* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Climate Induced Migration - The International Journal of Climate
Global warming controversy wikipedia , lookup
Michael E. Mann wikipedia , lookup
Climatic Research Unit email controversy wikipedia , lookup
2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference wikipedia , lookup
Climate change feedback wikipedia , lookup
Global warming wikipedia , lookup
Soon and Baliunas controversy wikipedia , lookup
German Climate Action Plan 2050 wikipedia , lookup
Fred Singer wikipedia , lookup
Heaven and Earth (book) wikipedia , lookup
Climatic Research Unit documents wikipedia , lookup
ExxonMobil climate change controversy wikipedia , lookup
General circulation model wikipedia , lookup
Effects of global warming on human health wikipedia , lookup
Climate change denial wikipedia , lookup
Climate sensitivity wikipedia , lookup
Politics of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Economics of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Climate engineering wikipedia , lookup
Climate resilience wikipedia , lookup
Solar radiation management wikipedia , lookup
Climate change adaptation wikipedia , lookup
Climate change in Tuvalu wikipedia , lookup
Climate change in Australia wikipedia , lookup
Climate change and agriculture wikipedia , lookup
Attribution of recent climate change wikipedia , lookup
Climate governance wikipedia , lookup
Climate change in the United States wikipedia , lookup
Citizens' Climate Lobby wikipedia , lookup
Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme wikipedia , lookup
Media coverage of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Scientific opinion on climate change wikipedia , lookup
Public opinion on global warming wikipedia , lookup
IPCC Fourth Assessment Report wikipedia , lookup
Effects of global warming on Australia wikipedia , lookup
Climate change and poverty wikipedia , lookup
Surveys of scientists' views on climate change wikipedia , lookup
VOLUME 5 ISSUE 2 The International Journal of Climate Change: Impacts and Responses __________________________________________________________________________ Climate Induced Migration Lessons from Bangladesh REAZUL AHSAN, JON KELLETT, AND SADASIVAM KARUPPANNAN on-climate.com THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLIMATE CHANGE: IMPACTS AND RESPONSES www.thelearner.com First published in 2014 in Champaign, Illinois, USA by Common Ground Publishing LLC www.commongroundpublishing.com ISSN: 1835-7156 © 2014 (individual papers), the author(s) © 2014 (selection and editorial matter) Common Ground All rights reserved. Apart from fair dealing for the purposes of study, research, criticism or review as permitted under the applicable copyright legislation, no part of this work may be reproduced by any process without written permission from the publisher. For permissions and other inquiries, please contact [email protected]. The International Journal of Climate Change: Impacts and Responses is peer-reviewed, supported by rigorous processes of criterionreferenced article ranking and qualitative commentary, ensuring that only intellectual work of the greatest substance and highest significance is published. Climate Induced Migration: Lessons from Bangladesh Reazul Ahsan, University of South Australia, Australia Jon Kellett, University of Adelaide, Australia Sadasivam Karuppannan, University of South Australia, Australia Abstract: Over the past decade human understanding of the potential variety and range of climate change impacts has expanded. For example, besides physical and environmental impacts it is clear that climate change is a driver of social change. This is particularly apparent through the creation of a new social community of “climate migrants”. In 1995 there were about 25 million environmental refugees around the world but this number is anticipated to rise to 200 million by 2050, many of them as a result of climate change. One of the countries most severely affected by climate induced migration is Bangladesh. This paper analyses how consideration of this growing body of climate migrants fits with traditional migration theory. Using a case study approach drawing on empirical research amongst migrants in Bangladesh, it examines the drivers of migration, the impacts on individual and family livelihoods of the explosion of climate migrants and the subsequent effects on urbanisation of major cities in Bangladesh. Keywords: Climate Change, Climate Migrants, Social Change, Livelihoods and Urbanization. Introduction T hroughout history it could be argued that the natural condition of human society has been migratory as individuals and groups have moved in search of food, shelter and other resources (Anthony 1990, Sahlins 1972). Whilst seasonal and climatic factors constitute some of the underlying causes which drove this early migration, it is the need to balance supply with demand for these basic human requirements, which has resulted in a largely economic perspective being taken when explanation of migration as a theoretical construct has been attempted. Ravenstein (1985) may be seen as the founding father of migration theory in the nineteenth century when he expressed human mobility patterns as the movement of people from densely to sparsely populated areas or from low to high income areas. By defining migration in terms of ‘push and pull’ factors this theory places it in the domain of economics. Consequently, the neoclassical theory of migration emphasizes migration decisions by individuals based on the comparison of the relative cost and benefits of remaining or moving to a better place (Castles 2009). The theory assumes that every individual searches for the place or country that will maximise their wellbeing (Borjas 1989). Recent catastrophic climate events such as Hurricane Katrina raise questions in respect of the adequacy of this economic interpretation of migration. Is it reasonable to view the migration decisions of people who are displaced by extreme natural phenomena as economically driven? What is the distinction between a migrant and a refugee? Here we seek to review the literature which conceptualises migration from a theoretical perspective and specifically question whether the theory adequately deals with climate induced migration. Following a discussion of migration theory we examine the experience of climate migrants in Bangladesh in an attempt to illuminate the theory by example and validate the need for its revision. The Economic Explanation of Migration Neoclassical theory assumes that potential migrants have full knowledge of employment opportunities and wage levels in their preferred destination regions. Therefore, migration decisions are completely based on economic factors and individual choice. In reality, migrants The International Journal of Climate Change: Impacts and Responses Volume 5, 2014, www.on-climate.com, ISSN 1835-7156 © Common Ground, Reazul Ahsan, Jon Kellett, Sadasivam Karuppannan All Rights Reserved, Permissions: [email protected] THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLIMATE CHANGE: IMPACTS AND RESPONSES are often subject to limited and misleading information and to a range of constraints such as limited resources, family ties and in some cases, limited time to make critical decisions. Neoclassical migration theory emphasizes economic betterment as the main factor in migration decisions. But the reality of migration may be that the migrant faces such different circumstances on arrival that they find integration difficult. Their economic circumstances may improve but their housing, family and social networks may be diminished. Historians, anthropologists, sociologists and geographers argue that migrant behaviour is strongly influenced by family and community dynamics as well as historical experiences. This is particularly so in traditional societies, especially in the marginal poor societies where family welfare, rather than individual welfare, appears to be the overriding issue in migration decision making. The historical-institutional approach developed in the 1970s and 1980s explains international migration as a way of mobilizing cheap labour. Differentials in wages cause workers to move from low-wage, labour-surplus regions to high wage, labour-scarce regions. Such movement is classified as semi-permanent or permanent migration. In the 1960s dependency theory for the first time, addressed regional/internal migration resulting from the penetration of multinational companies into less developed economies. Such large scale ventures of foreign companies accelerate rural change, leading to poverty, displacement of workers and rapid urbanization. With the support of dependency theory, “push-pull” economic migration theory became focused more on local than international movement of people (Massey et al. 1998). Lipton (1980), argued that push and pull factors have different influences on rural-urban migration processes. For example, when the pull-factor is applied to wealthy families, a family member may be pulled out for a better education or job with the help of surplus wealth. On the other hand poor farmers and landless labourers tend to be pushed out in search of subsistence. People who intend to continue with a similar economic life style usually prefer short distance migration, but people who move a longer distance are likely to experience a more dramatic change (Measham et al. 2011). Therefore, the wealthy family which can afford a bigger change in life may prefer long distance migration, while poorer farmers tend to prefer short distance migration, in most cases to the nearest urban areas. Usually migrants who cross international borders are people of intermediate social status and from countries which are undergoing economic and social change rather the poorest people from the least developed countries (Portes and Rumbaut 2006). Typically, internal migrants in developing countries are short-term or seasonal migrants, who migrate to urban areas or to neighbouring countries for better income. Usually such migrants are labeled as “target saver”, in that they migrate with a certain earning target. They return to their village as soon as their savings reach their target threshold (Dustmann 2003). Such migrants have an option to choose their migration destination, when they depart and their duration of stay. In typical economic motivated rural-urban migration, migrant networks tend to influence people in their selection of destination. Large migrant networks minimize the cost because new migrants may get assistance in finding jobs and housing. Large networks also lower the cost of adapting to a new culture and environment. The cost of migration is often a barrier for international migration but a migrant network at the destination can help to minimize that constraint. Some international migrants are motivated by fear of persecution. This may stem from political or religious beliefs, membership of racial groups or other reasons. The 1951 UN Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees (further amended in 1967) clarified the position of this sub set of migrants by defining them as follows: “A person who owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual residence as a result of such events, is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to it.”(UNHCR 2002) 2 AHSAN ET AL.: DEFINING CLIMATE INDUCED MIGRATION Thus an exception was made to the classical economic theory, accepting that concern for personal safety is an explicable cause of international migration. Furthermore, the Convention goes on to define the obligations on signatory nation states that receive such refugees. In this respect the protection of refugees is enshrined in international law and goes beyond the protection or assistance that an economic migrant might reasonably expect from their destination country. The Environmental Explanation of Migration A cursory glance at the OECD commentary on migration statistics is sufficient to reveal that the economic interpretation of migration continues to represent the dominant paradigm (OECD 2011). However, environmental change provides an additional causal explanation, and arguably represents a rapidly growing phenomenon which has profound implications for future policy and migration research. Movement of people as a result of natural disasters is not a new phenomenon. The summer heat of 1845 and 1846 in Ireland, which stimulated a fungus infection that destroyed the potato crop, lead to a famine that forced around a million people to migrate to England, USA, Canada and Australia. Similarly in USA, drought in the 1930s forced around three million migrants towards California from the dust bowl agricultural states of Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas (Ladurie 2004; McLeman et al. 2008). The causes of the crop failures which induced both of these migratory events may have been to a degree anthropogenically induced due to poor management, over exploitation of land and planting inappropriate crops. In each case migration occurred over a period of one or two years as conditions worsened and migrants sought better opportunities elsewhere. So an economic interpretation continues to provide a plausible model in apparently environmentally driven circumstances. Natural disasters provide a further category of environmentally stimulated migration. Cyclone NARGIS (2008) in Myanmar and recent earthquakes in Sichuan, China together temporarily displaced almost 17.4 million people (IFRC 2008). Around 1.5 million people were temporarily displaced by Hurricane Katrina in 2005 and an estimated 300,000 displaced permanently (2011). It is noteworthy that among those temporary displaced people about 107,000 were illegal immigrants who experienced secondary displacement due to Katrina; these people were already migrants when natural disasters forced them to move again (Castillo 2005). Increasing rapid-onset of naturally hazardous events will result in substantial human displacement from different parts of the world by 2050. The IPCC (2007) assessment report addresses natural hazards and resulting forced migration suggesting such development could move migration to a new magnitude. The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR 2002) estimated approximately 24 million people have fled because of floods, famine and other environmental degradation processes. A widely cited report on human mobility (Brown 2007), projects that by 2050 the number of environmental induced migrants could be 200 million. Furthermore another 700 million will remain under threat because 1 in every 11 people at that time will be affected by environmental factors (Christian Aid 2007). Brown (2007) suggests that four decades from now environmentally induced migration could be an issue for 3% of the current world population. The German Advisory Council on Global Change (WBGU) addressed environmental degradation as drought, desertification, flood, cyclones and other forms of water scarcity. It estimates that these environmental issues will affect as much as 1/3 of the world’s human population forcing vulnerable populations to secure their livelihoods (Kolmannskog 2008). The research on migration and environmental degradation recommends that certain parts of the world such as parts of the Middle and Far East including India, Pakistan and Bangladesh could experience severe impacts of environment induced migration; the vulnerability of these nations is enhanced by their large populations and relative poverty (Fernando, Warner, and Birkmann 2010). 3 THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLIMATE CHANGE: IMPACTS AND RESPONSES Climate Migrants Besides hurricanes and cyclones, climatic factors such as desertification, drought and irregular rainfall pose a threat for people who are already vulnerable to socio-economic factors such as poverty and malnutrition. These “gradual onset” climatic factors represent a steady worsening of local conditions and can act as an indirect force to migrate (Edwards 2008). The common factor in all these examples is climate. Displacement due to climate stress is well understood but very little consensus is found when it comes to defining “climate” or “environmental migrant”. Researchers try to draw a line to distinguish “economic migrants” and “climate migrants”. A common argument suggests that economic migrants respond to both push and pull factors, whilst ‘climate migrants’ have no choice but to flee, so are responding only to push factors. They often have limited options or choices in terms of destinations in the face of an immediate emergency, so may come to represent a new type of migrant in that they become serial, multi stage migrants. Environment and migration issues gained some traction in 1985 with the report titled “Environmental refugees” published by United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP). Since then social scientists, demographers and advocacy groups have produced a burgeoning literature about this category of migrants and how it might fit with traditional migration theory. The UNEP definition of environmental migration focuses on causality, reflecting at least part of the neoclassical definition in respect of push factors. It defines environmental refugees as: “...those people who have been forced to leave their traditional habitat, temporarily or permanently, because of a marked environmental disruption (natural and/or triggered by people) that jeopardized their existence and/or seriously affected the quality of their life. By ‘environmental disruption’ in this definition is meant any physical, chemical, and/or biological changes in the ecosystem (or resource base) that render it, temporarily or permanently, unsuitable to support human life.” The UNEP definition does not provide generic criteria distinguishing environmental refugees from other types of migrants, nor does it specify differences between environmental migrants and refugees (Bates 2002). Some commentators argue that environmental degradation may not always be sufficient to induce migration so there may be an overlap between migrants defined using the classical definition, which emphasises choice, and climate refugees, who may have no choice but to migrate. The decision to migrate is always made at the individual or household level, according to classical migration theory which characterizes “voluntary migration”. Voluntary migrants display a variety of motivations. Climate change may be viewed as providing an external compulsion to migrate and be likened to political or religious refugees fleeing to escape persecution. However, as with this latter group there are significant problems involved in establishing valid refugee status. For example it may be possible to distinguish between slow onset push factors such as gradual desertification and immediate disaster events such as cyclones. So classification of persons displaced by environmental and climatic factors poses a dilemma; are they “migrants” or “refugees”? The United Nations Refugee convention 1951 does not cover environment or environmental degradation as a motivation to make a migration decision so it has become a challenge for theorists to define such migration under mainstream migration theory (Bates 2002). Dun and Gemenne (2008) argue to address the victims who are exposed and vulnerable to climate events as climate migrants. They state that communities that are displaced solely because of climate change and hydro-meteorological disasters (i.e. they are most likely forced to migrate) often suffer hardship and economic marginalization at their migration destination, which could entitle them to some protection under the UN 1951 Refugee Convention. They have very limited options to select their destination, 4 AHSAN ET AL.: DEFINING CLIMATE INDUCED MIGRATION their date of departure is immediate and they are completely uncertain about the duration of stay; it could be short, long or permanent migration. It is not simply the cause that is a matter for concern but the treatment of these people when they arrive at their destination. Baird (2008) shows that in many cases the impact of climate change is felt most acutely by the minority and indigenous communities, who often live in the most marginal areas and are already vulnerable to other social conflicts. Many scholars recommend different approaches to define climate refugees and achieve a durable solution that can fit within the UN 1951 Refugee Convention and 1967 protocol and place climate change induced forced migration under a legal framework (Romer 2006). Renaud et al. (2007) propose to address these vulnerable communities as “environmental displaced person(s)” or in short “EDPs” and encourage governments to recognize their plight and provide them support. A factor which may distinguish them from refugees under the 1951 Convention is that they may move only within their country of origin. So their putative refugee status may become an issue for internal migration policy. Social scientists and demographers classify the environmental migration process in three different categories. First, in places affected by a gradual environmental degradation process, people may have time to make a decision to either cope with these environmental changes with some external assistance or move away. Those who move away from the affected area could be addressed as “environmentally motivated migrants”. Over long periods of time increases in drought or floods would be the prime motivations for semi-arid and low lying coastal communities to migrate. Such migration is considered as regional migration and difficult to predict (Piguet 2008). Second, if the migration decision is supported and triggered by environmental degradation or by frequent natural and hydro-meteorological disasters and there is not enough support available to cope with or to resolve these threats, then that migration decision may be considered as “forced migration”. Third, if there are any sudden direct or indirect environmental changes and the victims do not have time to react to these and not enough help is available, then migration is the only option to survive. It is these people who can be labeled as “environmental refugees” (Renaud et al. 2007). The obvious example is the case of low lying island communities which are increasingly susceptible to inundation as sea levels rise and storm severity increases. The 4th IPCC report addressed migration due to climate change factors through two different channels: drought and cyclone. However the IPCC report does not address forced or climate migration as a direct consequence of sea-level rise (IPCC 2007). Despite all these debates on climate refugee or migrants due to climate change actions, a working definition of climate change-related migration was designed by Kniveton et al (2008) and supported by the International Organization of Migration (IOM) 2008, namely: “…persons or groups of persons who, for compelling reasons of sudden or progressive changes in the environment that adversely affect their lives or living conditions, are obliged to leave their habitual homes, or choose to do so, either temporarily or permanently, and who move either within their country or abroad..” There are no complete definitions of climate migrants or environmental migrants although there are a number of studies which have been conducted to document historical evidence to link climate change and migration. Recent work outlined the role of the environment in migration related to Hurricane Katrina in the USA (Reuveny 2007) and the coastal cyclone in Bangladesh (Kniveton et al. 2008). So in summary it is clear that the conventional economic interpretation of migration is stretched by the increasing severity of environmental push factors, which in extreme cases leave populations no choice but to move. Most of these people will move within national borders and may move more than once as they perceive better opportunities, usually in larger scale urban settlements. So individuals and families which begin as climate refugees may shift status to become economic migrants, either within the borders of their home country or perhaps 5 THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLIMATE CHANGE: IMPACTS AND RESPONSES internationally, as they make successive moves. These incremental movements will inevitably impact on the location to which these populations migrate, particularly as the scale, frequency and severity of climate driven events increases and the numbers of migrants increase in proportion. Questions remain as to how such a migration definition can be integrated with the study of rural-urban and urban-international migration. The IPCC (2007) states that climate change has its strongest direct impacts on agricultural activities. To support the IPCC 4th assessment report, Morton (2007) concludes that climate impacts on subsistence agriculture are locally specific and many other complex non-climate drivers such as low technology and low capitalization are associated with the process. Thus countries which largely depend on an agricultural economy and have limited access to adaptation technology are vulnerable to climate change (World Bank 2010). As a result migration from the subsistence rural agricultural sector to the non-agricultural urban sector is to be expected. Thus climate change may be viewed as a driver of urbanization through internal migration. Such internal migration places more workers in the urban economy and reduces the urban wage, providing incentives for skilled urban workers to cross national boundaries becoming international economic migrants (Hatton and Williamson 2003). We can therefore observe a ripple effect of climate driven migration; desperate victims of catastrophic climate events migrating internally to the nearest city, boost the low paid urban worker supply. These may be classified as climate refugees. As urban wages fall and unemployment rises, a new wave of migrants from minor to major urban centres results. These are economic migrants, though their existence and the stimulus for their migration may be viewed as indirectly caused by climate events. At the level of higher order urban centres, as the continuing influx of internal economic migrants reduces opportunities and worsens urban conditions, better-off individuals and households may seek more favourable opportunities overseas. This group fall within the classic definition of economic migrants, but once again may be seen to be artificially boosted by climate events elsewhere. Below we discuss a particularly severe example: the coastal region of Bangladesh. We report on a survey of climate migrants to interrogate the detail of the actual experience of climate refugees and illustrate the processes discussed above. The Case of Bangladesh Bangladesh is presented here as a case study in order to illustrate the discussion above. Furthermore it represents an extreme, though not unique, case of a poor country which is affected by climate change out of all proportion to its ability to cope. Geographically Bangladesh is located between 20°34’ - 26°-38’ N and 88°01’-92°41’ E. Bangladesh is bordered on the west, north and east by India, on the south-east by Myanmar and on the south by the Bay of Bengal (Agrawala et al. 2003). The country is located at the unique juxtaposition of the composite, sprawling second largest river system in the world, the GangesBrahmaputra-Meghna. This river system drains an area of 1,086,000 km2 from China, Nepal, India and Bangladesh. Because of its unique geographical location the nation has been gifted with rich biological diversity, hosting a rich variety of species which populates the ecosystems of the country (Aminuzzaman 2010). However, much of the terrain is low-lying with more than 80% of the country occupied by floodplains. Mean elevations range from less than a meter on the tidal floodplains to the north-east Sylhet basin which is up to 6 meters above mean sea level. Only in the northwest of the country are elevations greater than 30 meters above sea level (Rashid 1991). The nation is rapidly urbanizing, though by international standards it has a high rural population. Just over a quarter of the total population (28%) live in major urban areas in Bangladesh. Dhaka, the capital, has a very high population density at 1,502 people per Km2. Uneven development; climate hazards, poor economic growth and lack of employment in rural areas along with rapid urbanization make the country vulnerable to climate change (Islam 2007). From 1974 to 1981 Bangladesh experienced a high urban population growth rate of 10.3% due to 6 AHSAN ET AL.: DEFINING CLIMATE INDUCED MIGRATION economic push and pull factors (BBS 2001). The pull factors included both the economic opportunities of jobs and the social benefits of better education and health in the cities. The push factors included poverty, natural disasters and ethnic discrimination. Migrants moved both from rural areas and from small towns to the adjacent large cities. Currently, each year between 300,000 and 400,000 migrants move to Dhaka to improve their economic prospects. Therefore internal migration is the dominant factor driving rapid urbanization in Bangladesh. This scale of migration presents a challenge for balanced development (Rana 2010). The 35 million people living in the coastal belt in Bangladesh are front line victims of climate change. With a climate induced one meter of Sea Level Rise (SLR) 15 million (11% of the total population) are potentially affected (UNEP 2007). Associated with this impact, 60% of the total population could be affected by flash flooding from river over-flow. Furthermore, with one meter SLR 13% of the total agricultural land, 8000 km of roads and 2 major cities could be impacted (Islam 2001). Much of the population in these vulnerable coastal districts will have no choice but to migrate to other parts of the country as their homes and land are destroyed. There is also the risk of serious health impacts due to shortage of water and polluted water supply in their original settlements, where these survive. Over the last two decades soil salinity, river erosion and frequent, extreme climate events, have forced many marginal coastal communities to migrate in search of safer conditions. The trend of migration due to climate events has increased since 2006 because of frequent disasters in the coastal belt. A sample survey of climate migrants in Khulna and Dhaka carried out in 2010, suggests that the volume of migrant flow is clearly influenced by extreme climatic events. Figure 1 shows the migration trend based on this field survey of 200 heads of households, who were identified as climate migrants. Figure 1: Migration trend due to climate change factors Source: Ahsan 2013. 7 THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLIMATE CHANGE: IMPACTS AND RESPONSES Figure 1 demonstrates migrant households becoming resident both in Khulna and Dhaka from as long ago as 1970 following a coastal flash flood but the largest number of migrants identified themselves as driven out by cyclone Aila in May 2009. Estimates suggest about half a million people were forced to leave their homes, more than 200,000 people were trapped in water, over 300 people died and 1120 people are still missing as a result of this cyclone (Land 2010). The field survey also demonstrates that forced migration may be considered as an adaptive measure to different climate driven factors as demonstrated in Figure 2. Figure 2: Reasons for forced migration Source: Ahsan 2013. Figure 2 demonstrates that most respondents in Dhaka were displaced by river erosion. But in Khulna cyclones and soil salinity are the main migration drivers. The field survey also includes some economic and social migrants in both the cities. In fact these are second generation migrants, who originally migrated as a result of climate driven factors and subsequently migrated again from another city for economic or social reasons. The field survey demonstrates a complex pattern of experiences and motivations which triggered the original decision to migrate. Over half of those interviewed were forced to move, having lost almost everything in extreme circumstances in their home area, whilst others migrated in order to safeguard their family from frequent climatic hazards. Others were seeking alternatives in the city where they could improve their earning opportunities as well as be assured 8 AHSAN ET AL.: DEFINING CLIMATE INDUCED MIGRATION of safety. Some were temporary migrants who stated an intention of returning to their point of origin but sometimes could not return as the land which they used to occupy no longer existed. Some were serial movers, having relocated more than once and some considered further moves in future, usually to a larger urban centre, normally Dhaka. Figure 3 provides a breakdown of the motivations and expectations of the climate migrants interviewed. Of the total sample only 5% could readily be labeled as classic economic migrants, though in fact they were originally displaced by climate factors. The majority are more easily labeled as climate migrants and more than half are climate refugees, since they became migrants wholly as a result of push factors and had no choice but to move. Figure 3: Push factors forcing the coastal community to migrate to urban areas Source: Ahsan 2013. Despite their informal status as refugees, most received no direct help from the Bangladesh government. The migrant communities studied faced natural hardships and hazards at their point of origin but these hardships did not end when they arrived in their urban destination. In the urban slums, which are the first destinations for these climate displaced communities, they experience multiple aspects of deprivation, which restrict their efforts to obtain a decent standard of living. For example in urban slums more than 65% residents do not have any sanitation facilities, about 45% of slum dwellers do not have any fixed place to dispose their garbage and 35% are outside of the garbage collection system (CUS 2006). Several internationally funded Non – Governmental Organizations (NGOs) are active in Khulna, Dhaka and other urban centres where climate migrants move regularly. These organizations monitor incoming migrants and are able to prioritise their needs according to their history and circumstances. The NGOs are active in providing some assistance such as low interest loans, low cost materials for building shelter and providing sanitation facilities in refugee settlement areas. So the experience of some climate refugees in Bangladesh is that informally they are treated as refugees within their own country and given help to re-establish themselves. 9 THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLIMATE CHANGE: IMPACTS AND RESPONSES Nevertheless, in the face of overwhelming demand such services are stretched. Many of the migrants reported suffering trauma and feelings of alienation as a result of their experiences. Changes to social status were widely perceived as a problem. Families who had owned land and property were now landless. They had lost not only their means of making a living but also the wealth that was formerly available to be passed down to the next generation. In their new urban situation they were regarded as separate from the established community and of a lower social status than the rest of the community. Uncertainty and lack of resources led them to settle in places where they could find cheap land and easy access to jobs. For many this meant squatting illegally on government owned land such as railway or highway verges or on agricultural land on the urban fringe, often in makeshift accommodation of a standard below their former situation. Most recognized they had no alternative but to put up with their new life as they had little hope of return to their original home, but they found such acceptance difficult. Figure 4 illustrates the stated attitudes of migrants to their new conditions. Figure 4: Perceived attitudes of climate migrants in respect of social status Source: Ahsan 2013. Conclusion Migration, which traditionally has been interpreted as an economic phenomenon, has become complicated in recent decades by movements of people who are driven to change their place of residence by political and environmental factors. Political refugees have been recognized officially as a sub group of migrants who invariably move across international boundaries to escape persecution and achieve a better quality of life and are labeled as refugees. Environmental migrants have traditionally been subsumed into the economic migrant category since as worsening conditions prompt populations to move away from a declining natural economic resource base, their migration continues to be viewed fundamentally as a search for improved quality of life and better economic prospects. However, recent catastrophic natural events, many resulting from global climate change, have added a new dimension to the concept of migration and begun stretching its definition away from a wholly economic interpretation. Key factors which distinguish climate refugees from economic migrants appear to be the immediacy of their decisions, the lack of considered or reliable knowledge about their potential migration destinations and the likelihood that their quality of life in the migration destination will be less 10 AHSAN ET AL.: DEFINING CLIMATE INDUCED MIGRATION than in their former existence. Because of its vulnerable geography Bangladesh provides an extreme example of the development of this new class of climate refugees. The experience of the group of climate migrants reported above supports this interpretation and suggests that it is time to take fresh look at the definitions of migrant, climate migrant and climate refugee and recognize that both the absolute and relative sizes of these groups are likely to change dramatically as the twenty – first century unfolds. International action through the agency of UNHCR is suggested as an appropriate response to the analysis presented here. This response requires a formal recognition of a category of climate refugees, who may be eligible for aid and resettlement either within their own country or elsewhere. The challenge for politicians and administrators is to adequately define climate refugees and accept their refugee status despite, in many cases, the fact that they have not crossed any international borders. Such action is likely to demand significant funding and a shift in thinking by receiving nations as the number of climate displaced persons rises over coming decades. 11 THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLIMATE CHANGE: IMPACTS AND RESPONSES REFERENCES Agrawala, Shardul, Tomoko Ota, Ahsan Uddin Ahmed, Smith, Joel and van Aalst Maarten. 2003. Development and Climate Change In Bangladesh: Focus On Coastal Flooding And The Sundarbans. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Ahsan, Reazul. 2013 "Climate Migration and Urban Changes: A Study of Adaptation in Bangladesh”, PhD dissertation, School of Natural and Built Environments, University of South Australia, Australia. Anthony, David. 1990 "Migration in Archeology: The Baby and the Bathwater", American Anthropologist, no. 92 (4): 895-914. Aminuzzaman, Salahuddin M. 2010. Environment Policy of Bangladesh: A Case Study of an Ambitious Policy with Implementation Snag In South Asia Climate Change Forum. Monash University: Monash Sustainability Institute. Baird, Rachel. 2008. Climate Change and Minorities. In Matheson, Ishbel (Ed) State of the World's Minority, London: Minority Rights Group International. Bates, Diane C. 2002. "Environmental Refugees? Classifying Human Migrations Caused by Environmental Change." Population and Environment no. 23 (5):465-477. BBS. 2001. Population census report. edited by Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics. Dhaka: Ministry of Planning. Borjas, George J. 1989. "Economic theory and international migration." International Migration Review no. 23 (3):457-485. Brown, Oli. 2007. Climate change and forced migration: observation, projection and implication. In Human Development Series. Geneva: UNDP. Castillo, E. Eduardo. 2005. Illegal immigrants afraid to get storm aid: Associated Press. Castles, Stephen. 2009. Age of migration: international population movements in the modern world. 4th ed. new York: Guilford press. Christian Aid. 2007. Human tide: the real migration crisis. In Christian Aid Report. London. CUS. 2006. Slums of Urban Bangladesh: Mapping and census, 2005. edited by Nazrul Islam. Dhaka: Centre for Urban Studies. Dun, Olivia, and Francois Gemenne. 2008. Defining environmental migration, Forced migration review: Climate change and displacement. Oxford: Refugee Studies Centre. Dustmann, Christian. 2003. "Return migration, wage differentials and the optional migration duration." European Economic Review no. 47:353-369. Edwards, Scott. 2008. Social breakdown in Darfur. In Climate change and displacement. Washington DC: Amnesty International. Fernando, Nishara, Koko Warner, and Jor Birkmann. 2010. "Migration and Natural Hazards:Is Relocation a Secondary Disaster or an Opportunity for Vulnerability Reduction." In Enironment, Forced Migration and Social Vulnerability, edited by Tamer Afifi and Jill Jager, 145-155. London: Springer. Grier, Peter. 2011. The great Katrina migration 2005 [cited 21 September 2011]. Available from http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0912/p01s01-ussc.html. Hatton, Timothy J., and Jeffrey G. Williamson. 2003. "Demographic and economic pressure on emigration out of Africa." Scandinavian Journal of Economics no. 105 (3):465-486. IFRC. 2008. China: Sichuan Earthquake. Emergency appeal. edited by Sichun: International Federation of Red Cross. IPCC. 2007. "Assessment of observed changes and responses in natural and managed system." In Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability, edited by P. Martin, C. Osvaldo, P. Jean, P. ven der Lind, and H. Clair. New York: Cambridge University Press. 12 AHSAN ET AL.: DEFINING CLIMATE INDUCED MIGRATION Islam, Nazrul. 2001. Urbanization, Migration and Development in Bangladesh: Recent trends and Emerging Issues. Dhaka: Centre for Policy Dialogue and United Nations Population Fund. Islam, Nazrul. 2007. Towards a National Urban Sector Policy. In Policy Dialogue Series. Dhaka: Centre for Policy dialogue and United Nations Population Fund. Kniveton, Dominic, Kerstin Schmidt-Verkerk, Christopher Smith, and Richard Black. 2008. Climate Change and Migration: Improving Methodologies to Estimate Flows. Sussex: Sussex University. Kolmannskog, Vikram Odedra. 2008. Future floods of refugees: A comment on climate change, conflict and forced migration. Oslo: Norwegian Refugee Council. Land, Graham. 2010. Bangladesh: 100 thousands still stranded from cyclones. Dhaka: Greenfudge. Ladurie, Le Roy E. 2004. Histoire humaine et comparee du climat. Paris: Fayard. Lipton, Michael. 1980. "Migration from Rural areas of Poor Countries: The Impact on Rural Productivity and Incom Distribution." World Development no. 8 (1):1-24. Massey, Douglas S., Arango, Joaquin, Hugo, Graeme, Kouaouci, Ali, Pellegrino, Adela and Taylor, J. Edward. 1998. Worlds in Motion, Understanding International Migration at the end of the Millennium. Oxford: Clarendon Press. McLeman, Robert, Mayo, Dick, Strebeck, Earl and Smit, Barry. 2008. "Drought adaptation in rural eastern Oklahoma in the 1930s: Lessons for climate change adaptation research." Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change no. 13 (4):379-400. Morton, John. F. 2007. The impact of climate change on smallholder and subsistence agriculture, National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America no. 104 (50):1968019685. Measham, Thomas, G., Preston Benjamin L, Smith, Timothy F., Brook, Cassandra, Gorddard Russell, Withycombe, Geoff, and Morrison, Craig. 2011. Adapting to climate change through local municipal planning: barriers and challenges. In Mitigation and Adpatation Strategies for Global Change, no.16 (8):889-909. OECD. 2011. International Migration Outlook. Paris. Piguet, Etienne. 2008. Climate change and forced migration. In Research paper 153, New Issues in Refugee Research Series Geneva: UNHCR. Portes, Alejandro, and Rumbaut, Ruben G. 2006. Immigrant America: A Portrait. London: University of California Press. Rana, Masud Parves. 2010. "Urbanization and sustainability: challenges and strategies for sustainable urban development in Bangladesh." Environment Development and Sustainability no. 3 (1):237-256. Rashid, Haroun. 1991. Geography of Bangladesh. 2nd ed. Dhaka: University Press Limited. Ravenstein, E.G. 1985. "The Laws of Migration." Journal of the Statistical Society of London no. 48 (2):167-235. Renaud, Fabrice, Bogardi, Janos J., Dun, Olivia and Warner, Koko. 2007. Control, Adapt or Flee How to face Environmental Migration. In Interdisciplinary Security Connections. Bonn: UNU Institute for Environment and Human Security (UNU-EHS). Reuveny, Rafael. 2007. "Climate change-induced migration and violent conflict." Political Geography no. 26 (1):656-673. Romer, Kate. 2006. 'Environmental' refugees How should governmnet support those at risk of displacement cliamte change? In Forced Migration Review. Oxford. Sahlins, Marshall D., 1972. Stone Age Economics. New York: Aldine de Gruyter. UNEP. 2007. "Global Environment Outlook GEO4." In United Nations Environment Programme. Washington, D.C.: United Nations Environment Programme UNHCR. 2002. A critical time for the environment. Geneva: United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. 13 THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLIMATE CHANGE: IMPACTS AND RESPONSES World Bank. 2010. World Development Report 2010: Development and Climate Change. Washington, DC: World Bank. 14 AHSAN ET AL.: DEFINING CLIMATE INDUCED MIGRATION ABOUT THE AUTHORS Dr. Reazul Ahsan: PhD Research Fellow, Barbara Hardy Institute, School of Natural and Built Environments, University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia. Professor Jon Kellett: Professor, School of Architecture and Built Environment, University of Adelaide, South Australia, Australia. Dr. Sadasivam Karuppannan: Lecturer and Program Director, Barbara Hardy Institute, School of Natural and Built Environments, University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia. 15 The International Journal of Climate Change: Impacts and Responses seeks to create an interdisciplinary forum for discussion of evidence of climate change, its causes, its ecosystemic impacts and its human impacts. The journal also explores technological, policy, strategic and social responses to climate change. The International Journal of Climate Change: Impacts and Responses is a peer-reviewed scholarly journal. ISSN 1835-7156