Introduction

1The inhabitants of Kiribati, an atoll state in the Central Pacific, have for a number of years been exposed to scientific scenarios, media reports and political discourses which confront them with the potential repercussions of anthropogenic climate change for the country, its people, and their sense of belonging (Hermann and Kempf, 2018: 21-22). In this article, I focus on the social and cultural processes of appropriation, translation and routinization of the scientific discourse on climate change and its effects in this part of Oceania. In connection with the local reception of climate change discourse, I explore a specific nexus of two very different domains and categories, namely climate change and tsunamis, and the indigenous connection that has been made between them – a configuration triggered by a series of national tsunami warnings on Kiribati.

2The theoretical framework of this study is based on Mike Hulme’s (2009, 2017) proposal to conceive of climate change not only as a physical reality but also as a scientific idea, conveyed through the global media, that finds its way into social worlds. Documenting and understanding the indigenous reception of recent, imported scientific narratives is one of the most important fields of research in the anthropology of climate change (see Crook and Rudiak-Gould, 2018; Pascht and Dürr, 2017; Hulme, 2009, 2017; Rudiak-Gould, 2011, 2012). The concept of reception has special significance in this context. I refer here in particular to Peter Rudiak-Gould’s (2011) concept of “reception studies”, with which he explicitly placed the global spread and local adoption of the scientific discourse on anthropogenic climate change at the center of analysis.

3Based on his research in the Marshall Islands, Rudiak-Gould (2011, 2012, 2013) illustrated the process of translation and cultural integration of climate change discourse. Many of the structural features of the reception in this Pacific island state are similar to those in neighboring Kiribati. The overwhelming majority of the population in the Marshall Islands, as in Kiribati, is familiar with the discourse on global warming and climate change and accepts both key scientific messages as well as projections. In both countries, only a minority hold skeptical to negative views of the scientific discourse. However, the reception of the discourse has led to unexpected transformations of the climate change concept among both Marshall Islanders and I-Kiribati.

4According to Rudiak-Gould, in the Marshall Islands the term mejatoto incorporates the meaning of both climate and weather as well as that of the natural, social and cultural worlds (Rudiak-Gould, 2012: 48-49; 2013: 109-116). He points out that this notion, with its cosmological connotations and extended spectrum of meaning, has affected the indigenous discourse on climate change in two ways. On the one hand, corresponding to the pronouncements and scenarios of climate science, the Marshallese associate climate change with long-term changes in the weather and environment. On the other hand, they have interpreted a wide range of changing phenomena as signs of a changing climate, including, for example, a solar eclipse, the acceleration of time, the decline of tradition, and the worldwide increase in earthquakes and diseases. Rudiak-Gould labelled this practice of conceptualizing climate change “promiscuous corroboration” (2012: 50; 2013: 114) and pleaded that observers should not just be critical of such culturally specific constructions but also recognize their positive role with regard to the local reception and acceptance of climate change discourse (Rudiak-Gould, 2012: 46, 52).

5In Kiribati, the term “climate change” has been translated into the national language as bibitakin kanoan boong (literally: “change of contents of days”). It is a neologism coined in the early phase of the Kiribati Adaptation Program (kap) (Hogan, 2008: 32-33), a World Bank-led, multi-million-dollar project to adapt the atoll state to climate change. In addition, the English term “climate change” has found its way into the language of I-Kiribati, the citizens of Kiribati. In Kiribati, as in the Marshall Islands, the reception of the scientific discourse on climate change has been accompanied by cultural modifications. Again, many of the I-Kiribati’s perceptions, understandings, and representations of climate change are in line with the basic assumptions and projections of climate science. However, I-Kiribati also cite additional causes of climate change, including the bombing of the ocean, the movement of the moon or God’s will (Kaiteie and Hogan, 2008: 23), and holes in the ozone layer. The consequences of climate change include volcanic activity, earthquakes, and tsunamis.

6In this article, my goal is to broaden the analytical perspective of reception studies at a theoretical level. Here, I seek to avoid Rudiak-Gould’s undoubtedly moderated but still latent constitution of true/false, as evident in his concept of “promiscuous corroboration” or in his use of specific terms such as un-‘climatic’, ‘mis’translation, or ‘mistranslation’ (see Rudiak-Gould, 2012: 46, 52; 2013: 109). Instead, I argue that indigenous translations, modifications and recombinations of causes and effects of climate change are what they are – open, relational arrangements made up of heterogeneous entities. All of the entities I-Kiribati mention – whether climate change, rising temperatures, weather extremes, solar eclipses, or tsunamis – can be considered as standing on the same ontological level and can be related to each other as such. An appropriate way to grasp and take seriously the indigenous practice of adopting, translating, and articulating climate change discourse in accordance with the local, emic perspective is, in my view, a combination of reception studies and assemblage theory. The concept of assemblage helps us to direct the analytical focus to the variable connections and distributed effects of entities without the need to repeatedly indicate the primacy of the Western scientific regime of truth through the use of ‘un’ or ‘mis’ constructions.

7In the social sciences and humanities, the concept of assemblage refers to an emergent, relational, and decentered grouping of limited duration and stability composed of diverse entities or actants, permeated with disparate forces of association and dissociation (Bennett, 2010: 23-24; Marcus and Saka, 2006: 106; Müller, 2015: 28). For example, when Pacific Islanders take up climate change discourses and incorporate them into their lifeworlds, new constellations of location, identity, temperature, ozone layer, sea-level rise, erosion, solar eclipse, or tsunamis arise. Matters of concern at the local level for a certain period of time, they may be contested, reworked, disassembled and reassembled.

8An essential aspect of the assemblage concept is the principle of heterogeneity. This maxim describes the symmetrical relationship between humans and non-human entities, which in an assemblage or network are equivalent actants on an ontological level (Bennett, 2010; Latour, 1993, 2005; Müller, 2015; Wieser, 2012). Efficacy or agency is distributed over the heterogeneous entities or actants of the configuration as a whole (Bennett, 2010: 23-24, 31-32). Within a network or an assemblage, atoll inhabitants, climate change, sea-level rise, erosion, temperature, solar eclipse, and tsunamis are all vital actants with agency. In the foreground stands the mutual influence of the actants: the scope of action, position, mission or goal that they define, enable, hinder or exclude for their respective others. In this manner, it is possible that atoll inhabitants are increasingly being prompted to associate wave activities and erosion with global warming, melting ice surfaces, and sea-level rise, as well as building sea walls and/or planting mangroves (see Hermann, 2017).

9“Relations of exteriority” (DeLanda, 2013: 11) are constitutive of an assemblage’s decentered character because individual components can be removed and inserted into other groupings. The variability of an assembly depends upon the autonomy and effectiveness of its components. A grouping of this kind never represents a seamless organic whole; it could be put together differently and still be effective (Anderson et al., 2012: 171-172; DeLanda, 2013: 10-11). As a relational arrangement, a network or assemblage does not have an exclusive center of power. Rather, effects of power are the result of the respective composition of and relationship between actants. A network, in which tsunamis became actants is a case in point. Thus, according to international scientific standards, tsunamis do not belong to the assemblage of anthropogenic climate change and its effects; they are external entities. Nevertheless, it may happen that tsunamis become connected to the network of climate change and thereby change the network’s power relations and distributed efficacy of actants within this new arrangement. This process is the subject of this article.

11In this article, I will show that some earthquakes and tsunamis that are far removed from Kiribati, as well as tsunami warnings in the country itself, can have a tangible impact on and unintended consequences for the people in the atoll state. I argue that the climate change policy of the former government under Anote Tong had an impact on the reception of tsunamis among sections of the population and, conversely, that the experience of I-Kiribati with tsunami warnings sometimes influenced the reception of political discourse on climate change and sea-level rise. The advantage of assemblage thinking, with its relations of exteriority, is that a combination of actants, such as climate change, tsunamis and sea-level rise, as well as this combination’s specific efficacy – hardly relevant from a Western scientific point of view but significant from a I-Kiribati perspective – can be brought into the analytical field of view.

12I am primarily interested in the links between climate change and tsunamis that have arisen in Kiribati as a result of the tsunami warnings from 2009 to 2011. My focus is on the emergence, stability and variability of the assemblage of climate change and tsunamis. In the first section of this article, I present the historical sequence of tsunami warnings and provide insights into the responses of the I-Kiribati population by means of official statements. The second section includes depictions of individual memories of alerts as well as local responses. Both these sections serve to reconstruct the very real power with which actants such as distant tsunamis and national tsunami warnings repeatedly impacted on the inhabitants of the atoll state and influenced the local discourse on the consequences of climate change. In the third section, I then document the nature of the links between climate change and tsunamis, which have consequently emerged, above all, in political discourse. The fourth section is devoted to written statements by students in questionnaires, which make it clear that a number of young I-Kiribati understand tsunamis to be a consequence of climate change. The fifth section explores the Christian-mythological dimension and follows the links between religious beliefs, tsunamis, and sea-level rise, as well as their role in challenging official discourses on current and future flooding in the country. The sixth section deals with the power of emotions in the assemblage of climate change and tsunami. Finally, I conclude by pointing out that I-Kiribati articulations of climate change and tsunamis can on the one hand be employed to make the future threat posed by rising sea levels concrete and comprehensible, while on the other hand it can also be used to challenge and foreclose projections of the loss of land and the prospect of relocation.

Tsunami Warnings on Kiribati

13The sequence of tsunami warnings to which I refer below occurred during the government of former President Anote Tong (2003-2016). I focus particularly on three events (see especially https://sos.noaa.gov/​datasets/​tsunami-historical-series-samoa-2009/​, https://sos.noaa.gov/​datasets/​tsunami-historical-series-chile-2010/​ and https://sos.noaa.gov/​datasets/​tsunami-historical-series-japan-2011/​) that caused the Pacific Tsunami Warning Center (ptwc) in Hawaii, operated by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (noaa), to issue a tsunami warning for the entire Pacific region:

1. The earthquake of September 29, 2009, close to the Samoa Islands, which measured 8.1 on the Richter Scale and triggered a Tsunami that cost 192 people their lives in Samoa, American Samoa and Tonga;

2. The earthquake of February 27, 2010, close to Chile, that measured 8.8 on the Richter Scale and triggered a Tsunami which caused destruction in the central part of Chile and led to the death of 124 people;

3. The earthquake of March 11, 2011, off the Pacific coast of Japan, which measured 9.0 and triggered a Tsunami which inflicted devastating damage and cost over 17,000 people their lives.

14The tsunami warnings in Kiribati referred to these disasters that occurred over three consecutive years. However, the Pacific island nation and its population were not significantly damaged by the tsunamis. Similarly, in the years after 2011, earthquakes in the Pacific region repeatedly prompted the former government of Kiribati to draw the country’s attention to the danger of possible tsunami waves. However, these national tsunami warnings were generally framed as low risk (see for instance: http://www.climate.gov.ki/​2015/​09/​17/​kiribati-on-tsunami-alert-low-risk-expected/​). It was above all the series of earthquakes, tsunamis and tsunami warnings of 2009, 2010 and 2011 which left a lasting impression in Kiribati.

15Individual official summaries of the then Kiribati government that emerged during this period give some indication of how dramatic such tsunami warnings must have been for the local population and their everyday lives, especially on the densely populated main atoll Tarawa. Regarding the alarm in September 2009, for example, an article in Rongorongo man ami Tautaeka (rmat), published by the former government, summarizes the events thus:

“Panic and mixed feelings about possible tsunami waves to hit Kiribati as a result of an earthquake and tsunami attack in American Samoa and Samoa was eased and settled when the National Disaster Office lifted the Tsunami warning at midday Wednesday 30 September 2009. The news of tsunami waves hitting Kiribati flew as thin air [sic] in the early rush hour of business as a Tsunami Warning was effected throughout Pacific countries dubbed to be on the path of the disaster, such as Tarawa and other islands in the Line and Phoenix groups, and Government immediately ordered a closedown of all government business and schools as a precautionary measure [...] At the peak of the Warning just before midday, Bairiki came to a complete stand still, people were seen sitting on the grandstand of the National Stadium while the majority stayed home…but shortly after at around 1:30 the Tsunami Warning was lifted…and people were back to normal with hundreds seen crowding a bingo game in Ambo from 3pm onwards.” (rmat, 2009: 4)

A Ministry of Finance and Economic Development report commented on the same event:

“Apart from the warning issued for the tsunami which was never noticeable, there was no advice as to what people have to do. People reacted in several ways including going to the widest part of South Tarawa, going to the highest buildings which are simply two story level, climbing coconut trees and other trees, going to the beach where there are boats, and keeping close other floaters.” (Ministry of Finance and Economic Development, 2010: 9-10)

16The series of earthquakes and tsunamis of the years 2009 to 2011 reached Kiribati via national tsunami warnings. These actants had a significant impact on the actions, thoughts and feelings of the people in the atoll state. Official accounts reveal the new links between distant natural disasters, national alarms, geographical conditions, human actions, and retrospective assessments that emerged at that time. The next section traces those links in the stories of I-Kiribati who experienced one or more of the tsunami warnings.

Local Memories of Tsunami Warnings

17During qualitative interviews conducted between 2009 and 2017 by Elfriede Hermann and myself on our regular field trips to Kiribati to study the reception of climate change discourses, I-Kiribati sometimes came to speak about their experiences in connection with the national tsunami warnings. The interview excerpts cited below are from interviewees on the main atoll Tarawa and an outer island in the southern part of Kiribati. They are chosen to exemplify and illustrate because they are both representative of the memories of the local population regarding past tsunami warnings and also make clear the associated reflections of the narrators in light of such an existential threat. The focus here is on descriptions that shed light on the exceptional circumstances and reactions of the local population from the perspective of I-Kiribati who were involved.

18The first account is based on a group interview with four middle-aged participants, two women and two men. The interview, conducted on Tarawa in September 2010, mainly consisted of questions relating to information and news on anthropogenic climate change as presented by Kiribati’s national media. During the interview, however, two of the interviewees soon went on to discuss the relevance of local media for the announcement of tsunamis. In their remarks, they reflected on the tsunami warnings of September 2009:

- Interlocutor 1: “And we know it’s really important to hear the news. But we don’t know what others think. Because most of the time, even when the tsunami warning comes, some – most people, we see them, they just roam around.”
- Interlocutor 2: “They don’t care about the tsunami, because they say that their –”
- Interlocutor 1: “Because most of them they said: “Well, God has given us our land. And he has – you know, –”
- Interlocutor 2: “– he can’t destroy –”
- Interlocutor 1: “– he is the one who looks after us too. We don’t expect the tsunami to come. Because God has given us our land. He is going to care for us too.”

Finally, one of the women gave a detailed explanation of her experience of the tsunami warning at the time:

• 2 Bikenibeu is a place on urban South Tarawa.

- Interlocutor 1: “I was on the way to [meet] my daughter and I heard it on the bus. One lady said – she knows me and she said: ‘Where are you going?’ And I said: ‘To Bikenibeu2, and you?’ ‘I went and brought my child back from school, from the kindergarten.’ I said: ‘Why?’ ‘Because the tsunami, they said the tsunami is at 10 o’clock or 11.’ ‘What?!’ ‘The tsunami is 11 o’clock. All the schools are now closed.’ And it was true. When the bus goes like this – even our school, the children start coming back home. And I just board the [other] bus to Bikenibeu. When we were there – huuu – the people at the marketplace – eh – they were catching their transport. But that was the second tsunami [warning] or the third. People are getting very alert. … That’s what I saw. Then we heard from the people: ‘Hey, the tsunami is coming.’ Even the people in the shop they were getting something ready… And the – and it was surprise for me, because it was my first time to see how many trucks going that way and the people have to wear the – what – what you call the – the –”
- Interlocutor 2+3: “Life jacket!”
Interlocutor 1: “Yes – the life jacket. That’s what we saw. Two trucks or three. And the people wore those life jackets. And I know now that the people are now on the alert, eh. The tsunami. … And we don’t have any place to go so we just have to watch. Sad eh – because we know how dangerous it is, eh. We feel sad. Because we know, if it really comes [claps] – no place to turn to. …”
- Interlocutor 2: “[Others] they prepare the bucket. Because they try to put their little child inside the bucket [laughs].”
- Interlocutor 1: “in the bucket –”
- Interlocutor 2: “Before the tsunami – that the bucket will float [laughs] –”
- Interlocutor 1: “– go float and – yeah – that’s what people do now. They are alerted and – but they know that – you know, Kiribati has no place to go to. But thank God, we are still safe, safe, safe.” (Interview, 2010)

19The interview excerpts offer a glimpse into the beliefs, stories and emotions relating to the tsunami warnings of recent years. One core area, which I will discuss in greater detail in a subsequent section, is the fundamental trust shared by many I-Kiribati in a forward-looking God who has secured the country with enduring protection against the fatal effects of natural or man-made catastrophes from the time of Creation. The narrative also remarks on the behavior and acts of those who do everything in their power to save family members and themselves from the anticipated tidal waves. Finally, reference is also made to the sense of helplessness and vulnerability at the prospect of a tsunami engulfing the atoll one day.

20The second illustration comes from a retired teacher from the outer island of Nonouti. The probable point of reference is the tsunami warning of March 2011, issued following the natural disaster off the coast of Japan. As above, this interview focused on the consequences of climate change for the population of Kiribati. The discussion about the future effects of progressive sea-level rise and resulting enforced migration and resettlement also evoked the interviewee’s memories of the past tsunami warning on the outer island:

“You know what? I was sitting in my house and my grandson was five. He came to me and he said: ‘Grandma, you know that there is going to be a tsunami!? Today!?’ And I said: ‘Oh (laughs briefly), yeah. If there is a tsunami, don’t worry, we have a boat. We get on the boat, we tie it to the breadfruit tree [with] a long rope, and then when the tsunami hit us, we will be floating on the water. And when the tide goes down, we will be sitting right next to the breadfruit tree.’ I was joking. I didn’t [know and] I – and I was surprised when people started talking: ‘The tsunami will come at two o’clock. The tsunami will come at two o’clock.’ [And I said,] ‘Really? Is that happening?’ And then I heard on the radio the schools were closed, the kids were sent home. And I was really scared. That’s when I got really scared. We won’t be able – we’ll die – we’ll be washed away into the sea when the tsunami hit us. I was sitting there and I said: ‘What will we do? What do we do?’ (laughs briefly). And I said [to my husband]: ‘Get us on the truck, we’ll go [to] Taboiaki [where the island is] wider than [here in] Matang!’ … I, I was sad. I knew that we wouldn’t be safe, right? Yes. Maybe we’ll climb trees, but then, trees will be uprooted by – (laughs a little bitterly). It, because it’s me, I was always scared of those kinds of things, like the westerly wind. When it blows, I was really scared. And when I think of a big wave, bigger than the trees, you know, may be as tall as the trees – I got really scared! We hope it won’t occur again.” (Interview, 2012)

21The woman’s account turns on the contrast between her facetious reply to her grandson’s remark and her sudden realization that she was facing a life-threatening menace. In her view, there were possibilities for action, though these point – as in the first interview fragment cited above – to the shocking realization of how defenseless one is on an atoll when faced with this force of nature, the tsunami. The prevailing memory is one of helplessness coupled with anxiety and fear, but also the hope that an emergency may never actually occur.

22It is particularly significant that both of the interview excerpts cited above on the possible threats posed by tsunamis and the local responses to concrete tsunami warnings arose during discussions on the possible consequences of climate change for Kiribati. In these talks, we did not introduce tsunamis or tsunami warnings as topics, nor were they the subject of specific questions. It also became evident over the course of the interviews that all the interviewees were well aware of the distinction between the consequences of climate change and the causes of tsunamis. Nevertheless, a connection and mutual influence of the two phenomena resonated within the discussions. The extent to which climate change or consequences of climate change are linked with the repeated earthquakes and tsunamis of the years 2009 to 2011, the public warnings of an acute threat of flooding, low-lying atolls, and the reactions and narratives of I-Kiribati is demonstrated in the next section.

Climate Change and Tsunami: Existential Threats

23The former government under President Anote Tong pursued a vigorous climate policy. According to Tong, ongoing climate change has become a question of security and survival, most notably for small island states such as Kiribati (cf. Hermann and Kempf, 2017). The former President, therefore, coupled his appeals for a worldwide reduction of greenhouse gas emissions with a request to support highly vulnerable atoll states through the implementation of necessary adaptation measures. While Tong regularly emphasized his government’s full determination to preserve the homeland and its sovereignty at all costs, his policy also drew on the concept of “migration with dignity,” which would facilitate many I-Kiribati’s efforts to establish a new existence abroad.

24Shortcomings in climate negotiations and increasing urgency on the issue of climate change prompted the Tong government to invite the then Secretary-General of the United Nations, Ban Ki-moon, to Kiribati to assess the country’s vulnerability for himself. In Tong’s speech in honor of Ban Ki-moon on September 4, 2011, he linked projections of rising sea levels to tsunami warnings:

“Usually in my statements I digress at this point into a short lesson on the geography of our islands to lend emphasis to the degree of vulnerability of our low-lying islands. But on this occasion not a thousand words could substitute for what you have seen today and what you will see better tomorrow and feel the sense of threat we feel when even the slightest rise in sea level is projected or a tsunami warning is in force.” (rmat, 2011: 3; author’s emphasis)

25Regarding the tsunami warning, Tong was presumably referring to the alarm triggered months earlier following the March 2011 disaster in Japan. We may assume that it was clear to the former president that both phenomena – the one caused by anthropogenic climate change, the other a natural disaster – are distinguished from a scientific point of view. However, the existential threat to people on low-lying atolls from rising sea levels and tsunamis – so the statement implies – is, in principle, comparable. The images of the devastating tsunamis in Japan, which were still current at the time, should at least convey something of the elementary dangers to which people on low-lying atolls are exposed. Tong relied on metaphorical maximization to demonstrate the urgency for action on climate change and rising sea levels to the world community to guarantee the long-term survival of at least some of the atoll state’s population. The statement – by the former head of the communications and press department of the presidential office issued years later – describing rising sea levels and concomitant long-term consequences for Kiribati as a “gradual tsunami” (Liljas, 2015) can be understood in the same sense.

26Another indication of the link between tsunamis and climate change can be found in the reminiscences of the National Climate Change Coordinator of the current government of Kiribati under President Taneiti Maamau, who has been in office since 2016. This government official spoke, on a more personal note, of his concern for family and friends during his studies in New Zealand when a tsunami warning was issued for Kiribati in response to the 2010 Chile earthquake:

“In 2010, while studying in New Zealand, a tsunami warning was issued for my country. Kiribati has a population of around 115,000 people including 56,000 people on the main island and the highest point is 3 m. When the tsunami warning was issued my family and friends had nowhere to find protection and I lived with the anguish of having to wait and see what would happen, there was nothing I could do and I wished I was there with them. People were panicked and families had tied themselves together with rope to ensure that they would be together if the end came.
Luckily the tsunami did not eventuate, but the events made me realize that the implications of climate change are real and now and I began dedicating myself to raising awareness and taking action to address climate change. In Kiribati, most people on the mainland know about climate change but on the other islands the knowledge is very low, people see that the sea levels are rising but they don’t know why and they don’t know that this situation is going to get worse.” (http://globalpowershift.org/​choi-yeeting-before-the-next-wave-arrives, author’s emphasis)

27The professional alignment and position in the current government makes it unlikely that the narrator understood the tsunami to be a consequence of anthropogenic climate change. He was more concerned with outlining the dramatic events during the 2010 tsunami warning as an illustration of the abstract danger of climate change; more specifically, of a progressive, dangerous rise in sea levels with permanent flooding.

28My last example serves to elaborate the by now well-established association between tsunami and sea-level rise. Here I refer to statements by a representative of Kiribati’s church elite. They come from a paper by a pastor of the Protestant Kiribati Uniting Church (kuc), the second-largest church in the island state in terms of membership. The I-Kiribati pastor wrote the paper as part of the requirements for obtaining a Master of Theology from an Australian university. In it he states:

“Although the writer has up to now been dealing with rising sea levels in social terms, there is a more practical consideration when discussing ordinary ocean phenomenon—a tsunami. Because the islands are so low, a tsunami, such as the one that hit Samoa in 2009, and which was predicted to also hit Tarawa, would effectively wipe out the islands. Nothing on the islands, even two-story buildings, would save people from the effects of a tsunami. While the effects of a tsunami would be brutally fast, rising sea levels can have a similar effect, only more slowly. As mentioned above, land is being washed away, villages are being moved, wells are becoming contaminated, fruit trees are dying.” (Timon, 2013: 8)

29The key message is that the ravages of a tsunami are comparable to the long-term consequences of sea-level rise. Together with the official presentations on and reminiscences of earlier tsunami warnings and the links between climate change impacts and tsunamis described in this section, the emergence, consolidation and routinization of the assemblage can be outlined as follows.

30The tsunami and tsunami warning of 2009, as well as the tsunamis and warnings of 2010 and 2011, have become actants of considerable reach and efficacy. These actants affected the people of Kiribati, moved them to action and were themselves linked by I-Kiribati with the vulnerability of the low-lying atolls as well as climate change and sea-level rise. This resulted in a relational configuration or assemblage, in which correspondences were established, relationships were consolidated, and convictions were formed. The outcome is a stabilized yet open grouping of entities with a specific potency, which can be characterized as follows: Tsunami warnings recall that tsunamis can be as devastating to the people of the small, low-lying islands of the Kiribati atoll state as the future consequences of climate change, in particular sea-level rise in all probability will be.

31The assemblage results from a process of mediation and translation that has caused many I-Kiribati to see large tidal waves and the scientifically projected flooding caused by a progressive sea-level rise as comparable threats to the existence and security of atoll dwellers. As an element of the collective memory, tsunami warnings can serve to make present the future dangers of climate change and sea-level rise; news reports, images and imaginations of tsunamis have made these dangers concrete.

Climate Change and Tsunami: Modifications

32The assemblage described so far (climate change – earthquakes – tsunamis – national tsunami warnings – low-lying atolls – government – local population – danger of acute flooding – rising sea levels – long-term inundation) has realized and routinized links between humans, atolls, climate change, tsunamis, and sea-level rise. The association has been shaped by actors sharing a Western scientific understanding of the difference between the impacts of climate change and the causes of tsunamis. However, other actors, with different beliefs, can cause shifts and adjustments within this network without necessarily mitigating the existing connections between tsunamis, climate change and sea-level rise, and their impacts. To present such modifications, I refer to data from questionnaires and essays in which students from Kiribati relate their views about climate change.

33The questionnaires were distributed and completed in schools on the main atoll in urban Tarawa as well as on the two southern outer islands, Nonouti and Onotoa, during our field visits between 2009 and 2017. The four open, simply formulated questions addressed level of knowledge, importance, impact and personal assessments regarding climate change. On the one hand, there are limitations to the data that can be obtained from such questionnaires, for example because answers are sometimes only a few sentences long. In addition, the students usually remain anonymous; there is thus no possibility for follow-up questions to clarify details or to contextualize or elaborate statements. On the other hand, questionnaires allow us to capture in a comparatively short time the contours of attitudes and knowledge of a larger group on a topic and to correlate them with statements from other written sources and interviews.

First, I cite questionnaire answers that provide examples of the former category:

• “Eang, e bon kona n rootaki iai, bukina bwa e bon rangi n rinano ao man aki kona ni kaitara te kanganga ngkana e roko taina for example high sea level and tsunami. Aikai kanganga are e na bon aitara Kiribati nakon taai aika ana roko.”
  “Yes, it [Kiribati] really can be affected by it [climate change], because it’s really very low and cannot face the problem if, for example, the high sea level and tsunami come [.] These are the problems that Kiribati will face in future.” (School pupil, Tarawa, 18 years old, 2010/18)

• “With regard to the statement whether Kiribati will be affected by climate change, I feel so scared and sad, because my own island will be wiped out because of the climate change, like the Tsunami or the strong wind that can destroy trees and plant life on some islands.
  And what can I do to prevent it or protect my own island? The answer is, to plant a big mangrove [plot] to prevent the tsunami affecting the Kiribati Island.” (School pupil, Tarawa, 17 years old, 2010/8)

• “Ngaia kanoan bibitakin te bong e bon nang tiraua aron kanoan bibitakin te bong te nae te tunami.”
  “So, climate change has many effects, one of which is the tsunami.” (School pupil, Nonouti, 15 years old, 2011/21)

• “Eang e bon kona n rotaki Kiribati n bibitakin kanoan bong n aron aikai i a butin tari, korakoran turiringa rokon te tinami. Ao a mwaiti riki bwai ni kabana aka a kona n rotaki bibitakin kanoan te bong i Kiribati.”
  “Yes, Kiribati can be affected by climate change, like the rise of the sea level, the strong heat of the sun, the coming of tsunami. And there are more consequences of climate change that can affect Kiribati.” (School pupil, Onotoa, 14 years old, 2011/16)

• “N nau iango ao Kiribati e na kona n rotaki i nanon bibitakin kanoan boong i bukina bwa te kangakanga n tai aikai e nang korakoran te riringa ao taian kai namwarake arotaki nikabane ao te tunami ae e tatatkinaki bwa ena roko ao ngkana e roko ao te moan bua abara ae Kiribati.”
  “In my view, Kiribati will be affected by climate change because the problems these days are the very strong heat of the sun and food trees are affected and the tsunami which is often talked about will come and if it comes, the first to get lost is our land Kiribati.” (School pupil, Tarawa, 17 years of age, 2013/41)

36In the second category of responses, students also understand tsunamis to be a consequence of climate change, but they deny their potential to endanger Kiribati and its people. Thus, a fourteen-year-old pupil from Onotoa responded to the question whether and from whom he had heard something about climate change with the following words: “I atia n ongo ngkekei irouia tinara ma tamara are e nang roko te tinami n e kanako abara ae Kiribati” (I have heard it from our mothers and fathers that the tsunami was coming to hit our land Kiribati). And to the question about whether Kiribati could be affected by climate change, he remarked tersely: “E bon aki kona bwa e bubura ara marawa” (“It will not come because our ocean is big [enough for the tsunami]”) (2011). A twenty-year-old college student on Tarawa provided an English commentary on climate change:

“[What] I think is that some people said that 50 years later our beloved country [will be] destroy[ed]. But to my own knowledge it can’t be destroy[ed], because only high islands can be affected by volcanoes. Our Country, which is the low land can only [be] affected by the rising sea level and not by the flood e.g. Tsunami.” (2009, capitals and lowercase letters in the original)

37And a seventeen-year-old pupil on Tarawa responded, also in English, to the question whether Kiribati might be affected by climate change by remarking: “I don’t think so. Kiribati is located on the equator. But Kiribati will be affected by the sea level rise. As you know, tsunami … are not possible” (2010). The fact that for some respondents sea-level rise can have consequences for Kiribati, but a tsunami cannot, points to a widespread local conviction. In this view, the effects of sea-level rise are acknowledged to a certain extent, whereas a future complete inundation of the country is not. Whether such a total flood is caused by tsunamis or sea-level rise, whether it takes place in the present or in the future, does not matter – Kiribati cannot and will not be permanently flooded (see Kempf, 2017: 34).

38Invariably, the country’s geographical characteristics – the great ocean, the low islands, the geographical location on the equator – are cited in these answers to explain why a tsunami poses no threat to Kiribati. It is striking to note that whereas a tsunami is understood to be a consequence of climate change, it is not necessarily, unlike many other effects of climate change, considered effective. The detailed answers of a sixteen-year-old schoolgirl serve well to underscore this. To the question of whether and where she had previously heard anything about climate change, she noted:

“I atia, ti ongo man te rerio (Radio). Ke te Newspaper are e taekinaki iai rongorongon kanoan te bong ke te climate change (Bibitakin Kanoan te bong) are e na roko te tinami (sunami) nakon te bong are imina ao te ang ae e na roko ma iriana are te karau ae rangi ni korakora.” (capitals and lowercase letters in the original)
“I have heard it from the radio. Or the newspaper which announces news about the daily changes or the climate change (bibitakin kanoan te bong) that will come, that is the tsunami the following day and the wind that will come accompanied by very heavy rainfall.” (2013)

Accordingly, the impacts of climate change, therefore, include mainly tsunamis, storms and heavy rainfall. When asked whether Kiribati would be affected by climate change, however, the student distinguishes between the consequences:

“N au iango Kiribati kanga a bon tii kona n rotaki man te ang te karau ai ma n angiin te tai ao Kiribati e bon aki kona n rotaki n te sunami are e rangi ni korakora, ibukiana bwa e bon rangi ni bubura marawan abana. Ma n angiin te tai ao tiaki toki n ongongo rongorongon te sunami bwa ena roko n te aba teuana ma teuana ao Kiribati e na rotaki naba ibukina bwa e uarereke abana ke. Ma ni bon etina ao koauana raoi e bon aki kona n rotaki bwai i aoni kawain taari ke nao (wave) ni buti ao e a bane naba korakorana, ao ni uarereke rokona iaoni Kiribati.”
“My view is that Kiribati only can be affected by the wind and the rain but, most of the time, cannot be affected by the heavy tsunami because it is a really very big [Kiribati’s] ocean. But most of the time, we always hear news that the tsunami will come to the one land and the other is that Kiribati will be also affected because its land is small. But actually and in truth it cannot be affected because as the sea or the [tsunami] waves move along, they will lose their force and become smaller as they reach Kiribati.” (2013)

39But what is the source of the confidence in the fact that a tsunami cannot endanger Kiribati? The students cited in this section make use of historically and culturally specific convictions in their remarks, allowing them to redefine the power of tsunamis in relation to Kiribati. Older interlocutors explain that precisely such repeated references to the expanse of the ocean and the location on the equator may be understood as allusions to a widespread Kiribati narrative construct about the creation of the land in mythical times. Following local cultural convention, the authority to recount and explain such mythical stories lies primarily with the older generation. Pupils therefore limit themselves to short, indirect references by emphasizing geographic knowledge.

Christian-mythological Perspectives: The Protection of the Land

40The various expressions of a more or less close link between climate change, atolls, I-Kiribati, earthquakes, tsunamis, tsunami warnings and sea-level rise serve to make the abstract scientific projections of future threats to the island state and its population concrete, imaginable and politically significant. Christian-mythological actants bring new, external relations into play, redefining and shifting the effects of climate change, tsunamis and sea-level rise. They modify the relationships and balance of power within the assemblage in so far as they rebut the threats presented by tsunamis, above all the prospect of future flooding, the complete disappearance of Kiribati, and the accompanying forced migration of its inhabitants. The view that God gave the land to the I-Kiribati and therefore will not take it from them has already been mentioned in an earlier quote from the group interview on the September 2009 tsunami warning. This is an example of a Christian discourse that is widespread in Kiribati (see Kempf, 2017: 34). Such Christian-religious articulations can be expanded and strengthened by connections with local creation stories, mythological narratives and divine beings. The remarks discussed below focus on these Christian-mythological networks and their efficacy.

41In terms of their relationship to creation, indigenous depictions of tsunami warnings or tsunamis are often fragmentary and incoherent. One constant in such narratives is that the indigenous mythical creator figure of Nareau took precautions to protect the land in future times (cf. Robertson, 2014: 35). The narratives usually make Kiribati a center from which the divine being Nareau distributes different forms of protection in several directions. The central position of the archipelago in mythical ages is identified today with the equatorial position of the country in the Central Pacific and with the fact that Kiribati is the only country belonging to both the northern, southern, eastern and western hemispheres. The descriptions vary as to the actions the creator Nareau took to protect Kiribati. One of my interlocutors spoke of “walls, transparent walls.” Others cited mythical stories in which Nareau assigned “supernatural huge waves” and groups of spirits as border guards to the different cardinal points. In an interview during which the future consequences of the sea level rise and the tsunami warnings on Tarawa were discussed, an elderly woman spoke of deep ocean trenches created by God to intercept large waves.

42The widespread identification of the mythical creator Nareau with the Christian God in Kiribati plays an important role in the configuration of creation and protective measures, tsunamis and sea-level rise. For many I-Kiribati, the association between Nareau and God represents a cultural resource that, in the face of existential external threats, connects indigenous notions of the country’s inherent resilience with the undisputed power and moral authority of the Christian churches in Kiribati. Nareau/God is assigned the position of an influential actant who is able to define and shape the relationships within an assemblage. The testimonies of an elderly woman are typical of such assemblages of local empowerment; she spoke of her memories of a tsunami warning on the outer island of Nonouti in a group interview with three members of a Catholic organization on climate change:

“I Nonouti. Ao e a taekinaki te tsunami, are aongkoa e na roko. Ao te neeti arei e taku: ‘Ngai bon au koaua e bon aki kona n roko te tsunami i abara aei. Bao? E bon aki kona n roko. E a tia n – ana karikibwai Nareau ao e taekinna: “Akea ae kona ni manga urua” – aron an berita. Te Atua ngaia ae ngai ti a bon aki kona n raraoma, bwa e bon aki kona n roko te tsunami. Akea ae kona ni manga urua aron ana karibwai Nareau.’”
“[It was] on Nonouti. And the tsunami was spoken of as if it will come. And there was one nurse who said: ‘Myself, I firmly believe that the tsunami really cannot come on this land. Why? It really cannot come – it is the creation of Nareau and he said: “Nothing ever again can damage” – that’s his promise. Now it is God that [assures us] we should not worry at all for the tsunami really cannot come. There is nothing that will ever again damage Nareau’s original creation.’” (Interview, 2015)

43The story of the tsunami warning and the intervention of a nurse prompted the narrator to further elaborate on the subject and to recount a disagreement she had had with a Catholic priest some time ago. At that time, however, the future disappearance of Kiribati as a result of the rise in sea level was the central issue:

“Ngaiare, Te Tama: ‚Ngkai e na bon roko ngkai, n am koaua ngkai e na boni mauna abara aei?‘ Ao te Tama e taku, kanga: ‚Eng, ena bon riai ni mauna bwa e bon taetaekinaki bwa ngkai te iabuti kanga titebo, ngkana e bon – e na boni mauna bwa are baika a tia n taekinaki.‘ Ao ngai, e bon aki kona ni mauna. Ao – ao, are ana karikibwai Nareau. Bwa antai ae karikibwai, kai e boni karikibwai Te Atua.”
“That is, [I asked] the Father: ‘Now, will it really come now, in your view, will our land really disappear?’ And the Father, he responded like: ‘Yes, it will be disappearing as it is really spoken of that now, the rising sea like it [the land] really – it will be really vanishing as these things have been spoken of.’ And according to my view, it will never vanish. And – and, that is Nareau’s creation. For who is it that is creating, it is God who is really creating [things].” (Interview, 2015)

44This series of statements exemplifies how sections of the population categorically rule out the existential threat to Kiribati from flooding – be it from rising sea levels or from tsunami waves – with reference to the creation and its implied protection of the land. Moreover, the comments of the older interlocutor make it clear what power is attributed to the Christian mythical creator Nareau-cum-God. Through the association of Nareau/God with the entities of the existing assemblage (earthquake – tsunami – tsunami warning – atolls – local population – flood risk – climate change – rising sea levels – long-term inundation) the power of tsunamis and sea-level rise is being reinterpreted. In combination with Christian-mythical actants, the acute and future scenarios of flooding lose their power of catastrophic endangerment. The goal of illustrating or concretizing an abstract danger gives way to their neutralization.

Discourses of Fear: Articulating Tsunamis and Climate Change

45The convictions of those I-Kiribati who contend that tsunamis could cause little significant damage to the country and its people reveal diverging views, knowledge, and associations. However, the fact that the country was spared from the tidal waves in 2009-2011 seemed to confirm the myth-based belief that tsunamis posed no threat to Kiribati. Representatives of this position, especially among the older generation, found support for their view. Thus, arguments were voiced that opposed any further national tsunami warnings:

“Because what I know – three times they announced the tsunami, but nothing happened. See! Nothing happened. Even if you see the sea maybe to come up – same thing, same thing. Nothing happened. So now they tell the president [of Kiribati] – and all those who usually give the announcement – not to give to the people the announcement again. Because it is just like, they are – they are frightening the people.” (Interview, 2010)

“I listened [to the parliamentary debates] on the radio. And I heard the leader of the opposition. … He even accused the National Council of Churches of working together with the President, with the Government, ‘trying to scare people! To scare people!’” (Interview, 2009)

47Even subsequent to Tong’s term in office, I-Kiribati have continued to report critical observations by a political faction that had consistently opposed his climate policy. With his recurring statements about future dangers to the point of the country’s eventual complete disappearance, the former president – according to contemporary criticisms – only managed to spread fear and insecurity among the population.

48The widespread uncertainty generated by the message spread by scientists, the media, ngos and politicians that Kiribati would, in 50-60 years, be submerged due to climate change and rising sea levels found an echo in the anxieties prompted by the series of tsunami warnings. For many I-Kiribati, the warnings of fatal tsunamis echoed the proclaimed future scenarios of climate-induced flooding and displacement. Both seemed threatening, destructive and unimaginable. Fear, uncertainty and discontent were linked both to the memories of tsunami warnings and to the discourses on the long-term effects of climate change. When emotions play an important role in the discourse on climate change in Kiribati (Hermann, 2017, 2018; Hermann and Kempf, 2018) and emotions are attached to the accounts of tsunamis, this then prompts certain reactions and associations. Emotions mediate between tsunamis and climate change impact; they contribute to establishing connections between previously distinct entities. Emotions are elementary components of the agency that spreads throughout networked entities (see Hermann, 2017). Together with other entities such as climate change and tsunamis, emotions enter into connections whose effectiveness they shape. In the era of government under Tong, this assemblage caused political waves that continue to shape the discursive landscape today.

Conclusion: Assembling Climate Change and Tsunamis

49The combination of reception studies and assemblage thinking makes it possible, beyond the limits of Western scientific categorization, to grasp and analyze the historically and culturally specific associations between climate change, tsunami, tsunami warnings, humans, low-lying atolls, and sea-level rise. This analytical perspective brings into view the different compositions and effects of an assemblage as it emerged in Kiribati and was subsequently stabilized, continued, modified and routinized. Particularly significant is the real impact of the earthquakes and tsunamis, conveyed by tsunami warnings, on society, culture and identity in the atoll state. For people on the low-lying islands, distant tsunamis and local tsunami warnings not only temporarily affected everyday life; they also impacted on the climate change discourses of the I-Kiribati.

50Climate policy and tsunami warnings became associated with each other under the government of Anote Tong. The dominant discourse at the time in Kiribati on the dangerous consequences of climate change, especially rising sea levels, influenced many I-Kiribati in their conceptualizations of tsunamis and tsunami warnings. In turn, people’s experiences with tsunami warnings and their imaginations of tsunamis impacted on the reception of climate change discourse, scientific projections, and the country’s official climate policy.

51On closer inspection, the assemblage of climate change and tsunamis in Kiribati proves to be an ongoing process of merging, a network of variable actants, relations, and effects. The decentered character of the assemblage becomes apparent in the different directions taken by the distributed agency as the composition of the network changes. Thus, as the political discourse on climate change in this example has shown, tsunamis and tsunami warnings can serve to draw attention to the abstract, future catastrophe of a permanent flooding of low-lying atolls by rising sea levels. In contrast, the agency of Christian-mythical actants is able not only to protect the islands from existential threats of all kinds of tidal waves and cast doubt on the meaning and purpose of tsunami warnings, but also to counter scientific projections of long-term loss of land, culture and nation caused by sea-level rise. Every composition and distributed agency of this assemblage of climate change and tsunamis is intertwined with the social and cultural reality of I-Kiribati and has concrete consequences for the local world.

52The assemblage of climate change and tsunamis, as it has been consolidated, modified and routinized in Kiribati, highlights the transformations that may take place in the local reception of scientific discourse on climate change. In general, we cannot assume that the globally circulating discourse on climate change will ever simply be adopted unchanged at the local level. Rather, as this case study from Kiribati shows, historical events and emergent assemblages bring about further translations and modifications over time. One of the central tasks of the anthropology of climate change is therefore to defend this continual process of reception and articulation against Eurocentric marginalization and exclusion and, instead, explain which relations of exteriority are decisive for such modifications. It is a matter of understanding and documenting the seriousness of indigenous perspectives.