**6. Conclusions**

In sum, little reliable scientific information is available on how climate change impacts on the dynamics, vulnerability, and resilience of coastal lagoon systems in the Pacific [100]. There is, however, strong evidence that unsustainable fishing methods, such as small mesh gillnets and spearfishing at night, are impacting on coastal fisheries on Malaita [101]; that corporate logging causes erosion and siltation of coastal ecosystems in the province [102]; and that the clearing of mangroves threatens the food security and livelihoods of the wane asi [103]. It is well-known that communities in the province are coping with a range of social issues such as alcoholism, crime, and domestic violence [104]. It is documented that 52% of households on Malaita lack access to an improved source of drinking water, that 85% do not have basic sanitation facilities [105], and that 40% of two to five-year-old children in wane asi communities are malnourished [79]. It is also widely acknowledged that public infrastructure in Solomon Islands, such as rural health clinics, schools, roads, bridges, and wharfs, have deteriorated over the past twenty years [106]. Addressing these problems will

reduce the vulnerability of coastal communities to long-term impacts of climate change. The reverse is unfortunately not the case. In fact, a narrow focus on climate change adaptation tends to distract from other, more pressing environment and development problems [107].

So why does the sinking islands narrative remain so persistent, despite the uncertainty, complexity, and contradicting empirical evidence? Partly, it can be attributed to opportunism from government agencies, donors, civil society organizations, and rural communities [108]. Partly, it offers a simple solution for a range of wicked problems: Reductionism is useful, and perhaps even necessary, to mobilize financial resources in the international political arena [109]. And, partly, the sinking islands discourse is what Ilan Kelman has called a 'convenient distraction' [107]. A focus on climate change de-politicizes environmental and development problems: By emphasizing a new, external, and all-surpassing natural hazard, decision-makers mask their failure to address the root causes of people's vulnerability, such as poverty, weak governance, corruption, and inequality [110]. After all, it is much easier to draft a community-based disaster risk management plan than to hold logging companies accountable, enforce fishing gear restrictions in remote areas, operate rural health clinics, or organize community committees to maintain water supplies.

This paper is not belittling the long-term impacts of climate change on coastal communities in the Pacific. The point is that the climate change threats projected by journalists, policy-makers, and development experts are often highly uncertain and distant, and that the wane asi have to cope with a range of more severe and urgent problems right now. The saltwater people should not be portrayed as helpless victims of climate change. Instead the focus should be on finding practical ways to enable these people to cope with rapid social and environmental changes.

**Author Contributions:** Conceptualization, J.v.d.P., H.E., T.M. and H.G.; methodology, J.v.d.P. and H.G.; fieldwork, J.v.d.P., M.S., T.M., H.E. and H.G.; literature review, J.v.d.P. and H.G.; data analysis, J.v.d.P.; original draft preparation, J.v.d.P.; review and editing, H.E., H.G., T.M. and M.S.; project administration, M.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

**Funding:** This work was undertaken as part of the CGIAR Research Program on Fish Agri-Food Systems (FISH) led by WorldFish. Field work activities were carried out in the framework of the Strengthening coastal and marine resources management in the Coral Triangle of the Pacific project funded by Asian Development Bank (TA-7753). Additional financial support was provided by the Australian Government through the Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (ACIAR) project FIS/2016/300.

**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results.
