In March of 2019, over 3 million people were displaced in Mozambique and some neighbouring countries due to Cyclone Idai. Just over a month later, another 300,000 people were displaced because of Cyclone Kenneth. Since the early 2000s, climate-related disasters are widely considered to be one of Mozambique's most pressing issues. In the past 20 years, Mozambique has experienced the worst droughts and floods on the planet.  Unfortunately, climate-induced displacement has become highly politicized due to the government’s encouragement of displacement in support of elite economic and political interests. Environmentally displaced peoples (EDPs) are marginalized at the local, regional, and international levels due to inadequate policy frameworks. Current approaches to planned displacement are driving away attention from the underlying causes of poverty in rural areas and obscuring the political motivations that lie behind the displacement of people.

The Mozambican government continues to put enormous pressure on rural farmers in the Lower Zambezi region to permanently relocate. Much of this push is driven by the government’s motive to control land and rid Indigenous practices for privatized-colonial policies. Resettlement may not be the best option for Mozambique as it opens land to the possibility of erosion and degradation and it creates a greater dependence on regional and international bodies to support migrants. The government relies heavily on dams and industrial agriculture as sources of revenue. Consequently, it is eager to privatize the land of small rural farmers, with the resulting rural poverty often left unchallenged by local leaders. The privatization of land maintains the asymmetrical power relationships between the rural population and the state.  This reflects the neoliberalization of climate change which is simultaneously occurring around the globe.

The leading policy approach for EDPs in Mozambique is permanent relocation. In resettlement areas, conflict often arises due to competition over land and resources. Weak and overloaded dispute-resolution mechanisms have enormous potential to fuel and ignite conflict. In the aftermath of Cyclone Idai, Mozambique saw a surge of land tenure issues, both in areas where EDPs left and in new settlement areas. There were many issues that arose, including occupation of other people’s land, encroachment on public spaces and buildings, boundary disputes, overloaded public systems for land administration, and the disruption of urban plans and policies. These issues are often left unaddressed and disproportionately affect the poorest and most vulnerable Mozambicans.

Current relocation policies in Mozambique marginalize vulnerable populations and lead to cycles of dependency. Six months after Cyclone Idai, researchers found that thousands of permanently resettled peoples were still aid-dependent and did not have agricultural land nor other forms of employment. Aid from international humanitarian organizations was scheduled to end in March of 2020. However, had aid ended, the majority of people displaced would be seriously impacted and likely return to high-risk areas. Further to this, from December 2019 through to January 2020, thousands of upgraded shelters and support facilities were destroyed following strong rains and floods. This highlights the fragility in Mozambique in response to climate-related disasters.

Resettlement can hardly be seen as a durable long-term solution for people in Mozambique. If resettlement is characterized solely by the physical displacement of people from high-risk locations to low-risk locations, Mozambicans will not be protected from future challenges.  Strategies for sustained livelihoods must be enacted.  For many individuals, this means access to secured land following resettlement, and compensation for the investments in the land they gave up.

There have been a few notable changes on the status of refugees at the regional level.  The Organization for African Unity (OAU), which has organized refugee claims in Africa since 1969, does not recognize EDPs in their definition of displaced peoples.  Although, the OAU has a broad definition which can allow for interpretation for EDPs, “events seriously disturbing public order in either part or in the whole of the country.” Lastly, the Kampala Convention, strengthens the status of EDPs, although notably Mozambique has signed the convention but has not ratified it.

Flooding in Mozambique provides a picture of the vulnerability many developing countries experience vis-a-vis extreme climate events2.  It is predicted that over 200 million people will be forced to migrate by the year 20504.  According to the UNHCR, “9 out of every ten natural disasters today are climate-related [and] … as many as 20 million people may have been displaced by climate-induced sudden-onset natural disasters in 2008 alone.” The droughts and floods in Mozambique foreshadow the wider global climate crisis that continues to accelerate.

There is substantial disagreement among policy makers, international organizations, and non-governmental organizations, on what constitutes an environmental refugee.  Neither the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (UNHCR) nor the International Displacement Monitoring Centre (IDMC) has accepted the responsibility for EDPs in their mandates, nor does the international system offer a clear legal resolution in international law. Those who are forced to move will do so with very little legal protection. 

There are no binding agreements in international law that protect environmental refugees.  For example, the principle legislation regulating displacement, the 1951 Geneva Convention relating to the status of refugees and its 1967 Protocol, does not acknowledge environment displacement as a cause for securing refugee status.  The UNHCR has refused to acknowledge environmental refugees and rather characterises them as environmental migrants.  The term migrant reduces the agency of EDPs in the international system.  By defining displaced peoples as migrants, they are characterized as voluntarily displaced by regional and international institutions.  The global effects of climate change are expected to accelerate, causing more people to relocate, yet international protection agencies have not kept up with climate change policies.

Climate refugees are not a new phenomenon, yet development agencies, multilateral institutions, and international laws are ill-equipped to protect vulnerable groups from climate disasters.  Most policies are guiding, rather than binding, and soft-laws of international bodies can result in significant limitations to enforceable legislation.  Many scientists call for nations around the world to prepare for climate-related disasters that inevitably lie ahead.

Currently, there is not an international migration issue for Mozambique, but without adequate preparation for the flooding expected to increase in strength and frequency, the country is predicted to face much more serious consequences.  National regulation and local leadership are critical for addressing the issues of EDPs.  The dominant policy debates around climate-induced displacement in Mozambique are highly politicized and overlook socially unjust outcomes of rural Mozambicans.  Resettlement— both within a country’s borders and internationally—is often deeply political in developing countries.  After Mozambicans are resettled they depend heavily on regional and international aid4.  In order for rural Mozambicans to be protected in years to come, there needs to be stronger policy decisions both at the regional level and international level. 

Like Us on Facebook