-
A Brief on the Intersection between Climate Change Impacts and Asylum and Refugee Seekers’ Incarceration on Manus Island, Papua New Guinea
Through the case of Manus Island and its regional refugee processing center, this contribution to the dialogue on Australia-bound refugees and asylum seekers in Oceania offers a consideration of how the reception of refugees and asylum seekers may be related to the vagaries of and local responses to climate change. Instead of accepting a siloing of the political logics and narratives surrounding the refugee crisis and the climate crisis respectively, seeing these “concentration camps for alien refugees” as disposable sites for “toxic otherness” can help us understand the global treatment (past and present) of Pacific Islands and their populations in the age of climate change, during which the region has been equally revealed as a dump for toxic nuclear waste and plastic and for climate change– generated occurrences, such as sea-level rise. The case of Australia with respect to Manus (and Nauru) exemplifies a situation whereby a first-world nation—whose development paradigms have amplified the impacts of climate change—has entangled itself with these “prison islands” and the politics of climate change. This case is even more interesting because Australia, in relation to Papua New Guinea (PNG), is not just any first-world nation; it is also a former colonial master and influential player in regional politics. Australia has certainly used bilateral aid to persuade a cash-strapped PNG government to relinquish a piece of its sovereign space for use as a regional processing center.
Due to my remote location in PNG relative to Manus Island, this paper’s focal site of interest, it was difficult to monitor the in situ impacts of climate [End Page 484] change. In contrast, the media scrutiny in relation to the incarceration of refugees and asylum seekers on Manus is watertight, and little escapes the media spotlight. This commentary is thus a desktop study of information derived from official reports, journal articles, newspaper reports, and other credible sources available in the public domain. To direct my focus, I also draw on my time in social media discussion groups and forums (eg, the Facebook group “Manus Issues”) tracking issues Manus communities deem relevant, as well as pertinent interviews conducted during a three-day trip to Manus in 2013. In what follows, I go through different representations of the notion of “refugee” in relation to the impact of climate change on Manus communities.
Refugees and Climate Events
The term “refugee” has become widely used in PNG as a result of media coverage of the regional processing center on Manus Island, but a related term, “climate refugee,” has been generated as a result of climate change and its impacts. “Climate refugee” is a notion that originated from the climate change–mobility nexus and has a unique connection to Oceania due to the social constructs that define it or actively contribute to its establishment (Farbotko 2005). From a legal perspective, the term “refugee” does not include people who are environmentally displaced as a consequence of climate change–induced events (Gonzales 2018, 380), as they do not meet the legal requirement of having a well-founded fear that results in their search for refuge and can be used to justify their refugee-type situation (Pulu 2015). However, it must also be understood that for many in Oceania, the issue with the label “refugee” has not been about its legal definition; rather, it has more to do with the term’s negative connotations (Pulu 2015, 11–13).
In the context of Oceania, “refugees” have been represented as desperate persons attempting to cross the ocean in small, unseaworthy boats, seeking asylum in Australia. However, these persons have instead ended up in detention centers with appalling conditions, either on Nauru or on Manus Island, where the locals have been forced to stare the global refugee crisis in the face. Therefore, the term “refugee” has been connected to frightening images of guarded camps populated by foreign “refugees,” many of whom are in a state of mental and physical anguish. It is on this basis that the people of Oceania, including those on Manus, have developed a hearty distaste toward the notion of being labeled “refugees” [End Page 485] themselves in the broader context of climate change discourse, particularly in relation to sea-level rise.
A suite of more general climate change–related impacts has seemingly taken center stage in PNG. Recent increases in incidences of extreme weather events, especially excessive and changing precipitation patterns, have affected all regions of PNG. Extreme weather events result in severe flooding, which destroys food gardens and key, expensive-to-replace infrastructure, such as roads and bridges. Widespread drought, resulting in acute water and food shortages across vast sections of PNG, is another extreme weather event that seems to characterize the climate change– impacted landscape. When comparing extreme weather events and Manus Island as a site for refugees and asylum seekers to understand their “center stageness,” it could be concluded that they are on par in terms of the significance they command on a national scale. The use of Manus as a site of incarceration for refugees and asylum seekers is a hot political issue that coalesces emotively with issues relating to patriotic nationalism and national sovereignty in the PNG context.
Important to appreciating the significance of both of these issues is understanding some of the geographical and social contexts characterizing Manus. Manus Province comprises a group of 208 archipelagic islands (Case, Pauli, and Soejarto 2005), encompassing 220,000 square kilometers of maritime space in the Bismarck Archipelago (Hempenstall 2016), and is located 250 square kilometers off the north coast of the PNG mainland. It has a population of fifty-four thousand (Narayan and others 2015), and due to their heavy reliance on the sea for their basic sustenance and livelihoods, a significant number of local communities dwell right on the edge of the shoreline and to some extent even within the intertidal zone (Hoeppe 2000, 25). As a result, they are highly susceptible to coastal risks and hazards (Narayan and others 2015), particularly those relating to sea-level rise.
Physical Impacts
The issue of forced mobility is a drastic follow-on effect of sea-level rise. Migration has been described as the most disruptive response to the impacts of climate change (Mitchell 2016). In the context of this paper, it refers to the relocation of people from a low-lying island experiencing a slow onset of environmental deterioration (eg, sea-level rise; see Gonzales 2018) to a secured, elevated location. Unlike other well-publicized Oceanic [End Page 486] cases, such as those of Tuvalu and Kiribati (see Farbotko 2005; Farbotko and Lazrus 2012), in which the prospect of crossing international borders to resettle displaced populations is currently being negotiated, the situation on Manus Island involves localized movements, perhaps to a higher neighboring island. But whether the migration is local or international, the displaced peoples’ basic human rights, which are embodied in issues such as access to the land and resources needed for their continued survival in their new homes, must be upheld and respected by their host communities (Pascoe 2015). Due to the nature of customary land tenure in PNG, land access and resource utilization remain big challenges for climate change–induced immigrants in Manus. Despite these issues, the PNG government sees fit to assist its Australian counterpart in accommodating refugees and asylum seekers who are bound for Australia to be incarcerated, processed, and even resettled on Manus Island. Many of these refugees and asylum seekers view the option to resettle on Manus—or in PNG more broadly, for that matter—as being against both their will and their basic human rights.
Also on Manus Island, sea-level rise is resulting in saltwater intrusion. This contamination of the water table destroys freshwater reserves and crop production due to increased ground salinity. Many communities in Manus rely on natural water sources for their household potable water needs. Thus, saltwater intrusion could prove a major survival challenge for coastal communities in Manus. In addition, the low-lying islands surrounding the main Manus Island are even more exposed to a gradual onset of environmental deterioration due to sea-level rise, and their populations may be forced to opt for adaptation measures in the form of coastal rehabilitation. As a primary response to the threat of sea-level rise, a number of desalination plants have been established in adversely affected communities, particularly through bilateral aid programs (eg, with Japan), as seen in the Mbuke Islands Group to the south of Manus (jica 2016). Two other options already being employed in parts of Manus include seawall construction using stones and dead logs (jica 2016) and mangrove tree planting (see Ariafa 2016). Despite these measures, low-lying island communities in Manus may nonetheless be forced to move to a new location if crop production fails due to increased soil salinity.
It is absurd that while the cash-strapped Manus provincial government is using its meager resources to finance the needs of its affected subpopulations as they endure the impacts of climate change, a wealthy country like Australia is offloading refugees and asylum seekers on Manus to [End Page 487] be incarcerated, all while casting a blind eye on the provincial government’s plight. Adding to this, according to Simon Bradshaw, Australia’s carbon footprint, generated through its domestic emissions and booming coal exports, has become too prominent to be ignored any longer (2018). Thus, Australia must take on its moral responsibility to clear its standing in the region—that is, assist with the challenges experienced by climate-displaced peoples in Manus.
Building on this discussion, it makes sense to consider implementing measures that promote resilience, thereby averting displacement as a first option. Such measures must pave the way, and if they fail, then the options of relocation and displacement due to sea-level rise could be pursued in their aftermath. I am referring here to measures such as mitigation, adaptation, and disaster risk management (see Raygorodetsky 2013), which, if successful in their execution, could help avoid resettlement and the associated costs and issues.
Social Corrective Measures and Impacts
Lack of food security is not an unprecedented issue in Manus. Having a failing or even nonexistent crop production as a consequence of poor soil fertility has been an ongoing challenge, especially for communities on low-lying islands. Accounts from the early twentieth century note how the different ethnic groups occupied distinct specialized ecological niches, which enabled them to barter with each other for products they originally had no access to themselves (see Schwartz 1963). Indeed, since ancestral times, a complex exchange system of trade has existed throughout Manus societies (see Mead 1930, 1956; Schwartz 1963; Carrier and Carrier 1989). For example, German researchers observed in the early 1900s that Papitalai, a coast-dwelling people on Los Negros Island in what is now Manus Province, harvested fish and frequently traded with other communities for coconut oil, dogs’ teeth, and clay pots (Hempenstall 2016). Hanson and coauthors also concurred that occupants of very small islands in Manus are known to be reliant on trade to survive (2001). Today, people from low-lying coastal communities still exchange fish and coconuts for sago and other garden produce. It is thus logical to encourage this trade system to continue and, where it has “died a natural death,” to revive it again in order to safeguard continued access to food and other daily needs against the impacts of sea-level rise. [End Page 488]
Reprise
In the face of environmental challenges to their existence, Manus people have demonstrated their resilience. As a people, they possess historically institutionalized systems that have greatly benefited and enhanced their survival strategies. Now that climate change is emerging as an environmental threat, a suggested strategy could be for them to fall back on their own traditional knowledge and customary practices to further promote their resilience.
Human displacement within Manus Province due to sea-level rise is an ongoing concern. However, since Manus Province has many high islands, this could be resolved internally as long as the institutional and governmental structures in place respect and uphold the basic human rights of those being resettled (Gonzales 2018, 396). Saltwater intrusion is another issue that threatens Manus communities as a result of sea-level rise. Potable water issues have been addressed in some of the islands through the establishment of desalination plants. The challenge of failing crop production is difficult to remedy; however, the traditional exchange system may be a survival strategy for communities to consider. As I have discussed, adaptation measures should precede other measures when addressing the impacts of sea-level rise. Coastal rehabilitation measures, such as stone wall construction or mangrove replanting, should be prioritized to encourage resilience and to avert displacement as a primary option.
In terms of political involvement, however, Australia must demonstrate its commitment to addressing climate change through genuine action if it wants to command respect from its Oceanic nation-state neighbors—especially in lieu of using their sovereign spaces as sites for processing refugees’ and asylum seekers’ claims.
Manus has largely been represented by global media as one of two remote islands in Oceania that cohosted regional processing centers for Australia-bound refugees trying to enter the country through what some viewed as the back door. As a result of bad press, the regional processing center on Manus (like the one on Nauru) has been shrouded in negativity, and the unflattering images that came to define these facilities and their occupants ultimately influenced the reception of the new social construct “climate refugee.”
Australia’s stance against refugees and asylum seekers should not be tainted by xenophobia, as in the case of refugees from Muslim countries [End Page 489] in the wake of the 2001 terrorist attack on the United States, and the country should not be using policy instruments to process asylum-seeker claims outside of Australian territory—on island territories in Oceania— using well-thought-out counterarguments as a smokescreen against this phobia.
robert bino received his PhD in resource management at the Australian National University in 2016. His thesis, “Conservation and Development Options of the Kokoda Track and the Surrounding Region,” is a historical analysis of the political ecology of tourism, conservation, and development along the most visited tourist site in Papua New Guinea, drawing on over twenty years working with, and managing, environmental conservation organizations in Papua New Guinea. Dr Bino has published about conservation, mining, cassowary conservation, and the New Guinea Singing Dog.
I thank Steffen Dalsgaard and Alexander Mawyer for reviewing and for their insights into improving the readability of this paper.
References
Factors Influencing Community Mangrove Planting in Manus Island, Papua New Guinea. Conservation Evidence 13:42–46.
2018 Friend or Foe: Australia, Climate Change and the Pacific. sgdia Working Paper 6. Suva: School of Government, Development and International Affairs, University of the South Pacific.
1989 Wage, Trade and Exchange in Melanesia. Berkeley: University of California Press.
2005 Factors in Maintaining Indigenous Knowledge among Ethnic Communities in Manus Island. Economic Botany 59 (4): 356–365.
Tuvalu and Climate Change: Constructions of Environmental Displacement in the Sydney Morning Herald. Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography 87 (4): 279–293.
2012 The First Climate Refugee? Contesting Global Narratives of Climate Change in Tuvalu. Global Environmental Change 22:382–390.
2018 Climate Justice and Climate Displacement: Evaluating the Emerging Legal and Policy Responses. Wisconsin International Law Journal 36:366–396.
2001 Papua New Guinea Rural Development Handbook. Canberra: The Australian National University.
2016 Pacific Islanders under German Rule: A Study in the Meaning of Colonial Resistance. Canberra: The Australian National University Press.
2000 When the Shark Bites the Stingray: The Night Sky in the Construction of the Manus World. Anthropos 95:23–36.
2016 PNG: Solar-Powered Desalination Plants Project in Manus Province. White paper on Development Cooperation.
1930 Melanesian Middlemen. Natural History 30 (2): 115–130.
2016 Protecting an Area and Its People: Papua New Guinea and Its Impacts of Climate Change. iucn (International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources), Gland, Switzerland.
2015 Protecting against Coastal Hazards in Manus and New Ireland Provinces Papua New Guinea: An Assessment of Present and Future Options. Technical report. Goroka, PNG: Wildlife Conservation Society.
2015 Sailing the Waters: Climate Change Migration, Self-Determination and the Carteret Islands. qut Law Review 15:72–85.
2015 New Zealand’s Climate Change Refugee Debate. Te Kaharoa 8:10–13.
2013 Faces of Climate Change: On the Frontlines of Climate Change in Papua New Guinea, Manus Islands Are Losing Ground to Rising Sea. Alternatives Journal 39 (2): 46–51.
1963 Systems of Areal Integration: Some Considerations Based on the Admiralty Islands of Northern Melanesia. Anthropological Forum 1 (1): 56–97.