Climate Refugees without Recognition: The Pacific Island and the Falepili Union Treaty

The growing effects of climate change are causing human displacement worldwide, and the problem is expected to increase exponentially by 2050. However, international law still lacks a clear definition of who "climate refugees" are and, consequently, an ad hoc regulatory framework that protects them. The present study aims to analyse this lack from a legal, political, and ethical perspective. The thesis begins by analysing the regulatory landscape outside which climate refugees and environmental migrants remain, with particular attention to the 1951 Geneva Convention. It then explores how international human rights law instruments offer partial protection, while equal attention is given to climate law frameworks that recognise how the adverse effects of climate change may contribute to the violation of human rights but fail to establish enforceable mobility pathways. Among the nations most affected by climate change, and especially by sea level rise, are the Pacific Islands, including Tuvalu, Kiribati, and the Marshall Islands, which serve as critical case studies in this thesis to analyse existing responses to the problem and those that can be observed. Additionally, the central focus of the thesis is the 2023 Falepili Union Treaty between Australia and Tuvalu, the first legally binding treaty to explicitly link climate change with migration. In examining migration provisions, security clauses and implications for national sovereignty, this research evaluates whether the treaty can really set a precedent for recognising climate displacement. Ultimately, the thesis argues that while bilateral treaties such as the Falepili Union can certainly offer innovations, they cannot replace systemic reform, carried out through either a review of the existing legal framework on the matter or the creation of new multilateral frameworks that can affirm the rights and sovereignty of peoples displaced by climate change.