For Hawaii, or any rain forest climate, certainly having multiple dry and wet zones where both upland and wetland plants can be cultivated is a huge advantage. Since taro is the backbone of the Pacific one would have to be nuts not to grow it, in fact I'd go so far than you have to be nuts not to give it a try if it's even remotely possible. You can hardly get a more perfect staple, and the plant is near magical in its loveliness anyway--something I can't say for, well, perhaps barley, which makes me sneeze just thinking about it. Since with taro the low holes and muddy spots are already spoken for, with a sustainable yield potential of possibly 2 lbs a square foot-- the rest of sustainability is easy. Taro is especially valuable because it's labor intensive, but labor intensive for everyone. There are no effective mechanical harvesters, and everyone is in the same position--for a market crop it makes a lot of sense. I focus on high end table taros, not poi taros, because they historically have grown better in my areas than anywhere else, and look like they still do. It's worth looking into.
Man, I can grow taro that comes out of the ground and tastes like a twice baked potato straight up, with the sour cream and butter built in. Thanks, Jerry! Some of that and a couple cups of kava and I'd need precious little else. . .
These muck holes in the rainforest are generally so rich and anerobic than near nothing can live in them. They are unutilized space in the native forest as even the plants more or less used to the area will die of root rot. Not taro. Planted with taro, in this sense, per acre, the bioresperation of CO2 is markedly increased--the native forest is unimpacted, but the yield is maximized by perhaps even a factor of 2. Too good to be true? Well, we'll think about that tomorrow. There are things to think about.