Climate change challenges the means of subsistence for many, particularly in the Global South. To respond to the challenges of climate change, governments increasingly resort to resettling those most affected by land erosion, heat, drought, floods, and the like.
In this article, the author investigates to what extent resettlement can compensate for the harm that climate-induced migration brings, and questions whether such measures can address the deeper ethical consequences of displacement.
What are designated as three central harms are identified. First, climate change alters people’s options to such an extent that migration can no longer be considered fully voluntary and may even become coercive. Second, climate-induced migration severs individuals’ ties to territory, which are constitutive for personal autonomy. Third, the loss of traditional and historical lands undermines people’s capacity to imagine a future.
It is concluded that although resettlement may improve material well-being and human flourishing, it cannot fully compensate for the harm done to individual autonomy, even when relocation is planned and chosen.
Learn more about this study here: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0892679423000412
Reference
Straehle, C. (2023). Migration, Climate Change, and Voluntariness. Ethics & International Affairs, 37(4), 452–469