Double displacement – Interactions between resettlement, environmental change and migration

Geoforum ◽  
2022 ◽  
Vol 129 ◽  
pp. 13-27
Author(s):  
Fiona Miller ◽  
Tran Thi Phung Ha ◽  
Huynh Van Da ◽  
Ngo Thi Thanh Thuy ◽  
Boi Huyen Ngo
Author(s):  
Victoria van der Land ◽  
Clemens Romankiewicz ◽  
Kees van der Geest

Author(s):  
Christopher S. Beekman

This chapter addresses recent research that identifies migration as a specific form of human movement in which social groups move into new social contexts. Migration is inherently disruptive to people’s lives, and it occurs embedded within political, economic, or social processes that make it highly context-specific. I discuss the history of theory in migration research, including recent shifts away from a concern with ethnicity in favour of communities of practice. Late Mesoamerica is a data-rich environment for the study of migration within its social context. The Classic period saw regional political systems that extended their reach economically or militarily and frequently had a demographic component. The widespread disruption of the Epiclassic or Terminal Classic periods included environmental change, political collapse, and a major reorganization of the social landscape. The Postclassic witnessed the re-emergence of complex societies claiming descent from migrant populations. The contributions to this volume come from many different disciplines and assess the timing, causes, perceptions, and impacts of migrations across a variety of social contexts. Political disruption, environmental change, and migration are frequently interrelated in ways reminiscent of our world today.


2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (10) ◽  
pp. 904-912 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roman Hoffmann ◽  
Anna Dimitrova ◽  
Raya Muttarak ◽  
Jesus Crespo Cuaresma ◽  
Jonas Peisker

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (6) ◽  
pp. 1045-1060 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan F Martin

With this paper I focus on international legal norms and organizational roles and relations applicable to migration induced by environmental change. I examine movements stemming directly and indirectly from environmental factors related to climate change—including, for example, movements resulting from intensified drought and desertification affecting livelihoods, rising sea levels, intensified acute natural disasters, and competition for resources that result in intensified conflict. The analysis focuses on the extent to which legal and institutional responses affect patterns of mobility, especially in slow-onset situations, and the extent to which governance, more generally, affects the likelihood that people will migrate as a result of environmental factors, especially in humanitarian emergencies. I conclude that immigration policies, governance, and the level of development in affected countries play a crucial role in determining the responses to natural hazards and conflict. They also help determine if migration poses technical or managerial challenges or presents political challenges. Given the current gaps in appropriate migration policies, more attention needs to be placed on identifying and testing new frameworks for managing potential movements. Attention needs to be given to both sides of the environment and migration nexus: (1) identifying adaptation strategies that allow people to remain where they currently live and work; and (2) identifying migration and relocation strategies that protect people's lives and livelihoods when they are unable to remain.


Author(s):  
Elizabeth Ferris

Abstract Today the issue of climate change-induced mobility—whether displacement, migration, or relocation—is receiving increased interest from policy-makers, academics, and the general public. Many are turning to the academic community for answers to basic questions (how many people are expected to move? when? where?) and for directions for future policies (what measures can support people to remain in their communities? If people have to move, how can the disruption be minimized—for those moving and for the affected communities?). While there is a growing body of literature on the issue, the academic community writ large is presently unable to provide consistent comprehensive evidence or guidance on these issues. Most obviously, there is no consensus about what terminology to use—climate change refugee? Environmental migrant? [e.g. Dun and Gemenne 2008. ‘Defining Environmental Migration’, Forced Migration Review, 31: 10–11]. Nor is there consensus on how many people are expected to move; different research projects use different time frames (2030, 2050, 2100, etc.), are based on different assumptions, and (not surprisingly) come up with different estimates, ranging from 50 million to 1 billion migrants associated with the effects of climate change during this century [e.g. Stern, N. (2006) ‘Stern review on the economics of climate change. Executive Summary’. London: HM Treasury. Baird 2007. Human Tide: The Real Migration Crisis: A Christian Aid Report. London: Christian Aid; UN Development Programme (UNDP) (2007/2008). Human Development Report: Fighting Climate Change, Human Solidarity in a Divided World; Kolmannskog 2009, Climate Change, Disaster, Displacement and Migration: Initial Evidence from Africa. New Issues in Refuge Research (Research Paper No. 180). Geneva: UNHCR; Warner 2009. Global Environmental Change and Migration: Governance Challenges. Global Environmental Change].


2012 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 36 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Morrissey

The debate over 'environmental refugees' is prominent in the literature on environmental change and human migration. Protagonists in the debate are 'maximilists' and 'minimalists' depending on their support for the concept. This article argues for the use of 'proponents' and 'critics' of the term. A nuanced critique of the 'proponent account' is offered, showing how the 'environmental refugee' is a particular representation of the relationship between environmental change and migration. There are conceptual problems in 'proponent' models, regarding both migration and development. These pertain to a sedentary bias and a reliance on pushpull, neo-classical models of both migration and the migrant. Some accounts are ahistorical and apolitical. The article advocates a research agenda that focuses on the interactions between environmental and nonenvironmental factors in mobility decisions, and that is historically relevant and contextually specific.Keywords: environment, migration, environmental refugee, discourse, representation


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document