Part 2/3 – Climate Change, Conflict and Forced Displacement
By: Sandor Madar
Our team at Alp Analytica had the immense opportunity to help realize UNHCR’s very first report on the climate-conflict-displacement nexus, titled No Escape: On the Frontlines of Climate Change, Conflict and Forced Displacement which was launched at the UNFCCC – COP29 in Baku, Azerbaijan, in November. (Also see this fascinating story map). This report is the result of collective efforts of brilliant minds from UNHCR, CGIAR, DGAP, IDMC, IMPACT Initiatives, Montana State University, NUPI, Oregon State University, YOUNGO, as well as Refugee-led Organizations: Community Aid Network and Dadaab Response Association.
One might wonder what UNHCR is doing at a climate change conference. The answer is going to be shocking. Based on the report findings: as of mid-2024, there were 123 million forcibly displaced people globally. Around 75% of them, 90 million people are currently located in countries that are exposed to high to extreme climate-related hazards. And even during the course of just a few months of drafting the report, this latter number had increased by 5 million. It means that three in four forcibly displaced people today live in countries with high to extreme exposure to climate-related hazards. Over the past 10 years, weather-related disasters have displaced 220 million people within their own countries, which is an equivalent of approximately 60,000 displacements per day. The jaw dropping statistics are endless but these alone justify UNHCR’s involvement in the climate arena to amplify the voices of forcibly displaced people.
Most of these people are living in countries like Sudan, Syria, Haiti, the DRC, Lebanon, Myanmar, Ethiopia, Yemen and Somalia. Another common denominator of these countries apart from climate change, is conflicts. All of these countries are experiencing either active, ongoing conflicts and violence or some sort of social and institutional fragility. When conflict and climate change intersect, they can multiply the toll and suffering of people and limit their chances for durable solutions, and also increase the risks of protracted, recurrent and onward displacement.
In 2023, 70% of refugees and asylum seeker came from highly climate-vulnerable countries that are also least ready to improve their resilience. Unfortunately, their destinations are also increasingly impacted by climate change. For instance, internationally displaced people from Venezuela, Afghanistan and Myanmar often find themselves in neighboring countries that are exposed to equal or greater climate-related hazards. While the number of countries facing extreme climate hazards is expected to rise from three to 65 by 2040, these 65 countries are already hosting 40% of displaced people and half of these countries also experience conflict or fragility. The report focuses on four areas for action: protection of displaced people, inclusion and participation of displaced people in climate action, finance for that action, and mitigation to reduce harmful climate change. Let’s take a closer look at those first three areas:
Protection:
Providing protection through the application of legal, normative and policy frameworks such as the 1951 International Convention and its 1967 Protocol Relating the Status of Refugees, the 1969 OAU Convention, and the 1984 Cartagena Declaration, among others is imperative to address the situation of millions of people in dire need of assistance. However, the increasing impacts of climate change on human mobility also require innovative, legal and normative measures to protect people in need of protection who have exhausted all available legal options. Therefore, the refugee and Internally Displaced People protection agendas must mainstream climate change-related considerations accordingly.
Inclusion and participation:
Forcibly displaced people are one of the most exposed and most vulnerable groups to the impacts of climate change, yet they are the least responsible for causing it. Despite their knowledge and capacities, forcibly displaced people’s voices are not heard and they are excluded, forgotten and neglected in climate change mitigation and adaptation measures. Only 25 out of 166 Nationally Determined Contributions, and 24 out of 60 National Adaptation Plans have included concrete provisions for displacement in the context of climate change. The numbers are similarly somber when it comes to their inclusion in disaster risk reduction strategies and emergency preparedness measures. Only seven out of 31 regional DRR strategies and relevant instruments reference displacement, and despite having two-third of national DRR plans contain reference to displacement, they often remain vague and unspecific. To address the challenges ahead, we must focus on building more inclusive decision-making processes and community-driven actions.
Finance:
There is a widening financial gap between the needs and available resources as well as an unequal distribution of the limited resources. Currently 90% of climate finance targets middle-income and high emitting countries. The most affected fragile and conflict-affected countries only receive around 2 USD per capita annual funding for climate change adaptation compared to developed countries that receive over 160 USD per capita annual funding. Even when these limited funds reach a fragile and conflict affected state, only a minimal amount triggers down to the field, to hard to reach areas, and to organizations and communities that could spend it the most conflict sensitive and resourceful ways due to risk aversion of donors, and bureaucratic and administrative impediments. Therefore, more equitable distribution of funds, more risk-taking donor attitude and simplified fund administration would be necessary to reach the communities that are most in need of climate finance.
In light of these climate finance trends, Alp Analytica is proud to be a contributor, and provide its endorsement to the Common Principles for Effective Climate Finance and Action for Relief, Recovery and Peace that was launched at the COP29 for the initiative of the Environment, Climate, Conflict, and Peace Community of Practice, hosted by EnPAx, CCDP and the Geneva Graduate Institute.
To conclude, unfortunately, the COP29 didn’t achieve its ambitions. This year’s COP was an opportunity to follow up on the partial successes of the previous years’ COPs and secure the needed 1 trillion USD yearly funding under the New Collective Quantified Goal on Climate Finance for developing states to help them to mitigate and adapt to the impacts of climate change. Instead, only 30% of the goal was achieved and the parties agreed upon 300 billion USD yearly funding by 2035 which was characterized as too little, too late, and it leaves all of us with grim outlooks regarding the future. On the bright side, the Fund for Responding to Loss and Damage was fully operationalized which is a lifeline for Least Developed and Low Income Countries, and Small Island States. Although this could be considered more as the success of the two previous COPs rather then this years.
N.B.: All figures and statistics in this article were quoted from the No escape: On the frontlines of climate change, conflict and forced displacement. United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees report
If you are interested in the links between biodiversity conservation and peace and security, you can read the first article of the series here or continue reading on the linkages between land, peace and security here.
Photo Caption: No Escape Report of UNHCR, Source: UNHCR (2024), No escape: On the frontlines of climate change, conflict and forced displacement. United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.
