Making of Modern-Day Climate Refugees

Article published in the August 2024 Newsletter of the Global Smart Grid Federation.

In earlier articles, I have written about climate change and its impact on our lives and livelihood. This article examines climate change in the context of people’s movement as lives become untenable. This mass movement will give rise to challenges unheard of and will need new definitions and policies at the United Nation, World Bank and national governments.

?As I assume my new part-time/on-call technical expert role at the Coalition for Disaster Resilience Infrastructure (CDRI), www.cdri.world (40 countries and several multilateral institutions) together with my continuing “Ambassadorial” role (6.5 years now) at the Global Smart Energy Federation (GSEF) www.globalsmartenergy.org, I often reflect on how climate change and its impact on humanity, is being repeatedly treated as disaster management and not as an endemic problem in need of a sustained solution.

?Climate Change has brought on various dimensions unheard of even a decade ago. Such dimensions include (a) abnormal weather conditions (floods, rain, snow, hurricanes, wildfires, etc.); (b) increased financial burden (expensive insurance and repairs); (c) infrastructure damages (roads, bridges, power/water supply); and (d) untenable livelihood (misery, health issues, hopelessness). While all four are interrelated, one or more can be the dominant force which results in people’s resolve to move or resettle elsewhere.

?One often associates climate change and human misery with poorer nations in Asia, Central/South America and Africa. These are victims of floods, landslides and/or drought. Due to their nation’s poor resources, very little is done other than managing the incident as a natural disaster. Soon all is forgotten, and the people move back. Life goes on until the next incident occurs.

?Strangely, this emergency-style approach is happening in developed nations as well (floods, hurricanes, wildfires). Many nations in the EU and many states (provinces) in the USA/Canada, despite their better financial resources and technological capabilities, still treat climate change disasters as emergency operations/restoration. Once normalcy returns it is assumed the local population will return to its original livelihood again, have adequate home insurance and people’s bank accounts can cover these restorations. Apart from timely and better disaster management, developed nations are as short-sighted to climate change disasters as their fellow poorer nations.

?The principal difference post disaster is that for people in poorer nations, it is their complete loss of livelihood with no fallback provisions, while in developed nations, it is creeping financial burden (high insurance, repairs, and ever-increasing utility upgrade tariffs). More the frequency of such extreme weather incidents, the more untenable life becomes.

?In South/Southeast USA, hurricane insurance premiums have increased manifold or even withdrawn. In Florida, condominium reserve fees are being hiked astronomically (USD thousands per month) to shore up major building restoration reserves, leading to diminishing property values and owner despair. In western USA and Canada, wildfires have been torching communities to almost destruction. The USA island of Puerto Rico is yet to recover from hurricane devastations from years ago, while still getting pummeled every year. The EU countries have seen a spate of urban floods and mud-rivers in small towns. Again, despite timely disaster management efforts, expensive restoration is hurting people’s financial abilities. More events will lead to poorer communities.

?All this is leading to the making of modern-day climate refugees in one’s own country. Sustained government actions are needed to prevent such migration. Yesterday’s well-established policies do not serve tomorrow’s climate change human misery. The question is what new policy measures would serve and protect local vulnerable communities and what policy alerts can be provided to warn future climate consequences. I offer a few suggestions (below):

?1.?????? Amend National Policies to be Region specific: Examples would include Federal and State provisions for resilient designs, construction, restoration and critical infrastructure. Planning disaster shelters and emergency healthcare should become more region specific and locally relevant.

?2.?????? Redefine utility mandates in climate critical areas: All critical infrastructure owners/operators (water, gas, electricity and transportation) both public & private, serving climate critical areas, need their charters redefined to include “duty to ensure continued emergency services with adequate climate resilience”. This will ensure changes to critical systems, architecture, design & construction methods for both new and upgrades. Low-cost alternative solutions must be encouraged rather than the methods of 70 years ago.

?3.?????? Introduce Federal/State Disaster Insurance:? Home insurance is now less affordable or has been withdrawn by private insurers in severe weather prone areas. These include higher categories of hurricanes, floods, wildfires, landslides. Due to this, home rebuilding efforts are stalled. The government must provide a last resort insurance backstop for residents to rebuild their lives.

?4.?????? Shape national discourse through critical risk maps: The scientific discourse on global 1.5 deg C or 2 deg C temperature rise, or GHG emissions, do not resonate within local communities. They need to know how climate change will impact their local livelihood. Existing maps relating to temperature, flood, fire, snow, sea-rise, etc. are outdated and need a 30-year projection to categorize the upcoming risks for local communities. This will enable long-term preparedness in a better infrastructure.

?5.?????? Prepare residents for calamities: Generic tutorials and emergency kits need to be tailored towards specific local risks and demographics. Community plans need to be in place to safeguard people, their property, their health, and survival.

Social sciences point out that human migratory movement to escape misery comes after enduring a lot of pain and suffering (often a few generations). The human tendency is to maintain the status quo and hope for a return to normalcy. But once the movement starts, it cannot be easily controlled nor rationally mitigated. So, it is in the government’s best interest to manage such eventualities through information sharing and adequate safeguards.

Refugees are often associated with poor and war-torn nations. However, in developed countries there is a risk of “modern day climate refugees” being created, wherein migration from climate risk areas will begin due to financial hardships, poor municipal support and short-sighted government policies. ???

?Unusual times call for unusual actions. Both the rich and the poor are in this together.

?

?