ABSTRACT Pacific Islanders are being affected by climate change and are often advised from outside the Pacific to respond through justice and transformation. This paper aims to step back from such rhetoric in order to examine its implications. Through considering four types of ‘fatigue’, it asks whether or not transformation and justice approaches for climate change responses account for on‐the‐ground circumstances of Pacific Islands and Islanders. Possible consequences of the language of transformation and justice are then explored. Critique can lead to responses which suggest how identified difficulties could be overcome through the Pacific approach of talanoa . Conclusions indicate how talanoa can assist in avoiding external impositions without bypassing what non‐Pacific approaches offer the Pacific—and especially vice versa.