Refugee voices are excluded from key decision-making spaces related to climate change, but their leadership is crucial for the creation of fair and effective policies. Three case studies highlight opportunities for input, as well as the barriers that remain.

Despite being particularly affected[i] by climate-related impacts, refugees^[ii] are routinely marginalised in global climate policy frameworks, negotiations and access to climate finance. Their lived experiences, adaptive strategies and innovative local solutions remain underrepresented.

Recent developments, such as the launch of the ‘Refugees for Climate Action’ network at COP29 by UNHCR, signal a growing recognition of the need to amplify refugee voices in climate discourse. However, meaningful inclusion remains rare. The result is a loss of refugees’ expertise in global conversations and lower adaptive capacity for refugees in response to climate change.

Drawing on the expertise of leading refugee climate advocates, this article argues for a paradigm shift from viewing refugees solely as vulnerable victims to recognising them as agents of change. By including refugee perspectives, climate policies can become fairer, more effective and better suited to the needs of those most affected.

Barriers to equitable access and participation

Displaced populations face a complex web of systemic barriers that hinder their meaningful participation in climate governance and their ability to access the resources necessary for effective adaptation. Central among these challenges is the restrictive legal and political environment in many host countries, where refugees often lack fundamental rights that would enable them to engage fully in public life, including in climate policy discussions and advocacy. Without legal protections and formal recognition, refugees encounter mobility restrictions and limited opportunities to organise or participate as stakeholders.

This legal marginalisation is compounded by a widespread lack of access to decision-making spaces at multiple levels. Refugees are generally excluded from local climate fora and national climate processes, such as National Adaptation Plans (NAPs), which outline how countries will adapt to climate change in the medium- and long-term, Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) processes, which set out their commitments on greenhouse gas emissions, and disaster preparedness efforts.[iii]

At the international level, the absence of official refugee recognition or accreditation within multilateral spaces such as the UN climate change processes and institutions – the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), Kyoto Protocol and Paris Agreement – means refugees have little or no voice in global climate policymaking.

Social perceptions and marginalisation further isolate refugees, as negative stereotypes portray them as passive recipients of aid rather than as active agents of change. This stigmatisation diminishes collaboration opportunities with host communities and decision-makers.

Finally, refugees are often excluded from international and national climate funding and technical assistance schemes due to procedural complexity, lack of information, and structural barriers – such as high costs of travel and restrictive visa regimes.

Such exclusion leads to climate policies that rarely address the specific vulnerabilities and needs of displaced communities, or incorporate their knowledge and expertise into designing and implementing solutions. Nevertheless, three examples from across the world highlight opportunities for greater refugee inclusion in key climate response processes, and the obstacles that remain to be overcome.

Disaster response in Pakistan

Disaster response in Pakistan highlights entrenched structural inequities, with Afghan refugees – among the world’s largest and longest-standing displaced populations – frequently marginalised in disaster planning and relief efforts. Refugee camps are often situated in vulnerable locations such as on riverbanks, in floodplains and on unstable slopes, exposing residents to recurring hazards like monsoon floods. During devastating floods in 2010 and 2022, refugees faced the destruction of shelters, loss of livelihoods and disruption of basic services. However, their access to timely and adequate assistance lagged behind that of host communities, revealing significant gaps in inclusive disaster risk governance.

Compounding this exclusion, formal disaster risk reduction (DRR) strategies rarely address refugee-specific vulnerabilities. Early warning systems commonly bypass refugee settlements, forcing communities to depend on informal communication networks, including youth-led WhatsApp groups, to disseminate urgent flood alerts. These grassroots efforts underscore refugees’ resilience but also reflect systemic neglect.

Legal restrictions, such as lack of secure land tenure and limitations on property rights, prevent refugees from building permanent, flood-resilient housing, trapping them in cycles of repeated loss. Yet despite these barriers, refugee communities demonstrate agency by reinforcing shelters with available local materials, improving drainage systems, elevating living spaces to prevent flood damage, and mobilising collective support to protect vulnerable community members. These adaptive survival strategies highlight refugees’ resilience but remain stopgap solutions that cannot replace the long-term security and stability provided by permanent resilient housing.

To create more effective and equitable disaster responses, refugee settlements must be integrated into provincial and national DRR frameworks, with guaranteed access to early warning systems and investments in resilient infrastructure tailored to their specific contexts. Recognising refugees as active partners with invaluable local knowledge could transform Pakistan’s disaster governance from reactive exclusion to inclusive resilience, benefiting both displaced and host communities amid escalating climate threats.

Uganda’s National Adaptation Plan

 Refugee-Led Organisations (RLOs) are already doing important work to mitigate and adapt to the impacts of climate change at the grassroots level in Uganda. However, these organisations face significant challenges: they have limited access to funding and technical assistance and are often excluded from key climate fora and decision-making spaces.[iv]

The Government of Uganda has long been heralded as a model of progressive refugee policy, welcoming refugees and supporting a settlement model that enables refugees to work and farm, a model that contrasts with the more restrictive encampment and employment policies of some refugee host countries. For this model to continue to be sustainable under worsening environmental conditions, refugees must be supported to transition to less resource-intensive energy sources and to adapt their farming techniques and homes to worsening drought, heat and storms.

A key element to this process is the development and implementation of Uganda’s National Adaptation Plan (NAP), which is currently underway. Refugees have significant expertise to contribute to this process but must be informed of how the NAP process is being conducted and how they can contribute to it. There must also be resources for them to participate, including for their attendance at consultations and participation on the NAP Committee.

Uganda’s 2023 Global Refugee Forum (GRF) pledge committed to including “refugees and their specific situations in its nationally determined contributions and adaptation plans,” and this must include the resources for meaningful inclusion, rather than just tokenistic representation by refugees in discussions.

If successful, the partnership between RLOs and the Government of Uganda can provide lessons for the inclusion of refugees in NAPs and NDCs around the world. As numerous other countries made similar GRF pledges, they can and should make progress on this inclusion by the next GRF in 2027 as well. These lessons can be amplified by the UNFCCC’s Task Force on Displacement under the Executive Committee of the Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage as well, as part of their implementation of the Technical guide on integrating human mobility and climate change linkages into relevant national climate change planning processes.

UN Climate Change negotiations

UNFCCC processes are party driven, meaning they are led by countries that are members of the Framework, Protocol, and Agreement. This participation structure leaves refugees without a seat at the table during annual Conference of the Parties (COP) meetings and mid-year Subsidiary Body (SB) meetings.

As part of recent COP and SB meetings, Refugees International’s delegation has included all three authors of this piece. We conducted pre-COP consultations with refugee leaders to collect their input and shared their perspectives via official side events and Pavilion events, bilateral meeting and press briefings.[v] However, as ‘observer’ organisations, civil society groups cannot actively participate while countries debate and decide. Three avenues offer promising options for greater inclusion of refugee perspectives and reflection in UNFCCC decisions.

First, civil society organisations should expand their outreach to refugee communities, conduct pre-COP consultations with a diverse array of refugee leaders and include more refugees as part of their official delegations.

Second, countries often consult with civil society ahead of formally determining their COP positions. Countries should also conduct consultations with refugee communities or invite them to these civil society meetings as well. As a result, country perspectives may more accurately reflect refugees’ concerns and input.

Finally, refugees must have a seat at the table as negotiators themselves as most host countries are likely to prioritise national perspectives over those of refugees in the case of divergent perspectives. While refugees are certainly not a monolithic group, they have some similar experiences and concerns across contexts. Through support for a refugee delegation, refugees could develop common positions much as countries do, and through official recognition at UNFCCC sessions, they would be able to advance these perspectives with the same status as countries.

Final recommendations

To enhance refugees’ ability to meaningfully participate and decide how to respond to climate change in their communities, they need access, information, and resources.

Access

As UN climate change institutions expand, they must ensure that refugees and RLOs are able to access the opportunities they offer on a par with others. This includes accreditation for RLOs at the UNFCCC, and addressing barriers to documentation for refugees and registration for RLOs at the national level within host countries. Physical or practical access barriers to participation must also be considered. Even if refugees are able to receive a badge to attend a UN conference, visa regimes and funding for travel costs must be addressed as well.

Other opportunities that build capacity for refugee leaders, such as educational programmes and scholarships, should also expand access by removing upper age restrictions and additional eligibility barriers – as refugees may have their education interrupted during displacement and take longer to complete academic programmes. Other barriers often include requirements for formal documentation (both identity and academic certifications), language proficiency exams, work or leadership experience, and legal residency status – all of which can be difficult for displaced people to provide due to the circumstances of displacement outside their control.

Information

Even if granted nominal access to participate in decision-making processes, refugees must have sufficient information to understand the systems and feel prepared to contribute. National governments, international bodies such as the UNFCCC’s institutions, and civil society organisations and universities produce huge quantities of technical information for climate action. These include models projecting future climate risks or hazards, as well as guidance on how to prepare for climate-driven disasters and adapt to other effects of climate change. However, these resources are rarely made available in multiple languages, particularly for communities that may not speak English or any of the UN languages. They may also be written in technical jargon that is inaccessible for refugees working with communities on the ground.

Resources

Due to systemic issues or practical barriers, RLOs are often excluded from funding opportunities provided by national governments and UN institutions. As the UNFCCC’s institutions expand, they must ensure that they expand their efforts to include refugees as well. This includes the Adaptation Fund and the Fund for responding to Loss and Damage, and the Santiago network for Loss and Damage, which is intended to provide technical assistance. Private sector efforts and philanthropies, such as the Adaptation and Resilience Fund, should ensure their outreach includes RLOs as well. They must ensure that their systems for application and receiving support are conscious of the barriers faced by refugees and provide options for mitigating them.

As displacement due to climate change and other environmental disasters increases, refugees and others living in displacement must be meaningfully included in all relevant decision-making spaces and policy processes. The shifts advocated here have the potential to generate policies that are fairer, more effective and better suited to the needs of refugees.

Qiyamud Din Ikram
Refugee Fellow Emeritus, Refugees International, Germany
qiyam.enviro@gmail.com
linkedin.com/in/qiyamud-din-ikram-a6a329183/

Ayoo Irene Hellen
Refugee Fellow Emeritus, Refugees International; Partnership Officer, Last Mile Climate; Uganda
ayooirene13@gmail.com
linkedin.com/in/ayoo-irene-hellen-179396185/

Jocelyn Perry
Senior Advocate and Program Manager, Climate Displacement Program, Refugees International, US
jperry@refugeesinternational.org
‪@jocelyngperry.bsky.social
linkedin.com/in/jocelynperry/

 

[i] Fransen S, Werntges A, Hunns A, Sirenko M and Comes T (2023) ‘Refugee settlements are highly exposed to extreme weather conditions’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, Vol 120 (0): e2206189120

^[ii] This article uses the term refugees and primarily addresses the economic, legal and political challenges faced by asylum seekers and refugees as defined under the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol. However, while displaced persons from other backgrounds – such as internally displaced people and those displaced by climate change – may face slightly different barriers, many of the solutions proposed here may be useful to improving access to policy spaces and resources for anyone.

[iii] Refugees International (2023) “It’s Time for Us to be Included”: An Assessment of Refugee and Displaced People’s Participation in National Adaptation Planning

[iv] US Committee for Refugees and Immigrants (2024) Policy Report – On the Front Lines: The Uganda Refugee Response and Refugee-Led Organizations

[v] Refugees International (2024) Climate Change is Hitting Us the Hardest. We Want to be Part of the Solutions

 

 

READ THE FULL ISSUE