Climate refugees: A global problem

CLIMATE refugees are people who have been forcibly displaced as a result of environmental factors caused by climate change and natural disasters. Every year since 2008, 26.4 million people have been forced to leave their countries due to extraordinary weather events such as typhoons, tsunamis, flooding and natural disasters such as earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, etc. (When people seek refuge within their own countries as environmental refugees, they are commonly referred to as internally displaced persons).

Scientific studies revealed rising seas will supplant encroaching deserts and other forms of land degradation as the major threat to habitability of many places this century. The evacuation of 1,400 residents of Papua New Guinea’s Carteret Islands (the world’s first climate refugees, according to the United Nations) due to rising sea levels offers a sobering vision of the future for coastal populations.

Global warming brought about by excessive fossil fuel use is reported to result in the thermal expansion of the oceans and the melting of icecaps. A 1-meter increase in sea level will displace millions of people in the delta regions of the Nile and Ganges rivers, further compounding land scarcity in Egypt and Bangladesh. To think that world population is projected to increase by 93 million annually, all of them in need of food, water and shelter. In fact, as the root causes of the Southeast Asian migrant crisis unraveled, it was not surprising, as it turned out in the UN High Commissioner for Refugees-backed Bangkok Special Meeting on Irregular Migration in the Indian Ocean of concerned countries, that some of the “boat people” are in reality climate refugees from Bangladesh and Myanmar aiming for Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia.

The combined effects of warmer climates and higher seas will make typhoons more frequent and more destructive, further damaging the habitability of coastal areas. Extensive river diversions will markedly lessen the amount of freshwater discharged into coastal areas while higher sea levels will increase saltwater intrusion thus reducing mangrove forest cover and disrupting major fisheries within fragile ecosystems.

Endangered places that may cease to exist include, among others, Tuvalu, Kiribati and the Marshall Islands in the Pacific, Maldives in the Indian Ocean as well as the touristic string of emerald islands and islets in the Caribbean, prompting the formation of an association of small island states working towards solutions to their plight to counter sea level rise before the UN.

Platforms on forced climate displacement

Climate refugees are very much benefited by the Platform on Disaster Management, a state-led initiative largely supported by Germany, that works to protect people displaced by the impacts of natural disasters. Successful initiative examples are Australia and New Zealand’s programs designed for Pacific island states, allowing people to obtain work visas for a number of months. The two countries’ programs offer access to skills development and support services to help people invest the money they earn back home so that their families can cope better and stay where they are for at least some more years. As an example, in a village in Samoa, 20 to 25 young men per year leave to work in Australia where they earn seven times more than what they earn in Samoa. The money that goes back is utilized in establishing businesses and in building storm-proof dwellings.

Furthermore, international relocation is under consideration in the Pacific island states.

Kiribati, for example, purchased an area of higher ground in Fiji, a precedent in the context of climate change. The land could be used for resettlement purposes or it could be farmed to secure food supply. Fiji, on the other hand, has its own relocation plans.

The message of the Pacific island peoples is clear. They want to leave in a controlled manner and not end up in refugee camps.

On the other hand, for Asean member states such as the Philippines that bore the brunt of many natural calamities in the recent past — e.g. typhoons, which caused floods, landslides and monsoon rains in the Visayas and parts of Luzon; the magnitude 7.2 earthquake that struck the islands of Bohol and Cebu; and Typhoon “Yolanda” in 2013 which claimed lives, property and crops — the response was ecosystem-based adaptation such as mangroves which dissipate wave energy during typhoons and tsunamis (even if mangrove saplings take time to root before they become effective defense against the onslaughts of wind and waves).

A project of the US-based Conservation International, making use of nature-based solutions like planting mangroves has also the advantage of least expense and the opportunity for coastal communities to collect mangrove forest species like crabs, fishes, etc. to improve livelihoods. Restoring mangroves has economic benefits beyond breaking waves compared to concrete seawalls which are expensive and need repairs from time to time.

In pursuance of the ecosystem-based adaptation and nature-based solution mentioned above, there is an available adaptation fund in the context of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change with $180 million to increase resilience to climate change.

Legal protection gap

Be that as it may, climate refugees are not covered by the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees (1951) for the reason that climate refugees are not fleeing persecution on account of race, religion, nationality or membership in a particular racial or political group. Any of these grounds is a requirement needed to fulfill traditional “refugee” models when applying for resettlement in another country.

Actually, the main problem in legislative protection for climate refugees is the distinction between “migrant” and “refugee.” For some legal minds, the former connotes a voluntary move while the latter is involuntary. Be it noted that human displacement as a consequence of climate change is a comparatively recent concept which emerged due to the destructive effects of global warming.

Whatever, paramount is granting protection to environmentally displaced persons into a context of law. Meaning, for those who have no choice but to leave their country, the chance of resettlement must be taken seriously in consideration of the rapidly deteriorating climate. This is the time to legislatively secure a new category of refugees and finally close the legal protection gap for the growing huge number of environmentally displaced victims.

Conclusion

Environmental change brought about by global warming has had enormous and irreversible effects on our climate with the last few years accounted as the warmest on record.  US climate officials even say there is a two to one chance that 2020 would end up as the globe’s hottest. It is also predicted that Latin America will experience further decrease in water availability; Europe’s coastal flooding will rise; and deaths from disease associated with floods and droughts are expected in the countries of Asia. In Africa, a great number of people are exposed daily to increased water stress with no solution in sight.

It is easy to surmise that the world’s poorest people will be hit the hardest, especially for those living on marginal lands or flood-prone cities and countryside. To think that according to an Oxfam report, the poorest 50 percent of the world’s population emit only 10 percent of emissions while the richest 10 percent are responsible for 50 percent of emissions.

Certainly, rich/developed countries have a duty to act fast to avoid dangerous climate change to prevent increasingly disastrous impacts from forcing more people out of their homes and support the growing number of desperate climate refugees already facing the worst consequences of climate change.

Indeed, poverty and inadequate development policies along with rapid population growth are the roots of environmental degradation in the developing world. Present climate refugees may already be the biggest single group of displaced persons. By the middle of this century, people forced to leave their homes and places of livelihood because of flooding, desertification, toxic pollution, sea level rise or other disruptions may even constitute the largest in number among those displaced by all other means. In that connection, the International Organization for Migration estimates that there could be as many as 200 million of these refugees by 2050.

The quickly spreading climate refugees in many parts of the world is an indication of the seriousness of global environmental decline. It is a fact that ecosystems are made more vulnerable by human pressure on land, forests and soils. Poor people are forced to live in disaster-prone areas and become more vulnerable to natural forces. Some villages in the Philippines are areas once covered by forests but are now virtually denuded. Areas susceptible to earthquakes are inhabited by thousands of Nepalis despite experiencing catastrophic earthquakes. Bars of silt and sand called “chars” in the middle of the Bengal delta are home to millions of Bangladeshis. Thousands of Latin American slum dwellers, living in hovels, perched on deforested hillsides, are potential mudslide victims during heavy rainstorms. All of them potential climate refugees. The problem must be stopped at its source through a combination of environmental and population measures.

This is the best time to consider bright prospects for the quickly growing climate refugees, helping and supporting them build a future, even as some more capable countries invoke the primacy of their people’s welfare to justify closing their borders to the influx of climate refugees fleeing from the impact of climate change.