Problem F: The Place I Called Home…
Researchers have identified several island nations, such as The Maldives, Tuvalu, Kiribati, and The Marshall Islands, as being at risk of completely disappearing due to rising sea levels. What happens, or what should happen, to an island’s population when its nation’s land disappears? Not only do these environmentally displaced persons (EDPs) need to relocate, but there is also risk of losing a unique culture, language, and way of life. In this problem, we ask you to look more closely at this issue, in terms of both the need to relocate people and the protection of culture. There are many considerations and questions to address, to include: Where will these EDPs go? What countries will take them? Given various nations’ disproportionate contributions to the
green-house gasses both historically and currently that have accelerated
climate change linked to the rising seas, should the worst offenders have a higher obligation to address these issues? And, who gets a say in deciding where these nationless EDPs make a new home – the individuals, an
intergovernmental organization like the United Nations (UN), or the individual governments of the states absorbing these persons? A more detailed
explanation of these issues is given in the Issue Paper beginning on page 3.
As a result of a recent UN ruling that opened the door to the theoretical recognition of EDPs as refugees, the International Climate Migration Foundation (ICM-F) has hired you to advise the UN by developing a model and using it to analyze this multifaceted issue of when, why, and how the UN should step into a role of addressing the increasing challenge of EDPs. The ICM-F plans to brief the UN on guidance for how the UN should generate a systemized response for EDPs, especially in consideration of the desire to preserve cultural heritage. Your assignment is to develop a model (or set of models) and use your model(s) to provide the analysis to support this briefing. The ICM-F is especially interested in understanding the scope of the issue of EDPs. For example, how many people are currently at risk of becoming EDPs[1]; what is the value of the cultures of at-risk nations; how are those answers likely to change over time? Furthermore, how should the world respond with an international policy that specifically focuses on protecting the
rights of persons whose nations have disappeared in the face of climate change while also aiming to preserve culture? Based on your analysis, what recommendations can you offer on this matter, and what are the implications of accepting or rejecting your recommendations?
This problem is extremely complex. We understand that your submission will not be able to fully consider all of the aspects described in the Issue Paper beginning on page 3. However, considering the aspects that you address, synthesize your work into a cohesive answer to the ICM-F as they advise the UN. At a minimum, your team’s paper should include:
An analysis of the scope of the issue in terms of both the number of people at risk and the risk of loss of culture;
Proposed policies to address EDPs in terms of both human rights (being able to resettle and participate fully in life in their new home) and cultural preservation;
A description of the development of a model used to measure the potential impact of proposed policies;
An explanation of how your model was used to design and/or improve your proposed policies;
An explanation, backed by your analysis, of the importance of implementing your proposed policies.
The ICM-F consists of interdisciplinary judges including mathematicians, climate scientists, and experts in refugee migration to review your work. Therefore, your paper should be written for a scientifically literate yet diverse audience.
问题F：我称之为家的地方…
研究人员已经确定了几个岛屿国家，如马尔代夫、图瓦卢、基里巴斯和马绍尔群岛，由于海平面上升，它们有可能完全消失。当一个岛国的土地消失时，会发生什么，或者应该发生什么?这些环境流离失所者不仅需要搬迁，而且还有可能失去独特的文化、语言和生活方式。在这个问题上， 我们要求你更仔细地看待这个问题，从需要搬迁人和保护文化的角度来看。有许多考虑和问题需要解决，包括:这些电子数据处理将何去何从?哪些国家会拿走它们? 鉴于 各国对温室气体的贡献不成比例，无论是在历史.上还是在目前，都加速了与上升的海洋有关的气候变化，最严重的违法者是否有更高的义务来解决这些问题?而且， 在决定这些无国籍的EDP在哪里建立一个新家一个人、 像联合国这样的政府间组织，还是吸收这些人的各国政府，谁有发言权?对这些问题的更详细解释载于问题文件第3页.
由于联合国最近的-项裁决为从理论上承认EDP是难民打开了大门，国际气候变化基金会(ICM-F)聘请你为联合国提供咨询，制定一个模型，并利用它来分析这一多方面的问题，即何时，为什么以及联合国应该如何发挥作用来应对EDP日益增加的挑战。信息和通信管理基金会计划向联合国通报关于联合国应如何为电子数据处理系统化作出反应的指导意见，特别是考虑到保护文化遗产的愿望。您的任务是开发一个模型(或一组模型)，并使用您的模型提供分析以支持此简报。信息和通信管理基金特别希望了解电子数据处理问题的范围。例如， 目前有多少人面临成为电子数据平台的风险[1];风险国家文化的价值是什么;这些答案可能会随着时间的推移而改变吗?此外， 世界应如何采取国际政策，特别注重保护其民族在气候变化面前消失的人的权利，同时又旨在保护文化?根据你的分析，你能就这件事提出什么建议，接受或拒绝你的建议有什么影响?
这个问题极其复杂。我们理解， 您的提交将无法充分考虑问题文件中描述的所有方面，从第3页开始。然而， 考虑到你所涉及的各个方面，把你的工作综合起来，成为对ICM-F的一个有凝聚力的答案，因为他们为联合国提供了建议。你们小组的文件至少应包括:
●从面临风险的人数和文化丧失风险两方面分析问题的范围:
●在人权(能够重新安置和充分参与新家园的生活)和文化保护方面解决环境流离失所者问题，拟议政策:
●说明制订一个模型，用以衡量拟议政策的潜在影响；
●解释您的模型是如何用于设计和/或改进您的拟议政策的；
●在您的分析的支持下，对实施您建议的策略的重要性的解释。
ICM-F由包括数学家、气候科学家和难民移民专家在内的跨学科法官组成，以审查您的工作。 因此，你的论文受众应该是具有不同科学素养的人。
Issue Paper
As noted in the problem statement, several island nations are at risk of completely disappearing due to rising sea levels.[1] The issue is quite complex. It is not simply a matter of identifying how to move a certain number of people around the globe – it is also about recognizing that these people are human beings who have rights and who are the last living representatives of their unique culture. In this Issue Paper, we highlight three of the essential ideas that frame this problem: relocation decisions as they relate to human rights, nation-state responsibility, and individual choice; the tension between assimilation and accommodation as part of resettlement and cultural preservation; and time factors such as the rate of the nation disappearing, the timing of these losses aligning with a global rise in nationalism, and the difficulty in making sound predictions about the size of this issue.
Relocation Decisions: Human Rights, Nation-State Responsibility, and Individual Choice Considering the relocation issue, you might think that such EDPs would have similar rights as other UN-recognized refugees, but the United Nations High Commission on Refugees (UNHCR) and the widely adopted 1967 protocol has historically only afforded rights to those who are
displaced due to politically related security issues, such as ethnic or religious persecution.However, in a very recent ruling, the UN has acknowledged this issue and recognized that some EDPs might qualify as refugees.[2] Although a ruling has now been made, there is not yet a vision on how the international community should respond as these situations increase in magnitude and frequency.[3]
Rights awarded to these refugees include right to work, freedom of movement, and protection by host governments. Additionally, the UNHCR, in collaboration with other aid organizations, work to provide aid and assistance to refugees until they are resettled in another country, become naturalized by their host state, or repatriate to their country of origin. Now, with this new ruling, the former inhabitants of the disappeared nation may be eligible for some of those rights or aid, but there is no hope of repatriation as the land itself is gone.
Even if EDPs are eligible for rights somewhere else, it is not clear where this new home would be or who would be responsible for making that decision. There are individual and international considerations related to whether the selection of a new long-term residence is made by individuals or if the choices are made or swayed by immigration policies developed by nations in isolation or as part of a cooperative effort coordinated by the United Nations. Possible migration policies could consider the financial ability of the new nation to absorb these new individuals, but there is also discussion of setting up burden-sharing based on nations’ relative contributions (pollution) to the environmental conditions that is leading to the loss of these nations. In other
words, the international community may press nations with high pollution records to contribute more to the resettlement of EDPs in some equitable manner.
Resettlement and Cultural Preservation: Assimilation versus Accommodation
In terms of the cultural preservation issues, the nations that are most at risk are arguably some of the most culturally distinct in the world with languages, music, art, dances, social norms, and ways of life that can be different from island to island even within the same island chain. As a result, the loss of one of these nations could represent a significant cultural loss. While the displaced inhabitants may be able to preserve some aspects of their culture, some are
geographically specific. For example, traditional ocean fishing techniques used in The Marshall Islands are unlikely to continue to be practiced by families who settle in the Alps. As another example, perhaps the language could be preserved, but this would require host nations to be more accommodating and less strict on the assimilation requirements of these special new residents who may be trying to preserve their culture in a new land. For example, France current requires refugees who resettle there to learn French, but if there were international pressure, perhaps France would waive this requirement for groups of EDPs who are trying to preserve a lost culture.
This leads to a tension between accommodation and assimilation as other nations volunteer to absorb the populations of the former nations. It is important to note that it is the lack of a UN protocol for dealing with EDPs that forces other nations to volunteer to settle and naturalize those affected. In fact, the loss of a nation falls into the no-man’s land between several UN charges – the care of refugees (UNHCR), the protection of world culture (United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)), and emergency aid response (United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (UNOCHA)). And while the residents of a handful of small island nations might be absorbed relatively easily by volunteer nations, the fact is that climate change has been ushering a literal wave of more frequent and more intense environmental disasters. Imagine a major tsunami taking out a nuclear power plant and causing enough other significant damage that a more heavily inhabited nation may become uninhabitable; or a place being hit by so many repeated severe storms that rebuilding was deemed unwise; or a place where climate change is making it impossible for a nation that was formerly flush with crops to provide for its people. At what point should the UN step in, and in what role?
Time Factors: Raging Waves, Rising Seas, and Rising Nationalism
If a nation is wiped out as a result of a rapid catastrophic event, such as a tsunami or hurricane, then there is no time to prepare, even if the country knew they were at risk of such an event. When a nation is sinking as a result of slowly rising sea levels, then there are issues about how a migration could be coordinated and planned, or even how the loss could be mitigated through
land-preserving measures taken by the at-risk nation with or without international support. It is not clear how the timescale of the loss would impact, or should impact, the ultimate decisions that need to be made concerning the resettlement of a population, the protection of their human
rights, and the preservation of their culture.
Additionally, as the urgency to address this issue is literally rising with the sea level, the world is also experiencing a rise of nationalism, so the global response today may be very different than it would have been at other periods in history where globalism may have been more in favor than nationalism. If policies, or a lack of policies, end up pushing EDPs towards a subset of welcoming nations, then those countries may get overwhelmed and become less welcoming in response. Therefore, the changing global political climate may also be an important factor to consider.
Lastly, all of these challenges make the size of this problem extremely difficult to predict. Credible studies have predicted anywhere from 140 million to one billion EDPs by 2050.
Summary:
In summary, as a nation disappears, it is not clear if an international cooperative and coordinated effort should be adopted to address the loss of homes, the need to resettle, and the preservation of culture. This issue is complex, and no model or report would be able to adequately address every
aspect in detail, but excellent reports need to be aware of these different aspects and how they are interrelated. There is the aspect of human rights, which are now recognized in theory, but have never been applied in practice. There is the balance of individual choice versus policy-driven migration. Another aspect is defining equitable burden sharing which could be driven by the capacity for nations to absorb new residents and/or obligations due to contributions to climate change; specifically, whether the nations with the largest contributions to climate change have any ethical obligations to take on a higher burden in assisting climate refugees. Yet another aspect is a balance between assimilation and accommodation, as new residents preserve their
culture and/or blend into their new home. Some nations may disappear slowly, such as sinking under rising sea levels or loss of the ability to produce food, while other nations may be wiped out in a catastrophic disaster; and the immediate needs and ability to plan for the long-term needs in these situations are different. Furthermore, the situation is evolving over time as climate change advances and as we see a global rise in nationalism. Lastly, all of this complexity has made it difficult to even measure the problem or predict how quickly it will escalate.
正如问题声明中所指出的，由于海平面上升，一些岛屿国家面临着完全消失的风险。 问题相当复杂。 这不仅仅是一个确定如何在全球移动一定数量的人的问题，也是一个承认这些人是有权利的人，是他们独特文化的最后一个活着的代表的问题。在这份议题文件中，我们强调了构成这一问题的三个基本思想：与人权、民族国家责任和个人选择有关的搬迁决定 ；作为重新安置和文化保护的一部分的同化和迁就之间的紧张关系；国家消失的速度等时间因素，这些损失发生的时间随着全球民族主义的兴起而一致，很难对这个问题的规模做出正确的预测。
搬迁决定：人权、国家责任和个人选择
考虑到搬迁问题，你可能会认为这种EDPs与其他联合国承认的难民一样，但联合国难民事务高级专员办事处（难民署）和广泛的通过的1967年议定书在历史上只为那些由于政治相关的安全问题，如种族或宗教迫害而流离失所的人提供了权利。不过，在最近的一次裁决，联合国已经承认了这一问题，并承认一些EDP可能符合难民的资格。虽然现在已经作出裁决，但随着这些局势的规模和频率的增加，国际社会应如何应对还没有一个设想。
给予这些难民的权利包括工作权、行动自由和东道国政府的保护。此外，难民署与其他援助组织合作，努力推动向难民提供援助和援助，直到他们重新安置在另一个国家，被其东道国入籍，或遣返原籍国。现在，有了这个新的裁决， 失踪国家的居民可能有资格获得其中一些权利或援助，但随着土地本身的消失，遣返是没有希望的。
即使EDP有资格在其他地方获得权利，也不清楚这个新家将在哪里，或者谁将负责做出这个决定。在选择新的长期居留地是由个人作出，还是由各国单独制定的移民政策或作为联合国协调的合作努力的一部分而作出或改变的问题上，存在着个人和国际考虑。可能的移民政策可以考虑到新国家吸收这些新个人的财政能力，但也有人讨论根据国家对造成这些国家损失的环境条件的相对贡献（污染）建立负担分担机制。换言之，国际社会可能会敦促有高污染记录的国家以某种公平的方式为重新安置EDP作出更多贡献。
重新安置和文化保护：同化与迁居
就文化保护问题而言，面临的风险最大的国家可以说是世界上语言、音乐、艺术、舞蹈、社会规范等文化差异最大的国家之一。 即使在同一岛链内，每个岛屿的生活方式也可能不同。因此，失去其中一个国家可能意味着重大的文化损失。虽然流离失所的居民可能能够保留其文化的某些方面，但有些是特定于地理的。例如，马绍尔群岛使用的传统海洋捕鱼技术不太可能在阿尔卑斯山定居的家庭继续练习。作为另一个例子，也许可以保留这种语言，但这将要求东道国更加宽容，而不是更少的人。 例如，“法国电流”要求在那里重新定居的难民学习法语，但如果有国际压力，也许法国会放弃对试图保存失落文化的EDP群体的这一要求。
由于其他国家自愿吸收前几个国家的人口，这导致了迁就和同化之间的紧张关系。必须指出的是，正是由于缺乏联合国处理弱势群体问题的议定书，迫使其他国家自愿安置和归化那些受影响的人。事实上，一个国家的损失在联合国的几项指控——照顾难民（难民署）、保护世界文化（联合国教育、科学及文化组织（教科文组织））和紧急援助反应（联合国人道主义事务协调厅（联科行动））之间是无人区。尽管少数小岛屿国家的居民可能相对容易地被志愿国吸收，但事实是，气候变化已经带来了更频繁、更强烈的环境灾难。想象一下，一场大海啸摧毁了一座核电站，并造成了足够多的其他重大破坏，以至于一个人口更稠密的国家可能变得无法居住；或者一个地方遭受了如此多次的严重风暴袭击，重建工作被认为是不明智的；或者是一个气候变化使一个以前农作物丰收的国家无法养活人民的地方。联合国应该在什么时候介入，发挥什么坐用？
时间因素：汹涌的浪潮、上升的海洋和上升的民族主义
如果一个国家由于海啸或飓风等迅速的灾难性事件而被消灭，那么就没有时间准备了，即使该国知道他们面临这种事件的危险。如果一个国家由于海平面的缓慢上升而下沉，那么就会有一些问题，比如如何协调和规划移民，甚至如何通过土地保护措施减轻损失，在有或没有国际支持的情况下。目前尚不清楚损失的时间尺度将如何影响或应如何影响需要作出的最终决定，关于重新安置一个人口、保护他们的人权和保护他们的文化。
此外，由于解决这一问题的紧迫性正随着海平面上升，世界也正在经历民族主义的兴起，因此今天的全球反应可能大不相同。 在历史上的其他时期，全球主义可能比民族主义更受欢迎。如果政策或缺乏政策，最终将EDP推向一部分受欢迎的国家，那么这些国家可能会不知所措，变得不那么受欢迎的回应。因此，不断变化的全球政治气候也可能是需要考虑的一个重要因素。
最后，所有这些挑战都使这一问题的规模极难预测。 可信的研究预测到2050年将达到1.4亿至10亿欧元的经济发展计划。
总结：
总之，随着一个国家的消失，是否应该采取国际合作和协调的努力来解决失去家园的问题、重新安置的必要性和保护问题尚不清楚。 这个问题很复杂，没有一个模型或报告能够充分详细地讨论每一个方面，但优秀的报告需要了解这些不同的方面以及它们如何是相互关联的。 还有人权方面的问题，这些问题现在在理论上得到承认，但从未在实践中得到应用。 个人选择与政策驱动的移民之间存在着平衡 配给。 另一个方面是界定公平的负担分担，这种分担可由各国吸收新居民的能力和（或）气候变化所致义务驱动； 从理论上讲，对气候变化贡献最大的国家是否有任何道德义务承担更高的负担来援助气候难民。 另一方面是平衡同化和住宿之间，因为新居民保留他们的文化和/或融入他们的新家。 有些国家可能会慢慢消失，如在海平面上升下下沉或失去生产粮食的能力，而其他国家可能在灾难性的灾难中被消灭；在这些情况下，规划长期需求的迫切需要和能力是不同的。 此外，随着气候变化的发展，随着我们看到民族主义在全球抬头，局势也在不断演变。最后，所有这些复杂性使得我们甚至很难衡量问题或预测问题升级的速度。
