Human Mobility and Climate Change Adaptation Policy: A Review of Migration in National Adaptation Programmes of action (NAPAs)

Abstract

In recent years, a number of reports have suggested that climate change will result in new waves of human migration, as people leave areas affected by sea-level rise, flooding, drought and other projected climate change impacts (Action Aid International, 2007; Christian Aid, 2007; Conisbee and Simms, 2003; Renaud, et al., 2007; Stern, 2007; Warner, et al., 2009). For example, the Stern Review (2007) suggested that 150-200 million people could be displaced by climate change by 2050. However, the relationship between climate change and migration is complex, and the available evidence shows that people make pragmatic, disaster-specific choices about where best to move in the face of environmental disasters (Naik, 2009: 273). These decisions are themselves mediated by a range of ‘intervening factors’ that either facilitate or constrain migration, including ease of transport, access to social networks and government policies that restrict or encourage migration (Black et al, 2011: 432). While there is some evidence to indicate that people move in response to climate events, in the context of low-income countries this often consists of short-distance, internal migration rather than overseas migration.

Despite increasing awareness of the complex linkages between migration and climate change, there is limited analysis on how issues of human mobility are currently addressed in national climate change adaption strategies. In response to this, the Migrating out of Poverty RPC conducted a comprehensive review of how migration is discussed in National Adaptation Programmes of Actions (NAPAs), which are national adaptation plans developed by Least Developed Countries (LDCs). NAPAs are intended to provide LDCs with an opportunity to create country-driven adaptation strategies that address immediate adaptation needs. Many LDCs face comparatively difficult challenges in adapting to climate change, as by definition they have severe structural impediments to growth including low per capita income, low levels of human capital and high levels of economic vulnerability.

The Migrating out of Poverty RPC’s review of NAPAs investigated that ways in which these policy documents discuss a range of migration-related issues including drought-induced migration, rural exodus, transhumance, refugees, population displacement, resettlement, and other issues. Each policy document was searched for key migration-related terminology, and subsequent analysis was done in order to clarify the context in which each of these terms was mentioned. The results of the review, which are presented in detail in this working paper, showed that consideration of migration issues varied widely across countries’ NAPAs. While some countries discussed in-depth the way that various types of migration were relevant to their national adaptation challenges, other countries scarcely accounted for migration issues in their NAPAs. From a policy perspective, to the extent that autonomous migration is mentioned at all in NAPAs’ proposed adaptation projects – which are termed ‘priority projects’ – it is typically viewed as impacting negatively on adaptation. While 13 NAPAs refer to rural exodus and nine refer to transhumance in their priority projects, these policy often involve investing in projects which will function in part to stop migration flows. Meanwhile, 14 countries introduce policies related to resettlement or population displacement, illustrating the perceived importance of protecting vulnerable communities in many NAPAs. Additionally, a number of proposed NAPA priority projects emphasise the perceived negative impacts of migration: three NAPAs view migration as barrier to proposed priority projects; two NAPAs attempt to resolve migration’s detrimental impact on the provision of services in their priority projects; and one refers to conflict-driven migration. Tellingly, 13 NAPAs do not discuss migration issues in their proposed adaptation projects at all.

This working paper also includes a case study on NAPAs from West Africa, which was selected because there are a relatively large number of NAPAs that have been produced by LDCs from this region (10) and there is a long history of regional migration due to environmental and other factors. The case study highlights three themes commonly discussed across NAPAs from this region: (1) migration that is already occurring in response to recent droughts in West Africa; (2) the present and future threat posed to communities by sea-level rise and flooding; and (3) the perceived negative impacts of migration, such as conflict over land, environmental degradation, and pressure on urban areas. Gaps in the discussion of migration and environmental change in West African NAPAs are also identified by the case study.

The working paper concludes with policy lessons that emerged from the Migrating out of Poverty RPC’s review of migration in NAPAs. While policymakers often emphasis the negative impacts of migration in low-income countries, especially rural-urban migration, there is evidence that such flows can play an important role in building adaptive capacity to climate change, for example by diversifying rural household income sources and leading to positive development impacts. While adaptation policies are needed in rural areas, such policies cannot be expected to stop rural-urban migration. Indeed, attempts to halt rural-urban flows by investing in rural areas – a common policy approach in many low-income and middle-income countries – have generally failed in all but the short term. Rather than attempting to stop these flows, more focus needs to be put on integrating urban planning in national adaptation strategies. Related to this, migration must be seen not only as a failure of development or adaptation, but as potentially contributing to livelihood strategies in low-income countries. Such an approach would focus attention on the vulnerabilities of livelihoods to climate change, and highlight the potential benefits and risks that migration brings in the context of on-going environmental change.