Originally published by:  Immigration Reporter, Toronto Star. Fri Oct 11 2013

What should be done about climate change refugees?

Up to 1 billion people could be displaced by climate change over the next 50 years. But many states, including Canada, prefer not to deal with it.

What should be done about climate change refugees?

spaceimaging.com / REUTERS

The multi-island nation of Kiribati is one of the most low-lying on Earth. One former resident is fighting for refugee status, claiming rising sea levels are making it too dangerous to go home. Above, the uninhabited Kiribati coral atoll known as Nikumaroro Island.

A pending court case in New Zealand involving a man from the low-lying island of Kiribati could have profound implications worldwide on the future of migration due to climate change.

The 37-year-old is seeking refugee status, but not because he is being persecuted back home, one of the definitions of a refugee. Rather, he says, flooding and rising sea levels due to climate change are making it too dangerous for him, his wife and three children to return to Kiribati. The island nation, with a population of about 103,000, is made up of 33 coral atolls in the Pacific, half way between Hawaii and Australia.

The case is to go to court on Oct. 16. New Zealand immigration officials have rejected the man’s previous claims, and most jurists are betting he’ll lose his case in the high court. But his lawyer, Michael Kidd, told The Associated Press he will, if necessary, appeal the case all the way to the Supreme Court.

Whatever the outcome, the legal battle brings attention to a question that academics, researchers, environmentalists, politicians and diplomats have been puzzling over: what, if anything, should be done to aid the projected 200 million to 1 billion people who may be displaced by climate change over the next 50 years?

Simulations, computer models and analyses vary widely as to which cities and regions will be the worst affected. The one thing most analysts agree on, in theory, is that both developed and developing nations need to look at ways to deal with some of the migration or displacement expected because of climate change. Not all of those solutions will involve moves to other countries; they might include increased sustainable development, aid and migration within one’s country, experts advise.

But many states, including Canada, would prefer not to deal with the issue at all, says Jose Rivera, senior adviser to the director of international protection at the UNHCR. “There is agreement today that climate change will result in changing weather patterns,” he says. “The problem is many states have not taken climate change seriously. They haven’t begun to do the forward thinking and planning for populations in harm’s way.”

That doesn’t mean experts haven’t been looking at possible solutions. Think-tanks, academics and experts on migration, human rights and the environment have all proposed ideas to deal with the waves of migration that might result from climate change.

Some would like to see a new UN convention to deal with the problem; others want the creation of a new refugee category — climate change refugees. “There are no visas for immigration or refugee status for climate change,” explains Rivera. “There is no legal justification for a climate change refugee or climate change immigrant. I love polar bears and we need to worry about the effect on flora and fauna, but hey, who’s thinking about human beings in all of this?”

Some believe it is important to allow those who may face displacement to stay home by creating a more sustainable economy and moving them from harm’s way internally. While others suggest countries could use regulations within their current immigration laws, such as temporary protection, which the United States did after the Haitian earthquake. Or, as is the case in Canada, humanitarian grounds could be invoked to deal with the waves of displaced migrants due to climate change.
Carbon gas emissions

But “the elephant in the room” in this debate is an international protocol to cut carbon gas emissions worldwide, Rivera says. Many environmentalists worry that in opening up a discussion on the displacement of people, the international focus might shift away from the negotiations to curb emissions.

However, given how much damage has already been done to the environment, mass displacement could be a very real possibility due to flooding or drought. And that needs to be planned for, many argue.

“We know people are going to be forced to leave their homes because of climate change,” says Elizabeth Ferris, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institute and co-director of the Brookings-LSE Project on Internal Displacement.

But Ferris acknowledges there’s not really a consensus on how many people will be on the move or where they will go. She believes it’s critical to strengthen the capacity of local governments in the developing world and local communities in the developed world, such as in Canada’s Arctic, to cope.

But even that may be too much. “People are just ignoring it in the United States,” says Ferris. She believes the issue of migration due to climate change has slipped on the international agenda. Her sentiments were echoed by one expert, who asked not to be identified. He told the Star he was “disheartened” by what he heard at a recent meeting of international officials discussing slow-onset climate change and its impact on people.

Like most other nations, Canada has no separate policy when it comes to the possibility of migration due to climate change.

“Citizenship and Immigration Canada is not actively examining this issue,” writes spokesperson Nancy Caron. “We are currently focused on implementing transformational changes to our immigration system to create a fast, flexible and fair system that will meet the new and emerging needs of Canada’s labour market and the Canadian economy, while maintaining our traditions of family reunification and responding to current humanitarian needs.”

Neither Immigration Minister Chris Alexander nor Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird would comment on the issue.

“Climate change hasn’t been a high-profile issue for this government,” says Daniel Scott, director of the Interdisciplinary Centre on Climate Change at the University of Waterloo. “All of the countries that are major contributors (to carbon emissions) should be actively engaged . . . Canada should be part of the dialogue to look at how we can support future climate migrants.”

Scott and others fear Canada will wait until the United States or the European Union develops a policy. “As the current administration is trying to more closely align border security, passport and immigration policies with the United States,” explains Scott, “until they act, it will be one more reason why Canada won’t act.”

Canada’s inaction doesn’t surprise Janet Dench, the executive director of the Canadian Council of Refugees. “I don’t see any interest in the Canadian government shifting toward a policy that is looking at future international needs,” she says. “The decision has been to reorient our immigration policy in to what is perceived as Canada’s immediate economic needs.”

Dench believes Canada has a deeper responsibility to all refugees, including those affected by climate change. “It’s important for us to recognize our role and responsibility in the world rather than shutting ourselves off, and environmental change is one of the areas where it’s brought home to us. We can’t just shut the door on the outside world and only look after ourselves.”

But what action Canada and other developed countries should take is still up for grabs in Dench’s mind. She falls short of calling for the creation of a separate category of “environmental refugees,” suggesting the rights of all migrants should be looked at by governments around the world, rather than just adding another category for those who are forced to flee for environmental reasons.

Canada isn’t alone in sitting on the sidelines. Other countries seem equally reluctant to put policies in place or aren’t sure which policies would work. When the UNHCR was celebrating its 60th anniversary in 2011, the issue was brought up. Most signatories to the UN Convention on the Status of Refugees attending that meeting rejected dealing with the issue of climate change migration and displacement head on, agreeing only to “engage in soft dialogue and collect and share experience and practices in handling such displacement.”

But out of the ashes of that meeting came an initiative by Norway and Switzerland to look at possible solutions for populations threatened with displacement because of climate change. Mexico, Costa Rica, Bangladesh, Kenya, Germany, Philippines and Australia agreed to come on board.
And in 2012 the Nansen Initiative, named partially in recognition of the first UN High Commissioner for Refugees, Fridtjof Nansen, was born. Over the next two years it is holding consultations in five regions with plans to have a report ready in 2015. Officials are hoping the consultations can kick-start global action.

“The important thing is for all governments to start to think about it, including Canada and Switzerland, my own country,” says Walter Kaelin, professor of law at the University of Bern and special envoy for the Nansen Initiative. “Because it is a real challenge and challenges need to be addressed.

“If we’re looking at the potential magnitude of the problem, ad hoc answers aren’t enough. We need a debate about what would be a good principled approach,” Kaelin says.

“We have to talk about climate change migration, forced displacement. We need a kind of tool box. We have to invest in adaptation measures so people can stay longer, prepare people for migration with dignity; invest in training people so they can compete abroad . . . In the past we’ve had bad experiences with relocation during the colonial period. We have to avoid past mistakes.”

Most academics and researchers agree with Kaelin that preparing for possible waves of climate refugees must be multi-faceted.

For Susan Martin, developing adaptation strategies and policies that help people remain where they are, if feasible, is one avenue. Those endeavours would include working on longer-term strategies, such as researching drought-resistant seeds, new farming techniques and reforestation to deal with creeping desertification.

But she also suggests that migration itself is an adaptation strategy that must be planned for. “We tend to see it as a failure of adaptation,” says Martin, a professor of international migration and director of the Institute for the Study of International Migration at Georgetown University. “But for millennia people have moved as a positive means to climate change. That’s what we want to have happen . . . We don’t want people to move because it’s too late to do anything else, but in a manner to anticipate where things are going.”

For Justin Ginnetti, senior adviser at the International Displacement Monitoring Centre in Geneva, multi-faceted preparation includes computer modelling that identifies the risks to certain populations in the developing world, including simple things such as home construction materials — concrete versus mud — and whether or not they live in a flood plain or by a river bank.

“If governments and communities address the two variables that are within their control, then they can go along way to reducing the risk of displacement occurring in the first place,” says Ginnetti. “And that’s really in everyone’s interest.”