Protection pathways for climate displaced persons

What current international, regional and national protection frameworks exist for climate-displaced IDPs and cross-border migrants and refugees in the context of climatic and environmental change? What obligations do such frameworks impose on states? Which legal gaps prevail for the human rights, refugee and IDP protection of climate-displaced persons, what are the consequences of such gaps and what protection approaches are being taken to respond to these gaps???

This week, participants of the International School on Climate Mobilities (ISCM) unpacked these questions, diving into the Week 4 theme: Protection Politics: Climate Mobility, Human Rights and Refugee Law.??

ISCM Week 4 Summary?

Frontline expert, Mr. Vishal Prasad , opened our lecture this week, followed by a panel discussion between Prof. Jane McAdam , Mr. Atle Solberg , Prof. Ademola Oluborode Jegede and Prof. Patricia Grazziotin Noschang . Through their presentations, visiting experts offered insights into the existing pathways for legal and humanitarian protection in the context of climate-related and disaster displacement, including under national, regional and international migration and human rights law. Deep diving into questions on legal protection in the context of climate-related (im)mobilities, ISCM participants engaged in enlivening seminar sessions, hosted by Dr. Matthew Scott and Prof. Camila Bustos , where they unpacked challenges and opportunities for protection in situations of cross-border?migration.?

Leveraging a toolbox of policy options and legal solutions??

Vishal Prasad kicked off the session by shining light on the ongoing efforts of Pacific Island Students Fighting Climate Change to seek an advisory opinion regarding states’ obligations to prevent climate change and their consequences for breaching these obligations from the International Court of Justice. Highlighting that advisory opinions like this one, which links climate change and human rights, are critical for pushing countries to increase their ambition both domestically and at the international negotiating table, Mr. Prasad advanced the crucial role of young people in the fight against climate change, providing several avenues to get involved. ?

Jane McAdam advocated that legal responses to disaster displacement should include protection for those who prefer to stay in place, those who desire to move in anticipation of harm, and persons who are displaced. Rather than fighting to create new refugee or human rights law principles, Prof. McAdam argued we should work towards equipping advocates and judges to apply existing legal principles to the novel facts brought about by climate change and, in the process, dynamically update the law so that it lives up to its promise of being a living instrument of protection.??

Atle Solberg urged us to consider a toolbox of policy options and legal solutions that promote resilience in the face of disasters, beginning with adaptation measures that allow individuals to stay in place. In cases where people are unable to stay, Mr. Solberg highlighted several humanitarian protection measures available, including: regular migration law; exceptional migration measures such as temporary protection visas; the application of international human rights law; free movement of persons mechanisms; and, lastly, the exceptional use of refugee law.?

Ademola Jegede reminded us of the transboundary nature and disproportionate effects of climate change, making the case for multi-scalar solutions across systems of national, regional and international governance. Significantly, he outlined the ‘twin drivers’ of climate-related (im)mobilities as 1) mobility driven by environmental stressors, and 2) mobility driven by climate change response measures such as?REDD+. Prof. Jegede offered insights into climate mobility in the African legal context under the African Charter, the Kampala Convention, the UN Refugee Convention and the OAU Refugee Convention, highlighting the potential for extraterritorial obligations which can serve as a legal basis for protecting those who are forced to cross borders due to climate change. ?

Patricia Noschang rounded out the panel with an overview of climate-related mobility in the Inter-American human rights protection system.?She highlighted growing legal recognition for climate displaced persons and state obligations towards persons on the move in the context of climate change under the?ongoing Cartagena Process. Prof. Noschang welcomed the groundbreaking Decision T-123/2024 of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Colombia that calls for the implementation of risk management policies through a human rights approach and with due regard for environmental displacement prevention. Speaking to the cohort from Rio Grande do Sul, she shared images of the recent, devastating floods that have impacted more than 1.9 million people since April, pointing to shortcomings in policy and preparedness, such as the absence of evacuation and adaptation plans within the state, as well as lack of communication culture around disasters. ?

Exploring the interplay between legal frameworks, policy, and advocacy?

In our discussions, ISCM participants were able to explore the application of various legal frameworks to specific lived experiences, and, in doing so, thought creatively about the interplay between law and policy and the strategic avenues for expanding legal protections.?

Matthew Scott highlighted that the legal tools and frameworks necessary for protecting those impacted by climate change differ based on whether they are internal or cross-border migrants. Guiding us through various international legal frameworks, Dr. Scott encouraged the cohort to think through various forms of responsibility across actors in the displacement protection sector; what a human rights-based approach to climate-related displacement should look like; and how can interactions between legal and policy frameworks be used to expand protections.?

Camila Bustos challenged us to critically investigate the ways in which legal frameworks can hinder or facilitate protection for (im)mobile persons in the context of climate change and disasters. Providing an overview of climate-related mobility under international law, she encouraged the cohort to reflect on the meaning of ‘protection’ in the context of climate mobility and why some are more protected than others. Drawing on her work in Gramalote, Colombia, Prof. Bustos provoked us to unpack why we have a legal regime of protection that leads to tragedy after tragedy, leading ISCM participants to consider climate mobility governance within a context of rising xenophobia and nationalism through the lenses of solidarity, and even, interpersonal relations. ?

Here are some of our key takeaways from the week:???

Key Takeaways?

1) Large-scale forced displacement is not inevitable.??

Whether and how people move in response to the impacts of climate change will be dependent on the policy choices that governments make now and into the future.??

2) Climate-related displacement only becomes an international protection issue when resilience-building efforts fail.??

Ideally, we wouldn’t need to approach climate-related human mobility as an international protection issue if there were concerted efforts to enhance resilience and create opportunities for people to move in a safe, orderly and dignified manner.??

3) In the absence of clear international legal frameworks to protect climate displaced persons, states have used and can use a variety of tools and policy options to afford legal protection.??

While many people who cross international borders related to the impacts of climate change, disasters and environmental degradation are not protected, depending on how we apply existing principles under international and regional migration and human rights law, some are. In practice, states have used and can use tools a variety of tools under migration and human rights law, as well as regional free movement mechanisms. ?

How can we continue to shape the law to protect those impacted by climate change??

How can we strategically utilize current legal frameworks in human rights and refugee law to protect persons on the move in the context of climate change and disasters? What novel legal concepts should be incorporated into our advocacy? And what are the shortcomings of leveraging law and policy for protection? This week left the ISCM cohort in agreement about the importance of legal frameworks to govern climate-related (im)mobilities and frustrated by their shortcomings and slow pace. Reflecting on how we are all situated within normative legal frameworks that consequentially govern our sense of belonging, we concluded the week by questioning what we can do in our everyday lives as we show up in the world to disrupt the ‘us’/’them’ logics at the heart of un/belonging and climate mobility governance. ??

?

Gabriela Nagle Alverio and Lauren Grant?

The ISCM is an educational initiative, co-hosted by Earth Refuge and SOAS University of London that brings scholars, academics, practitioners and change-makers together with 40+ visiting experts for a six-week online course to unpack climate-related (im)mobilities through the lenses of decolonial, feminist and critical environmental justice.??

Guided by the vision of a more resilient, just and sustainable world for all, the ISCM offers emerging leaders a platform to engage in knowledge and idea exchange to advance timely, creative, cross-sectoral solutions to the climate change, environmental in/justice and (im)mobilities nexus.??

Learn more about the ISCM.?

?

?

?