I can't read that. Can you make it anymore clear?
<h2>Answer</h2>
<h3>This paper traces the history of human-environment interactions in the Pacific Islands during the last millennium, focusing on three main periods: the Little Climatic Optimum, the Little Ice Age, and, in greatest detail, the transition around A.D. 1300 between the two. The Little Climatic Optimum (approximately A.D. 750–1300) was marked by warm, rising temperatures, rising sea level and probably increasing aridity. The latter condition was linked to development of water-conservatory strategies (agricultural terracing being the most common) requiring cooperation between human groups which facilitated formation of large nucleated settlements and increased sociopolitical complexity. The transition period (approximately A.D. 1270–1475) involved rapid temperature and sea-level fall, perhaps a short-lived precipitation increase. Temperature fall stressed crops and reef organisms, sea-level fall lowered water tables and exposed reef surfaces reducing their potential as food resources for coastal dwellers. Increased precipitation washed away exposed infrastructure. Consequently food resource bases on many islands diminished abruptly across the transition. The Little Ice Age (approximately A.D. 1300–1800) was marked by cooler temperatures and lower sea levels. The lingering effects of the earlier transition largely determined human lifestyles during this period. Conflict resulted from resource depletion. Unprotected coastal settlements were abandoned in favour of fortified inland, often upland, settlements. Climate change is suggested to have been a important determinant of human cultural change during the last millennium in the Pacific Islands.</h3>
<h2>Journal Information</h2>
<h3>Environment and History is an interdisciplinary journal which aims to bring scholars in the humanities and biological sciences closer together, with the deliberate intention of constructing long and well-founded perspectives on present day environmental problems.</h3>
<h2 />
<h2>Rights & Usage</h2>
<h3>This item is part of a JSTOR Collection. </h3><h3>For terms and use, please refer to our Terms and Conditions </h3><h3>Environment and History © 2001 White Horse Press </h3><h3>Request Permissions</h3>
<h2>
<em><u>Hope</u></em><em><u> </u></em><em><u>this</u></em><em><u> helps</u></em><em><u> you</u></em><em><u> </u></em><em><u>❤️</u></em><em><u>❤️</u></em></h2>
<h2>
<em><u>Mark</u></em><em><u> me</u></em><em><u> as</u></em><em><u> </u></em><em><u>brainliest</u></em><em><u> ❤️</u></em></h2>
<h2>
<em><u>and</u></em><em><u> </u></em><em><u>please</u></em><em><u> </u></em><em><u>follow</u></em><em><u> </u></em><em><u>me</u></em><em><u> ❤️</u></em></h2>
False. Landscapes tend to use a shallower depth of field.
Feudalism was used in Great Britain
Technically it is divisible by 3, but you would just end up with a decimal or fraction as the answer.
