Nature Communications, a scientific journal published by Nature Research, is a peer-reviewed, open access journal covering natural sciences. In a new study, published on the 6th April ’21, researchers, using machine-learning analysis, identify predictors of migration into the European Union.
Calculating numbers of climate migrants is inherently challenging because of the difficulty in defining causality; people often migrate for a multitude of reasons.
Studies show for example, a strong correlation between migration caused by climate change and higher levels of violence leading to an increase in migrant flow.
The study identified violence and insecurity as the strongest predictors of asylum migration to the EU, such as during the migration crisis of 2015-16. Economic and climate conditions, to a lesser extent, are predictors of migrant flow, and more so in non-conflict areas. Other studies however, have predicted that global warming may triple the number of asylum seekers to Europe in this century. A report published in 2019, by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, directs policy makers to consider that climate change can further exasperate stresses for conflict and disrupt food chains hence threatening livelihoods.
Whilst the stated confidence for climate change as a predictor for migration is low across recent studies, system research into the extent climate change can influence political violence, (or other superior factors identified as good predictors of migration) indicates a priority for future research.
Melinda Martinus from Jakarta, Indonesia, speaks with Gabrielle Lynn Utomo from the University of Pennsylvania about her experience working as a researcher in the Yusof Ishak Institute for Southeast Asian Studies, where she specializes in ASEAN urban policies surrounding climate change and urban resilience. She also shares insights about her work at an urban development NGO in Jakarta – a climate outlook survey in Southeast Asia – which you can read about here: https://lnkd.in/dXV5xXw
Melinda Martinus is a Lead Researcher of the ASEAN Studies Centre, ISEAS – Yusof Ishak Institute, Singapore. Melinda’s research interests revolve around smart city initiatives, urban resilience, and institutional frameworks and policies for advancing climate ambitions in Southeast Asia. Before joining the Institute, she was a program manager at Kota Kita Foundation, Indonesia and a researcher at the Center for Metropolitan Studies (Centropolis) at Tarumanagara University Jakarta. Melinda studied urban planning at Tarumanagra University Jakarta and Columbia University in New York City.
Residents of the Indian state of Uttarakhand, which sits a few hundred miles north of New Delhi and is bordered to its north by the Himalayas, have come face to face with the deadly impacts of climate change. In early February, the effects of melting glaciers in the Himalayas caused a flash flood of debris-filled water to crash through the Tapovan Vishnugad Hydropower Plant. Reports have estimated the death toll may be as high as 200, as search and rescue efforts were stymied by the harsh terrain around the Dhauliganga River. The flash flood was likely triggered by a massive section of glacial ice breaking free and causing a surge of water to rush downriver. Evidence shows that climate change is increasing the frequency and severity of these disasters by exacerbating extreme rainfall in the region as well as raising the average temperature of the glacial ice.
In a country grappling with the task of providing electricity for its growing population, the increased risk of severe flooding and avalanches may put India’s goal of expanding electricity access and reducing power outages at risk. According to The Associated Press, experts tasked with studying the impact of receding Himalayan glaciers on dams in the area have long recommended that hydroelectric projects “take into account the ecological fragility of the mountains and the unpredictable risks posed by climate change”, and other sources of renewable energy may pose less harm to the local community. But the human impact that these disasters have on residents of Uttarakhand is too often overlooked.
The increased risk of severe flooding and avalanches has already killed thousands of Uttarakhand residents and displaced many others. NPR reported that a number of villages immediately began evacuating residents and nearby riverside areas were put on high alert. According to the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), climate change is increasing the frequency of migration in Uttarakhand as well as the risk associated with relocation. To better accommodate the needs of migrants, PIK recommends that policymakers establish safe routes of migration and support the development of alternative livelihood options for the large population of agricultural workers who may be forced to leave their land behind.
Vaidya RA, Shrestha MS, Nasab N, Gurung DR, Kozo N, Pradhan NS, Wasson RJ, Shrestha AB, Gurung CG, Bajracharya A, Dasgupta P, Shrestha MS, (2019) Chapter 11: Disaster Risk Reduction and Building Resilience in the Hindu Kush Himalaya In: Wester P, Mishra A, Mukherji A, Shrestha AB (eds) The Hindu Kush Himalaya Assessment. Springer Nature, Cham, p 402. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92288-1_15
In recent weeks, an increasing surge of migrants have attempted to cross the U.S.-Mexico border, many of them being unaccompanied minors. Authorities have placed these minors in overcrowded detention centers. American lawmakers cast blame for the inhospitable facility conditions across the partisan aisle. Congress has been unable to pass any legislation to change their country’s immigration system. Meanwhile, thousands of bald eagles have begun their pre-breeding migratory season. They are crossing the U.S.-Canada border by the thousands to build their nests in the trees of the Prairie Provinces and British Columbia.
We are led to believe that our material reality exists in an orderly fashion, that what we call nature organizes itself through confinement. Certain things belong in certain places. Any movement outside of these confinements is an anomaly. What is foreign is invasive. Sonia Shah, in her recently published book The Next Great Migration: The Beauty and Terror of Life on the Move, points to a dynamic world (increasingly so with the impacts of climate change), and the enduringly migratory humans that, only recently, have placed abstract obstacles between one another.
A Faulty Science
A large portion of Shah’s book uses an appeal to nature when it comes to the inherent migratory function found in almost all species. Originally, our collective science of taxonomy was based on location. We thought of habitats as closed containers, where each species has a specific function to fulfill and can grow only based on the availability of resources within that closed space. Early scientists believed ecosystems were in a constant stasis, and therefore, any species leaving one location and entering another spelled disaster. They saw migration as a threat to the balance, where according to Gause’s Law of Competitive Exclusion, if two species are competing for resources within a closed space, one will always destroy the other.
It isn’t difficult to follow the threads of these beliefs through the history of racial discrimination and immigration law, and the conflation of those laws as ethics. The father of taxonomy, Carl Linnaeus, based his 18th century classifications on the distinctions between species and perpetuated that certain racial distinctions between humans invoked a hierarchy. As pseudoscientific racial science gathered support in Western countries, certain racial traits were deemed undesirable, nonexistent borders between races were arbitrarily parsed, and new immigration laws based on the prevention of racial mixing surged. These sentiments carry into modern-day immigration law with Linnaean nationalism and neo-Malthusian practices underlying modern reactionary anti-immigrant rhetoric, (e.g., American right-wing nationalism and Italy’s Five Star Movement).
No Vivarium in Nature
Of course, these beliefs are not centered in much scientific ground. No ecosystems functions as a closed system. Individuals move in and out of populations and environments constantly. Invasive species are often more common and less malevolent than people think. What scientists nowadays are adopting is an ecology not based on origin, but one based on traits and contributions to an ecosystem. According to Shah, the reasons for migration are a complex myriad of genetic and environmental factors, but she stresses the question we need to ask shouldn’t be why people choose to migrate. Rather, we need to ask why migration inspires terror in natives. Migration is written into the essence of our species. We have been migrating as long as we have been around, for opportunity and for survival. And as Shah finds, migrating peoples are not inherently more violent, nor less intelligent, nor unhealthier, nor a constant hindrance on a host country’s long-term economy. What remains is the ideological and immaterial borders we construct at the cost of the real suffering of people.Despite titling her work The Next Migration, Shah spends the majority of her book investigating the past and affords little time speculating about the future. If one were to build off of her findings and predict the future of migration, one needs to keep in mind the expiration date on xenophobia. There is no such thing as a closed system, and as assimilation increases and distinctions between people diminish, people holding on to some idealized figment of a place will find their environment change around them.
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. When he is not writing, Benjamin is trying to teach his cat how to type so he won’t have to.
A new Massachusetts climate law has been heralded as a crucial step in the state’s fight for environmental justice. The wide-ranging legislation, signed by Governor Charlie Baker at the end of last month, sets new goals on emissions and clean energy, however, it also has a significant emphasis on environmental justice.
The climate change legislation commits to achieve net zero emissions for Massachusetts by 2050, however in addition to this the bill also aims to protect vulnerable communities. The law has provided a clear definition of a community overburdened by pollution – also known as an Environmental Justice (EJ) community – defining it based on race, income and language-proficiency criteria. Advocates have welcomed this new definition, claiming it improves on the confusing parameters which were previously used in identifying the most vulnerable communities in the state.
The bill recognises the significant impact of climate change on EJ communities, which are more likely to have poor air quality and disproportionately high levels of pollution, and aims to allow these communities to have a say in future infrastructure projects or any other projects likely to impact air, water or soil quality. The law also says that the state must take into account how existing pollution levels have already impacted residents when considering whether to approve any new project in an EJ community.
This bill is a significant step towards protecting vulnerable communities who are disproportionately affected by climate change and paves the way for other states, and other countries, to pass climate justice laws in the future.
One of four priorities (Priority 4) in the current Sendai Framework: ‘Enhancing disaster preparedness for effective response, and to «Build Back Better» in recovery, rehabilitation and reconstruction.’, points to women and persons with disabilities to be public leaders in reconstruction and response phases to climate disasters. This follows from findings so far that women, children and people in vulnerable situations are disproportionately affected by climate disasters. Hence it is vital that women participate in implementing gender-sensitive disaster risk reduction policies and initiatives.
In practice, the Sendai Framework recommends investment into capacity development and maintenance into grassroots organisations and women’s groups that are knowledgeable of local needs and function as important community mobilizers. The Sendai Framework remains open to submissions of commitments for Disaster Risk Reduction.
When you think of environmental contamination, what comes to mind? You’d be right to list examples of a polluted river, a skyline darkened by smog, or an oil leak in the ocean. These capture headlines, and they are an important part of the equation, but these viscerally visual images embody only a small part of the crisis we face. Much of the damage to the environment is harder to see and it is hiding in plain sight all over the nation. Take, for instance, Industri-Plex.
Early History
Industri-Plex is a 245-acre plot of land in Woburn Massachusetts, and it is emblematic of New England’s industrial heritage. This seemingly small plot of land is iconic as both the climax and the new beginning of a story stretching back hundreds of years. It is the tale of a small 1600s settlement, which would rise to an 1800s industrial powerhouse, become the fifth-most contaminated site in the country by the 1980s, and emerge anew in 2010s as a symbol of hope for a revitalized environment.
Nowadays, Woburn is a city of just over 40,000 inhabitants, with a diverse economic sector, but it wasn’t always so. For much of Woburn’s early history – as was the case with many cities, towns, and settlements in the 1600s – it was reliant on agriculture as its primary economic opportunity. Woburn began its first steps into its modern identity in 1648 with the opening of its first tannery. Shoemakers began opening up shop and, not long after, the demand for shoe leather led to the opening of more tanneries. To this day, Woburn’s school sports teams are called the Tanners, in recognition of this history.
Woburn’s location was a massive selling point for industry; it was just 12 miles north of Boston, and it had a large and steady supply of clean water from the Aberjona River. But circumstances improved even further for the City in 1803, with the opening of the Middlesex Canal and the Boston & Lowell Railroad in 1835; both created new means of transportation to and from Boston. Around the same time, just a few miles to the north, the American Industrial Revolution really kicked off in Lowell with the opening of large textile mills.
That industrial spirit was quick to spread across New England, and in 1853, Woburn Chemical Works was built in what would later be part of the Industri-Plex Superfund Site. The company manufactured chemicals used by tanneries and the textile and paper industries. Business was good at this time; the ease with which products could be transported to and from Woburn strengthened the economy and spurred industrial growth. With the onset of the American Civil War, the demand for shoes and boots skyrocketed and Woburn supplied that demand, further bolstering its economic success.
As the nation greeted the twentieth century, the tanning and chemical industries had cemented themselves as two hallmarks of Woburn’s industrial legacy. By 1875, Woburn had risen to be New England’s largest producer of leather and in 1901, a Woburn man by the name of Henry Thayer invented the process of chrome tanning. This revolutionary new process is faster than previous tanning methods and could cure leather in a single day. The process involved soaking leather in chromium sulfate, a mixture of chromium salts and acid produced by Woburn’s own chemical companies. The process also resulted in significant environmental damage as spilt chromium would leach into the ground and groundwater.
Companies in Woburn were also involved in the creation of glue. The process involved cooking raw animal hide and waste from chrome-tanned hide to extract the glue. The discarded hides and residues were dumped in various spots around the Industri-Plex site and would eventually become known as the four “hide piles.”
While companies came and went, the waste remained and continued to contaminate the land. Between the 1850s and the 1950s, the original Woburn Chemical Works was purchased and succeeded by a long chain of other chemical companies. The chain concluded with Stauffer Chemical Company purchasing Consolidated Chemical Company in the 1950s. Stauffer remained in operation until 1969.
In 1968, the Mark-Phillip Trust entered the scene with high ambitions of building a large industrial park over the yet-to-be-deemed Industri-Plex Superfund Site. They began purchasing parcels of land, which had been subjected to over one hundred and twenty years of industrial operations, and eagerly got to work on redeveloping the land. Development included the excavation of the old hide piles, which released noxious odors. What became known as the “Woburn Odor” was so bad that passersby on the highway, as well as residents from multiple nearby towns, would complain of the smell.
Creation of the Environmental Protection Agency and Superfund
Around this time, the country was beginning to take more notice of environmental contamination. Concerns over air, water, and land quality sparked then President Nixon to create the Environmental Protection Agency in 1970. National dialog around the environment reached a fever pitch in 1978, when the federal government purchased the homes and evacuated hundreds of people residing near Love Canal in Niagara Falls, New York. The horror of Love Canal was a significant factor in the 1980 creation of the Superfund program, which authorized the EPA to locate, investigate, and clean up the most hazardous materials nationwide.
Children are particularly at risk for adverse health effects from contamination. Image retrieved from Living on Earth
The Superfund program was and is an incredibly comprehensive response to one of the most complicated problems modern America has to face. It includes regulations on 761 substances, with almost 600 of them still in active use by industry around the nation. Superfund also includes one of the most aggressive liability frameworks possible under US law. This allows EPA to go after responsible parties and force them to clean up the mess they’ve left behind.
Over the next few years, EPA set out to identify the parties potentially responsible for the cumulative contamination within the Industri-Plex Site. Numerous tests and studies were conducted on the site, revealing heavy metals, organic wastes, and volatile organic compounds. These various forms of contamination weren’t just in the ground; they continued to move in the groundwater and were released into the air, posing a significant public health risk.
With the situation as dire as it was, the EPA settled on a plan to remediate the site in 1986. The plan involved negotiating with thirty-four past and present owners of land within the site to secure funding from them to clean up the contamination. While it might seem obvious at first glance that the corporations that contaminated the land would be held liable for cleaning it up, this was not the case at the time. EPA relied heavily on its new powers under Superfund to retroactively hold parties liable for the harm they left behind. In fact, Industri-Plex was a somewhat defining case for EPA.
Cleaning up Industri-Plex
Such significant contamination meant that the cleanup was going to be expensive, and some of the parties, including the Mark-Phillips-Trust, did not have the money to pay for their share in it. To resolve this problem, the Trust agreed to sell its land on site to reimburse the government for fronting some of the cleanup costs. Critically, this meant that it was the corporations, not the public, that were going to pay the cleanup.
As for the cleanup itself, under consent orders from EPA and the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Quality Engineering (DEQE, now renamed the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection or DEP) – Stauffer Chemical conducted numerous site assessments and studies of the surrounding geology. Their results confirmed the presence of organic and inorganic compounds in the soil. The results also showed that these contaminants continued to pose risks as they were migrating in the ground water and being released into the air as vapors.
Some of these hazardous materials could be treated on site, some could be consolidated and moved to a permanent disposal facility, but others were too expensive, too dangerous, or simply incapable of being removed or treated. Take, for example, the East Hide Pile. The hides would constantly release vapors, but when they were moved, the release of vapors (including the “Woburn Oder”) would substantially increase. Wherever you put a giant stinking pile of old animal parts, its going to cause problems.
So, environmental engineers devised a different solution. They installed what is called a “cap” over the hide pile, which would prevent the vapors from releasing into the air. On top of the cap, they placed a layer of top soil and planted grass on it to help root it in place. They then drilled monitoring wells and installed a vapor collection system so that they could make sure the protections were holding, and prevent leaching of contaminants into the groundwater.
Another hide pile on site. Below the grass, top soil, and clay cap the hide waste still remains. This is not a hill; this is mound of discarded animal parts. Image was taken by author in March, 2021.
Similar strategies were used for other hard-to-remove contamination on the site. As for the ground water, the responsible parties were obligated to capture and treat the ground water to prevent it from spreading the contamination further. This is a long and difficult process and is heavily reliant upon the availability of good data, and available methods of removal, as well as the geology itself.
In 1989, EPA, DEP, the City of Woburn, and the current and former landowners created the Site Remedial Trust and the Site Custodial Trust. These Trusts helped organize partnerships with private and public actors to help businesses return and remain on site during cleanup. Nowadays, Industri-Plex is diverse commercial and industrial area. The City’s largest employer, Raytheon, is set up within the borders of the Indusri-Plex Site. 45 other businesses also reside on site and cumulatively, the current Industri-Plex businesses generate $210 million in employment to the city annually, as well as property and sales taxes.
Industri-Plex Today
In 2020, a portion of the Industri-Plex Site was removed from the National Priorities list. Much of it remains under active monitoring and is subject to five-year reviews. The story isn’t over, but it has entered a new chapter. Woburn has been on the pulse of the American industrial experience since the beginning. When the industrial spirit swept the region, it was there that innovative new techniques for the production of leather and chemicals were created. It captured the quintessential nature of the American Dream, that a person with an idea and ambition could build something greater, and it helped vault America forward into the position it is in today. Of course, it was also there when the costs of that untamed ambition and the lack of understanding of the consequences, caught up to it and as a result, it was also on the front lines of America’s reckoning with environmental contamination. Today, Woburn continues to be on the cutting edge, standing as an example of what is possible when we commit ourselves to environmental revitalization.
New construction within the Industri-Plex Site. Investment continues to flow into the once fifth-most contaminated site in the nation. Image was taken by author in March, 2021
To be clear, despite the inspiring thread, this story is woven by over a hundred years of contamination. Over that time, people got sick, workers were taken advantage of, employers prioritized profits over people, chemicals were produced that contributed to contamination elsewhere, and millions upon millions of dollars were spent over decades ($70 million in the initial 7-year remediation alone) to get us to where we are today. Furthermore, the industrial practices that led to this reckoning are not gone. Corporations continue to attempt to subvert the government’s attempts to protect people and the environment. Agencies like EPA are a great improvement, but they alone will not solve the crisis facing our planet. And yet, this was an insanely complicated and dangerous situation, and people did come together to respond to it. Industri-Plex today should be seen as an example that change is possible, that absurd and creative solutions can work, and that the rewards of a healthy environment are worth the effort.
A picture is worth a thousand words; I believe this one is worth a lot more. Below is a field of solar panels, residing directly on top of the East Hide Pile. Quite literally, the present, standing atop the past, looking up towards the future.
The East Hide Pile was and is the largest such pile on site. Today it remains as a humbling reminder of the past, as well as a beacon of hope for the future. Image retrieved from Google Earth, Street view: 99 Breed Ave. Woburn, MA (March, 2021)
This article is part of our Spring 2021 collaboration with students from the International Human Rights Clinic at the Western New England University.
Andrew Hanna has always been fascinated by the “why” questions in relation to human behavior. That fascination pushed him to study psychology, sociology, and philosophy during my undergraduate studies. He concentrated in mental health services and worked for two and a half year as residential counselor. The work was transformative, traumatic, and ultimately marred by layers of structure issues which negatively impacted the health of the children he worked with. The frustration he felt with the mental health system pushed him to apply to law school. Andrew is now a 2L at Western New England University School of Law. It is his hope that through legal training, he can find a way to improve the systems that offer services to those in need.
The effects of the flood disaster that followed the heavy rainfall in Australia last week are still continuing in the region. In the worst flood disaster in 60 years, 18.000 people were evacuated and 3 deaths were recorded. The economy is adversely affected by the damage to property and the disruption of coal exports.
Australia’s wildlife and livestock are also one of the parties most affected by this flood. Animals, reptiles and spiders, who were trying to take refuge in the surrounding houses and struggling to survive, were tried to be rescued by the locals and officials.
Successive fire and flood disasters make us question the impact of global warming on these natural phenomena. Scientists think that Australia’s tides between excess drought and excess rain will be the new reality. Although the authorities are careful in linking the cause of extreme rainfall to climate change, various reports and studies have suggested that the warming of Australia increased the intensity of the rainfall. Although global warming and changes in the structure of the atmosphere are not the only factors, Australia’s current warming of 1.4C increases the moisture holding capacity of the atmosphere and worsens the situation.
The SDG Global Festival of Action was held for the fifth time from the 25-26 March 2021 with the aim of accelerating the process towards achieving the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals.
For two days, at what was this time a virtual event, the UN brought together individuals and organizations in dynamic and interactive sessions under the objectives of SDG Action Campaign. Emphasizing the importance of individual actions, solidarity and cooperation in achieving sustainable development goals, participants were encouraged to think on how we can achieve transformative change, both socially and economically.
UN Climate Change, which gives wing to innovative projects in the direction of the climate action and bring stakeholders together, is considering increasing the innovation potential with “The UN Climate Change Innovation Hub”. The Hub aims to create an opportunity of cooperation for climate actors, who will try to limit the global temperature increase to 1.5C with various innovations. We will be able to follow the Hub’s work closely after it goes into operation together with the UN Climate Change Conference COP26 in November 2021.
The Biden Administration has marked international climate action as a key driver of his foreign policy goals. A climate change summit, organised by Biden, is to take place on the 22nd and 23rd April 2021, where 40 world leaders will discuss the urgency and economics of stronger climate action.
A policy brief has since been launched in March, by the Duke Centre for International Development (DCID), which specifically looks at factors driving migration from Honduras to the U.S. border. In the report, food insecurity linked to climate change was one of the key factors in increased migration from Honduras to the U.S in recent years. The report suggests investments to improve agricultural resilience to rainfall to improve food security, as a long-term plan.
A study by The Washington Postin 2019 looked at American public opinion towards climate migrants, compared to economic migrants and refugees. The study also looked at whether stances on climate migration correlated with positions about climate change mitigation efforts. The respondents by largely favoured climate migrants over economic migrants, and refugees over climate migrants. The findings also showed that most Americans don’t see climate change mitigation and climate migration as related. In other words, news about climate migration did not make respondents more likely to support climate change mitigation efforts more broadly.
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
