International environmental law needs substantial reform and strengthening to address the legal challenges posed by climate change-related migration. As climate change leads to increased displacement due to rising sea levels, extreme weather events, and resource scarcity, existing frameworks are insufficient to protect those affected. Here are several key ways in which international law could be strengthened:

1. Develop a Clear Legal Definition of "Climate Refugees"

• Current Challenge: International law lacks a recognized category for “climate refugees.” The 1951 Refugee Convention defines refugees as individuals fleeing persecution due to race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group—but it does not cover people displaced by environmental factors.
• Solution: International environmental law could adopt a new legal category or expand the refugee definition to include climate-induced displacement. This would allow climate migrants to access legal protections such as asylum and resettlement.
• Example: The Global Compact for Safe, Orderly, and Regular Migration (2018) makes some references to environmental migration, but it lacks legally binding force. A more robust treaty or amendment to existing laws is necessary.

2. Incorporate Human Rights in Climate Migration Law

• Current Challenge: Climate change disproportionately affects vulnerable populations, often leading to violations of their human rights, such as the right to housing, food, and clean water.
• Solution: Integrating human rights principles into international environmental law can provide stronger protections for those displaced by climate change. This includes recognizing climate-induced migration as a human rights issue and holding states accountable for ensuring the safety and dignity of displaced populations.
• Example: The Paris Agreement (2015) emphasizes climate justice, but it could be expanded to recognize the specific rights of displaced persons. Linking it to human rights frameworks, such as the UN Human Rights Council’s resolutions, could offer additional support.

3. Creation of Binding International Treaties or Protocols

• Current Challenge: Most agreements addressing climate change migration are non-binding, leaving significant gaps in protection.
• Solution: International environmental law could establish binding treaties that specifically address climate migration. These treaties could require states to take action on both mitigation (reducing the causes of displacement) and adaptation (supporting displaced populations).
• Example: A climate migration protocol under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) could establish legal obligations for countries to provide financial, technical, and humanitarian assistance to countries facing large-scale displacement due to climate-related disasters.

4. Expand Funding for Climate Adaptation and Resilience

• Current Challenge: Many countries most affected by climate change lack the resources to support displaced populations or prevent further displacement.
• Solution: Strengthening international law can involve expanding financial mechanisms like the Green Climate Fund and requiring wealthier nations—those historically responsible for the largest emissions—to contribute more to climate adaptation in vulnerable regions. This would help at-risk communities build resilience, potentially reducing the need for migration in the first place.
• Example: The Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage, created under the UNFCCC, could be expanded to provide direct financial support to communities affected by climate-induced migration.

5. Enhance Regional Cooperation Mechanisms

• Current Challenge: Climate change impacts are often regional, yet international law is primarily state-centric.
• Solution: Strengthening regional agreements, such as the Pacific Island Forum and the African Union's Kampala Convention on Internally Displaced Persons, could provide tailored solutions for regions particularly affected by climate change. Such frameworks could address cross-border displacement, regional resettlement plans, and shared resources for displaced persons.
• Example: The Nansen Initiative seeks to improve protections for people displaced by disasters, particularly in the Pacific region, and could serve as a model for regional responses.

6. Legal Responsibility for Climate-Induced Displacement

• Current Challenge: International law struggles to allocate legal responsibility for climate-induced displacement, particularly when multiple nations contribute to the problem but none directly cause the displacement of a specific group.
• Solution: Strengthening liability frameworks could ensure that states or corporations most responsible for climate change contribute to the cost of relocation or compensation for displaced populations. Establishing accountability mechanisms under international environmental law would ensure that the costs of displacement are shared equitably.
• Example: The concept of climate justice and the polluter-pays principle could be expanded in international agreements to address responsibility for displacement.

7. International Coordination for Planned Relocation

• Current Challenge: Mass migration due to climate change can strain receiving countries, leading to political and social instability.
• Solution: International law should facilitate planned relocation programs that proactively resettle populations before displacement becomes a humanitarian crisis. This requires global cooperation, coordination, and funding to ensure that both displaced persons and host communities are supported.
• Example: The Platform on Disaster Displacement aims to promote policy coherence in disaster-induced displacement, and similar efforts could be scaled up internationally.

Conclusion

To effectively address climate change-related migration, international environmental law needs to adapt by incorporating legal definitions, strengthening human rights protections, binding financial commitments, and establishing accountability mechanisms. Collaborative, multilateral frameworks, coupled with regional solutions and international funding, are essential to ensure that those displaced by climate change can access justice and receive the protection they need.

For further reference, see:

• UNFCCC and Paris Agreement texts.
• The Nansen Initiative and Global Compact for Migration documents.
• Human rights perspectives from the UN Human Rights Council on climate change and migration.

There is no "International Environmental Law" by any assembly of treaties, agreements or useless UN proclamations. One need merely look at the Paris agreement to see these are no more than politicians posturing. "Binding" is BS

Aren't so called climate migrants bluntly speaking economic migrants who had bad luck with weather events which are not protected by refugee convention? (In the same way as coming from country experiencing spectacular economic crisis or natural disaster unrelated to climate change like ex. tsunami/earthquake does not look like ground for refugee status)

Moreover there is awkward issue that there are countries experiencing really harsh climate (like ex. Iceland or UAE) but somehow as they are affluent local people aren't trying to run away in panic, which it undermines other claims that their migration is about "climate".

As side note, I thought that the mood in the West is right now is to actually shift towards better protection of local populations and respect will of the people expressed in elections, even at expense of curbing or outright suspending refugee convention and related acts.

Though luckily citizens of countries which consider it as valid concept are absolutely free to take any such migrants to their own countries, if they support this concept this much...