**Aspect 1: Nested land divisions provided the framework for systematic management of biocultural resources.**

The genesis of landscape-scale biocultural resource management, within the social-ecological system of the Hawaiian archipelago, was born out of necessity when human-population growth began to put a strain on natural resources. Hawaiian historians of the 19th century, such as Kamakau [7] and Malo [22], recounted that at the height of human population in the *ali*'*i* era, the land was divided into various scales—such as *moku*, '*okana*, *kalana*, *ahupua*'*a*, '*ili*, *mo*'*o*, *pauku*, and further into various types of agricultural plots (Table 1). Of these land divisions, the *moku* and the *ahupua*'*a* were key political boundaries in the pre-contact system of governance, managed by positions in the ruling class known as *ali*'*i* '*ai moku* and *ali*'*i* '*ai ahupua*'*a* respectively. Land divisions below the *ahupua*'*a* (social-ecological community) level were primarily derived through kinship and cared for by specific extended families [23]. While biocultural resources were managed within the context of those scaled boundaries, there is insufficient understanding of the interplay between the nested land divisions within the biocultural resource management system.




**Table 1.** *Cont.*

The first land division made to manage biocultural resources under the strain of a growing human population was that of *moku* (district or region), and continued population growth later necessitated the subdivision of *moku* into *ahupua*'*a* (a community-level division) for more localized resource management [6,7,24]. This approach to biocultural resource management was not standardized in a cookie cutter approach, but rather depended on biophysical aspects of the land- and sea-scape [16]. Historical maps and Hawaiian language records detail the proper names and boundaries of some units below the *ahupua*'*a* level, such as '*ili.* While these place names have been mapped for some individual *ahupua*'*a* [14], comprehensive mapping of these land divisions for all the islands in the archipelago has yet to be completed.

Aside from the biophysical differences across islands, as well as the regions within them, land divisions varied over time, being shaped by the dynamic and varied needs of each island's human population, as well as the political structure needed to govern people and manage biocultural resources. It is not clear how many times *moku* were re-subdivided into *ahupua*'*a* in order to manage the needs of a growing human population. The names of some *ahupua*'*a* seem to indicate that they were at one time larger *ahupua*'*a* that were later subdivided into two. This is evident by the occasional occurrence of adjacent *ahupua*'*a* having binomial names that are differentiated only by the epithet, being descriptors of opposing characteristics; whereas all other *ahupua*'*a* names are monomials. For example, on Kaua'i, Kalihi-wai (Kalihi of fresh water) is adjacent to Kalihi-kai (Kalihi of salt water), and Nu'alolo-kai (Nu'alolo of the sea) is adjacent to Nu'alolo-'aina (Nu'alolo of the land) [ ¯ 16]; and on Hawai'i Island, Pakini-nui (Pakini major) is adjacent to Pakini-iki (Pakini minor) [15]. This may be evidence that *ahupua*'*a* were subdivided to adjust to the needs of the people. A similar trend is observed in adjacent *moku* of similar aspect—such as Kona 'Akau and Kona Hema on Hawai'i Island, and Ko'olau Loa and ¯ Ko'olau Poko on O'ahu—although it is unknown whether or not these are the result of a historical subdivision process for which records have been lost to time.

All of the Hawaiian terms for land divisions (Table 1), with the exception of two—'*okana and kalana*—were primarily political boundaries associated with governance and systematic biocultural resource management as discussed above [7,22]. Both of these terms are somewhat cryptic, intermediate level social-ecological divisions. Each has a unique definition, but both seem to be applied to the same situation in different places in the archipelago; and, therefore, we suspect that these two terms are synonyms. Synonymy has been documented between the varying classification systems utilized in the pre-contact era [25], including for terms used to classify land designations within the Hawaiian biocultural resource management system [16]. Such synonymy can lead to confusion, which is particularly true for terms that have fallen out of common usage in the contemporary period, and especially for classifications that—by their cryptic nature—do not fit well into tables developed by scholars.

Both '*okana* and *kalana* were units smaller than a *moku* that could have either contained several small *ahupua*'*a* [9,26], or were distinct areas within large *ahupua*'*a* [27]. The intermediary nature of this land division has led to confusion about what this unit was, exactly, and how this concept fits into contemporary restoration efforts. It is seemingly more related to biophysical realities and regional identity of the community rather than governance and resource management. "'*Okana*", is a contraction of, "'*oki,*" and "'*ana*", meaning, "cutting off", [26] in reference to the partition of a larger land division into smaller units. While its synonym, "*kalana*", can be broken down into, "*kala*", and its nominalizing suffix, "*na*", to literally mean, "that which loosens, frees, releases, removes, unburdens" (translation by authors), in reference, perhaps, to a watershed. These divisions were based upon the biophysical characteristics of the area, rather than the political needs for governance.

There are a few known examples that can inform our contemporary understanding of these terms. The term *kalana* has been applied to the Hanalei region of northern Kaua'i, which includes the *ahupua*'*a* of Hanalei, Waioli, Waipa, and Waikoko [ ¯ 28]. This appears to reference lands that collectively release *wai* (fresh water) into Hanalei Bay. Other examples are observed on the dry leeward side Hawai'i Island, where the *moku* of Kona is divided into the *kalana* of Kekaha, Kona Kai'opua, and Kapalilua [ ¯ 29]. The *kalana* of Kekaha (a contraction of the term, "ke-kahawai-'ole", meaning, "land without streams") in the northern area of Kona is characterized by arid lands with neither streams nor abundant rainfall, but instead has subterranean freshwater flow. Kona Kai'opua (Kona of the puffy clouds above the ¯ ocean), in the middle section of Kona, is where the '*opua ¯* (cumulus) clouds commonly rest in the field of vision in region just off shore. Kapalilua (the double cliff), in the southern region of Kona, is composed of several *ahupua*'*a* which encompass a region in Kona with a unique topography that is dominated by large sections of sea cliffs.

Uncertainties remain relating to the boundaries of various land divisions, as described above. This arises from several factors: (1) While Hawaiians quickly adopted paper-based mapping, after contact with Europeans, as a crucial means of documenting and asserting knowledge and rule over lands, they did not make such maps in the pre-contact era [30]; (2) several volcanic eruptions have modified or destroyed *ahupua*'*a* and/or *moku* boundaries; (3) boundaries were well established at the shoreline, but were more ambiguous offshore; (4) the conquest and unification of the islands destroyed sovereign boundaries established by prior dynasties; and (5) current boundaries set by various indigenous and historical authorities are sometimes in conflict [15]. More research into historic land divisions and how their boundaries shifted over time is needed.
