Environmental Migrants in Africa: A Pan-African Solution

With little political will within the international community to broaden international or domestic definitions of refugee law, the search for a legal response must continue closer to home. A pan-African solution, far from being the ‘next best thing’ to a global effort, carries a number of inherent advantages.

A legal settlement for Africans by Africans would recognise that most environmentally induced migration is likely to take place within the territorial borders of the African continent. Herein lies a key difference between political and environmental migration. A refugee fleeing persecution by definition finds herself outside the country of her nationality. Unable to avail herself of the protection of her home country, she can only fall back upon international law.

Environmental migration, by contrast, is not intrinsically linked to the migrant leaving her wider geographical area. The prevailing pattern of migration triggered by climate stresses is for migrants to move step-by-step in pursuit of environments that will support them. “We never planned to leave, we just ‘crept’ after our living,” says a resident from the Caré village in the Tilabéri region of Niger interviewed by CARE International. For such a transient mode of living to be viable, migrants need to be able to take a bundle of realisable rights with them. Far from being limited to citizenship or residence rights, an African legal framework must address the primary socio-economic challenges faced by environmental migrants. This approach would see social justice, economic development and environmental sustainability as inextricably linked.

Better to prevent than to cure

Governments must act now to limit the likelihood of conflict over increasingly scarce resources. Central to this goal is a framework of land rights which ensures equitable access to resources, especially as large-scale acquisitions of land for agricultural investment - or “land grabs” - take off. Approved land allocations in Ethiopia, Ghana, Madagascar and Mali between 2004 and 2009 totaled some 2 million hectares, including allocations to foreign investors for over 1.4 million hectares, an area just under the size of Swaziland. Such a trend raises a pressing need for legal oversight to ensure that investments are structured so that they not only prevent the marginalisation of those who have worked land for generations, but also create new opportunities to improve living standards.

Inequality of bargaining power in contractual relations represents a huge barrier to equitable and development-orientated dealings with land. A recent report by the International Institute for Environment and Development notes a concerning lack of transparency and accountability in contractual negotiations between land developers and the host governments who formally own most of the land in African countries. However, tentative steps in the right direction are being made. In Ghana, deals with local leaders are common, though these lack a firm statutory grounding. Mozambique is one of a number of countries in which national law requires investors to consult local people before land allocations are made.

As well as strengthening the obligations of host governments in negotiating individual deals, measures to protect local land rights - many of them customary - must be promoted. These might include collective land registration where appropriate, a rigorous principle of free, prior and informed consent, and wider availability of legal aid. Crucially, these measures should be harmonised across African states to prevent undercutting and exploitation of loose systems of land governance.

Supporting migrants on arrival

Where displacement is inevitable, however, there must be a legal framework in place to support migrants on arrival. The biggest challenge in this context lies in the hearts and minds of policymakers. A recent review of Poverty Reduction Strategy papers across Africa shows that negative perceptions of migration are common. Migration is widely perceived as promoting the spread of crime and illness, as well as exacerbating rural and urban poverty. A radical change in mindset is needed. Dr Tacoli of the International Institute for Environment and Development notes the knee-jerk reaction of seeing migration as a problem which needs to be controlled leads to policymakers missing valuable opportunities to explore the potential contribution migrants may make to host communities.  

In order to enhance the effectiveness of migration as a response to climate change, social and economic barriers to adaptation must be removed. This demands a more decentralised distribution of economic opportunities, through wider access to alternative education and employment in cities and smaller rural towns. There must be local systems of governance which pledge to represent the interests of migrant groups; national governments cannot hope to address the diversity in migration and mobility patterns. Small practical adjustments – such as the facilitation of cash transfers – can have huge impacts; research has shown that remittances play an instrumental role in increasing resilience to climate change by supporting those at home who are unable to leave.

Freeing the flow of people, freeing the flow of resources

The linked questions of impetus and practical restraints remain: why should limited resources be spent on migrants? Two points are relevant here. The first is simply that a duty of care is owed to the most vulnerable.  Second, as the experiences of the European Union and the USA show, migration can ultimately prove economically beneficial, stimulating a transfer of knowledge, skills and resources. This is particularly pertinent in the African context, which sees many fertile and environmentally safe countries lacking the technical skills and systems of governance necessary to maximise development. Migrants have much to contribute, if only given a chance.

African countries have in the past been generous hosts of political refugees. In 1965, for instance, there were 850,000 political refugees from the Great Lakes region of Africa fleeing the political violence which followed a period of decolonisation. Many were received by neighbouring states. Similarly, the Refugee Convention adopted by the Organisation of African Unity in 1969 is an example of a strong legal framework tailored to the specific needs and context of the African continent.

It will no doubt be a struggle convincing governments to take on a new responsibility to protecting displaced persons and their rights. But ‘home’ is a crucial element of the distinctively human experience. Those who will be displaced by climate change will never stop hoping for a home away from home.