Editing IPCC:AR6/WGII/Chapter-7 (section)

==== 7.4.4.3 Attitudes Towards Climate Migration ====

<div id="h3-59-siblings" class="h3-siblings"></div>

''The success of climate-related migration as an adaptive response is shaped by how migrants are perceived and how policy discussions are framed'' ( ''high agreement, medium evidence'' ) ''.'' The possibility that climate change may enlarge international migrant flows has in some policy discussions been interpreted as a potential threat to the security of destination countries ( [[#Sow--2016|Sow et al., 2016]] ; [[#Telford--2018|Telford, 2018]] ), but there is little empirical evidence in peer-reviewed literature assessed for this chapter of climate migrants posing significant threats to security at state or international levels. There is also an inconsistency between framing in some policy discussions of undocumented migration (climate-related and other forms) as being ‘illegal’ and the objectives of the Global Compact on Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration and the Global Compact on Refugees ( [[#McLeman--2019|McLeman, 2019]] ). Although climate-related migrants are not officially recognised as refugees under the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, terms such as ‘climate refugees’ are common in popular media and some policy discussions ( [[#Høeg--2018|Høeg and Tulloch, 2018]] ; [[#Wiegel--2019|Wiegel et al., 2019]] ). The framing of migration policy discussions is relevant, for example, in discussing climate adaptation options for Pacific Island Countries, where there is considerable disagreement over policies that range from a ‘migration with dignity’ approach that would liberalise labour migration in the Pacific region to those that see migration as a last resort option to be avoided as much as possible ( [[#McNamara--2015|McNamara, 2015]] ; [[#Farbotko--2019|Farbotko and McMichael, 2019]] ; [[#Oakes--2019|Oakes, 2019]] ; [[#Remling--2020|Remling, 2020]] ). A more beneficial policy framing in terms of ensuring that future migration contributes to climate resilience and sustainable development has been established since AR5 within the framework of the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration (see [[#7.4|Section 7.4.7.7]] ).

''Attitudes of residents in migrant-receiving areas with respect to climate-related migration warrant consideration when formulating adaptation policy'' ( ''medium confidence'' ) ''.'' Existing research is modest and difficult to generalise with respect to the impacts of climate-related migration and displacement on social dynamics and stability in receiving destinations, with outcomes being tied to the attitudes and social acceptance of receiving communities and efforts to integrate migrant arrivals into the community (Koubi and Nguyen, 2020). Research from Kenya and Vietnam shows that residents of receiving communities view environmental drivers as being legitimate reasons for people to move and consequently tend not to stigmatise such migrants ( [[#Spilker--2020|Spilker et al., 2020]] ). In these examples, urban residents viewed environmental motivations as being comparable to economic reasons for migrating and did not see climate-related migrants as posing any particular risks for receiving communities. However, case studies from India suggest that a lack of recognition by local authorities of climatic factors being legitimate drivers of rural–urban migration may lead to discrimination against migrants in terms of access to housing and other social protections, thereby undermining household resilience ( [[#Chu--2018|Chu and Michael, 2018]] ).

<div id="7.4.4.4" class="h3-container"></div>

<span id="planned-relocation-and-managed-retreats"></span>