Part III: Policy responses Environment and Migration

Adaptation and Migration A failure to adapt, or an adaptation strategy? Environment & Migration

1. The nature of adaptation

What is adaptation? Adaptation and mitigation, two facets of the same problem  Initial focus on mitigation, increased attention paid to adaptation  Key issue: balance between mitigation and adaptation  Both concerned with equity and fairness, though equity is more discussed with regard to mitigation.  Not the same goal:  Mitigation is about avoiding what would be impossible to manage  Adaptation is about managing what is impossible to avoid  Adaptation is concerned with costs, mitigation might bring some benefits as well

Adaptation is linked with mitigation  Crucial to deal with the unavoidable impacts of climate change  Can mute the impacts, but cannot solve the problem  Limited and costly  These limits and costs will rise with failure to tackle mitigation  Local benefits

Role of adaptation in reducing the damages

The rationale for adaptation Used to be (and still is) considered as an option that should follow (and could possibly undermine) mitigation.  Justified because some of climate impacts are already under way, while others are unavoidable.  Bargaining chip in the negotiation process.  Considered by some as the most efficient way to fight climate change, especially after the failure of Copenhagen.

The new name of development?  Adaptation remains difficult to define  Just an adjustment to change?  Adaptation as a process  Depends highly on regional and local impacts, which are still difficult to predict  Development is key to adaptation  Adaptation policies implemented by development agencies  But development can also lead to mal-adaptation  And adaptation has some specificities  Key issue: funding vehicles

Vulnerability and adaptive capacity  Two sides of a same coin.  Both are often reduced to:  The level of development – Economic determinism  The geographical exposure – Environmental determinism  Other components include:  Spatial organization  Social cohesion  Economic diversification  Political and institutional organization

2. Adaptation in the negotiations

Adaptation in the climate talks  Adaptation provides mostly local benefits > makes it harder to justify collective action.  Recognised on the same basis as mitigation since Marakkech (2001) and New Dehli (2002)  Nairobi Work Program (2006)  Poznan (2008): Adaptation Fund  Can it still be used as a bargaining chip after Copenhagen?

Funding  How much does it cost?  Depends on the discount rate  UNDP 2007: 86 bn US$ / year  OAU 2009: 67 bn US$ / year for Africa  How is it funded?  Least Advanced Countries Fund (re NAPAs) - UNFCCC  Special Climate Change Fund – UNFCCC  Adaptation Fund – KP  Copenhagen Green Climate Fund

Funding (ct’d)  At the end of 2009, less than 500 Mio $ were available through:  Voluntary contributions  A 2% tax on CDM projects  After Copenhagen:  Fast-start scheme: 10 Bio $ yearly on the , funded mostly by EU and Japan  Green Climate Fund: Goal: 100 Bio $ / year from 2020 onwards.  Issue of additionality  Additional funding provided by development agencies

How will it be spent?  Three issues:  Who will control the use of the money?  Is the money the payment of a debt or a voluntary contribution?  What kind of projects will be funded?  Is it possible to distinguish adaptation projects from development projects?  Where does adaptation start?  Who’s getting the money?  Who’s the most vulnerable?  Does the state need to channel all the funding?  Most likely, fast-start money will be used to fund some pilot- projects  Is adaptation the new name of development?

Three taboos of adaptation  In adaptation funding, what is the share justified only by climate change?  Micro-insurance schemes against droughts  On which basis will the funding be allocated?  On a first-come, first-served basis? Equity criteria?  Assistance or compensation?

Migration as a failure to adapt  Initially, migration was very little considered in the debates on adaptation.  Absent from NAPAs  Restricted to small island states

Lobbying in the negotiations  Some states pushed for migration to be included in the negotiation package:  States already confronted with massive population displacements: Bangladesh, Mozambique, etc.  States using climate change as a way to better migration deals with industrialised countries: Algeria, etc.  Scholars and NGOs also pushed for migration to be included  As well as IOM and UNHCR

The Cancun success  Creation of the Green Climate Fund: 100 bn $ / year for developing countries, starting in  Paragraph 14 f:  Measures to enhance understanding, coordination and cooperation with regard to climate change induced displacement, migration and planned relocation, where appropriate, at national, regional and international levels  Policies related to migration and displacement are eligible for funding  Migration appears officially in UNFCCC texts  Recognition that migration can be an adaptation strategy

Some possible adaptation projects In the UNFCCC negotiation text FCCC/CP/2010/2, 10 February 2010

3. Fleshing out the migration- adaptation nexus

Adaptation for whom?  For the migrants themselves  Usual way of presenting migration as adaptation.  For the community of destination  Dominant narrative of tensions and conflicts  Migration towards vulnerable regions.  For the community of origin  Most difficult aspect.  To be noted:  Migration studies have long considered migration as a positive process aimed at adjusting to changes.  Migration at large, not only environmentally-induced, has an impact on adaptation.  The maladaptive potential of migration.

Impact on the community of origin  Negative outcomes  Loss of workforce and assets  Feeling of abandonment  Positive outcomes  Migrants networks  Humanitarian and development projects  Political and economic lobbying  Mobilization after disasters  Remittances  Collective adaptation projects?  Philanthropy  Income diversification strategy  Alleviation of pressure on resources

4. Two policy directions

Enabling the right to leave  The right to leave is the key condition of asylum, originating after the Peace of Westphalia.  This right is currently jeopardised by environmental change.  The most vulnerable often find themselves unable to leave  Because they don’t have the resources to do so  Because of barriers to migration  Their life, health and livelihood are directly exposed to danger  Migration as a risk-reduction strategy  Issue of pro-active population displacements

Enabling the right to choose  Many of the migrants are forced migrants, and many of the stayers are forced stayers.  Adaptation needs  In the origin region, adaptation will reduce the environmental constraints to migration.  Adaptation will also be needed in the destination regions.  In many cases, a sensible adaptation policy would be to promote and facilitate migration: migration can be a key tool to improve human security.  Adaptation and migration policies need to be consistent with each other.

Pending questions  Shift towards the UNFCCC as the key framework to address environmental migration  What about non-climatic environmental disruptions?  Allocation of funding?  What kind of programme can be funded?  Who can apply?  Compensation?  Migration governance as an environmental policy?