A Daunting Future for Pacific Island Nations: A Reflection on Migration in Kiribati
Imagine being the president of a small island nation so affected by climate change that you have to consider moving your entire population to avoid devastation. To do so, would threaten the culture, language, and unique heritage of your country. Former President Anote Tong of the Republic of Kiribati, a small, developing island nation located in the Central Pacific Ocean and made up of several island groups that cover 3.5 million km2 of ocean area, has had to address this unprecedented possibility. According to a United Nations University for the Environment and Human Security report, Tong purchased 5,460 acres of land on the island of Vanua Levu, Fiji’s second-largest island, in 2014. The purpose of the purchase was to ensure food security for Kiribati and to offer a possible destination of relocation in the event that the nation needs to migrate. The need to purchase land in a neighboring country is the result of growing instabilities due to the effects of climate change on the island. Relocation to Fiji is the last resort for the small island nation which is actively seeking alternative solutions.
Kiribati is, without a doubt, one of the most vulnerable nations in the world to the negative consequences of climate change because of the rising sea level. The nation’s population is consistently around 110,000 people, of which, most people live on low lying atolls. As a country who is at the front lines of the perils of climate change, the government has consistently been at the forefront of international diplomatic efforts relating to climate change. Unfortunately, as a small, developing island nation, their interests are too often overlooked. As a result, they are forced to fend for themselves in the wake of sea level rise and its implications, particularly saltwater intrusion into local water supplies. According to the UN report cited above, sea level rise has affected approximately 80% of households in Kiribati and saltwater intrusion has impacted just under half. In short, environmental change is already impacting a majority of households within Kiribati and is only expected to worsen. In fact, “it is projected that up to half of the island will be inundated under projected sea level rise unless adaptation measures are implemented.” As is evident in academic literature pertaining to climate change, Kiribati suffers some of the most significant consequences of climate change while contributing very little to the climate crisis. Although the nation itself is attempting to implement disaster risk reduction systems, climate adaptation policies, and further compliance with the 2016 Paris agreement, their efforts are not enough. Thus, as they have in the past, they now look to migration as a solution.
Migration is not a new occurrence in Kiribati. In the mid-twentieth century, “approximately 2,000 Kiribati were relocated by the British colonialists to the Soloman Islands (a different part of the country) due to perceived overcrowding and resource scarcity.” Since gaining its independence in 1979, Kiribati has experienced other forms of migration and displacement. Internal migration from island to island is very common, particularly to South Tarawa, the most densely populated of the islands. In general, Kiribati experiences net migration as many choose to seek a more resourceful life elsewhere, particularly in Fiji, New Zealand, and Australia.
Historically, climate change is not the primary catalyst of migration. Other reasons include work, medical reasons, or education. Kiribati has taken measures to improve the education and labor force on the islands. The nation has established seasonal labor migration programs with New Zealand and Australia. In accordance with their national policy framework — migration with dignity — the country has also established internationally accredited education. The purpose of this is to offer Kiribati students a stronger education and a better chance of seeking employment abroad, which generates remittances for families at home in Kiribati. In effect, these remittances may stabilize the economy of Kiribati and increase resilience and lower the nation’s vulnerability.
Without government-subsidized programs like these, a majority of Kiribati citizens would not have access to migrate. For most, migration is economically infeasible. Disturbingly, those communities that are most prone to climate-induced displacement in Kiribati are the least able to migrate. This is an example of the inequality that persists through the discourse on climate change.
It is widely understood that the debate between linking climate change and migration is relatively controversial. However, such controversy impedes the recognition and adoption of the labels “climate migrant” and “climate refugee” in existing treaties and their definitions. That is why the New Zealand Supreme Court denied Loane Teitiota refugee status in 2015. Mr. Teitiota applied for refugee status based on being displaced by climate change in Kiribati. The court denied his claims. It is projected that hundreds of millions of more displaced individuals will suffer Mr. Teitota’s same fate. That is unless the UN Convention Relating to the Status of refugees expands its protections.
The UN report discusses three modes of ‘environmentally related mobility” that raise implications for the UN Convention. It states, “migration infers a degree of choice in how and when to move. Displacement is forced as it means that persons have been pushed out of their homes either by isolated or repeated environmental events. Planned relocation is resettlement in a new area as staying in place is no longer viable.” What about those citizens of Kiriabti who are migrating, displaced, or planning relocation because of the climate crisis? Citizens of Kiribati face an extraordinary challenge as their homes are threatened by sea level rise, and yet, the international community fails to protect any individual who is migrating, displaced, or planning relocation because of climate change. With citizens who are prepared for outright relocation if the projected sea level rise does destroy the country, they will do so regardless of if the international community recognizes their environmental plight of migration as they, themselves are at the forefront of the climate crisis.
Written By Charles Beauregard, Refuge Press Intern, Summer 2019
About the IIHA
The Institute of International Humanitarian Affairs (IIHA) prepares current and future aid workers with the knowledge and skills needed to respond effectively in times of humanitarian crisis and disaster. Our courses are borne of an interdisciplinary curriculum that combines academic theory with the practical experience of seasoned humanitarian professionals. The IIHA also publishes on a wide range of humanitarian topics and regularly hosts a number of events in the New York area, including the annual Humanitarian Blockchain Summit and Design for Humanity Summit.
For media inquiries, please contact: Camille Giacovas, Communications & Research Officer, IIHA, cgiacovas@fordham.edu
