Editorial for the Special Issue on Climate-induced (im)mobilities

Andrea Maria Pelliconi, Sara Arapiles and Pratik Purswani

This Special Issue on Climate (Im)Mobilities problematises the role of the law in offering  potential responses and solutions to displacement and entrapment, mobility and immobility caused by or related to climate change, building on discussions held during the Seminar on “Climate Change and Migration: New Challenges, Legal Responses, and Policy Solutions” held by the University of Nottingham’s Human Rights Law Centre and the Nottingham Trent University’s Climate Justice Hub in June 2024, and sponsored by the SLSA. 

As the world grapples with the escalating impacts of climate change, the phenomenon of climate-induced (im)mobilities has emerged as a major issue for individuals, communities, livestock, and wildlife across the globe. Increasingly severe weather events, rising sea levels, and deteriorating environmental conditions are forcing communities to confront the harsh reality of displacement and migration. While some populations are compelled to flee their homes in search of safety and stability, others find themselves trapped, unable to move due to socio-economic barriers and legal restrictions. At the same time, others are demonstrating unshakeable resilience against the pressures of climate change, advocating for their right to remain in their homelands and asserting their claims to land, resources, and cultural identity in the face of relocation. 

Once a relatively niche topic, pioneered in legal academia by scholars such as Guy Goodwin-Gill and Jane McAdam, climate (im)mobility is emerging as a critical area of study and concern which is gaining attention from scholars and policymakers alike. Increasingly, research in the social sciences is dedicated to the study of international and internal displacement related to the effects of climate change and environmental disasters, and lawyers have started to look at the potential legal frameworks applicable to the phenomenon from a variety of angles. Some policy initiatives and scholarly works have focused on mechanisms of governance and management of international migration, especially at the level of intra-regional cooperation; others have advocated for an expansion of asylum laws and the international refugee regime. Importantly, many of the contributors to these works come from countries that are particularly affected by climate change, despite the traditional Anglo/Eurocentrism of international legal academia typically invisibilising voices from the Global South. 

Against this background, and drawing on existing literature, contributors to this Special issue bring unique lens to the topic of climate (im)mobilities and the role that the law can, or cannot, play in addressing the challenges faced by individuals, communities, states, and international organisations. Some contributors persuasively criticise the chronic inability of international law to effectively respond to the challenges faced by people forced to move because of climate impacts and, critically, to do so in a framework of climate justice. Others demonstrate a more doctrinal and, perhaps, optimistic view of the possibilities of legal initiatives to respond to humanitarian and social crises related to climate change. All, nonetheless, share the sense of urgency inherent to the need to tackle climate immobility amid often lengthy and politically unpalatable legal processes. 

Opening the Special Issue, Irene Sacchetti’s contribution argues that current legal categories such as “climate refugees” or “climate migrants” often overlook the nuanced experiences of climate-affected individuals, leading to their victimisation, marginalisation, and misrecognition. Sacchetti calls for a novel approach that recognises and empowers “climate refugees” beyond processes of “othering”, and advocates for alternative forms of legal protection that account for their dynamic identities and lived experiences. Carla Field delves deeper in the challenges of securing international protection for individuals displaced by climate change through the current refugee law framework, identifying key barriers such as the causality problem, political resistance, and fragmentation of legal frameworks. To overcome the latter, Field argues that the right to a Clean, Healthy, and Sustainable Environment could serve as a foundation for creating a hybrid legal approach that integrates human rights, environmental law, and refugee protections, ultimately facilitating the application of the principle of non-refoulement to those facing climate-induced displacement. From her part, Carmen Pérez-González highlights the link between climate change and increased vulnerability to human trafficking, emphasising that displaced individuals face heightened risks of being trafficked. Pérez-González pleads in favour of expanding the principle of non-refoulement to protect potential trafficking victims thereby preventing their return to conditions that expose them to risks of being trafficked. In her view, this approach could enhance legal protections for vulnerable populations and encourage states to fulfil their climate obligations.

The contributions of Nikolas Keckhut and Szymon Kucharski shift the focus from international refugee law to the response of the European Union (EU). Keckhut’s analysis examines the failed attempts to incorporate environmental migration into the European Parliaments revision of the Qualification Directive from 2017 to the adoption of the 2024 Qualification Regulation. Despite several proposals aimed at recognising and protecting environmentally displaced individuals, the outcome largely reflects a political failure, with right-wing opposition and a consensus-driven culture stalling progress. Nonetheless, according to Keckhut, while the amendments did not succeed, they reignited discussions on the topic, highlighting the challenges of integrating climate-induced displacement into existing international protection frameworks. If Keckhut looks at the failures of the (recent) past, Kucharski looks at the future. In his paper, Kucharski explores the potential for the EU to address climate migration through bilateral treaties with vulnerable countries, arguing for a proactive “three-pronged approach”: promoting local adaptation, facilitating international relocation for severely affected communities, and supporting other internal migration strategies. While recognising the challenges of the proposal, Kucharski argues that such treaties could enhance cooperation and solidarity, allowing for flexible and dignified solutions to climate-induced displacement.

The last two contributions to the Special Issue look at initiatives that are already underway in regions that are particularly affected by the effects of climate change. KMS Tareq discusses the emergence of regional frameworks aimed at addressing climate mobility in Africa, the Caribbean, and the Pacific, noting the lack of comprehensive international mechanisms. Each framework reflects regional challenges and includes commitments to support cross-border climate migrants, although they vary in scope and strength. Despite being soft-law solutions, these frameworks represent crucial steps toward recognising and protecting climate mobility and could inspire similar initiatives globally. Lastly, Vicky Kapogianni examines the legal vacuum in tackling the complex dynamics of climate-induced mobility in the Pacific and entrapment caused by rising sea levels. Kapogianni critiques the fragmented international legal frameworks that fail to protect displaced individuals and address the needs of those unable to migrate. In particular, the 2023 Falepili Union Treaty, despite promoting cooperation, raises concerns over sovereignty as it grants Australia veto power over Tuvalu’s foreign affairs, echoing post-colonial tensions. While the treaty acknowledges climate mobility, it lacks robust protections and rights for affected individuals. Kapogianni calls for binding international frameworks that prioritise genuine cooperation and support for vulnerable communities as climate change intensifies.

Altogether, the contributions to this Special Issue highlight the urgent need for international, regional, and national legal frameworks that meaningfully address the complexities of climate (im)mobility. The authors propose different potential pathways for action or reform, ranging from hybrid human rights approaches and non-refoulement expansions to regional cooperation and new treaties. At the same time, the contributions draw attention to the limitations, persistent gaps, and systemic inadequacies of existing legal frameworks, exposing an alarming reluctance among states to fully confront the human and non-human costs of climate change.