Monday, September 14, 2009
The Invisible Refugee by Leonie Joubert's new book, Invaded: The Biological Invasion of South Africa, was launched last month
http://www.mg.co.za/article/2009-09-12-the-invisible-refugee
The term "refugee" isn't one governments want to talk about in the context of climate change: they may be asked to open their borders to people forced to flee because of rising sea levels or extreme weather.
Ed Miliband, the British secretary of state for energy and climate change, sidestepped the issue during a climate change briefing with South African editors in Johannesburg, saying: "The best thing we can do is prevent climate refugees happening.
"I really think the prospect of a world with hundreds of millions of climate refugees is pretty bad,'' he said. "It's important that we take the action that is necessary to prevent that happening, for the sake of the refugees more than anything."
But Miliband didn't say the United Kingdom would accept climate refugees: "I think that the issue points to the urgency of acting on the overall situation."
Well, yes. The International Organisation for Migration predicts that about 200-million people may be looking for somewhere new to live as climate change amplifies existing causes of migration, such as environmental stress and conflict over resources, by 2050.
Greenpeace puts forward a much bigger number: by the middle of this century, one in nine people will be forced to migrate because of climate change.
A small state such as the Maldives, with its 300 000 people living across a series of islands barely above sea level, is already expecting inundation by a 1m rise in sea level projected by the end of this century.
Rising sea levels would also flood vulnerable deltas, including the Nile (home to 10-million people), the Mekong (with more than 14-million people) and the Ganges (where nine million people will likely be affected).
Environmental change is expected to trigger large-scale migration in the Sahel, which faces a future of water shortages and drought.
Downstream of the Himalayan glaciers, about 1,4-billion people in Asia face hunger as runoff disappears along with the glaciers.
As much of the pollution driving climate change has come from the developed world, such countries may well be asked to take responsibility for these climate refugees.
But will they? Later this month signatories of the Kyoto Protocol meet in Thailand in the penultimate effort to streamline the lengthy text that states may sign into life in Denmark in December.
The Copenhagen talks should replace the Kyoto agreement. But there's debate about whether the term "refugee" will be in the next-generation agreement at all. Some prefer the phrase "environmental migrant" -- migrants don't require as much legal protection as refugees, it seems.
Monday, September 14th, 2009, 6:12 am Amman Time | Make this your homepage | Subscribe
There are now 84 days to Copenhagen. An enormous diplomatic challenge lies before us if we are to secure the ambitious, effective and equitable agreement that we need to avert runaway climate change that would have disastrous consequences for Europe and the world.
Around the world, and particularly in the poorest and most vulnerable countries, global warming already threatens to undermine development efforts in health, agriculture and infrastructure. Migration caused by lack of access to water and land is increasing social tension and undermining political stability and security.
Climate change has the potential to bring about substantial geopolitical change. It will increasingly affect the foreign policy decisions of all our countries. European foreign ministries must make a real contribution now to the drive to achieve a deal at Copenhagen. The European Union must show renewed leadership to help unlock the negotiations through its commitment to take ambitious mitigation action at home, and on financial and technological support to help developing countries move to a low carbon growth path.
After the meeting in Copenhagen on September 10, we agree on how to tackle this collective diplomatic challenge. We pledge the following:
- To press for a deal at Copenhagen of sufficient ambition to keep global warming to a maximum of 2 degrees.
- To work to promote an ambitious and equitable international offer in which Europe will take its fair share in financing mitigation, technology and adaptation efforts by developing countries.
- To engage personally to direct the full force of our diplomatic efforts and mobilise the resources of our collective diplomatic networks to persuade the key participants in this negotiation to come forward with ambitious commitments.
- To work to ensure that the challenges climate change poses to international stability and security gets a prominent position on the international agenda.
- To work to ensure that the EU continues to show leadership in the negotiations with a readiness to move from our current commitment of reducing carbon emissions by 20 per cent by 2020, to a commitment to reduce emissions by 30 per cent in the context of an ambitious deal and comparable efforts by the other partners.
Through a strong message on finance for mitigation, adaptation and technology we will contribute towards a deal that gets all countries onboard a new agreement to be reached in Copenhagen.
The Copenhagen conference cannot agree on a new international regime to fight climate change unless we find a political balance among all parties. We must create mutual confidence and trust that the only sustainable global growth path is for us to transform our economies to low carbon. We can make this the great defining cause for Europe in the 21st century.
David Miliband, secretary of state for foreign and commonwealth affairs, UK
Carl Bildt, minister for foreign affairs, Sweden
Per Stig Moller, minister for foreign Affairs, Denmark
Bernard Kouchner, minister of foreign and European affairs, France
Alexander Stubb, minister for foreign affairs, Finland
Miguel Ángel Moratinos, minister for foreign affairs, Spain
14 September 2009
The Jakarta Globe
Protecting climate change refugees
Sunday 13 September 2009 14.00 BST http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/sep/13/climate-change-refugees-law
Communities hardest hit by climate change are also the poorest. Their right to compensation and protection needs to be made law
The phrase "environmental refugee" has been around since the 1970s, with the term "climate refugee" appearing more recently. Although the concept is simple to grasp, these terms have no meaning in international law.
The need to mitigate the effects of climate change has rightly held a high place on the international agenda, but it is only now that the reality of human suffering on a colossal scale, as a consequence of a changing climate, is being given the attention it deserves. I believe environmental security is a human right and, as climate change creates millions of environmental refugees, that this right must henceforth be enshrined in international law.
As early as 1990, the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPPC) suggested that the "gravest effects of climate change may be those on human migration." Similar predictions today suggest that 200 million people could be forced from their homes by 2050 due to environmental factors arising from climate change.
Crucially, it is evident that environmental stresses affect communities and regions least able to adapt to change, typically hitting the poorest people on our planet. At the same time, many of the regions and populations that will be most affected, such as Bangladesh or small island developing states such as the Maldives and Seychelles, also have some of the lowest per capita greenhouse gas emissions. Historically, they have been responsible for a tiny fraction of the warming gases released, compared with those released by western industrialised nations. For many in the west, the effects of a changing climate remain largely an abstract concept, yet among poorer nations the climate is already devastating the lives of millions.
Meanwhile, there is a complete absence of any formal, enforceable, legal multilateral mechanism designed to address the needs of these people and assist in creating some greater equality and proportionality between those causing climate change and those most affected.
The 1951 UN Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees was drafted in the immediate aftermath of the second world war; its focus on those who are forced from their country of origin through fear of persecution, "for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion". In today's world, the 1951 convention cannot meet the needs of climate refugees, as its narrow legal definitions will not apply to most of those affected by climate change. Also, the specific desire and best option for many will be to stay within their national boundaries if the financial and technical assistance to do so were forthcoming.
Just as the overarching threat of climate change is one of global responsibility, so is the fate of climate refugees. In this context, there is a clear and compelling imperative to create a new multilateral legal mechanism – and with it a new legal definition for climate refugees – that enshrines the right to life, food, health, water, housing and other essentials. This should apply to all those who are now affected and the millions more who will be affected by the changes in our climate created largely by a distant, and still largely unresponsive, wealthy west.
Every year, climate change leaves more than 300,000 people dead, 325 million people seriously affected, and economic losses of $125bn. If anyone should be in any doubt as to the comparative costs of propping up failing economies, and of protecting millions of people from climate change, the UN has estimated that annual global spending to mitigate the worst effects of climate change amounts to about $0.5bn. Compare that with the $150bn spent by the US federal government to bail out just one failing insurance company, or the top nine US banks which gave over $32bn in bonuses alone that same year.
The recent financial crisis has shown that both political will and financial muscle can be mobilised when the wealth and way of life for the developed world is threatened. Now, in the knowledge that not just the way of life, but the actual existence of many is threatened by climate change, we must mount a similarly forceful response and create a new legal framework for climate refugees alongside the essential action to curb our carbon emissions.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment