Climate Mobility Policy Responses for Home Affairs Ministries

This is the fourth in a five part series of ministry-focused briefs setting out rights-based, country-agnostic recommendations on climate mobility that governments can act on now.  To view the rest of the briefs, visit the overview.

WHY RESPOND TO CLIMATE MOBILITY?

Rapid onset and slow onset climate events are increasingly impacting cross-border migration patterns, flows and needs.  Yet most cross-border legal pathways lack a coherent and considered approach to responding to climate mobility through safe, orderly and dignified pathways.  This leaves decision makers and adjudicators without guidance or ministerial foresight, resulting in arbitrary decision making that lacks due consideration.

WHY ACT NOW?

Responding to climate mobility does not require establishing an entirely new framework.  The implementation lift can be minimised if Home Affairs ministries adapt existing pathways and facilitate expanded access for climate mobility.  This can be done with mutual interest in mind, for example by meeting domestic labour market needs.  In doing so, Home Affairs ministries can advance a controlled and proactive approach, rather than being forced to react to irregular migration that risks overwhelming border infrastructure.  Acting now allows ministries to manage migration through existing systems, reduces pressure on irregular flows and asylum channels, and allows for a uniform, more expeditious and more efficient administrative response to climate mobility.

KEY POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS:

1. DETERMINING ELIGIBILITY FOR PATHWAYS: “Climate migrant” is not a term defined under international law. It is also burdensome to adjudicate because migration is rarely driven by climate events alone. Moreover, affected individuals are unlikely to be in a position to conceptualise or establish that their migration is attributable to a climate event. Governments should instead take a pragmatic approach to eligibility and use objective indicators of climate vulnerability or disaster exposure such as:

• Adopting a collective basis to identification g. identify countries or regions of countries with climate vulnerability rather than adopting resource-draining and time-intensive individualised determinations of climate vulnerability.
• Drawing on country and socio-environmental data from Foreign Affairs ministries’ guidance and third-party sources^[1] that assess regional and national climate vulnerability.
• Partnering with trusted intermediaries such as UNHCR to identify climate vulnerable individuals locally.

2. ADAPT EXISTING LABOUR PATHWAYS TO RECOGNISE CLIMATE VULNERABILITY: Existing labour pathways represent the most promising tool for facilitating safe, orderly and lawful climate mobility responses at scale. Employers are often agnostic about who they hire through labour pathways, as long as their hires have the required skills and experience. Home Affairs ministries can define pathways to be mutually beneficial and meet specific domestic labour market needs, such as ‘green skills jobs’ which advance domestic green transition goals.

• Establish dedicated quotas for climate migrants: While some labour pathways are already being accessed by climate vulnerable individuals, Home Affairs ministries should more strategically and deliberately target the inclusion of individuals from climate vulnerable areas. ^[2] Dedicated quotas can be drawn up and applied to a list of qualifying climate vulnerable countries, and agreements could be put in place to allow sending country’s labour ministries to identify climate vulnerable candidates.
• Reduce administrative and documentary burdens on the applicant: Home Affairs ministries should take a flexible approach to documentation, accepting alternatives to professional certificates where possible, and reducing or waiving administrative fees.
• Incentivise the use of climate mobility labour pathways for employers: In order to overcome the additional cost to employers of hiring overseas workers, Home Affairs ministries should create incentives such as reduced application fees, expedited or guaranteed visa processing at a pace responsive to hiring needs, access to a skilled talent pool, or financing mechanisms to de-risk hiring such as income share agreements.
• Ensure adequate protection of workers’ rights. Portability of rights should be ensured for all migrant workers, including those from climate vulnerable communities, including fair recruitment processes, equal treatment, social security rights, freedom of movement and document safety.

3.         INCORPORATE CLIMATE MOBILITY INTO HUMANITARIAN AND OTHER PATHWAYS: Other visa pathways should recognise climate mobility and ensure access for individuals from climate vulnerable regions.  This can include:

• Issuing and adopting climate-specific guidance for decision makers: Home Affairs ministries should publish guidance on how to consider the impact of rapid onset and slow onset climate events when granting any form of leave to remain. Such guidance will ensure that climate events are routinely considered as part of a holistic assessment.
• Granting country-specific extensions of temporary leave to remain: Policies should trigger the automatic extension of temporary leave to remain for nationals from designated climate vulnerable countries that are already present in the destination country. Trigger events can include formal emergency declarations or when a country falls below a defined climate vulnerability threshold.
• Adapting existing sponsorship pilots to include climate vulnerability: Existing named or nominated private sponsorship programmes already being used for humanitarian or other pathways should be adapted to explore piloting an extension that explicitly includes climate vulnerability.

IMMEDIATE NEXT STEPS:

• Identify a climate mobility lead within the department who can coordinate with all pathways leads.
• Liaise with Foreign Affairs Ministries to identify climate vulnerable regions and countries with the potential to meet domestic labour market needs.
• Issue guidance to decision makers to recognise that harm caused by climate events, and foreseeable harm as a result of climate events, should form part of any holistic assessment of granting leave to enter, remain or stay, as well as any assessment of removability.