At home and in exile     

At home and in exile     

Context

We need to adequately plan for internal migration due to climate change 

What has happened?

In “Groundswell: Preparing for Internal Climate Migration”, a recent report by the World Bank, it is estimated that in Latin America, South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa over 143 million people would be forced to move within borders by 2050 as a result of slow onset climate events alone.

 Concerns over internal migration

Meaning: Movement within the same country due to variety of reasons like, in search of a job, due to marriage etc.

Issue: It might be a forced decision to move rather than a choice in the future considering climate change

Why people move

• In “Groundswell: Preparing for Internal Climate Migration”, a recent report by the World Bank, it is estimated that in Latin America, South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa over 143 million people would be forced to move within borders by 2050 as a result of slow onset climate events alone
• In the worst-case scenario, about 40 million of these migrants would be in South Asia, which is the most populous of the regions studied, with a number of climate change effects anticipated.

Three possible scenarios are described:

• High greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions along with unequal development paths, regarded as the pessimistic reference scenario
• An inclusive development scenario with high GHG emissions but development paths that improve access to services for the poor and consider their priorities and unmet needs
• A climate-friendly scenario involving lower GHG emissions but with unequal development. 

People would be forced to move away from Gangetic plains

With variability in the monsoons and warmer temperatures, crop failures will lead to migration from the Gangetic plains and from the rice-growing northeast of Bangladesh and the inundated coasts

Poor would be affected the worst

• The poor would be the worst affected by these slow onset events and most of them would migrate out of rural areas to nearby urban settlements, which would be cities and the peri-urban surroundings.
• Such “hotspots” of in and out migration would be stressed for natural resources, public services and livelihoods.

What can be done?

• Reducing GHG emissions is of utmost urgency, although that seems to be taking place at a pace determined by geopolitical as well as local initiatives
• Integrating internal migration with ongoing development planning is vital
• Ecosystems, part of the natural resources in peri-urban areas, ought to be protected as “special ecological zones”, so that as urban settlements expand, they don’t eat into ecosystem services
• Skill building, job training and other opportunities for education and jobs for locals and migrants would also have to become a focal point
• Rights for those who are forced to migrate would be fundamental in these preparations, as studies and experience have shown that ignoring issues of social justice and equity in adaptation can lead to serious governance failure.