This thesis was submitted to Western New England University School of Law in 2022 – by Brendan McCarthy
Abstract
We must redesign our coastal cities to mitigate the damage caused by increased storm frequency and severity. To do so, we must elevate environmental urban planning to the forefront of urbanization, so that we are able to adequately mitigate the resulting damage caused by rising sea levels, more powerful storms, and coastal flooding.
I am a rising 3L at the Western New England University School of Law with an interest in practicing environmental law upon graduation. Due to this interest, I helped revive the dormant Environmental Law Coalition to bring environmental awareness and sustainability to the forefront of conversation at the school. I graduated from Fairfield University with a double major in Environmental Studies and American Studies, and my time at Fairfield helped solidify my desire to work in the environmental field. I possess a strong belief that the protection of our natural world is necessary to promote human health and wellbeing, and I aim to strengthen these protections as I embark on my legal career.
No edits have been made to maintain the author’s tone of voice.
This thesis was submitted to SOAS in 2021 – by Ayesha Shingruf
Abstract
The onset of extreme weather events is creating drastic challenges for people around the world. Studies have shown strong links of climate change with the displacement of people, suggesting that the world will experience unprecedented levels of climate refugees. Because of the increase in the severity and frequency of intense weather conditions, refugee movements will be seen both internally and across international borders. This poses a serious question within international and domestic laws for their ability to offer protection to those displaced by climate change. By offering a case study of South Asia – a region containing some of the world’s most vulnerable countries to climate variability – this paper examines regional laws and policies as well as specific international principles as they relate to refugees. In particular, this research looks at the potential of the Warsaw International Mechanism (WIM) for Loss and Damage to arrive at possible pathways to safeguard rights for climate refugees. Using a human rights based-approach, this paper maintains that the principle of loss and damage will create channels for legal protection to those fleeing their homes due to the harsh changes in their environment.
What inspired you to write and research this piece?
I was born and raised in Lahore, Pakistan. For years, urban cities in Pakistan have consistently ranked as being the most polluted in the world, and some regions have experienced intense flooding and heatwaves. Similar patterns can be seen in India and Bangladesh as well. South Asia is collectively suffering the consequences of this global crisis on its agriculture, economy, human health, and livelihoods as we speak. There is a sense then, of people wanting to move to a different place to live a healthier and safer life. Those who pay attention to this crisis know that migratory movements caused by climate change are already occurring. Unfortunately, such movements will only increase in severity owing to the rise in temperatures coupled with regional conflicts. I wanted to address the fact that there is an absence of legal tools that can offer protection to climate refugees, and explore different frameworks that would help in safeguarding their human rights.
What impact do you hope this research will have?
There is minimal literature and discourse on climate refugees within the context of South Asia. This is alarming because the region is one of the most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. My only hope is that this drives significant conversation so that attention is paid to this looming threat. This is a collective fight, and a lot of research needs to be carried out to arrive at efficient policies for climate refugees. I look forward to students and academics exploring more pathways that can legally aid climate refugees in the future.
Ayesha Shingruf is a research fellow in climate change education and sustainability at Nottingham Trent University. She is interested in exploring the interplay of climate change, migration, and conflict. Ayesha completed her postgraduate degree in human rights law from SOAS, University of London. In her free time, Ayesha enjoys yoga, surfing, trying new foods, and reading a lot of poetry.
No edits have been made to maintain the author’s tone of voice.
This thesis was submitted to the University of Sussex in 2021 – by Louisa Gaus
Abstract
The influence of climate change on migration flows is a highly disputed topic, furthermore, the discourse about whether migration is a failure to adapt or an adaptive strategy emerges. The Republic of Kiribati has imminent adaptation needs due to the high dependency of the population on local ecosystems for subsistence and income, prevailing development issues, rapid population growth, and projected climate change impacts. The previous and current administrations deployed otherwise opposing adaptation approaches. Namely, ex situ adaptation, which inevitably leads to relocation, and in situ adaptation policies, approaches deployed ‘in the place’ of residence. Nevertheless, the significant negative implications of a sole prioritisation of one of these approaches suggest an alternative policy. This research argues, alongside other scholars, the emergent need for a hybrid adaptation policy. The aim is to answer the question if in situ and ex situ adaptation approaches can be harmonised or are due to their inherent characteristics incompatible in practice, and, from a practical perspective, what challenges such a hybrid adaptation policy encounters. The findings suggest that, in theory, in situ and ex situ adaptation approaches can be harmonised. However, due to the practical limitations stemming from the economic challenges and the lack of international law frameworks supporting cross-border migration, these adaptation approaches cannot yet be united into a hybrid adaptation policy in Kiribati.
What inspired you to write and research this piece?
In my opinion, the polarized debate about ex situ and in situ adaptation leaves little space for flexible decision-making. This inspired me to explore this what-if scenario of a hybrid adaptation policy practically.
What impact do you hope this research will have?
Hopefully, this research inspires us to think about climate change and migration not as a ‘fight or flight’ situation, but as an issue which is handled with a solution-oriented perspective and flexible short- and long-term planning.
Growing up in a small town in Southern Germany, I was always curious about other parts of the world. In my community, I engaged from a young age in youth work, such as leading a youth group. In 2015, after graduating from school, I underwent a Voluntary Social Year in the Republic of Kiribati. This stay awakened my passion for climate action and working in an international environment. After returning from overseas in 2016, I followed that passion and started studying ‘International Relations’ at the Rhine-Waal University of Applied Sciences. In 2019, I had the opportunity to intern at the Regional Program for Climate Change and Energy Security of the Konrad Adenauer Foundation and the Hong Kong-America Center in SAR Hong Kong.
In my Bachelor’s thesis, which was submitted in 2020, I researched the impacts of climate change on public health. In 2020, inspired by my past experiences and studies, I started my Master’s degree in ‘Climate Change, Development and Policy’ at the University of Sussex and Institute of Development Studies in Brighton, UK. The result thereof is my thesis on adaptation policies in the Republic of Kiribati. Currently, I am interning at the Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit in Berlin, Germany, and am eager to further engage myself in climate action. In my free time, I enjoy climbing, hiking, doing DIY projects (such as cutting my friends’ hair), and playing the violin and the ukulele.
No edits have been made to maintain the author’s tone of voice.
This thesis was submitted to the University of Pennsylvania in Spring 2021 – by Rachel Steinig
Abstract
Climate change has already begun causing displacement. This isn’t a new problem: since 2008, an average of 24 million people have been displaced each year by catastrophic weather disasters. There are currently at least 100 million forcibly displaced people worldwide – this is the highest level on record ever. However, climate migrants are not considered refugees under international law, according to the definition of a refugee adopted in the 1951 Geneva Convention on Refugees, and thus lack legal protections. In my thesis I investigated the role of existing bilateral and regional agreements to provide protection and asylum for climate refugees. My research question was: what are the conditions under which states agree to legally binding instruments to accommodate climate-induced migration? I collected nine case studies of bilateral and regional agreements that have either been implemented and have provided protection for climate-displaced persons or have been proposed but never implemented. My study presents somewhat of a grim picture for climate-displaced persons. None of my nine case studies provided a convincing example of the feasibility of using current regional or bilateral agreements to accommodate climate-induced displacement. In addition, most governments proved unwilling to even acknowledge climate displacement as a phenomenon.
What inspired you to write and research this piece?
Climate-induced displacement will only be increasing throughout time, and the fact that people displaced by climate change are not considered refugees under international law means that an increasing number of displaced people will be without legal protection or remedy. There isn’t a lot of existing research on the intersection of climate change, migration, and international law, so through my study I wanted to contribute to the budding literature on this topic and explore the feasibility of a potential solution to the lack of international legal protections for climate-displaced persons.
What impact do you hope this research will have?
Climate-included displacement is a phenomenon that will only be increasing in severity throughout time and requires attention and action at the local, national, and international levels. A key takeaway from my study is that there are no easy answers or solutions to climate-displacement, and that countries of destination will likely oppose the acknowledgement of and accommodation of climate-displaced persons. I hope that my study will positively contribute to the literature and that the amount of research on this topic will increase throughout time.
Rachel Steinig (they/she) works with asylum-seekers in Tijuana as a Project Coordinator with the Border Rights Project of Al Otro Lado, a bi-national legal aid nonprofit. They graduated from the University of Pennsylvania in 2021 with a bachelor’s degree in Political Science, a concentration in International Relations, and triple minors in Latin American and Latinx Studies, Spanish, and Modern Middle Eastern Studies.
She spent the summer after graduation volunteering at a migrant shelter on the Mexico-Guatemala border. In July they will be moving to central Mexico to work as a Human Rights Accompanier with the organization Peace Brigades International. They are dedicated to working in solidarity with asylum-seekers to combat the structural racism and violence of our immigration system and to advocate for a world without borders. She plans on working in international human rights law.
No edits have been made to maintain the author’s tone of voice.
On 22 June 2021, an international expert drafting panel commissioned by the Stop Ecocide Foundation shared its proposal for a fifth crime under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC). After approximately a year of negotiations, the new legal definition for the term “ecocide” emerged and was highly praised by a number of environmentalists. However, many are concerned about how the crime of ecocide could be prosecuted in practice.
The New Proposed Definition
The panel of international lawyers defined ecocide as“unlawful or wanton acts committed with knowledge that there is a substantial likelihood of severe and either widespread or long-term damage to the environment being caused by those acts”. If the introduction of this definition is welcomed and the efforts to criminalise ecocide are successful, the ICC would effectively be able to hold accountable those responsible for major ecological harms, such as governments and corporations.
The panel described “wanton” to mean: “reckless disregard for damage which would be clearly excessive in relation to the social and economic benefits anticipated” and “severe” as: “damage which involves very serious adverse changes, disruption, or harm to any element of the environment, including grave impacts on human life or natural, cultural, or economic resources”.According to Phillipe Sands, who co-chaired the expert panel, the definition catches “the most egregious acts”, such as major oil spills and transboundary nuclear accidents.
The History of Ecocide
The battle for the recognition of ecocide as an international crime has been a lengthy and challenging process.
The term ecocide was first used in the 1970s, particularly in relation to whether the US was creating an ecocide in Vietnam during the war. In 1970, when speaking at the Conference on War and National Responsibility, Professor Arthur W. Galston suggested that there should be “a new international agreement to ban ecocide”. In 1972, at the United Nations (UN) Conference on the Human Environment, Swedish Prime Minister Olof Palme explicitly described the Vietnam War as an “ecocide”. In 1985, the concept of ecocide resurfaced with a failed attempt to add ecocide to the Genocide Convention. Furthermore, the UN’s International Law Commission decided not to include “environmental crime” as an independent crime in its Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind.
In 2016, there was a shift in focus for the ICC, mainly in response to criticism for its unwillingness to investigate major environmental crimes at the time. The ICC’s Office of the Prosecutor, under former ICC Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda, published a policy paper which stated that the ICC would “prioritise” the prosecution of governments and individuals for environmental crimes, such as illegal exploitation of natural resources and land-grabbing.
Challenges in Applying the Ecocide Term
The ICC only has jurisdiction over natural persons, so it does not have jurisdiction to investigate and prosecute corporations. Therefore, where there has been alleged corporate involvement in ecocide, a corporation itself cannot stand before the court because (legally speaking) it is not a natural person. A further hurdle would be which of its corporate officers would be held accountable for the alleged crime of ecocide.
Additionally, a member of the expert panel, Christina Voigt stated that regardless of the exact wording to be adopted by State Parties, altering the Rome Statute to include the crime of ecocide will not be an easy accomplishment. Voigt notes that there will be difficulty in building broader political support and global cooperation around the definition. Thus, it appears that formulating a legal definition is just the first step: a member state needs to propose it to the ICC, thereafter it would need to be approved by a majority of ICC States. If the law is adopted into the Statute, harming nature or the planet will start to feel similar to harming humans. Nonetheless, the process of debating the definition will most likely take numerous years, while some argue it could take decades.
States such as France, Belgium, and Canada have voiced their support for ecocide to be recognised as a crime. However, it is important to note that the world’s top polluters, such as the United States, China, and India, are not members of the ICC.
The ICC is an autonomous and permanent court, established to investigate, prosecute, and try individuals accused of committing the most serious crimes of concern to the international community – namely genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression. The ICC does not replace national criminal justice systems, it complements them. It can investigate and, where warranted, prosecute and try individuals as a “last resort”, for instance, where proceedings are unduly delayed.
The proposed definition could be a historical development for the entire world as environmental damage is growing dramatically. The existence of “ecocide” will amplify the issue of the environment. If ecocide were to be recognised in international law, corporations, as well as governments, would be held responsible for environmental damage. They would be forced to take the issue seriously and would not escape the consequences without punishment. Immediate action should be taken by including “ecocide” as the fifth international crime against peace.
Mary Rizk is currently undertaking the Bar Professional Training Course at BPP Law School. She holds an LLM from Queen Mary, University of London. Mary has a particular interest in international human rights, criminal, and social justice issues.
Climate change and the ever-growing need for freshwater have taken their toll on metropolitan areas from Lagos, Nigeria, to Houston, Texas.
Jakarta, the capital of Indonesia, is no exception. The densely populated capital city is sinking at about 17 cm a year, the fastest globally. With 10 million city inhabitants and over 32 million in the greater metropolitan area, the most populated archipelago city has trouble on the horizon. By 2050, one-third of the city will be uninhabitable due to flooding.
In Jakarta, the sinking results from climate change and groundwater pumping. Climate change contributes to higher average temperatures and sea levels, while the need for freshwater drives underground extraction, causing the land to sink. As the city continues to grow, demands for drinking water will rise. Sea levels show no sign of halting their vertical march, leaving many wondering what solutions are to come.
The current President of Indonesia, Joko Widodo, has unveiled plans to address the sinking city by moving the capital to the neighboring island of Borneo. While this solution may solve the immediate crisis, the required 1,000 sq miles (256k hectares) of land and $34 billion of foreign investment in Eastern Borneo raise significant social, ecological, and geopolitical problems. Dwi Sawung, of the Indonesian NGO WALHI, notes three fundamental areas for concern with the plan: “threats to water systems and risks of climate change, threats to flora and fauna, and threats of pollution and environmental damage.”
Opponents have called it proof of “the government’s inability to solve the complex problems of Jakarta.” Many have shown their dissent, including 95% of the government officials required to move, and several local communities of eastern Borneo that will be displaced to accommodate the influx of 9,000 new government workers and infrastructure. Transplanting the capital appears to create more problems than it solves and may exist as a temporary solution to much larger and persistent problems like resource insecurity and social injustice.
Jakarta is not alone in the context of land insecurity and instability. Regions worldwide are learning to mitigate the myriad new challenges posed by climate change. However, as situations like this become more commonplace, we hope that Jakarta will serve as a lighthouse model for climate change mitigation from which the world can learn.
In the first five months of 2022, Mozambique was hit by five tropical storms and cyclones that devastated many regions of the country. In March, the most recent storm – tropical cyclone Gombe – impacted at least 700,000 people. Moreover, it fully or partially destroyed homes, health centers, electricity systems, water systems, and almost 100,000 hectares of arable land and crops. Gombe is just one example of many extreme weather events that have shattered communities across Mozambique this past year.
While scientists still cannot say with high levels of confidence that there are specific long-term trends in the frequency of tropical cyclones, the IPCC report released in August 2021 suggests that the incidence of stronger cyclones is likely over the next few years. Due to Mozambique’s coastal geography, the country is at heightened risk of these intensified cyclones and floods, and droughts due to the extensive coastline on which over half the population lives. In addition, the short recovery time experienced by communities across Mozambique between one extreme weather event to the next heightens the socio-economic impacts experienced and furthers issues of food insecurity, access to healthcare, housing security, and education.
These climate risks have amplified effects in specific regions due to the ongoing violence and instability due to the insurgency that began in 2017. According to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, in 2020, there were over 650,000 people displaced by violence in northern Mozambique. In 2022, the UN notes that 6000 people were recorded as newly displaced due to a resurgence in violence. Vulnerability to displacement will only increase with the growing incidences of compounding effects, and with a lack of resources, more and more populations will become affected.
20 May 2022 – by Earth Refuge Correspondent Ye-Eun Kim
In this interview, correspondent Ye-Eun Kim is speaking with Jihyuk Oh from South Korea about civil disobedience as a non-violent means to fight the climate crisis. Together, they explore the question of why South Korean youth are both victims and perpetrators of climate change. On the one hand, their age makes it very likely that the impacts of climate change will affect their future. On the other hand, because of where they live, they are part of an extractory society that continues to damage the climate.
Over the course of the interview, Jihyuk shares how his organization ‘Youth Climate Emergency Action’ is addressing this dilemma by using civil disobedience to kick off a “new type of transition into a livable and a greener society”. By using many vivid examples, he explains the power of this non-violent means as well as the challenges his organization faces.
“We’re trying to expose how the legal system itself does not actually protect us the people, but protects the private companies more, and that the legal system already has failed us. These companies haven’t been taken responsible for their greenhouse gas emissions nor for their pollutions.”
Youth Climate Emergency Action (YCEA) is a nonviolent direct action group against the climate crisis. In order to realize climate justice among countries, regions, classes, generations, genders, and species, YCEA is demanding drastic reductions in greenhouse gas emissions from the government and businesses. Their mission is to ensure the rights of those who are facing this crisis right now, let alone the next generation that is to come in decades.
06 May 2022 – by Earth Refuge Correspondent Skand Agarwal
In this interview, correspondent Skand Agarwal talks to Ruth Dzokoto about the impacts of climate change in Ghana. Drawing on her very personal experiences with climate change-induced natural disasters and even climate migration, Ruth shares her story as a climate educator. Along the way, Ruth also addresses the fact that climate migration is a highly gendered issue, which can even lead to child marriage and child pregnancy.
Together, they explore the challenges that climate educators face even in areas that are severely impacted by climate change themselves. Based on this conversation, Ruth outlines demands for the international community to support her incredible work.
“Currently, as I am talking to you, my mom, my dad and my siblings are no more where they used to be. They had to migrate to different locations because the sea had taken over their home. It is making them migrate to different settlements where they don’t even know anything about the place. Some young ladies and girls have to end up settling at places where they are going to be with men just because they need a roof over their head. This, I think, is the major cause of teenage pregnancy or unwanted pregnancy in the community.”
In September 2021, after four years of negotiations, Australia’s Queensland government returned four national parks to the Aboriginal Eastern Kuku Yalanji peoples. Spanning some 400,000 acres, these parks include the UNESCO World Heritage-listed Daintree Rainforest – the world’s oldest remaining rainforest.
The Eastern Kuku Yalanji peoples and the Queensland government will jointly manage the land for the foreseeable future. However, the overall goal is for the Eastern Kuku Yalanji peoples to become the sole and autonomous proprietors of their Indigenous land.
“The Eastern Kuku Yalanji people’s culture is one of the world’s oldest living cultures,” says Meaghan Scanlon MP, Queensland’s Minister for Environment, the Great Barrier Reef, and Science and Youth Affairs. “This agreement recognises their right to own and manage their Country, to protect their culture, and to share it with visitors as they become leaders in the tourism industry.”[1]
A month after Australia returned land to the Eastern Kuku Yalanji peoples, the United States (US) government restored full federal protective rights to the Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante monuments in southern Utah.[2] The previous administration, which was seeking to extract the land’s fossil fuels, had drastically reduced the size of the Bears Ears monument by up to 85%, as well as halving the area of the protected Grand Staircase-Escalante. This was the single largest rollback of public lands protections in the history of the US. These lands, which span more than 3 million acres, are vital pieces of culture and history for many Indigenous peoples, including the Hopi, Navajo, Uintah and Ouray Ute, Ute Mountain Ute, and Zuni tribes.[3]
What’s more, the US government and local officials continue to bolster protections for Native lands which facilitate the transition of ownership back to Indigenous communities. In December 2020, the Trump administration signed legislation which initiated the relinquishment of more than 18,000 acres of the National Bison Range to the Salish and Kootenai tribes. [4] In October 2021, around five acres of land were transferred to the Rhode Island Narragansett tribe. It was on this same land that the Indigenous Narragansett peoples survived near-annihilation at the hands of English colonisers in 1675.[5]
As a result of land reconciliation, not only can Indigenous communities return as rightful owners of their Native lands, they can also improve local environmental protection efforts.
The Positive Impacts of Land Reconciliation
For Australia’s Eastern Kuku Yalanji people, reclaiming their land is the first step towards long-term, sustainable social and economic growth.
“Our goal is to establish a foundation to provide confident and competent people with pathways and opportunities for mentoring, training, apprenticeships, work experience, and employment for our Eastern Kuku Yalanji Bama,” says Eastern Kuku Yalanji Traditional Owners Negotiating Committee Member Chrissy Grant. “[The goal is] to fill positions from a wide range of skilled trades, land and sea management, hospitality, tourism, and research so that we are in control of our own destinies.”
The Eastern Kuku Yalanji tribe has lived sustainably on these lands for some 50,000 years. The Kuku Yalanji Aboriginal culture is based on a deep respect for nature, with a heavy dependency on the ecosystem’s natural cycle. Their Indigenous expertise is vital in implementing sustainable conservation efforts, as well as protecting natural resources against climate stressors.
According to Meaghan Scanlon, these national parks will “protect important Aboriginal cultural sites, diverse ecosystems (including rainforests, woodlands, wetlands and mangroves), and form part of the Wet Tropics World Heritage Area, which is recognised as the second most irreplaceable World Heritage site on Earth.”
In Montana, the Salish and Kootenai tribes have a long history with managing local bison ranges, and their approach is seemingly more beneficial than previous federal tactics. “We treat the buffalo with less stress, and handle them with more respect,” says Tom McDonald, an Indigenous person and Fish and Wildlife Division Manager for both tribes.[6] The Salish and Kootenai tribes are also co-managing migrating bison herds from Yellowstone National to US Forest Service land.
Native peoples generally take a more sensitive and familial approach to handling bison populations. Their techniques include keeping bison families together, mitigating the likelihood of stampedes, and ultimately reducing stress placed on the animals. These Indigenous animal handling techniques have helped to improve conservation efforts and management of the land, as well as the welfare of the animals which inhabit it.
In Rhode Island, the Narragansett tribe will be recognised as the stewards of their Indigenous land, utilising their traditional ecological knowledge to preserve it. “We agreed to protect it; we agreed to steward it,” says Morgan Grefe, Executive Director of the Historical Society. “We’re here in continuation of that promise—to see that this land is protected and stewarded in a way that we could never have accomplished ourselves”.[7]
These examples indicate the in-depth expertise that Indigenous peoples have for their Native land, as well as their cultural mastery in preserving natural resources. According to a United Nations review of more than 300 studies, rates of deforestation in South America were 50% lower in areas under Indigenous control when compared to areas managed by non-Native communities.[8] Protecting these forests is vital for mitigating the threats of climate change and preventing the extinction of regional wildlife.
World leaders are also beginning to acknowledge the significance of Indigenous expertise in lessening the effects of climate change. At COP26, the US, the UK, Germany, the Netherlands, and several private donors collectively pledged to provide US $1.7 billion to support Indigenous and local communities in tackling climate change and protecting biodiversity.[9] The funds have the potential to help Native communities build their own infrastructure, resolve territorial disputes, and support land reforms, among other endeavours.
Opportunities for Further Reconciliation
Beyond the expertise that Indigenous communities provide, transferring stolen land back to its owners is a moral obligation. The Indigenous peoples mentioned here have been dispossessed, abused, neglected, and in the case of the Narragansett tribe, nearly annihilated. This pain cannot be healed by simply acknowledging these wrongdoings – it requires a long-term commitment to restore what rightfully belongs to Native communities. The returning of Indigenous land is the first step in showing such commitment.
Hayden King, the Executive Director of the Yellowhead Institute and co-writer of the text Land Back, describes the returning of Native land through the perspective of the Beausoleil First Nation tribe as more than just returning property. “It’s also about revitalising Indigenous life, because we’re thinking about land as everything in unity, we’re thinking about our languages… our culture… our family, and social organisations connected to the land.”[10]
The returning of land is not only an opportunity for reconciliation, but a path for the autonomous growth and reestablishment of Indigenous communities. As Brian Lightfoot Brown of the Narragansett Tribe states, the land “is so deeply ingrained in who we are”.[11]
As world leaders gradually continue to rightfully recognise the benefits of including Indigenous communities in environmental preservation programmes, the fact that Native peoples are given back their land and resources is not just transactional. It’s an opportunity to plant the seeds of growth and restoration, while the land still remains fertile.
Benjamin Chappelow is a writer and narrative designer in the Appalachian mountains, United States.
As an immigration researcher and former Narrative Writer for the Climate Resilience Toolkit, he is focused on how the stories we tell dictate our behavior in an ecological crisis.
References
[1] The Queensland Cabinet and Ministerial Directory. (2021, September 28). 160,000 hectares returned on path to reconciliation. Ministerial Media Statements. Retrieved January 18, 2022.
[2] Shivaram, D. (2021, October 8). Biden restores protections for bears ears monument, 4 years after Trump downsized it. NPR. Retrieved January 18, 2022.
[3] 7 big questions: What’s happening with bears ears and other national monuments? The Wilderness Society. (2021, August). Retrieved January 18, 2022.
[4] U.S. Department of the Interior. (2021, January). Secretary Bernhardt Signs historic secretarial order to transition the National Bison Range into Tribal Trust for the Flathead Indian Reservation. Indian Affairs. Retrieved January 18, 2022.
[5] Associated Press. (2021, October 27). Tribe Given Land Where Ancestors Survived Near-Annihilation. U.S. News & World Report. Retrieved January 18, 2022.
[6] Robbins, J. (2021, June 3). How returning lands to Native Tribes is helping protect nature. Yale E360. Retrieved January 18, 2022.
[7] Nunes, A. (2022, January 17). Site of ‘great swamp massacre’ returned to Narragansett Indian tribe. The Public’s Radio. Retrieved January 18, 2022.
[8] Carrington, D. (2021, March 25). Indigenous peoples by far the best guardians of forests – UN report. The Guardian. Retrieved January 18, 2022.
[9] Sutherland, L. (2021, November 3). $1.7 billion pledged in support of indigenous and local communities’ land tenure. Mongabay Environmental News. Retrieved January 18, 2022.
[10] Monroe-Kane, C. (2021, December 20). How the land back movement is reclaiming land stolen from indigenous people. Wisconsin Public Radio. Retrieved January 18, 2022.
[11] Brown, B. L. (2021, November 15). Long overdue: Sacred site returned to the Narragansett. Indian Country Today. Retrieved January 18, 2022.
Earth Refuge Newsletter
Sign up to our Earth Refuge newsletter for the latest updates on climate change, environmental justice and migration!
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will assume that you are happy with it.OkPrivacy policy
