Climate change presents an onerous challenge to human rights and a threat to the principles of human dignity. Nearly two decades after the publication of the United Nations Development Programme’s (UNDP) landmark 1994 Human Development Report (advocating for the promotion of human security through freedom from fear and want), climate change poses a multitude of challenges to the realisation of this goal. Climate-induced migration is one such challenge: by 2050, an estimated 143 million people could be displaced by the impacts of climate change. Such figures call for us all to explore how best to protect the rights and dignity of those displaced by a changing climate.
Significant gaps remain within the international framework for climate migration. Constrained by a lack of identifiable rights or migration pathways, climate migrants face limited opportunities for relocation in a manner that upholds their dignity. This article seeks to present some initial thoughts on one potential means of filling this gap: planned relocation frameworks.
CLIMATE MIGRATION: WHAT, WHERE, AND WHY?
Climate migration is not new, with climatic variations having triggered large-scale displacement in the past. What is new today is the unprecedented rate of change. Whether as a result of food shortages or natural disasters, the disruptions of climate change will increasingly push people to migrate both within and across state borders. Migrants face additional pathways of insecurity, as relocation often comes with the loss of land, livelihoods, and social support networks. As such, climate change will increasingly test the capacity of states—both those experiencing environmental insecurity and those receiving climate migrants—to ensure the security of those within their jurisdiction.
Whilst climate migration is a global phenomenon, research indicates that it disproportionately affects communities that have pre-existing vulnerabilities. To provide a few examples: in March 2019, a cyclone struck Mozambique, pushing an estimated 146,000 people to migrate due to increased food insecurity. Similarly, droughts in Afghanistan, compounding the insecurity caused by the ongoing conflict, have displaced over 250,000 people since April 2018.
The drivers of migration are multidimensional, context-specific, and often indirect. People do not migrate because of climate change, rather, they do so because they are no longer able to put food on the table. As such, climate change can be understood as a multiplier of existing vulnerabilities, with environmental threats being entangled within a complex and indivisible web of political, social, and economic factors.
DISPLACEMENT WITHOUT DIGNITY
Given that climate change can undermine states' abilities to uphold human security, the protection of vulnerable communities will rely in part upon the capacity of our international frameworks. Yet, climate migrants do not easily fit into the frameworks as they are currently structured. They are neither classified as traditional migrants, who are understood as people who move by choice, nor refugees, who are defined as those forced to leave their country due to fear of persecution. As such, those who have been pushed to migrate by the climate crisis—and those who may require to do so in the future—face substantial insecurity without the legal protections afforded to other groups.
Increasing awareness of this issue by academics, civil society, and vulnerable states has given rise to debates concerning how to fill this legal gap. Questions relate to whether to extend existing frameworks, such as the 1951 Refugee Convention, or to create a new international treaty to establish a climate-specific legal status. However, four major issues arise when considering the applicability of these solutions:
Most climate migration is internal within countries, whereas current frameworks only apply to those crossing international borders.
Determining the link between climate change and migration is challenging, given the complex and interconnected factors influencing decisions to migrate.
Climate migration is not necessarily “forced,” as the slow-onset impacts of climate change often push people to relocate preemptively before they face imminent harm.
There is little political will for opening up migration pathways given that politicians and public opinion often perceive migration as a security threat.
THE WAY FORWARD: A CASE FOR PLANNED RELOCATION
Whilst the potential for the inclusion of climate migrants under existing frameworks is perhaps limited, this does not mean that there is a complete absence of legal protections. States bear the responsibility under international law to respect, protect, and fulfil the human rights of all peoples subject to their jurisdiction. As such, given the threat climate change poses to the right to life in particular, it is increasingly being recognised that international human rights law may require states to prevent, mitigate, and prepare for climate-induced disasters.
One means by which states may fulfil their obligations to protect vulnerable communities is through national policies for planned relocation. Planned relocation—the voluntary resettlement of communities as a means of protecting them from the effects of climate change—has already been acknowledged by the United Nations as a feasible adaptation strategy and has gained traction from governments in the Pacific. States could enhance their capacity to preemptively protect communities from harm through implementing planned relocation legislation and regulations that are consistent with international human rights law.
While it is important to recognise that relocation comes with its own risks to human rights, it is for this reason that policies grounded in dignity, the fundamental principle of human rights, could be key. Integrating values such as consent, independence, and justice into relocation frameworks would provide opportunities to adapt to climate-induced insecurity in a manner that upholds human dignity.
Climate change directly and indirectly affects the realisation of human security and will increasingly do so in the future. It is therefore crucial to ensure that climate migration policies actively protect human rights and are rooted in the principle of human dignity. Given the challenges posed by the limited scope of current international frameworks and the lack of political will to implement global solutions, planned relocation may provide viable means for states to ensure migration with dignity.
Ellie Cumberbatch is studying toward an LLM in International Law at the University of Edinburgh, where she focuses upon international human rights law. She has experience working in international trade and climate security, and a keen interest in post-conflict justice.