Download Climate Induced Migration - The International Journal of Climate

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