Andrew Simms
Andrew Simms (United Kingdom): New Economic Foundation’s (NEF) Policy Director and head of the Climate Change program at the Centre for Global Interdependence. He has worked for a variety of development and environmental organizations, including Christian Aid, the International Red Cross, Oxfam, the World Development Movement, and the International Institute for Environment and Development. His publications include several reports on climate change, globalization and localization, development issues, debt, corporate responsibility, genetic engineering and food security. He has been a regular contributor to the International Red Cross’s annual World Disasters Report. His book Ecological debt: the health of the planet and the wealth of nations was published in Spring 2005.
Fred Pearce is journalist specialized in the environment and development. He was born in the United Kingdom and studied geography in the University of Cambridge. His latest book is When the Rivers...
Michael D. Lemonick is the senior writer at Climate Central, a nonpartisan organization whose mission is to communicate climate science to the public. Prior to joining Climate Central, he was a...
François Gemenne is a FNRS research fellow at CEDEM-ULg and at the Institute for Sustainable Development and International Relations (IDDRI), and also teaches the international politics of climate...
Active dans 72 pays et supportée par un million de membres, les Amis de la Terre est une ONG de défense de l’Homme et de son environnement. Elle œuvre pour des sociétés durables au Nord comme au Sud...
Andrew Simms (United Kingdom): New Economic Foundation’s (NEF) Policy Director and head of the Climate Change program at the Centre for Global Interdependence. He has worked for a variety of...
Norman Myers is scientist and consultant in environment and development. He has been an honorary visiting fellow at Oxford University and in various American Universities. Myers has been presented...
Environmental Refugees, the case for Recognition
29/08/2008 5:06 pm
The current system for dealing with refugees is based on the Geneva Convention of 1951. It came into being in Europe as a result of the Second World War and was designed to deal with issues of war, ideology and religion. It is in need of urgent overhaul to cope with the new refugee problems generated by environmental crisis.
The case for granting refugee status to people fleeing the destruction of their environment is both a moral and political one. The richer countries responsible should pay the costs of their own pollution: they should not expect poor nations and people to bear the brunt of somebody else’s lifestyle. Forcing rich states to face up to their responsibilities on environmental refugees could also generate greater political will for international action on the environment - particularly on issues such as climate change. But there are important economic and security issues. If entire nations become uninhabitable, or have to be relocated, current immigration policies may well collapse under the strain. As in the case of Israel and Palestine, displaced and alienated populations may become a breeding ground for terrorism.
Policies that cause harm to people but are pursued in full knowledge of their damaging consequences should be classed as environmental persecution. Current US energy plans will increase its emissions of greenhouse gases- the gases responsible for global warming and climate change - by 25 per cent by 2010. They will thus create millions more environmental refugees. The Geneva Convention defines a refugee as someone forced to flee because of a well-founded fear of persecution, be it religious, political or « other ». A well-founded fear of starvation or drowning is a compelling reason to escape. The Geneva Convention should be expanded to incorporate a new category of “ environmental persecution “.
Steps to achieve this could begin with a global commission, sponsored by the UN, reporting to the UN Security Council and the General Assembly on the implications of the growing number of environmental refugees. This should also examine the threat posed to nationhood by environmental problems such as global warming. Other suggested changes include:
Updating the Geneva Convention. Granting environmental refugees proper status under the convention will provide them with internationally assured protection, independent of and separate from the actions of their own governments. Often these governments do not have the resources or the will to help; sometimes they are themselves directly culpable.
Writing a new convention. An alternative to an amended Geneva Convention is a new convention specifically focusing on people whose way of life is being destroyed by a lost, ruined or degraded environment.
Compensating for ecological debts. The world needs to establish an internationally agreed measure of ecological debt, focused initially on the biggest issue, climate change and the use of fossil fuels. This would clarify the financial and environmental obligations of ‘over-polluting ’ countries, particularly the contribution they should make to climate-related problems such as the growth in environmental refugee numbers.
Andrew Simms and Molly Conisbee – Environmental Refugees, The Case for Recognition. Chapter 6. A new status for environmental refugees. P.36
]
Signaler un abus
