Kiribati: Adaptation and Mitigation

Funded in part by the World Bank, this strategy aims to reduce the vulnerability of Kiribati to sea level rise by managing inundation, protecting fresh water availability and raising climate change awareness. Sediment trapping has been achieved with sea wall building and mangrove planting, as this can help to limit the excessive erosion of beaches. Additionally, the installation of rainwater and groundwater harvesting systems aims to protect water resources even during periods of drought. The overarching aim of the programme was to show an alternative and viable response to complete relocation, the effectiveness of which was discussed by Donner & Webber (2014). They state that although their approach appears to be quite pro active, the strategies put in place thus far have been too tentative to make this a reality.  In spite of the reasonably effective short term solutions implemented to date, an absence of concurrent long term planning to protect the future existence of Kirbiati is highlighted. They also express their concerns for the availability of future funding for such a long term plan.    

Mangrove planting along the Kiribati coastline (Photo: Nic Maclellan/Oxfam)

‘Migration with Dignity’

Although still considered a last resort, a somewhat inevitable need for future relocation has been acknowledged by the government. In April 2013, President Tong made the following statement at a national high level public hearing on climate change.

‘The projection is that sea level rise will render our islands submerged and virtually uninhabitable...We’re not being defeatist, we’re trying the best we can in the circumstances, but what must be understood is that if we have to migrate we have to be ready.’

Consequently, the government have set up the ‘migration with dignity’ programme. This identifies areas with an ageing population in neighbouring countries, who would benefit from the relatively young I-Kiribati to fill labour needs. The seasonal overseas programme aims to provide the population with skills and cultural training, aiding an easier transition in the future. Additionally, the economic benefits of circular migration are helping to lower the vulnerability of the islanders receiving remittances; a secondary adaptive strategy. Although this particular aspect is very popular, it does not eliminate the common sense of disappointment and sadness felt by the people of Kiribati, about the prospect of losing their country.  

The nation is obviously determined to maintain Kiribati as a sovereign and habitable entity, the possibility of which seems dependant on external funding. The Pacific Islands do receive a comparatively larger amount of media attention which could help them to achieve more support in the future. I think it is the idea of a ‘loss of sovereignty’ that generates such an emotive response, and why similar examples such as Tuvalu are often considered to be on the ‘front-line’ of climate change. Places such as Bangladesh are likely to suffer a much greater magnitude of loss, but will probably not receive as much coverage comparatively. For this reason, I think it will be very interesting to see how any funding, specific to climate change adaptation and mitigation, is distributed in the future.