Beyond ‘Stay or Go’: How coastal communities respond to sea-level rise

Abstract Coastal communities worldwide face intensifying climate hazards, yet household-level responses to sea-level rise remain poorly documented. While climate-induced mobility is often framed as a binary choice between staying or leaving, this simplification obscures the diverse strategies households actually employ. This study provides household-level evidence on how coastal communities in Bohol, Philippines, respond to chronic tidal flooding driven by earthquake-induced land subsidence, effectively simulating accelerated sea-level rise. Combining a household survey (N=647) with key informant interviews (N=27) across four municipalities varying in subsidence and flood exposure, we document a spectrum of mobility responses operating simultaneously within communities and households: temporary evacuation, short-distance relocation, labour migration, and immobility. In-situ adaptations — including house elevation, livelihood diversification, and nature-based solutions — are widespread but face limits in the most exposed areas, where some strategies risk becoming maladaptive by locking households into cycles of debt and repeated loss. Willingness to relocate reaches up to 70\% in subsided municipalities, and is shaped by high exposure to flooding and perceived long-term impacts from sea-level rise. Yet significant barriers persist, including livelihood dependence, financial constraints, and delays in government relocation programmes, which create conditions characteristic of trapped populations. Labour migration, concentrated among younger household members, emerges as a critical risk diversification strategy, supported by remittances that buffer climate-sensitive livelihoods, though this may concentrate vulnerability among elderly residents who remain. These findings challenge the simplified "stay or go" narratives of climate mobility and underscore the need for integrated policies that recognise mobility as a legitimate adaptation strategy while addressing the financial, livelihood, and institutional constraints that impede dignified anticipatory movement.