Climate Change

Presenter: Professor Jon Barnett

Land Tenure and Social Vulnerability to Flooding in Tonga

Land tenure is: access to and use of land and the resources on it a form of property right which arises from the function of formal and informal institutions a mechanism for social control

Secure access to land reduces vulnerability to climate change: Land can be used as collateral on loans Investments in land are legally secure Land provides a means of subsistence Land, if leased or sold, can be used to generate income

Land and mobility in Tonga

1882 Tongan Land Act: the right of males to : - a tax allotment of 3.3 hectares for farming - a town allotment of 0.16 hectares for housing But ratio of eligible males: to tax in Tongatapu = 2.6 : 1 to town allotments in Tongatapu = 1.9 : 1 so more people than land Landlessness = poverty

Options for the landless: Lease Share Leave Seek an allocation from a hereditary estate Seek an allocation from the Government Squat

70 households /456 people A squatter settlement on government land, not serviced by mains electricity or telephone lines, only a few households have piped water Began with informal shing shacks in late 1950s From mid-1970s temporary settlers began to remain permanently, growth through cumulative migration Nukualofas main open pit rubbish dump since the 1940s - 2007: household, agricultural, industrial and medical waste

280 households, 1,714 people allocated to the public after Cyclone Isaac 1982 government contributed to the cost of building the main road, all costs relating to lling inside the lagoon, or on land prone to ooding, were met by households.

Flooding and its impacts

Survey of 76 households 41% in Patangata and 54% in Popua - stated that their land was inundated after any heavy rainfall events and/or high tides (particularly spring tides), and that this could occur as often as once every few weeks.

41% in Patangata and 57% in Popua considered that ooding was a serious problem for them. Impacts include: wading knee or ankle-deep through water in order to leave or access the house; solid, human and animal waste washed in with ood waters; risks to children of falling into deep or contaminated water

Impacts inability to grow on plots; damage inside household if ood waters rise above thresholds; costs of maintaining land against erosion; standing pools of water which attract high numbers of mosquitoes; vehicles getting stuck stuck; unpleasant smells after ood waters recede.

Who gets ooded?

Location: Low land gets ooded most In Popua, it is said that the people with the best connections to the Minister got the best land: The allocation process in Popua was unfair. There are empty plots everywhere which belong to people who live overseas, or who used to work for the government but live somewhere else. They havent developed their plots, they just took the land because they could, and then they left it. Yet the people who actually have to live here get the worst plots, which are uninhabitable

In Popua some land, including some of the best land is not developed acquired as investments, or not yet developed because of cost (116 blocks not developed) In Patangata, early settlers acquired the best land distant from the dump, and on higher ground. Later settlers: Away from the dump, at the rear of established sites on lagoon edge Closer to the dump, on ground that is both high and low Very close to the dump, on ood prone land

Tenure: In Popua, registered land owners invest in housing, and land reclamation and maintenance works - tenants who lease invest far less in house and land In Patangata, early settlers have substantial homes good sites, good incomes, and 30+ years of occupation - later settlers invest little, have poor sites, and fear displacement

Cost - of land reclamation and ood defences In Popua distance from main road increases costs, as have to build up the road as well - costs between TOP 3,000 and 10,000 to establish a site - and 280 900 / year thereafter to maintain site. But dont invest if dont have secure tenure. Respondents with a higher average weekly income were less effected

So people with secure land tenure, and money, can afford to invest in works that reduce ood risk - and they are less affected by ooding that those without insecure tenure, and/or who have lower incomes

Conclusion
Land tenure in Tonga creates vulnerability to ooding. The institutions of land tenure favor those with social and nancial capital and discriminate against those who do not But the ooded are not without reason, or agency (dont assume powerlessness): Lots of people mock and look down on us, but we are proud. They wonder why we all choose to live in a swamp and dont try to get land somewhere else instead. Its because we may be in a swamp, but we have our freedom