Choice of Research Focus and Location

This research grew out of a career working on IAS issues in New Zealand62_{, coupled}

with an interest in development studies; particularly in regards to how people interacted with environmental and conservation issues in developing countries. Holidays in the Pacific always had an environmental bent to them, with IAS being of particular interest. There are hundreds of IAS in the Pacific. The Global Invasive Species Database63_{, a global resource that is focused on documenting invasive alien}

species that threaten native biodiversity and which covers all taxonomic groups from micro-organisms to animals and plants, lists 867 species; 569 of which can be found in the Oceania region. While this research could potentially have focused on any one of these species, an interest in the livelihood impacts of W. auropunctata64 led to this species being the initial focus of my research. As discussed below, a second case study using A. fulica was added to the study following a pilot trip to the Solomon Islands.

The initial focus on W. auropunctata played a significant role in dictating the location of the study. As outlined in section 2.5.1, W. auropunctata is widespread throughout the Pacific region. This study could therefore have been conducted in any number of countries with an invasion history for this species. Prior to selecting a location to undertake this research I consulted with invasive species experts at the Pacific Invasives Initiative (PII) regarding the issue of W. auropunctata in the Pacific. This organisation “… was established as the first regional programme of the Cooperative Islands Initiative (CII)65 in 2004” (ISSG, 2011). Its establishment was a result of

62 _{I spent seventeen years working for the New Zealand Department of Conservation as a technical}

advisor on wild animal management issues. This work focused on the negative aspects of IAS and as such this has influenced to some degree the way I view IAS. To help avoid any personal subjectiveness I have used the responses of the participants throughout this thesis to capture and communicate the actual experiences of what they face. Additionally, I also kept a field notebook and personal journal while in the field. These were used to reflect on my experiences and observations, and to help develop ideas and question my views around IAS.

63 _{See http://www.issg.org/database}

64 _{This interest was sparked initially from conversations with an ex-colleague working on ant}

biosecurity issues in the Pacific.

65_{“The Cooperative Initiative on Invasive Alien Species on Islands (The Cooperative Islands Initiative}

or CII) is a global initiative that was launched in 2002 following calls from island countries and countries with islands for more efforts to manage invasive species. CII aims to facilitate cooperation and enhance capacity to prevent and manage invasive species on islands. The CII is hosted by the Invasive Species Specialist Group (ISSG) of the Species Survival Commission of IUCN - International Union for Conservation of Nature, under the umbrella of the Global Invasive Species Programme. The

65 requests from the Pacific region for help with capacity development in the management of IAS, and “…was the first formal invasive species partnership in the Pacific” (ibid.). With a multi-disciplinary team of invasive species specialists, PII provides advice, planning assistance, training, specialist assistance and information to Government agencies, NGOs, and community-based organisation working on invasive species management projects in the Pacific (ibid.). The discussions with this organisation identified some potential study locations and reinforced the concerns raised in the literature regarding the threat W. auropunctata posed to livelihoods in the Pacific.

Following these, and subsequent discussions with the Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP) verifying the current hotspots for W.

auropunctata in the region66, the Solomon Islands were purposively selected as a

potential location to undertake this research. The two deciding factors in favour of the Solomon Islands were language and the presence of a local researcher67 who was willing to provide initial assistance, such as facilitating contacts with officials and communities within the country. Although I do not speak Solomon Island pijin68 and was aware that I would need an interpreter to conduct the majority of my interviews, English is the official language of the country. This meant that accessing official documents, dealing with officials, and even conducting day to day activities such as shopping could be done in a language I knew. Borovnik et al. (2014, p. 117) note that in considering where to conduct your research “there is much to be said for starting from a position of some strength...”. Taking advantage of practical issues, such as a familiar language for example, can make a considerable difference when faced with the many challenges that fieldwork in a developing country throws up.

New Zealand Agency for International Development (NZAID) and the New Zealand Pacific Development and Conservation Trust (PDCT) provided funding to establish the programme based at

the ISSG’s headquarters, then at the University of Auckland. In 2002, CII was proposed by the NZ government as a Type II Partnership at the World Summit on Sustainable Development” (ISSG, 2011).

66 _{Solomon Islands, Guam, Hawaii and French Polynesia (P. Skelton, SPREP, pers. com. 2012)} 67 _{An outcome of my initial consultation with staff from PII was an introduction to a researcher who at}

the time was a lecturer at Solomon Islands College of Higher Education (now Solomon Islands National University – SINU), and who had undertaken research on W. auropunctata in the Solomon Islands (see Fasi, 2009; Fasi et al., 2013).

68 _{While there are numerous dialects spoken in the Solomon Islands (see footnote 129 Chapter 5),}

66 The Solomon Islands have a relatively long history of W. auropunctata. Although thought to be widely distributed throughout the country (Wetterer & Porter, 2003, p. 14), the actual distribution of W. auropunctata is largely unknown (ibid.). Because of this, a decision was made to focus the research on Guadalcanal as this was one island within the Solomon Islands that was known for certain to contain W. auropunctata, at least partly along the northern coast69 _{(J.K. Wetterer pers. com. 2012). Guadalcanal is}

also the location of the country’s largest urban centre, Honiara. Focusing on Guadalcanal as a research location and basing myself in Honiara would not only allow access to rural communities along the northern coast, but also allow access to other stakeholders such as government departments and NGOs which were based in the capital. In the end this proved to be a good decision, particularly with regards the latter, as I was able to undertake repeat visits to government departments and NGOs over the entire course of my fieldwork to discuss follow-up issues. More importantly, it gave me the flexibility to reschedule interview appointments with these stakeholders when they got cancelled or were not kept by the stakeholders70; or to pursue additional opportunities that arose as a result of the interviews71.

Prior to finalising the location of my research I made repeated email contact with John Fasi in the Solomon Islands with whom I discussed my research proposal and sought feedback and advice. Advice was also provided by a second contact, Bishop Terry Brown72. It was Bishop Brown who first raised the issue with me of A. fulica being of concern to households in the Solomon Islands.