On the front line of a warming world: how climate migration is reshaping Australia’s future - Lethal Heating Editor BDA

Key Points

Climate impacts are already driving displacement across the Pacific and within Australia, yet most people have no dedicated legal protection when they cross borders.1 Under current law, climate-displaced people rarely qualify as refugees, and instead must rely on narrow complementary protection or ad hoc migration pathways.2 The Falepili Union with Tuvalu creates an annual mobility pathway for up to 280 Tuvaluans, making it the world’s first bilateral climate mobility treaty of its kind.3 Temporary labour schemes such as the PALM program show both the potential for filling shortages in care and hospitality and the risks of migrant worker exploitation.4 Public concern about migration’s impact on housing and infrastructure is rising, with recent polling showing strong support for at least a temporary pause in intakes.5 Experts argue Australia needs a long-term, people-centred climate displacement strategy that links migration, housing, infrastructure and community support.6

Rising seas, stronger cyclones and relentless heat are already pushing people from their homes across the Pacific and within Australia, yet the law still has no clear category for those who move because of climate change.¹

From low-lying atolls like Tuvalu to bushfire-prone towns on Australia’s east coast, climate disruption now collides with long histories of inequality, fragile infrastructure and limited social safety nets.¹

Despite the scale of risk, people displaced by climate impacts seldom qualify as refugees under international law, which still centres on persecution rather than environmental collapse.²

Australia’s migration system offers some protection through human rights obligations and existing visa streams, but these options are patchy, discretionary and hard to access for the poorest and most exposed communities.²

The Australia–Tuvalu Falepili Union, which entered into force in 2024, is the first bilateral climate mobility treaty of its kind, promising an annual quota of Tuvaluans the right to live, work and study in Australia indefinitely.³

The agreement has been hailed by some as a “mobility with dignity” model that combines in‑country adaptation funding with a secure migration pathway if life at home becomes untenable.³

At home, however, anxiety about housing shortages, stretched infrastructure and record migration has hardened public opinion, with new polling showing large majorities in favour of at least pausing intake until services catch up.⁵

Labour schemes that draw Pacific workers into Australian farms, hospitality venues and care facilities promise economic opportunity, yet repeated inquiries have documented underpayment, unsafe conditions and weak enforcement of workplace rights.⁴

As climate impacts intensify, experts warn that without a coherent national framework linking visas, housing, infrastructure and community support, Australia risks managing climate mobility through crisis responses rather than long-term planning.⁶

The choices Australia makes now about who can move, under what conditions and with what support, will shape not only regional stability in the Pacific but also the social fabric of the country itself.¹

Who climate migrants are, and why they move

Climate displacement does not happen in isolation, it amplifies existing pressures such as poverty, land scarcity and political instability, rather than acting as a single trigger on its own.⁶

Recent humanitarian and policy analyses describe climate-induced movement as a spectrum that runs from temporary evacuation after disasters to permanent relocation when homes or livelihoods can no longer be sustained.¹

Within Australia, the 2019–20 “Black Summer” bushfires contributed to tens of thousands of internal displacements and left thousands facing longer-term relocation, underscoring that a rich country is not immune to climate-driven upheaval.⁷

Across the region, low-lying Pacific Island states face a mix of sudden-onset disasters like cyclones and slow-onset threats such as sea-level rise and salinisation, which steadily erode food security, freshwater supplies and habitability.¹

Most people affected by climate impacts move within their own countries, yet for small island states with limited land and resources, cross-border migration is already part of adaptation planning.⁶

Australia therefore finds itself as both a country of internal climate displacement and a likely destination for regional neighbours seeking safety and opportunity as conditions worsen at home.⁸

Law and the protection gap

International refugee law was drafted in the aftermath of war and persecution and does not recognise climate change, or environmental degradation alone, as grounds for refugee status.²

Australian case law has confirmed that applicants relying primarily on climate impacts have struggled to meet the definition of a refugee or to qualify for complementary protection unless they can show a specific risk of serious harm linked to recognised grounds such as race or politics.⁹

Scholars warn that trying to “force-fit” people displaced by climate change into the refugee category risks diluting core protections and may prove politically unworkable, even as needs grow.²

Instead, legal experts and advocacy groups have called for new instruments or guidelines that build on existing human rights law, especially the right to life and protection from cruel or degrading treatment, to prevent returns to places where climate impacts pose extreme risks.¹⁰

Australia’s domestic law already incorporates non-refoulement obligations through complementary protection provisions, but the threshold for success is high and decisions remain highly individualised rather than recognising group-based climate harms.⁹

In practice, most climate-affected people who reach Australia must rely on ordinary migration pathways, including skilled, family and humanitarian visas, that were not designed with environmental displacement in mind.¹

Falepili Union: model or one-off?

The Australia–Tuvalu Falepili Union, proposed by Tuvalu in 2023 and entering into force in 2024, has been widely described as the world’s first bilateral climate mobility treaty.³

Under the agreement, up to 280 Tuvaluans a year, around 2.5 per cent of the country’s population, will be able to move to Australia to live, work and study on an indefinite basis through a new mobility pathway.¹¹

The treaty explicitly links this migration channel to the “existential threat” climate change poses to Tuvalu, while also reaffirming the country’s ongoing statehood and the desire of its people to remain on their islands where possible.¹¹

Distinct from labour-only schemes, Falepili emphasises “mobility with dignity”, allowing circular movement so people can travel between Tuvalu and Australia without jeopardising their status, and it pairs this with long-term support for coastal adaptation projects in Tuvalu itself.³

Policy analysts suggest the agreement could serve as a template for similar arrangements with other highly vulnerable Pacific states, though any replication would need to respect different political contexts, population sizes and community preferences about staying or moving.³

Others caution that without broader reforms to Australia’s migration and humanitarian settings, Falepili risks becoming a unique exception rather than the foundation of a coherent regional climate mobility regime.⁸

Community ties and social integration

Decades of Pacific migration mean that many Tuvaluans, i-Kiribati, Fijians, Samoans and other islanders already have family in Australia, creating social networks that can support new arrivals coping with the trauma of displacement.⁸

Experience from other resettlement programs shows that when migrants can join relatives, access culturally appropriate services and participate in decisions about relocation, social integration is smoother and mental health outcomes improve.¹

Community-led organisations, including Pacific churches and diaspora groups, already play a central role in helping seasonal workers and new migrants find housing, navigate health and education systems, and maintain language and cultural traditions.⁴

Experts argue that any expanded climate mobility program should formally recognise and fund these grassroots networks, rather than relying solely on overstretched mainstream settlement services.⁶

For communities in receiving regions, early engagement, transparent information and visible investment in local infrastructure can help prevent resentment and build support for welcoming climate-affected neighbours.⁶

Designing relocation options in partnership with affected communities, rather than imposing them from Canberra, will be critical to maintaining trust in both origin and destination countries.⁶

Economic contribution, skills and exploitation

Australia already relies heavily on migrant workers in sectors facing chronic shortages, including agriculture, hospitality, aged care and disability support, where employers struggle to recruit and retain local staff.¹²

Programs such as the Pacific Australia Labour Mobility (PALM) scheme allow workers from Pacific Island countries and Timor-Leste to fill low and semi-skilled roles, often in regional areas where labour gaps are largest.⁴

Research and inquiries, however, have documented serious cases of underpayment, overcrowded housing and unsafe conditions across temporary migration programs, revealing systemic weaknesses in enforcing labour standards and protecting whistleblowers.⁴

Economic institutes have also shown that sectors like hospitality rely disproportionately on temporary migrants, especially international students and working holiday-makers, which can put downward pressure on wages when regulation is weak.¹³

Experts recommend that any climate mobility pathways be paired with robust rights, including full access to labour inspectorates, the ability to change employers without risking visas, and strong penalties for underpaying or exploiting migrant workers.⁴

Better recognition of overseas qualifications, targeted training in English and technical skills, and clear routes from temporary to permanent status would allow climate migrants to contribute at their skill level rather than being trapped in low-paid, insecure jobs.¹²

Public concerns and political headwinds

Climate mobility debates in Australia now intersect with a broader backlash against what critics call “mass migration”, fuelled by surging net arrivals and a visible housing crisis in major cities.⁵

Polling released in 2025 by a conservative thinktank found that more than 70 per cent of respondents supported temporarily pausing new immigration until housing and core infrastructure such as schools and hospitals catch up with demand.⁵

Housing system reports likewise point to persistent shortages of affordable homes and rental stress, though they emphasise that planning, tax settings and underinvestment in social housing all play significant roles alongside population growth.¹⁴

Analysts say governments will need to be candid about the scale of both climate risk and domestic constraints, explaining how targeted climate mobility can be managed in tandem with reforms to housing, infrastructure and labour rights.¹⁴

Framing agreements like Falepili as part of a broader responsibility to the Pacific, grounded in long-standing security and economic ties, may help distinguish them from general migration debates in the public mind.³

Without such clarity, climate migrants risk becoming collateral damage in wider political fights over population, borders and cost-of-living pressures.⁵

Planning for a climate‑mobile future

Humanitarian agencies and policy groups argue that Australia now needs an integrated national framework for climate displacement that spans foreign policy, migration law, housing, infrastructure and disaster planning.⁶

Such a framework would recognise that most climate-related movement will remain internal and regional, yet still prepare for increased cross-border mobility as some communities, particularly in small island states, face hard limits to adaptation.⁶

On the domestic front, this would mean aligning any future climate mobility pathways with investments in social and affordable housing, transport, health services and education in the communities likely to receive new arrivals.¹⁴

Regional planning could identify towns with declining populations or labour shortages where additional residents, backed by infrastructure funding, might help revitalise economies while relieving pressure on overheated urban housing markets.¹⁴

Internationally, Australia faces a choice between piecemeal, reactive responses to climate displacement, or helping to shape principled, rights-based frameworks that offer predictable, dignified options to move or to stay for its Pacific neighbours.¹⁰

The Falepili Union shows what is politically possible, but whether it becomes the start of a regional architecture for climate mobility or remains a one-off exception will depend on decisions made in Canberra and across the Pacific in the next few years.³

References

1. CBM Australia, “Climate-induced forced displacement”
2. UNSW Law Journal Student Series, “Protecting People Displaced by Climate Change: Why the Refugee Convention is Not the Answer”
3. Carnegie Endowment, “Australia–Tuvalu Falepili Union: The First Bilateral Climate Mobility Treaty”
4. The Australia Institute, “The PALM scheme: Labour rights for our Pacific family”
5. Institute of Public Affairs, “Poll: Opposition to out-of-control mass migration surges”
6. Act for Peace, “Climate Displacement Strategy 2025–2030”
7. Othering & Belonging Institute, “Australia Case Study – Climate Displacement”
8. Climate Refugees, “Australia – Spotlight”
9. Climate Change Litigation Database, “Refugee Application No. 1822451 (Australia)”
10. UNSW, “Expanding refugee protection for a changing climate”
11. Center for Global Development, “The Australia–Tuvalu Climate and Migration Agreement: Takeaways and Next Steps”
12. UNSW Law Journal, “Migration Pathways for Frontline Care Workers in Australia and New Zealand”
13. Grattan Institute, “Short-changed: How to stop the exploitation of migrant workers in Australia”
14. National Housing Supply and Affordability Council, “State of the Housing System 2025”

Back to Top