One of the most pertinent questions in regard to Oceania and the impacts of climate change is where will the people the go? According to several studies, many of the islands, and especially atolls, in Oceania will likely experience inhospitable conditions within the next 50-100 years. This presents a myriad of problems, especially the question of relocation.
First, the question of relocation is particularly complex as many of the indigenous populations of Oceania have a strong bond with their land and little desire to relocate. However, this may be immaterial if a combination of rising sea levels, regional redistribution of precipitation, rising ocean acidity, and relocation or destruction of native fish populations results in conditions unsuitable for human habitation.
Second, the intra-regional states that climate refugees may prefer for relocation will likely suffer comparable conditions that limit their ability to accept climate refugees. While non-atoll states will likely experience greater resilience to climate change than low-lying islands such as atolls, these states may not be capable or desiring of accepting an influx of climate refugees from nearby atolls. It is also unlikely that non-regional states such as Australia and New Zealand will accept a mass influx of refugees for various domestic reasons. Climate refugees will likely face significant challenges to integration whether they relocate within or outside Oceania. Worryingly, none of these issues even approach how to relocate at-risk populations within the region or what becomes of their land and territories after migration.
Preference for Home
Most of the people in Oceania prefer an outcome that allows them to remain in their homeland over relocating within or outside the region. From the perspective of identity, this is largely due to the desire to maintain cohesion as a people. For diaspora populations, it is inevitable that group identity experiences a reformation when in exile. Applied to Oceanic peoples, the reformation would be significant as a people united by geography, lifestyle, social and familial roles, methods of production, and religion would invariably experience the disruption or complete removal of all aspects listed. The issue of relocation also presents issues of private benefits for those who hold land to which populations may relocate. However, this issue is deserving of a post of its own and will not receive significant interest in this post.
Intra-regional migration
Intra-regional relocation to other Oceanic states also poses some significant issues. Notably, the region as a whole will likely experience similar effects of climate change, albeit with minor differences based upon geographic location and ocean currents. As such, intra-regional migration will likely not be an effective option for significant portions of populations that may need to relocate. Higher elevation states like Fiji have already sold some land to atoll states, specifically Kiribati, for the purposes of possible relocation. However, this solution brings significant issues itself.
Issues such as the status of Kiribatis in Fiji are at the forefront. Would Kiribatis become Fijian citizens or maintain some semblance of sovereignty upon Fijian land? Likewise, how would Fijian populations respond to an influx of other Oceanic peoples or a sovereign state within their own state? Additionally, is there enough land for other atoll state citizens to relocate to Fiji and other islands with significant elevations? And if so, can the land and its surroundings provide enough water, food, and other resources to sustain a significant population increase? The answers to these questions are not known at this time, but the likelihood of a seamless migration within Oceania appears low, if it is even possible.
Extra-regional migration
Extra-regional migration experiences many of the same issues as internal migration but with several differences as well. Migration to states such as Australia, New Zealand, France, the United States, China, and others may seem quite possible, but significant issues arise in this context as well.
First, the issue of status remains constant for intra or extra-regional migration. For some states, it may be possible to cede some undesirable land in the hinterlands to a diaspora population. However, the voluntary cessation of territory has been rather unpopular and quite rare since the rise of the concept of the nation-state. Additionally, the question of whether climate refugees would find such undesirable land worth inhabiting is valid.
Second, the reception of Oceanic climate refugees is unlikely to be well received in most extra-regional countries. Australia, China, France, and the United States have all increased measures to prevent immigration from mostly poor countries from entering their territory. It is unlikely that the governments or populations of these states would view the acceptance of thousands of Pacific Islanders positively. While many of these states have significant diaspora populations from Oceanic populations, they are usually accepted as economic migrants (example; Pacific Access Category).
Final thoughts
The solution of migration from low-lying vulnerable island states in Oceania intra or extra-regionally presents significant challenges that must be solved before large scale movement of people can begin. In addition to the social, political, and legalistic issues that migrants from Oceania are likely to face, the logistical nightmare for relocating an entire population itself needs to be considered.
Furthermore, issues such as the rights to mineral and other resources within the historical territorial holdings of these states would need to be solved. For instance, if Marshallese migrated to the United States, they would hardly be capable of maintaining claims to their former territories without third party assistance. When included with issues of where at-risk populations in Oceania could relocate and how they would be received by the domestic populations, logistical complexities of relocation and the legal status of lands from which populations moved complicate the issue of migration significantly.
Migration, while perhaps the only feasible option if adaptation fails and the consequences of global warming continue as predicted, will nonetheless be extremely difficult to effectively implement.