Women’s Hidden Knowledge Holds the Key to Pacific Climate Survival, Review Finds

Across the Pacific Islands, the people most likely to know which wild yam survives a drought, which mangrove species will hold an eroding coastline together, and which holes in the sand at low tide conceal a shellfish dinner are women. A sweeping new review argues that this gendered expertise is not a cultural footnote but a foundational pillar of climate adaptation and disaster resilience, and that ignoring it is actively making Pacific communities less safe. The study, published in Regional Environmental Change, synthesises decades of interdisciplinary evidence to show how traditional knowledge in the Pacific is held, transmitted and practised along sharply gendered lines that formal climate governance has almost entirely failed to recognise.

The review, led by Danian Singh of the University of Auckland with colleagues Meg Parsons and Karen Fisher, employed an integrative critical narrative review methodology, combining a structured Boolean search of Scopus and Google Scholar with targeted retrieval of grey literature from Pacific regional agencies and national adaptation plans. After screening, the authors identified a core corpus of thirty-four empirical studies of gendered traditional knowledge, most published since 2020 and concentrated in Fiji and the Solomon Islands, which they read alongside twenty-five theoretical, comparative and policy works. The analysis was framed by feminist political ecology and decolonial scholarship, and the authors were explicit about their own positionality as partial insiders and outsiders to the communities whose knowledge they synthesised.

Geographically, the review resists treating the Pacific as an ecological monolith. Its primary evidence comes from the volcanic high islands of Fiji, Tonga and Samoa, where larger land areas, richer soils and extensive reef and mangrove systems shape one set of gendered knowledge practices. Against this, the authors set the low-lying atolls of Kiribati as a deliberate analytical counterpoint, where acute groundwater vulnerability and constrained nearshore gleaning grounds produce adaptive practices that differ in kind rather than merely in degree. This comparative design guards against the common error of generalising from Melanesian cases to atoll nations facing fundamentally different ecological constraints.

The first domain of evidence concerns agriculture and food security. Across Fiji, Tonga and Samoa, the literature documents a culturally defined division of labour in which men typically undertake land clearing and large-scale cropping while women manage household gardens, seed selection, weeding and the maintenance of crop diversity. In Fiji, women cultivate quick-maturing tuber crops to avert shortages and restore farms after cyclones, and on Totoya Island they combine traditional food-processing knowledge with solar-drying technology to produce cassava and breadfruit flour that substitutes for imported wheat. During cyclone seasons, Fijian women have been documented preserving cassava through traditional drying techniques and drawing on drought-resistant crops such as wild yams and sweet potatoes that remain available when water is scarce.

The Tongan case reveals both the depth of this expertise and its colonial reshaping. Before colonisation, Tongan agroforestry cultivated root crops, trees and shrubs together in mutually sustaining systems of nutrient exchange, pest defence and climate buffering, a system progressively displaced by commercially promoted monocropping. Within the customary arrangement, men cultivated the plants while women transformed them through cooking, medicine and the making of koloa, the valued textiles that secure social relationships, so that food security rested on the interlocking of both genders’ contributions. Development interventions, however, misread these arrangements entirely, promoting an urban horticulture that encouraged women to plant Western vegetables in house plots never organised for food provisioning, on the mistaken assumption that Tongan women gardened on a Western model.

The second domain concerns water and marine resources, where women’s knowledge is perhaps most consequential and most invisible. Women’s knowledge of traditional well locations enables communities to find potable water during droughts, while in coastal Fiji’s Bua Province, women proved more likely than men to identify medicinal uses of mangroves, including seedling preparations used to treat children’s coughs and disinfect wounds. Elder women in the villages of Navunievu and Denimanu articulated mangroves’ coastal protection role in vernacular terms, describing how they hold the soil together, and recalled which species best stabilise eroding shorelines, guiding younger women to plant them in vulnerable areas. Meanwhile, the customary tabu system of temporary closures, including a five-year closure reported to have restored sea cucumber and fish populations, fuses ecological and cultural functions in ways formal marine protected areas rarely achieve.

Gleaning, the collection of shellfish, crabs and seaweed from shallow reefs and mangroves, is predominantly practised by women and functions as a disaster-resilience mechanism. In Kiribati, women use finely tuned techniques passed down through generations, watching for telltale holes, bubbles in the sand and particular tidal patterns, and employing specialised methods such as wai ibo and the nocturnal luring of ghost crabs. Elders emphasise that gleaning becomes crucial after storms, when open-sea fishing is dangerous and marine organisms wash into the shallows. Yet a Solomon Islands study found that women’s exclusion from marine governance led them to breach local management rules, because closures had been sited on their customary fishing grounds without their input, eroding both equity and the legitimacy of conservation itself. Researchers have coined the term womangroves to describe how women’s mangrove-based food knowledge is rendered peripheral within a conservation discourse oriented towards male-dominated fisheries and timber.

The third and fourth domains cover disaster risk awareness and caregiving. Women in rural Fiji read unusual flowering times and shifts in lunar cycles as early signs of droughts, floods or cyclones, complementing men’s knowledge of offshore fishing and infrastructure repair, and sustaining the solesolevaki system of pooled labour that becomes a lifeline during crises. After Tropical Cyclone Winston, women in several Fijian villages were among the first to undertake reconstruction, with rapid recovery attributed partly to collective care and local leadership. In Samoa, fa’afafine performed both men’s and women’s roles in disaster response after the 2009 tsunami, yet binary-organised evacuation facilities excluded some from aid distribution, illustrating how gender-blind planning fails even those who contribute most.

The review’s central argument is that these patterns of exclusion are not incidental but the contemporary expression of colonial restructurings of gender and authority. Colonialism and missionary Christianity displaced arrangements in which Pacific women held authority over land, food production and ritual life, imposing patriarchal norms and undermining matrilineal inheritance. Those legacies persist in governance structures that engage male chiefs and elders as the relevant knowledge holders, systematically omitting women’s expertise in agroecology, water security and medicinal plants. The authors warn that incorporating traditional knowledge without a gender lens risks maladaptation, since locally led governance that is not gender-inclusive may simply relocate the exclusion of women’s knowledge rather than remedy it.

The policy implications are concrete. The authors call for institutionalising women’s genuine decision-making power rather than token representation, adjusting consultation processes to address practical constraints of timing, language and childcare, documenting gendered knowledge through community-led oral history and seasonal calendars under protocols that secure Indigenous ownership, and designing adaptation to empower rather than overburden women, whose unpaid labour already sustains community resilience. Knowledge transmission itself faces compound threats from commercialisation, migration and the erosion of customary leadership, meaning that marginalisation and loss reinforce each other across generations. Centring gender in Pacific climate adaptation, the review concludes, is both an equity imperative and a practical pathway to more effective and just resilience, because a community that consults only half its knowledge holders forfeits half its capacity to survive what is coming.

Subject of Research: Gendered traditional knowledge in Pacific Island climate adaptation and disaster risk reduction

Article Title: Gendering traditional knowledge in Pacific climate adaptation and disaster management: a critical narrative review

Article References: Singh, D., Parsons, M., & Fisher, K. (2026). Gendering traditional knowledge in Pacific climate adaptation and disaster management: a critical narrative review. Regional Environmental Change, 26(4), Article 204. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-026-02676-x

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1007/s10113-026-02676-x

Keywords: traditional knowledge, Pacific Islands, climate adaptation, disaster risk reduction, gender, Indigenous knowledge, food security, marine resources, mangroves, colonial legacies, maladaptation, Fiji