Climate change is no longer a threat; it is the most dangerous contemporary issue of this century and the reason for the displacement of hundreds and millions of people around the globe. Climate change can be defined as a long-term change in temperature and shifts in weather patterns. Various natural activities like volcanic eruptions, continental drifts, and changes in the earth’s orbit played a role in changing the climate of the planet in the past. Although such natural activities play a role in climate change, researchers have shown that human activities like burning fossil fuels lead to the emission of greenhouse gases like CO2 and CH4 that cause rapid climate change, which we are facing today. Rising temperatures, melting glaciers, rising sea levels, and desertification are the consequences of this rapid climate change. Such changes are forcing millions of people to migrate internally as well as internationally, creating a new category of refugees, displaced not by war but by warming the planet. Now the question arises here is that; who is responsible for these displaced populations? Is it only the national responsibility of nations being impacted directly or a global responsibility demanding a unified response? What can the international community do to prevent further exacerbation of the situation?
Climate change is a result of a collective failure. Developed nations have built their economies through unsustainable practices, and the developing nations are withstanding the worst of the consequences. Rising sea levels threaten the existence of island nations like Kiribati and the Maldives. Droughts due to dramatic changes in temperature in Africa are forcing populations to the edge of famine. This is not collateral damage; it is a direct consequence of the world’s overconsumption and inaction. The issue of climate change is not a failure of one or two states but it is a failure of the whole world. Therefore, every nation should play its role in meditating on its effects.
Framing climate refugees as a national burden ignores the injustice at the core of the issue. Developed nations are the primary culprits, having emitted greenhouse gases for decades, changing the climate most severely in less developed or poor countries. Rising sea levels, increasing droughts, and intensifying storms are forcing people to flee their home countries in less developed nations, who often lack the resources to adapt. To consider them solely responsible for their displacement is to absolve the primary polluters of any accountability.
Furthermore, the “burden” narrative dehumanizes these refugees. These refugees are not economic liabilities, but humans with skills, experiences, and the potential to contribute. Forcing the responsibility solely on host nations or the impacted nations is morally inhumane and it ignores the economic and social benefits, a diverse, skilled refugee population can bring. Research has proved that migrants often create businesses, fill labor shortages, and contribute to the vibrancy of their new communities. Welcoming climate refugees is not just a moral responsibility; it is an economic opportunity as well. Refugees are not a burden; they are a source of human capital. They bring with them skills, talents, and a strong work ethic. Studies have shown that refugees can boost a nation’s economy by increasing its workforce and diversity. Germany’s integration of migrants from the Syrian conflict is an excellent example, proving that with proper support and management refugees can enrich their host countries.
Borders do not confine climate change, and neither should the response of nations around the world. Ignoring the plight of climate refugees is morally wrong as well as strategically shortsighted. Mass displacement, if left unchecked, can destabilize entire regions, straining resources, leading to social unrest, and potentially triggering wider conflicts. The ripple effect of climate-induced migration poses a major threat to global security.
The current system, where few countries shoulder the responsibility, is not sustainable and is unfair. We need a global framework for relocation, with quotas based on the capacity of a state and its historical contribution to climate change. Additionally, increased support for developing nations to adapt to climate impacts can reduce the need for mass displacement.
The argument against a global response often emphasizes the fear of mass migration straining national resources. However, this ignores the fact that many nations already have robust immigration systems in place. What we need is a well-coordinated international effort to create a fair and sustainable system for refugee resettlement. This could involve a quota system based on a nation’s capacity, ensuring that no single nation shoulders an undue burden.
Furthermore, focusing solely on national borders ignores the human cost of climate change. The stories of these refugees are not just about displacement; they are about the loss of homes, livelihoods, and cultural identities. Ignoring their plight is not only inhumane; it is an abdication of our shared humanity.
Prevention is better than cure; we cannot reverse the damage caused by rapid climate change but can make sure to reduce this in the future through multiple steps. First and the most important step to be taken are to switch to renewable energy generation methods instead of burning fossil fuels. This initiative should be taken by developed nations as they are the major consumers of fossil fuels and have the resources to make this shift. Secondly, we should invest in Carbon capturing and storing (CCS) technologies to reduce the chances of greenhouse gases being emitted into the environment. Finally, to provide the displaced persons with livelihood opportunities host or developed nations should invest in planned relocation and development projects.
The writer is a student of “BSIR” at “INTERNATIONAL ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY, ISLAMABAD and a member of PYDIR.”