In October last year, I shared my thoughts on why we need a national dialogue on adaptation focused population consolidation in the Maldives. The article titled "Do we need a national dialogue on 'adaptation focused population consolidation' in the Maldives?" was published on Maldives Policy Think Tank.
Bellow is an extract of the article that gives a summary of what is discussed in the article:
--
Where are we at?
Evidently, climate change poses an irreversible and existential threat to these islands, affecting islanders, their economy and their environment.
The resilience of Maldivian islands is deeply rooted on their natural bio-geophysical features, their size, shape, topography, vegetation, and their coastal and marine environment health. Unplanned, (unsustainable) development practices over the years have led to irreversible environmental change, increases in population pressures, unplanned urbanization, reclamation and coastal modification have significantly impacted these bio-geophysical features for the long run. Island topography, coastal dynamics, and geomorphology have all been altered, decreasing the natural adaptive capacity of our islands.
The cost of resilience; protecting our settlements sustainably for the long run or in other words “Climate-proofing” the Maldives is not cheap. Without a national dialogue, where communities and planners intentionally deliberate on a clear, long-term vision and strategy for climate adaptation and settlement resilience in the Maldives, the climate catastrophe will claim our shores, leaving generations of islanders homeless.
For the Maldives, climate-induced migration is inevitable. With the current data and projection, we know that sea level rise, storm surges and other coastal hazards are going to increase, causing significant damage to shorelines and infrastructure. What this equates to is certain forced relocations in the future. We also know that before permanent inundation can occur there would be many other impacts such as food security etc that may lead to islands becoming uninhabitable.
Maldivians have been migrating and they continue to do so for human development, in some cases voluntarily, but in most cases perhaps because there is no other option or choice. Even with decentralization rolling out in the country, there remains significant migration. No real change has yet materialized in service provision, access to critical facilities and infrastructure in most outer islands. Dependency continues to influence the decision for movement.
Relocations and development driven population consolidation is not a new concept in the Maldives. Over the decades, governments have made decisions that has led to relocation of entire communities, not all instances were voluntary, examples of forced relocation have proven loss of inherent rights and distinctive cultures of people. While it’s also important to note that development driven consolidation may have also increased living quality and standards for some.
Successive governments have also in some form or the other interpreted, proposed or implemented “safer islands” concept in the Maldives as an adaptation strategy for climate change as well as tsunami’s. This remains to be a key adaptation strategy to increase island resilience.
The cost implications for urgent and meaningful “total climate adaptation and resilience solution” for the entire population footprint of the country is too high to meet the current climate financing instruments accessible or available for the Maldives. There is an urgent need for a more meaningful and participatory decision-making process as a people in the Maldives to deliberate and agree on the future of human settlements in the Maldives.
Avoided national dialogue?
Questions such as “Can Maldivian’s sustain themselves with the implications of Climate Change in 187 islands?”, “Do we agree on the spatial planning direction towards a cluster-hub system?”, “Should we focus on increase connectivity to solve the issue of climate adaptation?”, “Should we live in 187 islands or maybe in 50 resilient ones?” and “Can we make all islands resilient?” needs deeper dialogue, consultation and research.
When I ask myself “why has this not been a major policy conversation in the Maldives?”, I am conflicted myself. I understand that it is the “islandness” of the islanders that makes these islands the Maldives. Relocation, consolidation and migration are not simple decisions. Consolidation, be it voluntary or forced will most certainly result in loss of islandness, distinctive heritage, culture, social ties and traditional livelihoods. Communities may even lose access to potential industries that sustain them (fishing, agriculture and tourism) that can create a form of economic displacement. Social resistance is understandable. These are perhaps reasons why this conversation is difficult and hard. But these difficult and hard conversations must happen, and it should start now.
An opportunity has perhaps presented itself. President Muizzu, following the Cabinet’s recommendation, has decided this September, to pursue the formulation of a 20-year National Development Masterplan for the Maldives. The President emphasised that the Masterplan would have legal backing, with a specifically designed law to support it. He further disclosed that “discussions at the island level, involving civil society groups, sports figures, political parties, and other respected individuals, would soon commence”.
Read the full article on Maldives Policy Think Tank.