MIGRATION RESEARCH LEADERS SYNDICATE

IN SUPPORT OF THE GLOBAL COMPACT ON MIGRATION

Environmental Migrants
and Global Governance:
Facts, Policies and Practices
The opinions expressed in the report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the
International Organization for Migration (IOM). The designations employed and the presentation of material
throughout the report do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of IOM concerning
the legal status of any country, territory, city or area, or of its authorities, or concerning its frontiers or
boundaries.

IOM is committed to the principle that humane and orderly migration benefits migrants and society.
As an intergovernmental organization, IOM acts with its partners in the international community to:
assist in meeting the operational challenges of migration; advance understanding of migration issues;
encourage social and economic development through migration; and uphold the human dignity and
well-being of migrants.

This publication has been issued without formal editing by IOM. Any errors or oversights in this publication
are the sole responsibility of the authors.

Suggested citation: Kälin, W. and S. Weerasinghe (2017) ‘Environmental Migrants and Global Governance:
Facts, Policies and Practices’, in McAuliffe, M. and M. Klein Solomon (Conveners) (2017) Ideas to Inform
International Cooperation on Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration, IOM: Geneva.

Publisher: International Organization for Migration

17 route des Morillons
P.O. Box 17
1211 Geneva 19
Switzerland
Tel: + 41 22 717 91 11
Fax: + 41 22 798 61 50
E-mail: [email protected]
Internet: www.iom.int

____________________________________________

© 2017 International Organization for Migration (IOM)

____________________________________________

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted
in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise without the prior
written permission of the publisher.

67_17
 Ideas to Inform International Cooperation on Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration

Environmental Migrants and Global

Governance: Facts, Policies and Practices
Walter Kälin* and Sanjula Weerasinghe

Executive summary
Human mobility linked to environmental factors such as sudden- or slow-onset disasters is a reality. Although
the global governance of environmental mobility is fragmented, many of the principles and elements to
improve it are, at least implicitly, enshrined in hard and soft-law agreements, policies, agendas and action
plans adopted by the international community. The Global Compact on Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration
(GCM) provides an indispensable opportunity to bring these principles and elements together into a State‑led,
global-level, normative framework. This can provide States and the international community with a clearer
understanding of obligations, policy options and actions necessary at different levels of governance.
To protect persons moving in the context of disasters and environmental changes, including adverse impacts
of climate change, and improve responses to environmental mobility, the GCM must be underpinned by a
recognition that such mobility takes different forms ranging from (predominantly) voluntary migration to
(predominantly) forced displacement. Regardless of the form, environmental mobility is multi-causal, and the
significance of the environment as a driver of human movement is context dependent. Most environmental
mobility will be within countries although there is also evidence of cross-border movements. Continuing
changes in the climate is expected to increase displacement.
This knowledge presents States and other actors with a series of policy options. Efforts to prevent, minimize
and address displacement can encompass: (1) action to reduce vulnerability and strengthen resilience of
at risk populations; (2) action to facilitate movement away from harm; and (3) action to protect displaced
persons within their country or across borders.

1. Introduction
An increasing number of people are displaced or migrating in the context of disasters, climate change and
other environmental factors. IOM calls such people “environmental migrants”, a term covering both forced
displacement and (predominantly) voluntary migration of people.1
The relationship between environmental changes, including adverse effects of climate change and human
mobility, is complex. The environment-mobility conundrum includes: (i) a limited understanding of the
environment-mobility nexus (section 2); (ii) the multi-causality of human mobility in the context of disasters
and environmental change and the difficulties of attributing such mobility to environmental causes (section
3.1); and (iii) the available and appropriate policy options (section 3.2). These aspects inform the conclusions
and recommendations for the GCM (sections 4 and 5).2

* The opinions expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Platform on Disaster
Displacement (PDD).
1 According to IOM, environmental migrants are “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.” To the extent that
movement is involuntary and across borders, the Nansen Initiative uses the term “cross-border disaster-displaced persons”. In
contrast, the UN and other actors discourage the use of the term “climate refugee”.
2 See Annex 1 for annotations to some of the key reference documents noted in this paper.
1
 Environmental Migrants and Global Governance: Facts, Policies and Practices

2. Background
Human mobility linked to environmental factors such as sudden-onset natural hazards or slow-onset
environmental degradation caused by global warming is a reality.
It often takes the form of displacement. During 2008 – 2016, on average more than 25 million people were
displaced each year in the context of extreme weather events and other sudden-onset disasters.3 The large
majority remain within their own country as internally displaced persons (IDPs). Some cross international
borders to find protection and assistance – usually in neighboring countries or within their region. Dynamics
vary from region to region with, for instance, sea-level rise being a key driver of human mobility in the Pacific
and drought in the Horn of Africa. While some instances are well documented,4 the overall number of cross-
border disaster-displaced persons is unknown. The same is true for persons displaced within their countries
or across borders in the context of slow-onset environmental degradation such as drought. The lack of agreed
criteria to distinguish displacement from (predominantly) voluntary migration makes the identification of
such persons difficult.
Predominantly voluntary migration is often used to cope with the dangers of sudden-onset natural hazards or
slow-onset environmental degradation. As stressed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC),
“[e]xpanding opportunities for mobility can reduce vulnerability” for populations at risk.5 Thus, “[c]hanges in
migration patterns can be responses to both extreme weather events and long-term climate variability and
change, and migration can also be an effective adaptation strategy… .”6 Migration is anticipatory when people
feel that, in the long-term, their homes will become uninhabitable or their livelihoods destroyed due to
environmental changes, and reactive when used to deal with the impacts of sudden- or slow-onset disasters.
Circular or temporary migration can build the long-term resilience of people and communities and promote
livelihood diversification when living conditions, in places such as low-lying coastal areas, become difficult.7
Permanent migration may be the only option for those who anticipate their homes becoming permanently
uninhabitable as a consequence of environmental changes. However, if irregular and not properly supported,
circular, temporary and permanent migration may expose people to exploitation, discrimination and other
violations of human rights and further exacerbate vulnerability by placing individuals and families in a more
precarious situation than if they had stayed in their place of origin.8
Permanent relocation of populations – whether initiated or supported by governments – is increasingly
considered as a solution of last resort in contexts where areas are expected to become unsafe or uninhabitable
due to natural hazards and environmental changes.9 The circumstances associated with a given relocation,
including its timing, procedural safeguards and available choices will determine whether such mobility is
characterized as displacement.10
Environmental change is also anticipated to erode different forms of economic and human capital and make
movement less possible. This can create “trapped populations” lacking the resources and means to move
away from locations vulnerable to disasters and environmental change.11

3 Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre (IDMC), Global Report on Internal Displacement 2017, 2017, p. 31.
4 See e.g., The Nansen Initiative Agenda for the Protection of Cross-Border Displaced Persons in the Context of Disasters and
Climate Change, 2015, Vol. II, Annex I.
5 IPCC, ‘Summary for Policymakers’, in Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability, Contribution of Working Group
II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, 2014, p. 20.
6 Ibid.
7 For example, remittances and knowledge acquired abroad can increase resilience.
8 K. Warner et al., Where the Rain Falls: Climate Change, Food and Livelihood Security and Migration: Global Policy Report, UNU-
EHS, 2012, p. 17.
9 United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), Brookings Institution and Georgetown University, Planned Relocation,
Disasters and Climate Change: Consolidating Good Practices and Preparing for the Future, Sanremo Consultation Report, 2014.
10 See e.g., B. Burson et al., The Duty to Move People Out of Harm’s Way in the Context of Climate Change and Disasters, 2017
(forthcoming).
11 See e.g., Foresight, Migration and Global Environmental Change: Final Project Report, The Government Office for Science, 2011.

2
 Ideas to Inform International Cooperation on Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration

While the IPCC expects displacement to increase due to the rise of extreme weather events and other climate
change effects, it highlights that “populations that lack the resources for planned migration experience higher
exposure to extreme weather events, particularly in developing countries with low income”.12 Thus people
living in poverty are likely to face a higher risk of being displaced than those with means to migrate internally
or abroad before disasters strike.

3. Analysis

3.1 Multiple causes

Sudden-onset natural hazards and slow-onset environmental change alone do not create compelling reason
for people to feel obliged to leave their habitual homes or to choose to do so. Rather, as is generally accepted
today, human mobility in such contexts is caused by multiple factors.13
People are displaced or – provided they have the necessary resources – migrate when they are: (i) exposed or
expect to be exposed to (ii) a sudden-onset natural hazard or slow-onset environmental change and (iii) lack
the resilience to withstand impacts. People exposed to natural hazards may lack resilience for a multitude
of socio-economic and political reasons, including poverty, social and economic marginalization, poor urban
planning, expansion of settlements into risk-prone areas, population growth, weak governance regarding
disaster risk reduction and management, and in some situations, violence or armed conflict.14 As compared
to the impacts of the natural hazard itself, demographic, social, economic, institutional and political factors
contribute as much as, and sometimes even more, to whether affected people will be able to stay or have to
move.15
Such understanding explains why it is difficult to attribute “compelling reasons”16 to flee or migrate to natural
hazards and environmental changes alone. Whether such events and changes sufficiently undermine the lives
or living conditions of affected persons to make them move from their habitual homes depends on many
factors that are “human” rather than “natural”. This is why the Nansen Initiative put the notion of disaster,
understood as a situation where the impact of a sudden-onset natural hazard or slow-onset environmental
change “exceed[s] the ability of the affected community or society to cope using its own resources”,17 as the
key trigger for displacement. This notion of disaster provides a useful basis for distinguishing displacement
and migration in the context of sudden-onset natural hazards and slow-onset environmental degradation
(hereinafter: disaster-related displacement and migration) from other forms of human mobility, including
labour migration.

3.2 Conceptualizing responses to environmental mobility: A toolbox approach

Taking the multi-causality of disaster-related displacement and migration seriously presents a plethora of
policy options to address the challenges of human mobility in the context of sudden-onset natural hazards
and slow-onset environmental degradation.18

12 IPCC, supra note 5, p. 20.

13 See in particular Foresight, supra note 11.
14 See e.g., Nansen Initiative Agenda for the Protection of Cross-Border Displaced Persons in the Context of Disasters and Climate
Change, 2015, Vol. I. The Agenda was endorsed by more than 100 States in October 2015.
15 IDMC, Disaster-related Displacement Risk: Measuring the Risk and Addressing its Drivers, 2015, p. 27.
16 See the IOM definition of environmental migrant, supra note 1.
17 “Terminology,” UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR).
18 Nansen Initiative, supra note 14.

3
 Environmental Migrants and Global Governance: Facts, Policies and Practices

Beyond mitigation measures in line with the climate change regime, available tools to prevent and minimize
displacement include:
(i) Reducing vulnerability and strengthening resilience through:
a. Disaster risk reduction (DRR) in accordance with the Sendai Framework on Disaster Risk
Reduction 2015–2030 (Sendai Framework), which calls, inter alia, for the promotion of
‘transboundary cooperation … to build resilience and reduce disaster risk, including …
displacement risk’;19
b. Climate change adaptation in accordance with the Cancun Adaptation Framework;20
c. Full implementation of the sustainable development goals as set out in the 2030 Agenda for
Sustainable Development (2030 Agenda), which refers to “more frequent and intense natural
disasters” and related “forced displacement of people” as factors undermining development.21
A key intervention involves systematically integrating human mobility aspects, including as they relate to
migrants, into regional, bi-lateral, national, and local DRR and climate change adaptation policies and
strategies. Such action could be underpinned by efforts to map areas or communities at risk of disaster
displacement and incorporate internal and cross-border migration and displacement scenarios into disaster
preparedness processes (e.g. early warning, contingency planning, stockpiling, coordination arrangements,
evacuation planning and public information). Ensuring that funding is allocated for displacement and
migration related measures within local, national, bi-lateral, and regional disaster risk management plans, will
be critical. In areas that are expected to experience slow-onset environmental degradation owing to factors
such as desertification or sea-level rise, it may be important to adopt long-term, strategic, multi-disciplinary
measures in national and local development plans to help people to stay as long as possible.
(ii) Allowing people to move out of harm’s way by:
a. Facilitating, both legally and practically, safe, orderly, and regular migration as a coping
mechanism and adaptation measure;
b. Implementing planned relocation in accordance with international standards as an option of last
resort.22
Policies that facilitate internal, intra- and inter-regional circular, temporary, or permanent mobility allow
at-risk populations to make timely and strategic choices regarding their well-being. Expanding options for
international migration as a form of adaptation can be undertaken through the creation and expansion of
safe, legal pathways that leverage regional agreements on free movement, labor mobility schemes, and
domestic immigration laws (related to work, family reunification, study, or other privileged access). These
efforts, which can be implemented through bi-lateral, regional, multilateral, or transhumance agreements,
can draw upon Regional Consultative Processes on Migration (RCPs), historical and contemporary mobility
patterns, political or colonial ties, and other networks. Providing residency permit quotas or seasonal worker
programs in accordance with international labor standards may be a particularly effective way to prioritize
people from countries or areas facing natural hazards, high levels of disaster risks, or climate change impacts.
Developing national guidelines and frameworks on planned relocation can ensure that when it needs to be
used as a preventive or responsive measure to reduce the risk of disasters and displacement, the necessary
structures and guidance are in place.

19 Adopted at the Third UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction, 2015, para. 28(d).
20 Decision 1/CP.16, The Cancun Agreements: Outcome of the work of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action
under the Convention, UN Doc. FCCC/CP/2010/7/Add.1 (2011), paras. 11-35.
21 Transforming Our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, UN Doc. A/RES/70/1 (2015).
22 For more on planned relocation, see e.g., Brookings, Georgetown University and UNHCR, Guidance on Protecting People from
Disasters and Environmental Change through Planned Relocation, 2015.

4
 Ideas to Inform International Cooperation on Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration

Such measures, if fully implemented, would to a large extent reduce, but not entirely stop instances where
people have to flee their homes in disaster situations and need protection and assistance as internally or
cross-border displaced persons.
(iii) Available tools to address displacement include:
a. Implementing existing normative frameworks to protect IDPs;
b. Exercising discretion to admit, or refrain from returning, persons displaced across borders.
Those displaced within their own country are covered at the global-level by the framework detailed in the
UN Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement and at the regional level by the African Union Convention for
the Protection and Assistance of Internally Displaced Persons in Africa (the so-called Kampala Convention).23
These frameworks need to be fully incorporated into domestic laws and policies to encompass internal
displacement in the context of disasters linked to natural hazards and environmental degradation. Strengthened
implementation and the provision of swift and adequate humanitarian assistance and protection to IDPs in
disaster contexts can assuage pressure to undertake subsequent movements.
When disaster-affected persons are displaced across international borders, they normally do not qualify as
refugees per se, although forms of persecution and violence relevant under international or regional refugee
law may also occur in disaster contexts.24 The non-refoulement obligation under international human rights
law may in some cases also impose constraints on returns of persons to disaster-affected countries.
Many States have used their discretion in migration matters to admit cross-border disaster-displaced persons
at least on a temporary basis, and to refrain from removing foreigners who were present on their territory
at the time of the disaster, even if their stay had become irregular.25 Such admissions and non-returns were
motivated by humanitarian considerations such as a real risk to life or safety from an ongoing or imminent
disaster in the country of origin; where affected persons had experienced physical harm, loss of family, or loss
of livelihood as a direct result of a disaster; or where they risked very serious hardship in the country of origin
because of an inability to access humanitarian protection and assistance. Such measures were sometimes also
taken as an expression of solidarity with governments whose capacity in the country of origin was temporarily
overwhelmed. In legal terms, affected persons have been admitted and allowed to stay on the basis of:
a. Regional or bilateral agreements on free movement of persons;
b. Regular national migration laws (e.g. through the generous and expedited provision of work
permits or family reunification);
c. Exceptional migration categories (e.g. humanitarian visas or temporary protection measures);
and
d. Ad hoc decisions.
This evidence of State practice provides opportunities to enhance dialogue and action by regional organizations,
as well as RCPs, to agree on and harmonize responses and solutions to cross-border disaster displacement.
Efforts should relate to the provision of temporary protection or humanitarian visas: (1) to admit persons who
are directly and seriously affected by disasters; or (2) to allow those already in another country at the time of
the disaster to stay if their return is not permitted by international law, not reasonable in light of humanitarian
considerations, not possible (for instance because airports are destroyed or otherwise closed), or if their
country of origin is temporarily unable to protect and assist them due to a disaster. Dialogue and action could
also relate to enhancing implementation of agreed responses through the adoption or harmonization of

23 United Nations Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement, UN Doc. E/CN.4/1998/53/Add.2 (1998); African Union Convention
for the Protection and Assistance of Internally Displaced Persons in Africa (2009).
24 For a discussion of the (non-)applicability of refugee law see in particular AF (Kiribati) [2013] NZIPT 800413 (25 June 2013, B.
Burson).
25 For more on this, including the following discussion, see Nansen Initiative, supra note 14, paras. 33, 47 and 65.

5
 Environmental Migrants and Global Governance: Facts, Policies and Practices

relevant domestic laws and policies or regional or bilateral agreements on admission and non-return of such
persons that are in accordance with international human rights law. Where, in the long run, a whole country
becomes uninhabitable or even disappears as in the case of low-lying atoll States, admission and non-return
would have to become permanent.
All these approaches to environmental mobility, including facilitating migration and protecting cross-border
displaced persons have to be in line with human rights standards. In particular, the duty to protect the
right to life applies to situations where a natural hazard is imminent and clearly identifiable,26 imposing on
States the obligation to take measures ensuring that affected persons are not exposed to life-threatening
situations. More generally, “protecting and promoting human rights of migrants and persons displaced across
international borders, in the context of the adverse impacts of climate change”, as recently recognized by the
Human Rights Council, is essential.27

4. Conclusions
As is apparent from the frameworks and tools highlighted briefly in this paper (and further annotated in
Annex I), the global governance of environmental mobility is fragmented.28 The primary responsibility for
the protection of affected persons is on the States under whose jurisdiction they find themselves. Despite
their human rights obligations with regard to displaced or migrating people, States possess a large degree of
discretion when responding to such situations. Bilateral or regional agreements, standard-setting by regional
organizations and discussions within the framework of RCPs still play only limited roles, but have a huge
potential to harmonize and improve responses.
In this context, it is important that the New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants recognizes that some
people migrate or are displaced “in response to the adverse effects of climate change, natural disasters (some
of which may be linked to climate change), or other environmental factors.”29 More specifically, member
States agreed that the GCM should address the drivers of migration, facilitate “safe, orderly, regular and
responsible migration and mobility of people,” including by creating and expanding “safe, regular pathways
for migration”, as well as provide effective protection for the human rights and “specific needs of migrants in
vulnerable situations.”30 People displaced or migrating in the context of disasters and environmental change
certainly belong to this category of migrants.
The above analysis suggests that many elements necessary for the global governance of environmental
mobility are, at least implicitly, already in place in hard and soft-law agreements, policies, agendas and action
plans agreed by the international community. The GCM provides a unique opportunity to strengthen the
global governance framework for environmental mobility by bringing together and synthesizing principles
in the climate change regime, including the Paris Agreement, the Sendai Framework, the 2030 Agenda and
other instruments that are particularly relevant for addressing drivers of migration. It is also an opportunity
to build on domestic laws and practices and frameworks such as the Nansen Initiative Protection Agenda and
the Migrants in Countries in Crisis (MICIC) Initiative Guidelines developed through ‘mini-multilateralism’ to
achieve the goal of safe, orderly and regular migration for all, including those crossing borders in the context
of climate change and disasters.31

26 European Court of Human Rights, Budayeva and Others v. Russia, Application Nos. 15339/02, 21166/02, 20058/02, 11673/02,
and 15343/02, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 2008-II, para. 137.
27 Human Rights and Climate Change, UN Doc. A/HRC/RES/35/20 (2017), para. 7.
28 One definition of global governance suggests that it can be defined in either substantive or procedural terms. “On a procedural
level, it can be understood as the process by which states engage in collective action to address common problems arising around
a particular issue. This process involves agenda-setting, negotiations, monitoring, implementation, and enforcement. On a
substantive level, global governance is identifiable by the norms, rules, principles, and decision-making procedures that regulate
the behaviour of states (and other transnational actors) in a particular issue area.” A. Betts, ‘The Governance of International
Migration: Gaps and Way Forward’, in Bertelsmann Stiftung and Migration Policy Institute (eds.), Improving the Governance of
International Migration, Verlag Bertelsmann Stiftung, 2011, p.69.
29 New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants, UN. Doc. A/RES/71/1 (2016), para. 1.
30 Ibid., Annex II, para. 8.
31 Such an approach was promoted by several delegations at the second informal thematic session on addressing drivers of
migration, 22-23 May 2017, New York. See the Co-facilitators' summary, pp. 3 and 7.

6
 Ideas to Inform International Cooperation on Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration

5. Recommendations
Elements that should be considered for inclusion in the GCM include the following principles:
• The commitment to take, in accordance with relevant international frameworks and instruments,
effective DRR and climate change adaptation measures that integrate human mobility aspects to
prevent and mitigate environment-related displacement of persons living in areas at risk;
• Recognition that temporary, circular, or permanent migration can be an important means for persons
to adapt to climate change and cope with disasters and, in order to expand the number and range of
regular pathways for affected persons, the commitment of States to review, existing domestic laws,
bilateral and multilateral agreements, and regional migration arrangements, and consider new laws
and agreements, to facilitate migration as an adaptation measure, in accordance with international
human rights and international labour law;
• The commitment to exercise States’ discretion in matters of migration to admit on humanitarian
grounds – and not return – persons displaced across borders if they are personally and seriously at risk
of, or already affected by a disaster, or if their country of origin is temporarily unable to protect and
assist them due to a disaster, and to find durable solutions for such persons;
• Recognition of and support for the crucial role played by regional organizations and processes such as
the RCPs to agree on and harmonize responses to environment-related displacement and migration
and to enhance their application; and
• The commitment to enhance international cooperation to assist affected States to prevent, avoid, and
respond to disaster- and climate change-related risks, including the risk of displacement.

7
 Environmental Migrants and Global Governance: Facts, Policies and Practices

Annex 1: Key reference documents

The documents listed below relate to the global-level and many suggest further reading.

1. Background materials

Reference Document(s) Relevance

Foresight: Migration and Global Produced by the UK Government Office for Science to inform
Environmental Change (2011), Final Project policymakers on necessary decisions and choices in contemporary
Report: Executive Summary (and full report) settings, this report, which examined cutting-edge science
(www.gov.uk/government/publications/ and evidence from a range of disciplines and involved more
migration-and-global-environmental-change- than 350 experts, explores how movement may be affected by
future-challenges-and-opportunities) environmental changes into 2060. Key findings include recognition
that environmental change influences the multi-causal drivers of
migration and discussion of ways in which environmental change can
hinder mobility and increase vulnerability.

Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation A part of the fifth (and latest) assessment report by the
and Vulnerability: Summary for Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPPC), this report
Policymakers (www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/ summarizes 30 chapters that examine vulnerability and exposure,
wg2/) observed impacts, future risks and adaptation. Mobility is examined
and discussed, particularly in the context of human security (Chapter
12). It notes that climate change over the 21st century is projected to
increase displacement and expanding opportunities for mobility can
reduce the vulnerability of such populations.

Global Report on Internal Displacement The Internal Displacement Monitoring Center (IDMC) is the
(GRID) 2017 (and earlier reports) (www. reference for global statistics on people displaced within countries
internal-displacement.org/global-report/) in the context of disasters. Its annual GRID reports (e.g. 2017; 2016),
and database (www.internal-displacement. provide a global overview of data, while identifying challenges (e.g.
org/database/) disentangling the immediate cause when conflict coexists with
disaster) and key gaps (e.g. cumulative totals; movements in the
context of slow-onset disasters)).

8
 Ideas to Inform International Cooperation on Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration

2. Normative frameworks and tools

Reference Document(s) Relevance

1992 United Nations Framework The UNFCCC does not explicitly address climate related mobility,
Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), but COP decisions have increasingly done so. Notably, in the Cancun
its Conference of the Parties (COP) Adaptation Framework (2010), within the context of adaptation,
Decisions (e.g. 2010 (http://unfccc.int/ the COP first called on Parties to undertake “[m]easures to enhance
resource/docs/2010/cop16/eng/07a01. understanding, coordination, and cooperation with regard to climate
pdf#page=4), 2012 (http://unfccc.int/ change induced displacement, migration and planned relocation,
resource/docs/2012/cop18/eng/08a01. where appropriate, at the national, regional and international levels.”
pdf), and 2015 (http://unfccc.int/resource/ (para 14(f)). In 2012, within the context of loss and damage, the COP
docs/2015/cop21/eng/10a01.pdf)) and the acknowledged the need for greater understanding and expertise on
2015 Paris Agreement (http://unfccc.int/ “how impacts of climate change are affecting patterns of migration,
paris_agreement/items/9485.php) displacement and human mobility” (Decision 3/CP.18, para 7(vi)).
In its preamble, the Paris Agreement explicitly references migrants:
“Parties should, when taking action to address climate change,
respect, promote and consider their respective obligations on human
rights, … the rights of … migrants, and people in vulnerable situations”.
The associated COP decision also required the establishment of a
task force “to develop recommendations for integrated approaches
to avert, minimize and address displacement related to the adverse
impacts of climate change” (para 49).

1998 United Nations Guiding Principles The GPID, which reflects and is consistent with international human
on Internal Displacement (GPID) (www. rights and humanitarian law, is the global normative framework on the
unhcr.org/protection/idps/43ce1cff2/ rights of, and obligations towards, IDPs, including those displaced in
guiding-principles-internal-displacement. the context of disasters and environmental change. IDPs are described
html) and Annotations (2008, 2nd Edition) as including persons “forced or obliged to flee or leave their homes
(www.brookings.edu/research/the-guiding- or habitual residences’ in the context of ‘natural or human-made
principles-on-internal-displacement- disasters”. The GPID covers all phases of displacement – from pre-
annotations-2nd-edition/). flight to return. Although non-binding, the GPID were unanimously
recognized as “an important legal framework” for IDP protection at the
2005 World Summit and the UN General Assembly has welcomed and
encouraged their use. The Annotations sets out the legal antecedents
to the GPID.

Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk The highly authoritative (albeit voluntary and non-binding) SFDRR,
Reduction 2015-2030 (SFDRR) (www.unisdr. adopted by 187 country delegations to the Third UN World Conference
org/files/43291_sendaiframeworkfordrren. on Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) in 2015 and subsequently endorsed
pdf) by the UN General Assembly, seeks to substantially reduce disaster
risk and losses through the prevention of new, and the reduction
of existing, disaster risk. In this context, in its preamble, the SFDRR
acknowledges that displacement is one of the devastating effects of
disasters and that migrants are a relevant stakeholder. The multiple
references to different forms of mobility throughout the SFDD reflect
the fact that both displaced persons and migrants are encompassed
with the SFDRR’s global targets, including the one on reducing “the
number of affected people globally” (para 18(b)) and they, along
with their property need to be protected in the context of managing
the risk of disasters (para 19(c)). Among the variety of activities for
States and other actors, the SFDRR encourages “the adoption of
policies and programmes addressing disaster-induced human mobility
to strengthen the resilience of affected people and that of host
communities” (para 30(l)).

9
 Environmental Migrants and Global Governance: Facts, Policies and Practices

UN Human Rights Council (HRC) Resolution The HRC has adopted a series of resolutions recognizing the
on Human Rights and Climate Change interactions between, and implications of, climate change on human
(2017) (UN Doc. A/HRC/RES/35/20, 7 July rights. Its 2017 resolution, the most detailed and comprehensive to
2017, https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/ date, “recognizes that climate change-related human mobility and
doc/UNDOC/GEN/G17/184/52/PDF/ human rights are cross-cutting in nature” (para. 9) and makes multiple
G1718452.pdf?OpenElement) and earlier references to better understanding and addressing the protection of
resolutions (www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/ migrants and persons displaced across international borders in the
HRAndClimateChange/Pages/HRCAction. context of adverse impacts of climate change.
aspx)

Nansen Initiative Agenda for the The 3-year Nansen Initiative, the State-led process begun in 2012,
Protection of Cross-Border Displaced culminated in the endorsement of its non-binding Protection
Persons in the Context of Disasters Agenda by 109 government delegations. The Agenda consolidates
and Climate Change, Volumes I and II the outcomes of extensive consultation, evidence gathering and
(2015) (www.nanseninitiative.org/global- consensus-building. To assist States and other stakeholders to improve
consultations/) and follow up work being preparedness and responses to address cross-border displacement,
undertaken by the Platform on Disaster the Agenda conceptualizes a comprehensive approach, a toolbox
Displacement (http://disasterdisplacement. that not only focuses on protecting those who cross borders, but also
org/) and the publications, perspectives and presents measures to manage risks in the country of origin. The Agenda
other resources on each website. compiles a broad set of effective practices and highlights three priority
areas for action at the national, (sub-)regional, and international
levels: (1) Collecting data and enhancing knowledge on cross border
displacement; (2) Enhancing the use of humanitarian protection
measures for those who cross borders in the context of disasters and
climate change; and (3) Strengthening the management of disaster
displacement risk in the country of origin by: (a) Integrating human
mobility within disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation
strategies and other relevant development processes; (b) Facilitating
migration with dignity as a potentially positive way to cope with the
effects of natural hazards and climate change; (c) Improving the use of
planned relocation as a preventative or responsive measure to disaster
risk and displacement; and (d) Ensuring the needs of IDPs displaced
in disaster situations are specifically addressed in relevant laws and
policies on disaster risk management and internal displacement.

International Law Commission (ILC) Draft In 2016, the ILC – the UN body of legal experts elected by States
Articles on the Protection of Persons in the to promote the progressive development of international law and
Event of Disasters (with Commentaries) its codification – adopted the Draft Articles with Commentaries
(2015) (http://legal.un.org/ilc/guide/6_3. and recommended to the UN General Assembly the elaboration of
shtml) a convention based on the document. The Draft Articles, while not
explicitly addressing human mobility, detail the scope and content of
State’s duties in the context of sudden and slow onset disasters with
respect to preventive and remedial actions. Article 9 states that States
have an obligation, derived from widespread State practice, to reduce
the risk of disasters. The Draft Articles are also underpinned by general
principles of international law, including respect for human dignity,
human rights, the principles of humanity, neutrality, impartiality, and
non-discrimination, and the duty to cooperate.

10
 Ideas to Inform International Cooperation on Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration

The Migrants in Countries in Crisis Developed through a State-led Initiative, these non-binding Guidelines
(MICIC) Initiative Guidelines to Protect provide a normative framework for protecting non-citizens affected
People in Countries Experiencing Conflict by disasters in the country in which they are present. The principles,
and Natural Disaster (2016) (https:// guidelines and practices targeted towards States, private sector
micicinitiative.iom.int/) and other tools actors, international organizations and civil society relate to migrant
listed in website, including practices protection from pre-departure to return.
repository.

Guidance on Protecting People from The Guidance and Toolbox, developed by institutional actors,
Disasters and Environmental Change academics and other multidisciplinary experts, with input from
Through Planned Relocation (2015) and States, seek to fill a knowledge gap on relocation of populations in the
A Toolbox: Planning Relocations to Protect context of disasters and environmental change. The Guidance sets out
People from Disasters and Environmental principles to assist States and other actors to develop laws, policies,
Change (2017) (https://isim.georgetown. plans and programs. The Toolbox highlights cross-cutting issues integral
edu/Planned-Relocations) and other to all planned relocations and identifies practical considerations and
resource listed in the Guidance, Toolbox challenges to assist with planning and implementation.
and website.

UNHCR Guidelines on Temporary This document provides guidance on the development of temporary
Protection or Stay Arrangements (2014) protection or stay arrangements as a response to humanitarian crises
(www.refworld.org/docid/52fba2404.html) and population movements, particularly where existing responses are
inadequate.

11
 Walter Kälin is professor emeritus for international and (Swiss) constitutional
law, University of Bern/Switzerland. He is the present Envoy of the Chair of the
Platform on Disaster Displacement and the former Envoy of the Nansen Initiative
on disaster-induced cross-border displacement (2012 – 1015). Prof. Kälin also
served as Representative of the UN Secretary-General on the Human Rights of
internally displaced persons (2004 – 2010), as a member of the UN Human Rights
Committee (2003 – 2008 / 2012 – 2014) and as Special Rapporteur of the UN
Human Rights Commission on the situation of human rights in Iraqi occupied
Kuwait (1991/92).

Sanjula Weerasinghe is a Senior Research Officer within IOM’s Migration Policy

Research Division and a non-resident Fellow with ​the ​Institute for the ​S​tudy
of ​In
​ ternational ​ Migration (ISIM) at Georgetown University​. Prior to her work
with MPRD, Sanjula worked with the Migrants in Countries in Crisis Initiative
Secretariat, based within IOM, where she was the lead secretariat drafter of the
MICIC Initiative Guidelines to Protect Migrants in Countries Experiencing Conflict
or Natural Disaster. Sanjula’s past experience ​includes work with ISIM, UNHCR,
the Brookings Institution and the UNSW Kaldor Centre for International Refugee
Law. She has also represented refugees and asylum seekers, managed legal aid
centers in Thailand and Hong Kong and worked as a legal practitioner.

International Organization for Migration

17 route des Morillons, P.O. Box 17, 1211 Geneva 19, Switzerland
Tel.: +41 22 717 9111 • Fax: +41 22 798 6150
E-mail: [email protected] • Website: www.iom.int