States’ Obligations Towards Climate-Induced Migrants

This paper explores states’ moral obligations towards climate change displacement and migration. Recent predictions anticipate an alarming increase in forced movement due to the adverse effects of climate change. There was a steep increase in public interest in this concern as well as growing recognition in official international statements and documents. The response from political philosophers was so far fairly limited in volume and scope. This paper aims to bridge this gap and bring the issue of climate mobility closer to current debates in political philosophy. By drawing on the intersection between global justice and climate justice I explain how states should prioritize between competing claims of immigrants. The argument is premised on two related claims. First, that emitting states are responsible for the harmful impacts of climate change they bring about. Second, states’ derivative obligations are towards all those affected by climate change hazards, and especially towards the most vulnerable. Therefore, what emitting states owe climate change immigrants must be understood on the background of these broader obligations. Following this view, the first part of the paper argues that states need to address climate immigration as part of their obligations to climate adaptation (the capacity to deal with climate change detrimental effects). Immigration can turn things to the better for immigrants, sending and receiving societies; but it can also make them worse. Considering that, states should aim at enabling immigration as an adaption strategy for immigrants as well as a contributing factor for the local adaptation of sending societies. This means that they have to adopt a more pro-active approach to immigration in the context of climate change. Simply relaxing the restriction on immigration will not be enough. The second part of the paper discusses normative guidelines for immigration policies on the background of the global justice and climate justice nexus. Both global justice and climate justice provide arguments for why states have obligation to admit immigrants. For most part the objectives of climate justice and global justice are complementary and do not pose a problem for establishing normative guidelines for policy-making. However, possible tensions and conflicts can arise between what global justice and climate justice commands with regard to immigration policies. I present those cases and explain how states ought to prioritize between their global justice and climate justice commitments and why this will differ across main global justice positions.