variability
Globally, climate-induced extreme events adversely affect agricultural productivity (Chandio et al. Citation2020) and food security, particularly in the remote rural areas of developing countries (Wossen et al. Citation2018). Climate change, though, affects male and women farmers differently, yet research on gender-specific perceptions and adaptation remains underdeveloped. Understanding these differences is crucial for developing equitable and effective adaptation strategies and support programmes (Ali et al. Citation2025). Research indicates that economically, socially, and culturally deprived groups are more vulnerable to the impacts of climate change (see Morgan et al. Citation2025). Sujakhu et al. (Citation2023) argue that women comprise the majority of these vulnerable groups, and therefore emphasise the need to incorporate gendered perspectives into climate change adaptation strategies that promote gender equality and sustainable development. For example, Jain, Tewathia and Barik’s (Citation2023) extensive review of the literature on the impact of climate change on gender-differentiated labour markets points to women facing unique challenges in climate disaster recovery due to their role as caregivers, unequal access to resources, labour market discrimination, and cultural restrictions.

Approaches to strengthening interventions for farming communities focus on improving social networks, increasing investment in diversifying livelihood strategies and income sources, such as planting more cash crops, and establishing tailored educational and support programmes for women, with particular emphasis on drought-related impacts to increase adaptive capacity in the study area (Ali et al. Citation2025; Nunn and Kumar Citation2019). For example, Parsons et al. (Citation2026) examined how social networks and gender norms shape women’s capacity to adapt to the impacts of climate change. The study found important gender differences in participation within social networks, with women farmers more often relying on informal, community-centred social networks for both practical and emotional support, while encountering marginalisation within male-dominated formal farming networks. Such informal social networks have proven critical for women in sharing knowledge, skills, resources and strategies, thereby enhancing their resilience to climate-induced stresses and shocks. The study underscores the need for gender-sensitive policies that “recognise the significant contributions of women in agriculture and horticulture, support inclusive climate adaptation strategies, and engender more equitable access to social capital” (Parsons et al. Citation2026, 1). By demonstrating these social dynamics, the study offers insights into the transformative intersectionality of gender, social capital, and climate adaptation.

These strategies affirm Hoque and Uddin’s (Citation2026) research findings on inconsistencies in how gender-mainstreaming theory addresses the specific needs of men and women when preparing, implementing, and evaluating policies and programmes. In contrast, adopting gender-transformative policies fosters a more balanced relationship between men and women by transforming power structures and resource allocation. For example, Stephenson and Furman (Citation2024) advocate a framework for “climate-just entrepreneurship” that could play a pivotal role in integrating proactive climate action with gender equality measures. This framework represents a significant step towards ensuring that entrenched, systemic inequalities are not perpetuated in nascent and rapidly evolving fields, such as the circular economy, social enterprise, and climate entrepreneurship.

2.2. Rural families, gender, and entrepreneurship
Climate change has forced rural communities to supplement their farm-based economic activities with off-farm income sources. Pritchard, Burch, and Lawrence (Citation2007) suggest that such changes require the industry to describe farmers as “farm family entrepreneurs”. This designation “describes the situation where family units remain at the social and economic heart of farm ownership and operation, but in the context where they relate to their land-based assets through legal and financial structures characteristic of the wider economy” (Pritchard, Burch, and Lawrence Citation2007, 75).

In Australia, women’s contributions to rural agricultural entrepreneurship have had a long and significant impact on revolutionising production practices. Alston (Citation2003) argues that such contributions have remained relatively “invisible” because “farmer” and “male” have become synonymous and interchangeable. Yet, rural women’s contributions to their local and regional communities are more discernible than those of their urban counterparts, with many of the former leading a range of activities (Houghton and Strong Citation2004; Stillman, Simmons, and Gibson Citation2006). For example, Langford (Citation2019) examined the financialisation of land and agri-business, concluding that spatially and temporally divergent farm development practices enabled shifting from debt-to-equity financing. The research argues that such entrepreneurship is “indicative of a new adaptive strategy of family farmers to shifting financial landscapes and of emergent family, corporate, and financial farm hybridity” (Langford Citation2019, 473). Another study by Hu and Gill (Citation2021) focused on dairy farmers in the Illawarra region in the Australian state of New South Wales, illuminating how farmers negotiate farming as a social institution with personal and voluntary choices, allowing them to be involved, improve, and maintain stability and changeability of farming traditions to adapt and reinvigorate family farming.

Other research has addressed a more comprehensive range of rural entrepreneurial activities and their common, everyday challenges. A study by Casey et al. (Citation2022) focused on how farming women in the Murweh and Paroo Shires of outback Queensland (Australia) mitigate weather-linked financial hardship, highlighting the complexity of entrepreneurial bricolage processes through women’s use of networking, learning digital technologies, repurposing of resources and places, and the use of family labour. It emphasises “place-based, gendered and context-specific understandings of drought mitigation, through identifying how entrepreneurial bricolage is employed” within rural community contexts (Casey et al. Citation2022, 196).

In rural Fiji, gender is a critical factor in livelihood diversification. Lawless et al. (Citation2021) argue that gender equality should be a mainstream principle of good environmental governance and sustainable development in such contexts. As such, “progress toward gender equality in the fisheries sector is critical for effective and equitable development outcomes in coastal countries” (Lawless et al. Citation2021, 2). Other research highlights the struggle to achieve gender equality in the South Pacific nations, with tensions existing between tradition and modernity being reflected in changing gender roles, voices, empowerment, and the influence of custom (Singh, Tabe, and Martin Citation2022; Singh-Peterson and Carnegie Citation2020; Thomas et al. Citation2019). For example, Singh, Tabe, and Martin (Citation2022) investigated the enabling and inhibiting factors affecting Fijian women’s ability to contribute to building community resilience and managing risk during climate change events, concluding that women’s voices are often unheard in these typically patriarchal communities, limiting their contributions to relevant decision-making. Such observations support the conclusion that although “women play crucial roles in fisheries, … their contributions are largely invisible, often ignored and unrecognised” (Thomas et al. Citation2019, 1).

Recent work on rural subsistence farmers engaging in local agriculture markets on Viti Levu Island, the largest in the Fiji archipelago, highlights the need for “gender mainstreaming activities to include empowerment activities for the community to share responsibility for providing for their households” (Singh-Peterson and Iranacolaivalu Citation2018, 19). Similarly, Barclay et al. (Citation2021, 584) argue that a gender discourse in the Fiji context “should be broadened from male-dominated industrial fishing to the whole of value chains, including domestic and informal enterprises in which women are equally involved”.

Research underscores the critical role of women in livelihood diversification and income sustainability. For example, Pearson, McNamara, and Nunn (Citation2019) study of mangrove ecosystem services in Fiji recognises women’s role as primary caretakers and critical knowledge holders on mangroves. Other research indicates that economic development was constrained by limited access to processing and patron-client relationships, thereby limiting the potential benefits for women from technical capacity-building training programmes (MacKeracher et al. Citation2019).

Technology adoption and social influence can also impact the diffusion of critical mobile value-added services (MVASs) for women’s micro-enterprises. For instance, Sathye et al. (Citation2018) surveyed 74 women micro-entrepreneurs, finding that the main driver of social influence draws on Fiji’s collectivist values of sharing and reciprocity to encourage technological adoption. Other studies show that culture, as a form of social organisation and networking, also inhibits, and sometimes even endangers, women entrepreneurs engaged in social innovation. Naidu and Chand (Citation2017) investigated barriers Fijian women entrepreneurs face and the moderating effect of culture on the relationship between women entrepreneurs’ success in micro, small, and medium enterprises. The study found that gender inequality is a significant barrier to women’s success, and that national culture inhibits women entrepreneurs, affects success, and moderates gender inequality and women’s success (Naidu and Chand Citation2017).

3. Research design and data collection
This research utilised a context-appropriate case study method using semi-structured interviews (Australian context) and talanoa (Fijian context) as the key data collection methods.Footnote1 Inductive thematic analysis was undertaken to explore livelihood diversification strategies that enable people in selected rural contexts in Australia and the Pacific Islands to cope with future climate variability and longer-term climate change. It documents the types of livelihood diversity used as “temporary” strategies for coping with climate variability/change, assesses the effectiveness of livelihood diversification as a coping strategy in contrasting rural contexts, considers commonalities and differences in livelihood diversity for climate coping in Australia and the Pacific Islands, and examines how livelihood diversity might contribute to strategies for sustainable rural livelihoods and gender barriers for diversification initiatives.

A multiple-case study design facilitated the investigation of “a contemporary phenomenon in depth and within its real-life context, especially when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not evident” (Yin Citation2018, 45). We collected in-depth information from representative Australian and Fijian rural contexts, thereby enabling a “holistic description” of both contexts. Following Yin’s (Citation2018) framework for case study research, this exploratory study examines each case in depth within its real-life context to capture the nuanced interplay between women’s livelihood diversity and climate coping. Drawing on Thomas’s (Citation2011) typology, the cases are intended to illuminate broader theoretical issues related to gendered entrepreneurship and rural socio-cultural dynamics, rather than to serve as a basis for any perceived representativeness. The dual-case configuration enabled a rich cross-case analysis, fostering a deeper understanding of how contextual factors shape these livelihood diversification strategies in distinct rural settings. Furthermore, the explicitly cross-national focus of the study allowed for contextualised comparison while maintaining depth in each case where policy, cultural, and structural differences shape the phenomenon under study.

3.1. Narrative inquiry: semi-structured interviews and talanoa
The study employed narrative inquiry through semi-structured interviews (Australia) and talanoa (Fiji) to gather and analyse stories for the project. Narratives can function democratically, allowing individual stories that oppose elitist and established discourses to be heard. Accordingly, these narratives offer an opportunity for marginalised groups, such as women, to participate in knowledge construction and transference.

Australian research team members conducted face-to-face and phone/Zoom semi-structured in-depth interviews with local entrepreneurial women and community leaders from the Murweh Shire and the surrounding region. Participants were identified through the research team’s networking with community leaders as part of ongoing support for women’s leadership and entrepreneurship development in rural settings in the Queensland shire. The interview protocol included questions that created a consistent framework for the conversational responses about adapting to extreme conditions such as prolonged drought, floods, or bushfires (wildfires). The protocol provides a framework for learning about the interviewee’s background, experiences, and perceptions regarding this study’s aims. Responses were recorded and transcribed using artificial intelligence software. Researchers provided participants with the opportunity to review their interviews.

In Fiji, the research team visited entrepreneurs in local markets at Namaka and Sigatoka. The veneer of prosperity in tourist-visited places obscures the uneven nature of the benefits they bring to Fiji. Our research also included three Non-Government Organisations (NGOs) that focus on empowering rural women to understand the livelihood challenges they face and their opportunities for livelihood enhancement: Rise Beyond The Reef, FRIEND Fiji, and DIVA for Equality. In Fiji, conversations were held as part of a gendered talanoa (see Farrelly and Nabobo-Baba Citation2014) with 15 women in leadership roles. They discussed issues related to coping with climate extremes and their societal, economic, and community impacts, especially approaches to livelihood diversification. The research team recruited participants through their existing networks. Leaders of women’s organisations, including the Soqosoqo Vakamarama (Women’s Association) operating within the Nadroga area, were invited to participate via the village headman (turaga-ni-koro) in the talanoa. The desired outcome of a talanoa session in a formal setting is for every participant to contribute freely to the discussion. Talanoa has a less rigid undertone than many formal meetings and could empower everyone to contribute and have a voice in the discussion. Talanoa sessions, to some degree, are like other focus group discussions, such as storian in Vanuatu and yarning circles in Australia. The research team also observed community interactions and discussions in household, community, and market contexts and noted observations and discussion points in diary form after the talanoa sessions.

3.2. Coding data, identifying patterns and thematic analysis
Thematic analysis is a versatile method for exploring and analysing relevant patterns, meanings, and themes within textual/interview data (Nowell et al. Citation2017). The approach allows researchers to strategically explore and understand participants’ lived experiences, perspectives, and the meanings they attribute to those experiences (Braun and Clarke Citation2023). We conducted an inductive thematic analysis using semantic coding (Terry et al. Citation2017) on Australian participants’ semi-structured interview responses, and the Fijian talanoa session discussion points to identify patterns (themes) within the data.

The thematic analyses aim to gain an understanding of participants’ perceptions of climate change, what livelihood diversification strategies were used (why and to what effect) to cope with severe/uncertain weather, if and how gender impacts the strategy selected, and if and how livelihood diversity might contribute to strategies for sustainable rural livelihoods in the future. For the Australian semi-structured interview data, we also applied an inductive thematic analysis approach, allowing themes to emerge naturally from the dataset to enhance the data’s confirmability. A familiarisation process facilitated understanding of participants’ responses and generated codes to capture key ideas, concepts, or patterns. The team members reviewed and refined the themes to ensure coherence, conceptual clarity, and meaning. For the Fijian talanoa session data, the researchers engaged in data confirmability by examining the data individually and then collaboratively to build consensus regarding rural women’s livelihood diversity in relation to climate change. Following the talanoa, the researchers undertook a comparative data analysis, deconstructing discussion themes into discrete “incidents” or “units” (see Lincoln and Guba Citation1985) to identify and illustrate them.

Climate change and gendered adaptation form the contextual backdrop against which two analytical themes were identified through the coding process: livelihood diversification and women’s entrepreneurship. These contextual conditions, which are the material realities of a changing climate and the gendered social structures within which women operate, shape how rural women in both countries pursue diversification and entrepreneurial strategies.

4. Results
This section reports the findings of the inductive thematic analyses for the Fijian and Australian cases. Both sections present findings as integrated narratives, weaving participant voices and observations into the context of each setting’s dynamics. Climate change and gendered adaptation are treated throughout as the contextual conditions shaping women’s livelihood diversification and entrepreneurship. The Australian section draws on semi-structured interviews, while the Fiji section draws on points from the talanoa session, woven contextually into the individual and community dynamics.

4.1. Fiji case: western viti levu, vusama-natadola area
Fiji is a Pacific island nation comprised of over 300 islands, about 100 of which are inhabited. The Fiji case study focuses on the western side of Viti Levu Island, the largest land mass in the group. Data was collected in the Vusama-Natadola area, representing rural subsistence-oriented contexts in the tropical Pacific Islands. As shown in Figure 1, there are several urban centres on western Viti Levu Island, but they account for only 17.5% of its population (8,512 people). More than four-fifths of the population (82.5% or 40,126 people) live in rural locations, such as the Vusama-Natadola areaFootnote2 (Fiji Bureau of Statistics Citation2023). One of the critical measures of rural versus urban life on Western Viti Levu Island is the multidimensional poverty rate, which, in the latest Fiji Household Income and Expenditure Survey (2019–2020), indicates 38.1% for rural dwellers and 20.4% for urban dwellersFootnote3 (Fiji Bureau of Statistics Citation2021). Almost 80% of urban dwellers aged 15–64 earned wages, compared to 38.5% of their rural counterpartsFootnote4 (Fiji Bureau of Statistics Citation2021).

Figure 1. Map of Viti Levu, the largest island in Fiji.

Read detailed figure description
A map of Murweh Shire marking Charleville, Augathella, Morven, Cooladdi, Langlo Crossing and the Warrego River, plus a locator inset.
Display full size
The Pacific Islands’ coastal cities and environments face threats from climate change, including sea-level rise, extreme weather events, coastal inundation, and ecosystem degradation. The result of such changes poses increasing socio-economic, cultural, and political risks to people’s security, income, and livelihoods in Small Island Developing States (SIDS), such as Fiji (Masson-Delmotte et al. Citation2021). The Climate Change Act 2021 (Fiji) and adherence to the Paris Agreement (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Citation2015) provide guidelines and strategic actions to meet Fiji’s climate change adaptation and mitigation targets. These targets are designed to deliver the policy priorities set out globally in the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals and locally in the National Development Plan, National Adaptation Plan, and Fiji’s Low Emissions Development Strategy (Government of Fiji Citation2018a, Citation2018b). Although gaining ground through its adaptation efforts to respond to climate change, Fiji is ranked the 72nd most vulnerable country out of 181 by the Notre Dame Global Adaptation Initiative Country Index (ND-GAIN), which summarises a country’s vulnerability to climate change and other global challenges alongside its readiness to improve resilience.

The Vusama-Natadola area (i.e. Tikina Malomalo) is typical of most in the tropical Pacific Islands. People live on the land, own/lease and grow/acquire foods they use for their own consumption and/or sell for cash in local markets, occasionally through cooperatives for export. Many rural dwellers live in communities (villages), while others live separately. There are comparatively few opportunities for wage employment, which means (especially during/post-COVID) that people commonly barter or exchange goods and services (Foley et al. Citation2022; lese et al. Citation2021). The area of study (i.e. Vusama-Natadola area) is the Tikina Malomalo in the southwest of Viti Levu Island (Fiji), part of the province of Nadrogā (Figure 2). It comprises several villages and numerous farms (not shown individually on the map).

Figure 2. The Tikina Malomalo (area) in southwest Viti Levu Island.

A map of land with green and brown areas.
Display full size
Livelihood diversification has become a focus of policies and investments to reduce poverty, vulnerability, and resource pressure in coastal communities experiencing the impacts of climate change. Many Fijians live in rural areas with few opportunities for paid employment, relying on subsistence farming and natural resources to meet their daily needs. In coastal regions, households engage in multiple activities, including fishing, farming, opportunistic trade, and tourism (Sulu et al. Citation2015).

4.1.1. Customary livelihoods and recent climate-change impacts
Those residents of western Viti Levu who are regular wage earners work mainly in the tourism sector and do not pursue subsistence livelihoods. For daily consumption, subsistence livelihood is acquiring food from the surrounding environments (land and water)Footnote5 (IPBES Citation2023). Such food systems often allow the acquisition of excess food for sale, especially in western Viti Levu, where access to points of sale is more common than elsewhere in Fiji. Although concerns exist about food and nutritional security in Fiji, most rural dwellers continue to follow ancestral ways of food acquisition that sustain individuals, families, and communities (Shah, Moroca, and Bhat Citation2018).

This time-honoured situation is breaking down, likely due to long-term climate change impacts and short-term system stressors, such as the COVID-19 pandemic and periodic financial crises (Foley et al. Citation2022; Medina Hidalgo et al. Citation2020). Climate change affects rural livelihoods in western Viti Levu Island in several ways. First, given that most rural people live along island coastlines and acquire much of their food from coastal lowlands, mangrove forests and offshore (reef-lagoon) environments, the effects of rising sea levels have proved highly impactful in some contexts. These impacts include the loss of coastal land through shoreline erosion and retreat, an increased incidence of coastal flooding, and groundwater salinisation,Footnote6 all of which affect rural communities and the food resources on which they largely depend.

Typical coastal settlements in the study area are Malomalo and Naidiri, with the former slightly elevated and protected by a coastal forest fringe from the sea, and the latter adjoining the ocean and built on low-lying ground, often flooded at high spring tides. Although both communities subsist primarily from marine food, they also grow many of their staples (especially cassava and taro) on low coastal flats. They report in the talanoa sessions that they are not producing as well, owing to saline water intrusion and periodic wave overwash.

Talanoa informants link recent coastal changes to the economically damaging loss of edible seaweeds (nama) formerly gathered here, primarily by women, for sale. Several people in the session mentioned that stronger tropical cyclones had introduced so much terrestrial sediment that nama beds had become choked. While most residents of the area agreed that tropical cyclones have become stronger on average over the past decade, informants in both Naidiri and Nalele noted that their usual route across the Fiji group also appeared to have mainly shifted westward, meaning that the study area had become less affected by them than was once the case. These aspects of climate change drive how people live and adapt in the area. Several exposed communities are considering relocating to less exposed locations, especially upslope and inland from the coast. Several of our informants explained that climate change was making traditional livelihoods less reliable, primarily by reducing/changing seasonality, but also by damaging economic resources like nama.

Consistent with long-standing ideas about gendered attitudes towards human-environment connection, men appeared more connected to culture, tradition, place, and ceremony. At the same time, women in the study area expressed connections to nature, specifically the sustainability of particular resources (food and water) and the possibilities for alternative (or supplementary) subsistence pathways (du Bray et al. Citation2019).

4.1.2. Gender roles and decision-making in rural Fiji society
The key to understanding these aspects and their implications for future climate-change adaptation lies in appreciating traditional gender roles and how they influence environmental decision-making. Although Fiji is home to diverse cultures, almost all exhibit significant gender roles rooted in tradition, especially in rural contexts. Most rural adult men are primarily “farmers”, charged with maintaining the supply of food crops (especially root crops and vegetables) for their families and other dependents. Adult men are also usually responsible for boat fishing. Most rural adult women are typically responsible for food processing and preparation, household management, and child-rearing. Such women often direct or lead shallow-water gleaning for shellfish and nama. In the Tikina Malomalo, mangroves constitute a resource supply system commonly accessed by women. Pre-adult males typically assist with a range of adult activities, but often less so than pre-adult girls, who often play critical roles in supervising younger siblings.

Most rural communities (including extended-family units) in the study area are nominally led by males, with both chiefly titles and traditional roles generally passed along patrilineally. While this tradition is not ubiquitous in the Pacific Islands, it is most common in the southwest Pacific. It explains why community-level decision-making is generally male-dominated and invariably guided by older individuals with little formal education. Notwithstanding this situation, most rural communities in the study area have decision-making pathways for both men and women, the latter primarily through women’s groups that nominate representatives to relay women’s concerns to the male decision-making apparatus but also develop gendered communal projects. For example, the adult women of Vusama Village indicated they often enjoy scheduled communal mat-weaving or fabric-sewing, which significantly raises funds for a specific purpose. The success of such models for gender inclusivity in communal decision-making varies.

With the advent of non-traditional religions, especially in the last few decades, combined with generally higher levels of schooling and greater contact with other groups elsewhere in the country (and overseas), traditional roles have become more fluid in the study area. Perhaps in no sector has this become more visible than in opportunities for waged employment, something almost unheard of in the study a generation ago. Today, women and men are employed in distinct roles by tourism enterprises, which often means that rural women become time-poor (in terms of their traditional roles) and better remunerated than previously, compared to men. In contrast, rural men are often called upon to fulfil non-traditional roles such as childminding and meal preparation. Such changes have given women a greater say in decisions affecting family units, such as how to sustain or diversify household economies.

The contribution of NGOs, such as the three gender-focused ones in Fiji mentioned above, to the de-gendering of decision-making in rural contexts in Fiji is minimal. Yet, as such NGOs gain funds and influence, their outreach is likely to broaden, and their agendas to empower rural women are expected to become more successful. Rise Beyond The Reef seeks to empower rural women, including some on comparatively remote islands within the Fiji archipelago, by paying them fairly for handicrafts sold to tourists online and through outlets in Nadi, Fiji’s tourism hub. FRIEND Fiji is based on a similar model, helping rural women earn an income by making condiments (chutneys and sauces). DIVA for Equality seeks to empower rural women through skills training (from housebuilding to permaculture) that enables them to build independent livelihoods. Yet, in parallel with these nascent efforts towards gender equality in rural contexts, many rural women in the study area indicated they had recently been forced into non-traditional enterprises for reasons and in ways that paralleled those of women in the Murweh Shire in rural Australia.

4.1.3. Gendered enterprise in group and individual contexts
Unanticipated and seemingly unprecedented externally driven incidents, such as the COVID-19 pandemic and various extreme climate-linked events (i.e. large waves or tropical cyclones or floods), have increasingly led Fijians (and other Pacific Island countries) to seek new ways of sustaining livelihoods in a changing world (lese et al. Citation2021; Movono, Scheyvens, and Auckram Citation2022). In ways similar to those in rural Australia, within the Tikina Malomalo, these responses are commonly gendered (conceived and pursued by either men or women) or involve distinct gendered elements (responses affect well-defined roles for men and women).

Several such responses were identified through observations and conversations in Vusama Village. Among these responses were cultural tours of the village that included demonstrations and explanations of traditional practices and ways of life. These events included a “kava ceremony”, village tours, song and dance, and opportunities for visitors to purchase locally made handicrafts, often bricolage items such as decorative shells, polished and painted coconut shells, and hand-woven coconut-fibre string/rope. Community residents identified such entrepreneurial activities as relatively lucrative opportunities to increase incomes, where men and women were equally invested.

A similar enterprise planned by the people of Vusama relates to the revival of their traditional salt-making practices, for which this community was once famed (Dean Citation2023). From pits dug on the tidal flats bordering the mangroves at the mouth of the Tuva River, Vusama males extract salt-rich groundwater, which Vusama women boil in tin drums and weave pandanus baskets to package the residual salt. Previously, such salt packages were prestige goods, typically offered at ceremonies like funerals and weddings. Now, the villagers plan to sell them to tourists.

These examples were conceived jointly by men and women in Vusama and involved complementary gender roles. Other examples include activities that are implicitly gendered, according to Fiji culture, and are consequently pursued by either men or women. These include landscape works, such as digging drainage ditches or pit toilets, or carting water by bullock cart from the river to residential storage facilities, all undertaken exclusively by men in the communities of this area. Conversely, women often collaborate to weave mats and produce handicrafts from locally available materials.

4.2. Australian case: Murweh Shire, Queensland
The Australian case study is typical of most parts of the country, where networks of rural communities act as service nodes for scattered farms, some of which are remarkably extensive, that supply food/produce to domestic and overseas markets. The Murweh Shire is a local government area in the Maranoa district, which lies in the southwest part of the State of Queensland (see Figure 3), 800 kilometres west of the capital Brisbane. At the 2021 Census, the Shire had a population of 3,971 people spread over 43,905 km2. The original inhabitants of Murweh Shire were the Bidjara Indigenous people; First Nations people make up 11.5 per cent of the population (Australian Bureau of Statistics Citationn.d.). The Charleville township serves as the regional hub for the Shire, supporting growth through expanded government facilities, industry, and economic diversification. The local government authority supports the viability of the smaller townships of Augathella and Morven through upgraded public infrastructure and promoting niche economic opportunities.

Figure 3. Map of Murweh Shire, Queensland, Australia. The inset shows the location within northeast Australia.

Figure 3. Map of Murweh Shire, Queensland, Australia. The inset shows the location within northeast Australia.
Display full size
The Shire is predominantly a rural area, focused on sheep, cattle, and grain production, but tourism has become an increasingly important contributor to the local economy since agriculture declined in recent decades, driven in part by climate variability, including floods and droughts. Tourism provides an economic boost by generating visitor spending on accommodation, food, retail, and local services, thereby supporting jobs and small businesses across Charleville and surrounding communities. It also promotes regional diversification and community development by leveraging attractions, such as Outback heritage, astronomy tourism (Charleville Cosmos Centre), events, and Indigenous cultural experiences, which help fund infrastructure and sustain local services (see Blundell, Shaffer, and Moyle Citation2020).

Murweh Shire is experiencing compound and intensifying climate hazards. A “boom and bust cycle of flood and drought” characterises the region (O’Toole Citation2022, 3), which is also exposed to severe storms, bushfires and heatwaves (Queensland Reconstruction Authority Citation2022). The “[i]ncreasing effect on climate patterns including flooding, desertification of prime agricultural areas, fire risks, [and] prolonged warming” have been recognised as risks for the Murweh Shire with potentially “extreme” consequences (EarthCheck Sustainable Destinations Citation2024, 6). These conditions of climate variability create systemic risks to infrastructure and regional development pathways (Queensland Reconstruction Authority Citation2022), increase income volatility and uncertainty for farm households (Hughes, Galeano, and Hatfield-Dodds Citation2019), and increase financial and psychological stress in rural communities (Steffen et al. Citation2018).

The same families have owned many of the farms within the Shire for generations. Yet, growing economic pressures have often rendered smaller farms unviable, leading to the consolidation of larger farms. In most rural Australian contexts, deep and long-standing resilience is associated with communities and their ability to work collectively to withstand weather-linked periods of hardship (Phelps and Kelly Citation2019). This collective resilience has fuelled a romanticised view of rural Australia in some quarters (Alexandra and Riddington Citation2007; Connell Citation2014) and created an in-migration of urban dwellers seeking a “sea-to-tree change” (Ragusa Citation2010). These trends mask the disadvantage experienced by many in rural Australian communities and their vulnerability to external stressors, such as climate change (Park Citation2017; Sherval and Askew Citation2012).

4.2.1. Livelihood diversification: side hustle, digital connectivity, and social media
In Australia, the impact of climate adaptation strategies on broadacre farmers was examined by Brown, Bridle, and Crimp (Citation2016) using a rural livelihoods framework. They found that key constraints were rural decline, debt, and high production costs, but that these were managed by accessing farmers’ experience, community ties, and off-farm income. As in many Australian rural communities, women’s entrepreneurship in the Murweh Shire has emerged from necessity, as a means of securing additional income to remain in the countryside.

Improved connectivity has reshaped how rural women in Murweh Shire engaged in livelihood diversification. The rollout of Australia’s National Broadband Network (Hay Citation2018) transformed this situation to some extent, and participants highlighted that the COVID-19 pandemic made digital access and competency skills more urgent than ever. Social media emerged as a low-cost, accessible alternative to traditional advertising channels, which participants widely described as prohibitively expensive. Where once a small business owner might have invested in a small, classified advertisement in a regional magazine for minimal reach, social media platforms offered a free and far-reaching alternative that many participants described as transformative for their rural enterprises. This digital shift also underpinned the emergence of “side hustle” enterprises (supplementary income-generating activities that women developed in response to the economic precarity of rural life), with participants describing livelihood diversification as arising from the intersection of identified need, personal creativity, and digital opportunity.

A nurse in Murweh exemplified this trajectory. Torn between the security of her healthcare role and the pull of entrepreneurship, she began producing millinery items after noticing that women in rural settings were poorly served by existing products (Casey et al. Citation2022). For example, the hats and accessories available were expensive, and she believed she could make them herself. Her home rapidly became a small production facility. This experience reflects a pattern found consistently among participants: the capacity to identify a gap, mobilise available resources, and build a micro-enterprise from everyday observation. Other participants echoed this resourcefulness. One described repurposing her retail shop into a tourist attraction, driven by the recognition that, without city-level resources, creativity and innovation become central survival strategies. This adaptability captures the spirit of rural entrepreneurial bricolage (Casey et al. Citation2022).

4.2.2. Women’s entrepreneurship: learning, innovation, and empowerment
This necessity meant that many women were self-taught and self-made, often balancing various roles in paid and unpaid work at home. Many were also volunteers, which meant they could enhance their networking opportunities as leaders while performing community service and sometimes advocating for their communities. One respondent indicated that the local council had partnered with the community through word-of-mouth, volunteering, and community development initiatives, reflecting the ways people support each other across the country.

Often, entrepreneurial activities emerge from necessity. One participant, who was an immigrant from the United Kingdom, had worked at a remote cattle station and found the sun and extreme heat damaging to her hands. She identified that men had designed the gloves women wore, and that they were not appropriately sized, protective, or aesthetically appealling. In response, she created a prototype “mits” for women working in similar harsh environments. Working in a remote community forced the participant to learn and innovate as she negotiated a labyrinth of technical, legal, and technological challenges. For example, the participant located an overseas manufacturer that worked with fabric certified to UV 50. The design was developed using patterns in Adobe Illustrator, with the participant balancing property commitments while designing the gloves during morning and lunch breaks and after work. Similar digital learning initiatives supported other forms of income diversification. Embracing opportunities in digital platforms, such as TikTok, enables “anywhere, anytime” learning that supports the development of side hustles.

Sometimes, participants returned to their previous work lives and skills to supplement family and property incomes during tough economic times. The work became a stepping-stone to other side hustles or collaborations with more established women entrepreneurs. One participant remembered how she transitioned from her previous retail hairdressing trade that earned a “bit of pocket money” from other business pursuits with similarly creative people. This approach enabled the participant to engage in the side hustles without committing full-time, working as a florist in a nursery and gift shop and collaborating with another woman who worked as a photographer and a florist.

Other study participants have benefited from women mentors rather than collaborators, whether from inspired individuals working in the community of creative and entrepreneurial projects. Referring to another successful businesswoman in the region, one participant described the dynamic mentoring, which provided a sounding board for ideas and drew on her successes to foster an “achieve anything” attitude. These participants illustrate how many rural women possess an innate entrepreneurial talent for resilience, whether through self-taught skills, problem-solving, or adapting knowledge from education or other parts of their lives to address the issues they confront daily. One participant indicated that such activities reflect the adaptability of women in the bush who are self-taught and self-made, working out of necessity, much like many online small businesses.

Each example of initiatives to diversify rural livelihoods highlights the subtle yet critically important relationship between women and empowerment, yielding outcomes that supplement incomes and enrich the lives of individuals, families, and communities. For more than 20 years, the research literature has documented cultural shifts within rural communities in which women construct alternative pathways to leadership, often outside hegemonic structures and organisations. One study participant linked this cultural shift to women’s empowerment, prompting important questions about recognising the impact of women from both business and community perspectives. This recognition relates to women proving their worth to industry and partnerships that result in successful side hustles “that go boom”. Such endeavours better balanced the income peaks and troughs from running livestock or cropping. This cultural shift illustrates what empowered women can do, including giving back to the community in important ways.

Across these accounts, livelihood diversification functioned as both an economic strategy and a form of gendered empowerment. Participants described a growing recognition (shared within the community) that women’s side-hustle enterprises were not merely supplementary income sources but were increasingly outperforming the financial returns of livestock and cropping, which are directly exposed to the risks of climate variability (see Casey et al. Citation2022). This adaptation to economic uncertainty represents a culturally significant shift in how women’s economic contributions are valued in rural Australia, and a view that participants described as both overdue and increasingly visible in the public and commercial life of their communities. As one participant observed, women had effectively chosen to demonstrate their value, with their entrepreneurial activities diversifying and stabilising households against climate-driven disruptions in ways that traditional farming alone could not.

5. Discussion
Livelihood diversification and insecurity manifest throughout the Australian and Fijian case studies as rural women negotiate cultural constructs traditionally (and often still) defined by patriarchal structures. Place-based, nuanced differences emerge in how livelihood and income diversification are applied when women secure supplementary income as a buffer against the growing impacts of climate change.

Australian participants, for example, were more geared towards income diversification, recounting their stories of side hustles to supplement their income. Yet the examples also illustrated the motivational differences driving income diversification. For some, the motivation came from necessity (protective mitts), creativity (floral design), or opportunity (a millinery warehouse). Some of the enterprises were also motivated/determined by the role models and mentors in some rural locations. Such guidance reflects Sujakhu et al.’s (Citation2023) and Ali et al. (Citation2025) notion of how women strategically access social capital to support entrepreneurial activities, relying on informal, community-centred social networks for practical, professional, and personal emotional support. Such approaches also align with Parsons et al.'s (Citation2026) transformative intersectionality among gender, social capital, climate adaptation, and entrepreneurship. These interwoven relationships are no more evident than in the critical role internet connectivity and digital learning play in rural Australian income diversification, enabling creative and innovative activities through social media and online consumer access (e.g. Facebook and Instagram) (Sutherland, Casey, and Crimmins Citation2024). In the Fijian context, the motivation appears to be driven more by the practical aspects of livelihood diversification and financial security against the impacts of adverse and changing climate conditions, such as stronger tropical cyclones, rising sea levels, flooding, and land loss. The recent global pandemic further exacerbated these conditions. For instance, in the talanoa session, informants mentioned that stronger tropical cyclones had introduced terrestrial sediment that choked nama beds. Responses to these conditions have made traditional roles more fluid and visible for waged employment (i.e. tourism). The result is that rural women become time-poor (in terms of their traditional roles within the family and community) but better remunerated.

Gender and adaptation to climate change in rural settings influence responses from the study’s Australian and Fijian participants. In the Fijian context, issues around gender and adaptation have led to women having a greater say in decisions affecting family units, such as how to sustain or diversify household economies. Observed responses included cultural tours of traditional village practices and life (i.e. the kava ceremony). These tours allowed tourists to purchase locally made handicrafts, often bricolage items, including decorative shells, polished and painted coconut shells, and hand-woven coconut fibre string/rope. These gender adaptations reflect Hoque and Uddin’s (Citation2026) position on adopting gender-transformative policies that foster a more balanced relationship between men and women by transforming power structures and resource allocation. Several NGOs contribute to de-gendering decision-making in rural Fiji through their outreach, supporting their agendas to empower rural women. For example, Rise Beyond The Reef, FRIEND Fiji, and DIVA for Equality empower, support, and train rural women to build independent livelihoods. Yet, alongside these nascent efforts towards gender equality in rural contexts, many rural women in the study indicated they had recently been forced into non-traditional enterprises for reasons and in ways that paralleled those of women in the Murweh Shire. Australian participants’ stories of side-hustle entrepreneurship also stemmed from necessity, leading many women to become self-taught and self-made, often balancing various roles across paid and unpaid work. Such responses reflect Stephenson and Furman’s (Citation2024) notion of “climate-just entrepreneurship” as pivotal in addressing and mitigating entrenched, systemic inequalities that threaten nascent and rapidly evolving fields, such as the circular economy, social enterprise, and climate entrepreneurship.

Women, as rural entrepreneurs, create opportunities and are active agents of resilience and recovery in the face of extreme climate events. In the Australian context, evidence points to a cultural shift towards women’s empowerment, prompting critical questions about how to recognise their impact on business and community development initiatives. Rural women bring social and economic capital to industry, partnerships, and community through side hustles and volunteerism. Such a climate-focused entrepreneurial approach provides more stable income streams through the peaks and troughs of livestock or cropping operations. It also encourages women to spearhead innovative or creative enterprises; however, awareness of intersectional advantages and disadvantages is critical to the formation of “resilience” (Casey et al. Citation2025). From a Fijian perspective, gender roles in small community-level enterprises play out in nuanced ways. For example, within the Tikina Malomalo, roles are either commonly gendered or involve distinct gendered elements. Agriculture/farming seems to be one sphere of activity in the Tikina Malomalo that is not explicitly gendered. Some adult women look after their family’s “food gardens”, often 1-2 km from their homes, either because their husbands cannot manage them or because there is too much land for one person (of either gender) to manage. For example, in the talanoa sessions, one participant explained that, because of her family’s financial hardships, she had diversified her livelihood and income streams to ensure the sustainability of her family and local communities.

6. Conclusion
In exploring the key question of whether gender, specifically the role of women, should be foreground in livelihood adaptation and diversification conversations, discussions, and actions, greater consideration of the complexities of gendered adaptation to climate change in differing contexts is vital in policy formation as not only do conditions such as climate change widen divides across multiple areas including housing affordability and availability, quality of life, and education inequality (Yadav et al. Citation2021), these divides disproportionately affect rural women in both Australian and the Pacific because of social norms and structures, geographical issues, diversity in rural communities, service provision, and effective practice models (AIFS Citation2015; Alston, Fuller, and Kwarney Citation2025).

Further, as these case studies demonstrate, women already make valuable contributions to their communities’ livelihood and income diversification strategies. In the Australian context, digital access, connectivity, and inclusion were critical to the growth of rural women’s entrepreneurial strategies. Combined with digital communication technologies, entrepreneurial bricolage has the potential to transform and sustain many rural communities. Yet the advantages of digital technologies and associated economic, social, and political participation and connectivity cannot be shared equally if rural women face barriers to participation and inclusion, as in Fiji. The emerging trends in the de-gendering of decision-making in rural Fiji contexts, however, suggest that as some groups of women gain funds and influence, their outreach is likely to broaden and their agendas to empower rural women will become more successful, a phenomenon worthy of fuller examination. In rural Australia, the research team found that women entrepreneurs effectively navigate digitally and socially mediated “slippages” among entrepreneurialism, advocacy, and community engagement to diversify their livelihoods and support their communities as they experience climate change. Efforts to broaden rural livelihoods highlight the vital link between women and empowerment. These endeavours enhance incomes and improve the lives of people, families, and localities.

Authors’ statement
We hereby confirm that the submitted manuscript has not been previously published nor submitted for publication anywhere else. Furthermore, we are not aware of any ethical conflicts that have arisen during the research. Ethical approval was received for this project by the “University of the Sunshine Coast Ethics committee: Livelihood Diversity as a Strategy for Coping with Climate Change: Case Studies from Rural Australia and the Pacific Islands” (A221850).

Acknowledgements
We thank the University [anonymised for review] for funding the pilot study and the Murweh Shire Council for supporting the project.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information
Funding
This work was supported by University of the Sunshine Coast.
Notes
1 A talanoa is informal conversation, storytelling, yarning, or discussions between two or more people, such as among friends, family members, local community members, church members, and work colleagues. It is the most culturally-appropriate way of exchanging information in rural Pacific Island contexts.

2 These data are for the Nadroga-Navosa Province, as shown in Table 5 of the 2017 Population and Housing Census Release 1.

3 Fiji Household Income and Expenditure Survey, Annex H.

4 Fiji Household Income and Expenditure Survey, Table 27.

5 Subsistence livelihoods are those “in which a species [or plant or animal] is used or consumed directly by the individual who obtained it from the wild and his/her/their direct social network” (IPBES.net).

6 Salinisation is the process by which water-soluble salts accumulate in soil and groundwater reducing fertility and affecting agriculture and access to fresh water sources. In the Pacific Islands it is likely to create in atolls and low-lying islands due to the combined climate change impacts of more intense cyclones and sea level rise (lese et al. Citation2024).

References
Alexandra, J., and C. Riddington. 2007. “Redreaming the Rural Landscape.” Futures 39 (2-3): 324–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2006.04.002.
(Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Ali, I., A. A. Shah, B. A. Alotaibi, A. Ali, and Y. Ali. 2025. “A Gendered Analysis of Perception and Adaptation to Climate Change among High Mountain Farmers: A Case Study of Nagar District, Pakistan.” Local Environment 30 (11): 1385–1402. https://doi.org/10.0.4.56/13549839.2025.2477009.
(Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Alston, M. 2003. “Women in Agriculture: The ‘New Entrepreneurs’.” Australian Feminist Studies 18 (41): 163–171. https://doi.org/10.1080/08164640301726.
(Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Alston, M., S. Fuller, and N. Kwarney. 2025. “Women and Climate Change in Vanuatu, Pacific Islands Region.” Gender, Place & Culture 32 (1): 83–104. https://doi.org/10.1080/0966369X.2023.2229530.
(Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Arora-Jonsson, S. 2011. “Virtue and Vulnerability: Discourses on Women, Gender and Climate Change.” Global Environmental Change 21 (2): 744–751. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.01.005.
(Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Australian Bureau of Statistics. n.d. Murweh: 2021 All Persons QuickStats. https://www.abs.gov.au/census/find-census-data/quickstats/2021/LGA35600(open in a new window).
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Australian Institute of Family Studies (AIFS). 2015. Domestic and Family Violence in Regional, Rural and Remote Communities: An Overview of Critical Issues. https://aifs.gov.au/cfca/publications/domestic-and-family-violence-regional-rural-and-remote-communities(open in a new window).
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Babela, M. S., V. R. Shindea, D. Sharmab, and N. M. Dang. 2020. “Measuring Water Security: A Vital Step for Climate Change Adaptation.” Environmental Research 185:109400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2020.109400.
(Open in a new window)PubMed
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Barclay, K. M., A. N. Satapornvanit, V. M. Syddall, and M. J. Williams. 2021. “Tuna is Women’s Business too: Applying a Gender Lens to Four Cases in the Western and Central Pacific.” Fish and Fisheries 23:584–600. https://doi.org/10.1111/faf.12634.
(Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Bertana, A., and N. Blanton. 2023. “Climate Change Adaptation, Gender, and Mainstreaming: The Role of Gender in Fiji’s Relocation Initiative.” Climate and Development 15 (1): 60–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/17565529.2022.2055524.
(Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Blundell, E., V. Shaffer, and B. D. Moyle. 2020. “Dark Sky Tourism and the Sustainability of Regional Tourism Destinations.” Tourism Recreation Research 45 (20): 549–556. https://doi.org/10.1080/02508281.2020.1782084.
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Braun, V., and V. Clarke. 2023. “Thematic Analysis.” In The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research, 6th ed., edited by N. K. Denzin, Y. S. Lincoln, M. D. Giardina, and G. S. Canella, 385–402. Los Angeles: SAGE Publishing.
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Brown, P. R., K. L. Bridle, and S. J. Crimp. 2016. “Assessing the Capacity of Australian Broadacre Mixed Farmers to Adapt to Climate Change: Identifying Constraints and Opportunities.” Agricultural Systems 146 (July): 129–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2016.05.002.
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Casey, S., G. Crimmins, J. McIntyre, and S. O’Sullivan. 2025. “Stories of Country Women: Advancing Feminist Intersectionality for Climate Change Adaptation in Australia.” Sociologia Ruralis 65:e12474. https://doi.org/10.1111/soru.12474.
(Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Casey, S., G. Crimmins, L. Rodriguez Castro, and P. Holliday. 2022. “‘We would be Dead in the Water without Our Social Media!’: Women Using Entrepreneurial Bricolage to Mitigate Drought Impacts in Rural Australia.” Community Development 53 (2): 196–213. https://doi.org/10.1080/15575330.2021.1972017.
(Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Chandio, A. A., Y. Jiang, A. Rehman, and A. Rauf. 2020. “Short and Long-run Impacts of Climate Change on Agriculture: An Empirical Evidence from China.” International Journal of Climate Change Strategies and Management 12 (2): 201–221. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCCSM-05-2019-0026.
(Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Connell, J. 2014. “Soft Country? Rural and Regional Australia in Country Style.” In Rural Change in Australia: Population, Economy, Environment, edited by R. Dufty-Jones and J. Connell, 211–234. Surrey: Ashgate.
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Dean, M. R. U. 2023. “Indigenous Knowledge for Social Cohesion, Ecological and Community Well-being, and Climate Resilience: Reviving Indigenous Salt Crafting in Vusama, Fiji.” AlterNative 19 (3): 711–722. https://doi.org/10.1177/11771801231194205.
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
du Bray, M., A. Wutich, K. L. Larson, D. White, and A. Brewis. 2019. “Anger and Sadness: Gendered Emotional Responses to Climate Threats in Four Island Nations.” Cross-Cultural Research 53 (1): 58–86. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069397118759252.
(Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
EarthCheck Sustainable Destinations. 2024. Murweh Shire Risk Assessment. Murweh Shire Council. https://www.murweh.qld.gov.au/files/assets/public/v/1/community-and-services/documents/sustainable-tourism-destination-documents/msc_risk_full_version.pdf(open in a new window).
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Farrelly, T., and U. Nabobo-Baba. 2014. “Talanoa as an Empathic Apprenticeship.” Asia Pacific Viewpoint 55 (3): 319–330. https://doi.org/10.1111/apv.12060.
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Fiji Bureau of Statistics. 2021. 2019–2020 Household Income and Expenditure Survey: Main Report. Government of Fiji. https://www.statsfiji.gov.fj/images/documents/HIES_2019-20/2019-20_HIES_Main_Report.pdf(open in a new window).
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Fiji Bureau of Statistics. 2023. Fiji Statistics at a Glance. https://www.statsfiji.gov.fj/(open in a new window).
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Foley, A. M., S. Moncada, M. Mycoo, P. Nunn, V. Tandrayen-Ragoobur, and C. Evans. 2022. “Small Island Developing States in a Post-pandemic World: Challenges and Opportunities for Climate Action.” Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews-Climate Change 13 (3): e769. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.769.
(Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Government of Fiji. 2018a. National Adoption Plan. https://fijiclimatechangeportal.gov.fj/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Brief__Fiji_National_Adaptation_Plan_Policy.pdf(open in a new window).
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Government of Fiji. 2018b. Fiji’s Low Emissions Development Strategy. https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/Fiji_Low%20Emission%20Development%20%20Strategy%202018%20-%202050.pdf(open in a new window).
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Griffiths, R., and N. Evans. 2015. “The Welsh Marches: Resilient Farmers? Exploring Farmers’ Resilience to Extreme Weather Events in the Recent Past.” Ager-Revista De Estudios Sobre Despoblacion Y Desarrollo Rural 18 (Jan–June): 161–189. https://doi.org/10.4422/ager.2015.05.
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Habib, N., A. Ariyawardana, and A. A. Aziz. 2023. “The Influence and Impact of Livelihood Capitals on Livelihood Diversification Strategies in Developing Countries: A Systematic Literature Review.” Environmental Science and Pollution Research 30:69882–69898. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-27638-2.
(Open in a new window)PubMed (Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Hay, R. 2018. “The Engagement of Women and Technology in Agriculture.” PhDDissertation, James Cook University. https://doi.org/10.4225/28/5ad015a60c689.
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Hoque, M., and Md. K. Uddin. 2026. “Climate Change and Adaptation Policies in South Asia: Addressing the Gender-Specific Needs of Women.” Local Environment 31 (1): 98–116. https://doi.org/10.0.4.56/13549839.2025.2456549.
(Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Houghton, K., and P. Strong. 2004. “Women in Business in Rural and Remote Australia: Growing Regional Economies.” RIRDC Publication No 04/130, Report for the Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation, September. https://agrifutures.com.au/wp-content/uploads/publications/04-130.pdf(open in a new window).
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Hu, R., and N. Gill. 2021. “The Family Farming Culture of Dairy Farmers: A Case Study of the Illawarra Region, New South Wales.” Sociologia Ruralis 61 (2): 389–421. https://doi.org/10.1111/soru.12329.
(Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Huang, J., H. Yu, D. Han, G. Zhang, Y. Wei, J. Huang, L. An, X. Liu, and Y. Ren. 2020. “Declines in Global Ecological Security under Climate Change.” Ecological Indicators 117:106651. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.106651.
(Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Hughes, N., D. Galeano, and S. Hatfield-Dodds. 2019. Analysis of the Effects of Drought and Climate Variability on Australian Farms. ABARES Insights 6. Department of Agriculture, Australian Government. https://www.agriculture.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/EffectsOfDroughtAndClimateVariabilityOnAustralianFarms_v1.0.0.pdf(open in a new window).
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2023. “Summary for Policymakers.” In Climate Change 2023: Synthesis Report, edited by Hoesung Lee and José Romero, 1–34. Geneva: IPCC. https://doi.org/10.59327/IPCC/AR6-9789291691647.001.
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). 2023. Homepage. https://www.ipbes.net/(open in a new window).
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Jackson, G., K. E. McNamara, and B. Witt. 2020. “‘System of Hunger’: Understanding Causal Disaster Vulnerability of Indigenous Food Systems.” Journal of Rural Studies 73:163–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2019.10.042.
(Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Jain, V., N. Tewathia, and K. Barik. 2023. “Gender-differentiated Labor and Adaptation Effects of Climate Change in Rural Areas: A Systematic Literature Review.” Gender Issues 40:168–184. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12147-023-09310-8.
(Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
King, J., D. Grant-Smith, R. Danvers, and D. Leibmann. 2026. “Intersecting Realities, Compounding Complexities: Climate Change, Disability, and Justice.” In Research Handbook on Disability and Society, edited by A. M. Bruyère and M. Saleh, 266–285. Edward Elgar.
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Lamb, B. 2023. Love for the Land: Lessons from Farmers Who Persist in Place. New Haven: Yale University Press.
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Langford, A. 2019. “Capitalising the Farm Family Entrepreneur: Negotiating Private Equity Partnerships in Australia.” Australian Geographer 50 (4): 473–491. https://doi.org/10.1080/00049182.2019.1682320.
(Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Lawless, S., P. J. Cohen, S. Mangubhai, D. Kleiber, and T. H. Morrison. 2021. “Gender Equality is Diluted in Commitments Made to Small-Scale Fisheries.” World Development 140 (April): 105348. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2020.105348.
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
lese, V., M. Wairiu, G. M. Hickey, D. Ugalde, D. H. Salili, J. Walenenea, T. Tabe, et al. 2021. “Impacts of COVID-19 on Agriculture and Food Systems in Pacific Island Countries (PICs): Evidence from Communities in Fiji and Solomon Islands.” Agricultural Systems 190:103099. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2021.103099.
(Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
lese, V., H. Waqa-Sakiti, T. S. Tauaa, R. T. Rarokolutu, V. Falaniko, E. Challies, S. Patolo, et al. 2024. Thirst for Life: Water Security and Changing Climate in the Pacific. University of Canterbury, The University of the South Pacific, and the Pacific Ocean and Climate Crisis. https://ir.canterbury.ac.nz/server/api/core/bitstreams/50aa97f9-5fe6-4ca2-bd88-93bd7f44c762/content(open in a new window).
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Lincoln, Y. S., and E. G. Guba. 1985. Naturalistic Inquiry. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Lobell, D., and M. Burke. (eds). 2010. Climate Change and Food Security: Adapting Agriculture to a Warmer World. Dordrecht: Springer.
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Lobell, D. B., W. Schlenker, and J. Costa-Roberts. 2011. “Climate Trends and Global Crop Production since 1980.” Science 333 (6042): 616–620. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1204531.
(Open in a new window)PubMed (Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
MacKeracher, T., S. J. Foale, G. G. Gurney, and S. W. Purcell. 2019. “Adoption and Diffusion of Technical Capacity-building Innovations by Small-Scale Artisanal Fishers in Fiji.” Ecology and Society 24 (2): 3–15. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-10777-240203.
(Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, A. Pirani, S. L. Connors, C. Péan, S. Berger, N. Caud, et al., eds. 2021. Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/(open in a new window).
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
McKune, S. L., E. C. Borresen, A. G. Young, T. D. A. Ryley, S. L. Russo, A. Diao Camara, M. Coleman, and E. P. Ryan. 2015. “Climate Change through a Gendered Lens: Examining Livestock Holder Food Security.” Global Food Security 6 (October): 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2015.05.001.
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Medina Hidalgo, D., P. D. I. Witten, S. Burkhart, J. R. Bogard, H. Beazley, and M. Herrero. 2020. “Sustaining Healthy Diets in Times of Change: Linking Climate Hazards, Food Systems and Nutrition Security in Rural Communities of the Fiji Islands.” Regional Environmental Change 20 (3): 73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-020-01653-2.
(Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Morgan, E. A., M. Crichton, G. MacCarrick, E. Stephenson, and S. H. Rimmer. 2025. “Scoping Existing National Policy Recognition of Future Generations: Prospects for Future Global Climate Justice.” Global Policy 16:525–540. https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.70007.
(Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Movono, A., R. Scheyvens, and S. Auckram. 2022. “Silver Linings around Dark Clouds: Tourism, Covid-19 and a Return to Traditional Values, Villages and the Vanua.” Asia Pacific Viewpoint 63 (2): 164–179. https://doi.org/10.1111/apv.12340.
(Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Msimanga, L., and G. Mukwada. 2022. “Themes in Climate Change and Variability within the Context of Rural Livelihoods: A Systematic Literature Review.” Research in Globalisation 5 (December): 100101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resglo.2022.100101.
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Naidu, S., and A. Chand. 2017. “National Culture, Gender Inequality and Women’s Success in Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises.” Social Indicators Research 130:647–664. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-015-1203-3.
(Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Nowell, L. S., J. M. Norris, D. E. White, and N. J. Moules. 2017. “Thematic Analysis: Striving to Meet the Trustworthiness Criteria.” International Journal of Qualitative Methods 16 (1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847.
(Open in a new window)PubMed (Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Nunn, P. D., and R. Kumar. 2019. “Cashless Adaptation to Climate Change in Developing Countries: Unwelcome Yet Unavoidable?” One Earth 1 (1): 31–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2019.08.004.
(Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Nursey-Braya, M., R. Palmera, A. Stuart, V. Arbon, and L.-I. Rigney. 2020. “Scale, Colonisation and Adapting to Climate Change: Insights from the Arabana People, South Australia.” Geoforum; Journal of Physical, Human, and Regional Geosciences 114 (August): 138–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2020.05.021.
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
O’Toole, S. 2022. “Foreword”. In South West Regional Resilience Strategy. Queensland Reconstruction Authority, Queensland Government. https://www.qra.qld.gov.au/sites/default/files/2022-07/south_west_regional_resilience_strategy_july_2022.pdf(open in a new window).
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Park, S. 2017. “Digital Inequalities in Rural Australia: A Double Jeopardy of Remoteness and Social Exclusion.” Journal of Rural Studies 54 (August): 399–407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2015.12.018.
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Parsons, M., H. H. Ko, M. Nursey-Bray, A. Gienger, R. Noor, G. May, and L. Makey. 2026. “Gendered Social Capital and Adaptive Capacity: Exploring the Role of Women Farmers in Climate Adaptation in Aotearoa New Zealand.” Local Environment: 1–25. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/13549839.2026.2638464.
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Pearson, J. K., E. McNamara, and P. D. Nunn. 2019. “Gender-specific Perspectives of Mangrove Ecosystem Services: Case Study from Bua Province, Fiji Island.” Ecosystem Services 38 (August): 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2019.100970.
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Peña-Lévano, L. M., F. Taheripour, and W. E. Tyner. 2019. “Climate Change Interactions with Agriculture, Forestry Sequestration, and Food Security.” Environmental and Resource Economics 74 (2): 653–675. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-019-00339-6.
(Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Phelps, D., and D. Kelly. 2019. “Overcoming Drought Vulnerability in Rangeland Communities: Lessons from Central-Western Queensland.” The Rangeland Journal 41 (3): 251–270. https://doi.org/10.1071/RJ18052.
(Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Phuong, T. T., N. Q. Tan, N. T. Hai, and N. H. Ngu. 2023. “Reframing Climate Change Resilience: An Intersectional Perspective of Ethnicity and Gender from Vietnam.” Climate 11 (4): 85. https://doi.org/10.3390/cli11040085.
(Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Pritchard, B., D. Burch, and G. Lawrence. 2007. “Neither ‘Family’ nor ‘Corporate’ Farming: Australian Tomato Growers as Farm Family Entrepreneurs.” Journal of Rural Studies 23 (1): 75–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2006.04.001.
(Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Queensland Reconstruction Authority. 2022. South West Regional Resilience Strategy. Queensland Government. https://www.qra.qld.gov.au/sites/default/files/2022-07/south_west_regional_resilience_strategy_july_2022.pdf(open in a new window).
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Ragusa, A. T. 2010. “Seeking Trees or Escaping Traffic? Socio-cultural Factors and ‘Tree-change’ Migration in Australia.” In Demographic Change in Australia's Rural Landscapes: Implications for Society and the Environment, edited by G. W. Luck, R. Black, and D. Race, 71–99. Dordrecht: Springer.
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Rarai, A., M. Parsons, M. Nursey-Bray, and R. Crease. 2022. “Situating Climate Change Adaptation within Plural Worlds: The Role of Indigenous and Local Knowledge in Pentecost Island, Vanuatu.” Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space 5 (4): 2240–2282. https://doi.org/10.1177/25148486211047739.
(Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Sathye, S., B. Prasad, D. Sharma, P. Sharma, and M. Sathye. 2018. “Factors Influencing the Intention to Use of Mobile Value-Added Services by Women-owned Microenterprises in Fiji.” Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries 84 (2): e12016. https://doi.org/10.1002/isd2.12016.
(Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Shah, S., A. Moroca, and J. A. Bhat. 2018. “Neo-traditional Approaches for Ensuring Food Security in Fiji.” Environmental Development 28 (December): 83–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envdev.2018.11.001.
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Sherval, M., and L. E. Askew. 2012. “Experiencing ‘Drought and More’: Local Responses from Rural Victoria, Australia.” Population and Environment 33 (4): 347–364. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11111-011-0149-x.
(Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Singh, P., T. Tabe, and T. Martin. 2022. “The Role of Women in Community Resilience to Climate Change: A Case Study of an Indigenous Fijian Community.” Women's Studies International Forum 90 (January–February): 102550. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wsif.2021.102550.
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Singh-Peterson, L., and M. Carnegie. 2020. “Integrating Gender in Agricultural Development Initiatives across the South Pacific: Customs, Values and Intersections.” In Integrating Gender in Agricultural Development: Learnings from South Pacific Contexts, edited by L. Singh-Peterson and M. Carnegie, 1–12. London: Emerald Publishing Limited.
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Singh-Peterson, L., and M. Iranacolaivalu. 2018. “Barriers to Market for Subsistence Farmers in Fiji: A Gendered Perspective.” Journal of Rural Studies 60 (May): 11–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2018.03.001.
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Son, H., and A. Kingsbury. 2020. “Community Adaptation and Climate Change in the Northern Mountainous Region of Vietnam: A Case Study of Ethnic Minority People in Bac Kan Province.” Asian Geographer 37 (1): 33–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/10225706.2019.1701507.
(Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Srivastava, T. K., P. Singh, and R. R. Verma. 2022. “Weather Variability Trends in Gangetic Plains of Uttar Pradesh, India: Influence on Cropping Systems and Adaptation Strategies.” Environment, Development and Sustainability 24:3588–3618. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-021-01578-8.
(Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Steffen, W., M. Rice, A. Dean, L. Hughes, and H. Bambrick. 2018. Deluge and Drought: Water Security in a Changing Climate. Climate Council. https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/resources/water-security-report/(open in a new window).
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Stephenson, E., and S. Furman. 2024. “Climate Just Entrepreneurship: Feminist Entrepreneurship for Climate Action.” International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship 16 (1): 89–109. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJGE-03-2023-0070.
(Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Stillman, L. V., V. Simmons, and B. Gibson. 2006. “Enterprising Women in Rural, Regional and Remote Australasia.” Small Enterprise Research 14 (1): 82–94. https://doi.org/10.5172/ser.14.1.82.
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Sujakhu, N. M., S. Ranjitkar, Y. Su, J. He, and J. Xu. 2023. “A Gendered Perspective on Climate Change Adaptation Strategies: A Case Study from Yunnan, China.” Local Environment 28 (1): 117–133. https://doi.org/10.0.4.56/13549839.2022.2130883.
(Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Sulu, R. J., H. Eriksson, A.-M. Schwarz, N. L. Andrew, G. Orirana, M. Sukulu, and J. Oeta, et al. 2015. “Livelihoods and Fisheries Governance in a Contemporary Pacific Island Setting.” PLOS ONE 10 (11): e0143516. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0143516.
(Open in a new window)PubMed (Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Sutherland, K., S. Casey, and G. Crimmins. 2024. “Social Media Behaviors and Barriers Impacting Women E-commerce Entrepreneurs in Rural Australia: A Pilot Study.” Community Development 56 (1): 39–58. https://doi.org/10.1080/15575330.2024.2339279.
(Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Swanson, K. 2021. “Equity in Urban Climate Change Adaptation Planning: A Review of Research.” Urban Planning 6 (4): 287–297. https://doi.org/10.17645/up.v6i4.4399.
(Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Terry, G., N. Hayfield, V. Clarke, and V. Braun. 2017. “Thematic Analysis.” In The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research in Psychology, edited by C. Willig and W. S. Rogers, 17–37. London: SAGE Publications.
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Thomas, A. S., S. Mangubhai, C. Vandervorda, M. Fox, and Y. Nanda. 2019. “Impact of Tropical Cyclone Winston on Women Mud Crab Fishers in Fiji.” Climate and Development 11 (8): 699–709. https://doi.org/10.1080/17565529.2018.1547677.
(Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Thomas, G. 2011. “A Typology for the Case Study in Social Science Following a Review of Definition, Discourse, and Structure.” Qualitative Inquiry 17 (6): 511–521. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800411409884.
(Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Thompson-Hall, M., E. R. Carr, and U. Pascual. 2016. “Enhancing and Expanding Intersectional Research for Climate Change Adaptation in Agrarian Settings.” Ambio 45:373–382. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-016-0827-0.
(Open in a new window)PubMed (Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. 2015. Paris Agreement. Adopted December 12, 2015. https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/united-nations-framework-convention-on-climate-change(open in a new window).
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Wamsler, C., and J. Bristow. 2022. “At the Intersection of Mind and Climate Change: Integrating Inner Dimensions of Climate Change into Policymaking and Practice.” Climatic Change 173 (7): 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-022-03398-9.
(Open in a new window)PubMed
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Wamsler, C., and G. Osberg. 2022. “Transformative Climate Policy Mainstreaming: Engaging the Political and the Personal.” Global Sustainability 5:e13. https://doi.org/10.1017/sus.2022.11.
(Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Wannewitz, M., and M. Garschagen. 2023. “Collective Adaptation to Climate Change.” Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 61 (April): 101248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2022.101248.
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Wossen, T., T. Berger, M. G. Haile, and C. Troost. 2018. “Impacts of Climate Variability and Food Price Volatility on Household Income and Food Security of Farm Households in East and West Africa.” Agricultural Systems 163:7–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2017.02.006.
(Open in a new window)Web of Science ®
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Yadav, P., N. Saville, A. Arjyal, S. Baral, P. Kostkova, and M. Fordham. 2021. “A Feminist Vision for Transformative Change to Disaster Risk Reduction Policies and Practices.” International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 54 (February): 102026. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2020.102026.
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Yin, R. K. 2018. Case Study Research: Design and Methods (6th ed.). Los Angeles: SAGE Publications.
(Open in a new window)Google Scholar
Download PDF
Related research
Recommended articles
Cited by
Sugarcane farmers’ perceptions of climate change and their “adaptation” methods in Fiji: adaptation for the industry or for their livelihood?
Ravinal Prakash et al.
Climate and Development
Published online: 30 Dec 2023
Climate change adaptation practices and challenges among women maize farmers in rural Tanzania: a case study of Nyasa district
Kastory A. Mbunda et al.
Cogent Food & Agriculture
Published online: 10 Dec 2025
Climate change, vulnerability and well-being in the Pacific region
Rukmani Gounder
New Zealand Economic Papers
Published online: 12 May 2024
View more
Information for
Authors
R&D professionals
Editors
Librarians
Societies
Open access
Overview
Open journals
Open Select
Dove Medical Press
F1000Research
Opportunities
Reprints and e-prints
Advertising solutions
Accelerated publication
Corporate access solutions
Help and information
Help and contact
Newsroom
All journals
Books
Keep up to date
Register to receive personalised research and resources by email
Sign me up

Copyright © 2026Informa UK Limited Privacy policy Cookies Terms & conditions Accessibility
Registered in England & Wales No. 01072954
5 Howick Place | London | SW1P 1WG

Taylor and Francis Group
×
Listen
Dictionary

We consider the effectiveness of mainstream climate change adaptation practices in two contrasting rural contexts. We demonstrate how gender, specifically the role of women, should be foregrounded in livelihood diversification discussions and actions, illustrated by two rural case studies from Australia and Fiji. The case study sites were selected to compare customary gender roles, livelihood diversification and opportunities, and differences in community governance and cash economies. The study employs a qualitative research design, deploying semi-structured interviews with 12 rural women entrepreneurs and community leaders in Australia, and a Fijian talanoa session with 15 women in leadership roles, recruited through purposive and snowball sampling via the village headman and women’s organisations. Data were analysed using inductive thematic analysis to identify themes and illustrate similarities and differences. Findings indicated livelihood diversification and economic uncertainty are evident in both contexts as rural women navigate cultural norms shaped by patriarchal systems. Differences emerge based on location in how women secure additional income to cope with climate change impacts. Case studies highlight distinct motivations driving livelihood diversification. Gender dynamics and adaptation to climate change shape participants’ responses in both countries. In Fiji, gender and adaptation issues empower women in family decision-making regarding whether to sustain or diversify household incomes. In Australia, evidence of a cultural shift towards women’s empowerment exists, raising vital questions about how to acknowledge their influence in business and community development. Across both nations, rural women play a pivotal role, creating opportunities and actively contributing to resilience and recovery amidst climate change challenges.

Geoheritage research suggests a connection between oral traditions and the transmission of memories over time. Brittany has many such myths and legends about submergence and silting along the coast. Studying the link between these stories and the environment to determine if they can be traced back to real events is highly relevant for mitigating current sea-level rise in the area and developing the necessary adaptation processes. This paper highlights how the Brittany coastline provides a wealth of resources for this research and presents the Géomyth’Ys project that focuses on this topic. It will outline a first attempt to map such stories, confirming both the potential benefits of a story-field survey connection and the challenges and stakes involved. Géomyth’Ys is a multi-disciplinary project associating literature, toponymy, history, geomorphology, and archaeology, and is well suited for moving from story to field survey. Simultaneously examining intangible and tangible elements takes into account the inherent ambiguities of folkloric material and enables the reconstruction of palaeo-environmental changes and human settlement to help ascertain whether these stories are based on real events.

The settlement of western Remote Oceania involved interactions among deeply divergent populations. Initial settlement ∼3,000 years ago by Lapita-associated, Southeast Asian-related groups was followed by Papuan-related expansions and later sea voyages from Polynesia. We present genome-wide data spanning the past three millennia from the eastern Solomon Islands, Vanuatu, Fiji, and Tonga. We find that the Papuan-related expansion proceeded at a slower pace than the earlier Lapita-associated expansion and reached Fiji through at least two distinct human dispersals, centuries earlier than previously suggested. We provide direct evidence of Polynesian-related gene flow at around 1,000 years ago, giving rise to Polynesian Outlier communities in southern Vanuatu. Finally, we examine an early Fijian community, revealing social practices that preserved wealth/status within a biological kin group with elevated Southeast Asian-related ancestry. Our findings refine the settlement model of western Remote Oceania and highlight the complex interplay of past migrations and community structure.

Throughout the island groups of the western Pacific, there exist culturally-grounded protocols for acknowledging once-inhabited places that have been submerged. Such protocols typically involve signs of respect made by persons sailing over sunken places; it is commonly said that a failure to abide by such protocols may result in calamity. Associated with these protocols are sights of lands beneath the ocean surface that are inhabited in much the same way as are those on modern island coasts. Sounds and scents coming from undersea lands have also been noted in some instances. These protocols and traditions are interpreted as reconstituted memories of land sinking, often hundreds of years ago, that enabled them to be preserved and sustained in pre-literate (oral) contexts. These protocols and traditions are referenced through a spiritual lens, the provision of land and its removal from human use being regarded as divine acts that need to be constantly acknowledged. The main function of these protocols and traditions is principally historical, enabling present populations to recall place-based pasts that give them identity and entitlement. Their function is also pragmatic, concerned with having people who are alive today understand past and present risks from environmental hazards, something that is key to sustaining livelihoods, especially in such tectonically unstable environments. In an era of climate change, where many coastal settlements are likely to be rendered uninhabitable in the next few decades as a result of sea-level rise, such protocols and traditions have a role to play in helping people adapt. For they demonstrate that issues of land loss and population displacement are not unprecedented in this region—and that anticipatory adaptation is therefore desirable. While the Pacific Islands region is a good place to document and analyse such cultural protocols and associated traditions, there are signs that such cultural expressions were once widespread and served similar purposes elsewhere in the world. This study shows that dismissing such cultural protocols and stories as ‘myth’ or ‘legend’ risks losing valuable insights into human pasts, especially in non-western contexts.

This book explores the intersection of indigenous wisdom, spiritual traditions, and ecological sustainability. It brings together diverse perspectives from scholars and practitioners, highlighting how ancient spiritual practices foster environmental stewardship. Covering themes like sacred ecology, ritual-based conservation, and ethical living, this book demonstrates how traditional beliefs can promote harmony with nature. By bridging spirituality and sustainability, it offers valuable lessons for addressing modern ecological crises.

Ideal for researchers, environmentalists, and spiritual custodians, including traditional knowledge holders and faith leaders, this book is a vital resource for understanding the role of cultural heritage in creating a sustainable future. Themes explored include the spiritual connection between humans and nature in indigenous traditions, how religious ceremonies and practices promote environmental protection, moral teachings rooted in traditional worldviews that encourage sustainable living, and the integration of belief systems with ecological activism.

Drawing on contributions from every inhabited continent, the book offers a uniquely global perspective on the intersections of spirituality, culture, and sustainability.

Ancient coastal tales reveal deep memories of land, sea, and survival.
What if the legends of submerged cities, land-making witches, and sea-crossing bishops are not mere inventions but echoes of real events? Whispers from Celtic Seas revisits coastal traditions from the Celtic fringes of northwest Europe, showing how they preserve memories of dramatic environmental change—floods, land loss, and shifting shorelines—carried forward through oral storytelling for generations. Drawing on cutting-edge geological and archaeological research, this book recasts these tales not as fantasy but as historical testimony grounded in lived experience. With clarity and insight, it also brings to life the tellers and collectors of these stories, tracing how oral knowledge endured even as literacy spread. It is a compelling invitation to listen again to old stories, and to hear what the land and sea remember.

This book chapter highlights the affinities between traditional spirituality and sustainability. Across global and local contexts, development initiatives have often privileged outsider perspectives and technocratic interventions that misalign with local worldviews. Consequently, many climate change adaptation efforts have proved ineffective and unsustainable, shaped by foreign agendas and external funding. Moreover, many traditional knowledge-holders perceive modern development models as grounded in materialism, consumerism, and excess, rendering them incongruent with their local values and cosmologies. Set against this background, the chapter calls for a paradigmatic shift in research, policy, and practice to better harness the synergies between traditional spirituality and sustainable development. Such alignment promises adaptation strategies that are not only more effective and enduring but also more equitable, ethical, and culturally grounded. The chapter also introduces this volume—Handbook of Traditional Spirituality and Sustainability—outlining its structure, thematic focus, and individual contributions across seven regional and conceptual sections.

Traditional Knowledge and oral accounts of natural phenomena provide valuable insights into natural hazards, including volcanic eruptions. Indigenous societies with Oral Traditions have often developed culturally grounded strategies for mitigating volcanic hazards. However, the integration of cultural knowledge and scientific understanding remains underexplored in modern volcanic hazard mitigation. This study takes a qualitative approach, using examples from Australasia and the Pacific Islands, to examine how the integration of long-standing cultural knowledge and volcanological research can enhance our understanding of precursory activity, eruption chronologies, and the relative timing of past volcanic events. Additionally, it offers detailed accounts of the hazards experienced and their impacts on people and the environment. We also propose directions for future research. Whilst differing world views in the causation of volcanic activity will remain, incorporating all available knowledge on past volcanic events will help local communities in volcanically active regions become better prepared and more resilient to future volcanic activity.

Culturally-appropriate planned relocation policies are critical to enabling climate adaptation, particularly in the Pacific and Indian Oceans where rising sea levels and intensifying hazards threaten communities. Fiji and Vanuatu are frequently cited as international leaders in relocation policy, yet there has been limited critical analysis of the effectiveness and comprehensiveness of their policy frameworks. We analysed 27 institutional instruments guiding climate-induced relocation and displacement in Fiji and Vanuatu and assessed each instrument's contribution to community resilience across three dimensions: means, equity, and tradition. While both countries have developed a suite of policies that collectively support relocation, tradition – encompassing cultural heritage, attachment to place, and customary governance - is underrepresented. Successful relocation policy requires the integration of cultural and traditional dimensions alongside material and procedural considerations, particularly in Indigenous contexts where culture, identity and land are intertwined. Strengthening internal policy design capacity and fostering cross-sectoral integration will contribute to just, sustainable, and culturally-grounded relocation processes and outcomes. Insights from Fiji and Vanuatu offer valuable lessons for other nations developing culturally-inclusive relocation policy in response to climate risks.

The exploration and settlement of the Pacific Island world is one of the most remarkable achievements of humanity. Early seafarers, skilled in navigation, discovered diverse habitats and biotas extending across a third of the globe. In this “sea of islands,” they established thriving communities where they lived for thousands of years. Today, although island ecosystems and cultures are facing great change, Pacific Island peoples remain resilient.

This new edition of a popular text reviews the diverse landforms, climates, ecosystems, societies, and cultures of the Pacific region. Seventy-five contributors—including numerous Indigenous scholars—address two key themes: (1) environmental dilemmas and possibilities, and (2) demographic, economic, and political challenges facing the people of the region.

New chapters highlight hydrology, ecosystem disturbance, conservation, Indigenous origins and activism, social media, ethnography, kava, contemporary dance, theater, and the cultural impact of globalization.

Other noteworthy chapters are significantly updated: biogeographical dynamics, prehistory of Near and Remote Oceania, fisheries and aquaculture, the fluidity of gender, mobility and urbanization, tourism as encounter, island economies, shifts in literary trends, Pacific music, water and development, and a new overview of land, marine, and water tenure.

The book concludes with a reflective essay. Pacific Island societies have been coping with environmental and demographic challenges for millennia; surviving societies have much to teach us about sustainable living, social justice, and reconciliation.

Policy makers, educators, students, and the general public will find this book an indispensable resource for understanding the region’s past, present, and future. [Book Synopsis]