Change Will Cause The Next Migrant Crisis : Case Study of

Putu Ratih Kumala Dewi Universitas Udayana [email protected]

ABSTRACT The impact of on global society is a matter of increasing concern for policy makers and the wider public as awareness of environmental migrant increases. Rising sea levels as well as natural disasters, pose challenges in terms of their effect on development and livelihoods, settlement options, food production and health. These effects will force people to leave their homeland. These have been predicted to lead to the large-scale displacement of people worldwide and this is still to increase. Concerns about environmental migrant have become a real political topic. And it leads to a question, does climate change affecting mass migration and cause migrant crisis. In order to describe, this research deploys qualitative approach through document reviews and secondary data analysis. In this paper, writer present a case study of Kiribati as one of atoll countriy threatened to sink caused by sea level rises. Kiribati is predicted to be the first country in the world to relocate its residents to other countries. This country have high rates of population increase. This paper will refer to both environment and climate change as interacting with migration. As the conclusion, climate change and environmental degradation have had a significant impact on population movements. Keywords: climate change, environmental migration, migrant crisis

ABSTRAK Dampak dari perubahan iklim terhadap masyarakat global telah menjadi perhatian para pembuat kebijakan dan publik yang lebih luas seiring dengan meningkatnya jumlah migran akibat perubahan lingkungan. Kenaikan permukaan air laut seperti halnya bencana alam menimbulkan tantangan dalam hal pengaruhnya terhadap pembangunan dan penghidupan, pilihan penyelesaian, produksi pangan dan kesehatan. Sebagai dampaknya, ini akan memaksa orang untuk meninggalkan tanah air mereka. Ini diprediksi akan menyebabkan perpindahan orang-orang secara besar-besaran dan jumlahnya masih terus meningkat. Kekhawatiran tentang migran lingkungan telah menjadi topik politik yang nyata. Dan ini mengarah pada sebuah pertanyaan, apakah perubahan iklim mempengaruhi migrasi massal dan menyebabkan krisis migran. Untuk mendeskripsikannya, penelitian ini menggunakan pendekatan kualitatif melalui review dokumen dan analisis data sekunder. Dalam tulisan ini, penulis menyajikan studi kasus Kiribati yang merupakan negara atoll yang terancam tenggelam akibat kenaikan permukaan air laut. Kiribati adalah negara atol yang diprediksi menjadi negara pertama di dunia yang memindahkan penduduknya ke negara lain. Negara ini memiliki tingkat kenaikan populasi yang tinggi. Makalah ini mengacu pada lingkungan dan perubahan iklim dan bagaimana hubungannya dengan migrasi. Dengan kesimpulan bahwa perubahan iklim dan degradasi lingkungan memiliki dampak signifikan pada pergerakan populasi. Kata Kunci: perubahan iklim, migrasi akibat perubahan lingkungan, krisis migran Background

Climate change has been issued since 1979 at First held by World Meteorological Organization. And it became a big issue in Earth Summit Conference held in Rio De Janeiro, Brazil. This summit conducted the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change 1992 focusing on climate change and global warming effects on earth and human lives. The loss and damage caused by climate change is getting bigger, but global were not seriously responded about these issues.

There are some effects caused by climate change and sea-level rise is one of the most significant effects of climate change. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) projections of future range between .09 and .88 meters between 1900 and 2100 (IPCC, 2001). The most likely effects of sea level rise which will affect migration include increasing flood frequencies, erosion, inundation and rising water tables (Perch-Nielsen, 2004, p.66). The rising of sea levels and will makes coastlines, , and countryside, uninhabitable. More frequent and the increasing of extreme natural disasters will destroy homes, land and source of income around the world. These effects will force people to leave their homeland. Thus climate change and environmental degradation have had a significant impact on population movements worldwide and this is still to increase.

Climate change and global warming effects is happening to all countries in the world. Pacific Island countries are directly in the climate change firing line. The countries most ‘at risk’ include Kiribati located in the Pacific Ocean. Archipelagic State of Kiribati threatened to sink and is predicted to be the first country in the world to relocate its residents to other countries. Kiribati may eventually disappear under rising tides. Table 1. Current and projected atoll populations

Source : Campbell , John and Olivia Warrick, 2014, p.17 Kiribati is one of atoll countries. An atoll is a low-lying, ring-shaped island built of coral that sits upon an extinct, undersea volcano. There are four atoll countries among Pacific Islands, of which three are included in the former study such as Kiribati, the Marshall Islands and . These atoll countries are characterized by high population densities and in the case of Kiribati, this country have high rates of population increase. The population density is the highest on the urban atolls within these countries, and there are relatively low population densities on most of the outer islands.

Currently in 2013, the combined population of the three atoll countries is 173,900 people, with an estimated total of 298,900 in 2050 (see table 1). In addition to these three countries, there are also populated atolls in the Federated States of Micronesia, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands and Tonga. The total of atoll populations all of the countries may be as many as 350,000 people, who under the worst possible scenarios would become displaced. The pressure to leave their homeland and migrate is likely to be relatively high among this population.

Professor Norman Myers from Oxford University warned that if in 2050 there will be 200 million people affected by the disruption of seasons, and other heavy rains, or unexpected long-term natural , and also affected by rising sea levels and floods. “In desperation, the people seek refuge elsewhere,” Myers said, adding: “Not all of them leave their country, many of them move in the country, but obviously they all leave their homeland for a while, if they can not move permanently, in hopes of returning to their homeland” (Myers, 2005, p.1).

The social consequences of sea level rise are frequently addressed through future predictions. Basic questions have not been yet addressed about how people react to sea level rise, whether permanent migration is at all feasible, and how adaptations to sea level rise lessen migration as a response. Across the Pacific, hundreds of thousands of people are likely to migrate in the next decade because of this condition. Many of them can be expected to try to go to the nearest wealthy, welcoming country, where lots of Pacific Islanders are already settled. As it makes connection with other countries, concerns about 'environmental migrant' have become a real political topic. And it leads to some questions. How many people are being forced to move due to climate change? How many will be in the future? Does climate change affect mass migration and cause migrant crisis? The discussion will begin with the overview of sea level rise as climate change effect and how this leads to migration, followed with the overview term of environmental migrant and the facts of Kiribati as case study in this paper. In order to do so, this research deploys qualitative approach through document reviews and secondary data analysis.

Climate Change and Migration Climate change phenomenon has become one of environmental issue that gives a significant influence on all the components of life and living systems of many people today. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) define climate change as “means a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the global atmosphere and which is in addition to natural climate variability observed over comparable time periods” (United Nations, 1992, p.7).

Climate change comes as form of environmental damage that has an impact on almost every areas of life that threaten the existence of human life both at the local, national and also on a global level. The issues have touched upon a multidimensional condition with high complexity because it has affected various aspects. Climate change effects especially sea level rise are almost certain.

Sea level rise is one of the most significant effects of climate change. Sea level can rise by two different mechanisms with respect to climate change. First, as the oceans warm due to an increasing global temperature, seawater expands—taking up more space in the ocean basin and causing a rise in water level. The second mechanism is the melting of ice over land, which then adds water to the ocean (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 2017).

High projected rates of future sea-level rise have captured the attention of the world. Scientists have determined that global sea level has been steadily rising since 1900 at a rate of at least 0.04 to 0.1 inches per year (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 2017). The researchers took samples of sediment from 83 different sites around the world, and these “natural thermometers” enabled them to work out what the sea surface temperature had been more than 125,000 years ago. This revealed that over the course of some 4,000 years the oceans had got about 0.5C warmer, reaching about the same temperatures as are found now – after a similar increase achieved largely as a result of human-induced climate change in little over a century (Johnston, 2017).

Previous research has established that sea levels at the time were between six and nine metres higher (The Guardian, 2017). This gives an indication of what sea levels might be like once the vast oceans expand and ice sheets melt over the course of the next centuries and millennia. If sea levels were to increase by nine metres, some countries would be lost to the sea especially atolls in island countries (Johnston, 2017).

Sea level rise cause physical vulnerability and social vulnerability. Physical vulnerability to sea level rise is a function of how rapidly the change in sea level is expected, the presence of low-lying atolls, the population on the island, and the available mitigation possibilities. Social vulnerability is shaped by the available economic resources to deal with rising levels and the political relationships between atoll and neighboring states.

These vulnerability will impact on the life of inhabitant. Rising of sea levels due to melting of and sea ice and widespread water due to rising temperature cause some of the lowland coastal areas to be completely drowning, while other areas will more often experience a rise water surface in a short time. Coastal erosion is exacerbated by rising sea levels. Stronger storms and typhoons resulting in the loss of land and buildings and the destruction of island's original inhabitants. People may have to be relocated out of their traditional territory. Developing countries consisting of small islands will mainly be vulnerable affected by sea level rise, and also the changes in marine ecosystems because of their primary dependence on marine resources (UNEP, 2002). One possible outcome is the decline in productivity in the major fishing areas inhabited.

It has drawn international attention, because higher sea levels in the future would cause serious impacts in various parts of the world. Particularly, countries which are located in low-lying areas as well as small islands are concerned that their land areas would be decreased due to inundation and coastal erosion. At worst effect, a large proportion of their population may be forced to migrate to other countries. Clearly, the regions most physically and socially vulnerable to sea level rise include small islands states and atoll countries (Barnett, and N. Adger, 2003).

Affected countries have begun working on ways to limit the effects of this increasing catastrophe, especially in the Pacific. Their challenges are intensified by the combination of sea level risea nd floods, storm surges, wind intensity, coastal erosion, and drought. Respond to this condition, a variety of precautions performed. In general, there are two different method when it comes to dealing with climate change, mitigation and adaptation. Mitigation involves attempts to slow the process of global climate change, usually by lowering the level of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Planting trees that absorb CO2 from the air and store it is an example of one such strategy. Adaptation involves developing ways to protect people and places by reducing their vulnerability to climate impacts (UCAR, 2017). For example, to protect against sea level rise and increased flooding, communities might build seawalls or relocate buildings to higher ground.

The actors of the environmental movement agreed that climate change agenda should pay more attention to the looming migration crisis by mitigation and adaptation. Measurement that allow people to stay in their homes and do not need to be evacuated should continue to be sought. Despite all prevention measures, There are situations where, people will have to leave their livelihoods. The planned relocation should be the last option when all adaptation strategies are impossible to be implemented.

Both rapid and slow-onset environmental events can result in displacement of affected people and communities, caused by degradation and land loss, and serious water and food degradation, health and educational opportunities (Anonim, 2017). The difficult decisions will come for countries that faced challenges brought by climate change, like sea level rise, coastal erosion and . Some experts suggest that rising sea levels have put some countries at risk of extinction. These miseries and complications become even scarier for small island nations especially atoll countries. This is a grim prospect that may prove this is inevitable for some. Many have begun to search other adaptation strategy, the possibility of forced migration.

The UN reports the highest increase in due to climate change. The United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) commission warns that natural disasters related to climate change and diminishing natural resources such as water, keep people in developing countries forced to migrant (The Times, 2017). Massive migration of up to a billion people will be done by those whose homes are inundated, or those who no longer have food.

As the effects of climate change become apparent, therefore this issue has resulted in heightened attention internationally. Respond to this facts, migration can be a solution and possible adaptation strategy, but only if it is well organised. But it also can create another problems. Indeed, especially when fleeing slow-onset changes of the environment, the decision to migrate should be voluntary and planned. Also, without the possibility to return, it is crucial to address the challenges of resettlement and reintegration. There is a question of what rights they should have when displaced from their traditional territory and being forced to move to another country or region.

Theoritical Perspective on Environmental Migration and Environmental Migrant Studies of migration have integrated a number of different approaches from disciplines ranging from geography and economics to sociology and political science (Boswell & Mueser, 2008). Environmental considerations as one of factor in migration decision are included in a number of classic migration frameworks, including those posed by Wolpert, Speare, De Jong and Fawcett (Hunter, 2005, pp.273-302).

One of the earliest considerations of the role of the physical environment was by Petersen in 1958 who conceptualized migration in primitive times as being the movement from ecologically risky areas to safer locations (Petersen, 1958). The theoretical ‘stress– threshold model’ developed by Wolpert is often identified as the first migration model (of contemporary society) to incorporate non-economic aspects. In this model, the environment is conceptualized both as a residential ‘stressor’ creating strain that may lead to the consideration of migration, and also as means of determining the ‘place utility’ of the destination location (i.e., the value of the place being migrated to) (Wolpert,1966 in Hunter, 2005, p.276). Speare further developed the concept of ‘utility’ into how an individual experiences the effects of social and contextual factors on levels of dissatisfaction and that, once a threshold of dissatisfaction is crossed, migration may be considered. In this conceptualization, the environment is considered as a ‘locational characteristic’ providing physical amenities or disamenities (Speare, 1974 in Hunter, 2005, p.278).

The ‘value–expectancy’ model of De Jong and Fawcett posited that individual migration is motivated by the interplay of values placed on different goals, such as wealth, status, stimulation, autonomy, affiliation and morality, and the perceived likelihood that a chosen behaviour will lead to these goals. In this conceptualization, the physicalenvironment is included as helping to determine the goal of ‘comfort’ by providing a more pleasant residential location and/or a less stressful one (De Jong and Fawcett, 1981 in Hunter, 2005, p.277).

According to Zelinksky, the role of personal preferences is central to the migration decision-making process and is primarily influenced by social and economic changes due to modernization (Zelinksky, 1971). Within this context, the ability to fulfil the recognized preference for a less risky residential environment is suggested by Hunter (2005) to be facilitated by increases in modernization. Micro-economic perspectives on migration generally consider the environment only implicitly, as a locational characteristic. Instead, such perspectives view migration as shaped by a cost-benefit calculation between personal investment and returns. Despite a focus on human capital and the economic dimensions of migration decision making, econometric models have revealed an indication of societal value placed upon locational amenities or disamenities, which is reflected in wage differentials across locations (Knapp & Graves, 1989).

Environmental factors have a strong correlation with migration. It had an impact on global migration flows, as people have historically left places with harsh or deteriorating conditions. It is called environmental migration. Different from sudden-onset environmental changes such as those resulting from earthquakes or floods lead to , environmental migration commonly presents itself where there is a slow-onset environmental change or degradation process (such as desertification) affecting people who are directly dependent on the environment for their livelihood and causing them livelihood stress. When environmental degradation is a contributing but not major factor, it becomes questionable whether such migration can be called environmental migration. The increased complexity of current migration patterns also contributes to the difficulty of finding a consensus over definitions.

There is considerable debate about the terminology. Terms and concepts such as ecological , environmental refugee, climate refugee, forced environmental migrant, environmentally motivated migrant, climate change refugee, environmentally displaced person (EDP), disaster refugee, environmental displacee, eco-refugee, ecologically displaced person, or environmental-refugee-to-be (ERTB), environmental migrants are found scattered throughout the literature. The term climate exiles has been used to refer to those climate migrants who may be in danger of becoming stateless (Byravan and Sudhir Chella Rajan, 2005). The distinctions between these terms are contested. The main reason for the lack of definition relating to migration caused by environmental degradation or change is linked to the difficulty of isolating environmental factors from other drivers of migration. Another major hindrance lies in the confusion of forced versus voluntary migration.

Due to migration theories are explained before, this paper use environmental migrants term. There is currently no consensus on definitions in this field of study. Environmental migrants are people who are forced to leave their home region due to sudden or long-term changes to their local environment (Boano, et.al, 2008). These are changes which compromise their well-being or secure livelihood. Such changes are held to include increased , desertification, sea level rise, and disruption of seasonal weather patterns. Environmental migrants may choose flee to or migrate to another country, or they may migrate internally within their own country. The International Organization for Migration (IOM) proposes the following definition for environmental migrants: "Environmental migrants are persons or groups of persons who, for compelling reasons of sudden or progressive changes in the environment that adversely affect their lives or living conditions, are obliged to leave their habitual homes, or choose to do so, either temporarily or permanently, and who move either within their country or abroad" (IOM, 2007)

The International Organisation for Migration proposes three types of environmental migrants: (IOM, 2014) • Environmental emergency migrants: people who flee temporarily due to an environmental disaster or sudden environmental event. (Examples: someone forced to leave due to hurricane, tsunami, earthquake, etc.) • Environmental forced migrants: people who have to leave due to deteriorating environmental conditions. (Example: someone forced to leave due to a slow deterioration of their environment such as , coastal deterioration, etc.) Based on this types, nvironmental migrants can be used in clear cases where sudden- onset environmental changes such as those resulting from earthquakes or floods lead to forced displacement and in the cases where there is a slow-onset environmental change or degradation process (such as desertification)which is affecting people who are directly dependent on the environment for their livelihood and causing them livelihood stress. • Environmental motivated migrants also known as environmentally induced economic migrants: people who choose to leave to avoid possible future problems. (Example: someone who leaves due to declining crop productivity caused by desertification) The focus on environmental migration has been on somehow proving that environmental factors can be a single major cause for displacement and migration. For academic purposes the interest in developing a definition lies in understanding the factors underlying migration decisions. The need in finding the definition is a crucial step in the conceptualisation of environmental migration. This can lead to the development of policy responses to address these flows.

However, two main factors driving the need for a definition could hinder its development. Firstly, many scholars would like to establish environmental migration as a specific field within migration studies. There is a tendency to fence off this area and consider it apart from classical migration theories, as if environmental migration were of another kind. More would be gained by trying to integrate environmental factors into existing migration studies. Secondly, there is a widespread appetite for numbers and forecasts amongst journalists and policymakers. In order to make their research policy-relevant, many feel compelled to provide some estimation of the number of those who are or may become ‘environmentally displaced’(Dun, Olivia and François Gemenne, 2017).

These numbers, obviously, need to rely on a clear definition of who is an environmental migrant. Larger definitions draw bigger numbers; there is a tendency to enlarge the definition so as to encompass as many people as possible. However, defining environmental migration too widely would be damaging for those in need of the most protection. While this is also of interest and concern to policymakers, they have an additional need to know what rights such a person is afforded. Without a precise definition, practitioners and policymakers are not easily able to establish plans and make targeted progress. Migrants and displaced persons falling within the definition are not clearly recognisable and may thus not receive appropriate assistance.

In summary, it can be seen that a number of migration frameworks include the environment as a contextual consideration. The following section explores the empirical evidence of a linkage between migration and the environment.

Kiribati as Evidence of a Migration–Environment Link The increase in temperature on the surface of the earth is very serious on 325 million people, killing 300,000 people, and give a loss of $ 125 billion every year (Yu, 2013). By 2100 the average rise in sea level could reach 1.9 meters, eliminating low-lying countries (low lying states), and making regions inaccessible. There are 43 countries with small land areas (small island states) that are particularly vulnerable to rising sea levels (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fourth Assessment Report, 2007). Kiribati is one of them.

The Republic of Kiribati is located in the Central Pacific Ocean and is made up of the Gilbert, Phoenix and Line Island groups covering an ocean area of 3.5 million km². It consists of one raised limestone island and 32 low-lying atolls with a total land area of 811 km² (Kiribati Government, 2013). Extreme events such as droughts and floods threaten most islands of Kiribati, with severe droughts in 1988-1989 and 2007-2009 (Oakes, et.al, 2016, p.22). These events reduced the water supplies in the Gilbert Islands, turned groundwater brackish and dried out plants causing, in particular, declines in copra production in the outer islands as coconut trees dried up. is another impact of climate change. Aragonite saturation values in the waters around Kiribati have decreased from 4.5 in the 18th century to approximately 3.9 in 2000, thereby negatively impacting coral calcification (Oakes, et.al, 2016, p.22).

Diagram 1. Households experiencing the impacts of climate change.

Source. UNESCAP, 2016.

Almost every household (94%) surveyed in Kiribati reported that they had been impacted by environmental hazards over the preceding 10 years and 81% of households were affected by sea level rise over the same period. Sea level rise is the hazard which has impacted the most house-holds, affecting approximately 8%. Saltwater intrusion impacted just under half of all households. All of the other hazards were reported more frequently in the outer islands than in South Tarawa. Nevertheless, migration is not reported as a common experience in Kiribati and international migration is rare. Less than one tenth of I-Kiribati experienced a movement in the previous decade. There are large differences in migration patterns between the islands of Kiribati, with migrants from Kiritimati much more likely to move overseas (31%), than migrants from South Tarawa (19%) and the outer islands (11%). Two thirds of migrants from the outer islands departed to South Tarawa. This is despite the marginal environment and overcrowding of the capital, which these flows of people are worsening. One in seven of all movements are attributed to environmental change (14%), meaning that it is the third most important motivation for migration after employment (42%) and work (26%) (see table 2). There is comparatively little international migration, and there is very little stepwise migration from the outer islands and then overseas. Table 2. Kiribati’s Migration Patterns and Destinations in 2005-2015

KIRIBATI (2005-2015)

Drought & Saltwater Storm Cyclone irregular floods Sea level rise Households intrusions surge rains affected by natural hazards South Tarawa 26% 31% 31% 85% 49% 22%

Other Islands 42% 41% 38% 77% 49% 27%

Medical Environment Education Work and other Migration motives Internal 19% 28% 19% 34%

International 1% 28% 25% 46%

South Internal Migration Abaiang Kiritimati Others Destinations Tarawa

9% 7% 52% 32%

International Marshall Fiji Australia Others Migration Islands Destinations 21% 24% 7% 16% 32%

Last Population 105,058 in 2015, 1.3% moved internationally, 7.7% moved internally, and 9% wanted to migrate but could not.

Source: Oakes, et.al, 2016 dan UNESCAP, 2016

Most internal migration is to South Tarawa, due to the fact that almost three quarters of internal migrants from the Outer Islands move to the capital. From South Tarawa, there is a significant flow of migrants to Kiritimati. For international migration, the most popular specific destination is New Zealand followed by Fiji. The most frequent destinations for migrants from South Tarawa are Fiji, then New Zealand and Australia. Migrants from the Outer Islands are more likely to move to New Zealand and then Fiji. The sample does not include any migrants from the Outer Islands to Australia. Seafaring is much more common from South Tarawa, reflecting the fact that the marine training centre and main port are located in South Tarawa. South Tarawa is used as a stepping stone for migrants from the Outer Islands who then go onto work in the international shipping industry. According to the survey, work is the most common reason for migration, followed by education and climate change. However, the reasons for migration differ depending on the place of origin. Climate change is not a main factor for movements from South Tarawa, while education is a much more common driving factor for movements from the Outer Islands. People migrate to South Tarawa for work, education and climate change in approximately equal proportions. Migration to Kiritimati occurs overwhelmingly for work and in some cases due to environmental factors. Migrants move to other internal destinations mainly for education and work. For international movements, those to Fiji is primarily driven by work, with the remaining share of migrants moving for education. This pattern is repeated for New Zealand, but Australia is only a destination for education. Migrants travel to other destinations almost exclusively for work.

Figure 1. Perceived impact of climate change manifestations on future migration

Source: PCCM Kiribati fieldwork

The I-Kiribati have a strong sense of attachment to place, but environmental pressures are already leading to migration. Although climate change is not the main reason to migrate but there are also a range of environmental conditions which would encourage migration for Kiribati households. Most inhabitant engaging in subsistence activities like Kiribati’s agricultural output- copra, or marine resources, for example has been severely affected by climate change. Sea level rise, saltwater intrusion, more difficulties growing crops and more serious floods would each trigger over 70 per cent of households to send out a member of the household. Therefore, with very little economic prospect and job security on the island, the new environmental migration strategy that is framed as an adaptation measure to enable disaster resiliency identifies itself as a solution. Under climate change it is likely that differing forms of human mobility will become increasingly necessary.

There are clear links between migration and reduced house-hold vulnerability. Migration could bring diversification of income and livelihoods and reduce the strain on households. Through remittances, households might be able to improve physical infrastructure, thereby increasing their resilience. However, there are a variety of views on migration and climate change within Kiribati. It is doubtful that any policy designed to facilitate migration will maximize its utility unless this range of views is recognized and validated.

Not only the threat from the environment, the high population growth also creates concerns about the crisis that will be experienced by Kiribati. Kiribati experiences a relatively fast growing population and rather high unemployment (Hughes, et.al, 2003). High population growth in Kiribati is a problem. The annual average population growth rate is 1.6%. Without action, Kiribati's population is expected to almost double by 2025. A population policy endorsed by the cabinet in 2004 aimed to stabilize the population by 2025, but there has been little progress, and cultural and religious factors hinder implementation. Related to migration, this can cause more problems.

The predictions shows so many people will need to move. But a large section of the population of Kiribati has been unable to migrate. In the decade preceding the survey, about 9% or 10.000 people wanted to migrate but could not (Oakes, et.al, 2016, p.11). The most common reasons for not migrating was a lack of money, accounting for 75% of unrealized migration ambitions. This financial issue was more pronounced in the outer islands, where it explains almost 90% of unrealized movements (Oakes, et.al, 2016, p.12). Eventhough, households surveyed believe that they are more likely to send out migrants if the environmental situation deteriorates. Over 70% of households believe this course of action will be necessary if sea level rise, saltwater intrusion, agricultural yields and floods worsen. However, despite this desire for migration, only 24% of households believe they possess the means to finance migration, and only 26% thought they could acquire the documents necessary to migrate (Oakes, et.al, 2016, p.12). As a result, it is possible that a large number of I-Kiribati will be unable to migrate despite the perception of an increased necessity to move. According to Kiribati, the country set out a strategy to “invest in its main assets- its people - and to transform the lives of I-Kiribati through further development of the economy and their capabilities” (Kiribati Government, 2012). Investing in people does prove to inherently build resilience; Kiribati continues to advocate for its people to gain skills and be able to live in their respective homes should they want to. Long-term adaptation is a national priority to ensure that additional vulnerabilities are mitigated and the I-Kiribati have a future. Investing in human capacities to undertake coastal protection and sustainable food sourcing are means to build resilience inherently. For example, sourcing seedlings that can grow in saline water and implementing them on the shores of the islands could contribute to the nation becoming more food secure (Nair, 2016, p.5).

Part of the environmental migration policy is to skill Kiribati’s youth as hard protection measures against climate volatility. Former President of Kiribati, His Excellency , coined the phrase “migration with dignity”. Migration with dignity implies skilling and training the youth population should they want to migrate abroad. The initiative adheres to adapting to new ways and circumstances facing the country.

Migration often seems to be misperceived as a failure to adapt to a changing environment. Instead, migration can also be an adaptation strategy to climate and environmental change and is an essential component of the socio-environmental interactions that needs to be managed. Migration can be a coping mechanism and survival strategy for those who move. At the same time, migration, and mass migration in particular, can also have significant environmental repercussions for areas of origin, areas of destination, and the migratory routes in between and contribute to further environmental degradation

The question that remains is how to deal with the migrants problems due to climate change. What are their rights, who is responsible for providing essential services for them and what about their legal protection. Movement of people can also entail significant effects on surrounding ecosystems. The impact of climate change on the future of refugees is one of the major non-traditional threats that greatly affects regional security. Extreme weather, resource scarcity and increasing natural disasters act as stress that can trigger mass migrations of the people, leading to social destabilization within the state and in neighboring countries.

Migration is not entirely bad. When handled properly, migration can be a positive solution and can provide hope for the human population. Migration is an important adaptation strategy when supported by policy actions. This complex nexus needs to be addressed in a holistic manner, taking into account other possible mediating factors including, inter alia, human security, human and economic development, livelihood strategies, crisis and conflict. Migration can not be solved on its own. Thus it must be solved through cooperation, whether bilateral or multilateral. Policy support will be needed to facilitate international migration with dignity.

Conclusions Studies have projected that hundreds of millions of people will be displaced this century by the impacts of climate change. The science is increasingly conclusive that human- induced climate change is causing sea levels to rise. Not by much; at present only a couple millimeters per year on average, but for atoll nations like Kiribati where the land is no more than a meter or two above the sea, even that rate of change is problematic. A few small islands are already in trouble, like Kiribati which have no high ground to which people can relocate.

People in Kiribati is already experiencing climate change impacts: incremental sea level rise, saltwater intrusion, and drought. Most households in this country have been impacted by climate change over the past 10 years. This motivates some people to search for new homes – either to ensure a source of income or to find land on which to live.

Climate change is already impacting migration patterns in Kiribati. Although climate change is not the main reason to migrate but environmental pressures like sea level rise, saltwater intrusion, more serious floods, more difficulties growing crops and marine resources affected by climate change, would encourage migration for Kiribati households. The government of Kiribati appears to have resigned itself to its fate. It is encouraging its citizens to migrate elsewhere by migration with dignity program.

Overall, the case study of Kiribati shows environmental factors have a strong correlation with migration. It had an impact on global migration flows, as people have historically left places with harsh or deteriorating conditions. However, the scale of such flows, both internal and cross-border, is expected to rise as a result of accelerated climate change and high growth population, with unprecedented impacts on lives and livelihoods. Such migration can have positive and negative effects on both the local coping capacity and the environment in areas from which these migrants originate, as well as in their temporary or permanent destinations. REFERENCES Anonim. 2017. Migrasi Paksa. IAPD Forum Magazine, 42 (2), pp.10-15. Retieved from http://apdf-magazine.com/iAPDF_V42N2_iNDO_040617.pdf Barnett, J. and N. Adger. 2003. Climate dangers and atoll countries. Climatic Change, 61, pp. 321-337. Boano, C., Zetter, R., and Morris, T., (2008). Environmentally Displaced People: Understanding the linkages between environmental change, livelihoods and forced migration. Refugee Studies Centre Policy Brief No.1 (RSC: Oxford), p.4 Boswell, C. &Mueser, P.R. 2008 .Introduction: Economics and interdisciplinary approaches in migration research. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 34(4), pp. 519–529. Byravan, Sujatha and Sudhir Chella Rajan, 2005. Before the Flood. The New York Times, 9 May 2005. Retrieved from https://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9402E0DE1230F93AA35756C0A96 39C8B63 Campbell , John and Olivia Warrick. 2014. Climate Change And Migration Issues In The Pacific. United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific Pacific Office Dun, Olivia and François Gemenne. 2017.Defining ‘environmental migration’. Climate Change And Displacement Fmr31, pp.10-11. Retrieved from http://www.fmreview.org/sites/fmr/files/FMRdownloads/en/climatechange/dun- gemenne.pdf Hughes, Terry P., et al. 2003. Climate change, human impacts, and the resilience of coral reefs. Science 301, no. 5635 (2003), pp. 929-933 Hunter, L.M. 2005. Migration and environmental hazards. Population and Environment. 26(4), pp. 273–302. IOM, 2007. Discussion Note: Migration And The Environment. Retrieved from http://www.iom.int/jahia/webdav/shared/shared/mainsite/about_iom/en/council/94/M C_INF_288.pdf IOM . 2014. IOM Outlook On Migration, Environment And Climate Change. Retrieved from http://publications.iom.int/system/files/pdf/mecc_outlook.pdf IPCC. 2001. Climate change 2001: The scientific basis. Contribution of working group I to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on climate change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Johnston, Ian. 2017. Global warming could cause sea levels to rise higher than the height of a three-storey building, study suggests. Retrieved from http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/sea-level-rise-global-warming-climate- change-9-metres-study-science-a7536136.html. Kiribati Government, 2012. Kiribati Development Plan 2012 – 2015: Enhancing Economic Growth for Sustainable Development A vibrant economy for the people of Kiribati. Retrieved from https://dfat.gov.au/about-us/publications/Documents/kiribati- development-plan-2012-2015.pdf Kiribati Government. 2013. About Kiribati : The Country & Geographic Location. Retrieved from http://www.kiribatitourism.gov.ki/aboutkiribati Knapp, T. & Graves. P. 1989. On the role of amenities in models of migration and regional development. Journal of Regional Science, 29(1), pp.71–87. Leatherman, S. 2001. Social and economic costs of sea level rise. In Sea level rise: history and consequences, eds. B. C. Douglas, M. S. Kearney and S. P. Leatherman, 181-223. San Diego: Academic Press. Myers, Norman. 2005. Environmental Refugees: An Emergent Security Issue. 13th Economic Forum, Prague, 23-27 May 2005 Nair, Vidya. 2016. Tensions of Adaptation and Disaster Resiliency in the Context of Climate Change: A Case Study of Kiribati. Retrieved from http://ic-sd.org/wp- content/uploads/sites/4/2017/01/Nair.pdf National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 2017. Ocean Facts : How is sea level rise related to climate change?. Retrieved from http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/sealevelclimate.html Oakes, R., Milan, A., and Campbell J. 2016. Kiribati: Climate change and migration – Relationships between household vulnerability, human mobility and climate change. Report No. 20. Bonn: United Nations University Institute for Environment and Human Security (UNU-EHS). Retrieved from https://collections.unu.edu/eserv/UNU:5903/Online_No_20_Kiribati_Report_161207. pdf Perch-Nielsen, S. 2004. Understanding the effect of climate change on : The contribution of mathematical and conceptual models. Department of Environmental Studies. Zurich, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology. M. Sc. Environmental Physics. Petersen, W. 1958. A General Typology of Migration. American Sociological Review, 23(3), pp.256–266. The Guardian. 2017. Sea Levels Could Rise By Six To Nine Metres Over Time, New Study Warns. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/jan/19/sea-levels- could-rise-by-six-to-nine-metres-over-time-new-study-warns. The Times. 2017. UNHCR and Climate Change Displacement. Retrieved from http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article4159923.ece UCAR. 2017. Climate Mitigation and Adaptation. Retrieved from https://scied.ucar.edu/longcontent/climate-mitigation-and-adaptation UNEP. 2002. UNEP Annual Evaluation Report 2002. Retrieved from http://www.unep.org/ UNESCAP, 2016. Climate Change And Migration In The Pacific: Links, attitudes, and future scenarios in Nauru, Tuvalu, and Kiribati. Retrieved from http://collections.unu.edu/community/UNU:1882 United Nations. 1992. United Nations Framework Convention On Climate Change. Yu, Boby. 2013. The Sinking Nation of Kiribati: The Lonely Stand Against and Displacement from Rising Oceans. Retrieved from , Zelinksky, W. 1971. The hypothesis of the mobility transition. Geographical Review, 61, pp. 219–249.