Cryptocurrencies: Not So ‘Green’?

green leafed plant

30 June 2021 – by Raj Shekhar

The global cryptocurrency revolution has reached an all-time high with people actively involved in cryptocurrency investing. The idea of a decentralized currency without privacy concerns has been the key factor behind the growing popularity of these digital currencies. This has been acknowledged by institutions like Deutsche Bank, which anticipates that by 2030 digital currencies will have over 200 million users and could eventually replace cash one day. Another major factor that propels the success of already popular cryptocurrency is its portrayal as a ‘greener’ alternative to traditional cash and its potential to evolve into a global currency. However, Elon Musk stirred global controversy when he questioned the environmental impact of cryptocurrencies, and subsequently declined to accept Bitcoin for Tesla payments.

The exchange rate of Bitcoin has fallen drastically, due to subsiding hype and excitement, the prevalence of common sense, and the global audience shifting their attention to how much energy is actually consumed by these cryptocurrencies. The potential conflict between these ‘future global currencies’ and the efforts being made towards ‘a sustainable future’ is intriguing. This article attempts to understand this potential conflict through a detailed analysis of the energy consumed by cryptos, its incompatibility with the idea of a sustainable future, and the challenges it poses to a greener tomorrow. 

Cryptocurrency Mining and Energy Consumption

Cryptocurrencies, unlike the traditional banking system of maintaining account balances in a central database, make use of a distributed network of ‘miners’. These are a network of specialized computers that keep a record of new and constantly added blocks. A computational race exists between these miners to earn incentives, and as such blocks can only be recorded by solving cryptographic puzzles. Incentives or bonuses are only given to the recording miner. While on the one hand this assures a fail-proof system, on the other, it requires huge computational power. This mining process tends to lose efficiency due to the rising prices of the cryptocurrencies, because the mathematical puzzles to create blocks become more complex and require more computation power to keep the number of transactions constant. This means more computing power and energy is being consumed per block to process the same number of transactions in the face of the increasing complexity of the puzzles.

As per recent research by the University of Cambridge which aims to create a Bitcoin electricity consumption index, it has been estimated that the miners of Bitcoin alone are going to consume 130 Terawatt-hours of energy (TWh). This energy is close to 0.5% of global electricity consumption. Just like any other conventional source of energy, electricity has its fair share of carbon emission issues. Using the standard global scale, such an amount of electricity usage would put the Bitcoin economy on par – in terms of carbon dioxide emissions – with a small developing nation. It is also interesting to note that 65% of Bitcoin mining takes place in China, where the major source of electricity generation is coal burning. Many other countries around the world are primarily dependent on coal and fossil fuels for electricity generation. This is even more concerning as coal burning is a significant contributor to climate change, owing to the high carbon emission rates associated with it. An alarming report by CNBC suggests that Bitcoin alone produces 35.95 million tons of carbon dioxide emissions every year.

The Paris Agreement and Sustainable Development Goals

Under Article 2(c) of the UN Paris Agreement (a legally binding international treaty on climate change adopted by 196 Parties at COP 21 in Paris on 12 December 2015) every signatory is obligated to make attempts to hold global temperatures within 2°C above pre-industrial levels. This agreement also reflects the understanding that the future of international finance must include a to switch to low greenhouse gas emissions. Thus, the signatories that allow for such crypto-mining to continue are directly violating the agreement. Furthermore, the central idea of the agreement was to enable modern technology to be utilized in a way that mitigates greenhouse gas emissions to the highest standard possible. The highly polluting use of technology, such as that discussed above, would be in stark contravention of the spirit of the agreement.   

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are a global agenda which was adopted by countries in 2015 with a vision to end poverty, protect the planet, and ensure that all people enjoy peace and prosperity. The 17 SDGs and 169 targets are part of what is known as ‘the 2030 Agenda’ which recognizes that “eradicating poverty in all its forms and dimensions, including extreme poverty, is the greatest global challenge and an indispensable requirement for sustainable development”. Usage of cryptocurrencies directly contradicts these goals which were formulated to ensure a sustainable and better future for humanity. They directly go against SDGs 7, 9, 11, and 12 which deal with ensuring affordable and clean energy, industry, innovation and infrastructure, creating sustainable cities, and responsible consumption and production respectively.

The Solution: Revamping the Crypto-Model

The analysis of the various reports and the due examination of the crypto energy consumption pattern highlights that the seemingly ‘green’ currency actually has a huge carbon footprint. The present generation of the human race, in its efforts to tackle global climate change, has been constantly trying to transition towards more energy-efficient technology. Millions of dollars are being poured into research and development to come up with sustainable and green technology. On the face of this, the growing popularity of cryptocurrencies can be seen as a major setback because, in their present state, they endanger the future of human civilization.

With global temperatures increasing, we have seen a fresh rise in global warming-related issues. Whether it be as a result of untimely flooding or pre-season blooming, the very existence of human life is being threatened. People are forced to leave their homelands because of climate stressors. It is ironic that the currency which promised to, in a way, mitigate the challenges of the global climate crisis has itself become one of its major causes. The energy consumption of these cryptocurrencies and the hope of a sustainable future are antagonist pairs; neither can live while the other survives. The key lies not in the complete abandonment of cryptos but a gradual transition to more energy-efficient ways of mining them.

Whether you’re in favor of cryptocurrencies or against them, there is little doubt that these blockchain-based currencies use enormous amounts of energy. Much of this energy usage comes from burning coal and other fossil fuels, although cryptocurrency advocates have argued that renewable sources are also a major component. While the exact figures are disputed, even the best-case scenarios indicate that mining is a major factor in carbon dioxide emissions. Thus, the question that naturally follows is: do we abandon the cryptocurrency framework? The answer to this question is tricky. While there is no denying that cryptocurrencies in their present state of operation are a great threat to the idea of sustainability, there have been recent developments of alternate cryptos which are more promising and less energy-consuming. For instance, Ripple (XRP) consume only 0.0079 KWh per transaction – this is highly power-efficient when compared to Bitcoins. Further, new forms of energy-efficient crypto mining are being introduced.

Cryptocurrencies, in their current form, are not only highly inefficient, but their continued usage can pose considerable danger to the future of humans. There is more than one solution to the problem: from devising a better mining strategy, to transitioning towards greener energy for mining. The entire concept is so nascent that hardly any academic debate or scientific report available could suggest concrete plans. However, looking at the growing popularity of cryptos, it is pertinent to note that there indeed exists a problem and the need of the hour lies not in ignoring it, but rather starting a meaningful discussion to come up with better strategies to effectively tackle it.


Raj Shekhar is a law student at National University of Study and Research in Law, Ranchi, Jharkhand, India. He is the current Future Leaders India (Political Strategy) Fellowship holder.

Pacific Island States: Does the Future of Global Climate Displacement Lie in the Present?

green and black mountain beside body of water during daytime

24 June 2021 – by Nikunj Bhimsaria

Amid ongoing global debate around the definition, classification, and treatment of ‘climate migrants’, little attention is paid to what the people affected want. 1 There have been multiple reports with varying estimates of the number of people expected to be displaced due to climate change by 2050. 2,3 The common link featured in these reports, however, is that the majority of climate displacement is and will be internal. People around the world will be forced to relocate within their own countries to escape the slow onset impacts of climate change. Even in the face of uninhabitable conditions, people are generally unwilling to leave their homes and relocate to foreign lands. So, in addition to arguing over cross-border arrangements, countries ought to come up with inward-looking strategies to deal with climate-induced displacement.

One needs to look no further than the island states in the Pacific as examples. These small island nations are more vulnerable to the acute effects of climate change than any other region in the world. 4 Sea-level rise, amongst other climatic changes, is threatening the existence of these geographically isolated and small landmasses. Kiribati, which rises no more than two meters above sea-level at its highest point, is one such island state. A 2016 United Nations report has shown that half of the households have already been affected by sea-level rise on one of Kiribati’s constituent islands. 5 In neighboring Tuvalu, a UNU-EHS study found that 97% of surveyed households had been impacted by natural hazards between the period 2005 and 2015, yet only 53% of the people affected believed that they would be able to afford migration in the future. 6

Despite the above, people of these nations have been unwilling to leave their homes, families, and lives. New Zealand’s Pacific Access Ballot, an annual lottery which selects people from five Pacific countries for New Zealand residency each year, has repeatedly had quotas go unfulfilled. 7 The governments of these islands are trying to build adaptive capacity and employ migration as a means of improving the quality of life. The Kiribati government has implemented a program, entitled ‘Migration with Dignity’, which aims to create a skilled workforce that can find decent employment abroad. In 2014, the government also purchased 6,000 acres in Fiji to try and ensure food security whilst the environment changes. 8 With support from the Green Climate Fund, the Tuvalu Coastal Adaptation Project will enhance resilience to coastal hazards on some of the nation’s islands. 9

These measures might not be enough, but they are better than simply waiting for other countries to help. As Kiribati President, Taneti Maamau said: “We are telling the world that climate change impacts Kiribati, it’s really happening… But we are not telling people to leave.” 8 Rather than simply focusing on relocation – an option that does not support true self-determination for the affected people – international policy should provide adaptive capacity and long-term support to these island states. Many engineering options are available, such as coastal fortification, and land reclamation technologies. It is imperative, therefore, for developed countries to voluntarily adopt these measures before they are forced to do so.


Nikunj is a consultant currently working for a climate focused philanthropy. In the past, he has worked as a business strategy consultant across various sectors and has also volunteered for various non-profits. His undergraduate background is in Engineering from BITS Pilani. Interested in human-environmental ecosystems and how they adapt to climate change, Nikunj has been part of various climate adaptation projects.


References

[1] The Refugees The World Barely Pays Attention To, Tim McDonnell (Link)

[2] Groundswell: Preparing for Internal Climate Migration, World Bank (Link)

[3] Migration and Climate Change, IOM (Link)

[4] Climate Change and the Sinking Island States in the Pacific, Saber Salem (Link)

[5] Kiribati: Climate change and migration, Oakes, R., Milan, A., and Campbell J. (Link)

[6] Pacific Islanders Faced with Migration Can Benefit from Paris Agreement, UNFCCC Newsroom (Link)

[7] NZ Immigration launches annual Pacific Access, RNZ (Link)

[8] An Island Nation Turns Away from Climate Migration, Despite Rising Seas, Ben Walker (Link)

[9] Climate Change and Tuvalu (Link)

How Can Southeast Asian Climate Activists Tackle Climate Displacement?

tree cover mountain

1 June 2021 – by Jiahui Qui

“We demand that Global North countries recognise climate migrants as such.”

– Xiye Bastida, youth climate activist, US Leaders Summit on Climate 2021

As climate activists demand accountability from powerful corporate and government actors, the disproportionate impacts of climate change on vulnerable groups is the imprint on the flipside of the climate justice coin. With climate change and human rights issues growing inseparable, activists are focusing their attention on vulnerable groups like farmers, women and people in poverty, especially in the Global South. An issue that encompasses all these groups is climate-induced displacement and migration.

 ‘Climate migration’ refers to the movement of people forced to leave, or choosing to leave their homes predominantly due to climate change impacts[1]. Slow onset climate change impacts that drive climate migration include crop failure, water shortage, and rising sea levels. These can pressure people to flee their homes either by rendering their livelihoods untenable (e.g. for farmers) or making their homes uninhabitable (e.g. due to sea level rise)[2]. Other sudden climate-induced events like flash floods and typhoons also drive temporary displacement. 

The International Organization for Migration (IOM) estimates that 80% of annual worldwide sudden onset natural disaster-induced displacement occurs in the Asia Pacific region, where income inequality, conflict, and regional connectivity are also major drivers of migration[3]. A 2010 report for the US National Intelligence Council predicted that climate change may induce cross-border movements of “Vietnamese and Indonesians to Malaysia, Cambodians and Laotians to Thailand, Burmese to Thailand and Malaysia, and Filipinos throughout the region”[4]. Within borders, coastal communities can feel the growing impacts of sea level rise, fish stock depletion and intensifying coastal storms, and may move inland away from the coasts. Nearby cities and urban areas with commerce, job opportunities, and family relations also serve as pull factors for displaced people[5].

LET’S TALK ABOUT IT

Climate migration remains on the fringe of discourse in the front-facing messages of some prominent climate movements, both in Southeast Asia and internationally. It is merely identified as one of many climate threats in cautionary messages about global warming, rather than a potential thrust of climate action. Mentions of climate migration or displacement usually take the form of standalone articles aiming to educate audiences about the urgency of climate change, such as those by Greenpeace US[6]. Extinction Rebellion US consolidates resources on climate change and migration on its website, directing users to news articles and research[7]. In news interviews, members of Klima Action Malaysia (KAMY), a Malaysia youth climate group, cite climate migration as one of the consequences of inaction[8]

Understandably, activists focus on solutions and opportunities that can lead to calls for action that their audiences can contribute to, and demands for governments and corporations. These are messages that feed into their positive imagination of a just transition and a climate-resilient future; but can climate migration be a part of that imagination?

The table below exhibits some examples of initiatives prioritised by these movements.

Organisation/initiativeRegion/countryMain calls to action, demands or principles
Greenpeace InternationalInternational‘Ways to Act’·  Protect the Oceans·  Tell your story·  Stop plastic pollution·  Join the movement for clean air·  Prevent uncontrollable global fires·  Raise your voice for climate justice
Sunrise MovementUnited States(Selected) principles·  Stop climate change and create good-paying jobs in the process·  People from all paths of life·  Non-violence·  Unite with other movements for change·  Fight for the liberation of all people
Asia Climate Rally 2020AsiaDemands·  Climate action now·  Defend our environmental defenders·  Policies for the people and planet·  Demand ambition, collaboration and accountability·  Towards a just recovery
Youth Advocates for Climate Action Philippines (YACAP)Philippines‘Points of Unity’·  Climate justice·  Urgency of climate action·  Defend our environmental defenders·  Youth-led collective action·  System change
Klima Action Malaysia (KAMY)MalaysiaDemands·  Inclusive and intersectional climate action·  Serious political will·  The right to climate information

Besides calling for accelerated reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, as shown in bold, most of these groups share a common thread on inclusiveness and climate justice — making sure that climate action considers the voice and well-being of all people, including vulnerable groups. It is evident that the protection of climate migrants does fall under the umbrella of inclusive climate action that is being championed by many activists; but it is discussed mostly insofar as minimising climate change can help to prevent climate displacement. The fact is that climate displacement is already happening. How does the current plight of climate migrants fit into the demand for a just transition?

A THREAT TO SECURITY?

Governments have already recognised the alleged security threat presented by climate migration for some years. The security-based narrative for approaching climate migration argues that instability in neighbouring countries can drive illegal migration, which can in turn exacerbate drug and arms trafficking and resource-related conflict[9]. This perspective uses self-interest as a credible motivation for governments, so integrating human rights and justice into such a mindset is a challenge. Some have responded to this security concern by advocating for a military strategy focusing on stronger border protection, but climate security expert Professor Lorraine Elliott warns this will instead likely increase instability and uncertainty, while further punishing those already vulnerable to the climate crisis[10]. In a report on climate migration, peacebuilding organisation International Alert stresses that “migration in itself need not be a destabilising factor… it is not the process, but the context and the political response to immigration that shape the risks of violent conflict”[11]. For example, in a study on Indonesian-Malaysian labour migration, researchers found that conflict was triggered when it shifted from “being perceived as an economic issue with potential gains for both countries” to a “political and security issue in which the interests of sending and receiving states were “viewed as threats to one another”[12].

INTERNAL DISPLACEMENT

In terms of internal displacement, case studies from the Philippines, Cambodia, and Indonesia have found inadequate institutional and legal provisions for the human rights of those affected by natural disasters — especially women, people with disabilities, and the elderly. Researchers’ recommendations included disaster risk management policies with specific guidelines on the treatment of vulnerable groups in compliance with international standards, as well as comprehensive laws enacting the rights of internally displaced people (IDPs) in accordance with the UN Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement. In particular, it was pointed out that such policy development would be an opportunity to overcome patriarchal beliefs and “harness the knowledge and experiences of women”[13].

There is, then, a precedent for climate activists to apply the “justice” in “climate justice”, to garner greater empathy and equity in government responses to climate migrants. Professor Elliott does not support “simply mainstreaming climate change into security discourses”, but rather for “bottom-up policymaking” that aims to strengthen adaptation, social resilience, disaster risk management, and sustainable development strategies[14]. This is echoed by a 2018 World Bank report on internal climate migration, which recommends that governments actively embed climate migration into development planning and seek to improve their understanding of the issue itself[15].  

A POSITIVE OUTLOOK

Climate activists also favour a positive framing of climate action, not just as the prevention of disaster, but as an opportunity for better lives. A campaign by the Singapore Climate Rally called #TakeBack2050 encouraged its audience to imagine what life would be like in 2050 after overcoming the climate crisis. Participants raised their hopes for community gardens, renewable energy, and a more equitable society[16]. This uplifting narrative has already been embraced by many world leaders. At the US Leaders’ Climate Summit in April 2021, Vietnam’s President Nguyen Xuan Phuc emphasised that transitioning to a net zero economy would “bring about huge opportunities and benefits, including jobs, ensuring energy security and enhancing economic competitiveness and sustainability”.

Such positivity can also be applied to climate migration. Former director of the Australian Migration Research Centre, Professor Graeme Hugo, argued that climate migration can help build resilience and adaptive capacity in vulnerable areas. Migration can benefit host and source countries through remittances, knowledge transfer, increased foreign direct investment and diaspora involvement in development and most certainly, benefit migrants themselves and their families. Migration has also contributed to poverty reduction in Southeast Asia[17]. Therefore, viewing climate migration as a development opportunity rather than just a coping response can maximise the benefits for all parties.

Paying greater attention to climate migration as a tenet of climate justice is well-aligned with the existing principles and demands of climate activists. While Global North activists can argue for the moral responsibility of developed countries to help climate migrants in and from developing countries; Southeast Asian countries, which are mostly developing, call for different tactics. Framing the issue as a pragmatic development opportunity can help avoid excessive security tensions around climate migration in a region already rife with political turmoil, and instead encourage the mainstreaming of climate migration into national planning. Southeast Asian climate activists repeatedly point out that their countries are already experiencing some of the most intense impacts of climate change, which disproportionately affect vulnerable groups; and these include climate displacement and migration. It is an issue which presents both the urgency and potential for climate activists to call upon governments and the international community to recognise the opportunities that fair and well-planned climate migration and displacement policies in Southeast Asia can establish beyond humanitarian responses.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not represent the ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute.


Jiahui Qiu is a research officer at the Climate Change in Southeast Asia Programme, ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute, Singapore. She is a graduate in Environmental Studies from the National University of Singapore. Her interests include natural capital and ecosystem services, climate policy, and just transitions.

Understanding the Vicious Circle: Climate Change, Environmental Destruction and Contemporary Slavery

brown rocky mountain under white clouds during daytime

27 May 2021 – by Chris O’Connell

Research conducted by Earth Refuge Advisor Dr Chris O’Connell in Bolivia and Peru, and published by Anti-Slavery International, indicates that climate change is a big – but not the only – factor driving displacement and vulnerability. He summarises his core findings in this article. 

Climate change is the primary cause of migration worldwide. It presents an existential threat that is undermining traditional livelihoods, worsening the vulnerability of already marginalised groups and communities, and driving displacement. According to the World Bank, if sufficient action is not taken, over 140 million people could be displaced by 2050. Indeed, there is growing evidence that this is already occurring, with research linking northward migration from Central America to climate variability.

Under the right circumstances, migration represents an important form of climate adaptation, helping to mitigate economic precariousness and escape hazardous conditions. However, as highlighted in my report – ‘From a Vicious to a Virtuous Circle’ – if communities are not adequately listened to and supported, this situation can expose migrants to the risk of exploitation, including trafficking, debt bondage and forced labour. 

My research in Bolivia and Peru reveals that climate change is not the only factor that is driving displacement and vulnerability, however. Until recently, the issue of environmentally destructive activities – such as mining and export-oriented agriculture – was predominantly treated as a ‘pull factor’ for migration by creating a demand for cheap labour. But as research participants made clear, in many places it is also a significant ‘push factor’ by making other economic activities – and even life – unviable in certain places. 

Around 90% of the poorest people depend directly on natural resources, while 75% make a living from small-scale farming or fishing. These are more than just economic activities for many communities: they are deeply intertwined with their culture and identity, and often rely on ancestral knowledge passed down through generations. This same knowledge is increasingly recognised as crucial to preserving and restoring biodiversity, and for successful adaptation to the climate crisis.

Nevertheless, vital lifelines for communities and indigenous peoples are being shut down or restricted due to the expansion of extractive activities. Not only do these activities contaminate the air, soil and water, they are also associated with ‘staggering’ rates of deforestation and heavy water usage at a time when climate change is driving water scarcity.

Over and over, research participants described the negative environmental and human impacts of pesticides from industrialised agriculture, toxic oil spills, and pollution from mining residue that contains chemicals and heavy metals. This situation is also endangering the food security of these communities. In the words of an indigenous broadcaster I interviewed in the Peruvian Amazon, 

it is due to pollution, but also to the changes that are happening to the climate – both things are affecting us. The rivers used to be full of fish, but not now; we are eating our last fish…

For many families and communities, this combination can represent the ‘last straw’ in pushing them to migrate. The cruel irony is that in countries where economic activity relies on natural resource extraction, the only choice for many citizens is to accept offers to work in these same environmentally destructive sectors. This work often consists of highly exploitative and degrading conditions, including instances of debt bondage and forced labour, which causes further human degradation and contributes to further greenhouse gas emissions. This is the vicious circle from which many struggle to escape. 

The distinction between environmental impacts linked to climate change and those arising from man-made environmental harm is an important one. While the roots of both lie in the history of unequal development, their immediate drivers and control levers differ. Mitigating climate change is a long-term global challenge, but action to reduce environmental destruction should, in theory, be more straightforward. 

Yet, rather than regulating these activities, governments in many countries are actively facilitating them via state policy, including tax breaks, subsidies, and infrastructure projects, while often turning a blind eye to human rights abuses against land- and environmental-rights defenders. This situation must be tackled as a matter of urgency, and must also involve the meaningful participation of affected groups and communities. 

Responsibility for this scenario extends beyond national governments to include transnational corporations, consumer demand, and the architecture of global trade and investment – all of which restrict the ‘space’ for governments and suppliers to improve labour and environmental standards. Measures such as mandatory environmental and human rights due diligence legislation and a ‘Just Transition’ that respects workers’ rights are essential steps to taking a holistic approach to climate resilience.

All of this points to the need to not only improve legal safeguards for those who are displaced, but also to actively prevent or mitigate such vulnerability. Whether moving or staying, the fundamental rights of those most affected by climate and environmental breakdown must be upheld. Many of the tools required to tackle this situation already exist in the form of International Labour Organisation conventions, and UN human rights treaties, declarations, and principles such as the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights among others. What is needed now is corresponding action to translate these commitments into tangible change.

[Read the report here. | Lee en informe aquí.]

To See or Not to See, That is the Question

statues on top of building

20 April 2021 – by Flora Bensadon

Those driven from their homes by the climate crisis need to be welcomed, protected, promoted and integrated”– Pope Francis

On March 30th, 2021 the Migrants and Refugees (M&R) Section and the Dicastery for Promoting Integral Human Development released a booklet entitled “Pastoral Orientations on Climate Displaced Persons” (POCDP). It provides guidelines on how the Church will respond to migration caused by climate change, promoting solidarity between individuals and urging the international community to care for this crisis through immediate action. 

In the document’s preface, the Pope points out that displacement due to an uninhabitable environment might seem like a process of nature when it is in fact the result of “poor choices and destructive activity, selfishness and neglect.” The climate crisis we are now facing comes to no surprise as our environment has been decaying continuously since the start of the Industrial Revolution. While this crisis is a global one, the ones facing the most consequences are those who have contributed the least. Today, we witness the rapid acceleration of climate migration for which there needs to be immediate global responses. 

Come, let us talk this over. If you are ready to listen, we can still have a great future. But if you refuse to listen and to act, you will be devoured by the heat and the pollution, by droughts here and rising waters there” (cf. Isaiah 1:18-20) the Pope quotes. This message, although one of faith, strongly reflects how this crisis has been ignored by many players in the global community. It emphasizes the importance for those in power to listen and acknowledge the distressing position of climate migrants by taking necessary measures to mitigate its impact.

The POCDP begins with a general introduction on the climate crisis and how it plays a role in the displacement of many. It is then followed by nine steps that deal with the various aspects of climate migration. They are the following:

  1. Acknowledging the climate crisis and displacement nexus 
  2. Promoting awareness and outreach
  3. Providing alternatives to displacement
  4. Preparing people for displacement 
  5. Fostering inclusion and integration 
  6. Exercising a positive influence on policy-making
  7. Extending pastoral care
  8. Cooperating in strategic planning and action 
  9. Promoting professional training in integral ecology
  10. Fostering academic research of CCD (Climate Crisis and Displacement)

Local church leaders and congregations were asked to develop these guidelines, particularly those who witnessed first-hand climate-related incidents or displacement, such as archbishop Claudio Dalla Zuanna from Beira, Mozambique. In 2019, the city of Beira was critically hit by Cyclone Idai causing massive flooding, the destruction of 90 percent of its buildings and the displacement of hundreds of thousands of people. Having witnessed the emergency response to this natural disaster, the archbishop stated that it is not enough to solely resettle people. It is important to take additional measures by putting in place the conditions necessary to welcome climate migrants and to provide them with essential services.  

Between 2008 and 2018, 253.7 million people were displaced by climate disasters. The document states that in the first half of 2020 only, 9.8 million people were displaced because of droughts, floods and other climate-related events. The number of climate migrants is still growing and is expected to reach 200 million by 2050. With those numbers in mind, the Vatican’s policy guidelines offer possible ways to raise awareness on climate migration and promote the importance of conversations between governments and policy makers. The M&R Section also encourages churches around the world to welcome displaced people, offer support and integrate them within their new society. 

The POCDP is an important move towards a solution-based approach in the confrontation of the climate migration crisis. By calling for international help and action, the Catholic Church takes a stance in an important debate, which could bring positive changes to our current migration policies. While the primary message of this document relies on a message of faith, it extends a hand to climate migrants, making them feel seen and supported, a step most governments have not yet taken. 


Flora Bensadon is an Earth Refuge Archivist with a degree in History and International Development Degree from McGill University. Through her studies, her culturally diverse background and her travels, Flora has taken a profound interest in the problems of migration, specifically those of climate refugees.


References

Migrants & Refugees Section, Dicastery for Promoting Integral Human Development. Pastoral Orientations on Climate Displaced Persons. Migrants & Refugees, 2021. https://migrants-refugees.va/2021/03/30/pastoral-orientations-on-climate-displaced-people/

Wells, Christopher. Church offers guidelines for response to climate migration. Vatican News, 2021. https://www.vaticannews.va/en/vatican-city/news/2021-03/church-pastoral-orientations-response-climate-displaced-people.html

Parson, Thea. Vatican Releases Guidelines to Address Climate Displacement. Climate Refugees, 2021. https://www.climate-refugees.org/spotlight/2021/4/9/vatican

Brown, Oli. Migration and Climate Change. IOM International Organization for Migration, 2008. https://olibrown.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/2008-Migration-and-Climate-Change-IOM.pdf

Wooden, Cindy. Vatican calls for action to assist victims displaced by climate change. Grandin Media, 2021. https://grandinmedia.ca/vatican-calls-for-action-to-assist-victims-displaced-by-climate-change/
Giangravé, Claire. Vatican makes moral case for supporting people displaced by climate change. Religion News Service, 2021. https://religionnews.com/2021/03/30/vatican-makes-moral-case-for-supporting-people-displaced-by-climate-change/

Environmental Contamination to Revitalization: Industri-Plex

6 April 2021 – by Andrew Hanna

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.

Stone bridge over Middlesex Canal. Image from Library of Congress, retrieved from New England Historical Society

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.”

This is one of the hide piles. The surface is covered by a clay cap, below which the old hide wastes still remain to this day. Image from National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

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.

These companies didn’t just create chromium sulfate for the tanneries. They also manufactured lead-arsenic insecticides, acetic acid, sulfuric acid, hydrochloric acid, phenol, benzene, toluene, and explosives. These products, the components for their creation, and the byproducts of their creation were dumped into the soil of the Industri-Plex Site. Many of these pose significant risks to human and environmental health.

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.

With the nation’s attention focused on environmental contamination, EPA arrived on the scene at Industri-Plex in 1979, after receiving a court order to stop the Mark-Phillip Trust from illegally filling in a wetland. In 1983, the initial iteration of the National Priorities List was finalized (this list includes all the Superfund sites across the nation), Industri-Plex was among the first to be identified, boasting the title of being the fifth-most contaminated site in the nation.

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.

Double Threat: The Combined Effect of Wildfires and a Pandemic Upon Businesses

1 April 2021 – by Jennifer Fields

Wildfires are not something most businesses on the United States’ West Coast can easily prepare for. They often occur with little to no warning, as they spread rapidly, and their path can be unpredictable. Even if a place of work itself is not at risk, employees’ homes and commuting roads are often damaged. On either side of highways, there are usually expensive fields and farmlands which have the capacity to burn rapidly. When highways, and railways, shutdown, employees often cannot make it to work. Once the fires have passed, the roads may remain closed due to the pavement’s temperature and the debris blocking the paths. When neighborhoods and towns are evacuated, employers lose a majority of their workforce, making it difficult for them to run their business. [1]

The Farming Industry

During the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, farmers were considered essential workers, which meant that they could continue to operate, but often under less-than optimal conditions. Due to the overlap between the pandemic and fire season, many migrant workers had left the California farming areas, which made for a scarcity of available employees. This meant a heavier workload and less productivity for the remaining workers. Once fruits and vegetables are ready to be harvested, there is usually only a window of a few days within which to pick them before they are rendered unmarketable.[2] This is what happened to a lot of products in California this season because the workforce was just not available.

The workers who were still farming faced a harsh reality. They often worked in temperatures over one hundred degrees Fahrenheit, for shifts spanning twelve-hours or more.[3] There was also a K-95 mask shortage, which risked the safety of the employees and the products being harvested. Many workers suffered heat-related injuries due to the extreme heat and the physical toll of the labor.[4] Farmers were often woken up in the middle of the night because they needed to move their cattle somewhere safer or because they themselves needed to evacuate.

When smoke and flames do destroy fields, the chemical composition of the soil is changed. Farming becomes more challenging and can even change the quality of the plants that are able to grow. The destruction of pastures also presents a challenge for farmers as it is the main source of sustenance for the livestock. Buying alternative food sources for livestock is expensive and oftentimes not worth the expense, forcing ranchers to slaughter early to avoid unnecessary expenses.[5] In the event that pastures are saved, herding the cattle can be difficult. The fires can destroy fences, some of which are multiple miles long (to fulfil the purpose of the enclosure of large plots of land). Transporting thousands of animals back to safe pasture is time-consuming, expensive, and physically demanding.[6]  Rebuilding the fences is also a costly endeavor and time-consuming, but it must be done as quickly as possible so that the cattle are not lost.[7]      

The Timber Industry

Scientists say that fossil fuels create a more considerable fire risk which could lead to the end of the timber industry, hurting many rural families who depend on the forests for a living.[8] Oregon is the number one producer of lumber in the United States (US), but even their trees take a very long time to grow. It can take over thirty years before a tree reaches a size appropriate for cutting.[9] A wildfire in Oregon destroyed a plot of 25-year-old trees at the Seneca Sawmill. Almost all of their younger trees were wiped out, and 25 years of work and care went to waste.[10] While many people heat their homes with oil and alternative energy, many Americans – especially those in rural areas – rely on lumber to stay warm in the winter. It is also used to make homes, furniture, and other products. The newly planted trees will take about 40-60 years before they can be harvested, which could create future layoffs and economic setbacks for the timber industry.[11]  The logging industry will also be impacted, as with any issue of supply and demand: shortages will create a hike in prices and a more competitive industry, especially when up against timber yards in other states that are not facing wildfires.[12]

The Restaurant Industry

The restaurant industry has also suffered as the result of the smoke from wildfires, and the impact of COVID-19 preventative measures. Both of these factors have led to a reduction in tourism, which is what many of the smaller restaurants in California and Oregon rely on for businesses. COVID-19 regulations forced many restaurants to close their doors to inside seating and instead open up to outside seating. However, the smoke from the wildfires made the air outside unsafe as well. Even when the fire diverts and does not physically destroy buildings, the smoke makes the air quality in surrounding areas unsafe.[13] Restaurants in San Francisco have often had to close over the weekend, despite it being their busiest and most profitable time, because the air quality was too poor to safely host outdoor dining.[14]

It is important to note that restaurants and cafes that are Asian-run, or that serve Asian food have faced an increased decline in business since the start of the pandemic in February of 2020 due to a myriad of circumstances.[15] Travel restrictions and tax season meant that people had been eating out less, but COVID-19 misinformation surrounding the origins of the virus in China has also played a large role in increased xenophobia and discrimination towards the Asian community and restaurants.  For instance, the Liang’s who own a small noodle bar to consider closing their doors.[16] They faced over a 50% drop in orders within just two weeks, and their situation is not unique – they are one of many businesses impacted in this way.

While customer orders were down, some restaurants kept busy feeding those who were protecting the community.[17] Tyler Florence, a chef from the World Food Kitchen, joined local chefs in Sonoma County, California to help feed those in need during the shutdown. While the restaurants were not open for business, they helped feed first responders and people forced to evacuate.[18] On one Sunday, they served over 6,000 meals to people in the area, including firefighters who spent over 12 hours working a shift and were too exhausted to cook. [19]

Fighting wildfires and the pandemic simultaneously have created competing risk analyses. Controlled burns are one way in which the government attempts to prevent wildfires. It helps in removing debris and other materials that could spread wildfires by burning them under close supervision. Even if under control, this is still a fire, and creates smoke which intensifies the already poor air quality in California’s valleys.[20] This can cause complications for older citizens and those with lung conditions. Poor air quality has led to an increase in hospitalizations, when health providers are already stretched thin due to COVID-19.[21] In response, the US Forrest Service decided to halt planned controlled burns so as not to worsen air quality conditions. However, the Bureau of Land Management continued their control burns as planned to prevent more wildfires in the future.[22] There are trade-offs to all of the decisions being made, but the public’s safety remains the top priority.

Conclusion

Restrictions on dining, travel, and social distancing have taken their toll on businesses. The pandemic safety precautions combined with environmental disasters – such as the wildfires and resulting smoke – have increased the struggles of many citizens living on the West Coast of the US. Farmers have had incurred extra costs trying to repair the damage to their soil, property, and crops/ livestock. This increases the risk of food shortages and farmer’s leaving the profession for a more economically sustainable career. The timber industry has suffered setbacks with the burning of their trees, which will take decades for them to recover, creating shortages in the not-too-distant future. Many Americans rely on wood to build and heat their homes. No industry has seem to escaped unscathed as the restaurant industry has  also struggled with Coivid-19 protocols as outside dining is no solution when the outside air is unsafe. 

This article is part of our Spring 2021 collaboration with students from the International Human Rights Clinic at the Western New England University.


Jennifer Fields is a second year Law Student at Western New England School of Law in Springfield, MA.  She is on the Dean’s List and is working on a concentration in International and Comparative Law to complement her passion for justice. In college, she worked for Beit Ha’Gefen in Haifa, Israel, creating a safe, multicultural space for refugees settling into Israeli life. Currently, she is active in her community as a trained legal observer for the National Lawyers Guild and does Pro Bono work with the ACLU. When the season is right, she enjoys skiing and spending time on the water.


References

[1] The True Impact of Wildfires on Business, (Aug. 27, 2020), https://www.alertmedia.com/blog/the-impact-of-wildfires-on-business/.

[2] Kelly Haddock, California Wildfires Effect on Agriculture, (Aug. 25, 2020), https://georgia.growingamerica.com/features/2020/08/california-wildfires-affect-agriculture

[3] Id.

[4] Id.

[5] Effects of Wildfire on Agriculture, (Oct. 27, 2020), https://www.corvallisadvocate.com/2020/effects-of-wildfire-on-agriculture/.

[6] Id.

[7] Id.

[8] Id.

[9] Id.

[10] Keaton Thomas, Oregon timber industry hit hard by fires, will have generational impact, (Sept. 28th, 2020), https://katu.com/news/following-the-money/timber-industry-hit-hard-by-fires-will-have-generational-impact.

[11] Id.

[12] Id.

[13] Lisa Jennings, (Oct. 28, 2019), Fires, evacuations and smoke hurt restaurants in Northern California, https://www.nrn.com/news/fires-evacuations-and-smoke-hurt-restaurants-northern-california.

[14] Id.

[15] Benjy Egel, Sacramento Chinese restaurant owners worry coronavirus fear is hurting business, (Feb, 28, 2020), https://www.sacbee.com/food-drink/restaurants/article240715076.html.

[16] Id.

[17] Id.

[18] Jennings, Fires, evacuations and smoke hurt restaurants.

[19] Id.

[20] Will McCarthy, Will Smoke From Controlled Burns Hurt Covid-19 Patients?, (May 4, 2020), https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/04/us/coronavirus-california-air-pollution.html.

[21] Id.

[22] Id.

Involuntary Stayers: A Case Study of Environmental Racism in Flint, Michigan

11 March 2021 – by Emma Cooper

As climate change and subsequent environmental disasters continue to force people to leave their homes, policymakers and aid organizations must acknowledge that relocation is more difficult for vulnerable populations and low-income communities. Climate migrants are “involuntary movers,” but it is important to investigate the traumas and challenges of “involuntary stayers” in the context of climate crises as well in order to create robust support networks. 

In instances of climate-induced displacement, the ordinary stresses of moving are compounded with the stresses of an environmental catastrophe. Not only must migrants account for the significant financial, social, and physical tolls of moving, but also consider the specific implications of the crisis facing their home. Flooding, fires, and other disasters related to climate change require rapid evacuation, forcing migrants to make split-second decisions about their material possessions in order to survive. A 2016 study by the U.S. Global Change Research Program found that many people who are exposed to climate disasters experience a plethora of serious mental health consequences, including depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder. The same study also indicated that children, older adults, and economically disadvantaged individuals are at a higher risk for mental health consequences as a result of exposure to climate disasters. These groups face an additional factor of compounding stress as a result of forced migration which can create additional barriers to relocation that are particularly problematic when an environmental catastrophe posits immediate danger. 

The social, political, and economic factors that hinder flight in the aftermath of an environmental crisis are apparent in Flint, Michigan, where the 2014 decision to reroute the city’s water supply through the lead-contaminated Flint River has left the city in an ongoing water crisis. This disaster exacerbated an exodus of residents that has left particularly vulnerable populations behind. The city has seen a population decrease of over 23% since 2000, a lingering symptom of long-term disinvestment that stems from the collapse of Detroit’s auto industry in the late 1960s. As auto industry jobs left the area, affluent white families fled Flint and moved into the suburbs, a textbook example of white Flight. Flint’s low-income residents and communities of color had limited pathways to relocation due to redlining, a racially discriminatory zoning policy that was widely practiced in mid-century America, economic barriers and were left with no choice but to stay. Financial distress has plagued Flint since this collapse: the 2020 average median income was almost $25,000 below the Michigan state average, which is already about $5,000 less than the national average. Buying enough bottled water to meet the weekly needs of your family is a mandatory and significant expense in Flint that tightens budgets and sets the ordeal of moving out of reach for many. 

Money is not the only thing that forces people to become “involuntary stayers”. The daily burden of the water crisis has a time cost, for cooking, cleaning, and showering with bottled water require countless errands and energy. “The rhythm of the family is disrupted,” says Dr. Tam Perry, a professor of social work and anthropology at Wayne State University in Detroit. Dr. Perry has been studying the impact of the Flint water crisis on older adults since 2014. Through her ethnographic approach to research in Flint, she has observed the ways in which everyday rituals and cultural practices have been altered to demand more effort, such as the process of cooking collard greens, a vegetable with great historical and traditional significance in Black culture going back to the American civil war. Preparing collard greens is a “source of comfort” and a way for people to “hold onto their cuisine in the face of a crisis,” says Max Smith, a social worker and research assistant to Dr. Perry. However, due to the resource-intensive preparation process, the sheer number of plastic water bottles needed to wash and boil collard greens makes the recipe prohibitive for those who need to conserve water in order to literally survive. This illustrates the cultural damage that can be created by environmental catastrophes for “involuntary stayers” and “involuntary movers” alike, as migrants may also experience feelings of cultural severance upon moving. 

Though the contamination of Flint’s water supply was not the direct result of climate change, it stands as a pertinent example of environmental racism and neglect of human rights in a low-income community that is akin to many places currently confronting climate-induced displacement. Warming climates and gradually rising sea levels will produce evacuations over a long-term scale and in this way, Flint provides an important case study to inform future community displacement planning and migration patterns. The burden of the climate crisis will continue to fall most heavily upon low-income areas and communities of color. Governments, NGOs, and other organizations working at the forefront of these issues must consider this disparity in their mitigation approaches to ensure that there is adequate support for vulnerable populations that may not otherwise see relocation as financially, politically, or physically feasible, even in the face of a climate disaster. 


Emma Cooper is a Michigan native currently studying at the University of California, Berkeley. This discussion of the cultural toll of environmental disasters builds upon an interview with Dr. Tam Perry, a professor at Wayne State University in Detroit, Michigan who has been conducting research on the social impact of the Flint Water Crisis since 2015, and Max Smith, a social worker in the Detroit area, who served as a research to Dr. Perry on several projects.

A Tale of Two Cities: The Complexity of Climate Migrants in North Carolina, USA

2 March 2021 – by Ben Chappelow

Due to its low elevation and vulnerable barrier islands, North Carolina is one of the more at-risk areas in the United States (U.S.) when it comes to sea level rise. It has the largest estuarine system on the U.S. Atlantic Coast, with over 2,300 square miles (3700 sq. km) of coastal land vulnerable to a one-meter rise in sea level. Current projections place more than 789,000 North Carolinian properties at risk in the next thirty years. In some places, tidal flooding has increased by 100 percent since 2000. Even before flooding, many residents will experience heftier down payments and inequities in insurance, which could increase household debt. Either way, North Carolina will experience an exodus of people moving westward. For some communities, a managed retreat is not so simple. Coastal areas like New Bern and Princeville can illustrate the pain and complexity U.S. climate migrants face due to rising sea levels.

New Bern

In 2018, Hurricane Florence swept through the coastal city New Bern, a storm that meteorologists claim was intensified by climate change. Flooding engulfed more than 800 homes, including multiple public housing complexes. Displaced residents in New Bern applied for temporary housing assistance and property loss reimbursements from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), but for many of them, this didn’t solve the problem. Most FEMA reimbursements only last a few months, whilst opening new low-income housing is a multi-year process. Many New Bern locals ended up in shelters, crashing on floors, and renting motel rooms with their FEMA checks. 

The search for new homes isn’t a simple one. Private parties can prey on low-income migrants for a profit, and there are fewer affordable housing projects available to households with mixed income. In the state of North Carolina, it is legal for landlords to discriminate against applicants with ‘section 8’ vouchers (a federal subsidy on housing intended to ensure safe private housing for low-income residents). In Trent Court, New Bern’s housing project, landowners decided to demolish the damaged buildings despite former residents continuing to inhabit their old homes. 

Increasing storms and floods are displacing those who cannot afford to stay. Public housing residents, along with other poor, disabled, elderly, and vulnerable people are forming one of the first waves of climate migrants in the U.S. According to a 2017 report, 9 percent of public housing units and 8 percent of privately owned federally subsidized housing units in the U.S. sit in a floodplain. This is close to 500,000 units and approximately one million people. Many residents of government-subsidized housing in New Orleans, Miami, Houston, and Puerto Rico have already become climate migrants. With sea levels on the projection to rise, New Bern is posed to be one of the canaries in the coal mine for American citizens living in public housing. 

Princeville

For many communities, the problem is not only finding a new home but leaving their current one behind. Princeville, a small town of approximately two thousand people, was a symbol of resilience. It is believed to be the oldest town chartered by freed slaves, originally named Freedom Hill and established by freed slave and carpenter Turner Prince. Residents dealt with Jim Crow-era vigilante violence directed at a self-sufficient all-Black town. Its population remains 96 percent Black. 

Situated along the Tar River, Princeville experiences frequent flooding. This was one of the main reasons Black people in the 19th century were able to settle the land in the first place—white landowners did not want it. The relegation of Black people to flood-prone land and hazardous areas exposes them to greater levels of environmental threats. This inequality became clear when the town has battled two supposed “100-year storms” within the span of twenty years (i.e., Hurricane Floyd in 1999 and Hurricane Matthew in 2016). Homeowners faced a difficult decision: either remain in an increasingly hazardous floodplain or sell their homes to FEMA and risk an end to their community. 

Selling their property to FEMA would have prevented anyone from building again on their flood-prone land and led to a reduction in the town’s tax base. Many residents have relocated, but FEMA has helped fund multiple projects to rebuild county infrastructure for the locals who remain. In December of 2020, Princeville developed a comprehensive plan for redevelopment. Only time will tell if the town can withstand an increasing rate of storm surges and flooding.

For many of its residents, Princeville stands as more than their home, but as a land tied heavily to their history and culture. Uprooting their lives means more than a loss of property. For many groups, especially Native or Indigenous communities, the loss of one’s home can be harmful to one’s identity, and relocation may not be a remedy for that loss.

Current State of Migration in NC

For the financially well-off households impacted by natural disasters, western migration might be a smoother process. Real estate agents are more likely to flag down climate migrants who bring substantial financial resources with them to Western North Carolina. They will offer properties that will only increase in price with the influx of potential buyers. Wealthy out-of-state buyers have already been flocking to these mountains for years in search of second homes, and when surveyed, the vast majority of buyers claimed climate issues were a strong motivator. When more low-income households must move west, the limited supply of available property will likely skyrocket due to increased demand. Those who cannot afford the inflated prices will have a difficult time finding a place to live.

It is hard to say if the available resources North Carolina has to offer will ensure the safety of its citizens. The state does not have the best track record when it comes to confronting sea level rise. In 2012, NC-20 lawmakers passed a controversial bill that, according to policy manager Tancred Miller, “put a moratorium on using any official numbers, rates of sea level rise for state-level planning or state-level regulation.” In other words, the bill did not allow state and local agencies to base policy decisions on models that include the rapid accelerating effect of global warming. Instead, decisions had to be based on outdated historical data that places sea level rise projections much lower than what scientists claim. According to the Columbia Undergraduate Law Review, this bill “ignores crucial scientific evidence and has the potential to harm North Carolinians on the coast.” The North Carolina Coastal Federation claimed the bill “may result in unintended consequences for coastal property owners.” Current policies now fit later scientific reports, but the bill paints a picture of NC lawmakers’ hesitation to face the encroaching issues climate change brings. 

The many complexities of climate migration only magnify on the global scale as international communities seek refuge across national borders. Leaving one’s country carries with it further conflicts of culture and identity. If the U.S. hopes to lead in the effort to combat climate-induced displacement, it needs to learn from the issues face by its own citizens.  


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.

Where is the International Refugee Regime Headed?

body of water surrounded by pine trees during daytime

11 February 2021 – by Flora Bensadon

When it comes to the question of refugees and providing aid, the Global North is first in line with answers and propositions. However, when it comes to acting on the agreed upon policies and practices, the Global North is also first to counter-act with policies relieving the states from cooperation and burden sharing to protect their own interests (Behrman 2019:59). Over the past few decades, the world has witnessed a dramatic increase in refugee flows, to which states in the Global North answered by restricting entry to their territory. As we move into the 21st Century, the world now faces new challenges and the emergence of a new type of refugee: those fleeing their countries due to climate related issues. The Global North adopted restrictive policies when faced with the ongoing refugee crisis, which leads us to believe it will do the same throughout the 21st Century. This essay will thus be focusing on just that.

First, we will define the system of remote control and discuss the different border controls set in place within the Global North. We will continue by establishing the lack of governance within the international refugee regime, which eventually leads to a lack of accountability of the Global North with regard to refugees. Finally, we will discuss the role of public opinion in the refugee protection discourse.

Remote Control

Remote control is a “system of passports, visas, and passenger ship checks” that keeps people from leaving for certain destinations without having passed initial screening (Fitzgerald 2019:4). For instance, states have put in place pre-clearances in foreign airports to avoid having refugees reach their territories. The same governments also converge on global visa policies, carrier sanctions and liaison officers (Fitzgerald 2019:14-15). In addition, they campaign for remote control throughout the countries of departure, like the British government did in 1934. They successfully pressured the Greek government to pass a law prohibiting anyone without a valid passport or visa to leave from Greece to Palestine (Fitzgerald 2019:5). These policies of expulsion, and many others, are meant to keep asylum seekers away from the Global North (Fitzgerald 2019:1). Because of the non-refoulement clause of the 1951 UN Refugee Convention (Hatton 2020:82) that prevents refugees from being sent back to their persecutors once on the territory, states now result in the manipulation of territoriality (Fitzgerald 2019:9). It allows states the possibility to refuse entry to refugees by saying they did not actually step foot into their territory.

Border reinforcements of wealthier democratic states therefore suggest the following: While the respective governments do cooperate amongst themselves to exclude refugees and migrants, there is a lack of willingness to cooperate in the burden-sharing when it comes to the reception of refugees. Yet, more lenient border policies would further provide refugees with protection and aid by providing them basic human rights. This entails access to safety, to food, to shelter, to healthcare, to education and to work (Feldman 2012:391). However, given the current geopolitical context, it does not seem that recipient states would enact such policies due to the fact that they perceive refugees as an economic strain (Behrman 2019:59).

Refugees can first be perceived as an economic strain because of the expanses spent by host countries to provide them with the necessary protection, which is with national resources and services, as previously mentioned. This would result, according to International Monetary Fund (IMF) estimates, in refugees costing countries of the European Union 0.1% of their GDP (Shellito 2016:16). In addition, refugees might also disturb local economic markets, from food to housing, thus altering prices. For instance, Turkey has faced a sharp increase in rental pricing because of the refugee crisis, which hurts Turkish families with relatively low incomes (Shellito 2016:17).  And so, because refugees can negatively impact host countries’ economy, said countries are less inclined to adopt lenient border policies.

Lack of Governance

The international refugee regime has always lacked a clearly defined system of global governance, allowing states of the Global North to avoid their responsibilities. It remains restrained as it contains no binding obligation on states to cooperate or ensure the functioning of the regime (Betts and Milner 2020:1-4). In turn, this weak governance has prevented important forms of dialogue, political engagement and cooperation, which are necessary to facilitate international cooperation or the realization of the regime’s core objective: solutions for the protection of refugees (Betts and Milner 2020:4), including those affected by climate change.

The United Nation High Commissioner for Refugees (“UNHCR”) the regime’s primary institution, was founded to provide this protection; it also supervises the application of conventions and develops international refugee law (Goodwin-Gill 2020:2). However, the UNHCR’s financial structure was designed to make it dependent on Western states as it relies mostly on the donation of those governments (Parekh 2020:28). Its role is to supervise the international refugee regime and publish non-binding guidelines on the application of international refugee law. Because the UNHCR does not hold power to enforce any rule of law (Goodwin-Gill 2020:40), it constrains its ability to resist or influence the actions and interests of more powerful states (Betts and Milner 2020:2). Thus, as nothing prevents governments of the Global North from prioritizing their own interests above their responsibility to help refugees, they have no incentive to cooperate with the international refugee regime any more than they already do (Parekh 2020:23).

Finally, states of the Global North measure their success in the refugee regime in their ability to control refugees by containing them in their regions of origin (Betts and Milner 2020:7) or monitoring their movement through remote-control policies (Behrman 2019:48). And so, as long as refugees remain in the Global South, whether in their home region or refugee camps, governments will neither be motivated to cooperate empathetically, nor feel the pressure to assume their share of the burden (Betts and Milner 2020:7).

Lack of Accountability

States within the Global North have a duty to rescue due to the superior means they possess over developing countries. However, because they are not the cause of the problem, nor have they initiated the events that forced refugees to flee their countries of origin, they minimize their obligations toward refugees (Parekh 2020:23). Although their duty to protect and rescue comes second to their own interests, states of the Global North are still seen as rescuers. As a result, they are somewhat excused from taking on too much of the burden of refugees (Parekh 2020:24). As it is not clear who should be responsible for the protection of displaced persons, those who fail to rescue are rarely held accountable.

However, if wealthier states with actual resources to help cannot be blamed for not upholding their duty of rescue, they can be blamed for being co-contributors to a system that structurally prevents the majority of refugees from seeking refuge because of the aforementioned remote-control policies (Parekh 2020:27). If not held accountable for their actions, governments will continue to allow the perpetuation of human rights violations refugees face.

For example, in 2010, following the destructive earthquake that occurred in Haiti, Haitians have been granted Temporary Protected Status (TPS); it allowed them to work legally in the United States (US). Unfortunately, in 2017, the Trump administration attempted to end TPS for Haitians (Macdonald 2019). Although it did not succeed, this kind of behavior is a clear indicator of the current US president’s stance toward refugees, bringing us to believe that cooperation and burden-sharing will not be increased in the near-future. And consequently, without accountability, governments might try to further minimize their role within the international refugee regime.

Public Opinion

Finally, while governments of the Global North have been struggling between their own interests and their moral obligations to refugees, the rise of nationalism has only added fuel to the push back against refugees (Parekh 2010:23). Although populist political parties might not always get elected in office, they still shift the agendas of other political parties towards a more anti-immigration stance (Hatton 2020:87).  In fact, general public opinion has shifted dramatically against immigrants all across the Global North, due to the overall climate that surrounds refugees and asylum seekers more specifically (Hatton 2020:88). For example, because public opinion is strongly against unauthorized entry; an increase in the number of arrivals has induced hardened attitudes towards immigrants as a whole (Hatton 2020:89).

As the decisions of the democratic governments in the Global North normally reflect the majority of the populations’ point of view towards a contentious topic, the rise of nationalism across the Global North has the ability to reveal the poignant possibility that the burden-sharing and cooperation of Western governments and related institutions within the international refugee regime will not increase in the decades to come.


Flora Bensadon is a recent graduate of History and International Development from McGill University, Canada. Through her studies, her culturally diverse background and her travels, Flora has taken a profound interest in the problems of migration, specifically those of climate refugees.


References

Alexander Betts and James Milner. May 2019. “Governance of the Global Refugee Regime,” World Refugee Council Research Paper No. 13: 1–14.

David Scott FitzGerald. 2019. “Never Again?” In: Refuge Beyond Reach: How Rich Democracies Repel Asylum Seekers, 21–40. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

David Scott FitzGerald. 2019. “The Catch-22 of Asylum Policy,” In: Refuge Beyond Reach: How Rich Democracies Repel Asylum Seekers, 1–20. Oxford: Oxford University Press.