The United Nations Secretary-General, Antonio Guterres, warned that rising sea levels would result in a “mass exodus of entire populations on a biblical scale” during a speech to the UN Security Council in New York last month. As well-meaning as his comments were, in an era of growing hostility towards migrants, they may have unintended and unfortunate consequences for those impacted by climate change.

For sure climate change is reshaping human movement today in a range of fashions from seasonal and labor migration to forced displacement, planned relocations and even immobility. While no region is unaffected, most movements today are happening in the Global South, where contributions to global warming are minimal, and so too are the capacities to respond.

Most people are displaced or moving internally within their countries, or if across borders, to neighboring states. For some, movement can be temporary, short-term and even a means of adaptation to climate change. For others it may be forced and permanent displacement. The point is, climate-related movements vary, and the way we speak about migrants and migration plays a pivotal role in how humanely and effectively we respond.

The first-ever open debate on the impact of sea-level rise on international peace and security gave the UN chief, along with other speakers from UN member states and institutions, the opportunity to provide a stark warning on vanishing coastlines, endangered nations, competition over increasingly scarce natural resources and displacement across the globe.

Guterres' impassioned speech was grounded in climate science. According to the World Meteorological Organization, global sea levels have risen faster in the last century than at any other time over the last 3,000 years. Oceans have warmed faster over the past century than at any time in the past 11,000 years. In October, the UN warned that the world is on track to experience a 2.8°C rise in global temperatures, which Guterres called “a death sentence for vulnerable countries”. 

That vulnerability is already here for many, as 10 percent of the world’s population (approximately 600 million people) lives in coastal areas less than 10 meters above sea level. A majority of those low-elevation coastal zones are in the Global South, where communities are already dealing with climate-driven social disruptions resulting in displacement for some and immobility for others. Rising sea levels have already jeopardized access to water, food and health care, destroyed livelihoods in key industries such as agriculture, fisheries and tourism, and damaged infrastructure and communities globally. 

Guterres warned that a wide array of countries like Bangladesh, China, India, the Netherlands and the United States are all at risk and that mega-cities on every continent will face serious impacts due to rising sea levels. 

Whether in the United States or Bangladesh, we are at a critical juncture regarding climate change and displacement, and it is important to effectively communicate the issues at stake. Unfortunately, the “mass exodus” remark and the explicit linkage to “security” by multiple speakers during the Security Council session, despite coming from international leaders who are understandably frustrated with global inaction, risks sparking fear amongst the public and even policymakers.

Governments, particularly in the Global North, are prioritizing border security over human security. In fact, research from the Transnational Institute reveals that seven of the biggest high-emitting countries collectively spent at least two times more on border and immigration enforcement as they did on climate finance between 2013 and 2018.

We have seen a pattern of developed countries all too ready to further restrict regular migration in the face of allegedly imminent ‘waves’ and ‘hordes’ of climate migrants, ignoring the fact that most displacement occurs internally or regionally, and can be relatively short in duration. This mismatch between rhetoric and reality will likely result in increasingly irregular and dangerous migration, with more suffering and death for people on the move.  

Rather than frightening people into misguided action, we should recognize the gravity of the current crisis that we are facing while advocating for appropriate and just solutions. Movement and relocation due to the disastrous effects of climate change are only parts of the solution. There must be adequate investment in climate adaptation efforts in order for communities to develop solutions that affect their own livelihoods. In this process, individuals must be given the resources and agency to decide what is best for them, including the ability to choose whether they stay or move. And we should not be waiting until that choice erodes into an unjust and largely predetermined outcome. Ultimately, it is imperative that states and policymakers guarantee the full spectrum of rights for individuals affected by climate displacement, such as protecting livelihoods and ensuring equitable access to vital services.

Leaders, especially those with a large platform, must remember that words have consequences. Those impacted by climate change, regardless of whether they migrate, deserve effective communication, advocacy, and policymaking that advances effective and tangible solutions. Overly broad and dramatic rhetoric fails to do this and risks halting progress by stoking fears among electorates and rewarding poor policy choices. The situation is dire for many, but we will not solve it with panic.

All our content is 100 percent independent, volunteer supported, and funded by a concerned public, just like you. You can help—and grow our ability to scale and keep doing this work—with a donation and by subscribing to our newsletter DISPATCH.