The concept of 'climate refugee'

BRIEFING

EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service

Author: Joanna Apap with Sami James Harju;

Graphics: Stéphanie Pradier, Samy Chahri

Members' Research Service

PE 698.753 – October 2023

The concept of 'climate refugee'

Towards a possible definition

SUMMARY

According to recent statistics published by the Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre, over

376 million people around the world have been forcibly displaced by floods, windstorms,

earthquakes or droughts since 2008, with a record 32.6 million in 2022 alone. Since 2020, there has

been an annual increase in the total number of displaced people due to disaster compared with the

previous decade of 41 % on average. The upward trend is alarmingly clear. With climate change as

the driving catalyst, the number of 'climate refugees' will continue to rise. The Institute for

Economics and Peace predicts that in the worst-case scenario, 1.2 billion people could be displaced

by 2050 due to natural disasters and other ecological threats.

Despite steps in the right direction, national and international responses to this challenge remain

limited, and protection for those affected inadequate. There is no clear definition of a 'climate

refugee', nor are climate refugees covered by the 1951 Refugee Convention. The latter covers only

people who have a well-founded fear of being persecuted because of their race, religion, nationality,

membership of a particular social group or political opinion, and who are unable or unwilling to seek

protection from their home countries. This means that climate cannot currently be cited as a reason

for seeking asylum or refugee status, although the 2018 Global Compact for Migration, in its second

objective, cites climate as a potential reason for migration. While the EU has not formally recognised

'climate refugees', it has expressed growing concern and has taken action to support and develop

resilience in countries most vulnerable to climate-related stress.

This briefing is an update of an earlier version published in October 2021.

IN THIS BRIEFING

 Background



The complex task of defining a 'climate

refugee'

 How climate change contributes to increased

displacement of people

 Shaping an international legal framework to

address the protection gaps for 'climate

refugees'



Promising developments: Climate litigation

through a human rights lens

EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service

Background

Since 2008, over 376 million people have been displaced as a result of climate disasters. This is the

equivalent of one person being displaced every second, or as if the entire population of Australia

were forced to abandon their homes every year. In 2022 alone, 36.2 million people were displaced

because of natural disasters brought about by climate change, and while many found refuge within

their own country, some were forced to go abroad. With the projected number of people affected

expected to double by 2050 according to the

International Federation of Red Cross and Red

Crescent Societies (IFRC), the annual worldwide displacement of millions of people due to

environmental disasters needs to be addressed properly.

Since the 1994 International Conference on Population and Development, the issue of international

migration and its connection with development has been rising steadily up the agenda of the

international community. The United Nations (UN) 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development

includes several migration-related targets and calls for regular reviews of progress towards their

achievement using data disaggregated by, inter alia, migratory status. Nevertheless, the response

to this challenge has been limited, and protection for those affected remains inadequate. The lack

of a legal definition for persons forced to move for climate-related reasons is of particular concern,

as they can easily find themselves in a legal limbo owing to the lack of recognition of their status

and their need for humanitarian protection. Principle 1 of the 1972 Declaration of the United Nations

Conference on the Human Environment (the Stockholm Declaration) states that there is 'a

fundamental right to freedom, equality and adequate conditions of life, in an environment of a

quality that permits a life of dignity and well-being'. The Stockholm Declaration reflects a general

recognition of the interdependence and interrelatedness of human rights and the environment,

which is key to addressing this legal limbo.

Although most people who have been forcibly displaced for climate-related reasons remain within

their national borders (i.e. they are internally displaced), some go abroad and therefore become

externally displaced. Yet, as most of the available data focuses on internally displaced persons, it is

difficult to develop a clear overview of the scale of cross-border migration for reasons relating to

climate. This lack of precise data (also caused by the legal void surrounding the status of such

persons, also referred to as 'external climate migrants'), prevents the implementation of an

international legal framework to address this issue. However, since the launch of the

Nansen

Initiative in 2012, the international community has begun to consider the phenomenon of external

migration for climate reasons.

On 19 September 2016, the UN General Assembly adopted the New York Declaration for Refugees

and Migrants, in which it called for the development of two global compacts, one on refugees and

the other on 'other migrants'. The second, the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular

Migration (GCM), endorsed on 10 December 2018 in Morocco, acknowledges under its Objective 2

the urgent situation of migrants displaced because of climate change. In the same year, the 24th

Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (

CO P24)

addressed the displacement of people as a result of climate change. Nevertheless, although climate

migration is now a recurrent topic in international negotiations, so far no official status or legal

protection has been granted to those affected. The 2019 COP25, while relying on the

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)

special report on climate change and land,

addressed the issue of desertification and the heightened global food scarcity risk as outcomes of

climate change compromising the quality of human life. Building on that, the International

Organization for Migration (IOM) stated that climate change-related outcomes that worsen the

living conditions of already vulnerable populations act as triggers for increased human mobility.

The significance of the nexus between climate change-induced disasters and displacements has

been acknowledged, but without sufficiently addressing the need to secure a special status for

climate-displaced persons. Host countries prefer to seek to solve the problem 'at the root', by

diminishing pollution and minimising climate change. Tackling this 'root cause' was at the heart of

The concept of 'climate refugee'

COP26 held in 2021 in Glasgow. However, as participants continued to disagree on whether the

world was on track to keep temperatures below 1.5 °C, they failed to produce legally binding targets

with the required sense of urgency. According to CarbonBrief

, they also failed to provide vulnerable

nations with adequate resources to undo or address the impacts of climate change. While new

pledges might prove fruitful for tackling long-term objectives, humanity continues to face the short-

term challenge of displacement due to climate change.

COP27, which took place in November 2022 in Sharm El Sheikh, was supposed to be the litmus test

for actions agreed upon in prior conferences. Progress was indeed made in certain key areas, an

example being the issue of loss and damages linked to the impact of climate change, which had

created understandable mistrust between developing and developed nations. Taking account of

the fact that many poorer countries have been the most severely affected by climate disasters (while

often having contributed least to the problem), a new multilateral funding mechanism was

established, with initial pledges worth roughly €340 million

being made by the EU, Canada and New

Zealand. On the sidelines of the conference, the Global Centre for Climate Mobility established the

Climate Mobility Pavilion, a forum to discuss policy solutions for climate mobility and displacement.

However, despite COP27 having been hailed as the 'implementation COP', its pledges and promises

to translate words of affirmation and solidarity into 'action on the ground' once again lacked the

backing of precise and mutually enforceable implementation plans.

The UNHCR, in a 2020 article on climate change and disaster displacement, and the European

Commission, in its 2019 communication on a European Green Deal initiative, both express their

understanding of the current and future role of climate change in the forced displacement of

people. Yet, a clear void remains in the international legal framework regarding the protection of

such people. Since the

1951 Refugee Convention applies only to people who have a well-founded

fear of persecution based on race, religion, nationality or membership of a particular social group or

political opinion, and who are unable or unwilling, owing to fear of persecution, to seek protection

from their home countries, neither this convention nor its additional protocol recognise climate

hazard as a valid basis for obtaining refugee status. The meaning of the term 'climate refugee' is

therefore most

uncertain both legally and in practice.

Climate change will continue to have an enormous effect on many populations, especially those in

coastal and low-lying areas. In 2023 alone, hundreds of thousands of persons were affected by

natural hazards and severe weather disasters

across the globe. In September 2023, Storm Dan iel

claimed over 12 000 lives in Libya, and 40 000 people were forced to leave their homes. In the

summer of 2023, temperatures in the Mediterranean region and the US reached record-br eaking

highs, and floods in Italy's Emilia-Romagna killed 14 people and displaced 50 000. In 2022, floods in

Pakistan displaced over 10 million people, and the Horn of Africa experienced its worst drought in

40 years, leading to widespread famine and migration. Still in 2022, the US suffered 18 separate

'billion-dollar' weather disasters that inflicted damage costing over US$165 billion and claimed

474 lives. The most notable of these, Hurricane Ian, which struck Florida in September 2022, became

the

third-costliest weather disaster ever recorded, with US$113 billion in damages and 161 deaths.

On 13-14 July 2021, at least 243 people died in floods in parts of western Germany, northeastern

France, eastern Belgium, the eastern Netherlands and Luxembourg.

Events like these should serve as a grave reminder that climate-related disasters are not simply

limited to the Global South, and that the effects of large-scale disasters traditionally observed in

developing countries, including displacement, are becoming an increasingly global phenomenon

that is occurring closer and closer to home. According to Justin Ginnetti

, head of the Data and

Analysis Department of the Internal Displacement Monitoring Center (IDMC), people are now twice

as likely to be displaced than they were in the 1970s. This is due to the combined effect of rapid

population growth, urbanisation and exposure to climate disasters. According to the 2019 IPCC

Special report on the ocean and cryosphere in a changing climate, scientists estimate that in this

century, between 6 000 and 17 000 km

of land will be lost owing to rising sea levels and coastal

erosion, both caused by climate change; this could displace between 1.6 and 5.3 million people. The

EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service

2021 IPCC report made serious and alarming observations on the future of coastal cities and their

populations as a result of the life-threatening rise in sea levels. Maintaining global warming below

C would still cause oceans to rise up by 60 cm, posing risks to the lives or livelihoods of about

300 million people through annual floods by 2050. Rising sea levels pose threats for cities s uch as

Mumbai, Jakarta, Shanghai, New York and Venice, and could cause entire countries – such as the

Netherlands – to disappear and their populations to face displacement. The

2023 IPCC report calls

urgently for climate-resilient development to integrate adaptation and mitigation, to advance

sustainable development for all through increased international cooperation. Access to adequate

financial resources needs to be improved, particularly for vulnerable regions, through more

inclusive governance and coordinated policies.

The complex task of defining a 'climate refugee'

The phenomenon of 'climate refugees' has been in the public discourse since 1985, when the UN

Environment Programme (UNEP) expert Essam El-Hinnawi defined 'environmental refugees' as:

'those people who have been forced to leave their traditional habitat, temporarily or permanently,

because of marked environmental disruption (natural and/or triggered by people) that jeopardised

their existence and/or seriously affected the quality of their life'. This definition is also used for the

term 'climate refugees'; whether there is a practical difference between 'environmental' and

'climate' remains unclear. One of the key challenges in securing protection for those affected by

displacement due to climate change lies in the complexities involved in defining the term 'climate

refugee', while also taking the pre-existing discourse surrounding the Refugee Convention and

previous attempts at defining 'environmental refugees' into account.

In 2020, during a European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) hearing, Isabel Borges, professor

and researcher at the Norwegian Business School and University of Oslo explained: 'The absence of

an accurate definition of what constitutes a person displaced by environmental factors has resulted

in the inability to measure exactly the number of existing and potential displacement flows'.

According to academic researchers Docherty et al. (2009),

a 'climate refugee' definition should

include the following parts: 'forced migration, temporary or permanent relocation, movement

across borders, disruption consistent with climate change, sudden or gradual environmental

disruption, and a more than likely standard for human contribution to the disruption'.

Some terms commonly used to describe people displaced for climate-related reasons

The term 'environmental refugee' has been used in position papers presented by various non-

governmental organisations, and also in the media and in academic literature. The term is especially

associated with the early stages of reflection on the topic, before a distinction started to be drawn

between the different types of environmental change and forms of mobility. It was used to raise awareness

and to focus on the forced nature of the displacement. However, the use of the term and status of 'refugee'

to describe people in this situation has subsequently been criticised, primarily because the term has a

specific legal meaning in the context of the 1951 Refugee Convention and international refugee law.

Relevant UN agencies and the IOM considered that the use of the term 'refugee' would be inappropriate

in that context, and that it would not be opportune or feasible to widen the definition of refugees provided

in the 1951 Refugee Convention to include additional categories of persons.

The term 'environmental migrant' is widely used, including by the IOM. Nevertheless, the term 'migrant'

might not always be considered appropriate, as it suggests a degree of volition in the decision to move.

One of the most recent terms to have gained popularity is 'environmentally/climate displaced person'.

This term is descriptive – referring to at least of one part of the mobility spectrum (displacement) – and

does not necessarily imply responsibility as regards governance. Although there is no internationally

accepted legal definition of a 'displaced person', the concept of 'internally displaced persons' (IDPs) is

relevant when displacements occur internally.

The concept of 'climate refugee'

Attributing the title of refugees to persons displaced internally and externally has attracted criticism.

Initially, the term 'climate refugees' was found to be incorrect by the UNHCR, as it blurred the

boundaries between the definition of refugees according to the 1951 Refugee Convention –

'Convention refugees' – and popular concepts regarding refugees. In June 2019, Dina Ionesco, head

of the Migration Environment and Climate Change (MECC) Division at the IOM, expressed her

concerns about granting refugee status to climate migrants. She argued this could weaken the

UNHRC 1951 Refugee Convention while also excluding from aid and support climate-displaced

persons unable to give a suitable proof that their forced displacement is due to climate.

The question is whether climate refugees should be the subject of a new treaty or convention. The

UNHCR argues that those displaced as a result of environmental change could in theory still rely on

protection offered by their countries, while traditional refugees could not, as countries ar e often a

source of persecution, thus making an individual 'unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that

country' as required by Article 1A(2) of the 1951 Refugee Convention. Yet, in reality, certain regions

struck by recurrent climate disasters (mostly in the Global South where migration movements

mainly come from), face difficulties in recovering from these events, as they often overlap with

existing structural problems, disrupting both reconstruction efforts and the return of the displaced

people. The endorsement of a new binding convention designed to legally protect and support

climate displaced people should at least be considered. A regional system, such as that es ta blished

through the Kampala Convention

in Africa, may better employ notions of subsidiarity that more

accurately reflect the reality of state behaviour rather than would a top-down legal framework.

Professor Walter Kälin, former UN representative on the human rights of internally displaced

persons, and Nina Schrepfer from the UNHCR, use four key findings

relevant to forced population

movement: a) reduction in available water; b) decrease in crop yields; c) risk of floods, storms and

coastal flooding; and d) negative overall impact on health (especially for the poor, elderly, young

and marginalised). They identify three kinds of impediment to the return of people in such

circumstances: legal impediments to return after the end of an environmental crisis under human

rights law: whereby in forcing return, the host state would expose the individual to a substantial risk

of torture, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; factual impediments: there is no

means of sending people back to the country (for instance, no airports, roads or other essential

infrastructure); humanitarian impediments: where even though it is possible to return people and

there are no human rights obstacles, there are compassionate and humanitarian grounds for not

sending people back. According to the authors, so long as any one of the three situations exists, the

persons affected should be classified as forcibly displaced and in need of protection and assistance

from another state.

How climate change contributes to increased displacement

of people

Climate change can generate 'refugees' in a number of ways, and rising temperatures are known to

increase the frequency and intensity of weather-related disasters. While most climate displacement

happens internally

and displaced people can sometimes return to their homes after a disaster, the

growing impact of climate change is making certain areas increasingly uninhabitable, making it

difficult to return.

EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service

Figure 1– Internal displacement of persons due to natural disasters

Data source: Global Report on Internal Displacement, IDMC, 2022 and World Bank, World Development

Indicators, 2022. Graphic update Stéphanie Pradier, based on original infographic by Giulio Sabbati, EPRS.

The concept of 'climate refugee'

Despite the difficulties in quantifying accurately the number of persons externally displaced

because of climate disasters, studies show that external migration linked to climate disasters will

most probably increase

in the coming years. This will only add to the pressure on refugee agencies

and migration policies that are already under stress because of the ongoing migration crisis notably

in Europe since 2015. Whether it is internal or external, forced displacement of people can lead to

conflict and tension with those already living on the destination land. In 2019, the

IPCC explained

that displacement can create competition for food, clean water access and jobs, whilst also

exacerbating pre-existing ethnic tension or

gender violence and worsening the situation in sensitive

regions affected by wars and violence.

The IEP published its third annual Ecological Threat Report in October 2022, as part of its continued

task of measuring and monitoring the level of ecological threats faced by vulnerable countries, while

providing projections for 2050. Combining comprehensive ecological data with measures of

resilience, the report lists the countries that are least likely to withstand the effects of climate

disasters and ecological shocks in the coming decades. Additionally, the report finds that over

1 billion people live in countries where the state's ability to cope with projected ecological events

by 2050 is seen as insufficient. According to the report, North/sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle East

and South Asia are the regions that are most strongly exposed to these ecological shocks, which

include food insecurity, water risk and natural disasters.

The report further states that out of what are deemed the 40 least peaceful countries in the world,

almost half are simultaneously perceived to be under the highest threat of ecological disaster.

Similarly, the IDMC

report states that 'disasters often overlap with conflict in certain regions'. Among

these countries, Afghanistan is the most strongly affected by natural hazard displacements, with

1 117 000 people displaced because of climate disasters in 2020. In 2022, Afghanis were the second-

largest group, by nationality, of

asylum seekers in the EU. Indeed, regarding overall displacement

data, climate disasters trigger over three times more displacements than conflict and violence while

also triggering local conflicts or worsening ongoing ones. The drought in Somalia drove people

away from their rural homes to urban areas where they are now at greater risk of eviction and attacks

by armed groups. People who having been forcibly displaced by adverse climate conditions

encounter stigmatisation and violence in the places to which they fled, can fall within the remit of

the 1951 Refugee Convention and be granted legal status and international protection.

Shaping an international legal framework to address the

protection gaps for 'climate refugees'

While the universal human rights treaties do not refer to a specific right to a safe and healthy

environment, the UN human rights treaty bodies all recognise the intrinsic link between the

environment and the realisation of a range of human rights, such as the right to life, health, food,

water and housing.

Under the 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child, states parties must act

appropriately to combat disease and malnutrition 'through the provision of adequate nutritious

foods and clean drinking water, taking into consideration the dangers and risks of environmental

pollution'. Unfortunately, the rights guaranteed by these conventions are difficult to implement. Yet,

consequences associated with climate change include food competition, difficult access to clean

water, water stress and desertification, which exacerbate violence and conflicts that are already

present within tense regions, prompting people to flee. That way, climate change acts as trigger to

migration within countries but also beyond their borders. In April 2021, the UN World Food

Programme (WFP) alerted that southern Madagascar

was on the brink of famine because of long

and successive droughts over the previous 4 years. According to the WFP, the situation had already

displaced

thousands of people due to climate change rather than conflict.

The non-binding 1998 UN Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement provide a framework for

protecting victims of natural disasters who do not cross an international border. In 2009, the Co uncil

of Europe suggested using these principles as a model to develop a global guiding framework for

EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service

the protection of displaced persons crossing international borders because of climate change and

natural disasters.

While these guiding principles still do not cover cross-border displacement, they

were used to draft the Kampala Convention

for the protection and assistance of internally displaced

persons in Africa. Under the convention, complementary forms of protection allow states to provide

protection on human rights grounds for persons facing the prospect of being returned, in cases not

addressed by the 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 protocol. These types of protection are

subsidiary to the refugee status granted under the 1951 Refugee Convention and may vary widely

from one jurisdiction to another. It has also been argued that complementary forms of protection

may be relevant for some people forced to move on a long-term basis or permanently, i.e. when

there is no prospect of return in the long term. In 2008, the O

ffice of the UN High Commissioner for

Human Rights (OHCHR) studied the effects of climate change on human rights and found the need

for progress on three key issues, before a claim could officially be made that climate causes a

violation of human rights:

 obtaining sound proof that one country's greenhouse gas emissions cause a specific

effect on another country;

 showing that the warming of the climate system is unequivocal and that most of the

observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century is very

likely human-induced;

 rethinking the fact that the human rights framework is usually utilised in response to

violations, whereas climate change regulation is concerned with potential future

harm.

Promising developments: Climate litigation through a

human rights lens

Climate change litigation – an emerging body of environmental law – has seen growing traction as

a realistic means of bringing both private and public institutions to court for poor mitigation efforts.

The role of human rights-based arguments in particular has proved fruitful in a handful of recent

ground-breaking cases, as a means for the public to influence policy change and hold governments

accountable for the consequences of climate change. One such case,

Urgenda v The Dutch

Government (2019), became the first tort climate case successfully taken against a government

on the grounds of human rights violations. It was seen that the state had failed to meet minimum

carbon-emissions reduction goals set by experts and scientists, thus endangering its own citizens

under the European Convention of Human Rights (Articles 2 and 8). As a result, the Dutch

government was required to set new, more ambitious emissions reduction goals. Similarly, in 2020

the

Friends of the Irish Environment (FIE) won a case against the Irish government, when it was

found that the government's national mitigation plan was unlawful because it lacked ambition and

failed to comply with the requirements of a preceding climate act. The FIE stressed the human

impact that would occur if the plan was not revised and internationally defined goals were not met

– including the increased risk of fatalities and destruction of people's homes and livelihoods.

Cases like these are slowly transforming the grounds on which climate action can be carried out by

ordinary people. Rights-based torts in an environmental context are now one of the promising new

ways to challenge the sometimes ambiguous or temporally distant negative effects of climate

change and the moral responsibility of governments to protect their citizens from these effects.

Litigation relating more specifically to the short-term consequences of climate change and

displacement has also seen recent advances. In September 2022, the UN Human Rights Committee

based in Geneva found Australia to be guilty of failing to protect the indigenous people of Torres

Island from the already existing consequences of climate change. With their island slowly becoming

submerged, it was found that the island population's fundamental right to be free from interference

in their private life and culture had been breached. The Australian government had failed to provide

adequate short-term solutions in the form of (inter alia) seawalls, and to achieve sufficient progress

in long-term efforts to reduce greenhouse emissions. While these cases serve as encouraging

The concept of 'climate refugee'

human rights-centered legal avenues for those under the direct threat of climate change, the

majority of claims

result in negative outcomes. It also goes without saying that the most vulnerable

to climate disasters and displacement do not have the opportunities or avenues to challenge

governments in the courts.

In 2012, the Nansen initiative, launched by the governments of Norway and Switzerland, appeared

as the first milestone for the recognition and the protection of people externally displaced by

climate-related events. It aimed to fill the legal protection gap regarding the status of people

externally displaced by climate adversities, by building a consensus among states to implement a

protection agenda with standards of treatment. This states-led consultative process established in

October 2015 a non- binding ag

enda for the protection of cross-border displaced persons in the

context of disasters and climate change, endorsed by 109 states. It paved the way for the COP21 of

December 2015, where the Paris Agreement finally acknowledged climate change as a threat to

humankind and a trigger to human mobility.

Building on the endorsement of the protection agenda closing the 2012 Nansen initiative process,

a platform on disaster displacement

– the 'Protection Agenda' – was launched during the

Humanitarian summit of Istanbul in 2016. This platform offers states a toolbox to better prevent and

prepare for displacement before a disaster strikes. When displacement cannot be avoided, it helps

states to improve their responses to situations in which people are forced to find refuge, either

within their own country or across an international border. Rather than calling for a new binding

international convention on cross-border disaster displacement, the Protection Agenda supports

the integration of effective practices by states and (sub-) regional players into their own legal

frameworks, in accordance with their specific context.

After the adoption of the Paris Agreement in 2015, the COPs started addressing the issue of climate

displacement with the aim of building a framework able to prevent migration (see box above).

Hence, in 2017, COP23 developed the InsuResilience Global Partnership

to help the countries

affected by climate disasters in the implementation of infrastructure and programmes in support of

2015 – COP21: The preamble to the Paris Agreement recognises that climate change is a common concern

of humankind. It includes a reference to migrants, asking parties to respect, promote and consider their

respective obligations towards migrants, among others, when taking actions to address climate change. It

also calls on the Executive Committee of the Warsaw International Mechanism (WIM) to prepare a task force

on displacement. In its

decisions, the Conference of the Parties recognises the dangers of displacement

and the fact that climate change is a driver of displacement (paragraph 50).

2017 – COP23: Held in Bonn, Germany, COP23 put together a platform – InsuResilience Global Partnership

for Climate and Disaster Risk Finance and Insurance Solutions – seeking to reduce the humanitarian impact

of climate disasters by helping vulnerable population in their recovery.

2018 – COP24: Held in Katowice, Poland, COP 24 encouraged the parties, in its decision text paragraph 5(b),

to 'continue working on human mobility under strategic workstream through an enhanced cooperation

and facilitation in relation to human mobility, including migration, displacement and planned relocation'.

It also

recommended in its Annex1(c) strengthening 'coordination, coherence and collaboration across

relevant bodies under the Convention and the Paris Agreement, and institutional arrangements, programs

and platforms, with a view to enhancing understanding of human mobility (including migration,

displacement and planned relocation), both internal and cross-border, in the context of climate change, as

they undertake their work, and in collaboration with the Executive Committee'

2021 – COP26: held in Glasgow, Scotland, the COP

sought to establish a preventive framework with

defences, warning systems and resilient infrastructure and agriculture, to respond to loss of homes,

livelihoods and lives caused by climate disasters, and in that way to prevent climate-induced migration.

2022 – COP27: held in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, the COP reached a breakthrough agreement on establishing

a new loss and damage fund for countries most vulnerable to disasters attributed to climate change, where

forced displacement was successfully recognised as a form of 'loss'. The event also hosted the launch of the

Climate Mobility Pavilion – a forum created by the Global Centre for Climate Mobility as a space dedicated

to discussions on policy solutions for climate mobility and displacement.

EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service

populations – victim of climate hazard, notably through financial help, insurance, resilience

programmes, regional collaboration and coordination. In 2018, both COP24 and the UN Global

compact for safe, orderly and regular migration framework recognised climate change as a driver of

human mobility. COP24 took up the commitment made in the Paris Agreement to fight climate

change, and for the first time a series of measures

was proposed to address the situation of people

affected adversely by climate change.

Furthermore, the COP24 framed a discussion to accompany

both home and host states with the displacement of people due to climate disasters. Later, the 2018

Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration also included climate migration in its

second objective.

It is evident from all the above that so far, it is not the legal status of climate-displaced persons that

has been addressed, but rather, the root causes of their displacement to prevent the massive climate

migration waves forecast for 2050. As can be seen above, though the Nansen initiative has paved

the way for new possibilities for the recognition of people who have been externally displaced due

to climate, a legal void regarding their status remains.

How the coronavirus pandemic worsened the condition of

climate-displaced people

Although the forced movement of people might have been expected to subside during the

pandemic, human mobility flows relating to climate disasters increased in regions such as sub-

Saharan Africa, Europe and Central Asia. IDMC

estimates reveal that the 30.7 million displacements

registered in 2020 made it the year with the highest level of displacements linked to climate since

2010. Yet, some

climate-disaster affected people chose to stay in their vulnerable homes rather than

risk being infected by the virus in migrant camps with poor sanitation. In September 2020, a fire

destroyed the Moria camp in the Greek island of Lesvos, displacing 12 000 people and illustrating

the vulnerability of migrants living in camps on the EU's borders. The ongoing pandemic at the time

made it all the more difficult and complex to offer a swift and safe response.

Following the devastating earthquake in Croatia on 28 December 2020, which left 8 people dead

and 2 000 displaced, fears that this would lead to an increase in COVID-19 infections materialised:

two out of the six temporary shelters, housing 487 people, were placed under quarantine. The

pandemic and related border restrictions made it harder to seek assistance, especially for vulnerable

people fleeing their homes due to climate calamities or hazards but not qualifying for refugee status.

The EU response to 'climate refugees'

In the 2019 European Green Deal initiative, the European Commission recognised climate change

as a trigger of migration and of other sources of instability such as conflicts, food insecurity and

population displacement. Climate has been acknowledged several times by both the European

Commission and the

European Parliament as a catalyst for migration. The number of climate

migrants is expected to rise to between 25 million and 1 billion by 2050 if the issue is not properly

addressed. Since 1994, the European Parliament Intergroup on Climate Change, Biodiversity and

Sustainable Development has brought together Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) from

all political groups and parliamentary committees to find sustainable solutions to some of the

greatest challenges of our time. In its

resolution of 15 June 2023, the Parliament called for 15 July to

be designated the EU day for the victims of the global climate crisis, as of 2023, in order to raise

awareness of the human lives lost and the humanitarian crisis caused by climate change. However,

although many developing countries have urged the EU to afford climate migrants the status of

refugees, individual EU Member States have not supported the idea. The EU has so far addressed

the root causes of climate migration, advocating through the Green Deal for better global climate

policies and for regional development programmes to reduce the impact of climate change on

already vulnerable regions and populations.

The concept of 'climate refugee'

In 2018, the European Commission made a proposal to address the main causes of irregular

migration, namely underdevelopment, demography, lack of opportunities, climate change and

inequality, through the establishment of an asylum, migration and integration fund. Link ed t o this

proposal is the new pact on migration and asylum, published in September 2020, seeking to protect

refugee status and to propose better integration of rightful immigrants. However, this new pact

does not address climate change as a recognised reason for migration or list it as a fair motive for

seeking asylum. It is therefore difficult to draw any solid conclusions regarding the legal status of

'climate refugees' based on the main EU instruments on migration. In 2020, the European Economic

and Social Committee (EESC) highlighted the lack of an accurate definition of climate migration,

which obstructs efforts to properly measure the proportions of the problem and address it. Du ring

this hearing, Isabel Borges stressed that there is no comprehensive framework to address the

climate migration issue. 'Environmental displacement has to be seen as a human rights issue and

there should be a rights-based approach', Borges maintained.

With environmental degradation due to climate change proving to be an ever-increasing problem

closer to home, the EU may start viewing climate migration not only from the viewpoint of a territory

receiving displaced people from abroad but also as one where climate displacement occurs

internally. To achieve the goal of climate neutrality by 2050, the European Green Deal and

subsequent COPs have focused primarily on tackling the 'root causes' of climate change. However,

the EU may increasingly be prompted to explore other avenues and policy initiatives for climate

change mitigation, especially when emissions reductions are not happening rapidly enough.

Falling under the broad umbrella of environmental degradation, biodiversity loss has a significant

negative impact on our planet's ability to protect itself and its inhabitants from the consequences

of climate change. Biodiversity loss and climate change are deeply mutually enforced,

interconnected by the direct impact they have on one another. This is recognised in the proposed

regulation on a nature restoration law

, on which the European Parliament adopted amendments on

12 July 2023. In its resolution on the vote, Parliament stated that the regulation is a key step in

avoiding ecosystem collapse and preventing the worst impacts of climate change and biodiversity

loss. Implementation of the

EU's biodiversity strategy for 2030 is also underway, with a core

objective of increasing resilience against the negative effects of climate change. While the legal

status of 'climate refugees' remains an issue in and of itself, a more holistic approach to climate

change mitigation that includes biodiversity restoration, among other things, might ultimately

tackle the overarching causes of climate displacement more effectively.

Outlook

According to the IPCC, to keep the global temperature rise under 1.5

C or 2

C by 2050,

approximately 10 gigatonnes of net CO

per year need to be removed. If the initiatives proposed by

the IPCC and as discussed above serve as catalysts for sustainable and implementable solutions, the

displacement of millions of people could be avoided by 2050, and their living conditions could at

least be stabilised if not improved. It is however imperative to also understand and address climate

displacement as a short-term challenge. Hence, a treaty based on the Nansen initiative, considering

its 10 principles, could perhaps address the legal gap as regards the status of persons moving as a

result of climate hazards in the short and medium term. The EU could lead by example, by

establishing, for a start, a European framework of rights for people forcibly displaced owing to

climate hazards, envisaging, among other things, proper and timely remedial action in support of

the victims of climate disasters. Further to COP27 in Egypt and the concrete initiatives adopted to

support victims of climate change, COP28, which will take place from 30 November to

12 December 2023 in Dubai, will look into ways to ensure a just and balanced energy transition

that

spurs the switch from fossil fuels to renewables while keeping costs in check.

EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service

MAIN REFERENCES

Bilak A. et al., Global Report on Internal Displacement 2021, Internal Displacement Monitoring Center

2021.

De Smedt K. and Faure M., Compensation for victims of climate change disasters, Policy Department C,

Directorate-General for Internal Policies, European Parliament, July 2023.

Hinkel J. et al., Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate, Intergovernmental

Panel on Climate Change, 2019.

Kraler A. et al, Climate Change and Migration, Policy Department C, Directorate-General for Internal

Policies, European Parliament, 2020.

McAdam J. and Limon M., Human rights, Climate change and cross-border displacement: the role of the

international human rights community in contributing to effective and just solutions, Universal Rights

Group, 2015.

Walsh B. et al., The cost of doing nothing, International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent

Societies, 2019.

ENDNOTES

See, Bonnie Docherty & Tyler Giannini, Symposium: Confronting a Rising Tide: A Proposal for a Climate Refugee Treaty,

33 Harvard EVITL L. Rev. 349, 372, 385 (2009).

The report predicts a sharp increase in forced migration and conflict as a result. Afghanistan, South Sudan, Syria,

Ethiopia and the Democratic Republic of the Congo experienced the highest levels of internal displacement, while

developed countries can expect to see an expanding influx of climate refugees forced to leave their homeland.

ILO Convention No 169 (1989) concerning Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries provides for

special protection of the environment of the areas that indigenous peoples occupy or otherwise use. At the regional

level, the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights and the San Salvador Protocol to the American Convention

on Human Rights recognise the right to live in a healthy or satisfactory environment. Moreover, many national

constitutions refer to a right to an environment of a certain quality.

See Resolution 1862 (2009) of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, point 6.5, which states 'encourage

the United Nations and its other relevant partners to seek avenues for extending the Guiding Principles to include

people displaced by gradual environmental degradation, and to consider developing similar guiding principles or

guidelines to cover the rights of those moving across international borders for compelling environmental reasons

(''external displacement'')'.

The EU and scores of developing countries have pledged to toughen their existing commitments to reduce

greenhouse gas emissions, to enable the world to stay within a 1.5°C rise in global warming.

DISCLAIMER AND COPYR

IGHT

This document is prepared for, and addressed to, the Members and staff of the European Parliament as

background material to assist them in their parliamentary work. The content of the document is the sole

responsibility of its author(s) and any opinions expressed herein should not be taken to represent an official

position of the Parliament.

Reproduction and translation for non

commercial purposes are authorised, provided the source is

acknowledged and the European Parliament is given prior notice and sent a copy.

Photo

eprs@ep.europa.eu (contact)

www.eprs.ep.parl.union.eu

(intranet)

www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank

(internet)

http://epthinktank.eu

(blog)