Climate change is already creating refugees, and the way we tackle climate change will determine future numbers of climate refugees. Whatever the numbers, the international community needs a plan to support these individuals and assist their countries to help the rest of their population. Current policies and practices aren't adequate for climate refugees. Read on to find out why and what could change.
I want to start with a little disclaimer:
Refugees are never "the issue". Refugees are people who have run from or been displaced by an atrocity in their home community, whether that be war, persecution, a weather event or anything else. The real issue where refugees are concerned is why they had to leave and the treatment they receive afterwards.
Climate disasters and environmental degradation will undoubtedly increase in frequency and intensity as the climate emergency continues; it's in the name. We talk a lot about how these events wreak havoc on people's lives and homes, but we talk very little about the inevitability of people becoming climate refugees. The issue I want to tackle today is the current treatment of refugees and what it means for the future.
Currently, the UNHCR definition of refugee is this:
A person who has fled war, violence, conflict or persecution and have crossed an international border to find safety in another country.
You will notice that the definition lists specific reasons for fleeing a home country. This means that, legally, governments can turn away people leaving their homeland in response to a climate disaster under the guise that they aren't refugees. As a result, the current term used to describe people crossing international borders to flee climate disasters and environmental degradation is forced climate migrants. Here lies the first barrier for protecting those living in areas continually damaged by climate change.
Predictions for how many people will be displaced by climate change vary wildly. The IOM (UN's International Organisation for Migration) estimate that by 2050 the numbers will be between 25 million and 1 billion people. That's a vast range, but it's a massive number of people, even at the lower end. How many people end up as forced climate migrants depends on how the international community acts in the face of climate change now and how those displaced by climate change choose to act. Some will become forced climate migrants, some will be internally displaced and stay within their country, and some will simply refuse to leave their homeland. This is a perfectly valid choice.
So, forced climate migrants will become something countries have to deal with, but how will they? I will focus on the UK because that's where Teach the Future is based, but the answer to this question could be very different in different countries.
Currently, the UK government is doing everything it can to prevent asylum seekers from reaching it and reduce the number of asylum seekers becoming refugees. You've likely seen headlines about needlessly harsh asylum policies pushed by the government, as well as protests against these policies. The UK is already a very hostile place for asylum seekers: they aren't allowed to work, are often placed in dreadful housing, and must live on less than £5.50 per day. And that's just those who make it into the system. In Priti Patel's Nationality and Borders Bill (sitting for its final reading tomorrow), Border Force officials would be allowed and encouraged to turn refugees away from British territorial waters to prevent them from officially reaching Britain. To be clear, this would breach international maritime AND refugee laws. That is the level of hostility we're talking about.
You will have also heard government claims that the UK takes "too many" refugees and that we're more generous than other European countries, but that's not true. Firstly, the number of people seeking asylum in the UK is significantly lower than in the early 2000s. Secondly, in 2019, Germany alone accepted more asylum claims than the UK did from January 2015 to December 2020. Government officials also like to say, "asylum seekers should stay in the first country they get to". In answer to that, most of them do. 86% of refugees live in countries neighbouring their country of origin. There's also nothing in international law saying refugees must claim asylum in the first country they reach. One EU law states that adult refugees can be returned to the first European country they arrive in, but following this policy would but a significant responsibility on countries on the edge of Europe.
All of this information doesn't give me a lot of hope for how the UK will respond to forced climate migrants landing on its shores. So far, no country has accepted asylum applications based on climate-related issues alone. New Zealand is leading the way by talking with nearby Pacific Islanders about what measures they want surrounding the future of climate refugees. However, New Zealand is just one country, and the Pacific Islands don't speak for everyone who may become a forced climate migrant, so this conversation needs to start globally. Our only other option is to push Vietnamese families into chronically flooded houses, drive Somalian farmers back to desertified land with no water for their crops or livestock, and force Bangladeshi children with cystic fibrosis to keep breathing the highly polluted air catching more and more infections.
As early as 2008, many analysts argued that immigration is a necessary element of climate justice and an essential response to climate change. Effectively, greenhouse gas emitters should take an allocation of forced climate migrants in proportion to their historical emissions. Though the IOM didn't formally recommend this to the international community, they did not speak against it. Personally, I believe any recommendations or legislation regarding forced climate migrants must consider that the needs and desires of individual MAPA communities will be different.
Though most of this blog has focussed on the need for legislation for forced climate migrants, it's essential that we don't skip straight to that step. There's still a lot that the international community can still do to help those most at risk of climate change before leaving their home becomes their only option. From cutting out fossil fuels and defunding deforestation to supporting developing countries to build strong defences against climate disasters and ensuring their whole population is equally protected.