Climate is a decisive factor whether a community could have a stable life or not let alone a family. In times of drought families get affected very much. The bread winner has to migrate in search of work to support the family causing family separation. Children are left with a mother that can hardly feed them. The Ethiopian experience shows that climate change has affected many families. For example, government initiated a number of resettlement schemes for communities affected by climate change. Husbands moved to settlement areas leaving their families in the place of origin, till they make things favorable for their members to bring them to the new site. Those husbands some of them ended up marrying women settlers and some developing relations with sex workers. On returning home such men infected their wives with HIV. Those that moved with all their family members have had hard time to live in a society that has lost its sense of community. You see communities have their norms and values but if displaced they lose them. It has been observed that poor families encouraged their teen girls to engage in sex for money exposing them to HIV, STI and other reproductive health problems. Family values get distorted during climate impacted scenarios .

Whatever the context may be, for me the family is the core of any society and it has to be taken seriously. Anything that contributes to the disintegration of a family  affects society as a whole irrespective of  which nation we are talking about. Any responsible government and leadership should work hard to keep families intact. During disasters such as climate change induced disasters, all attempts should be made to take care of the family. During the flood disaster in Deri Dawa, Ethiopia, every effort was made to care for the family as a unit, and the effect of the disaster  did not impact other undesirable behaviors such as prostitution and the like.

Good question here. We could maybe think about it along the following lines, are we talking about environmental stability? Also what is purpose or goals of the FB in this case. In interesting example would be consider, hostile (economically, politically or socially) environments and family business. Does the owners of the FB perceive the FB as a platform to counter such negativities, eg provide employment for family or extended family/clan, provide economic stability or upward social mobility. In this case, taking  a SEW perspective, those fb owners who see themselves in the loss mode, may engage in some unusual behaviours or decisions in order to continue to survive, eg engage in nepotism, cronyism etc. On the flip side, FBS could attempt to fill important institutional voids, eg providing critical services. In short, yes environment is important in shaping and guiding the attitudes and behaviours of FB owners. Question is what type of environment and how is it inline with goals of FBs

From the responses given, I think I misunderstood your question as you could see from my responses.

If you are speaking  about a  family owned business, it depends on its size. Small family businesses can easily adopt  to different  environments/contexts and survive and even grow to some extent. If the businesses are big they are governed not only by local environments but also also by international trade relations. In this case they have to be able to deal with multiple contexts. The risk with small businesses is low while with the big ones is high. Small family firms can easily adjust to contexts, for they operate in a limited scope.