Climate change to drive U.S. migration, change regional makeup | Jon Talton – The Seattle Times

Report on Climate-Induced Migration and Sustainable Development in the United States

Introduction: Shifting Demographics and the Urgency of the Sustainable Development Goals

A notable shift in regional demographic trends within the United States is emerging, driven not by traditional economic migration but by factors related to climate change. This phenomenon directly engages several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities) and SDG 13 (Climate Action). Recent data indicates a significant slowdown in migration to the South and a relative increase in migration to the Midwest, suggesting a nascent response to the escalating environmental pressures in traditionally high-growth regions.

Urban Unsustainability and its Conflict with SDG 11

Case Study: The Sunbelt’s Environmental Challenges

Cities in the Sunbelt, such as Phoenix, Houston, and Miami, exemplify the challenges to achieving SDG 11. The city of Phoenix, for instance, is experiencing a significant deviation from historical climate norms, with autumn temperatures remaining exceptionally high. This is largely attributed to urban sprawl, which has replaced thousands of acres of agricultural land and natural cooling landscapes. This process undermines multiple SDGs:

• SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities): The replacement of natural, cooling ecosystems with heat-retaining urban infrastructure renders cities less resilient and sustainable.
• SDG 15 (Life on Land): The conversion of agricultural and natural land to urban sprawl contributes to biodiversity loss and ecosystem degradation.
• SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being): Increased urban heat islands pose significant health risks to residents.

The long-term viability of these urban centers is in question, posing serious policy concerns for regions, such as the Pacific Northwest, that may see an influx of domestic climate migrants.

National Policy and its Impact on SDG 13 (Climate Action)

Federal Stance Versus Scientific Consensus

The national policy environment presents a significant obstacle to achieving SDG 13. The administration’s position, which contradicts the consensus of 97% of climate scientists, has led to numerous actions aimed at increasing fossil-fuel production and weakening programs designed to reduce their use. This policy direction is in direct opposition to the global commitment to climate action.

The Economic Costs of Climate Inaction

The financial consequences of climate change are escalating, directly impacting SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth). Data from the relaunched Billion-Dollar Weather and Climate Disasters Database indicates that losses in the first six months of the year exceeded $101 billion. These costs, along with threats to major economic sectors like Washington’s $14 billion agriculture industry, underscore the economic imperative for robust climate policy aligned with SDG 13.

State-Level Initiatives Driving Progress on the SDGs

Washington State’s Comprehensive Climate Strategy

In contrast to the federal landscape, Washington state is actively implementing policies that align with the SDGs. The state’s focus is on the effective execution of existing climate initiatives, demonstrating a commitment to SDG 13. Key actions include:

1. The 2021 Climate Commitment Act: This legislation establishes a cap-and-invest program to lower statewide greenhouse gas emissions. It also promotes SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals) through plans to link its carbon market with those in California and Québec.
2. Resilience and Adaptation Measures: The state is addressing climate impacts by easing heat risk in schools (SDG 3, SDG 11), improving wildfire preparedness (SDG 11, SDG 15), and reforming recycling systems to align with SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production) by shifting costs to manufacturers.

Sustainable Infrastructure: A Foundation for SDG 9 and SDG 11

Advancements and Setbacks in Sustainable Transportation

Developing sustainable transportation is critical for achieving SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure) and SDG 11.2 (Sustainable Transport Systems). Washington state is making progress with investments in the Amtrak Cascades rail corridor, including the introduction of new train sets and plans for electrification. This provides a low-emission alternative to air and road travel.

However, progress is not uniform. In Seattle, the failure to complete the First Avenue Streetcar project represents a significant setback. This stalls the development of an integrated urban transit network, limiting sustainable transportation options and hindering the city’s progress toward its SDG 11 targets.

Conclusion: Preparing for Climate Refugees and Securing a Sustainable Future

The phenomenon of climate refugees is a growing global concern, with projections indicating the potential displacement of billions of people in the coming decades. This issue intersects with SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions) and SDG 11. It is imperative that regions like the Pacific Northwest prepare for an increase in domestic climate migrants from unsustainable areas. Proactive planning for housing, infrastructure, and social services is essential to manage this influx and ensure that progress made toward the Sustainable Development Goals is not undone by unplanned demographic shifts.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

The article discusses several interconnected issues that directly relate to the following Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs):

• SDG 13: Climate Action: This is the central theme of the article. It explicitly discusses human-caused climate change, rising temperatures, the burning of fossil fuels, the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and policy actions at the state level (Washington’s Climate Commitment Act) to combat these issues. The article also highlights the economic costs of extreme weather events, directly linking to the impacts of climate change.
• SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities: The article addresses urban sustainability by critiquing cities like Phoenix as “unsustainable” due to sprawl and rising temperatures. It also focuses on the importance of sustainable transportation systems, such as trains (Amtrak Cascades) and streetcars (First Avenue Streetcar), as essential alternatives to driving in urban and regional corridors. The discussion of climate-driven migration and the need for cities like Seattle to prepare for “climate refugees” also falls under this goal.
• SDG 7: Affordable and Clean Energy: The article touches upon this goal by advocating for the electrification of the railway system using “abundant hydropower.” This represents a shift from fossil fuel-based transportation to systems powered by renewable energy sources.
• SDG 2: Zero Hunger: This goal is connected through the article’s mention of the risks climate change poses to agriculture. It specifically notes the threat to “Washington’s $14 billion agriculture sector,” linking climate impacts directly to food production and economic stability in the agricultural industry.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

Based on the issues discussed, the following specific SDG targets can be identified:

1. Target 13.2: Integrate climate change measures into national policies, strategies and planning.
   • The article provides a clear example of this at a sub-national level with Washington state’s “2021 Climate Commitment Act,” which includes a “cap-and-invest program to reduce statewide greenhouse gas emissions.” This is a direct implementation of climate change measures into state policy and planning.
2. Target 13.1: Strengthen resilience and adaptive capacity to climate-related hazards and natural disasters in all countries.
   • The article mentions state-level bills aimed at easing “heat risk in schools” and better anticipating “wildfire dangers in rural areas.” It also discusses the need for Seattle to prepare for an influx of “climate refugees,” which is a form of building adaptive capacity to the social consequences of climate change.
3. Target 11.2: By 2030, provide access to safe, affordable, accessible and sustainable transport systems for all…
   • The author’s preference for using “the Amtrak Cascades to travel to Portland or Vancouver, B.C.” and the disappointment over the “unbuilt” First Avenue Streetcar in Seattle directly point to the need for and promotion of sustainable public transport systems as an alternative to driving.
4. Target 11.5: By 2030, significantly reduce… direct economic losses relative to global gross domestic product caused by disasters…
   • The article explicitly references the “Billion-Dollar Weather and Climate Disasters Database” and quantifies the financial impact of extreme weather, stating that the first six months of the year “have cost more than $101 billion in losses.” This highlights the economic dimension of climate-related disasters that this target aims to address.
5. Target 7.2: By 2030, increase substantially the share of renewable energy in the global energy mix.
   • The proposal to “electrify the entire system, operating on Cascadia’s abundant hydropower” is a direct call to increase the share of renewable energy (hydropower) in the transportation sector.
6. Target 2.4: By 2030, ensure sustainable food production systems and implement resilient agricultural practices that increase productivity and production… and strengthen capacity for adaptation to climate change, extreme weather…
   • The article’s concern about the “risks to Washington’s $14 billion agriculture sector” from climate change implies the need for resilient agricultural practices to adapt to a warming planet and ensure the sustainability of food production.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

Yes, the article mentions or implies several indicators that can be used to measure progress:

• Indicator for Target 13.2: Greenhouse Gas Emissions. The article’s discussion of Washington’s Climate Commitment Act, which aims to “reduce statewide greenhouse gas emissions,” implies that the level of these emissions is the key indicator for measuring the success of this policy.
• Indicator for Target 11.5: Economic losses from climate-related disasters. The article provides a direct, quantifiable indicator by citing the “Billion-Dollar Weather and Climate Disasters Database” and the specific figure of “$101 billion in losses” over six months. This metric is used to track the financial cost of extreme weather events.
• Indicator for Target 11.2: Availability and use of public transportation infrastructure. The article implies this indicator by discussing the planned new “Airo train sets” for the Amtrak Cascades corridor and the failure to build the “First Avenue Streetcar.” The existence and modernization of such infrastructure are measures of progress toward sustainable transport systems.
• Indicator for Target 2.4: Economic stability of the agricultural sector. The article mentions “Washington’s $14 billion agriculture sector” being at risk. The continued economic output and health of this sector in the face of climate change can serve as an indicator of the resilience of the state’s food production systems.
• Indicator for Target 7.2: Share of renewable energy in transportation. The call to “electrify the entire system, operating on Cascadia’s abundant hydropower” suggests that the percentage of the transportation network powered by renewable sources is a key indicator of progress.

4. Summary of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: seattletimes.com