Does my conclusion fit with my essay?

Throughout the latter half of the 20th and into the 21st century there has been a dramatic increase in CO2 levels in the atmosphere. Before this the biggest issues of intra country migration were mainly due to religious or political persecution, but due to climate change this has changed drastically. This essay will discuss how climate change is pressuring the citizens of lesser developed countries(LDC’s), the responsibility held by developed nations due to their early use of fossil fuels, and the problematic use of the term Climate Refugee due to the law definitions created in the 1950’s regarding international protections for refugees, while relating such issues to signs of societal collapse through the lens of Diamonds’ five-point framework.

LDC’s are disproportionately affected by the climate changes seen due to greenhouse gas emissions(GHGs). Most LDC’s are located in the southern hemisphere and/or closer to the equator and heavily reliant on rainfall or waterways to sustain their ways of life. Most LDC’s economies are heavily reliant on agriculture to sustain their economy. We see an example of this from Gilberto Ysaias in Vice:

“Because of the heat, farmers are planting fewer crops and planting more grass for cattle. Because landowners are planting more grass, there are fewer jobs maintaining crops”
(Ramirez, 2019). 

With less work available and no alternative jobs, along with smaller amounts of food and drinking water due to increased temperatures the people are forced to look elsewhere for their livelihoods and survival. Through this change in planting habits, we see humans' impact on the environment also become an immediate factor. When switching out crops for grass to be eaten by cattle, there is a much higher risk of soil erosion, compaction, and waste runoff into local water supplies from the animals' waste if the grazing land is not managed properly. 

It is well known that more developed countries(MDC’s) such as the United States and the European Union gained their wealth from the development of technologies that rely heavily on fossil fuels, that in turn produce GHG’s when consumed. Rishika Pardikar specifies just how much of the emissions these countries are responsible for:

“The United States is responsible for 40% of the climate breakdown the world is experiencing today, and the European Union is responsible for 29%, according to new research. In total, the Global North is responsible for 92% of excess global carbon emissions”(Pardikar, 2020).

Since we are well aware that these gasses they are producing are a massive contributor to the climate change the world is experiencing, it is reasonable to assign a respective amount of financial and moral responsibility for this issue to these countries. More developed nations have a responsibility to both accept migrants that have been forced to move by climate change and provide monetary support to help LDC’s that suffer major damages from the effects of climate change. This may be a difficult task to coordinate as there has been a major precedence of climate change denial from those in power for quite some time. Even those who believe in it do not believe that it is a pressing matter to resolve. Gibb and Fords’ article touches on this saying:

”Until the world’s most influential nations truly acknowledge climate change as an urgent issue and commit to take action—be it within or outside UN
processes—the proposed strategy for recognition will likely fail”(p. 8).

The longer we wait the more difficult it will be to prevent a major crisis from occurring simply from society’s lack of a proper response to these issues. Time is a critical factor. As the effects of climate change grow, immigration to MDC’s will become an increasingly problematic topic. This is already an issue being brought to our attention. Nawrotzki mentions:

”While some authors have argued that immigration might reduce labor market opportunities of less skilled natives (e.g., Borjas 2001), the general opinion among migration scholars seems to be that the overall economic effects of immigration are negligible (Simon 1999, Card 2004, Hanson 2009, Holzer 2011)”(Nawrotzki 2014, p 11).

Even without acceptance of climate change as a major concern by those in power, many right wing politicians voice the concern that immigrants will take jobs from locally born citizens. With the addition of water and food restrictions due to climate change issues these relations may be strained to the point that we no longer allow immigrants into our borders leaving them stranded. If our relations with our neighboring allies(friendly societies) change due to immigration problems this can cause a wide variety of problems that can lead to societal collapse such as further supply chain bottlenecks and increased lack of cooperation. Hoarding of resources and restricted immigration laws can also increase concerns about terrorism from hostile nations:

-“The security community also highlights the connection between climate change and terrorism—for instance, the decline of agricultural and pastoral livelihoods has been linked to the effectiveness of financial recruiting strategies by al-Qaida”(Podesta, 2019).

With a lack of resources worldwide there will be increased competition for those same resources and citizens of hostile nations may resort to desperate measures to survive and for a chance at those that are left that others may already possess.

Lastly, the term “climate refugee” is a hot button topic since it technically is not a legal term:
”UNHCR, the international organisation’s refugee agency, doesn’t endorse using the term ‘climate refugee’, largely, it seems, because it’s not a term that exists in international law”(Goodfellow, 2020).

The term “Climate Refugee” is technically not recognized by international law and therefore climate migration is not a legally enforceable reason to apply for refugee status. The laws created to protect those seeking asylum were created originally to protect those persecuted in their own country for reasons due to political or religious identity. Since then, the world’s international concerns have changed drastically yet the laws have not changed. 

Climate change continues to be an increasing concern worldwide that directly relates to Diamonds five-point framework for societal collapse. It calls for immediate and drastic change in our worldwide response to many different problems. We must begin international cooperation between MDC’s both friendly and hostile, and assist the LDC’s who have been most affected by GHG emissions. Our international refugee and migration laws require a massive overhaul to prevent conflict and suffering, and our methods of food production and water sourcing need to become more sustainable in LDC’s to prevent starvation and increased migration. Overall, we must reflect on Diamond’s criteria and examine our failure to respond and perceive these issues if we are to maintain a level of normalcy as the world is increasingly morphed by climate change.