Currently, there is a large number of scientific papers on simulation of the flooding of coastal areas for different scenarios of sea level rise. In 2013, there was published a comprehensive report by IPCC on this issue (Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis). When testing the most relevant term “sea level rise” with Google Scholar engine (advance search, with the exact phrase), we have received 148,000 (anywhere in the article) and 5,840 (in the article title) matches.
But a much more challenging task is to model (forecast) human migration from flooded coastal areas. Testing through Google Scholar the terms “sea level rise” and “migration” in combination with each other, we have noticed that there is a lot of qualitative research, considering the local migration in the wake of small plots of land being flooded (eg., in estuaries). At the same time, we have not found any papers on modeling migration flows over large territories. For carrying out such studies one should use, in our opinion, detailed maps of the population density for these territories and should be able to establish linkage between the area of the gradually flooded territories and the number of people living there, taking into account the demographic forecast.
We must also understand where to send emerging migration flows so that it does not affect the neighboring territories. In coastal areas to be flooded in the first place, it is vital now to have plans for the relocation of people. This problem is of great geopolitical importance for global sustainability. Meanwhile, on the Internet we can only read that according to the worst-case scenarios of sea level rise, millions of people will have to migrate. As I see it, this problem can be solved effectively only by creating a network consortium within FP8. What do you think about it, dear colleagues?
It is a good idea. I guess it will be nice to generate thematic layers which should include vulnerability maps according to different flood scenarios and to identify potential migration areas in each case. This can be developed for each coastal region as well as areas adjacent to river flood plains.
Migration is a geopolitical issue more than anything. The rise in sea level predicted by the last work of the IPCC should have a slightly accelerated rate (around 5mm/year) in relation to what happened in the last 150 years (the 1mm/year 3mm/year).
.
As there is no a catastrophic prediction of the variation of this level, an increase in the average level of rates considered, we slow migration and local conflicts.
.
Mathematical model of this migration is to assume that there are no wars and revolutions in those areas and in contiguous areas in a 70-year period, that is, model a (totally uncertain) historical event from also uncertain assumptions.
.
Another interesting thing to note is that the models of sea level do not work with the concept of Mean sea level (MSL), ie the mean sea level in relation to coast. But for people who live along the coast does not interest the movements of the tectonic plates and all the fixes that are made about the level of the sea, for example the mean sea level measured by satellites undergoes a correction due to Glacial Isostatic Adjustment (GIA ), but the net values of local variation in sea level.
.
Can not you understand that the IPCC projections are for net values of the local level of the ocean!
.
Mathematically model the migration over the next 70 years is just merely lost time, because the predictions are doomed to failure.
.
.
Assuming we knew exactly the future rise in sea level .
.
Assuming we knew for sure the areas that would be flooded .
.
Assuming it was possible to measure all the processes of coastal dynamics .
.
Assuming it was possible to predict all deployed projects to protect coastal areas and also which ones have success and failure .
.
Assuming it was possible to evaluate the economic development of all countries accurately .
.
Assuming it was possible to determine a priori the urbanization of agricultural populations in coastal areas .
.
Assuming it was possible to determine the future level of education and professional capacity of all people in hazardous areas.
.
Suppose we know the will of the residents in risk areas to migrate to other areas.
.
Assuming knew the will of the residents of the areas that receive migrants.
.
Assuming we could evaluate all possible global and regional conflicts that will occur in the coming decades.
.
Assuming, assuming and guessing.
.
We would have a chance with a degree of uncertainty median assess future migrations.
.
Consider such work as important and as accurate as what I found in Acta Astronautica, 2011, 68 (11-12) (http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1104/1104.4462.pdf)!
.
I'd say that deluge preparedness tax will make sure people flee from coastal areas far sooner than any harm comes upon them.
In the US, increases in property insurance will cause a movement from coastal development. Some people who had their home rebuilt after hurricane Sandy already had the price of flood insurance increase 10-fold. Thus, without government insurance subsidies, which are going away insurance costs are becomeing too high. Miami and New Orleans are the most indangered cities in the US. Miami is not likely to be inhabited at the turn of the next century (article by professor at the University of Miami). My guess is that property will become uninsurable and therefore unable to be sold well before then. My understanding is that Bangladesh is the country that will be wiped out by storms and sea level rise first, not including island countries. The population of Bangladesh is over 124 million. I've spend time in The Netherlands where my collegues say that Dutch engineering may survive about 1 more meter of sea level rise. so, perhaps I agree with Davor if he means "flood insurance" when he says "deluge preparedness tax.
Although not directly relevant to your query, there have been some studies done on the relationship between climate change and conflict which might be of interest here. I can recommend:
"Climate Change and Violent Conflict in Europe Over the Last Millenium", Richard S.J. Tol and Sebastian Wagner, Working Paper FNU-154, Hamburg University and Centre for Marine and Atmospheric Science.
"Climate Change, Social Unrest and Dynastic Transition in Ancient China", Zhang Dian et al., Chinese Science Bulletin, Vol 50 No.2, pp 137-144, Jan 2005
Despite of great uncertainties in long-term forecasting of dynamics of coastal flood, it is necessary to use simulation modeling based on GIS-technologies. This kind of modeling allows playing different scenarios of sea level rise and coastal floods resulting in people’s migrations. It is better than merely watch and do nothing. If you have n-scenarios of sea level rise and m-scenarios of demographic forecasts for coastal territories, we will find ourselves having n × m- scenarios for migration modeling. I’m seeking to know if someone has already done a research like this, or if someone intends to do one, or if someone knows how such researches are done. Maybe some of you would like to join an international team to research into this problem. Roger Graves, thank you for literature references.
I wonder if the wealth of nations would determine the migration pattern in response to change. Richer nations may be able to cope/adapt better. Perhaps we should be more concerned for, for e.g., Bangladesh and its future relationship with India than, say, Netherlands. Can models simulate this wealth effect?
.
Dear Pande.
.
The Dutch when they started making their Polders and Dikes had less technological (and economic) resources than today, but they had two alternatives, migrate or fight. They chose the latter.
.
And so far in 20th century they had only one serious deluge, the North Sea flood of 1953 with many casualties ... but they are still there.
Europe and the Dutch are fortunate that they are rarely if at all hit by hurricanes and the like. A few years ago, Dutch colleagues told me they thought there their country could withstand 1 more metre of sea level rise. Scientists have been rising estimates for the rate of sea level rise, although those estimates depend on whether emissions of green house gases continue to accelerate or are reduced. If or when we melt Greenland, that will raise sea level by 30 m but that will take centuries, according to current science.
While the idea that Europe is not hit by hurricanes is very sound, as their trajectories simply do not go here, it is not correct saying that there are no such winds in the coastal areas. Every winter we have several such events at Adriatic coast when winds reach hurricane strength, and ... occasionally a roof or two is blown away. Because the weather is - as it is - people build real houses with real walls and real roofs. Last time the people fled the area was because of poverty caused by taxes and partly by phylloxera plague that decimated their source of income. Not weather.
If you wish to see how it is like when a 200kmh wind hits a village in northern Adriatic (and blows in varying strength for a whole day or longer), it is easy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ahFdLhTTvX0
Not a single roof flew that day. We call that wind a Bura, and surely there will be a few more of those in the season.
It is like that in the bay of Biscay as well. Hurricane? Pfffft! When you say cats and dogs, we say axes and friars, but it is only a bit of weather.
My point: other people, imposing inhumane costs of life, will depopulate every given area far sooner than any kind of weather.
As far as I understand the original question, the sea-level rise is not the sole driver to consider in relation with migrations. Global warming will also affect the soil ecosystems and thus agricultural yields, while the increasing cost of energy will affect transport of goods. In the long term, several scenarios are possible accordingly, either more concentration of people in cities, or the opposite. There are interesting foresight studies available on that topic, in particular from the UK
I also disagree with Davor's statement that Europe (including the Netherlands) is not at risk to be hit by hurricanes. There have been several major hurricanes recorded in the recent years along the Atlantic coast, e.g. Xynthia in 2010.
And as far as I know (especially from visits in the field), the Dutch people are actively working to adapt their coastal defenses against hurricanes. That is why they can support a sea level rise of 1 meter or so.
Following Xynthia, there was vaguely a debate in the media, about mitigation measures and their cost to society. Migration from vulnerable areas was not the most popular response ...
"Global warming will also affect the soil ecosystems and thus agricultural yields" - I presume you mean by this that crop yields will decrease if global temperatures increase. However, a global temperature increase will presumably be accompanied by an increase in atmospheric CO2 levels, and there is clear evidence that crop yields increase with CO2 levels (see, for example, "Effects of low and elevated CO2 on C3 and C4 annuals", J.K.Dippery et al, Oecologia (1995) 101, pp.13-20). I would therefore suggest that worldwide there will be less incentive for population migrations in a high-CO2 world than in a low-CO2 world because of the greater abundance of food.
Precisely. Same thing happens around active volcanoes. Lots of people despite a real risk.
More on hurricane level winds:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xy7QKmihvOk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Q6M0DdWaC8
My friends.
.
This discussion causes me extreme discomfort because it can have a very large double sense.
.
The first sense of the discussion, honest and meritorious, is the concern about the fate of people who would suffer with the problems of climate change. But this concern is completely obscured by questions that are never answered. Questions such as which regions will be harmed or privileged by climate change (warming).
.
It is known from paleoclimate data that higher temperatures create larger global precipitation and also larger generation vegetative matter, especially if this higher temperature is associated with increased CO2. In the past warm periods were times of prosperity, exactly contrary to the coldest periods.
.
Nobody has even today a comprehensive and conclusive balance in global terms the advantages and disadvantages that warming would bring humanity.
.
As for the disadvantages, it is clear in the documents themselves IPCC scenario is considered unreliable amplification of extreme catastrophic events, calling more attention to changes in the average, but even with these conclusions always emphasizes catastrophic scenarios as the modern world would cease to exist with climate variability.
.
I have not seen until today a serious review of what will be the consequence of the global increase in precipitation in the semi-desert or desert areas to the world. In various studies on paleoclimate of the Sahara and Sahel shows that for a few millennia has expanded the areas of agriculture and livestock in these regions. My question is: With the increase in global temperature could not have this arid area (and other) increased agricultural production would offset the loss of other regions?.
.
Another observation on the same point of view. Displacing part of the tundra most northerly will not win increased agricultural productivity or livestock? We all know that already existed in the Siberian tundra immense herds of mammoths, and these animals need a lot of vegetation to survive, ie, with the increase of a degree or two does not regain vast areas for agriculture and livestock?
.
This all was fear of the future or an unconscious attempt to try to leave everything exactly as it is today?
.
Based on these questions I am led to my second discomfort. Why emphasize the losses and not quantify the gains?
.
Can I create a series of assumptions that justify this stance and I would say no pleasant.
.
I can imagine that the overall balance between profit and loss for humanity is positive or neutral, but it results in the loss of economic importance in many regions, changing the "status quo" geopolitical, which would be unpleasant for many.
.
A second scenario, which results in an expectation based on a new migration of "hordes of barbarian invaders on the civilized world" sinistrose, could be a sort of preparation of spirits to a new version of the farce of "Clash of Civilizations". An ecological and politically correct version would justify further intervention in the world "uncivilized" that occurred during the Bush administration.
.
Not to appear a mere conspiracy theory, remember that who begins to study determinism between climate and civilization is Ellsworth Huntington (1876 - 1947), an academic at Yale who not coincidentally was President of the Board of Directors of the American Eugenics Society from 1934 to 1938 infamous association that is completely denuded the brilliant book by Edwin Black "War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America's Campaign to Create a Master Race.". Ie, the attempt to make a direct connection between climate, development and eugenics is not new and is not my hypothesis, is a historical reality.
.
For these and other reasons I see with great reluctance studies pseudoscientific scenarios "famished hordes of" raiding homes and properties of "well-born" people, driven by the AGW.
.
More CO2 and less water (as the precipitation increase does not seem the most likely in the literature I read), what could happen in soils?
Dear Marc Babut.
Looks like we're not reading the same technical articles, but to show how your statement does not find an echo in unsuspected bibliography IPCC will seek to show what is CLEARLY READS in "WORKING GROUP I CONTRIBUTION TO THE IPCC FIFTH ASSESSMENT REPORT CLIMATE CHANGE 2013 : THE PHYSICAL SCIENCE BASIS ".
.
As the AR5 report is not yet open to quote, I will write what is quoted on page 8 item TS.2.5.1 Atmosphere.
.
On average degree of confidence there was an increase in precipitation in the northern hemisphere until 1950, and that going to a high degree of confidence after 1950.
.
The report states that the atmospheric moisture (troposphere) has increased since 1970, there is only a general decrease in humidity in recent years (perhaps according to my opinion hiatus due to temperature rise, my quote).
.
The report also talks about the increase in cloud cover consistently in certain regions, but can not detect global trends.
.
I wonder where did you get these inconsistent observations of decreased rainfall. In addition to contradict the observations contradict MODERN entire climate history, there has always been a strong correlation between increased temperature and increased rainfall.
.
Eager to prove hypotheses, people rely on data with no basis in scientific literature.
.
Rogerio,
I recently coordinated the writing of a paper dealing with impacts of climate change on pesticides risk assessment and management. This open source paper starts with a comprehensive literature review of the effects of of climate change on ecosystems, and drought is clearly pointed out as a probable outcome in many regions. The paper is available in my profile.
My main point concerning this debate is that some contributions seem quite reductionist, and look at specific and limited aspects, while a question such as "the consequences of global change on human migrations" is very complex. This is not appropriate for modern scientists and would not help the community to find its way.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Geoscience
- Atmospheric Sciences
- Climate Science
- Climate Change