Writer: Pierson Froelich
Editor: Morgan Burns
Fall 2023
Climate change is perhaps the most consequential and pervasive issue facing humanity. As the planet warms, more cities, regions, etc., become environmentally stressed - some even uninhabitable. For the world to address the climate crisis fully, international law requires protection for individuals undergoing climate displacement.
The primary hallmarks of international climate governance are the Paris Agreement and the annual Conferences of the Parties (COPs) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). While these two emphasize the importance of emissions reduction goals among states, one crucial problem of climate change is overlooked in both international and human rights law: the increasing number of climate-displaced refugees. For instance, “Since 2017, more people have been displaced within their own countries by sudden-onset disasters than by conflict - sixty-one percent compared to thirty-nine percent.”¹ Clearly, the issue of climate change will only continue to displace people against their will. However, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the legal body that defines what constitutes one as a refugee and their protections, does not include an explicit definition of a climate refugee. A clear definition is necessary if states party to international agreements - and the institutions themselves - are legitimately serious about meeting their goals and tackling the climate crisis.
According to the UNHCR’s 1951 refugee convention, a refugee is “someone who is unable or unwilling to return to their country of origin owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion.”² For refugees fleeing their homes for climate reasons, this language proves ineffective in providing aid to their causes.
Ioane Teitiota, a citizen of the Pacific island nation Kiribati, relocated to New Zealand on a short-term visa with his family. Kiribati’s land remains under threat due to rapidly rising sea levels associated with climate change. After his visa expired, Ioane and his family continued to live in New Zealand in fear of facing climate danger in their home nation. Eventually, Teitiota was apprehended following a traffic violation. His appeals case to remain in New Zealand as a refugee reached the nation’s Supreme Court. Because of the UNHCR’s refugee definition, the court waived Teitiota’s claim of refugee status, forcing him to return to Kiribati.³
Therefore, the UNHCR’s outdated definition of a refugee prevents individuals from fleeing to another nation. Moreover, it appears to remain outside the bounds of the principle of non-refoulement, a legal principle meant to prevent states from sending individuals seeking refuge back to their country of origin, regardless of status. How could this not “trigger” states’ non-refoulement obligations, and what does this say about states’ advocacy/championing of human rights and climate mitigation?³
If all states participating in the international community are truly committed to protecting both our climate and human rights, then a legal definition of a climate refugee is a necessary piece to the puzzle. Through this addition, states will face more responsibility and accountability in light of their contributions to climate change, particularly those that emit the most carbon. Arguments that climate refugees only worsen the issue of capacity to accept refugees are not merely unethical but also expose our true lack of preparedness in response to our planet’s warming. To honor Ioane Teitiota and the many others who will face displacement via climate change in their lifetime, we ought to ensure that these individuals have a home.
References
1. McAdam, J. (2020). Protecting people displaced by the impacts of climate change: The
UN Human Rights Committee and the principle of non-refoulement. American Journal of International Law, 114(4), 708–725. https://doi.org/10.1017/ajil.2020.31
2. What is a refugee?. UNHCR US. (n.d.). https://www.unhcr.org/us/what-
refugee#:~:text=The%201951%20Refugee%20Convention%20is,group%2C%20or%20political%20opinion.%E2%80%9D
3. Foster, M., & McAdam, J. (2022). Analysis of ‘imminence’ in international protection
claims: teitiota v new zealand and beyond. International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 71(4), 975–982. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0020589322000367
Comments