2025/10/02 by David Miller, Christine Straehle · 1 voice
Environmental Science · Social Sciences · #Climate Change and Geoengineering #Climate Change, Adaptation, Migration #Island Studies and Pacific Affairs
paper · pdf · doi:10.1080/16544951.2025.2578899
openalex publication_date 2025/10/02 · openalex created_date 2025/10/28 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/22
The impact of global warming on vulnerable peoples often presents them with a compelled choice between in situ adaptation and relocation from their homelands. Two existing philosophical approaches to this dilemma – the climate refugee approach and the territorial justice approach – pay too little attention to the cultural losses incurred when people with strongly-located cultures are forced to move. We examine in some detail three cases in which Pacific islanders have relocated from their existing lands, to show how even relatively ‘successful’ relocations can be disruptive of community norms and practices. We also consider the impact that new arrivals can have on the existing inhabitants of the territory they move to. How, then should adaptation v. relocation decisions be made, given that community members may have conflicting preferences? Younger members may attach more weight to gaining access to the resources of a bigger and possibly more open culture, while their elders are more concerned that their traditional culture should as far as possible be reproduced in a new setting. We favour Draper’s democratic model of decision-making, which proceeds through deliberation and tries to balance the interests of majorities and minorities by proving ‘effective rights of exit’ to those who do not want to join a collective relocation. These may, however, pose problems for the viability and cohesion of the community as it relocates; instead, members may have a time-limited moral obligation to move to the new territory, after which they should be offered sufficient resources to move elsewhere.