Periodic Reporting for period 1 - CLIMACY (Practices of Climate Diplomacy and Uneven Policy Responses on Climate Change on Human Mobility)
Reporting period: 2020-03-01 to 2022-02-28
Although seldomly recognising themselves as affected by the links between climate change and human mobilities, European nation states are active at the international level in pursuing the development of climate diplomacy that specifically addresses these interacting phenomena. However, if European nation states do not see themselves as impacted by climate change and human mobilities and are still pushing for diplomatic efforts, what is motivating them? Is there harmonisation or deviation between the ways they frame the issue in the international arena and on domestic policy agendas? Are domestic policies compatible with what they are pushing for at the international level? In order to answer these questions, CLIMACY had the central objective of examining the practices of international climate diplomacy of European nation states within the sub-domain of climate change and human mobility, setting these in contrast with the practices of policymaking at the nation state level, as well examining the extent to which the distinct policy areas of climate change and of human mobility are in dialogue at the nation state level. The research question of the project was therefore formulated as follows: How are nation-states developing practices of international climate diplomacy in relation to climate change and human mobility and to what extent do these align or discord with their practices at the state level?
A comparative case study analysis of Austria, Germany, Denmark, and Sweden was conducted. Empirically, the study conducted document analysis of a document corpus (parliamentary transcripts, government strategies, party political election manifestos, civil society reports and press releases, transcripts of live events, and media articles). Furthermore, a series of 34 semi-structured interviews were carried out across the 4 case studies with parliamentarians, civil servants, civil society representatives, and academics. Finally, the Q-method was used to identify discourses on climate change and human mobilities among parliamentarians.
Project Conclusions
This project was conducted entirely during the COVID-19 pandemic, which resulted in significantly less activity in climate diplomacy, particularly during the early stages of the project where empirical data was being gathered. Nevertheless, significant climate diplomacy on climate change and human mobilities has been taking place, mainly be Germany, which has been positioning itself in strategic fora such as the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Platform on Disaster Displacement (PDD).
The policy discourses on climate change and human mobilities at the level of the individual nation states had a number of distinguishing features. Overall, the policy discourses across all four nation states focussed on displacement, with types of human mobilities, and indeed immobilities considered considerably less frequently. A second point of focus for these discourses was on human mobilities occurring in, or originating from, the Global South. Particular emphasis has been placed on any situations that are perceived as potentially leading to large numbers of people coming to Europe from the Global South. These points of focus combine to mean that climate change and human mobilities are largely considered from the perspective of development policy. In many nation states, different interests in stringent climate action, and restrictive migration policy respectively, are being played off against each other, either in the formation of coalition governments, or in negotiating cross-party positions.
An in-depth analysis of the debate surrounding the introduction of a so-called ‘climate passport’ in the German parliament highlighted the Eurocentricity of conceptualisations of climate change and human mobilities. German voices and perspectives are foregrounded, and Germany is placed in a problem-solver position in relation to affected communities. While united in their Eurocentrism, the supportive and critical discourses surrounding the climate passport have very different starting points. A supportive discourse is anchored in climate justice, historical responsibility, and providing timely solutions enabling affected people to make choices about migration and focusses on inhabitants of Pacific Island States as potential holders of the climate passport. In contrast, opponents focus on potential economic migration from Africa, emphasising the multicausality of migration (or indeed, denial of climate as a migration driver at all) and population growth, and preferring solutions that focus on development cooperation as migration prevention.
This project also focussed on the discourses of parliamentarians on climate change and human mobilities. Four distinct discourses were detected among parliamentarians: 1) ‘A responsible place in the world’; 2) ‘the climate-reluctant racist’; 3) ‘trust in the international community’; 4) ‘our way or the highway’. The main line of distinction between the four discourses is how responsibility is perceived, with different contours present in regard to how much nation states are responsible for problems at the global level and to what extent their own citizens are to be prioritised. Because climate change and human mobilities have almost exclusively been portrayed as issues occurring in the Global South, in more restrictive nationally-focussed understandings of responsibility, there is little interest in enacting policies on climate change and human mobilities, other than those that protect the borders of the respective nation state.
Overview of Exploitation and Dissemination of Results
CLIMACY has been disseminated via 25 presentations or outreach opportunities (for example, radio interviews, panel discussions, newspaper interviews) during the project. At least one further workshop presentation is planned. Two non-peer review media articles have been published (one online news media, one print media and online). One book chapter in an edited volume was also contributed to. A further six written outputs are forthcoming. Three journal article manuscripts are submitted and in review. A policy brief will be published by the end of 2022. A magazine article and book chapter in an edited volume are both forthcoming in 2023 (invited pieces).
Project Conclusions
This project was conducted entirely during the COVID-19 pandemic, which resulted in significantly less activity in climate diplomacy, particularly during the early stages of the project where empirical data was being gathered. Nevertheless, significant climate diplomacy on climate change and human mobilities has been taking place, mainly be Germany, which has been positioning itself in strategic fora such as the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Platform on Disaster Displacement (PDD).
The policy discourses on climate change and human mobilities at the level of the individual nation states had a number of distinguishing features. Overall, the policy discourses across all four nation states focussed on displacement, with types of human mobilities, and indeed immobilities considered considerably less frequently. A second point of focus for these discourses was on human mobilities occurring in, or originating from, the Global South. Particular emphasis has been placed on any situations that are perceived as potentially leading to large numbers of people coming to Europe from the Global South. These points of focus combine to mean that climate change and human mobilities are largely considered from the perspective of development policy. In many nation states, different interests in stringent climate action, and restrictive migration policy respectively, are being played off against each other, either in the formation of coalition governments, or in negotiating cross-party positions.
An in-depth analysis of the debate surrounding the introduction of a so-called ‘climate passport’ in the German parliament highlighted the Eurocentricity of conceptualisations of climate change and human mobilities. German voices and perspectives are foregrounded, and Germany is placed in a problem-solver position in relation to affected communities. While united in their Eurocentrism, the supportive and critical discourses surrounding the climate passport have very different starting points. A supportive discourse is anchored in climate justice, historical responsibility, and providing timely solutions enabling affected people to make choices about migration and focusses on inhabitants of Pacific Island States as potential holders of the climate passport. In contrast, opponents focus on potential economic migration from Africa, emphasising the multicausality of migration (or indeed, denial of climate as a migration driver at all) and population growth, and preferring solutions that focus on development cooperation as migration prevention.
This project also focussed on the discourses of parliamentarians on climate change and human mobilities. Four distinct discourses were detected among parliamentarians: 1) ‘A responsible place in the world’; 2) ‘the climate-reluctant racist’; 3) ‘trust in the international community’; 4) ‘our way or the highway’. The main line of distinction between the four discourses is how responsibility is perceived, with different contours present in regard to how much nation states are responsible for problems at the global level and to what extent their own citizens are to be prioritised. Because climate change and human mobilities have almost exclusively been portrayed as issues occurring in the Global South, in more restrictive nationally-focussed understandings of responsibility, there is little interest in enacting policies on climate change and human mobilities, other than those that protect the borders of the respective nation state.
Overview of Exploitation and Dissemination of Results
CLIMACY has been disseminated via 25 presentations or outreach opportunities (for example, radio interviews, panel discussions, newspaper interviews) during the project. At least one further workshop presentation is planned. Two non-peer review media articles have been published (one online news media, one print media and online). One book chapter in an edited volume was also contributed to. A further six written outputs are forthcoming. Three journal article manuscripts are submitted and in review. A policy brief will be published by the end of 2022. A magazine article and book chapter in an edited volume are both forthcoming in 2023 (invited pieces).
CLIMACY has progressed the state-of-the-art on European perspectives on climate change and human mobilities in particular regarding policy discourses at the nation state level, where the project findings are very interesting. The publications, which will include a comparative analysis, a critical analysis of European climate mobilities regimes, a focus on the German ‘climate passport debate, and an analysis of parliamentarians’ discourses respectively, provide an interesting body of literature that can be built on. This is one of the expected impacts of the project, which foresees future work by academics that builds on this literature. This has been ascertained via positive feedback in workshop and conference settings as well as in written feedback (formal and informal) on draft journal articles. Interview partners have also indicated the interest of the findings for parliamentarians, activists, and civil society organisations, with the later in particular requesting access to findings so that they can adjust their policy-work accordingly. The policy brief is being specifically tailored to these individuals.