Content uploaded by Julia Blocher
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Julia Blocher on Feb 13, 2017
Content may be subject to copyright.
How can migration serve adaptation to climate
change? Challenges to fleshing out a policy ideal
FRANC
ßOIS GEMENNE*†‡ AND JULIA BLOCHER*‡§
*Hugo Observatory, Department of Geography –University of Li
ege, Li
ege, Belgium
E-mail: f.gemenne@ulg.ac.be
†University of Versailles (CEARC –UVSQ), Versailles, France
‡Sciences Po Paris, 27 rue Saint-Guillaume, 75007 Paris, France
E-mail: francois.gemenne@sciencespo.fr, julia.blocher@sciencespo.fr
§United Nations University Office at the United Nations, 2 United Nations Plaza, New York, NY
10016, USA
E-mail: blocher@unu.edu
This paper was accepted for publication in November 2016
Migration continues to be pictured in public debates as a failure to adapt to changes, while
policymakers explore adaptation measures as a means to reduce migration pressures, and scholars
have contended that migration processes exist within a larger framework of strategies for adapting to
damaging climate change impacts. So what are the impacts of migration on the adaptive capacities
and vulnerabilities of the origin and host communities, as well as of the migrants themselves? The
objective of this conceptual and methodological paper is to identify possible different options for
research into the consequences of migration for adaptation. The first section reviews how the
migration–adaptation nexus has been addressed in the literature, confirming the potential of human
mobility to build resilience and to increase adaptive capacities within complex and potentially
maladaptive processes. The next section explores the potential impacts of migration that need to be
studied, from three main vantage points: the migrants themselves, the community of origin, and the
community of destination. A final section weighs the possible approaches and suggests solutions that
may exist to advance empirical study of the migration–adaptation area nexus, so that it can address
not just the causes, but also the consequences of migration in the context of environmental changes.
KEY WORDS: migration, adaptation, climate change, migration governance, displacement, resilience
Introduction
One of the founders of migration studies,
Ravenstein (1885), described migration as
‘life and progress’, whereas a sedentary
population meant ‘stagnation’. Other authors in the
field have characterised migration as a process
aimed at adjusting to changes (including Ratzel,
Wolpert, Huntington).
This idea has been revived, with a broader
dimension, in the context of the impacts of climate
change. Scholars have extended their view that
sudden and recurrent environmental factors influence
secular seasonal and short-term mobility (Chhetri
1987; Findley 1994) to account for the potential of
climate changes to produce migration outside of
‘usual’migration patterns (Glantz 1991; Rosenzweig
and Hillel 1993). Some suggest that climate change
has caused the displacement of whole societies and
the subsequent fall of empires (Orlove 2005; Magnan
et al. 2016). Climate change erodes the resilience of
communities, modifying not only the number of
migrants but the characteristics of pre-existing patterns
of migration as well. Rural resource-based livelihoods
are the most directly affected (Obokata et al. 2014).
People in vulnerable environments are highly
exposed, for example, in mountain (Afifi et al. 2014;
Milan and Ho 2014; Milan et al. 2015) or island
communities (Barnett 2001; Mortreux and Barnett
2009; IPCC 2007 2014).
Though migrants are often portrayed as victims in
the context of climate change, empirical evidence
also shows that in the face of environmental and
climatic stress, migration is a common household
strategy aimed at supporting basic needs and
livelihoods (Hampshire 2002; Foresight 2011; Piguet
The information, practices and views in this article are those of the author(s) and do not
necessarily reflect the opinion of the Royal Geographical Society (with IBG).
© 2017 Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of British Geographers).
The Geographical Journal, 2017, doi: 10.1111/geoj.12205
2013). Yet a UN review of national policy views and
priorities for international migration revealed that
most governments tend to focus migration policies on
reducing pressures to migrate, managing authorised
movements, and controlling irregular flows (UN DESA
2013). This is reflected in the dominant public and
political narratives of migration, through which
policymakers are incentivised to oversimplify
migration as an issue of competition and tensions
(Boswell et al. 2011; Blocher 2016), while linking
migration to endemic conflict, disease, crime and
resource scarcity (McLeman 2014). Policymakers
often view climate change adaptation measures and
sustainable development in the larger sense as a
means to reduce migration pressures, particularly for
rural and hazard-exposed populations (Clemens
2014).
Additional empirical work is needed (Foresight
2011). There is growing consensus among scholars
that migration itself serves as part of the positive
adaptation strategies adopted in the context of
environmental and climatic change (Bardsley and
Hugo 2010; Black et al. 2011a; McLeman and Smit
2006). It can be a way to reduce population
pressures in places prone to climate risks (Lonergan
1998; McLeman and Hunter 2010), while diasporas
provide important resources to help communities
adapt and respond to climate change, through
economic and social remittances and more (de Haas
2007 2008 2010; Levitt and Lamba-Nieves 2011).
Although discussed often, the application of
migration in the field of climate change adaptation
has not been adequately examined. Furthermore, the
policy apparatus capable of delivering the potential
of migration has not yet been developed (Bettini and
Andersson 2014). A key challenge today is to flesh out
the relationship between migration and adaptation
processes in the context of climatic changes. This
article seeks to provide a perspective on this from the
field of migration studies, and begins to address
managed migration as a new tool for climate change
adaptation policy, and one that transforms mobility
into a positive exercise.
Overview and contribution of this article
Since the late 2000s, migration has been increasingly
characterised as a potential adaptation strategy in
response to climate change (Black et al.2011b;
Webber and Barnett 2010). Yet, despite a proliferation
of empirical studies on the topic (cf. Piguet 2010 2013),
a number of fundamental gaps remain in its theoretical
and empirical understandings. Many studies are limited
to single documented events (hurricane, drought, etc.)
or natural resources (e.g. rainfall), and the analysis
compares ‘before’and ‘after’situations (Findley 1994;
Paul 2005). This is a weakness in the literature, merely
capturing snapshots of movement rather than
incremental migratory responses (Piguet 2010).
Thus far discussions have largely been through
the lens of the natural sciences (Massey et al. 2010;
Morrissey 2009), often identifying community
response to the impacts of climate change as a
direct function of exposure (IPCC 2007; McLeman
and Hunter 2010). Polarisation between
environmental sciences and migration studies
(Castles 2011; Gemenne 2011; Morrissey 2009)
helps perpetuate oversimplified accounts of how
ecological changes are interlinked with mobility
(Bettini and Andersson 2014). This paper seeks to
leverage lessons from migration studies to inform a
debate that is heavily dominated by environmental
scholars, with the aim of helping researchers to
explain better the distinctive character of migration
in the context of climate change. Because adaptation
is widely seen as a matter of environmental policy,
we argue that such policy needs to account for all
dimensions of migration. We contend that not only
do the situations of migrants need to be considered,
but also those of the communities of origin and of
destination. This goes beyond direct impacts (e.g. of
remittances) to include indirect effects on wider
economic development, social growth, health
outcomes, power structures, inter alia (de Haas 2010;
Barbieri and Confalonieri 2011; Abdurazakova 2011).
Furthermore, potential maladaptive effects on all sides
of migration systems must be considered holistically.
Migration is understood in broad terms, given a
diversity of types of internal and cross-border
migration and variable accompanying effects on
individuals and households. Internal migration is
likely to represent the majority of migrations related
to climatic and environmental changes (Hugo 1996),
although international migration is currently the
primary preoccupation of policymakers (UN DESA
2013). We posit that researchers should not limit
their attention to any one cause of migration, in
order to encompass the outcomes of all types of
migration, whatever their reasons. While we focus on
the social, economic and political outcomes of
migration, which do imply a productive use of
available resources, we are unable to consider fully
the long-term ecological outcomes of migration.
However, this is undoubtedly a critical aspect of the
sustainability of migration flows, as is the long-term
sustainability of healthy and productive environments
in the destination and origin regions (cf. Hugo 1996;
Carr 2009).
Our key framing question is the following:
adaptation by migration for whom? First, we
endeavour to define adaptation in this context. Next,
we provide an overview of the environmental
migration literature
1
, and follow this with a
discussion of the methodological challenges facing
researchers in investigating the linkages between
environmental and climatic changes and migration.
Finally, using noteworthy pieces from among the
most directly relevant empirical and conceptual
The Geographical Journal 2017 doi: 10.1111/geoj.12205
© 2017 Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of British Geographers)
2How can migration serve adaptation to climate change?
work from across migration studies, we discuss the
merits and challenges to answering our framing
question from each of three possible vantage points:
the migrant, the community of origin, and the
community of destination. We aim to weigh the
essential characteristics, advantages and disadvantages
of each approach in order to support future qualitative
and quantitative research. While we recognise that
these three ‘vantage points’do not exist in isolation
from one another in practice, we attempt to use this
framework as a conceptual guide. In the interest of
answering the key question, this paper emphasises the
impacts of migration rather than its causes.
In the final section we stress that migration in
general, and not only migration triggered in part by
environmental changes, can have an impact on
adaptation. We recommend that research limits be
pressed beyond the superficial category of a migrant
whose mobility appears to be directly related to
environmental changes (Foresight 2011; IOM 2011).
Research would benefit from approaches that are
more concurrent with the nuance and long time
scale of the impacts of climate change. In the
concluding section, we suggest combining methods
and addressing technical challenges with this
approach. To assist this, Table 1 lays out, in
narrative form, four approaches we identify in this
text; three vantage points and a combination of
methods.
Defining adaptation
The concept of adaptation emerged from the world
of evolutionary biology as a dynamic, non-
directional, longer-term phenomenon (Williams
1966, vii). It has since been applied in the social
and political sciences, notably, in the case of
cultural and social exchange and adaptation (Chhetri
1987). The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (IPCC) defines adaptation thus: ‘In human
systems, the process of adjustment to actual or
expected climate and its effects, which seeks to
moderate harm or exploit beneficial opportunities’
(IPCC 2014).
Environmental changes have the potential to
erode resilience and adaptive capacities, modifying
not only the number of migrants but also the
characteristics of pre-existing patterns. Positive
adjustments are produced through two mechanisms.
First, migrants can contribute to recovery following
unavoidable shocks. Second, migration may increase
adaptive capacities, defined as the abilities of people
and societies to transform structure, function, or
organisation to manage better their response to
weather hazards and other negative changes (IPCC
2012, 72). Migration may not be the first or only
adaptive strategy chosen or, indeed, the most
appropriate (Brown 2008). People move short and
long distances within the larger frame of their
responses to the world around them, an evolving
relationship largely shaped by subjective and non-
environmental factors (Faist and Shade 2013).
Perceptions, cultural values and norms are
paramount. The perceived ability to employ
adaptation strategies successfully may be as
important as the objective ability (Grothmann and
Patt 2005).
Migration can be a ‘successful’adaptation strategy
if it can increase the ability to rely on existing
household resources (Tacoli 2011b; Warner and Afifi
2014). Adaptive actions are non-linear, may change
over time, and are not always necessarily positive.
Short-term coping strategies that mitigate harm may
be seen as adaptive, but in many cases have proven
to be maladaptive in the long term. Maladaptation is
defined as an action taken ostensibly to avoid or
reduce vulnerability to climate change, but that
impacts adversely on, or increases, the vulnerability
of other systems, sectors or social groups (Barnett
and O’Neill 2010). Both direct and indirect
vulnerability to climate-related pressures are important
(Magnan et al. 2016). Of note are adaptation measures
that may simply reduce in situ pressures by displacing
them onto another ecologically or socioeconomically
connected ‘system’; that is, communities of origin or
destination (cf. Juhola et al. 2016; Magnan et al.
2016).
State of the art
In fragile environments, migration is essential in
preserving life and satisfying basic needs. Recent
figures suggest that since 2008, an average of 26.4
million people are displaced every year by natural
hazard-induced disasters (IDMC 2015). In addition,
environmental degradation, exacerbated by climatic
changes, can erode livelihoods to a point of rupture.
Numerous case studies link increased mobility to
periods of environmental stress (Tacoli 2011a;
Ginnetti et al. 2013), but socio-economic factors are
often the proximate causes of vulnerability (Ginetti
et al. 2013). Outside evacuation scenarios, it is
important to consider why households perceive
themselves to be imminently at risk. Ezra and Kiros
(2001), for example, demonstrated through a multi-
level analysis of 2000 households in 40 villages in
Ethiopia that perceived local vulnerability to a food
crisis was a key factor in out-migration.
Recent empirical observations highlight migration
as a powerful adaptation strategy for populations
faced with environmental and climate changes
(Bardsley and Hugo 2010; Black et al. 2011a;
McLeman and Smit 2006). In the underpinnings of
the New Economics of Labour Migration (NELM)
approach, migration is understood as a risk
management strategy adopted at the household level
(Stark and Levhari 1982; Lucas and Stark 1985).
Migration scholars conclude that among rural
The Geographical Journal 2017 doi: 10.1111/geoj.12205
© 2017 Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of British Geographers)
How can migration serve adaptation to climate change? 3
Table 1 Positive points, challenges, indicators and methods for on each vantage point and their or combinations
Vantage point Positive points Challenges Indicators Commonly used methods
Migrants Most commonly adopted
Aligns methodologically with
significant completed empirical
projects (e.g. EACH-FOR, and
Rainfalls)
Identifying migrants who faced
significant environmental drivers
Low information quality related
to neglect of the fate of the
community of origin
Small samples; significant
resources would have to
be invested
Migrant well-being
Socio-economic conditions
Skills, knowledge and
livelihood
enhancements
Remittances volume/
proportion
Individual surveys (e.g. Findley
1994; Halliday 2006)
Qualitative/ethnographic
methods (e.g. J€
ager et al. 2009)
Community
of origin
Relatively straightforward to find
respondents/interviewees
Most aligned with NELM, presently
considered the pre-eminent
economic approach to migration
Identifying households who faced
significant environmental drivers
Questions on information
quality on the fate of migrants,
due to their absence
Data on out-migration are
typically less rich than data
on in-migration
Remittance uses
Role of networks and diaspora
Socio-economic well-being of
non-migrants
Communal structure
Individual surveys
Household surveys (e.g.
Rainfalls)
Ecological inference (e.g. Henry
et al. 2003; Van der Geest
2011)
Time series on out-migration
(e.g. Kniveton et al. 2009;
Nawrotski et al. 2015)
Multilevel analysis (e.g. Henry
et al. 2003; Nawrotski
et al. 2013)
Qualitative/ethnographic
methods
Community
of destination
Innovation potential
Directly addresses impacts rather
than causes
Identifying environmental drivers
at source areas
Judgements on number, location
and characteristics of the
communities of destination to
be studied –efficiency
of resources
Lack of information or
misinformation about
community of origin
Contributions of migrants
Communal structure
Market and labour shortages
Migrant integration
Individual sample or household
surveys
Ecological inference
Time series on in-migration
Qualitative/ethnographic
methods
The Geographical Journal 2017 doi: 10.1111/geoj.12205
© 2017 Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of British Geographers)
4How can migration serve adaptation to climate change?
households in particular, dependent on natural
resources for household production and
consumption (Obokata et al. 2014), internal and
cross-border migration can be employed to address
income gaps and serve as an informal insurance
strategy (Lee 1966; Stark and Levhari 1982; Lucas
and Stark 1985; Gubert 2002; Foresight 2011).
Migration is not necessarily a strategy of last resort
(Hampshire 2002), but is often a voluntary decision
taken as part of longer-term strategies aimed at building
capacities to confront unfavourable conditions (J€
ager
et al. 2009). In 1966, Wolpert showed that the large-
scale internal migration in the US in the 1930s during
the ‘Dust Bowl’was an adjustment to environmental
stress. Rather than a migration en masse,however,the
timing and outcomes of migration in this period are
distinguished by capital endowments, as a function of
household resilience (McLeman and Smit 2006).
Perhaps unsurprisingly, empirical studies produce
variable and context-specific signals. Social and
political components of exposure and sensitivity to
environmental factors evolve (Turner et al. 2003);
individual attributes in the makeup of a household
vary; and the occurrence of natural hazards and the
availability of natural resources are themselves
changing, in accelerated and unpredictable ways due
to climate change (Stocker et al. 2013). Using a multi-
level approach to migration histories in Burkina Faso
from 1960 to 1998, Henry et al. (2003) demonstrate
that people from drier regions are more likely to
engage in both temporary and permanent migration to
other rural areas, but the likelihood of short-term
moves to distant destinations decreases when rainfall
is scarcer, due to more limited household resources.
Comparing time series of north–south internal
migration and average annual rainfall in Ghana, Van
der Geest (2011) suggests that migration can be
reduced at times of the most pronounced
environmental stress. He emphasises that this
behaviour must be seen as part of the ‘normal’
internal and temporary migration patterns in the
region, which serve a traditional lifestyle that is
routinely tested by adverse conditions. J
onsson (2010)
echoes this notion in her review of case studies of
international and internal migration related to
drought, desertification and soil degradation in the
Sahel. Highlighting the role of pre-existing migration
patterns and routes in these movements, she
furthermore underlines that these patterns are manifest
outcomes of social and cultural considerations.
An important element of the household migration
decision-making process appears to be the disposition
of various capitals required to migrate. A number of
studies demonstrate a U-shaped relationship between
migration flows and deviation from average rainfall
variability, highlighting that the capacity to migrate
varies with (changing) household economic resources
(Feng et al. 2010; Nawrotzki et al. 2013 2015).
Similarly, in an analysis of the drought-prone state of
Table 1 Continued
Vantage point Positive points Challenges Indicators Commonly used methods
Combining
communities
of destination
and of origin
Innovation potential
Comprehensiveness of the
approach
Technical challenges connecting
the community of origin and the
community of destination
Internal validity is a key issue
for climate hot spots
If through recalled migration
histories: challenges related to
informant accuracy and the
questionable value of
retrospective data (cf. Smith and
Thomas 2003)
If tracking migrants e.g. through
migration corridors: questions
on the efficiency of resources
for numerous destinations, and
potential for dropout
Combine points above Combining one or more of the
above with qualitative methods
Agent based modelling (ABM)
which uses statistical data and/
or natural resource data with
qualitative evidence (e.g. Smith
et al. 2008; Warner and
Afifi 2014; Afifi et al. 2015)
The Geographical Journal 2017 doi: 10.1111/geoj.12205
© 2017 Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of British Geographers)
How can migration serve adaptation to climate change? 5
Durango in Mexico between 1951 and 1991,
increased rainfall is positively correlated with migration
to the US (Kniveton et al. 2009). During times of
relative plenty of natural resources, households
areabletofreeuptheresourcesnecessaryfora
family member to migrate. During times of peak
environmental stress, households lacking the resources
to migrate are less mobile, and choose to prioritise
basic necessities. The Where the Rain Falls project
(hereafter Rainfalls) takes the link between rainfall
patterns and human mobility further, distinguishing
household ‘profiles’of environmental migration in
eight countries (Warner and Afifi 2014; Afifi et al.
2015). Rainfalls suggests that while the decision of
resource-dependent households to invest in a
household member migrating may be correlated with
rainfall, the ‘success’of migration is often related to
contextual conditions and household attributes
preceding movement.
Empirical studies thus suggest that migration is a
complex and nuanced phenomenon. In public
debates, however, migration remains mostly presented
as the undesirable outcome of a failure to adapt. In
debates around the UN Framework Convention on
Climate Change (UNFCCC), emphasis is often placed
on displacement of at-risk populations as a
forgone conclusion. The presentation of migration as
problematic is evidenced by a policy focus on
influencing the modalities, volume and geographic
bounds of migration, rather than delivering on the
development potential of migration (DFID 2013; Black
et al. 2011b). Misconceptions and mounting distrust of
migrants and asylum seekers contribute to this view
(Bosswick 2000; Morrissey 2012).
Such a disconnect between empirical research
and public debate is likely at best to induce
governance and institutional structures poorly suited to
respond to the challenges and opportunities presented
(Blocher 2016), or at worse to promote policymakers to
support maladaptive policy responses aimed at
preventing migration (Black et al. 2011b). This article
attempts to inform evidence-based policymaking by
suggesting conceptual and methodological approaches
for future studies.
Adaptation for whom? Three vantage points to
assess
We explore migration impacts against a framing
question: adaptation by migration for whom? Three
population groups need to be considered: the
migrants themselves, the community of origin, and
the community of destination.
For the migrants themselves
Traditionally it is envisaged that migrants adapt
themselves to environmental influences, and this is
usually manifested in one of two ways according to the
literature. First, migration can thus serve as a response
when needs cannot be satisfied in situ, whether there
are immediate needs precipitated by a ‘tipping point’at
which habitation in the home area is no longer
tolerable, as identified by residents in Bolivia, Senegal
and Tanzania, for example (Tacoli 2011a).
Interviewees who identify environmental factors in
their decision to migrate often refused to be considered
as victims, but insisted on their resourcefulness and
proactivity (Farbotko 2005; Gemenne 2011).
Second, migrants also seek access to improved
socio-economic status. Indeed, migrants often enjoy
greater access to employment, services, and other life
opportunities. The multi-country ‘Environmental
Change and Forced Migration Scenarios’(EACH-FOR)
project, a pioneering project which produced a
number of empirical studies specific to environmental
migration, concluded that in many contexts, apparently
successful migrants –a self-selecting group –were the
young and socially mobile, who are able to enjoy
relatively improved status during migration or upon
return (Stark and Taylor 1989 1991; J€
ager et al.2009).
In some contexts, migration constitutes an important
rite of passage into adulthood as well as an affirmation
of household and personal success or prestige (J
onsson
2010 2011). Such insights have since been confirmed
by numerous other empirical studies. For many women
in post-Soviet countries, migration has often provided
new opportunities for greater autonomy, financial
control and self-confidence, and also promotes a better
balance between the sexes (Abdurazakova 2011).
Migration is, however, a strategy entailing potential
risks. In Ghana and Tanzania, for example, it has been
characterised as an ‘erosive’or maladaptive coping
strategy for vulnerable households (Warner and Afifi
2014). Migrants often suffer a relatively lower
socioeconomic status than their hosts, and when
compared with their previous status in their community
of origin (Czaika and de Haas 2012). Migrants face
barriers to obtaining employment, access to adequate
and dignified living conditions, and security of
tenure. Migrants face serious pressures to succeed.
Remittances may represent a significant proportion of a
migrant’s income, leaving them in relative poverty.
Anecdotes suggesting that migrants take out loans to
visit their families and make shows of wealth are not
uncommon, suggesting families may be unaware of the
poor conditions in which a migrant is living.
Testing adaptation of the migrants themselves often
relies on various indicators of individual wellbeing.
Many studies to date have considered the process
leading to migration as well as the relative success of
migrants in the area of destination (cf. Halliday 2006;
J€
ager et al. 2009). However, this is a one-sided view.
Concretely, migrants may inaccurately represent or be
unaware of the situation of their potentially idealised
community of origin. Furthermore, non-migrants and
community members unable to migrate are
underrepresented in these studies, although to
The Geographical Journal 2017 doi: 10.1111/geoj.12205
© 2017 Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of British Geographers)
6How can migration serve adaptation to climate change?
consider the adaption of the community overall, those
left behind are important (Black et al. 2011a).
For the community of origin
Literature on migration and development weighs the
outcomes of migration as a meaningful development
strategy for the region of origin, against potential
negative effects on the origin areas (cf. de Haas 2010).
Communities are influenced either by the migrants’
absenceorbythelinkstheymaintain.Atthemostbasic
level, migration can lessen strain on limited resources
while alleviating other risks related to overpopulation;
this offers those who stay better chances for survival
(Mink 1993; Scheffran et al. 2012). Sending a family
member out of an area with low access to capital
markets allows a household to overcome barriers to
production and income (Taylor 1999).
On the other hand, migration can result in
deterioration of the workforce and assets amongst
those who stay. People who choose not to, or who
are unable to, migrate suffer considerably from the
departure of others. For example, women are often
left with the burden of care for elderly relatives and
children. They may suffer isolation, deprivation and
the emotional costs and fears of migrant loved ones
not returning (Abdurazakova 2011).
The role of migrant networks and personal
linkages for the economic and social development of
origin areas is significant (Chhetri 1987; Adger 1999;
Gubert 2002; de Haas 2007 2010). The commonest
intervention for such individuals and networks are
the financial remittances sent to relatives back home
on a regular basis, which can greatly improve the
resilience of the latter to environmental changes and
shocks. These transfers play a crucial role in poverty
alleviation and development: they are larger and
more stable capital flows than overseas development
aid or foreign direct investment (Yang and Choi
2007). In addition, social and political remittances –
the skills, knowledge, and behaviours migrants
transfer between receiving and sending areas, along
with political and civic practices, bargaining, and
identities –are critical to providing the know-how
and connections helpful for development in the
areas of origin (Barnett and Webber 2010; Levitt and
Lamba-Nieves 2011; Asian Development Bank
2012). Transfers of financial, social, and intellectual
capitals can foster adaptation in three main ways
identified below.
First, they can bolster capital investments and
income-generating activities. Household by
household, migration is a way of securing a source
of revenue in times of hardship. In addition,
remittances can support agricultural and non-
agricultural investment. In aggregate, they foster a
more resilient agriculture and are instrumental in the
diversification of rural economies (Yang and Choi
2007; Barnett and Webber 2010). In some contexts,
the poorest households are those that do not receive
remittances (Tacoli 2011a; Milan et al. 2015). A
study conducted in parts of Uzbekistan and
Tajikistan found that household incomes deriving
from remittances were used mainly for durable
goods, business investment, health, education and
family traditions (Abdurazakova 2011).
Second, remittances can provide support in the
wake of disasters. Natural hazard-induced disasters
and humanitarian crises usually trigger waves of
solidarity among emigrant groups, which organise
themselves to provide relief efforts in the immediate
aftermath (Yang 2008). A number of studies in Haiti,
Jamaica, the Philippines, Viet Nam and Samoa have
found that remittances towards these countries
increased following disaster events (Paulson and
Rodgers 1997; Adger 1999; Foresight 2011). Internal
and international diaspora groups may support the
livelihoods of communities of origin in the short
term (Adger et al. 2002). Diaspora philanthropy can
be channelled by formal and interpersonal networks;
via NGOs, places of worship, hometown
associations, formal and informal alumni groups, and
so on. Diaspora networks can also provide political
capital. Following Typhoon Haiyan, the Filipino
community in the United States lobbied for the
Philippines to be granted temporary protection status
(although in this case it was not granted, it was a
well supported movement) (Grenier 2013).
Finally, remittances can also fund collective
adaptation projects. Although there is little evidence
of remittances being pooled to fund projects specific
to climate change adaptation, the exacerbation of
climate change impacts might make this more likely.
Migrant networks have been known to mobilise
resources following natural hazard events (Asian
Development Bank 2012). Such networks also
contribute over time by providing resources,
information and capacities to help communities deal
with environmental changes. In a number of study
areas, for example in Bolivia, remittances have
provided the bulk of the capital needed for local
agricultural development (Tacoli 2011a). Diaspora
philanthropy is increasingly being facilitated by the
existence of online social networks and the use of
new communications technology.
Testing adaptation of the community of origin
implies paying attention to communities affected by
a high level of out-migration and/or by environmental
changes. Research needs to assess the scale and
ultimate use of remittances, monetary and otherwise.
Remittance income has been shown to have direct
effects on the resource base, economic wellbeing and
resilience of a community (Adger et al.2002).
Regardless of the type of migration (short versus long-
term, internal versus international), a relatively long-
term perspective must be adopted. This means that
considering whether migration has helped to fulfil
basic needs, or to enhance long-term stability, is
The Geographical Journal 2017 doi: 10.1111/geoj.12205
© 2017 Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of British Geographers)
How can migration serve adaptation to climate change? 7
significant in the assessment of migration as
adaptation. The use of remittances for investment
may widen pre-existing inequalities (Stark et al.
1986), in ways that use of remittance income for
consumption may not. In addition, social remittances
may be of comparable value to monetary remittances
(Levitt and Lamba-Nieves 2011). Researchers could
assess the extent to which these skills were acquired
abroad, continue to be used upon return, and have
been taught to others.
It would furthermore be important to determine
whether a labour shortage and loss of skills in the
same region was adequately compensated (cf. Tacoli
2011a). Research could assess whether the
magnitude of remittances allows, for example, the
hiring of day labourers. These dynamics will also
depend on the time migrants spend away, and
whether the accrued experience of migrants helps
the community to build ever-greater capacities.
For the community of destination
The dominant narrative on the impacts of migration
for its destination regions remains one of
competition, tension and conflict. According to a
United Nations (UN) review of an array of policies
of low- and middle-income nations, the proportion
with policies to reduce migration to urban centres
rose from 51% in 1996 to 73% in 2005 (UN 2006).
A review of Poverty Reduction as well as
Development Strategy Papers across Africa argues
that migration is a common ‘scapegoat’for a host of
broader socio-economic structural issues (DFID
2013), from the spread of crime and HIV/AIDS to
land degradation and poverty (Black et al. 2006).
Migration is commonly referred to in public
discourse as a driver of overpopulation and conflict.
However, few studies have been able to identify
strong links between resource scarcity, migration and
conflict
2
. Casting environmental migrants as failures
plays into commonly held pre-misconceptions, at a
time in which migrants and asylum seekers are
increasingly viewed in a negative light (Bosswick
2000; Oels 2011).
There are nevertheless important and potentially
maladaptive migration flows towards regions that
are highly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change
due to resource scarcity, overcrowding and inadequate
infrastructure (de Sherbinin 2007), and to coastal and
deltaic cities in particular (de Sherbinin et al. 2014).
The increasing scale and frequency of natural hazards,
and ineffective disaster warning and response
mechanisms, exacerbate risk (Ginnetti et al. 2013).
Migration and development scholars profess the
benefits of migration, as a component assisting in a
wider socio-cultural phenomenon of adaptation. First,
internal and international migration is historically
viewed as an adjustment to market imbalances. In
growing urban areas in particular, migrants may fill
labour and demographic gaps (Ravenstein 1885; Lee
1966; Taylor 1999; Foresight 2011). Migrant
populations also create demand for goods and services,
including those from their source areas, bolstering
economic growth while forging new and stronger trade
relationships.
Second, recent work on multiculturalism and
migration policies has highlighted the cultural
benefits of migration for diversity. The presence of a
migrant population which contributes to public
debate and social change has dividends for
education, inclusiveness and innovation (cf. Massey
et al. 1998; de Haas 2007 2010). Social and cultural
capitals, noted above, flow in all directions in
migration systems.
Afinal, and related, point is that because of the
diversity that accompanies migrant communities,
migration acts as a vehicle for transfers of knowledge
and technologies, and thus can help spur growth and
development (Freeman and Kessler 2008; de Haas
2010). Migrants are a self-selecting group, and may
have a more developed entrepreneurial and risk-taking
spirit compared with the average population (Jaeger
et al. 2010).
Testing the climate change adaptation–migration
nexus
Adaptation for whom? Some recommendations
More empirical studies are clearly needed. While
case studies are limited, quantitative studies are even
more so (Piguet 2010; Foresight 2011; Milan et al.
2015). Combining methods could draw upon a
range of methods including ecological inference,
individual sample surveys, time series analysis,
multilevel analysis, agent-based modelling (ABM),
amongst others (cf. Piguet 2010). The impacts of
migration in all its forms are relevant to
understanding long-term adaptation. These dynamics
can be observed by exploring the creation of new
social networks among migrants and between
communities as well as through the transfer of
knowledge, technology, credit and other resources.
Studies examining both areas of origin and
destination (e.g. Warner and Afifi 2014) remain
relatively few in number. Such an approach is
resource intensive and suffers from the existence of
various barriers to studying the migration system as a
whole. In addition to financial constraints, the
marginalisation of migrants, political sensitivities,
and privacy and security concerns can also be
prohibitive when it comes to tracing individual
migrants throughout their journey. In Table 1 we
summarise a number of the advantages and
challenges of each of the approaches described
above.
The Geographical Journal 2017 doi: 10.1111/geoj.12205
© 2017 Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of British Geographers)
8How can migration serve adaptation to climate change?
Conclusions
Scholars’opinions diverge over whether the adaptive
benefits of migration outweigh the ‘costs’to the
home communities. In migration studies to date,
methodological choices may have inadvertently led
to inaccuracies as interview and survey participants
reflect false assumptions about their counterparts in
the migration process. Distinguishing the effects of
migration on areas that may be source, destination
and transit areas poses distinct conceptual
challenges. These dynamics clearly demonstrate that
all of the vantage points of the migration process
should be weighed objectively and comprehensively
in investigating migratory outcomes. In order to
advance the body of knowledge around the
migration–environment nexus, it is necessary to
develop a better appreciation of how migration,
when employed as a strategy to respond to climate
change, affects the adaptive capacities of migrants,
communities of origin, and communities of
destination.
In the sections above, we have attempted to
respond to the conceptual and methodological
challenges surrounding these questions. A persistent
concern is explicitly relating migrants to
environmental factors and seeking to identify the
latter in situ, due to the multi-causality of migration
phenomena and the role of individual perceptions
and motivations. Focusing on ‘environmental’
migration may overlook the role of other forms of
migration in increasing the adaptive capacities of
participating communities (Gemenne and Blocher
2016). In studying migration in general, and without
seeking to embed definitions, complications of
pursuing this area of study may be adequately
managed. There remains the need for a reference
group against which to compare results; whether
it be the non-migrants of the migrant-sending
households, members of those households not
sending migrants, other migrants, or the host
community.
In our final section we argue that studies should,
where possible, begin from a starting point of
examining changes to migration patterns and
migrants as part of system-wide effects. Considering
migration in the context of climate change requires
this perspective in order to ensure that the potential
of migration can be understood and delivered.
Future empirical studies should seek to provide a
means to consider policy approaches that facilitate
the positive contributions of the three vantage points,
in order to maximise the benefits and minimise the
harms of migration. More empirical evidence at
micro- and maco-levels is needed to fill the gaps in
current knowledge in order to develop common
approaches to promote adaptation.
More reflection is also needed to define what
constitutes ‘successful’migration in the context of
adaptation. Examples noted above distinguish
‘successful’movements from maladaptation (Warner
and Afifi 2014; Afifi et al. 2015 Magnan et al.
2016), but have not addressed the timescales over
which one can draw a conclusion. This requires
consideration of multiple types and dimensions of
vulnerability. What constitutes adaptation for some
may represent maladaptation in other parts of the
system. Hence, the development of policies which
promote migration as adaptation warrants not just a
reflection on the beneficiaries of these policies, but
also on the indicators of success –and at which
points in time they may best be measured; and these
reflections need to be properly integrated.
Progress towards these objectives will help dispel
assumptions and negative attitudes surrounding
migration, which impose normative judgments on
changes in migration flows as having some standard
form of impact, positive or negative, on either or
both the communities of origin and destination
communities. This is critical to advancing the
academic discourse and political dialogue
surrounding migration, which is a precursor to
developing measures to assist migrants and non-
migrants as they adapt to changing conditions.
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by the European Union-
financed Migration, Environment and Climate
Change: Evidence for Policy (MECLEP) project. We
thank our colleagues from the MECLEP consortium
for their insight and expertise, although they may not
agree with all of the interpretations of this paper. We
thank two anonymous reviews for comments that
greatly improved the manuscript.
Notes
1 In regards to environmental drivers of migration, the
‘CLIMIG’bibliographic database developed by the University
of Neuchatel ensured we conducted a comprehensive
review: https://environmentalmigration.iom.int/projects/climig.
2 Cf. O’Loughlin et al. (2012), on the non-linear relationship
between temperature and conflict in East Africa between
1990 and 2009, and Kelley et al. (2015), on the potential
implications of the 2007–10 drought in Syria on the
demographic factors contributing to civil unrest.
References
Abdurazakova D 2011 Social impact of international migration
and remittances in central Asia Asia-Pacific Population
Journal 26 29–54
Adger W N 1999 Social vulnerability to climate change and
extremes in coastal Vietnam World Development 27 249–70
Adger W N, Kelly P M, Winkels A, Huy L Q and Locke C
2002 Migration, remittances, livelihood trajectories, and
social resilience Ambio 31 358–66
The Geographical Journal 2017 doi: 10.1111/geoj.12205
© 2017 Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of British Geographers)
How can migration serve adaptation to climate change? 9
Afifi T, Liwenga E and Kwezi L 2014 Rainfall-induced crop
failure, food insecurity and out-migration in Same-
Kilimanjaro, Tanzania Climate and Development 653–
60
Afifi T, Milan A, Etzold B, Schraven B, Rademacher-Schulz C,
Sakdapolrak P and Warner K 2015 Human mobility in
response to rainfall variability: opportunities for migration as
a successful adaptation strategy in eight case studies
Migration and Development 1–21
Asian Development Bank 2012 Addressing climate change and
migration in Asia and the PacificADB, Manila
Barbieri A F and Confalonieri U E C 2011 Climate change,
migration and health: exploring potential scenarios of
population vulnerability in Brazil in Piguet E, Pecoud A and
de Guchteneire P eds Migration and climate change Editions
de l’UNESCO, Paris 49–73
Bardsley D K and Hugo G J 2010 Migration and climate
change: examining thresholds of change to guide effective
adaptation decision-making Population and Environment 32
238–62
Barnett J 2001 Adapting to climate change in Pacific Island
countries: the problem of uncertainty World Development 29
977–93
Barnett J and O’Neill S 2010 Maladaptation Global
Environmental Change 20 211–13
Barnett J and Webber M 2010 Migration as adaptation:
opportunities and limits in Climate change and
displacement: multidisciplinary perspectives Hart Publishing,
Oxford 37–56
Bettini G and Andersson E 2014 Sand waves and human tides:
exploring environmental myths on desertification and
climate-induced migration Journal of Environment and
Development 23 160–85
Black R, Arnell N W, Adger N W, Thomas D and Geddes A
2011a Migration, immobility and displacement outcomes
following extreme events Environmental Science and Policy
27 s32
Black R, Bennett S R G, Thomas S M and Beddington J R
2011b Migration as adaptation Nature 478 447–9
Black R, Crush J, Peberdy S, Ammassari S, McLean Hilker L,
Mouillesseux S, Pooley C and Rajkotia R 2006 Migration and
development in Africa: an overview migration and development
series Southern African Migration Project, Cape Town
Blocher J 2016 Climate change and environment related
migration in the European Union policy: an organizational
shift towards adaptation and development in Rosenow-
Williams K and Gemenne F eds Organizational perspectives
on environmental migration Routledge, New York
Bosswick W 2000 Development of asylum policy in Germany
Journal of Refugee Studies 13 43–60
Boswell C, Geddes A and Scholten P 2011 The role of
narratives in migration policy-making: a research framework
British Journal of Politics and International Relations 13 1–11
Brown O 2008 Migration and climate change IOM Research
Series IOM, Geneva
Carr D 2009 Population and deforestation: why rural migration
matters Progress in Human Geography 33 355–78
Castles S 2011 Concluding remarks on the climate change-
migration nexus in Piguet E, Pecoud A and de Guchteneire
eds Migration and climate change Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge 415–26
Chhetri R B 1987 Migration, adaptation and socio-cultural
change: the case of the Thakalis in Pokhara Occasional
Papers in Sociology and Anthropology 143–72
Clemens M 2014 Does Development Reduce Migration? IZA
Discussion Papers 8592 Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA),
Bonn (http://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:iza:izadps:dp8592)
Accessed June 2016
Czaika M and de Haas H 2012 The role of internal and
international relative deprivation in global migration Oxford
Development Studies 40 423–42
Department for International Development (DFID) 2013
Policy review: attitudes toward migration in African
Development Bank Country Partnership Strategy Papers
(CPSPs) Sussex Migrating out of Poverty Research
Programme Consortium, Brighton
de Haas H 2007 Remittances, migration and social
development: a conceptual review of the literature Social
Policy and Development Programme Paper 34 United
Nations Research Institute for Social Development,
Geneva
de Haas H 2008 Migration and development: a theoretical
perspective International Migration Institute Working Paper
Series No. 9 James Martin 21st Century School, University of
Oxford, Oxford
de Haas H 2010 Migration and development: a theoretical
perspective International Migration Review 44 1–38
de Sherbinin A 2014 Climate change hotspot mapping: what
have we learned? Climatic Change 123 23–7
de Sherbinin A, Schiller A, Hsieh W H and Pulsipher A 2007
The vulnerability of global cities to climate hazards
Environment and Urbanization 19 39–64
Ezra M and Kiros G E 2001 Rural out-migration in the drought
prone areas of Ethiopia: a multilevel analysis International
Migration Review 35 749–71
Faist T and Schade J 2013 The climate–migration nexus: a
reorientation in Faist T and Schade J eds Disentangling
migration and climate change: methodologies, political
discourses and human rights Springer, Leiden 3–25
Farbotko C 2005 Tuvalu and climate change: constructions of
environmental displacement in the Sydney Morning Herald
Geografiska Annaler 87B 279–93
Feng S, Krueger A and Oppenheimer M 2010 Linkages among
climate change, crop yields and Mexico–US cross-border
migration Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
USA 107 14257–62
Findley S E 1994 Does drought increase migration? A study of
migration from rural Mali during the 1983–85 drought
International Migration Review 28 539–53
Foresight 2011 Migration and global environmental change
The Government Office for Science, London
Freeman G P and Kessler A 2008 Political economy and
migration policy Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 34
655–78
Gemenne F 2011 How they became the human face of climate
change. Research and policy interactions in the birth of the
‘environmental migration’concept in Piguet E, P
ecoud A and
de Guchteneire P eds Migration and climate change
The Geographical Journal 2017 doi: 10.1111/geoj.12205
© 2017 Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of British Geographers)
10 How can migration serve adaptation to climate change?
Cambridge University Press/UNESCO, Cambridge and Paris
225–59
Gemenne F and Blocher J 2016 How can migration support
adaptation? Different options to test the migration–adaptation
nexus Migration, Environment and Climate Change: Working
Paper Series 1/2016 IOM, Geneva
Ginnetti J, Dagondon B, Villanueva C, Enriquez J, Temprosa F
T, Bacal C and Carcellar N L 2013 Disaster-induced internal
displacement in the Philippines: the case of Tropical Storm
Washi/Sendong The Internal Displacement Monitoring
Centre, Geneva
Glantz M 1991 The use of analogies in forecasting ecological
and societal responses to global warming Environment 33
10–33
Grenier A 2013 Will Filipinos be granted temporary protected
status in the wake of Typhoon Haiyan? Immigration impact
(http://immigrationimpact.com/2013/11/22/will-filipinos-be-
granted-temporary-protected-status-in-the-wake-of-typhoon-ha
iyan/) Accessed 15 June 2016
Grothmann T and Patt A 2005 Adaptive capacity and human
cognition: the process of individual adaptation to climate
change Global Environmental Change 15 199–213
Gubert F 2002 Do migrants insure those who stay behind?
Evidence from the Kayes Area (Western Mali) Oxford
Development Studies 30 267–87
Halliday T 2006 Migration, Risk, and Liquidity Constraints in El
Salvador Economic Development and Cultural Change 54
893–925
Hampshire K 2002 Fulani on the Move: Seasonal Economic
Migration in the Sahel as a Social Process Journal of
Development Studies 38 15–36
Henry S, Boyle P and Lambin E F 2003 Modelling the influence
of the natural environment on inter-provincial migration in
Burkina Faso, West Africa Applied Geography 23 115–36
Hugo G 1996 Environmental concerns and international
migration International Migration Review 30 105–31
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2007
Climate change 2007: impacts, adaptation and vulnerability
Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment
Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK 976 pp
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2012
Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to
Advance Climate Change Adaptation: A Special Report of
Working Groups I and II of the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change in Field C B, Barros V, Stocker TF, Qin D,
Dokken D J, Ebi K L, Mastrandrea M D, Mach K J, Plattner
G K, Allen S K, Tignor M and Midgley P M eds Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, UK, 582 pp
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2014
Climate change 2014: synthesis report in Pachauri R K and
Meyer L A eds Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III
to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change IPCC, Geneva 151 pp
Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre (IDMC) 2015 Global
Estimates 2015: People displaced by disasters IDMC, Geneva
International Organization for Migration (IOM) 2011 Glossary
on migration International Migration Law No. 25 IOM,
Geneva
Jaeger D A, Dohmen T, Falk A, Huffman D, Sunde U and
Bonin H 2010 Direct evidence on risk attitudes and
migration Review of Economics and Statistics 92 684–9
J€
ager J, Fr€
uhmann J, Gr€
unberger S and Vag A 2009 EACH-
FOR Synthesis Report EACH-FOR Secretariat, Budapest
J
onsson G 2010 The environmental factor in migration
dynamics –a review of African case studies International
Migration Institute Working Papers No. 21, Oxford
J
onsson G 2011 Non-migrant, sedentary, immobile, or ‘left
behind’?Reflections on the absence of migration
International Migration Institute Working Papers No. 39,
Oxford
Juhola S, Glaas E, Linn
er B O and Neset T S 2016
Redefining maladaptation Environmental Science and Policy
55 135–40
Kelley C P, Mohtadi S, Cane M A, Seager R and Kushnir Y
2015 Climate change in the Fertile Crescent and implications
of the recent Syrian drought PNAS 112 3241–6
Kniveton D, Smith C, Black R and Schmidt-Verkerk K 2009
Challenges and approaches to measuring the migration-
environment nexus in Laczko F and Aghazarm C eds
Migration, environment and climate change: assessing the
evidence International Organization for Migration (IOM),
Geneva 41–111
Lee E S 1966 A theory of migration Demography 347–57
Levitt P and Lamba-Nieves D 2011 Social remittances revisited
Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 37 1–22
Lonergan S 1998 The role of environmental degradation in
population displacement Environmental Change and Security
Project Report 4 5–15
Lucas R E B and Stark O 1985 Motivations to remit: evidence
from Botswana Journal of Political Economy 93 901–18
Magnan A K, Schipper E L F, Burkett M, Bharwani S, Burton I,
Eriksen S, Gemenne F, Schaar J and Ziervogel G 2016
Addressing the risk of maladaptation to climate change
WIREs Climate Change 7 646–65
Massey D S, Arango J, Koucouci A, Pelligrino A and Taylor J E
1998 Worlds in Motion: Understanding International Migration
at the End of the Millennium Oxford University Press, Oxford
Massey D, Axinn W and Ghimire D 2010 Environmental
change and out-migration: Evidence from Nepal Population
and Environment 32(2–3) 109–36
McLeman R A 2014 Climate and human migration: past
experiences, future challenges Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge
McLeman R A and Hunter L M 2010 Migration in the context
of vulnerability and adaptation to climate change: insights
from analogues Climate Change 1 450–61
McLeman R A and Smit B 2006 Migration as an adaptation to
climate change Climatic Change 76 31–53
Milan A, Gioli G and Afifi T2015 Migration and global
environmental change: methodological lessons from
mountain areas of the global South Earth System Dynamics 6
375–88
Milan A and Ho R 2014 Livelihood and migration patterns at
different altitudes in the Central Highlands of Peru Climate
and Development 669–76
Mink S D 1993 Poverty, population and the environment
World Bank Discussion Papers The International Bank for
The Geographical Journal 2017 doi: 10.1111/geoj.12205
© 2017 Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of British Geographers)
How can migration serve adaptation to climate change? 11
Reconstruction and Development/the World Bank,
Washington DC
Morrissey J 2009 Environmental Change and Forced Migration:
A State of the Art Review, Refugee Studies Centre, Oxford
Department of International Development, Queen Elizabeth
House University of Oxford, Oxford
Morrissey J 2012 Rethinking the ‘debate on environmental
refugees’: from ‘maximalists and minimalists’to ‘proponents
and critics’Journal of Political Ecology 19 36–49
Mortreux C and Barnett J 2009 Climate change, migration and
adaptation in Funafuti, Tuvalu Global Environmental Change
19 105–12
Nawrotzki R, Hunter L, Runfola D M and Riosmena F 2015
Climate change as a migration driver from rural and urban
Mexico Environmental Research Letters 10 114023
Nawrotzki R, Riosmena F and Hunter L 2013 Do rainfall
deficits predict U.S.-bound migration from rural Mexico?
Evidence from the Mexican census Population Research and
Policy Review 32 129–58
Obokata R, Veronis L and McLeman R A 2014 Empirical
research on international environmental migration: a
systematic review Population and Environment 36 111–35
Oels A 2011 Comparing three theoretical perspectives on
climate change as a security issue: from the ‘securitisation’of
climate change to the ‘climatisation’of the security field in
Scheffran J, Brzoska M, Brauch H G, Link M L and Schilling
Jeds Climate change, human security and violent conflict
Springer, Berlin 185–205
O’Loughlin J, Witmer F D W, Linke A M, Laing A, Gettelman
A and Dudhia J 2012 Climate variability and conflict risk in
East Africa 1990–2009 Proceedings of the National Academy
of Sciences USA 109 18344–9
Orlove B 2005 Human adaptation to climate change: a review
of three historical cases and some general perspectives
Environmental Science and Policy 8 589–600
Paul M K 2005 Evidence against disaster-induced migration:
the 2004 tornado in north-central Bangladesh Disasters 29
370–85
Paulson D and Rogers S 1997 Maintaining subsistence security
in Western Samoa Geoforum 28 173–87
Piguet E 2010 Linking climate change, environmental
degradation and migration: a methodological overview Wiley
Interdisciplinary Reviews Climate Change 1 517–24
Piguet E 2013 From ‘primitive migration’to ‘climate refugees’: the
curious fate of the natural environment in migration studies
Annals of the Association of American Geographers 103 148–62
Ravenstein E G 1885 The laws of migration Journal of the
Royal Statistical Society XLVIII 167–227
Rosenzweig C and Hillel D 1993 The dust bowl of the 1930s:
analog of greenhouse effect in the Great Plains? Journal of
Environmental Quality 22 9–22
Scheffran J, Brzoska Kominek J, Link M L and Schilling 2012
Climate change and violent conflict Science 336 869–71
Smith C D, Kniveton D R, Black R and Wood S 2008
Predictive Modelling Forced Migration Review 31, Oxford
University Press, Oxford
Smith J P and Thomas D 2003 Remembrances of things past:
test-retest reliability of retrospective migration histories
Journal of the Royal Statistical Society A 166 23–49
Stark O and Levhari D 1982 On migration and risk in LDCs
Economic Development and Cultural Change 31 191–6
Stark O and Taylor E J 1989 Relative deprivation and
international migration Demography 26 1–14
Stark O and Taylor E J 1991 Migration incentives, migration
types: the role of relative deprivation The Economic Journal
101 1163–78
Stocker T F, Dahe Q and Plattner G K eds 2013 Climate
change 2013: the physical science basis Contribution of
Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, London and New York 1535 pp
Tacoli C 2011a Not only climate change: mobility,
vulnerability and socio-economic transformations in
environmentally fragile areas of Bolivia, Senegal and
Tanzania International Institute for Environment and
Development (IIED), London
Tacoli C 2011b The links between environmental change and
migration; a livelihoods approach International Institute for
Environment and Development, London
Taylor J E 1999 The new economics of labour migration and
the role of remittances in the migration process International
Migration 37 63–88
Turner B L, Kasperson R E, Matson P A, McCarthy J J, Corell R
W, Christensen L, Eckley N, Kasperson J X, Luers A and
Martello M L 2003 A framework for vulnerability analysis in
sustainability science Proceedings of the National Academy
of Sciences USA 100 8074–9
United Nations (UN) 2006 World population policies 2005
Department of Economic and Social Affairs, New York
United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs
(UN DESA) 2013 International migration policies government
views and priorities UNDESA, New York
Van der Geest K 2011 North–south migration in Ghana:
what role for the environment? International Migration 49
69–94
Warner K and Afifi T2014 Where the Rain Falls: Evidence
from 8 countries on how vulnerable households use
migration to manage the risk of rainfall variability and food
insecurity Climate and Development 6 1–17
Warner K, Ehrhart C, de Sherbinin A, Adamo S and Chai-Onn
T2009 In search of shelter –mapping the effects of climate
change on human migration and displacement CARE/CIESIN/
UNHCR/UNU-EHS/World Bank, Bonn
Webber M and Barnett J 2010 Accommodating migration to
promote adaptation to climate change World Bank,
Washington DC
Williams G C 1966 Adaptation and natural selection: a critique
of some current evolutionary thought Princeton University
Press, Princeton, NJ
Wolpert J 1966 Migration as an adjustment to environmental
stress Journal of Social Issues XXII 92–102
Yang D C 2008 Coping with disaster: the impact of hurricanes
on international financial flows, 1970–2002 The B.E. Journal
of Economic Analysis and Policy 81–45
Yang D C and Choi H 2007 Are remittances insurance?
Evidence from rainfall shocks in the Philippines The World
Bank Economic Review 21 219–48
The Geographical Journal 2017 doi: 10.1111/geoj.12205
© 2017 Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of British Geographers)
12 How can migration serve adaptation to climate change?
