News

Aug 12, 2023

USCRI Policy and Advocacy Report: Volume 6

World + 16 more CONTENTS Policy Brief Climate-Related Displacement: Potential Protections in U.S. Policy Monday, July 3, 2023, was the hottest day on record. This milestone, measured by the U.S.

World + 16 more

CONTENTS

Policy Brief

Climate-Related Displacement: Potential Protections in U.S. Policy

Monday, July 3, 2023, was the hottest day on record. This milestone, measured by the U.S. National Centers for Environmental Prediction, lasted only one day— with Tuesday, July 4, surpassing it for the highest average global air temperature recorded. The World Meteorological Organization labeled the first week of July as the “hottest week on record” alongside “unprecedented sea surface temperatures and record low Antarctic sea ice.” Consecutive days of record-breaking heat prompted renewed alarm about the current pace of climate change, which United Nations (UN) Secretary General António Guterres this month called “out of control.”

Climate change poses direct and indirect challenges to almost every aspect of human security, from public health and food security to political stability and communal cohesion. Climate-related disasters exacerbate pre-existing vulnerabilities, often driving people from their homes in search of safety or sustainable livelihoods. Environmental migration is not a new phenomenon, and migration is often a necessary adaptation measure in the face of climate-related threats. But displacement from climate change is already a major trend that raises existential questions about the current domestic and international models of protection for displaced people and their rights.

On June 21, the Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration (PRM) in the U.S. Department of State announced new details of its approach to climate change and its effects on migration and displacement. “The impacts of climate change are increasing the need to strengthen safe, orderly, humane, and regular migration management and to expand access to protection for displaced populations,” according to the PRM statement. It represented one of the more public facing statements on climate-related displacement from the Biden administration since its October 2021 White House report on the impacts of climate change on migration.

This report examines the latest trends in climate-related displacement. It discusses the lack of domestic and international protections for climate displaced persons and how some states are beginning to act with varying degrees of success. The report concludes with domestic policy recommendations from the U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants (USCRI) and how they fit into a broader understanding of climate justice.

Climate extremes ‘increasingly driving displacement’

Climate-related displacement can take many forms but has some common underlying characteristics. Climate-related events can be sudden-onset or slow-onset. Sudden-onset disasters include floods and storms such as hurricanes, cyclones, and typhoons. Slow-onset events include more gradual changes in the natural environment. Some of the most recognizable trends tied to climate change— sometimes described as “too much water or too little” of it— include droughts and sea level rise. But other slow-onset trends are also associated with climate change and clearly undermine living conditions for individuals and communities, such as desertification, ocean acidification, salinization of groundwater supplies, glacial melt, or permafrost thaw.

Climate-related disasters do not occur in a vacuum when they cause and contribute to displacement. Climate-related displacement often occurs in a context of fragility and underlying social vulnerabilities. The adverse effects of climate change and disasters are often exacerbated by other factors such as “poor governance, undermining public order; scarce natural resources, fragile ecosystems, demographic changes, socio-economic inequality, xenophobia, and political and religious tensions.” Across continents, climate- related disasters often hit the most vulnerable groups in society the hardest.

Climate risks also often intersect, amplify, and exacerbate pre-existing persecution and rights abuses, like extortion from non-state armed groups or persecution of Indigenous populations. USCRI, the International Refugee Assistance Project (IRAP), and Human Security Initiative (HUMSI) detailed in a joint research report in March that Mexican, Guatemalan, Honduran, and Salvadoran asylum seekers reaching the United States-Mexico border between Tijuana and San Ysidro frequently faced climate-related impacts from droughts, storms, floods, and extreme heat in their home communities. These conditions resulted in business closures and livelihood shocks making these individuals more vulnerable and exposed to gang-related extortion and threats of violence.

Climate-related displacement most often involves internal displacement and movement within countries— although people do cross international borders after climate-related shocks. The Internal Displacement Monitoring Center recorded 32.6 million internal displacements in 2022 associated with disasters— many of them related to climate change such as floods or droughts. More than 1.1 million internal displacements were recorded last year in drought-ravaged Somalia amid another failed rainy season. Floods in northern South Sudan routinely displace thousands of people. In Central America, hurricanes, tropical storms, droughts, and El Niño and La Niña weather pattern changes continue to force people out of their home communities in climate-vulnerable countries such as Guatemala.

Climate and weather extremes are increasingly driving displacement in Africa, Asia, North America, Central America, and South America, “with small island states in the Caribbean and the South Pacific being disproportionately affected relative to their small population size,” according to the Climate Change 2023 Synthesis Report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

The results are clear: climate-related displacement is not some sort of future specter, but an ongoing phenomenon already occurring across the world.

Limits of international protection

The 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol form the bedrock of the modern international protection system for displaced people and their rights under international humanitarian law. Individuals qualify as refugees if they have fled their country of origin due to persecution or well-founded fears of persecution on the basis of their race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion.

The 1969 OAU Convention and 1984 Cartagena Declaration extend the refugee definition to those fleeing “events seriously disturbing public order,” prompting some consideration of whether climate-related disasters would fall under that purview.

For its part, the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) assesses that people fleeing in the context of the adverse effects of climate change and climate-related disasters may have valid claims for refugee status under the 1951 Convention. Claims for international protection “should not focus narrowly on the climate change event or disaster as solely primarily natural hazards,” UNHCR noted in a 2020 review on the legal considerations of climate displacement. “Such a narrow focus might fail to recognize the social and political characteristics of the effects of climate change or the impacts of disasters or their interaction with other drivers of displacement.”

However, to be clear, those displaced by climate change “do not have formal status under current international refugee law” on account of their climate-related displacement alone— meaning there is “no international legal framework” for international relocation in the context of the changing climate. Persecution or well-founded fears of persecution on protected grounds remain the basis for valid refugee claims. As such, UNHCR, the International Organization for Migration (IOM) and other experts t­­­end to avoid using the terms “climate refugees” or “environmental refugees” for causing potential confusion between refugee status based on persecution and displacement on account of climate change.

As the Refugee Act of 1980 features the UN’s refugee definition from the 1951 Convention and its 1967 Protocol, there is currently no formal status available in the United States specifically for individuals displaced by climate change. Temporary Protected Status (TPS) offers protection from removal and work authorization for nationals of countries that are affected by conflict, environmental disasters, and other extraordinary and temporary conditions that prevent safe and voluntary returns. TPS has been designated for countries hit by climate-related disasters, such as Central American countries Honduras and Nicaragua after Hurricane Mitch in 1998. Some of the world’s most climate-vulnerable countries have also been designated for TPS for civil conflict in their territories, such as Somalia, Afghanistan, and Ethiopia. However, TPS has its limits in that it only offers temporary protection in increments of up to 18 months and is only available to nationals who are already physically present in the United States.

Other approaches

In the vacuum of no international legal framework for climate-related displacement, states have explored their own programs to offer protection to displaced individuals:

Argentina

Disposición DNM N° 891/2022 was launched in May 2022 by Argentina’s National Immigration Directorate (DNM, as its Spanish acronym) and is considered one of the leading state-led initiatives to respond to climate-related displacement.

This special humanitarian visa program grants admission and a temporary visa for certain individuals based on humanitarian grounds under Argentina’s Immigration Act No. 25 871 for up to three years with the possibility of transitioning to permanent resident status.

Nationals or residents of 23 Central American and Caribbean states are eligible for the visa if they were affected by a sudden-onset, socio-natural disaster. According to Article 4 of the program, applicants can be identified by UNHCR or IOM and referred to DNM within 120 calendar days from the declared disaster.

Andrés Pérez Esquivel, the director of international affairs at DNM, said in a Georgetown University event last year that beneficiaries will be able to gain access to housing and other support for one year through a civil society organization sponsoring them and accompanying their process of integration and autonomy.

As of June 2023, this visa route has not been used.

Colombia

A legislative proposal in Colombia would legally recognize climate-related internal displacement within the country.

The bill states that “forced internal displacement due to causes associated with climate change and environmental degradation is understood as forced mobility of a person, families, or social groups who are forced to move from their territory, abandoning their place of habitual residence, family and social nucleus, their economic activity and/or means of subsistence as a result of or to avoid the effects of natural disasters or climate change.”

As observers note, this definition is deliberately expansive by trying to capture the effects of climate change on economic activity and means of subsistence for vulnerable populations.

The nonprofit Climate Refugees notes that the bill would give individuals internally displaced by the effects of climate change priority access to housing, health services, and education. The organization also praised the expansive definition of climate displacement in the bill “from families fleeing sudden events such as hurricanes to slow-onset events like drought and environmental degradation, situations that are increasingly forcing farmers to move due to crop failure and food insecurity.”

The bill was first introduced in November 2022. A legislative backgrounder on the bill and its draft text in Spanish can be found here. The bill has passed the first debate of four it will need to become law in Colombia.

Past attempts in New Zealand, Australia, and Brazil

The Center for Global Development (CGD) notes that other efforts to expand protections to climate displaced persons have faced challenges.

In 2017, New Zealand announced an “experimental” humanitarian visa category for Pacific Islanders displaced by climate change. The plan was dropped shortly thereafter, in part, because small island developing states (SIDS) in the region wanted to focus on climate change mitigation instead of immigration pathways.

Australia reportedly considered a similar visa program in 2007, but the plan did not move forward after “criticism regarding the difficultly of defining the eligible populations.” Similarly, Brazil’s 2017 Migration Law— to allow those displaced by natural disasters to access humanitarian reception through temporary visas— has not taken effect due to definitional and admission criteria questions.

“Humanitarian pathways are few and challenging,” CGD bluntly summarizes in its omnibus review of climate change and migration for development practitioners and policymakers. “While some humanitarian pathways are being created for those affected by sudden-onset disasters, people affected by slow-onset disasters are more numerous and have little recourse. New approaches are necessary.”

Policy recommendations

The United States has the capacity to aid those affected by climate-related disasters, as demonstrated in the domestic response to crises in Afghanistan and Ukraine. It is in the humanitarian and national security interests of the United States for individuals affected by climate change to have access to safe, legal avenues to pursue international protection, including for resettlement in the United States.

To that end, USCRI recommends:

A dedicated climate-specific protection and resettlement pathway: People affected by climate-related disasters may be able to leave their countries of origin through other existing pathways. As previously discussed, those affected by climate disasters may be eligible for protection through an existing humanitarian pathway like third-country resettlement. Labor migration pathways are frequently discussed in climate change adaptation research and literature for their value in facilitating cross-border movement from regions and states affected by climate change, particularly when it comes to remittances.

However, pathways based on political or economic considerations do not capture the clear humanitarian nature of climate-related displacement. An ideal and appropriate policy response to this phenomenon would feature a specific mechanism or program to facilitate resettlement, rather than the ad-hoc application of pathways or protections for displacement on other grounds.

“The United States does have a national interest in creating a new legal pathway for individualized humanitarian protection in the United States for individuals who establish that they are fleeing serious, credible threats to their life or physical integrity, including as a result of the direct or indirect impacts of climate change,” according to the White House’s 2021 report on climate change and migration. “This new legal pathway should be additive to and in no way infringe upon or detract from existing protection pathways to the United States, including asylum and refugee resettlement.”

Sen. Ed Markey of Massachusetts and Rep. Nydia Velásquez of New York in 2021 introduced a bill to establish a new visa pathway for climate displaced persons. While any legislative proposal establishing such a pathway faces an uphill climb in the 118th Congress, this type of legislation retains value in pressing for a systematic response to climate-related displacement with a regular, regulated pathway established by Congress and not administrative fiat.

Use of the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program: In the absence of a new climate-specific protection pathway, existing pathways have some promise in the United States’ humanitarian response to climate-related displacement. In fact, PRM highlighted protection in its June 21 statement as one of the principal objectives of its approach to climate change, in order to “strengthen and expand protection of refugees, conflict victims, internally displaced persons (IDPs), stateless persons, and migrants in situations of vulnerability affected by climate change, including through the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program.” (emphasis added)

The U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) is the United States’ flagship system for welcoming individuals fleeing persecution in their countries of origin, resettling more than 3.4 million refugees since its inception. The USRAP includes processing priorities to distinguish who may be eligible to access the program.

Priority 2 designations reflect a judgement that a group of individuals is of special humanitarian concern to the United States. Refugee resettlement agencies and advocacy organizations including USCRI believe Priority 2 designations could be used to target specific groups of refugees who are also vulnerable to the effects of climate change—either in conjunction with their underlying persecution or after their flight to a third country.

South Sudan is a prime example. Thousands of South Sudanese refugees fled their country’s devastating civil war beginning in 2013 to neighboring countries. South Sudanese resettled in a camp in Sudan’s White Nile state that was hit by crippling floods in 2021. South Sudanese refugees have been further displaced by the ongoing crisis in Sudan, with more than 130,000 South Sudanese refugee returnees crossing back into South Sudan. A Priority 2 designation of South Sudanese refugees and returnees would target a particularly climate-vulnerable group that clearly meets the threshold for special humanitarian concern.

Through the new Priority 4 designation, the Welcome Corps private sponsorship program could also serve refugees affected by climate-related disasters, particularly during the program’s second phase when specific refugees are identified and referred to USRAP for resettlement. It is clear Welcome Corps will be used to offer USRAP referral to specific refugees in line with organizations’ missions, such as educational institutions joining the “Welcome Corps on Campus” initiative to sponsor refugee students. With heightened civil society attention on the climate crisis, recruitment organizations and private sponsor organizations supporting the Welcome Corps could target their Phase 2 efforts to refer refugees to USRAP whose persecution overlapped with climate-related disasters or remain in climate-vulnerable settings.

Temporary Protected Status designations, reforms: Despite its limits, TPS still has value as an established program of protection in the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).

In corresponding Federal Register Notices, TPS designations, redesignations, and extensions should normalize the role of climate change in exacerbating temporary and extraordinary conditions that prevent safe and voluntary returns of a designated country’s nationals.

As the White House report in 2021 suggested, the TPS statute could also be amended to remove the requirement that foreign governments must request the designation in cases of an “environmental disaster.” This change could heighten the centrality of humanitarian concerns in reaching TPS verdicts and minimize political considerations that otherwise affect TPS decision-making.

Conclusion

In the book “Storming the Wall: Climate Change, Migration, and Homeland Security,” author Todd Miller chronicles the plight of climate-vulnerable communities in the Philippines, Honduras, Mexico, and elsewhere. Miller contrasts the humanitarian dimensions of climate-related displacement with what is often the primary policy response of border militarization and fortification that relies upon interdiction, arrest, incarceration, and deportation. “One of the most reliable forecasts of our collective future is that vast numbers of people will be on the move, and vast numbers of agents will be trained, armed, and paid to stop them,” Miller wrote.

This path— ever harsher deterrence policies combined with limited access to humanitarian protection— is a choice. It is not an inevitable policy direction from a changing climate. It is a choice that violates our humanitarian principles and does not achieve its own central goals of prevention through deterrence. Across populations or crises, it is often the absence of safe and legal protection pathways that force the most vulnerable toward unforgiving terrain, into illicit networks, and onto dangerous routes. In the face of a daunting climate crisis, the time has come for new and expanded pathways to aid those displaced by climate disasters.

Pathways and protections for climate-displaced persons should be expanded in conjunction with corresponding progress in climate mitigation efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, climate finance mechanisms to cover Loss and Damage (L&D), and climate adaptation measures like climate-resilient infrastructure and early warning systems. This holistic approach boosts the agency of those most affected by climate change and supports their efforts to remain resilient in the face of climate-related shocks.

USCRI will continue to advocate for legal pathways and protections to respond to the displacement and migration impacts of climate change. It will also continue to study policy issues specific to climate vulnerable populations, such as previously displaced groups affected by the crisis in Sudan and small island developing states including the Federated States of Micronesia, the Marshall Islands, and Palau.

This report is part of USCRI’s ongoing policy and advocacy work highlighting strengths and weaknesses in existing U.S. and international policy toward migration from climate-affected countries and possible policies or models to pursue in response.