Climate Refugees Policy Recommendations to US Government Agencies on Climate Displacement

 Climate Refugees Submission of Written Comments/Recommendations to the Department of State Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration (PRM) and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) for its Report to the President on Planning for the Impacts of Climate Change on Migration  

This expert contribution to PRM and USAID is based on Climate Refugees report: “Climate Change, Forced Displacement, Peace and Security: Biden Administration Actions That Ensure Rights released in March 2021 in response to President Biden’s February 4 executive orders on Planning for the Impacts of Climate Change on Migration. And this 2020 joint NGO report addressing the adverse impacts of climate change in Central America countries due to the strategic policy and operational response needs of forced migration arising from Central America to the United States, where evidence suggests climate change impacts and climate variability have impacted agriculture and the livelihoods of millions of farmers.

PRM and USAID should take note of the Comprehensive Development Plan for El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and south-southeast Mexico, coordinated by ECLAC, which addresses the structural causes of irregular migration by centering sustainable development at its core, with the aim to create synergies with the MIRPS program addressing forced displacement in Central America and Mexico. The Plan is based on four pillars of economic development, social well-being, environmental sustainability and the migratory cycle, encompassing proposals from all the UN agencies, funds and programs operating in the region for joint actions. The Central American Integration System has expressed the need to approach the situation through development, rather than security, and through coordinated regional responses. The structural causes of migration identified are poverty and inequality, insufficient growth, high demographic growth in cities, with rural areas lagging, vulnerability to climate change, high levels of violence, wage gap between the region and the US, and family reunification needs in the US. US support is vital to address root Covid-19 economic effects, twin hurricane impacts, and agricultural loss has affected more than 4 million people. Vital US funding would forge regional support and the necessary new actions of linking multidisciplinary action. Coordinated “whole of government” opportunities exist through this Plan for national and foreign policies for PRM, and the offices of Special Envoy Kerry, Secretary of State Blinken and USAID Administrator Samantha Power.

 With respect to options for protection and resettlement, Climate Refugees’ founder hails from the US Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP), having worked in the entire process of the USRAP “pipeline” from identification of cases for US resettlement referral with UNHCR, to US arrival, resettlement and integration.

Responding to Climate-Related Migration at the US Border and Overseas

Northern Central America Countries

Understandably, in the pursuit of addressing the ‘root causes’ of migration from Central America to the US southern border, the United States is motivated by a foreign policy built on seeking to improve conditions in Central America countries. However, this policy fails to fully grasp the extreme conditions that now mark contexts of forced displacement.

 Somewhat lost in years of discourse of “caravans” of Central America migrants at the US border, is that many are rural and Indigenous Peoples, historically oppressed and marginalized by development policies, land grabs, expulsions, and impacted by the effects of climate change, who have been on the move internally and across borders for several years.

 A deeper understanding of this complex human rights situation in parts of Central America and its connections to development policies, climate change and forced migration is needed in order to better respond to this population’s asylum and refugee needs in a predictive capacity.

Along with traditional asylum and refugee situations of localized violence and persecution that force many Central Americans to US borders, extreme conditions in weather, destruction to local economies and loss of local habitat, characterized by lack of land, loss of lands, failed crops, climate extremes, rising food insecurity, poverty, and a history of marginalization, many entrenched within extractive industries, have converged in forced movements seen in neighboring countries and, in larger numbers, internally.

UNDP estimates 265,000 migrants from El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras have left to the United States since 2014. A growing number are women and children, and one out of five succeed, while 80 percent are stopped by Mexico or US authorities. Still others find themselves stranded, where community tensions are increasingly escalating. ECLAC data between 2000-2010 indicate migrants from northern Central America (NCA) increased by an average of 59 percent, and immigrants detained by US authorities increased from 50,000 to over 400,000 in 2016. Honduras, alone, saw a 94 percent increase in emigration.

 A majority of migrants come to US borders from Central America’s Dry Corridor (CADC), the economic backbone in the region, comprising approximately 30 percent of the entire Central America territory, where the greatest population density and a number of Indigenous groups reside. The CADC is a region with another type of convergence, one where extreme climatic events like prolonged droughts, (recently 2014-2017), coffee rust outbreak, hurricanes, (recently Eta and Iota), and tropical storms render social, economic, environmental and political vulnerability on the region, its people and, ultimately, the national economies of these countries.

Many here are subsistence farmers, where economic and social mobility have been hindered by historic exclusion, inequality of land tenure, and poverty, leading to the peoples’ underdevelopment, while land and natural resources have made way for public and private investments in mega development projects and extractive industries in mining, agrobusiness, energy, tourism, and infrastructure. Many of these development projects - as much as 90 percent - are on Indigenous lands.

While there are a number of reasons that drive migration, for northern Central America countries, ECLAC does note the fundamental issue of poverty, especially in Honduras and Guatemala, where poverty rates are 74 percent and 68 percent, respectively. Rural poverty is particularly acute in Honduras and Guatemala, reaching rates of 82 percent and 77 percent, respectively. In these rural areas, extreme vulnerability to climate events combines with poverty to destroy the livelihoods of millions of people. Other contributing factors are family reunification networks in destination countries, especially the US, and violence and insecurity that significantly weighs as a factor of whether to stay. Violence is an issue in transit countries as well, as evidenced by the reported migrant deaths en route.

 Subsistence farming, social fractures and climate events, are documented in deep food insecurity, where WFP and FAO say 1.4 million people are in urgent need of food assistance after crop loss due to rainfall and drought. A 2017 WFP study of NCA migrants denied by Mexican authorities from reaching the US, found 50 percent had been working in the agricultural sector.

 Asylum-Seekers

The vast number of Central American cases within the US immigration and asylum systems converge with legitimate asylum claims. For a majority of these cases originating from the Dry Corridor, it is in US policy interests to determine whether migrants from Central America within those caseloads are Indigenous People, who could very well constitute valid persecution claims on the basis of race.

It is equally important to understand that many of these asylum seekers may be afraid to identify as Indigenous due to a long historic record of oppression and documented massacres, unwittingly weakening their asylum claim. Data and programs directed at Indigenous groups are lacking in this region but human rights researchers know of at least 6 Indigenous groups in Honduras, and over 30 in Guatemala, the majority of whom reside in the Dry Corridor region.

 Important work conducted by Saskia Sassen analyzing data in Central America, has found climate change and loss of land were key factors in children and unaccompanied minors fleeing NCA countries, assumed or even self-reported to have been fleeing violence and lack of opportunities.

“Economic Migrants”

A lack of understanding has also led to defining migrants as “economic migrants” - a classification lacking any international legal basis. With the exception of Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras and Nicaragua are all classified as middle-income countries, determined by per capita GDP, which does not accurately reflect the large rural population living below the poverty line and without basic care. In terms of international protection, the high rates of poverty, now compounded by climate change effects on livelihood, fails to take into account the historic exclusion Indigenous groups suffer.

Misunderstanding of Migrants

A deeper understanding of this region will reflect the interconnections between the killing of environmental leaders, historic oppression of Indigenous Peoples, the ways in which people are losing access and being moved off their lands, specific industries, and direct or indirect drivers of conflict and violence by gangs.    As much as we know about ‘climate migration’, we still know very little. What we know is that every situation will look different, largely because there is no single driver for movement that can be singularly attributed to ‘climate change’. Even in situations of disasters, we can move people out of harm's way in order to save lives, but it’s their protection needs before, during and after a disaster that requires cohesive action.

The Central America context, because of the current dilemma, strategic importance, and because climate change effects will continue to batter the region, serves as a timely opportunity for US action. An international protection framework exists to review individuals from northern Central America countries at US borders, within the US, or in transit, that are categorized as migrants or asylum-seekers, and, when applicable, to offer protection and resettlement.

With this coordinated policy, because the situation has been securitized and unaddressed for so long, there is opportunity to address the backlog of asylum cases in the current system, turn the tide on the high rates of deportations, many of which lack fair process, and for PRM to create a predictive quota of such cases to be referred to the USRAP.

REFUGEE, ASYLUM & MIGRATION POLICY

Recommendations for PRM & DHS

  1. EXPLORE ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS

    Updated Training of Department of Homeland Security (DHS) US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Refugee, Asylum and Immigration Officers (RAIO) on ‘Researching and Using of Country of Origin Information (COI) in RAIO Adjudications’ - to effectively deal with the number of individuals seeking admission and protection by the US government, there is a need for updated training and understanding by USCIS, PRM and other relevant agencies of the populations of concern, the regions and country contexts, side-by-side with climate change effects in NCA countries and the CADC. US agencies and personnel within the asylum and refugee process should undertake:

  • broader and nuanced understanding of climate change effects on the lives, locations and impacts and enjoyment of human rights of these populations from Central America.

  • USCIS should provide coordinated countries of origin and vulnerable groups interview training for US, Refugee, Asylum, Immigration Officers (RAIO), ICE and Border personnel involved in the immigration, asylum and refugee processes at all levels and sectors and locations, including at throughout the USRAP, borders, border towns, US Consular Offices and detention centers.

  • Provide each agency coordinated and updated country of origin information (COI), and most importantly, Indigenous group history, reflective of the fear of identification and understanding of that basis for use in credible fear interviews.

2. cONNECT TO THE US REFUGEE DEFINITION

Train USCIS RAIO Officers to understand contexts in which the adverse effects of climate change could give rise to credible claims of persecution as protected under the 1951 Refugee Convention. New guidance issued by UNHCR in October 2020, is critically important for understanding the Convention’s ability to provide protection to climate-displaced individuals even outside of contexts that meet ‘nexus dynamics’ - that is situations where climate change impacts intersect with violence, conflict and situations of persecution, and second, the vital individuals protections that human rights law can provide climate-displaced individuals.

PRM and DHS must update the USCIS RAIO Officer ‘International Human Rights Law’ training module for refugee, asylum and immigration officers to reflect 1) UNHCR legal considerations regarding climate displacement; 2) international and regional human rights law, and human rights instruments on the rights and protections of Indigenous People. Since many Indigenous People, including Central American asylum seekers at the US southern border live within much of the world’s remaining agricultural forests and biodiverse areas, and often lack state-issued land title, they remain vulnerable to land grab by governments, private entities, armed groups, conservation groups and more. While the UN Declaration is not legally binding international law, PRM and USCIS can utilize the international and regional instruments below to enhance training and understanding for RAIO, and seek protection for vulnerable refugees and asylum seekers under the corpus of international law below directed to the advancement and protection of Indigenous Peoples’ rights.

3. Enhance pathways for admission & protection such as Deferred Enforcement Departure (DED) and Humanitarian Parole, but most notably Expand Temporary Protected Status

PRM should advocate for USCIS expansion of TPS category countries, and especially for protections to be extended to Guatemalans, Hondurans, Salvadorans and Nicaraguans already residing in the US. TPS was created by the US Congress in the Immigration Act of 1990 to grant temporary immigration status to foreign nationals from designated countries in need of protection due to conflict, environmental disaster, or extraordinary temporary conditions. Several of these NCA countries consistently rank high in climate risk indices, and with disasters expected to increase in frequency and intensity, the administration should adapt the provision to allow these countries and other nationals at risk to disasters, to seek protection in the United States, before they happen. TPS confers limited benefits and as such is not a prolonged solution in the best interests of climate displaced persons. However, the program is designed to offer emergency protections and should reflect that reality in disaster contexts by offering safe routes of evacuation in order to save lives.

  • The United States recognized asylum limitations in the current 1980 US Refugee Act, in line with the 1951 Refugee Convention, when it introduced Temporary Protected Status (TPS) in the 1990 Immigration Act. TPS as it is well known, expanded protection to individuals from designated countries living in the United States, who could not return to their countries of origin due to armed conflict, environmental disaster or other extraordinary or temporary situations. What it did not do, however, is go far enough to truly offer complementary pathways of protection, like when someone faces serious human rights violations but that harm does not meet one of the five grounds of the Refugee Convention, as is the case with climate change, by adding temporal limitations, a narrow scope of rights and a prerequisite that individuals already be in the US. The TPS program as we know it now is unsuitable for three important reasons:

1) it requires individuals already be within the United States at times of designation, making it unsuitable for those fleeing sudden-onset disaster-like conditions;

2) with increased frequency and intensity of climate change-related events, the likely increase in designees is incongruent to the immigration reforms long sought;

3) TPS’ restrictions on time and rights deem it unsuitable as an extended solution for changing and dynamic climate contexts, notably slow-onset effects that make safe return challenging.

 4. Expand the use of protection from forcible return

Both DED and TPS can be expanded to prevent forced return in violation of the principle of non-refoulement in the context of climate change, in keeping with the January 2020 ruling of the UN Human Rights Committee.

  • Notably in line with that UN HRC ruling, incorporate the considerable risks of slow-onset disasters into assessments of DED country designations, and especially for assessments of return to ensure safe return in line with international human rights law standards.

Overseas Options for Refugee Resettlement Consideration

Establish a Climate Displacement Resettlement Admissions Program

PRM should explore a climate displaced resettlement program that offers protection and resettlement of a separate category of refugees vulnerable to climate change and lacking durable solutions due to the slow-onset and sudden-onset effects of climate change. These refugees admitted to the US should be separate, however, to the already established presidentially determined refugee admissions ceiling under the USRAP. PRM should actively work with domestic partners in the US asylum process, regional partners in Mexico and Central America, international partners such as UNHCR to advocate for the creation of a separate category and ceiling of refugees, admitted as climate displaced persons. There are several pathways available that can support this endeavor.

  1. Establish an Eighth Resettlement Category

PRM should work with resettlement referral partners to establish a new ‘climate change’ resettlement category for refugees who cannot return to their domicile within their country-of-origin due to climate and environmental changes, and who lack alternative durable solutions. For example, a Somali or Central/South American refugee, recognized under the expansive definition under the OAU or Cartagena conventions can qualify for resettlement under the ‘climate change’ category. However, it is important that the President, with Congress, establish a separate number of persons or refugee ceiling to be resettled globally under this category, from the already established refugee ceiling under the current USRAP “quota” so as to not detract from other equally vulnerable refugees in need of resettlement.

Because refugees already live for prolonged periods of time within host countries in harsh climate conditions, and a vast number of refugees originate from countries of origin that have increasingly untenable climate conditions, applying a combination of expansive definition, combination of new and existing resettlement categories, and being a pioneer country to establish a separate refugee resettlement ceiling of climate displaced persons for refugees who meet traditional refugee definitions and equally demonstrate climate displacement, would allow the United States to lead with a planned, systematic and visionary approach that utilizes existing tools, laws, policies and practices for changed displacement dynamics.

2. Pursue Regional Resettlement Agreement with OAS Countries

Introduce an “Irreversible Path” on Climate Policies – In his statement to the UN Security Council in February, 2021, Special Envoy John Kerry said the US was committed to an “irreversible path” on climate action. Through international cooperation, PRM should work counterparts within the State Department and the Climate Envoy’s office to explore a formal regional resettlement agreement with member countries of the Organization of American States to resettle the predictive and burgeoning number of Central American refugees and asylum seekers impacted by climate change throughout Latin American countries. Forming a binding agreement with the Organization of American States on regional resettlement would be quite difficult for future administrations to disentangle, and the broader refugee definition contained within the 1984 Cartagena Declaration, recognized by OAS and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights can serve as supplementary sources of protection to move from ‘burden sharing” to regional shared responsibilities.

A secondary avenue is via UNHCR and regional diplomatic engagement to explore bi-lateral and formal regional resettlement agreements with member countries of the OAS to resettle Central American refugees and asylum seekers impacted by climate change throughout Latin American countries.

3. Passage of New Legislation

Senator Ed Markey introduced S. 2565, and Representative Nydia Velazquez introduced H.R. 4732 in 2019 to establish a Global Climate Change Resilience Strategy to authorize the admission of climate-displaced persons in need of resettlement for admission to the United States. The role and mandate of PRM would be enhanced, supported and financed by the passage of this legislation, which the administration could revive and/or support to officially amend the US Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) to recognize climate displaced persons.

4. Resettle Climate Displaced Persons When States are “Unable” or “Unwilling” to Offer Protection

In settlements outside of Mogadishu, Somalia, more than 450,000 people are now internally displaced persons (IDPs), many in a situation where complex existing crises have been exacerbated by climate change effects. With displacement now protracted, the needs of IDPs have outweighed the role and capacities of humanitarian agencies, leading to the Somali government and IOM to create the Durable Solutions Initiative (DSI) in 2016. Funded by the World Bank, Peacebuilding Fund, and UN agencies, the DSI is meant to help displaced Somalis better integrate and become self-reliant in their new locations, since returning home remains unviable. 

The Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement sets forth the primary responsibility of states to provide protection and assistance to its own internally displaced citizens. The sheer magnitude of the 2.6 million Somali IDPs - from both conflict and climate change effects - has created protracted displacement situations, where forcibly displaced populations are now required to become self-reliant, when return is unlikely. In this reality, it is striking to see durable solutions - traditionally presented to refugees – now being pursued by the International Organization for Migration in IDP contexts, a responsibility that generally falls to the State. Despite these efforts, continued violence, floods, droughts and the worst locust invasion in 25 years has continued to force people from their homes, as IDPs struggle in crowded makeshift camps with insufficient latrines, sanitation, healthcare, and basic needs, amidst the Covid-19 pandemic. Officially, IOM plays a supportive role to the Somali government, however the external funding and facilitative role of international agencies may point to a threshold of “states unable” to offer protection that can serve as a helpful benchmark where legal gaps exist. 

5. Other Legal Pathways

The United States once had a wider refugee definition that included ‘natural calamity.’ In line with US interests, the US government has instructed its agencies to grant refugee status and resettle individuals who do not strictly meet the exact parameters of the 1951 Refugee Convention. One of the more publicly known versions of this are those who do not meet the threshold of being outside their country of origin. The Priority 2 Lautenberg/Lautenberg-Specter program is one such, while there have been others.

Individual case developments in human rights law also prove helpful. In the past year alone, legal developments have shown climate change-related migration is not just a climate issue, it’s a human rights issue.

  • In January 2021 a French court ruled in favor of a Bangladeshi migrant, granting him residency on the grounds that the air pollution in his home country, coupled with his health condition, deemed it unsafe for his return.

  • In January 2020, the UN Human Rights Committee upheld the principle of non-refoulement - the cornerstone of refugee law – ruling that states could not deport individuals who face climate change-induced conditions that violate the right to life, as enshrined in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights - in addressing the complaint of an I-Kiribati asylum-seeker in New Zealand whose claim for protection on the basis of climate change was denied.                                                         

  • Understanding that forced displacement threatens a vast array of human rights, a 2019 Parliamentary Assembly resolution of the Council of Europe noted that the absence of a legally binding definition for “climate refugees” does not preclude the possibility of developing specific policies to protect people who are forced to move as a consequence of climate change, calling on member states to develop in their asylum systems and in international law, protection for people fleeing long-term climate change. It further called on member states to develop in their asylum systems and in international law, protection for people fleeing long-term climate change in their own countries. It further stated that industrialized member States of the Council of Europe carry a particular responsibility to those countries, especially the countries of the “global South'' affected by human-generated climate change, and should therefore provide appropriate asylum for climate refugees.

  • The right to a healthy environment is now incorporated in 156 of the 193 UN member states’ constitutions, legislations, regional human rights instruments or decisions of their highest courts, clearly demonstrating growing jurisprudence for its legal application.

  • In 2018, the UN Special Rapporteur on human rights and the environment presented the Framework Principles on Human Rights and the Environment to the UN Human Rights Council, illustrating the widespread global acceptance of the right.

Last year, Climate Refugees was proud to have signed the civil society global call for the UN Human Rights Council to recognize the human right of all to live in a safe, clean, healthy and sustainable environment. 

Identification of Referrals

The existing USRAP can serve as an identifying tool to a future program due, in part, to all the mechanisms already in place, including the essential security and medical vetting systems. Keeping with the previous Somali IDP example, it would not be unusual to find Somali refugees residing across the border in Kenya, under prima facie refugee status or expansive regional definition, who may not be referred for US resettlement on account of having a stronger climate-related push factor like livelihood loss than conflict or persecution. If the US expressed intent to broaden its scope, it would offer UNHCR enhanced partnership where the US has played a traditional leadership role in refugee resettlement.

REFUGEE RESETTLEMENT: Establish New UNHCR Deployment Rosters

PRM could support a trained roster within RSC's, where staff could deploy to ‘climate hotspots’ where individuals are likely to have protection needs, and can fill UNHCR needs to interview and, if necessary, refer such cases to the US government.

CENTRAL AMERICA REFERRALS: Establish Consulate, Regional and Deployment Roster Referrals

Replace the current unplanned border arrival situations of dangerous and harmful practices at the US southern border with planned, systematic and cooperative asylum processes through establishing:

  1. Climate visas; humanitarian visas and other provisional visa quotas;

  2. Enable asylum seekers to seek asylum at US consulate/embassy offices in countries of origin, where trained US asylum officers are posted in known ‘climate displacement hotspots’, predicated on border arrival data;

  3. Establish a roster of trained asylum and refugee officers to be deployed at short notice or on emergency basis to ‘climate displacement hotspots’ to respond to sudden onset climate events, compounding crises that exacerbate displacement and other such conditions.

  4. By referring in-country, the US government mitigates potential border arrivals that may meet changed policies in future administrations and contribute to a backlog of cases; offsets the ‘carbon costs’ of overseas processing that involves a hefty carbon footprint involving group transport, travel and logistics. 

Other Climate Displaced Populations for Resettlement Consideration

  1. Region: Lake Chad Basin; Countries: Cameroon, Chad, Niger, Nigeria - see Climate Refugees Lake Chad Basin regional report

  2. Region: The Sahel; Countries: Mali, Burkina Faso, Sudan, Eritrea

  3. Region: Horn of Africa; Countries: Somalia, Eritrea, Ethiopia

  4. Region: Asia; Countries: Myanmar Rohingya

Fund Country and Regional-Driven Research

It is documented and understood that gaps in data and analysis stymie global policy. A multi-disciplinary approach is needed to gather qualitative data, interviews with local experts and interviews and focus group discussions with impacted communities that provides both a science and social science perspective on situations.

  • Forced movements, up to now, are known primarily through a conflict lens, and there is a need to widen that lens of understanding in intersectional climate change contexts.

  • We have better understanding and response mechanisms within the sudden-onset category, but slow-onset effects are seen over time and require broader contextual understanding and analysis in order to understand the extent climate change effects have on forced movements.

  • We’ve learned in some of these NCA countries, it is difficult to track these movements because of the contrast to the violence-propelled movements seen previously.

Establish a National Climate Migration Coordinator

PRM should suggest the Domestic Office on Climate Policy establish an office and coordinator to address the disaster preparedness, displacements and planned relocation needs that will arise with greater frequency and intensity within the United States. One million disaster-related displacements have occurred in the US since 2016. Pursuing voluntary relocation through a streamlined and coordinated process will certainly make people safer, but this process must also ensure the rights and protections of vulnerable people and relocated communities, along with their consent and participation. The ad-hoc, household-by-household approach the federal and state governments use to respond to hurricanes and floods does not provide a promising model for dealing with large-scale climate displacement.

INTERNATIONAL ASSISTANCE

Recommendations for USAID

Aid alone won’t fix the problem, especially without conscious efforts to ensure its reach to the most vulnerable and impacted frontline communities. Furthermore, aid won’t deter migration either. Recently, UNDP revealed climate change driven displacement was leading to decades of development setbacks. El Salvador was one of the countries assessed.

Climate Refugees joined advocates in a joint NGO report last year, urging the U.S. to step away from policies that prevent people from fleeing or using aid as a band-aid. Rather, reminding that migration is a right, we urged a message of protection of rights and well-being of citizens that enable a choice to also stay.

Approach USAID Programming Holistically

By targeting Central America Dry Corridor funding to be climate and population-specific as top priority. All these countries but Guatemala are classified as Middle-Income countries. Although the period of drought and climatic changes have been devastating to the main agricultural sector, this economic classification has been a barrier to accessing funding.

Northern Central American country funding must be directed at the CADC, representative of the rural poverty rates and development indicators for that region, rather than the countries as a whole.

Support the Regional Comprehensive Protection and Solutions Framework

MIRPS, which is a state-led initiative supported by the Organization of American States (OAS), Central American Integration System (SICA), UNHCR and the wider UN system. Many of the countries within this framework are aligned in linked development-migration-climate work. The Biden administration should engage MIRPS to formally make these linkages to climate change within MIRPS. With a mandate to strengthen the regional cooperation and shared responsibility for forced displacement in Central America, there are opportunities to take up exploring these links in countries’ national action plans of protection, but sufficient data, research and analysis remain barriers that the Biden administration could fund. An additional area of exploration is to widen the scope of extreme risk conditions under Protection Transfer Mechanisms, via the Global Compact for Refugees, to reflect understanding of sudden-onset disaster situations and slow-onset effects and malnutrition rates, coupled with the Covid-19 pandemic, that have pushed some situations to emergencies. 

Support the Comprehensive Development Plan for El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and south-southeast Mexico

Coordinated by ECLAC, the plan addresses the structural causes of ‘irregular’ migration by centering sustainable development at its core, with the aim to create synergies with MIRPS. The Plan is based on four pillars of economic development, social well-being, environmental sustainability and the migratory cycle, encompassing proposals from all the UN agencies, funds and programs operating in the region for joint actions. The Plan has identified obstacles to achieving the SDGs as reasons for generating out-migration.

Fund Country and Regional-Driven Research

Gaps in data and analysis stymie global policy. A multi-disciplinary approach is needed to gather qualitative data that provides both a science and social science perspective on situations. Forced movements up to now are known primarily through a conflict lens, and there is a need to widen that lens of understanding in intersectional climate change contexts. We have better understanding and response mechanisms within the sudden-onset category, but slow-onset effects are seen over time and require broader contextual understanding and analysis in order to understand the extent climate change effects have on forced movements. We’ve learned in some of these NCA countries, it is difficult to track these movements because of the contrast to the violence-propelled movements seen previously.

Support Climate Adaptation, Climate Resilience, and Disaster Risk Reduction through Robust Financing

Although rich country climate policies are obliged by the principle of ‘common but differentiated responsibilities’, only 5% of global climate finance is directed at adaptation. Combined, these Central American countries have contributed less than 1% to global CO2 emissions and yet climate change effects here are growing with intensity with minimal adaptive support. Global climate finance is woefully lacking. Mitigation measures promoted at the individual level are personal insurance, which the average subsistence farmer cannot afford and won’t get the scale of the job done, but mostly, are simply unjust. Support for using the Warsaw Mechanism for Loss & Damage under the UN climate framework (UNFCCC) is all but nonexistent, leaving countries with few options. Migration is being championed as a means of adaptation and yet no finance is directed to support that adaptation, nor are political powers or borders facilitating its movement either.

The US can and must take a lead in changing this narrative, especially given its contribution to global warming and past policies in the region. Northern Central America countries have been building resilience through the Global Climate Fund in areas like re-forestry, water management, and linking development into migration work. US support, both in finance, technology, and regional cooperation is critical.