Authored By: Kirti Soni
Vivekananda Institute of Professional Studies, GGSIPU
Abstract
The aim of this article is to examine the expansion of international law to the unprecedented challenges and emerging opportunities created by climate-induced displacement in an increasingly interconnected world.
This study traces the historical development of key legal instruments, highlighting the limitations of existing definitions of “refugee” that exclude those displaced by environmental factors. It analyzes the fragmentation and insufficiency of current responses: the non-binding nature of global agreements like the Paris Agreement and the Global Compact for Migration, the restricted scope of regional instruments such as the Kampala Convention, and the patchwork of isolated national policies.
Presenting the scale and complexity of climate displacement—from internal migration to existential threats facing island nations—the article examines both the acute vulnerabilities of affected populations and the varied, often inadequate, legal protections currently available. It reviews proposals for legal and policy reform, including a possible new international convention for climate refugees, regional cooperation mechanisms, and the establishment of a global fund for climate-displaced persons.
Ultimately, the paper argues that international law must undergo bold and principled reform— moving beyond incremental adjustments—if it is to uphold justice, dignity, and human rights amid escalating environmental disruption.
Keywords:
Climate Change, Climate Refugees, Global Migration, International Law, Global Warming, International Refugee Law
Introduction
“The international community must realize its responsibility to protect people displaced across borders by climate change impacts.”
Ian Fry, Former United Nations Special Rapporteur
The term “refugee” as defined by the 1951 Refugee Convention refers to someone who, “owing to well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country.”1 However, this definition, crafted in aftermath of World War II doesn’t encompass people forced to leave their homes because of environmental disasters, rising seas, or climate-related food and water shortages.
The term “climate refugee” has not been legally pronounced by any legal instrument. It was around 21st Century that this term gained prominence in international diaspora. Essam El Hinnawi is credited as one of the first to propose such a definition, but there remains no internationally agreed-upon standard. Attempts to define climate refugees have focused on factors such as forced movement, temporary or permanent relocation, cross-border displacement, a clear link to climate change, and evidence of human contributions to environmental disruption. For example, Biermann and Boas (2007) describe climate refugees as “people who are forced to leave their habitats, either immediately or in the near future, as a result of sudden or gradual alterations in their natural environment related to at least one of three impacts of climate change: sea-level rise, extreme weather events, and drought and water scarcity.” The proposed Convention for Climate Refugees also lays out the definition of climate refugees as “people whom climate change forces to relocate across national borders.”
The environmental changes emerging from climate change have accerlerated the intensity of ecological disruptions which has led to displacement of people living under those extreme conditions. The scale of this climate displacement is staggering. The data provided by UNHCR quantifies an estimated 21.5 million people are displaced each year by climate-related events. The Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre reports that over 23 million people were internally displaced by climate-induced disasters in 2021, and this figure is expected to rise dramatically in the coming decades. The World Bank’s Groundswell Report warns that, without action, there could be more than 143 million internal climate migrants across sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia, and Latin America by 2050.2
These figures only tell part of the story. The impacts of climate displacement are not evenly distributed. Small island nations like Kiribati and Tuvalu face existential threats from rising seas. Communities in sub-Saharan Africa are devastated by drought and desertification. Low-lying coastal regions in Bangladesh, Brazil, and India are regularly inundated by floods, cyclones and forest fires. In these places, the human and legal consequences are acute: lives disrupted, homes lost, cultures threatened, and futures uncertain. These developing countries are most disproportionally affected as they bear most of the brunt of this crisis even though they contribute least of all countries.
Nevertheless, the developed countries are not immune. In the United Kingdom, the village of Fairbourne in Wales is expected to be abandoned due to rising sea levels, and in the United States, events like Hurricane Katrina revealed how climate disasters can lead to mass internal displacement, especially among the poor and marginalized.
Research Methodology
This research adopts a qualitative, doctrinal legal methodology complemented by interdisciplinary analysis to examine the evolving challenge of climate-induced displacement under international law. It involves a detailed examination of primary legal instruments such as the 1951 Refugee Convention, the UNFCCC Paris Agreement, the Global Compact for Migration, the Kampala Convention, and key human rights treaties like the ICCPR and ICESCR. Judicial decisions, particularly Teitiota v. New Zealand, are analyzed to assess how current legal frameworks interpret claims of climate displacement. The study draws on an extensive review of academic literature, international reports (e.g., UNHCR, IDMC, World Bank), and national policy documents from countries like Sweden, New Zealand, and Kiribati to highlight both the strengths and limitations of existing responses. By integrating perspectives from environmental studies, human rights discourse, and climate science, the research situates legal analysis within the broader socio-political and ecological context. Comparative analysis of regional and national frameworks is used to identify gaps and inconsistencies in protection mechanisms. Furthermore, the research evaluates proposed legal reforms and institutional responses, such as the potential development of a Climate Refugee Convention and the creation of a global climate displacement fund, using normative and policy-oriented frameworks. Overall, this methodology facilitates a comprehensive understanding of the fragmented legal landscape and supports the call for principled, justice-based international legal reform.
Fragmented Protection—The Limits of Existing Legal Instruments
The absence of international legal recognition for climate refugees reflects a void in the global governance of migration and human rights. The 1951 Refugee Convention, the cornerstone of international refugee law, does not provide a basis for protection.
Soft-law instruments offer partial, but ultimately insufficient, responses. The Paris Agreement under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) acknowledges the link between climate change and human mobility through its Task Force on Displacement, which aims to develop recommendations for managing climate-induced displacement. But the Paris Agreement is non-binding, and its provisions on migration lack enforceability.
The Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration (GCM) of 2018, is one of the first international agreements to explicitly recognize climate change as a driver of displacement. Objective 2 of the GCM encourages states to address the causes of forced migration, including environmental degradation and climate change.3 But like the Paris Agreement, the GCM is non binding and depends on voluntary state cooperation.
At the regional level, there are more targeted, but still limited, initiatives. The African Union’s Kampala Convention for the Protection and Assistance of Internally Displaced Persons in Africa (2009) explicitly recognizes natural disasters, including those linked to climate change, as causes of displacement. The Convention obliges member states to prevent displacement, provide assistance, and promote durable solutions, but it applies only to internal displacement within Africa.
Some states have adopted national measures. For example, Sweden’s Aliens Act (2005) allows for the granting of asylum to people displaced by environmental disasters, and New Zealand’s Pacific Access Category provides resident visas to citizens of climate-vulnerable Pacific Island nations. Kiribati’s “Migration with Dignity” policy seeks to equip citizens with skills for voluntary migration as a form of adaptation. However, these are small-scale, ad hoc responses that do not address the global scale of the problem.
Human rights law provides another avenue. The right to life under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the right to an adequate standard of living under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) can, in theory, offer protection to the climate displaced. But in practice, courts have been reluctant to interpret these rights expansively in this context.
Judicial Acknowledgment and Community-led Adaptation
The most prominent case is Teitiota v. New Zealand. Ioane Teitiota4, a citizen of Kiribati, applied for refugee status in New Zealand on the grounds that rising sea levels and other environmental changes made it impossible for him to return safely. The New Zealand courts, and later the UN Human Rights Committee, rejected his claim. They found that Teitiota did not face a risk of “serious harm” or a violation of his right to life that was sufficiently imminent or individualized to qualify under the 1951 Convention or the ICCPR. The Committee noted that, while climate change poses serious risks, Teitiota could still find land and water in Kiribati, and that the harm he would face was not yet so severe as to justify protection.
This case illustrates the high threshold and state-centric nature of current legal frameworks. Courts are generally unwilling to extend refugee protections to climate-displaced persons, fearing a flood of claims and a dilution of traditional refugee categories.
In Panama, the Guna community of Gardi Sugdub located in the San Blas archipelago off Panama’s Caribbean coast, facing rising sea levels, undertook a managed relocation to the mainland with government support.5 This project aimed not only to provide safe housing but also to preserve cultural heritage and ensure community participation.
Recent disasters, such as the catastrophic floods in Brazil in 2024, have underscored the vulnerability of low-income communities to climate displacement and the inadequacy of existing legal frameworks. According to climate monitoring organizations, these floods displaced over 650,000 people, with the poor suffering disproportionately due to a lack of resources and infrastructure. In early 2025, over two million people were displaced in the Sahel region of Africa due to worsening drought and desertification—an ecological collapse driving mass internal and cross-border migration that remains largely unprotected under existing refugee laws. The lessons of Hurricane Katrina in the United States—where low-income and minority communities faced prolonged displacement and systemic neglect—are equally indicative.
Toward a New Legal Landscape—Proposals and Pathways for Reform
Given the shortcomings of existing law, scholars, practitioners, and international bodies have proposed a range of reforms. These include revising the 1951 Refugee Convention6, creating a new international convention specifically for climate refugees, expanding national and regional frameworks, and strengthening human rights protections.
Revising the 1951 Convention is politically and logistically challenging. Some experts warn that reopening the treaty could undermine protections for existing refugees, while others argue that such a process would be time-consuming and unlikely to achieve consensus.7 There is also a concern that many states lack the political will to expand their obligations at a time when migration is increasingly politicized and securitized.
A more promising approach may be the creation of a new international instrument—a Climate Refugee Convention—that specifically addresses the rights and needs of those displaced by environmental factors. Such a convention would need to establish clear definitions, procedural standards, and mechanisms for international cooperation and responsibility-sharing. It would also need to address the complex causality of climate displacement, which often involves multiple, interconnected factors—environmental, economic, political, and social.
Until a new legal framework is established, the UN Special Rapporteur on human rights and climate change, Ian Fry, has urged all states to develop national legislation providing humanitarian visas for people displaced across borders by climate change. He has also called on regional human rights bodies to expand their definitions of refugees to include the climate displaced. Beyond legal protection, Fry emphasizes the need for funding mechanisms to assist vulnerable populations and address both immediate and long-term needs.
Other proposals focus on integrating migration into National Adaptation Plans (NAPs), developing planned relocation programs, and strengthening regional mechanisms for cooperation and protection.8 The principle of loss and damage, which refers to supporting vulnerable countries in coping with unavoidable climate impacts, is particularly relevant. The creation of a Global Fund for climate-displaced persons, informed by principles of climate justice and solidarity, could provide much-needed resources for adaptation and resettlement.
Conclusion
As climate change continues to reshape our world, the need for legal protection for those it displaces becomes ever more urgent. The current system—rooted in post-World War II notions of persecution and national sovereignty—cannot keep pace with the realities of environmental upheaval and planetary disruption. The law must adapt—not just in an incremental, piecemeal fashion, but through bold, principled reform that centers justice, dignity, and human rights.
This means expanding the definition of who warrants international protection. It means building new institutions for responsibility-sharing and support. It means listening to those most affected and shaping policy and law accordingly. And it means recognizing that, in a warming world, all people—wherever they live—are potential climate migrants. The sooner our legal systems reflect this reality, the sooner we can begin to address it with the seriousness, urgency, and solidarity it requires.
Reference(S):
1-Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees (adopted 28 July 1951, entered into force 22 April 1954) 189 UNTS 137 (Refugee Convention) Art 1(A)(2), https://www.unhcr.org/en-us/3b66c2aa10.
2 Groundswell: Preparing for Internal Climate Migration, The World Bank (March 19, 2018), https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/infographic/2018/03/19/groundswell—preparing-for internal-climate-migration [hereinafter “Groundswell”].
3Intergovernmental Conference to Adopt the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration, ¶ 12, U.N. GA Doc. A/CONF.231/3 (July 30, 2018), https://undocs.org/en/A/CONF.231/3.
4-Teitiota v. Chief Executive of the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (2014) NZCA 173 https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/pdf/jdo/b8/alfresco/service/api/node/cont ent/workspace/SpacesStore/70056dfa-a205-4baf-9d8d-e97ed5244899/70056dfa-a205-4baf 9d8d-e97ed5244899.pdf.
5 Climate-Induced Displacement: Establishing Legal Protections for Climate Refugees, Human Rights Research Center (February 5, 2025),https://www.humanrightsresearch.org/post/climate-induced-displacement-establishing-legal-protections-for-climate refugees#:~:text=This%20research%20aims%20to%20bridge%20the%20gap%20between,urgent%20need%20for% 20reform%20and%20propose%20actionable%20solutions.
6 Protecting Climate Migrants: A Gap in International Asylum Law, Earth Refuge Organisation (January7, 2021), https://earthrefuge.org/protecting-climate-migrants-a-gap-in-international-asylum-law/#_ednref14
7– Benjamin Glahn, ‘Climate refugees’? Addressing the international legal gaps, International Bar Association (June 11, 2009), https://www.ibanet.org/Article/NewDetail.aspx?ArticleUid=B51C02C1-3C27-4AE3-B4C4- 7E350EB0F442.
8 UN Human Rights Expert Calls for Full Legal Protection for People Displaced Internationally by Climate Change, Climate Refugees Organisation (July 17, 2023) https://www.climate-refugees.org/spotlight/2023/7/17/unsr-legalrights
