Abstract

This paper is a response Ferris (2020), specifically to the call for coalescence around a single term by which to talk about people migrating in response to climate change. While sympathetic to the imperative behind Ferris’ (2020) call, my overall argument is to reject this proposal. Instead I argue for less of focus on what we call people migrating in response to climate change, and more of a focus on how we talk about them. To justify this, I argue that a single term is inherently reductive and likely to play upon anti-immigrant sentiment due to the need to portray ‘migration as a problem’. At best this will result in a policy focus with limited capacity to address the challenge of migration in a context of climate change. At worst it will drive a policy response that is overtly counter-productive. As an alternative, I propose embracing a multitude of discourses, informed by principals that I argue will drive a humane climate agenda, and allow for a flexible approach that can account for the variety of concerns at the nexus of climate change and human migration.

中文翻译：

---

我们应该如何谈论气候变化和移民？

摘要

本文是对Ferris（2020）的回应，特别是关于围绕单个术语进行聚结的呼吁，通过该术语来讨论人们为响应气候变化而迁移。尽管我对Ferris（2020）呼吁背后的当务之急表示同情，但我的总体论点是拒绝这一提议。相反，我主张减少对我们所谓的应对气候变化的移民的关注，而更多地关注我们如何谈论他们。为了证明这一点，我认为单个术语本质上是还原性的，并且由于需要将“移民视为问题”，因此很可能会影响反移民情绪。充其量，这将导致政策重点放在应对气候变化背景下的移民挑战的能力有限。在最坏的情况下，它将导致明显适得其反的政策反应。作为备选，