What is it about?
Some recent scientific work expects a "global redistribution of people" from the Global South to the Global North, because large areas could become too hot or too dry to live in. This perspective article by 37 researchers questions that idea. It argues that whether a place is habitable depends on more than temperature and rainfall: it also depends on local conditions, political decisions, funding and people's own knowledge and choices. Declaring places "uninhabitable" from a distance can discourage the investment that communities need to adapt where they live. Examples from the Marshall Islands, Costa Rica and the UK village of Fairbourne show how such declarations can leave people without support. The article offers recommendations for how researchers should talk about habitability and climate-related movement.
Featured Image
Photo by Chamika Jayasri on Unsplash
Why is it important?
Forecasts of mass climate migration shape how governments, donors and the media think and act. If they are treated as certain, they can steer money away from local adaptation, ignore the many communities who want to stay, and fuel fear of migration. Models that only look at climate also tend to overestimate how many people will move, because they leave out things like social networks, attachment to place, borders and conflict. The article shows that the future is open and depends on choices: investing in local adaptation, reducing inequality and respecting people's right to decide whether to stay or to move. It also reminds researchers that how they present their results has real consequences.
Perspectives
Being one of many authors on this piece was a reminder of how much agreement there is across regions and disciplines on a simple point: people living in climate-exposed places should have a say in decisions about their future. In my own work on climate (im)mobility, the question of who is allowed to decide when a place is "no longer livable" comes up again and again. I hope this article helps keep both options in view, the right to stay and the right to move, and encourages colleagues to be careful with strong headline claims. I would be glad to hear how these arguments fit, or do not fit, the situations you know.
Dr. Dipl. Geogr. Simon Alexander Bunchuay-Peth
Universitat Wien
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: Climate-induced redistribution of people is not inevitable, Environmental Research Letters, August 2025, Institute of Physics Publishing,
DOI: 10.1088/1748-9326/adfdfd.
You can read the full text:
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
