While providing disturbing details of the threats facing humanity on a heating planet, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has failed once again to recognize the centrality of migration. Yet the movement of people is already a key consequence of the broader climate crisis, and it could be a part of the solution.
BERKELEY – Going beyond the headline figures of rising temperatures and sea levels, the latest report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) captures the full scale of the threat to human life in a heating world. It explains how extreme weather, drought, habitat and species loss, urban heat islands, and the destruction of food sources and livelihoods are all intensifying. And the scientific community is now more certain that climate change is having a direct influence on migration.
Climate-related displacement disproportionately affects people who have contributed least to the problem. Thanks to the repeated failure of the world’s major powers to address climate change, extreme weather in Central America, fires and storms in North America, flooding across Europe and Asia, and drought in Africa are forcing people to move. Last year, the Red Cross confirmed that it was already dealing with the consequences of climate change in all 192 countries where it operates.
The IPCC report recognizes that migration is a form of climate adaptation – and that it is already occurring. This is an important correction to the widespread narrative of climate-linked displacement as a problem to be managed at some point in the future.
That view is often accompanied by fearmongering in wealthy countries about swarms of climate refugees. Across the Global North, ever more public money is being funneled into a growing border-security and surveillance industry that promises to tackle the “threat” with a “Global Climate Wall.” The industry’s lobbyists and political allies claim that advanced networks of weapons, walls, drones, surveillance technology, and lawfare will be needed to protect powerful countries against future waves of climate displacement.
But climate walls provide no such protection, even as they threaten civil liberties (in wealthier countries as much as anywhere else) and divert resources from meaningful climate action to the hands of crisis profiteers. Worse, these operators are closely linked to the fossil-fuel sector, global finance, and the arms industry, which profits from the conflicts that generate refugee flows (and that climate change will make more likely).
These false solutions are already costing lives and livelihoods. In 2020-21, 2,000 people were killed in the Mediterranean due to illegal “pushback” policies in the European Union. People being turned away at the US-Mexico border are also fleeing extreme weather conditions, as are many now languishing in indefinite detention in countries from Britain to Australia.
At a time of escalating global turmoil, there is an urgent need for incisive, informed analysis of the issues and questions driving the news – just what PS has always provided.
Subscribe to Digital or Digital Plus now to secure your discount.
Subscribe Now
The IPCC report is right to stress the urgency of decarbonization to prevent further displacement. But we must not stop there. The governments of major emitters of greenhouse gases must be pressured to support countries that face irreversible loss and damage from climate change. The global climate movement will fail if it focuses only on renewable energy and not also on ameliorating the suffering caused by the climate emergency that is already here.
What more should be done? First, we must safeguard both the right to move and the right to stay. Climate finance to help at-risk communities build resilience and limit migration is essential, as are improvements to disaster warning and relief systems. But we also need financing to facilitate the safe movement of people when it is necessary. Most displacement happens within countries, not across borders, so we must ensure that poorer countries have the resources to manage both short- and long-term resettlement.
Second, in cases where climate-linked displacement does cross borders, we should respond with pragmatism and compassion, not paranoia and profiteering. The money being thrown at dystopian military and surveillance infrastructure should instead go toward supporting safe and legal routes and procedures for people who need to move. The dominant political impulse today is to try to divide people by the circumstances of their birth. But with more resources and a different political vision, we could ensure that both newcomers and host communities alike benefit from immigration.
Third, we need to broaden our understanding of what counts as climate-linked displacement. Those who are directly fleeing storms, fires, and floods obviously need policy support. But climate change is also a growing factor in resource shortages, income loss, political instability, and violent conflicts. We must resist efforts to limit the definition of who counts as a climate-displaced person. We cannot wait for disaster to strike before acting. We should already be considering processes to achieve planned migration with dignity, allowing people in vulnerable locales to move before the worst effects materialize.
Despite its shortcomings, the IPCC report does acknowledge that human migration is an important part of the solution to the broader crisis of climate change. Displaced, indigenous, and vulnerable communities in both the Global North and South have already had their lives changed for the worse by pollution, fossil-fuel extraction, and climate change. They have much to teach us about preserving life in a heating world, if we seize the opportunity to bring people together, to foster cross-border problem-solving, and to push back against the petty nationalism that has hamstrung the world’s pandemic response.
The solutions to displacement already exist, as do the legal and moral bases for establishing practical agreements between governments. What we need is international action to provide systems that can ensure a safe and dignified future for everyone. A climate movement that has learned to protect human life to the fullest must be at the forefront of that effort.
To have unlimited access to our content including in-depth commentaries, book reviews, exclusive interviews, PS OnPoint and PS The Big Picture, please subscribe
With German voters clearly demanding comprehensive change, the far right has been capitalizing on the public's discontent and benefiting from broader global political trends. If the country's democratic parties cannot deliver, they may soon find that they are no longer the mainstream.
explains why the outcome may decide whether the political “firewall” against the far right can hold.
The Russian and (now) American vision of "peace" in Ukraine would be no peace at all. The immediate task for Europe is not only to navigate Donald’s Trump unilateral pursuit of a settlement, but also to ensure that any deal does not increase the likelihood of an even wider war.
sees a Korea-style armistice with security guarantees as the only viable option in Ukraine.
Rather than engage in lengthy discussions to pry concessions from Russia, US President Donald Trump seems committed to giving the Kremlin whatever it wants to end the Ukraine war. But rewarding the aggressor and punishing the victim would amount to setting the stage for the next war.
warns that by punishing the victim, the US is setting up Europe for another war.
Within his first month back in the White House, Donald Trump has upended US foreign policy and launched an all-out assault on the country’s constitutional order. With US institutions bowing or buckling as the administration takes executive power to unprecedented extremes, the establishment of an authoritarian regime cannot be ruled out.
The rapid advance of AI might create the illusion that we have created a form of algorithmic intelligence capable of understanding us as deeply as we understand one another. But these systems will always lack the essential qualities of human intelligence.
explains why even cutting-edge innovations are not immune to the world’s inherent unpredictability.
BERKELEY – Going beyond the headline figures of rising temperatures and sea levels, the latest report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) captures the full scale of the threat to human life in a heating world. It explains how extreme weather, drought, habitat and species loss, urban heat islands, and the destruction of food sources and livelihoods are all intensifying. And the scientific community is now more certain that climate change is having a direct influence on migration.
Climate-related displacement disproportionately affects people who have contributed least to the problem. Thanks to the repeated failure of the world’s major powers to address climate change, extreme weather in Central America, fires and storms in North America, flooding across Europe and Asia, and drought in Africa are forcing people to move. Last year, the Red Cross confirmed that it was already dealing with the consequences of climate change in all 192 countries where it operates.
The IPCC report recognizes that migration is a form of climate adaptation – and that it is already occurring. This is an important correction to the widespread narrative of climate-linked displacement as a problem to be managed at some point in the future.
That view is often accompanied by fearmongering in wealthy countries about swarms of climate refugees. Across the Global North, ever more public money is being funneled into a growing border-security and surveillance industry that promises to tackle the “threat” with a “Global Climate Wall.” The industry’s lobbyists and political allies claim that advanced networks of weapons, walls, drones, surveillance technology, and lawfare will be needed to protect powerful countries against future waves of climate displacement.
But climate walls provide no such protection, even as they threaten civil liberties (in wealthier countries as much as anywhere else) and divert resources from meaningful climate action to the hands of crisis profiteers. Worse, these operators are closely linked to the fossil-fuel sector, global finance, and the arms industry, which profits from the conflicts that generate refugee flows (and that climate change will make more likely).
These false solutions are already costing lives and livelihoods. In 2020-21, 2,000 people were killed in the Mediterranean due to illegal “pushback” policies in the European Union. People being turned away at the US-Mexico border are also fleeing extreme weather conditions, as are many now languishing in indefinite detention in countries from Britain to Australia.
Winter Sale: Save 40% on a new PS subscription
At a time of escalating global turmoil, there is an urgent need for incisive, informed analysis of the issues and questions driving the news – just what PS has always provided.
Subscribe to Digital or Digital Plus now to secure your discount.
Subscribe Now
The IPCC report is right to stress the urgency of decarbonization to prevent further displacement. But we must not stop there. The governments of major emitters of greenhouse gases must be pressured to support countries that face irreversible loss and damage from climate change. The global climate movement will fail if it focuses only on renewable energy and not also on ameliorating the suffering caused by the climate emergency that is already here.
What more should be done? First, we must safeguard both the right to move and the right to stay. Climate finance to help at-risk communities build resilience and limit migration is essential, as are improvements to disaster warning and relief systems. But we also need financing to facilitate the safe movement of people when it is necessary. Most displacement happens within countries, not across borders, so we must ensure that poorer countries have the resources to manage both short- and long-term resettlement.
Second, in cases where climate-linked displacement does cross borders, we should respond with pragmatism and compassion, not paranoia and profiteering. The money being thrown at dystopian military and surveillance infrastructure should instead go toward supporting safe and legal routes and procedures for people who need to move. The dominant political impulse today is to try to divide people by the circumstances of their birth. But with more resources and a different political vision, we could ensure that both newcomers and host communities alike benefit from immigration.
Third, we need to broaden our understanding of what counts as climate-linked displacement. Those who are directly fleeing storms, fires, and floods obviously need policy support. But climate change is also a growing factor in resource shortages, income loss, political instability, and violent conflicts. We must resist efforts to limit the definition of who counts as a climate-displaced person. We cannot wait for disaster to strike before acting. We should already be considering processes to achieve planned migration with dignity, allowing people in vulnerable locales to move before the worst effects materialize.
Despite its shortcomings, the IPCC report does acknowledge that human migration is an important part of the solution to the broader crisis of climate change. Displaced, indigenous, and vulnerable communities in both the Global North and South have already had their lives changed for the worse by pollution, fossil-fuel extraction, and climate change. They have much to teach us about preserving life in a heating world, if we seize the opportunity to bring people together, to foster cross-border problem-solving, and to push back against the petty nationalism that has hamstrung the world’s pandemic response.
The solutions to displacement already exist, as do the legal and moral bases for establishing practical agreements between governments. What we need is international action to provide systems that can ensure a safe and dignified future for everyone. A climate movement that has learned to protect human life to the fullest must be at the forefront of that effort.