Evaluating Research and Planning for Climate Migration and Displacement in the Rural and Arid West

Publication Date: 2023

Abstract

The purpose of this project is to explore existing research and practice around planning for climate displacement in Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Region 8, with the aim of advancing equitable approaches for managing climate displacement, migration, and resettlement. We explored opportunities to better integrate different research fields working on climate displacement in a broad sense, while also examining the degree to which displacement and equity were considered and incorporated into existing environmental, disaster, and climate plans in FEMA Region 8. To do so, we conducted a systematic literature review on general climate displacement as well as a content analysis of existing plans and policies in FEMA Region 8. Our literature review revealed some variation on conceptual frameworks in terms of key authors, publications, institutions, and funding bodies depending on which framings of displacement (environmental, climate, or disaster) are used. Our policy and planning analysis suggests climate displacement is not frequently incorporated into state, city, and county plans across Region 8. Essentially, there is both a lack of a cohesive framework around the issue of climate displacement broadly, and FEMA Region 8 is relatively underprepared to deal with climate-induced migration and displacement. The United States, as a whole, also appears underprepared for dealing with increased stress caused by climate displacement and related migration. We suggest potential spaces and opportunities for better integrating the literature and connecting research and policy around the issue of climate displacement.

Introduction

Climate change is outpacing predictions. Globally, unprecedented levels of catastrophic climate events are unfolding and evidence of climate displacement is mounting (IPCC, 2018). The manner in which climate displacement, migration, and resettlement transitions occur will depend on how we plan for them. How people transition, including the direction and magnitude of climate-induced migration flows, is of particular concern as it intersects with existing flows of in- and out- migration already occurring in places experiencing high levels of population growth in FEMA Region 8, like the states of Colorado, Montana and Utah. Yet, questions about climate displacement decision-making—including who becomes displaced, who and what places are deemed worthy of preservation, and who has the power and authority to make these decisions—remain underdeveloped. To address this gap, this proposal is a first step in the development of a critical research agenda which examines existing climate adaptation policies for managing migration, displacement and resettlement decision-making, and the underlying rationale of such policies. We also explore the state of the broad field of the literature to understand gaps in scholarship, while then focusing more narrowly on researching Region 8 plans and policies which address climate adaptation.

Literature Review

In 2020, more people were internally displaced via climate disasters than war (Dehgan, 2021). In the future, climate displacement is likely to exacerbate migration stressors (Burleson, 2010¹) and increase resource tensions. Thus, climate displacement can intensify existing injustices (Whyte, 2017²) and, if unplanned or improperly planned for, will aggravate existing conflicts and create new injustices as the impacts of climate change escalate. These injustices may disproportionately impact people experiencing intersectional risks, meaning that they fall into multiple disadvantaged categories, such as Black women of low socioeconomic status (Mattsson, 2014³). Given possible disruptions to social, place-based bonds (Weber & Peek, 2012⁴), the potential to experience post-migration stressors (Porter & Haslam, 2005⁵), links between migration and inequality (Burzyński et al., 2022⁶), and the potential for environmental justice and human rights violations, a climate displacement research agenda has crucial implications for justice and equity in climate policies across local and global contexts.

As such, it is essential that a more critical analytic approach is applied. Critical theories tend to highlight the importance of social and historical contexts that shape existing conditions within a society. They work to understand the roots of societal and environmental inequity, paying close attention to how society is structured and organized in ways that create and maintain inequalities, and exposing underlying intentions and meanings that may get glossed over in other types of analysis. This research has practical implications, as a place-based, critical approach can improve preparedness and planning for climate displacement and migration by more accurately accounting for individual- and community-level needs and establishing more just processes and outcomes in climate adaptation efforts.

Research Questions

A critical approach to climate governance focuses on the role of power and inequality in shaping policies (Kaijser & Kronsell, 2014⁷). Yet with few exceptions, critical approaches to climate adaptation, displacement and resettlement policies have not been systematically undertaken. As such, there is a gap in knowledge which can be addressed through a more critical and place-centric approach to studying climate displacement. More research is needed to interrogate: (a) existing plans for climate displacement and migration (b) relevant socioenvironmental factors which are considered in displacement planning. and (c) who is included and excluded in displacement decision-making processes.

To begin to address these questions and inform more equitable, just and place-based planning for managing climate displacement, we ask the following three research questions:

1. How can the field of climate displacement and migration research be strengthened through better integration of multidisciplinary approaches?

2. To what degree do local, state, and regional mitigation and adaptation plans in FEMA Region 8 address issues of climate displacement and migration?

3. Are existing Region 8 plans place-based, inclusive and reflective of differential needs and capacities of climate-displaced persons and communities?

Research Design

Systemic Search and Review

To better develop and integrate interdisciplinary scholarship on climate migration, displacement and resettlement, we conducted a systematic search and review of migration and displacement literature across climate, environmental, disaster and emergency management fields. This type of review is both critical and comprehensive, and “addresses broad questions to produce ‘best evidence synthesis’” (Grant & Booth, 2009:95⁸). Through the application of the Search, Appraisal, Synthesis and Analysis (SALSA) framework (Cronin et al., 2008[^Cronin et al., 2008]; Grant & Booth, 2009), we undertook an organized and replicable approach to find, select, and analyze published academic research (Tranfield et al., 2003⁹). This framework derives from health sciences, but has increasingly been used in environmental contexts, such as ecosystem services research (Cook et al., 2019¹⁰; Mastrangelo et al., 2015¹¹).

Through SCOPUS, a program that allows users to compile groups of peer-reviewed articles, we conducted three searches using separate terms: (1) environmental, (2) climate, and (3) disaster as they are linked to terms related to displacement, migration, and resettlement. For example, the environmental search query was as follows: climate displacement” OR “climate migration” OR “climate-induced displacement” OR “climate resettlement” OR “climate-displaced” OR “climate relocation” OR “climate migrants” OR “climate-induced mobility” OR “climate evacuation” OR “climate refugee.” Each search returned ~4,000 articles (climate = 4741 results; disaster = 3149 results, environment = 4556 results). To explore the degree to which there was overlap, we also performed a search that included all environmental, climate, and disaster terms. This resulted in only 200 articles, suggesting very little overlap across the three search queries.

From these searches we arranged the results in two ways: (1) by relevance and (2) by most citations, selecting the first 50 responses in each category for further analysis. This strategy was done to ensure that we did not exclude some of the most recent articles that might be most relevant to our study, while also recognizing the importance of representing the most influential articles in each search. The 300 resulting article abstracts were then screened for relevance resulting in approximately 100 articles relevant to our search interest. We are conducting preliminary analysis and developing a full literature review article based on our analysis of these ~300 articles where we will share key conceptual insights, overlaps, and gaps in the existing fields. Below we draw on the data from the larger pool of results in the initial SCOPUS searches to show existing overlaps and disparities across these different framings of displacement research, for example in terms of influential authors and publication outlets.

Critical Document & Policy Analysis

We conducted a critical document and policy analysis to evaluate existing FEMA Region 8 climate adaptation policies and their inclusion of climate displacement and migration considerations. Sankofa (2022¹²) fills a methodological gap by developing a Critical Method of Document Analysis (CMDA), which is useful for understanding the “agentic role” that documents play in creating and maintaining issues of equity or inequity.

We identified 26 documents within FEMA Region 8 and were deemed as appropriate emergency, disaster, and climate planning and policy documents for analysis. Our primary source for access to existing planning materials was the Adaptation Clearinghouse’s database powered by the Georgetown Climate Center (adaptationclearinghouse.org). The website’s purpose is to serve as “An online database and networking site that serves policymakers and others who are working to help communities adapt to climate change.” Using the state and local adaptation plans finder on this site (https://www.georgetownclimate.org/adaptation/index.html), we identified 11 state, 12 local-level, and three Tribal climate adaptation plans for analysis. We also conducted our own searches for additional plans that may also address displacement and migration issues, primarily by visiting government websites. Finally, we did reach out to representatives for state-level municipal organizations (i.e., the Colorado Municipal League) by email to ask about existing local-level plans. However, we did not receive responses.

Through a critical examination of these documents, we identified successes, gaps, oversights, and failings of existing climate displacement, migration and resettlement policies in FEMA Region 8. We found that very few plans and policies mention issues of environmental inequality or incorporate planning for climate migration and displacement in their current form. Further, the few that do mention these concepts provide little to no further detail about how these issues might be addressed moving forward. This meant there was little content available for-in-depth analysis, but indicates that relative to other FEMA Regions, Region 8 may be underprepared to address issues of climate migration and displacement. This makes it difficult to envision that the impacts of these type of events are likely to be evenly distributed across Region 8 households and communities.

Ethical Considerations and Researcher Positionality

Ethical Considerations

This project relied on analysis of existing scholarship and policy and planning documents. As a result, we did not collect any primary data from emergency officials or residents that may have been impacted by disasters, climate change, or any sort of environmental hazard or risk. Our primary sources for accessing planning and policy materials are described above. Given the reliance on secondary data, this project was granted exemption status from the Utah State University’s Institutional Review Board.

Positionality

Stacia Ryder (she/her) is a cisgender white settler who was born in the United States and has worked in higher education institutions in both the United States and the United Kingdom. Her race and nationality have afforded her various privileges throughout her academic journey, though her background from a working-class family and as a first-generation student have meant that she is continuously still learning how to navigate, situate herself within, and challenge the culture of academia. She is an early career sociologist and Assistant Professor of Sociology at Utah State University, who primarily uses qualitative methodology to explore interdisciplinary environmental issues with a focus on equity and justice. She takes a critical and social constructionist approach to theory and knowledge creation, recognizing the importance of plural sets of knowledge and the degree to which all science is value-laden. Theoretically her work is often inspired by critical environmental justice, standpoint theory, intersectionality, and feminist political ecology; subjects that she wants to acknowledge as the contribution of scholars and activists of color over the last several decades. As a current resident of the state of Utah, she has an interest in better understanding how the FEMA Region 8 region can develop preparedness and planning for climate change in an inclusive and equitable way. While she has some personal and professional experiences related to environment, disasters and climate change (i.e. living through heatwaves in the UK and working at the Loveland Disaster Assistance Center following the 2013 Colorado floods), she has been privileged in that she has not personally been displaced by a disaster event or climate change.

Jordan Rowley is a PhD student in Sociology at Utah State University. When reflecting on this topic, he notes that: Climate displacement is not something that I have ever had to think about. Having grown up in Utah, the climate has had a small impact on my life. However, the past two years I lived in Arizona. I recently experienced my first heatwave in a southern state and it had a huge impact on my perspective of climate change. My breath was taken away from me by the heat and I thought that I would melt into the pavement. Living back in Utah it is easy to forget that experience. However, I think the most important thing we can do is be prepared for the worst. The ultimate impact the climate will have has not been felt yet and it is important to have the policies and studies in place to mitigate its impact when it comes. To be underprepared would be an act of environmental injustice and is not an option for the uncertain future we face.

Dallin Johnson (he/him) is a white settler who was born and raised in Utah. He has lived in Northern and Central Utah as well as the Dominican Republic. As a student pursuing a master’s degree in sociology at Utah State University, his approach to research is still evolving, but he has primarily used quantitative methods in his research and gravitates toward conflict and social constructionist theories. In the past year, he began learning about the potential consequences of the Great Salt Lake drying up, and suddenly climate displacement, which he was previously privileged not to have to think about, became an all-too-real concern. Now, understanding and preparing for the possibility of climate displacement as it could affect millions of his fellow Utahns, including most of his family, is hugely important for him.

Findings and Discussion

Considerations of Displacement and Equity in Existing FEMA Region 8 Climate Plans and Policies

Of the 26 plans and policies identified (see Appendix A), the majority (11) were state-level plans. Additionally, we identified three Tribal plans, one regional plan, 10 city-level documents, and two county documents. Finally, two plans were blended city/county plans. These plans were not evenly distributed across the FEMA Region 8 states, and the overwhelming majority (15) originated from Colorado. We identified four plans from Montana and four from Utah. As mentioned, three plans were from sovereign Tribal nations. No plans or policies were identified in Wyoming, North Dakota, or South Dakota.

In terms of community involvement in developing the plans and policies we identified, we were impressed that nearly half (11) were community-led, with two additional documents being a mixed-approach. Most of the community-led plans and policies were developed at the city or county level. In addition, all three Tribal plans were community-led, demonstrating that larger-scale planning can be done with community engagement. Nonetheless, we did not find any community-led plans at the state level, suggesting that state-level planning processes could be improved to be more inclusive of the public.

Of the 26 documents we reviewed, only six (~26%) mention issues of environmental equity. Six additional documents (~26%) also mention the topic of climate displacement, with only four documents discussing both environmental equity and climate displacement. Eight of these 12 documents are from Colorado, while three are from Montana and one is from Utah. Six are state-level policies or plans (five are state of Colorado and one is the state of Montana) while two are county-level documents (one Colorado, one Montana respectively) and four are city-level documents. This suggests that of the states in FEMA Region 8, Colorado is leading the way in terms of thinking about both equity and climate displacement issues. Additionally, despite the lack of community inclusion at the state-level, state-level policies were more likely to include considerations of equity and climate displacement. Of course, there are likely additional plans which we have not identified that might mean that more city and county-level plans do in fact address these issues to the same degree. Still the overarching takeaway is that only a few of these FEMA Region 8 plans include in-depth consideration of equity issues and only one of all 26 documents fully address the issue of climate displacement in depth.

The singular plan that addresses both equity and displacement concerns in-depth is the “Climate Ready Missoula: Building Resiliency in Missoula County” plan. The climate ready plan contains a section on “Climate Migration and Population Changes” as well as a section on “Implications for Underrepresented Groups” (Maneta et al., 2020¹³). The plan notes that a preliminary analysis suggests that beyond direct impacts of climate change locally, there is likely to be an increase in population in Missoula County due to climate change. This is in addition to the current trend of population increase in the county. The authors of the plan demonstrate the differences in population changes with the 10 counties that Missoula County is most connected with, with population in- and out-flows being primarily between counties in other nearby Western states such as Washington, California, Oregon Arizona, Nevada, Idaho, and Utah. They then examine predicted population changes due to different climate impacts to demonstrate the predicted growth. Finally, they discuss the implications that climate migration will have on the county’s various services and infrastructure, including: land use planning and transportation; buildings; energy and water infrastructure; business; recreation and tourism; and forests and terrestrial ecosystems. These infrastructure and service considerations offer a starting point for existing and future plans and policies across FEMA Region 8. For example, while population growth due to climate migration is included in this plan, calculations for additional population growth are not included in the city’s 2015 or the county’s 2016 growth policies. Moving forward, more integration of these considerations for planning will be necessary to manage population and service changes effectively.

The “Climate Ready Missoula” plan demonstrates how climate impacts can create and exacerbate existing inequalities. It provides examples of how historically marginalized groups may face greater negative impacts of climate change, such as a higher likelihood that lower income households are often built-in locations with higher exposure to flooding risks, the degree to which gender-based violence can increase, and how the elderly and chronically ill may face increased risk of physical harm and social isolation. Further, the authors identify negative impacts on local animal and plant species, demonstrating the importance of a multispecies approach to studying the impacts of climate change on underrepresented groups and entities. While the authors do not go so far as to discuss how these impacts may emerge intersectionally—say a chronically ill elderly person in a low socioeconomic group—the recognition of these inequities and the differential consequences is an important inclusion in the plan. Despite pointing to these inequities, the plan does not offer solutions to address these problems, an important next step in preparing for climate change impacts.

Different Frameworks for Displacement Research: Preliminary Literature Review Results

In total, our SCOPUS results returned 12,446 article results. We did a preliminary examination of these search results across the climate (4,741 results), disaster (3,149 results) and environmental (4,556) queries. Next, we examined similarities and differences in terms of authorship; keywords subject area; author affiliation; and publishing and funding sources (see Appendix B). We performed this analysis by selecting these categories from our SCOPUS results and generating an excel file that contained this summary data of our search. Given this process, it is important to keep in mind that these descriptive aspects are generated from the sets of queried data prior to us narrowing down the most relevant and influential articles that were identified from the search.

In looking at the descriptive data for these three different queries (environmental, disaster, climate), we reviewed the top 10 results for each descriptive category (i.e. the most frequently cited author; the journals with the most publications; the most frequently used keywords; the institutions with the most affiliations; and the most frequently acknowledged funders). We found significant overlap in terms of the authors of the articles framed as addressing climate and environmental displacement or migration issues (five of the top 10 cited authors are the same), while there was no overlap between authors using disaster, environmental, or climate frameworks. The most frequently used keywords were very similar across the environmental and climate queries, with seven out of 10 matching, while “human(s)” and “climate change” were in the top 10 most frequently used keywords across all three searches. There was no other overlap between keywords in the disaster query and the environmental and climate searches. Both the environmental and climate searches relied on “adaptation"; “adaptive management”; and “vulnerability” as key descriptors of the research articles. Additionally, “environmental change” was common in the environmental search. Further, the disaster query included “disaster management” and “evacuation.” Finally, there is an interesting geographical component in the top key words, as both “United States” and “Bangladesh” were top keywords in the climate search, while “China” was in the top 10 environmental query. The disaster search did not return any geographic location in the top 10 results; however, “Japan” was the 14th most frequent key word across the disaster query.

SCOPUS organizes “subject area” very broadly, so all three queries found that most results were from the social sciences and secondarily from environmental science. There were further overlaps across the three queries, however, the orders were not necessarily congruent. For example, while engineering was the third most frequent subject that articles identified from the disaster query were published in, engineering was the ninth listed subject in both the environmental and climate search. In addition, the disaster query included articles coming out of (a) computer science; and (b) mathematics, while the environmental and climate queries drew from (a) agricultural and biological sciences; and (b) economics, econometrics, and finance. In terms of publishing destinations, articles from the climate and environmental queries showed significant overlap; half of the articles from these queries were published in the same journal. Only two journals were top journal outlets across all three searches—the International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction.

In terms of institutional affiliation, there was again significant overlap in environmental and climate framed research, with eight of the top 10 affiliations appearing in both categories. Only two universities were within the top 10 affiliations across all three queries—the University of Melbourne and University College London. In the disaster query, five of the 10 listed institutions were in Japan, while no Japanese affiliated institutions made the top 10 list for the environmental or climate query. When paired with the data on country, these trends suggest that most research is coming out of the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia; with data on disasters being prevalent also in Japan. The data on funding and language of publication further point to a pre-dominance of research from the United States and Australia across the board, as well as broad European funding agencies. Still, Japan is a noteworthy addition in terms of funding for research framed around disasters.

One interpretation of these data is that research framed through environmental and climate lenses tends to be more closely intertwined, while disaster-based research tends to have its own subset of authors, institutions, funders and publication outlets. In addition, this exercise is fruitful for identifying spaces where there may be some degree of integration of the approaches and the opportunity to build more bridges—such as in the pages of Sustainability and the International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, and through researchers working at University College London and the University of Melbourne (see Appendix B which highlights the prevalence of publishing in these journals and authorship from these institutions across all frameworks). Finally, it is important to note that there is space for further diversity in terms of where the work on all of these topics is being produced.

Beyond this broader analysis, as mentioned we are in the process of writing a literature review based on the substantive content of the most cited and relevant articles across these topics. While this work is ongoing, some initial observations include geographic divisions across the different frameworks, as well as an emphasis on global migration and human rights in the research oriented around the “environmental” search. Finally, we have noted that in climate research, studies tend to examine broad concepts at greater geographic scale, rather than utilizing in-depth case study research. This suggests the need for more in-depth, qualitative research to not only understand current instances of displacement and migration, but also to inform future planning around these themes.

Conclusions

Implications for Practice or Policy

The long-term goal of the initial and subsequent stages of the research agenda discussed here is to develop recommendations and metrics that can be used as actionable guidance by emergency managers, planners, and policymakers in FEMA Region 8 (and beyond) to create more equitable and just decision-making in the context of climate migration, displacement and resettlement, as well as account for differential and place-based needs and capacities. We also hope to strengthen the interdisciplinary scholarship on climate migration, displacement, and resettlement by integrating existing approaches to studying displacement. We are organizing a webinar to share the results of this research with emergency managers and interested local and state officials in FEMA Region 8. We hope this will provide an opportunity to highlight gaps in policy but that it will also be an opportunity for practitioners to identify gaps in our research, particularly in terms of existing plans and policies in FEMA Region 8 that we may have missed in our review. We also hope to solicit feedback about how we can develop next steps in research in a way that might help them improve their policy and planning processes.

Limitations

There are several important limitations to this study. First, we know that despite our best efforts there are likely many more plans and policies across FEMA Region 8 that we have yet to identify for analysis. Second, given that there were no plans or policies to analyze from three of the six FEMA Region 8 states, coupled with relatively little content on issues of inequity, migration, and displacement, it is difficult to definitively answer some of our research questions. This is particularly true in terms of inclusion of intersectional considerations, which were essentially absent from the policy and planning documents we reviewed. However, this demonstrates gaps in planning when it comes to considerations of intersectional needs and capacities in climate adaptation. Further, migration and displacement continue to be overlooked in climate plans and policies.

Given the scope of this research is limited to FEMA Region 8, the policy-based aspect of this research project focuses only on this region. Based on our research, it appears that other FEMA Regions have done more to incorporate equity, migration, and displacement into their plans and policies, however, without conducting a similar analysis in other FEMA Regions we cannot say this with certainty. future research is needed to explore readiness efforts and opportunities to learn from other regions.

Another limitation of the research is our reliance on one search engine as a starting point for our literature review. SCOPUS is one of the most reputable database search engines, and what we relied upon to conduct a review of the various relevant literatures. However, no search engine is perfect and we recognize that key articles may have been missed due to limitations of the search engine. In addition, we rely on several pre-determined categorizations for this research—what disciplines SCOPUS assigns journals and articles to, and what keywords authors and journals choose for each article. These categorizations are subjective, and we recognize that other interpretations may vary.

Finally, these findings are preliminary; we are at present still working on our analysis and findings presented here are early, generalized, and subject to change. We have not conducted any statistical analysis for this work so we cannot make any definitive claims about the relationships between the relevant variables explored in the review of the literature (e.g., disciplines, journals, authors, funding agencies, countries of publication, etc.). In addition to using SCOPUS, we are also in the process of analyzing some of the key papers in other ways, such as through the website “Connected Papers” (https://www.connectedpapers.com). This is important because Connected Papers is a visual tool that goes beyond standard practices in literature reviews. Their database is connected to Semantic Scholar Paper Corpus and their site’s algorithm identifies and displays papers that are similar to any given paper of interest. This includes displaying papers connected to a given article through citation practices (including what authors are cited in and by a particular paper). This tool allows us to see and analyze the degree to which different sets of literatures might be siloed, and it will also be useful in developing a more detailed understanding of which authors may carry the most influence across these disciplines.

Future Research Directions

The tasks proposed in support of the research aims of this project is a first step in building a research agenda around critical climate displacement research, preparation, and planning. Moving forward, we intend to expand this pilot project by developing a similar analysis on climate displacement and migration plans through future funding. This will enable further sharing of practical approaches to climate-related mobility both within and across FEMA Region 8 and other FEMA regions around the United States. At the moment, the lead author has a proposal submitted to the United States Geological Survey Southwest Climate Adaptation Science Center (CASC) to explore issues related to equity in adaptation, migration, and displacement in planning for lake desiccation across Utah, Nevada, Arizona and California.

In future research proposals we will continue to expand on this work by engaging in more in-depth qualitative research through methods we are familiar with, namely through multi-sited, critical policy ethnography (i.e., see Ryder, 2018¹⁴). Future research may also include conducting surveys and interviews of governance officials who are working on climate and disaster plans to gain a better understanding of the drivers and targets of displacement plans and policies. It may also include engaging with communities who may be at high-risk of experiencing climate displacement. By working with individuals in communities which may be at high-risk for experiencing climate displacement in future research, there is the possibility of pre-emptively identifying intersectional and place-based needs and capacities that must be considered in the context of climate migration planning. This community-based work is likely to involve interviews, focus groups, participatory mapping and photovoice. We will also work to identify new methodologies for understanding how place-based relationships are embodied, and how these relationships and bonds might be maintained through a more just, community-led approach to preparation and planning for climate displacement.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the Natural Hazards Center and the NSF Quick Response Research Award Program, specifically those working in Region 8 for their support of this project.

References