Deciphering the image of "Small sinking islands on the other side of the planet": Distance, alterity and the dynamics of an emerging climate change-induced migrations paradigm in the South Pacific

International audienceThe possibility of people being forced out of their land because of climate changes, especially in poorer countries, is the cornerstone of pleas supporting the creation of a "climate refugee" status. Small Island Developing States (SIDS) of the South Pacific are an interesting case, as they are often presented as "hotspots" for climate change-induced migration and displacement. However, for the purpose of my master's thesis (which focused on the links between climate variability and out-migrations) and during the first months of my PhD, I conducted an extensive survey of political, media and scientific literature (In particular the work of Carol Farbotko in Tuvalu), 150 qualitative interviews carried on in Europe and in the Pacific region (Tuvalu, Fiji, French Polynesia, New Zealand and Australia) as well as a review of several historical sources from the Gilbert and Ellice colonial censuses. This research led me to the hypothesis that the physical processes associated with climate changes are not the only factors in the complex logics of scientific, political, militant and media discourses on climate change-induced migrations and displacements. Adopting a geographical approach, distance can be considered as a form of alterity. This being said, it is possible to argue that the dynamics of distance underlying most of the First world's representations of South Pacific islands can contribute to explain the image of SIDS as archetypical victims of sea-level rise and candidates for international protection. Looking at the case of SIDS in the Pacific, several configurations of distance appear to be shaping the concept of climate change-induced migration as an international matrix of thought and policies. First, geographic distance (From continents and large groups of populations, between islands....) contributes to cognitive distance and thus to a lack of knowledge of Pacific Islands among key actors of the international community. The variety of these islands' physical environments, the complexity of the geo-morphological processes in question and the dynamics of local societies often remain unknown among many actors that influence the Climate Change agenda. It often leads to vague appreciations of the exact nature and temporalities of environmental changes as well as simplistic appreciations of Pacific populations' mobilities or reactions to environmental changes and finally to fragile interpretations of the links between climate change's impacts and migrations. Secondly, in a globalised context Pacific Islands are often considered as peripheries, distant from the various "centers" of the globalised world from a geo-economical and geopolitical perspective. In other words many actors stress the fact that Pacific island states are economically and politically powerless. This systemic distance seems to exacerbate the "great divide" between the "North" and the "South". Consequently, the idea that the SIDS of the Pacific are entirely victims of global changes caused by rich countries and at the same time dependant on the North in order to cope with this crisis is widespread. With regard to climate change-induced migration in the case of the South Pacific it implies for instance that Australia or New Zealand should grant asylum to fleeing Pacific islanders. As a result, alternative forms of mobilities, within or between archipelagoes are often overlooked. A third form of distance can be found in the perception of cultural alterity. South Pacific islands are often seen as "exotic paradises" in Europe. As a consequence, two types of attitudes have developed. On the one hand, local populations are perceived as indigenous and traditional communities acting as a group. On the other hand, given the relatively young governmental structures of recent independent states and the asymmetrical nature of international power relations, policy makers and researchers tend to relate to governance and policy models forged in dominant countries at the international level. In both cases, alterity and individuality seem to be denied in favor of top down and international level policy options to deal with climate change-induced migration