The European Union policy and normative framework in addressing climate mobility

<p dir="ltr">Climate change is altering the character of human mobility in myriad ways: migration is taking more complex forms, altering traditional ones that are based on more linear and clearly distinguishable causal narratives. <a target="_blank">[1]</a>Responses to climate migration have been fragmented and fraught to date, owing partly to the contentious nature of climate change and migration and partly to the multivarious stakeholders, interests and jurisdictions involved. <a target="_blank">[2]</a> Consequently, and precisely because of the wide range of mobility outcomes, the distinction between certain protection norms or frameworks is excessively rigid and outdated. What is required is a two-pronged legal and policy approach that seeks to minimise forced displacement while facilitating, where necessary, migration as an adaptation strategy to ensure that all those affected by climate change receive appropriate support. Adequate protection of climate migrants <a target="_blank">[3]</a> with sound planning for and management of climate mobility has become critical for human security. What is required, therefore, is a more holistic approach with more concerted efforts and greater international responsibility-sharing to support host communities develop effective localised practices world-wide. Countries concerned need to better ensure that climate change adaptation measures, both incremental and transformational, address climate-driven human mobility.</p><p dir="ltr"><br></p><p dir="ltr"><a target="_blank">[1]</a> E. Pan, ‘Reimagining the Climate Migration Paradigm: Bridging Conceptual Barriers to Climate Migration Responses’ (2020) 50 <i>Environmental Law</i> 4: 1173, 1175.</p><p dir="ltr"><a target="_blank">[2]</a> Ibid. at 1176.</p><p dir="ltr"><a target="_blank">[3]</a> In the interest of conciseness, the use of the notion “climate migrant” is here used in broad terms. The lack of a solid empirical foundation for the causal link between climate change and migration explains the absence of a clear definition of “climate migrant” and existing disagreements among academics and policy-makers as to a notion that can comprehensively capture the complexity of this type of human mobility. The debate is centred around two main and opposing schools of thought, namely maximalism and minimalism. The former conceives of the link between environmental change and migration as causative and direct. As such it predicts large scale human mobility as a necessary outcome of large-scale changes in the environment. The latter emphasizes the multifactorial conditions that determine migratory movements and thus question the assumption of a direct causal link between environmental change and migration; see further J. Morrissey, ‘Rethinking the 'debate on environmental refugees': from “maximalists and minimalists” to “proponents and critics”’ (2012) 19 <i>Journal of Political Ecology</i> 1: 36-49. doi: <a href="https://doi.org/10.2458/v19i1.21712" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.2458/v19i1.21712</a>; G. Sciaccaluga, <i>International Law and the Protection of “Climate Refugees”</i> (Springer 2020), pp. 39-56; for a detailed account of the plethora of notions and terms adopted over time, see F. Rosignoli, <i>Environmental Justice for Climate Refugees</i> (Routledge 2022), pp. 1-31.</p>