For 300,000 years of human history, humans lived as climate migrants. Hunter-gatherer societies were characterized by small bands of people extending their seasonal access to food and other resources by migrating throughout the year. With the advent of agriculture, however, human societies became more settled and fewer individuals participated in climate-migration.
Today, we are seeing a new type of climate-migration emerge. Climate migrants are now driven by the rise of anthropogenic climate change, often accompanied by irreparable damage to the environment. The climate-migration nexus is a term used to describe this confluence of changes in the climate and in migration patterns.
What may seem less apparent is the reason organizations like the UN and the International Organization for Migration (IOM) use this term instead of a more evocative phrase, like “climate refugees,” to identify the problem at hand of forcible displacement due to climate change. This week on our Impactfull series, we will discuss the climate-migration nexus and where this term falls in existing policies and international law governing climate refugees.
Defining the Climate-Migration Nexus
An essential component of the climate-migration nexus is the two-way relationship between climate change and human migration. Shifts in the climate do not occur in a vacuum, nor does migration happen without creating environmental consequences. altering the environment in which it takes place. The Brookings Institute identifies climate change as both a “contributing and exacerbating factor” for conflict and migration. At the same time, urbanization and other forms of migration can put pressure on resources that lead to the depletion of natural resources and the outbreak of conflict. Conflict is a missing link that often connects the phenomena of climate change and migration.
Climate change is part of an increasingly complex list of push and pull factors driving migration decisions. Environmental factors for migration are multicausal. The IOM identifies these factors as both encompassed and exacerbated by climate change. Although environmental factors are important for determining migration decisions, it is essential to examine this relationship through the lens of human factors. Population growth, economic inequality, resource governance, personal insecurity, and conflict are all parts of the human side of the equation in the climate-migration nexus.
So, what’s the sum result of this massively complex equation for migration decision-making? Often, the answer is stepwise migration. Rather than waking up one day and fleeing across international borders, most environmental migrants and climate refugees engage in a multistage process of movement. A coffee farmer facing multiple years of failed crops may first move from her rural farm to the outskirts of a large city. Lacking economic opportunities and security in this urban area, she may have to migrate further, even abroad, so that she can send remittances to her family to support them financially. Through this stepwise migration, we can see why some of the legal challenges to defining climate refugees as “refugees” emerge.
Migration as a Climate Adaptation Strategy
Some consequences of climate change are irreversible, no matter what mitigation strategies we implement now or in the future. Arctic sea ice will no longer cover most of the Arctic Circle each year as warming of the oceans accelerates. California’s natural aquifers will be permanently unable to recover the six trillion gallons of water lost over the last century due to structural collapses caused by the loss of water. Abrupt climate change and the loss of suitable habitats will lead thousands of species to go extinct, creating a cascade of biodiversity loss in the Amazon and throughout much of the world.
However, migration can enable humans to better respond to climate change. In a study of citizens of the Republic of Mauritius, migrant households were found to be more likely to adapt to climate change compared with non-migrant households. Experience with migration allowed households to prepare for potential short-term and long-term environmental and climatic events. These findings suggest that integrating migration as a climate adaptation strategy into the policy framework governing climate change can produce resiliency and reduce the vulnerability of climate refugees.
Climate Change, Migration, and International Law
Introducing policies that encourage safe migration and deter conflict can be one way to resolve the challenges posed by the climate-migration nexus. Yet, it is also important that these policies take place under an international framework which recognizes the unique vulnerabilities and threats that climate refugees face. We can see a poignant example of this from Kiribati, a small island developing state in the middle of the Pacific Ocean facing devastating sea level rise.
Ioane Teitiota, an I-Kiribati man who filed to seek asylum in New Zealand, highlights the importance of a legal protective framework. Last year, the United Nations Human Rights Committee (UNHRC) made a decision on his case, which alleged that he should be considered a “climate refugee” and protected accordingly by international law governing refugees, including the policy of non-refoulement, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). Teitiota had already faced an initial rejection of his claim by New Zealand, whose courts determined that deporting him to Kiribati did not violate his right to life (ICCPR Article 6) nor did it cause him to be subject to torture or cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment (ICCPR Article 7).
Although it was disheartening that the UNHRC did not rule in favor of Mr. Teitiota’s claim, the UNHCR responded optimistically, stating that, “the [UNHRC] nonetheless determined that people who flee the effects of climate change and natural disasters should not be returned to their country of origin if essential human rights would be at risk on return.” The decision seems to suggest that under the ICCPR, as climate change worsens and forces migration, individuals should not be returned to their countries of origin due to potential violations of their rights under Articles 6 and 7.
Ultimately, the most important next step is to explicitly protect the rights of individuals like Ioane Teitiota by incorporating climate refugees into the legal landscape governing the treatment of refugees in the international community.
- State of the UNIONS: Welcome to September’s Impactfull Series - September 2, 2022
- What We Can Learn from the Ukrainian Refugee Crisis - March 29, 2022
- The Olympic Effect: Changes in Host Communities - February 21, 2022