Original article (in Croatian) was published on 04/12/2023; Author: Matea Grgurinović
The relationship between the climate crisis, migration, and conflict is frequently discussed, yet establishing clear causal connections remains challenging.
Climate change not only poses a social threat in itself but is also seen as a factor that exacerbates other risks (often referred to as a “threat multiplier”), including conflicts, migrations, and security concerns. Despite common assertions that the climate crisis directly triggers conflicts or drives migration, pinpointing a straightforward cause-and-effect link among these complex phenomena is complicated.
In the 2009 United Nations (UN) General Assembly report titled “Climate Change and its Possible Security Implications,” it’s noted that climate change might not directly or inevitably lead to conflict. However, its interplay with other social, political, and economic factors can exacerbate and worsen the impacts on peace, stability, and security.
Likewise, the International Organization for Migration (IOM) in their publication “Exploring the climate change–conflict–mobility nexus” acknowledges the difficulty in clearly defining the connection and mechanisms (specifically when and why) between climate change and violent conflict.
The Complex Overlap of Climate, Migration, and Conflict
“And while climate change may contribute to worsening conflict, it is not per se the cause of conflict in the absence of other factors. However, since climate change is a conflict multiplier, it is important to understand the various contextual factors that can, in combination with climate change, affect conflict-ridden or fragile states”, writes the IOM.
As the IOM notes, “it is widely accepted that climate change presents challenges that can exacerbate both the risk and existing violent conflicts.” Yet, the exact connections and mechanisms of how climate change interacts with conflict remain unclear.
For instance, natural disasters like floods or storms can directly cause people to leave their homes, illustrating a clear link between climate change and migration. However, not all migrations are prompted by climate-related events. In some instances, migration occurs several years after the immediate impacts of climate change in a specific area, making it challenging to trace a direct cause-and-effect relationship. Compounding this issue is the fact that many countries lack comprehensive statistics on internal migration, as pointed out by the IOM in its research.
In addition to all of the above, the impact of climate change on the populations is significantly shaped by a state’s response to the crisis. Political decisions regarding the allocation of funds and aid play a crucial role and can exacerbate existing inequalities. “It is inevitable that climate change will challenge states to provide services and thereby undermine their legitimacy, which may consequently lead to an undermining of the population’s trust in government”, writes the IOM.
Challenges of State (In)Competence
Experts consulted by Faktograf.hr echoed the complexity of establishing a clear cause-and-effect link between climate change, migration, and conflict. Wim Zwijnenburg, an environmental and conflict researcher with the Dutch peace organization PAX, who has experience in Iraq and Syria, shared with Faktograf.hr that rising temperatures, erratic rainfall, droughts, and other extreme weather phenomena severely impact natural resources, agriculture, and water supplies.
These environmental challenges can lead to significant socio-economic impacts on society, potentially igniting or intensifying political tensions, protests, or conflicts over natural resources. This is particularly true in countries that are already vulnerable or experiencing ongoing conflicts.
Zwijnenburg, who has had work experience in the Middle East, observed firsthand how ““conflicts have led to the destruction of infrastructure and the state’s ability to deal with a range of environmental issues.”
“Destruction of irrigation infrastructure, limited access and production of fertilizers and similar problems had an extremely negative impact on agricultural production. Droughts and unpredictable rainfall make it all worse, while on the other hand, the decrease in stable precipitation presents serious challenges for farmers. As a result of all this, people have to give up their sources of income and migrate to cities in search of work, which in turn causes more tension in a region that is already struggling with high unemployment and political insecurity,” he explained to Faktograf.hr.
Zwijnenburg pointed out that climate change has a negative impact on food production, which in turn is linked to droughts and changes in weather patterns, as well as the fact that more extreme climate events can drive people off the land.
“The inability of governments to respond to all these problems can lead to the strengthening of conflicts, and this can also result in tensions between governments and the population or between groups that use natural resources whose quality is deteriorating or reduced due to the impact of climate change”, said Zwijnenburg, adding that all very much depends on the context of a particular country or region.
According to Zwijnenburg, while it’s possible to establish a link between climate and conflict in certain countries or conflict situations, the ability of a country to manage the climate crisis is also a critical factor. States with limited professional expertise, inadequate financial resources, or insufficient capacity will find themselves in a far more challenging position, lacking the means to effectively mitigate the impacts of climate change.
“So it’s not just the changing climate that determines the risks, but also the state’s ability to deal with it”, he told Faktograf.hr.
When a state is unable to address the aforementioned risks, the likelihood of conflict escalates due to the loss of livelihoods, income generation opportunities, and rising unemployment rates. This situation can trigger social unrest and disputes over access to natural resources.
“It is so difficult (to determine a clear cause-and-effect relationship between all these phenomena) because it is a complex issue in which the human factor is also important, if we are dealing with cases where the destruction of the natural environment leads to a scarcity of resources and socio-economic collapse”, said the expert.
Unquantifiable Elements in Conflict Analysis
Juliane Schillinger, who is currently pursuing her PhD at the University of Twente in the Netherlands, focuses on the impact of conflict on water resource management in the Middle East. She corroborated the difficulty in establishing a direct link between climate change, conflict, and migration. Her research underscores the multifaceted nature of these issues, where quantifiable factors alone cannot fully capture the dynamics at play.
“Climate change, as well as migration and conflict, are very complex phenomena, which means that there are numerous factors that influence eventual outcomes, and therefore it is very difficult to untangle exactly which factor influenced which outcome and under what circumstances”, said Schillinger for Faktograf.
Adding to this discussion, Schillinger emphasizes that researchers typically rely on quantitative data and statistical analyses to establish cause-and-effect relationships between such complex phenomena as climate change, conflict, and migration.
However, although “there are some aspects of conflict and migration that can be quantified, some others cannot (at least for now)”, Schillinger pointed out. These unquantifiable factors often account for the significant variability observed in conflicts.
As an example, Schillinger highlights several key elements that are challenging to quantify but play a critical role. These include the actions of various stakeholders in mitigating the impacts of climate change, tensions between communities, the strength of social networks and social cohesion, and the previous experiences of communities that have faced similar situations.
“Some of these events and actors can be approximately determined, but the inclusion of all contingencies in a statistical model will cause that model to grow exponentially, to the point that it will no longer be possible to work on it and it will become very difficult to collect all relevant data”, said the researcher.
As far as she is aware, previous quantitative studies on whether there is a direct cause-and-effect relationship between climate change and other environmental pressures and conflicts have had inconclusive, insufficient or negative results.
“There are some qualitative approaches to the topic that describe in more detail the specific dynamics in certain case studies and provide important insights into how in some cases climate impacts can indeed worsen and intensify existing tensions, but this does not represent a direct cause-and-effect relationship,” Schillinger told Faktograf.
The case of the Sahel
She refers to the report “Unpacking ‘new climate wars’: Actors and drivers of conflict in the Sahel” by the Danish Institute for International Studies (DIIS). This report examines recent conflicts in the Sahel, a Central African region stretching from Senegal to Sudan. It concludes that factors like poor socioeconomic development and limited state capacity are far more influential in fueling conflicts than climate change. However, the report acknowledges that climate change can still play a role in influencing armed conflicts.
“Armed conflict is a multidimensional phenomenon that arises as a result of the interplay of institutional, economic, social and historical factors that depend on the context, with which the impacts of climate change are often intertwined”, states the report, which claims that the violence and conflict in the Sahel are primarily driven by the presence of armed groups with various political and ideological agendas, rather than climate change itself.
In such scenarios, ineffective management of natural resources becomes a key driver of the conflict. This is particularly true in situations where there’s increased pressure on land and water resources, with climate change worsening these tensions.
At the same time, climate change can “lead to ‘existential insecurity’ due to the irregularity of the seasons, which in turn threatens the existence based on natural resources”. This type of insecurity thus interacts with political and economic factors that increase the risk of conflict over access and use of natural resources.
Addressing the concept of climate change as a risk multiplier for other threats, Schillinger explains that in the context of conflicts, this term typically refers to the potential of climate change to intensify and exacerbate existing tensions and injustices. These aggravated conditions, “under the ‘right’ circumstances can lead to (violent or non-violent) conflict.”
“The bottom line is that if there are already threats to social cohesion and there is no adequate conflict resolution mechanism in place, the impact of climate change can be a factor that will make the situation worse. This is especially the case in societies that depend on natural resources, such as agriculture. This is also one of the reasons why much of the scientific literature dealing with climate change and conflict focuses on conflicts between herders/pastoralists and farmers in the Sahel – perhaps the best-known example of how climate intensifies competition and struggle about natural resources and tension between different population groups”, said Schillinger.
Yet, he also highlights instances where climate change has fostered cooperation between communities, as demonstrated by a case in Senegal.
Environmental Threats and Increased Risks
Zwijnenburg from PAX emphasizes how conflicts can lead to environmental degradation, thereby amplifying climate risks. “For example in Syria where the war led to the loss of almost half of the forests that were cut down due to the need for fuel, due to coal smuggling, uncontrolled fires that associated with poor forest management due to war or destruction due to fighting”.
Such devastation means the loss of crucial carbon sinks like trees, which are vital for cooling the Earth and preserving biodiversity.
Zwijnenburg also gives the example of Iraq, which in post-war reconstruction focused on oil production. This, combined with poor governance by the state and growing insecurity, has led to neglect of the problem of gas flaring at oil wells, which contributes to greenhouse gas emissions.
“Because of the fighting and conflicts, international companies are reducing their investments (in that country). Because of US sanctions on Iran and because Iraq is one of the few countries that can still buy gas from Iran, groups linked to Iran are blocking investments to reduce gas flaring in oil production”, said Zwijnenburg.
“So, once again, regional security issues affect climate change, which in turn is also connected to past conflicts and current tensions between Iran and the USA”, added the expert.
Zwijnenburg also discusses the situation in South Sudan, where floods are increasingly severe and unpredictable, now inundating oil fields. These fields contain open pits for waste storage and areas where chemicals are kept. The pollution from these floods contaminates drinking water sources for both people and their livestock. He notes that environmental mismanagement, exacerbated by the civil war and the fight for independence, further aggravates environmental and public health issues in the region.
Given these complexities, establishing a clear cause-and-effect relationship between climate change, migration, and conflicts in areas impacted by climate change is neither straightforward nor simple. These issues are multifaceted, with other factors playing a significant role, such as the crisis management capabilities of foreign countries and the specific local context of each country or region. Thus, the interdependencies among these phenomena are complex and indirect, warranting more detailed investigation to fully understand their interconnected nature.