Introduction
Ten years ago, legal and academic experts, together with governments and international organizations, drafted Guidance on Protecting People from Disasters and Environmental Change through Planned Relocations. The Guidance outlined foundational principles to safeguard and uphold the rights of people affected by planned relocation in the face of environmental hazards, including people and communities who relocated, their host communities, those who live in close proximity and community members who prefer to stay. At the time, there was little guidance – or even understanding – about planned relocations. This short article provides background on the development of the Guidance and explores how it has been used in practice in the decade since.
Background
The COP 16 meeting in 2010 was the first time that human mobility linked to climate change was referenced in a UNFCCC document, building on advocacy from some international organizations and advocates that migration was – or could be – a form of adaptation to the effects of climate change. Paragraph 14(f) of the COP Adaptation Agenda called on all parties to take:
“Measures to enhance understanding, coordination and cooperation with regard to climate change induced displacement, migration, and planned relocation, where appropriate, at national, regional, and international levels.”
While quite a bit of work had been done to unpack and understand climate-related migration and displacement, the issue of planned relocation was relatively unknown. For example, neither IOM nor UNHCR had done much substantive work on climate-related planned relocations. The World Bank had a long history of resettling communities in the context of development projects, particularly dam construction, but had not applied this experience to relocations made necessary by the effects of climate change.
UNHCR organized a small seminar in 2010 to explore the various types of human mobility linked to climate change and included a paper on planned relocations which referenced much of the World Bank’s work and in particular its safeguard policies on development-induced displacement and resettlement. Many questions were raised and further background papers were drafted. UNHCR decided to convene an expert meeting in March 2014, together with the Brookings Institution and Georgetown University and with the support of the European Union and the governments of Norway and Switzerland, to dig deeper into the issue.
The Brookings-LSE Project on Internal Displacement, which was a joint initiative with the UN Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights of IDPs, took the lead in drafting a background paper to frame the issue for the consultation. The expert meeting, which included member states, identified a large number of issues to be considered in planning relocations – from preservation of cultural identity to decision-making processes to the various communities likely to be impacted by relocations. The recommendations included a call for more research and for compiling existing relevant documents from the humanitarian and development sector which might be relevant in developing guidance on planned relocations in the context of climate change. In follow-up to this meeting, the Brookings Institution compiled a 66-page collection of relevant international law and operational frameworks grouped around six themes (displacement, disaster risk reduction, development induced displacement, evacuations, evictions, and land rights) which was to serve as a basis for development of principles and guidance for planned relocations in the context of disasters and the impacts of climate change.
But first, the sticky question of terminology had to be addressed. While the multilateral development banks referred to resettlement of affected populations, the humanitarian agencies’ use of the term resettlement normally referred to refugees resettled in third countries. The Brookings Institution convened a small meeting with representatives of a range of actors and different strands of law (human rights, migration, environmental, refugee, law) to discuss alternative terms and finally agreed to use the term ‘planned relocations’ – mainly because of its use by the UNFCCC Conference of Parties documents. In 2015, UNHCR, the Brookings Institution and Georgetown University, with the support of the MacArthur and Rockefeller Foundations, convened an international seminar in Sanremo, Italy to review all of these laws and operational frameworks and to come up with basic definitions, principles, and guidelines for governments and other stakeholders in carrying out planned relocations. Representatives of governments, international organizations and academic institutions, in an intensive week of work, drafted the Guidance on Protecting People from Disasters and Environmental Change through Planned Relocations. The Guidance was based on the principle that planned relocations should be a means of protecting people and should safeguard and uphold the human rights of all affected populations. While climate change was at the forefront of thinking about the need for relocations, the drafters considered that geophysical hazards, such as earthquakes and volcanoes, could also be reasons for communities to undertake relocations, and for this reason the Guidance was framed more generally.
Foundational Principles of Planned Relocations These principles are excerpted with minor amendments from the Guidance on Planned Relocation. 1. Planned Relocation is undertaken for the benefit of Relocated Persons and in a manner that respects and protects their rights and dignity.
2. States bear the primary responsibility under international law to respect, protect, and fulfill the human rights of people within their territory or subject to their jurisdiction. This includes the obligation to take preventive as well as remedial action to uphold such rights and to assist those whose rights have been violated.
3. States must have compelling reasons, robust evidence, and a sound legal basis for undertaking Planned Relocation.
4. States should ensure sufficient and sustainable funds for Planned Relocation.
5. Persons or groups of persons at risk of, or affected by, disasters and environmental change should have the right to request Planned Relocation, as well as the right to challenge Planned Relocation before a court of law.
6. Planned Relocation should be used as a measure of last resort, after other risk reduction and/or adaptation options have been considered in a timely manner and reasonably exhausted.
7. Planned Relocation should be carried out within a rights-based framework that safeguards both individual and collective civil, political, economic, social, and cultural rights of Relocated Persons and Other Affected Persons throughout all phases. The rights to self-determination, preservation of identity and culture, and control of land and resources are important, particularly for indigenous communities.
8. Relocated Persons and Other Affected Persons should be informed, consulted, and enabled to participate in decisions on whether, when, where, and how a Planned Relocation is to occur, as appropriate.
9. The agency, resilience, and empowerment of Relocated Persons should be recognized, promoted, and enhanced throughout a Planned Relocation.
10. The specific rights, needs, circumstances, and vulnerabilities of Relocated Persons and Other Affected Persons, as applicable, should be taken into consideration and addressed in all phases of a Planned Relocation. These specific rights, needs, circumstances, and vulnerabilities, may be linked, inter alia, to: a. demographic and health characteristics; b. socio-economic characteristics; c. membership of a marginalized group; d. special dependency on, and/or attachment to, land or local/localized resources/opportunities; e. direct and indirect impacts of disasters or environmental change; f. or prior experiences of displacement.
11. Planned Relocation should provide opportunities and conditions to: a. enable Relocated Persons to improve, or, at a minimum restore, their living standards; b. enable Host Populations to maintain their pre-existing living standards, or to attain the same living standards as Relocated Persons, whichever is higher; and c. mitigate adverse impacts related to the Planned Relocation that may affect Persons Who Live in Close Proximity.
12. Planned Relocation shall be carried out in a manner that respects and upholds the principle of family unity. Planned Relocation should also be carried out in a manner that respects and maintains household, community, and social cohesion as well as kinship ties.
13. Relocated Persons shall: a. enjoy, in full equality, the same rights and freedoms under international and domestic law as other similarly situated persons in their country; b. not be discriminated against in the enjoyment of any rights and freedoms on the grounds that they have taken, or will take, part in a Planned Relocation; and c. have the right to freedom of movement and the right to choose their place of residence.
Dissemination of the Guidance occurred through meetings and academic articles. The development of the Guidance coincided with other important initiatives, such as the Nansen Initiative and subsequent Platform on Disaster Displacement, to explore other facets of human mobility linked to climate change. The World Bank’s KNOMAD (The Global Knowledge Partnership on Migration and Development) organized a seminar on planned relocations in 2016 and later organized further workshops in both Washington and Central America.
While the Guidance was well-received, feedback also indicated a need for more practical, on-the-ground tools for governments. In May 2017, UNHCR, IOM and Georgetown University organized a workshop for governments in Geneva, asking for their input into a possible Toolkit for implementing planned relocations. The resulting Toolbox: Planning Relocations to Protect People from Disasters and Environmental Change was published in 2017 and focused on five cross-cutting themes: legal frameworks, needs of affected populations, consultation and participation, land issues and monitoring and accountability. Rather than prescribing what governments should do, the Toolbox was based on a series of checklists which governments could consider in their planning processes.
This process of developing guidelines for planned relocations was accompanied by a burst of research on planned relocations and identification of planned relocation cases in practice. A number of efforts mapped documented cases of disaster or climate related planned relocation around the world. For instance, a global mapping supported by the Platform on Disaster Displacement, Kaldor Center, and International Organization of Migration collectively identified over 400 disaster-related planned relocation cases in English, Spanish, French and Portuguese academic and grey literature. Other academic efforts (see, for example: Ajibade et al. , Balanchandan, Olhansky and Johnson, and Martyr-Kenyon) similarly reviewed the mounting case study evidence, highlighting differences and similarities across planned relocations in diverse geographic and governance contexts.
Alongside this surge in research on planned relocation linked to environmental and other hazards, which has been well-documented and analyzed elsewhere, policy and practice has also evolved in this field in the last ten years. The following sections summarize a few updates at global, regional, national and community levels, with a particular focus on how the 2015 Guidance, and the principles articulated therein, have been integrated in these developments.
Global updates
At the global level, UNDRR’s 2019 Words into Action on Disaster Displacement recognizes that facilitating people’s movements to avoid exposure via evacuations or planned relocations is an effective way to reduce mortality and injury. It draws on the 2015 Guidance to articulate how planned relocation should be considered incorporated in DRR laws, policies, strategies and plans. IFRC’s 2024 global Disaster Risk Governance Guidelines, which consolidates 20 years of research and recommendations in the area of disaster law, also references the 2015 Guidance and its foundational principles.
There are a range of other ongoing initiatives aimed at addressing knowledge gaps and advancing policy and practice on planned relocation. As illustrative examples, the Columbia University conference on Managed Retreat, renamed the Mobility and Resilience in 2025, has occurred every two years since 2019, and Georgetown University has launched a Managed Retreat Toolkit focused on tools for regulatory action. While the 2015 Guidance did not directly lead to these programs, it may have contributed to sparking interest in the issues among the organizers.
More recently, many of the principles from 2015 are reiterated in a 2024 Report to the Human Rights Council focused on planned relocation by the Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Internally Displaced Peoples, the first UN special procedures report specifically on this issue.
Regional updates
At a regional level, there have been a few efforts to tailor the foundational principles and guidelines documented in the 2015 Guidance to a regional context. In the Pacific, for example, the International Organization for Migration and the Platform on Disaster Displacement are currently supporting efforts to develop Pacific Guidance on Internal Planned Relocation. This regional guidance is part of the implementation of the Pacific Regional Climate Mobility Framework, endorsed by Pacific leaders in 2023, which committed to “Develop regional planned relocation guidelines in consultation with affected Pacific Island Forum (PIF) members and communities, including chiefs and customary landholding groups and councils.” While the guidance is not yet finalized, early drafts already demonstrate a few ways that the 2015 Guidance is being tailored in unique ways to the Pacific regional context. As an illustrative example, given that many Pacific Island states are home to populations with very high percentages of people who identify as Indigenous, the Regional Guidance includes greater focus on the role of customary land tenure systems, an assumption that Indigenous rights (e.g., to self-determination, free prior and informed consent) apply to nearly all planned relocation contexts, and a greater focus on including cultural heritage and non-economic loss and damage in assessments.
In the Americas, another parallel effort is ongoing, this time led by the Platform on Disaster Displacement and the Inter-American Institute of Human Rights. The full name of this guidance in Spanish is “Planificación e implementación de reubicaciones planificadas en el contexto de desastres y el cambio climático. Una propuesta de Guía orientadora y Lista de verificación con enfoque de género, interseccionalidad y derechos humanos.” Reflecting themes and issues that are particularly salient in the Americas region, this guidance includes a specific focus on gender and intersectionality.
While the final versions of both the Pacific and Americas regional guidance on climate-related planned relocation are not yet published, both these initiatives demonstrate the ongoing legacy of the 2015 Guidance. By translating international principles to regional contexts, more national governments will see their value and be inspired to integrate them into national policies on planned relocation. Other regions, West Africa or South Asia, for instance, may also want to consider developing regional guidance on climate-related planned relocation to adapt global principles to the unique themes and geographies at the regional level. Indeed, this pattern reflects broader trends in climate mobility governance, whereby global principles, such as those captured in the Nansen Initiative Protection Agenda, are made actionable at the national level through this intermediary step of regional and sub-regional policy guidance.
The 2015 Guidance has also informed and influenced efforts by operational actors to develop practical guidelines to implement planned relocation. For instance, the 2021 Planned Relocation in the Context of Disasters and Climate Change: a guide for Asia Pacific National Societies recognizes that National Societies are, in practice, supporting communities and authorities to undertake planned relocations both before and after disasters and aims to provide the tools for maximizing the potential for successful outcomes.
Looking forward, carrying out the principles enshrined in the 2015 Guidance requires ensuring that planned relocations have adequate funding, and that budgets are allocated to more than just housing construction, including cultural dimensions. As one example, IOM Latin America and Caribbean’s took the regional initiative to calculate the comprehensive costs of relocation, developing a Toolkit to help governments and other stakeholders budget for relocation, and particularly to calculate losses after disasters. The toolkit includes such measures as the costs of surveying the population to be relocated and provision of psycho-social services to address trauma associated with the move. This has been field tested in two Latin American countries – Costa Rica and Chile. The materials are available now in Spanish and will soon be translated into English.
National updates
Since the 2015 Guidance was developed, a range of national governments have made important strides to develop their own national policies, laws, or other normative instruments that address planned relocation. This includes Fiji’s 2018 Planned Relocation Guidelines: A framework to undertake climate change related relocation; Solomon Islands’ 2022 Planned Relocation Guidelines; a 2017 amendment to Peru’s 2012 Ley de Reasentamiento Poblacional Para Zonas de Muy Alto Riesgo No Mitigable; and Uruguay’s 2018 Proyecto de Reglamento Operativo de Programa Plan Nacional de Relocalizaciones. Analyzing the extent to which each instrument addresses the principles in the 2015 Guidance is beyond the scope of this short piece, but at a high level, two policies in particular – Fiji and Solomon Islands – do make explicit reference to many of these core principles, such as that planned relocations should always be a “measure of last resort.” Other countries currently developing dedicated national policies or other normative instruments on planned relocation include Panama, Guatemala, Niue, and Papua New Guinea, though the extent to which these instruments integrate principles from the 2015 Guidance remain to be seen.
Every country has a unique governance system, and a standalone normative instrument on climate or disaster-related planned relocation may not always make sense. A mapping exercise identified at least 16 other instruments, primarily focused on climate change, disaster risk reduction or internal displacement, that address planned relocation, although it is not their sole focus (for examples, see PDD Information Brief). For instance, Vanuatu’s 2018 IDP policy includes considerable sections on planned relocation as a durable solution for disaster IDPs and makes reference to many principles of the 2015 Guidance. As another illustrative example, the Marshall Islands National Adaptation Plan also includes planned relocation.
Moreover, in the United States, the Biden Administration advanced considerable interagency resources with opportunities for federal support to “voluntary community-driven relocation“, although the Trump administration disbanded the Inter-Agency Task Force charged with overseeing this work. Other specific sub-national jurisdictions, including in Louisiana and Southeast Florida, have used the 2015 Guidance and 2017 Toolbox to guide their approaches on planned relocation.
Community updates
Hundreds of communities around the world are grappling with planned relocation, and updates about how local policy and practice reflects the 2015 Guidance, and the principles contained therein, is far beyond the scope of this short piece. One noteworthy trend is that some relocating communities have begun to develop their own protocols for how they would like to be engaged by governments and other external actors during their planned relocations, and for other communities that are facing similar challenges. For example, in 2021, Enseada de Baleaia in Brazil developed a Protocolo de Consulta that outlines their relocation journey and vision for dignified community-led processes. Isle de Jean Charles in Louisiana United States developed a guide titled Preserving Our Place A Community Field Guide to Engagement, Resilience, and Resettlement: Community regeneration in the face of environmental and developmental pressures, which noted “One important goal of this document is to provide possible ways for communities to help maintain control of the planning process and its narratives”. These engagement protocols detail a community-led vision for what protecting their rights – particularly their right to self-determination – during planned relocation means in practice. Many communities in Alaska, including Napakiak Newtok, and Shishmaref, have long been developing their own plans for what community-led planned relocation means to them, and what support they require. These examples both pre- and post-date the 2015 Guidance and demonstrate how the principles therein can be implemented at the community level.
Indigenous communities in Alaska have been particularly affected by the impacts of climate change, and many have been identified as needing relocation. Following years of advocacy and search for financial support for relocation, the 300 residents of Newtok, Alaska finally relocated to Mertarvik, 9 miles away in 2024. The community began searching for a suitable relocation site in 1996 – relocation made necessary by melting permafrost, storm surges, and coastal erosion. However, reports indicate that the relocated residents are living in difficult conditions with inadequate water and electricity and homes that are deteriorating in Alaska’s fierce weather. Dozens of grants from several federal agencies eventually made funds available to cover the estimated $150 million cost of relocation, but, according to ProPublica, most of the burden for implementing the move has fallen on the small Newtok Village Council. Many other Alaskan indigenous communities have been planning to relocate, some for many years and continue looking for support.
Recently, a new coalition of community leaders and their advocates was launched in June 2025, which seeks to build cross-context solidarity and enable learning between communities, and is a forum for community leaders to share experiences such as those codified in these guides and protocols. The overall goal of the coalition is to advance more dignified, human rights-centered and community-driven planned relocation policy and practice, including through advocating for every country with a coastline to develop and implement a rights-respecting national policy on planned relocation.
Future horizons
Ten years after the development of 2015 Guidance, its underlying objectives – and its defined scope and purpose, to assist States, communities and other actors in protecting people affected by the impacts of disasters and environment change through planned relocation – not only remain relevant but have taken on renewed urgency. The IPCC’s 6th assessment report recognizes increasing risks of displacement associated with extreme events and that some areas will become unsafe and uninhabitable, increasing the need for planned relocation in some cases. We are seeing renewed efforts at different levels to better understand, strengthen policy and practice, and engage and build communities of practice on planned relocation.
The 2015 Guidance made crucial strides in broadening conversation to include a focus on not only the rights of relocating persons, but also on the rights of host communities, those who remain behind in sites of origin, and all those whose lives are affected by planned relocation. The foundational principles articulated in the 2015 Guidance, and its content on governing planned relocation, including through legal, policy, institutional and other dimensions, also remain largely applicable to communities considering relocation in response to disasters and climate change.
In the intervening years, the 2015 Guidance has been complemented and supplemented by other guidelines, frameworks, and operational tools, including the 2017 Toolbox. The 2015 Guidance has served as backdrop to the development of some of these documents and resources, while others have explicitly referenced or drawn from its content. Research, practice and community knowledge and expertise have also identified additional priorities and insights and helped to adapt the principles and guidelines in the 2015 Guidance for regional and local contexts.
As we look ahead, and considering the IPCC’s foresight, there is much more to do and further guidance may be needed. New areas for iterative evolution and insights on our collective efforts to protect people affected by disaster and environmental change through planned relocation will need to include additional issues. For instance, guidance on community autonomy and support for engagement protocols developed by community leaders themselves are not included in the 2015 Guidance. Additional specific guidance may also be needed regarding how to support communities where some members decide to stay, and how to support “translocal” members of a community who move between their new and origin sites on a regular basis to carry out their daily lives (e.g., for livelihoods or cultural reasons). The 2015 Guidance only focused on the relocation of people, but given the importance of livelihoods, future guidance could include the complex issue of relocating businesses. It could also be helpful to provide more guidance on relocation in urban settings; although most of the documented cases of relocation have taken place in rural settings, given demographic projections, it is likely that more urban communities may face decisions about relocation in the future.
Looking ahead, a range of actors and institutions are increasingly engaging in planned relocations, making more specific and tailored guidance necessary. As more international organizations engage in planned relocation policies and processes, there is a need for guidelines to ensure coordination between IOs and accountability to the populations they serve. As we consider “the humanitarian reset” and the renewed energy towards strengthening localization, there is also a need to identify how local actors should be better engaged to support communities during planned relocation processes. One common theme in almost all relocation cases is the need for adequate financing, as many communities are self-funding their relocations through remittances. Guidance in finding financing, including from multilateral development banks (MDBs) and the UNFCCC’s Loss & Damage Fund, is urgently needed. Goldfinch and Huckstep argue that MDBs could provide technical assistance and funding for relocations and note that the comparative advantage of MDBs is support for financing and project development. However, given the troubling track record of MDBs in development-induced resettlement, there is need for new guidance to ensure human rights principles and community consent are central to their financial support for climate-related planned relocations that are unique in their logic and scope. Finally, for the research community, guidance may help structure more publicly available and systematic evaluations of planned relocations which have taken place, including to answer core questions: what are the outcomes for affected populations? What policy measures or practices have worked well and led to improved outcomes for affected persons? Conversely, what policy measures or practices have led to suffering and negative outcomes? What have been the bottlenecks in the process? What are good practices that have evolved to make the process easier?
A decade on, it’s clear that the 2015 Guidance was agenda-setting, and the principles contained therein are still relevant. Every national and local context is unique, and identical governance approaches will not work everywhere; however, core principles, such as those detailed in the 2015 Guidance, have some universal salience and can be adapted to different contexts. As climate change accelerates, more action is needed to implement and adapt the 2015 Guidance at regional, national and community levels, and ultimately to ensure policy and practice on planned relocation protect people and minimize harm.
Elizabeth Ferris is a Senior Fellow and previously served as director of the Institute for the Study of International Migration at Georgetown University. Prior to joining Georgetown, Beth was a Senior Fellow and co-director of the Brookings Project on Internal Displacement and spent 20 years working in the field of humanitarian assistance, most recently in Geneva, Switzerland at the World Council of Churches. From 2019-21 Beth served as an expert advisor to the UN Secretary-General’s High-Level Panel on Internal Displacement. She has worked on planned relocations since 2010, including developing Guidance and a Toolbox for those planning – or thinking about – relocating communities.
Erica Bower is a member of the Advisory Committee of the Platform Displacement and an Affiliate of the Kaldor Centre at UNSW. She has over a decade of experience studying climate mobility and advocating for policies to better protect people’s rights on the move. She has worked on planned relocations since 2017 when she led UNHCR’s contributions to a Toolbox. Erica has co-authored a global mapping on planned relocation, catalyzed the launch of a new Coalition on Dignified Climate Relocation, and worked with relocating communities and the governments supporting them across multiple regions.
Sanjula Weerasinghe is a Non-Resident Fellow at the Institute for the Study of International Migration (ISIM) at Georgetown University, a Centre Affiliate at the Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law at the University of New South Wales, and a member of the Advisory Committee of the Platform on Disaster Displacement (PDD). She has contributed to advancing policy and practice on planned relocation, including serving as rapporteur for the 2014 expert meeting, supporting the development and drafting of the 2015 Guidance, and co-authoring several reports and academic articles, including a global mapping of planned relocation. Sanjula currently works as the Global Coordinator on Migration and Displacement at the International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC), based in Geneva. This article is written in her independent capacity. The views expressed in this article belong to the author and not the author’s employer, its affiliates, or employees.
KEYWORDS: Climate Change, Planned Relocations, Disaster Risk Reduction, Durable Solutions
Selected References
Bower, Erica. Planned relocation of communities in a changing climate: risk reduction, livelihoods and justice. Doctoral Dissertation in Stanford University Archives (2024).
Bower, Erica, and Sanjula Weerasinghe. “Leaving place, restoring home: Enhancing the evidence base on planned relocation cases in the context of hazards, disasters, and climate change.” Platform on Disaster Displacement (PDD) and Andrew & Renata Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law (2021)
Brookings Institution, Georgetown University, UNHCR. Guidance on Protecting People from Disasters and Environmental Change through Planned Relocation (2015).
Bruce Burson, Walter Kälin, Jane McAdam and Sanjula Weerasinghe, “The Duty to Move People out of Harm’s Way in the Context of Climate Change and Disasters” Refugee Survey Quarterly, 37 (4) (2018).
Ferris, Elizabeth. Background document, Planned Relocation, Disasters and Climate Change: Consolidating Good Practices and Preparing for the Future (2014).
Georgetown University, UNHCR, IOM. A toolbox: Planning Relocations to Protect People from Disasters and Environmental Change (2017).
Harrington-Abrams, Rachel & Bower, Erica. A missing link? The role of international organizations in climate-related planned relocation
McAdam, Jane, and Elizabeth Ferris. “Planned relocations in the context of climate change: Unpacking the legal and conceptual issues.” Cambridge International Law Journal 4, no. 1 (2015).