Climate change is not only reshaping coastlines and weather patterns, but it is also remapping the future of the human movement. According to the World Bank, over 216 million people could be internally displaced by climate impacts by 2050, a staggering projection that underscores how environmental instability is fast becoming a major driver of human movement. Yet, despite this mounting evidence, the UK continues to treat climate-related migration as a peripheral issue, delegated to overstretched humanitarian agencies or securitized border frameworks. Rather than recognizing climate mobility as a central pillar of foreign policy, it remains fragmented across disconnected departments. In an era of cascading crises, as authors like Gordon Brown have noted in works such as Permacrisis, siloed responses are no longer viable. The UK must adopt a holistic approach that sees climate displacement not as a future scenario, but as a present geopolitical and moral imperative.
For a country with global reach, diplomatic networks, and historic responsibility for global emissions, the UK has both the obligation and the opportunity to lead. Doing so means shifting away from deterrence-based responses and toward a rights-based, forward-looking model that recognises migration as a legitimate adaptation strategy. Ethical climate migration governance is not just about avoiding humanitarian failure. It’s about rebuilding trust, shaping mobility systems that work, and restoring the UK’s credibility in climate and migration diplomacy. Ultimately, creating an ethical approach to climate migration governance is not just a matter of moral leadership, it is a strategic imperative for making the world more robust, resilient, and stable. In a globally interconnected era, the UK’s credibility on these issues strengthens its diplomatic influence, enhances its ability to build coalitions, and reinforces its role as a serious actor in addressing shared global risks.
The Protection Gap and the Need for a Rights-Based Approach
Despite the growing number of people displaced by climate stress, international protection systems remain dangerously outdated. The 1951 Refugee Convention does not cover environmental or climate-induced displacement. There is no legal status for “climate refugees,” and most displaced people fall into a protection gap where they are labelled as “irregular” and left without rights, status, or safe alternatives.The Global Compact for Migration encourages states to expand safe pathways (Objective 5) and reduce adverse drivers of displacement (Objective 2), including climate change. However, these commitments are not binding, and in many cases—including the UK’s—they remain aspirational at best. There is still little effort to align national migration policy with the realities of climate mobility.
An ethical approach would reframe climate-related migration as a rational and often necessary strategy for survival. It would involve protecting those who move and investing in adaptation strategies that allow people to stay. This dual approach—protection and resilience—is the foundation of ethical climate mobility governance.
The UK’s Missed Opportunities
Despite its capacity to lead, the UK has taken a reactive and often securitised approach to migration. The now-defunct Rwanda plan, which proposed offshoring asylum claims to a third country, clearly indicated this strategy. Although the UK Supreme Court ruled it unlawful in 2023, the plan exemplified a broader narrative shift toward deterrence and outsourcing, rather than legal protection and international cooperation.
In 2021, the UK also reduced its overseas aid budget, directly impacting climate adaptation and development programmes in high-risk regions. These are precisely the investments that reduce the likelihood of forced displacement. By cutting them, the UK undermines the resilience of countries already facing the frontlines of the climate crisis.
The UK’s muted role in global climate forums further reflects a lack of political will. While it played a visible role during COP26 in Glasgow, its engagement with climate-related migration at COP27 and COP28 was minimal. It has not meaningfully contributed to discussions around mobility within Loss and Damage frameworks, nor advocated for legal innovation to protect those displaced by climate impacts.
This silence is costly. Countries like Bangladesh, where sea-level rise could displace over 13 million people by 2050, are already experiencing the consequences. As a former colonial power and a key development partner in South Asia, the UK has both a historical responsibility and the diplomatic influence to act. Ethical climate policy here means ensuring aid is not just reactive, but forward-looking tied to resilience-building, legal migration pathways, and regional cooperation.
Reimagining UK Leadership on Climate Mobility
There is still time for the UK to step into a leadership role — but it will require a clear shift in direction. First, the UK should support the creation of legal and humanitarian pathways for people displaced by climate impacts. Humanitarian visa schemes expanded resettlement quotas, or regional labour mobility agreements can provide safe and predictable options for those unable to remain in their home areas.
Second, the UK must support climate adaptation and resilience in vulnerable regions. Only 0.4% of global climate finance currently goes to projects directly addressing displacement risks. The UK could help close this gap by targeting funding where it matters most — before displacement becomes unavoidable.
Third, UK diplomats should actively push for the inclusion of human mobility in Loss and Damage discussions. Climate migration must be treated as part of the global response to climate justice, not an externality to be managed by border forces.
Finally, and critically, the UK must change its public narrative on migration. Mobility is not inherently a threat — it is a strategy, often a necessity, and a decisive contribution to development if supported through the right policy frameworks. Climate migrants bring skills, resilience, and adaptive capacities that can strengthen both host and origin communities. When planned, legal, and well-resourced, migration can fill labour gaps, stimulate local economies, and foster cross-border innovation. Yet this potential is too often overlooked in favour of fear-based narratives. By reframing climate migration as an opportunity for shared growth rather than a challenge to be managed, the UK can begin to build a more constructive public and diplomatic consensus—one rooted in pragmatism, partnership, and long-term global stability.
Climate Leadership Requires More Than Emissions Targets
Some may argue that the UK is already overburdened by migration and cannot afford to expand its protection. But this perspective overlooks the escalating costs of inaction — from the rise of irregular migration routes to the mounting strain of humanitarian crises and the ripple effects of regional instability. For the UK, this can translate into increased pressure on border enforcement, higher emergency aid expenditures, and growing diplomatic tensions in regions already central to its foreign policy. Proactively supporting ethical and managed mobility pathways, particularly in response to climate displacement, is not just a moral imperative — it’s a strategic necessity. The longer we delay, the fewer options remain — both for those displaced and for the governments tasked with responding.
If the UK wants to be taken seriously as a leader in climate diplomacy, it must demonstrate that its commitment goes beyond emissions targets and green investments. Leading on climate migration is not just about justice — it’s about credibility, foresight, and global cooperation.
The displaced do not need pity. They need policy. And if the UK doesn’t lead with the right solutions, others will fill the gap — potentially with the wrong ones.
References
- World Bank – Groundswell II: Acting on Internal Climate Migration (2021)
https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2021/09/13/groundswells-new-evidence-on-climate-migration - Global Compact for Migration (GCM) – International Organization for Migration (IOM)
https://www.iom.int/global-compact-migration - UNHCR – Climate Change and Displacement
https://www.unhcr.org/en-us/climate-change-and-disasters.html - Loss and Damage Finance and Policy – UNFCCC
https://unfccc.int/topics/adaptation-and-resilience/the-big-picture/introduction-to-loss-and-damage - Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre (IDMC) – Bangladesh: Internal Displacement Report (2020)
https://www.internal-displacement.org/sites/default/files/publications/documents/2020-IDMC-Bangladesh-report.pdf - UNFCCC – Mobilising Climate Finance for Humanitarian Action (2022)
https://unfccc.int/news/mobilising-climate-finance-for-humanitarian-action - UK Supreme Court Ruling on Rwanda Asylum Plan – BBC News (November 2023)
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-67432154 - UK Aid Cuts and Climate Finance Criticism – The Guardian (2021)
https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2021/nov/03/uk-aid-cuts-criticised-as-unfit-to-tackle-climate-crisis