Navigating tomorrow’s horizons: exploring the interplay of environmental factors in mobility decision-making among migrants in the Lowlands

ABSTRACT

Despite the growth of research in environmental migration, less research has been done on how migrants consider environmental change and weather events when making future migration decisions. Furthermore, little is known about how transnational ties are considered in this process. In this study, 36 migrants living in the Netherlands and Belgium participated in an individual or group interview or in a focus group discussion. In accordance with the framework of Findlay (2011), participants preferred not to migrate, despite climatic factors encouraging migration decisions and local weather conditions not being appealing. Return migration was preferred at a later stage of life, where dependence on the natural environment was less relevant to their livelihood. Most of this return migration was temporary, especially given the distinct welfare systems and larger dependence on these systems in the later life phases. Finally, climate risks and climate-related stress, as well as emotions related to changes to the natural environment (‘solastalgia’), were mentioned, which especially occurred in younger participants’ narratives.

KEYWORDS:

• Environmental migration
• environmental change
• migration decision-making
• ageing
• solastalgia
• climate change

Introduction

Most research in the field of environmental mobility connects mobility decisions to people experiencing or expecting grave effects of environmental change – and in particular climate change – in the near or far future (McLeman and Gemenne 2018). Recent attention has been given to the forecasting or predicting of future mobilities (Boas and Wiegel 2021; Durand-Delacre et al. 2021; Schewel et al. 2024; Stojanov 2006). However, less research has been done on how environmental factors – including climate change – impacts individuals’ future migration decisions, including the destinations chosen. People have migrated to find better climatic conditions, ranging from seasonal migration to disaster avoidance, to finding better opportunities (De Haas, Castles, and Miller 2019). There are two relevant trends in the research. The first trend can be found in migration studies, which recognize that migration decision-making concerns a complex interplay of factors and is also shaped by migration capabilities (Schewel et al. 2024; Van Praag and Timmerman 2019). Most studies concentrate on migration decision-making before and during migration (De Haas, Castles, and Miller 2019) or ‘fragmentary journeys’ (Collyer 2007), and they consider future migration plans of migrants to a lesser extent. The relative importance or the ways in which people consider the changing climate in their migration decisions remains understudied (Durand-Delacre et al. 2021). This is even more the case when including environmental factors that interact with other migration drivers such as economic, political, demographic, and social factors (Black et al. 2011). Moreover, when looking at future mobility decisions of migrants living in the Global North, many studies investigate the return migration of the elderly within and across regions (Constant and Massey 2002; Lundholm 2015; Yahirun 2009). When applied to environmental mobility, studies focus on how mobility decisions are made after disasters or when living in threatened regions (e.g. McKinzie 2019; R. McLeman, Schade, and Faist 2016; Parks 2023; Phillips and Murphy 2021).

The second trend in the research concerns the fact that the rapidly changing climate has accelerated interest in the topic of environmental mobility, which also includes an interest in all climate impacts, risks, and weather events (McLeman and Gemenne 2018; Piguet, Kaenzig, and Guélat 2018). Following the definition of the IOM, environmental migrants can be defined as ‘persons or groups of persons who, predominantly for reasons of sudden or progressive change in the environment that adversely affects their lives or living conditions, are obliged to leave their habitual homes, or choose to do so, either temporarily or permanently, and who move either within their country or abroad’ (IOM 2007). Despite the rise in research on environmental migration in general (McLeman and Gemenne 2018; Piguet, Kaenzig, and Guélat 2018) and future migration predictions in particular (Stojanov 2006; Boas and Wiegel 2021; Durand-Delacre et al. 2021; Schewel et al. 2024), it is striking that the prevailing literature on environmental migration has neglected how the natural environment is considered and can shape individuals’ future migration decisions (Findlay 2011), especially in the Global North.

This study adds to the literature by improving our understanding of how environmental factors are considered when making future mobility decisions, rather than studying mobility patterns related to environmental factors. This is especially relevant due to the increasing awareness of global warming and higher numbers of people experiencing the impact of environmental factors in previous migration trajectories. By studying migrants living in the Global North, more specifically the Lowlands (i.e. Belgium and the Netherlands), who come from diverse regions of origin, we aim to understand how diverging experiences in relation to migration drivers, transnational migrant networks and environmental stressors further impact future mobility decisions. By studying people who have migrated and are currently living in the Global North, this research further investigates how local capabilities for climate adaptation are incorporated into future decision-making (Ulibarri et al. 2022). Thus far, there are very few studies on whether local adaptation discourses are considered by migrants living in these regions and how this, alongside other local factors such as current living experiences and the welfare system (Ciobanu, Fokkema, and Nedelcu 2017), is seen as relevant to future mobility decisions.

Future mobility decisions and environmental factors

Research on environmental mobility is rapidly evolving, resulting in the detailed development of specific research domains (McLeman and Gemenne 2018; Wiegel, Boas, and Warner 2019). One strand of research in this field that focuses on future mobility has looked at migration as a preventive measure to avoid worsening climatic conditions (Durand-Delacre et al. 2021). These studies have mainly dealt with very clear-cut cases (see Piguet, Kaenzig, and Guélat 2018) of populations that heavily rely on the natural environment for survival and who live in very climatically vulnerable areas (e.g. Magnan et al. 2016). For example, communities living on low-lying islands in the Pacific Ocean are concerned about how they will survive, whether their communities should be transplanted and where, and how they might obtain legal protection and financial support to organize such relocations (Farbotko and Lazrus 2012). The Inuit community in Greenland (e.g. Nuttall 2010) and Indigenous communities in the Amazon and the Andes also face similar concerns (e.g. Kronik and Verner 2010; Salick and Ross 2009). In other regions with less clear-cut and identifiable vulnerabilities, the role of climate change and weather events are intertwined with economic, political, and social dynamics. These regions mainly experience slow on-set environmental changes that in turn affect the availability of resources (Black et al. 2011).

A second strand of research that deals with past migration decisions has examined how both objective and subjective environmental factors impact mobility decisions (e.g. Bardsley and Hugo 2010; Koubi et al. 2016; Ou-Salah, Van Praag, and Verschraegen 2022, 2023; Van Praag 2021; Van Praag et al. 2021). For example, in a comparative study by Bardsley and Hugo (2010), it was found that people tend to migrate more when experiencing sudden environmental changes, compared to slow-onset change. In a similar vein, theory development has focused on how people experiencing environmental stressors intend to migrate (Black et al. 2011; Ou-Salah, Van Praag, and Verschraegen 2022; Renaud et al. 2011; Van Praag et al. 2021).

Nevertheless, many migrants do not identify environmental factors as playing a leading role in their migration processes, underestimating their importance (Meze-Hausken 2000; Ou-Salah, Van Praag, and Verschraegen 2022; Van Praag 2021; Van Praag et al. 2021). This underestimation of environmental factors in the literature is strengthened by constant pressure from policy makers to categorize migrants in terms of economic, political and social migration drivers, failing to grasp the complexities underlying migration decision-making (Crawley and Skleparis 2018). However, perceptions about the environment and climate may inform future mobility decisions. This might become the case even more as environmental change, and especially climate change, has become more prevalent in policy, research and the media, and thus may enter prevailing discourses and affect migration decision-making. The role of environmental factors might be especially significant when the loss experienced due to environmental change results in distress and climate-related emotions, also referred to as ‘solastalgia’ (Albrecht 2005; Albrecht et al. 2007; Askland and Bunn 2018; McKinzie 2019; Tschakert and Tutu 2010).

Findlay’s theoretical framework

To the best of our knowledge, Findlay (2011) is the only framework that theorizes future destinations in the context of environmental mobility. He starts by identifying how scholars in migration studies have understood the attraction of specific places, which is also takes up a prominent space in current debates in environmental sociology (Parks 2023). Findlay emphasizes that these migration decisions do not have a single-factor cause but are rather related to the interplay of contextual factors that gradually shape how migrants and immobile groups reflect upon migration destinations. Six principles governing the attraction of places to potential migrants were identified: 1) that most potential migrants prefer immobility over mobility, if possible; 2) there is a preference for shorter over longer distances; 3) they take intervening opportunities, instead of searching for the most attractive destinations possible; 4) migration decisions weigh up economic and human capital costs; 5) they are shaped by pre-existing social and cultural capital; and 6) social and cultural capital are also considered assets (over economic capital). Similarly, when applied to environmental mobility: 1) immobility is preferred wherever possible; 2) relocation is more likely to destinations at a shorter distance; 3) intervening opportunities within one’s own country are preferred over those that require travel abroad; 4) economic inequalities at various levels need to be considered to understand changes, as they accompany the opportunity to migrate (e.g. immigration law); 5) existing international networks that are based on historical and cultural relations may become more important in deciding where to migrate to; and 6) social capital is used to accommodate migration opportunities. The present research used these six principles to guide the data analysis in a study of the role of perceived and expected environmental factors in future migration decisions among migrants in the Lowlands.

Methods

Research design

The study was conducted as part of a larger research project that focuses on environmental mobility and how migrants living in the Lowlands reflect upon climate adaptation and future mobilities. We conducted 36 qualitative semi-structured interviews with migrants living in Belgium and the Netherlands between December 2021 and January 2023, approved by the Ethics Committee for the Social Sciences and Humanities (SHW_20_98) of the University of Antwerp and the DPAS (Department of Public Administration and Sociology) Ethics Review Committee of the Erasmus University of Rotterdam (ETH2223–0236). A heterogeneous sampling method was used, selecting participants based on: 1) being a migrant who moved to Belgium/the Netherlands; (2) age, as many migration decisions involve return migration after retirement and distinct experiences with weather events over time; and (3) socioeconomic status in the immigrant country, which was relevant to their ability to migrate (temporally). First, data was collected in Belgium (Antwerp) to understand how migrants approached environmental factors in the past and with respect to their future, and to interpret local climate adaptation. Second, a similar research design was set up in the Netherlands (Rotterdam) to understand the importance of contextual factors in two comparable port cities that are located approximately 120 kilometers from each other. Nonetheless, during the second stage of the fieldwork, theoretical saturation was reached for this heterogeneous group of migrants (Aldiabat and Le Navenec 2018), suggesting that replicating a similar research design of the Belgian fieldwork in the Netherlands, without focusing on one migrant group in depth. Based on the data analyses, this would not yield much new information using the same questionnaire and that more in-depth interviews needed to be conducted that focused more on one specific migrant group (see Discussion section).

Data sampling

To realize this heterogeneous sample, participants were recruited using snowball sampling starting from: 1) local migrant integration and municipality organizations working with migrants; 2) followed by Dutch language schools for newly arrived migrants; 3) the personal contacts of the researcher; and 4) social media groups (expat groups, specific migrant community groups and organizations). This sampling strategy resulted in a sample of 29 participants in Belgium and 7 participants in the Netherlands (see Appendix), including 14 male and 22 female respondents. Concerning the age range: 5 respondents were born between 1950–1959; 13 respondents were born between 1960–1969; 9 respondents were born between 1970–1979; 4 respondents were born between 1980–1989; 3 respondents were born between 1990–1999; 1 respondent is born between 2000–2009, and 1 respondent’s birth year was unknown. The participants had migrated from: Poland (3), Morocco (9), Iran (1), Pakistan (4), India (3), Nepal (2), Afghanistan (1), Kyrgyzstan (1), Ghana (1), Yemen (1), Syria (2), Italy (1), DR Congo (1), Romania (2), Hungary (1), the United States (1), Cape Verde Islands (1) and Curaçao (1). Most migrants had lived in Belgium/the Netherlands for longer than 10 years, although this varied considerably from 1 year to 33 years. Due to the organizational approach and existing migrant networks, further accentuated by the snowball sampling, a larger group of participants originating from Morocco was included in the sample.

Data collection

The interview protocol followed an open template. Data collection entailed a cyclic process with thematic analyses using the data analysis facilitating software NVivo. The interview was conducted as follows: (1) a narrative question was asked about the places in which the participant had lived in chronological order; (2) discussion about each place the participant had lived in concerning environmental/climate change, place attachment, changes over time and reasons for moving/staying; (3) connecting these narratives to broader contexts and making comparisons with people within their migrant/social networks and the social, cultural and economic capital they had; (4) asking about participation in transnational activities (including remittances) and/or environmental and/or migrant-led organizations and initiatives; (5) a debriefing period, where the researcher asked whether reflecting on these matters provoked discomfort during the interview; and (6) an informative moment talking about potential future steps and a briefing on the research.

Organizations were approached to ensure that a variety of voices were included, and a heterogeneous sample was obtained. As the first author who conducted the fieldwork was only allowed to conduct focus group discussions at one specific educational institution and group interviews at another, this resulted in a diverse data collection strategy. The individual interviews provided more in-depth information, as more time could be spent questioning the participant, while in the group interviews and focus group discussions new elements emerged and participants felt more comfortable to talk about certain issues (e.g. arrival in the immigrant country or experiences of discrimination) due to the interaction in the group. Two focus group discussions were conducted with five and six participants respectively (with participants of the language schools; N = 11) and 21 individual interviews (in two cases with an additional translator present to translate Russian and Arabic, N = 21) and 2 group interviews (with 2 participants per group interview, N = 4) were conducted until theoretical saturation was reached. Interviews were conducted primarily in Dutch or English, and they were recorded (apart from one interview and one group interview) and subsequently transcribed verbatim. For the unrecorded interviews, the researcher took detailed notes during the interviews and these were analyzed thematically to see how these ideas differed from other interviews. However, no quotes from these interviews have been used in this paper. Some participants hesitated to participate as they feared that their knowledge of environmental/climate change and climate adaptation was not sufficient, but they participated after being assured that the researcher was solely interested in their own knowledge and views.

Data analysis

Interviews were analyzed using inductive thematic analysis (Braun and Clarke 2006; Dusi and Stevens 2022). The data was analyzed by: (1) becoming familiar with the data; (2) starting to generate initial codes, such as ‘migrant integration,’ ‘climate change knowledge,’ ‘environmental factors,’ ‘ageing,’ ‘migration decisions’; (3) identifying how these codes were related to each other and grouping them into common themes; (4) reviewing of themes and understanding differences within these themes, (5) refining and revising the themes and (6) writing up these themes and relating them to the existing literature. During Phases 3 and 4, the emerging themes were contrasted with the six guiding principles of Finlay’s theoretical framework and were used as ‘sensitizing concepts.’

Results

In line with the first guiding principle of Findlay’s framework (Findlay 2011), immobility was preferred. This was, in some cases, related to a limited capability to return. The possibilities for return were related to initial migration drivers, such as political conflict and/or employment opportunities, as well as opportunities to migrate beyond the borders of the current immigrant country. These findings revealed the diversity in migration drivers, migrant experiences in the immigration country and ties with ‘home’ of this heterogeneous sample in terms of region of origin (see Constant and Massey 2002). Environmental factors that impacted people’s living conditions both in the region of origin and after arrival in the Lowlands were mentioned. The often sunny and dry weather conditions in the region of origin encouraged people to move elsewhere, due to the limitation on employment opportunities this climate produced. However, after arrival, new employment conditions were disconnected from the natural environment. Thus, its relevance diminished after migration and mainly remained important in people’s experience and sense of belonging to the immigrant country.

For this sample of international migrants, Findlay’s second and third principles concerning the distance of the migration trajectory and the taking up of intervening opportunities also emerged from the data. Local migration policies and local practicalities in Europe (e.g. language, educational systems for their children, retirement schemes) were relevant when making mobility decisions and many participants used existing social ties (elsewhere and in the region of origin). In line with the fourth, fifth and sixth guiding principles of Findlay, participants reflected upon hybrid ways of returning (i.e. temporarily for specific objectives and phases), influenced by the social ties and networks established and facilities in the immigrant country in which they were residing. This included having children and other family, work and a wealthier lifestyle, and having built up a life in Europe. Looking to the near future, the relatively older participants also considered the increased need for health care facilities during their older age.

In the following sections, we will highlight how the environmental factors were considered in participants’ narratives. This provides a unique insight into their views and the importance of the natural environment, both in the immigrant country and in their region of origin. Finally, when reflecting on future mobility decisions and climate risks, a small but significant group of participants did not entirely fit into Findlay’s framework. Being aware of increasing climate risks, this group aimed to reduce risks associated with global warming by migrating to ‘better’ and more climate resilient destinations. We will discuss these main findings in-depth and in chronological order according to the migration trajectories, with the aim of understanding future mobility decisions.

Leaving the sun for the water in search of better opportunities

Before migrating

Despite strong preferences to stay in the region of origin, many participants migrated in search of better economic and migration opportunities elsewhere. They did so partially due to existing global economic inequalities but also related to changing climatic conditions, such as increasing occurrence of drought. For example, for R16_BE, the weather conditions in Morocco diminished her opportunities there, leading her to relocate elsewhere:

R16_BE (Morocco, female): For me, in Morocco, it was really not good; that was really not good. If there was no rain, we couldn’t plant anything, and then we couldn’t eat. But it’s always dry and that is very bad for the economy, for people who live there, for everything.

Similarly, R29_BE argued that although many Moroccans who migrated to Belgium were encouraged to come to take jobs in the labour market in Europe, he considered the climate was at the basis of their decisions and need to migrate:

R29_BE (Morocco, male): “Earlier, here in Belgium, France, Germany, or Holland. People came after ’45 [1945], they did not have sufficient men. And then Europeans went to Northern Africa to bring people to work here. But why? The climate is bad over there. If the climate had been better nobody would have come here, because then they would have had work. But Europeans are smart, they noticed this and said, ‘Ah those men over there, they have too little rain, too few profits, we will go get people there’.”

As he continued, he stressed that people migrate in search of better opportunities:

R29_BE: When the children grow up, the son goes to the city, but can’t find a job. Then, Las Palmas, Tenerife, Lanzarote, [they] are not such big islands, but they need people to work. Because there are a lot of jobs but too few people work, too few people. Because there are a lot of jobs and too few people work, and then the “patron” comes to the city from Spain and says: “Come to work, but without declaring it”. (…) and then people go in a boat there to work.

In his narrative, and in relation to Morocco, the natural climate and water scarcity were given as reasons to migrate in search of work. Similarly, in addition to the weather differences, R8_BE noted a lot more:

R8_BE (Sudan, male): Belgium has a good system, with respect for people, with a lot of help for people. But the system is good, people respect each other. But there is a bit of a problem with the weather: in my country, it’s a bit hot, here it’s cold.

These interviews illustrate how environmental factors interact with other drivers of migration. This section provided an overview of the participants’ awareness of the environmental factors impacting mobility.

After arrival

In addition to initial environmental drivers of migration, the weather conditions after arrival were also frequently mentioned by participants. For example, R19_BE stated: ‘I miss the weather, it’s always warm, warm, healthy weather.’ Many of the participants referred to the cold and rainy weather when replying to how life in Belgium/the Netherlands affected them:

R20_BE (Morocco, male): I came here for the first time. I encountered a bit of a hard time due to the cold, and you come from a warm climate. And here, yes, it is really cold for me, it is really a problem. I am cold, my feet hurt, really cold.

R21_BE (Poland, female): In Belgium, it is similar, but you have slightly less sun than us in summer. I won’t complain, as last year we had a very nice summer. At our place, there is a lot of sun in May, June, July and August. We really had a lot of sun and, if it rains, the sun returns [In Poland], the sun returns, but here [in Belgium] not, it is a bit darker. For the rest it’s more or less the same.

Concerning the climate, R21_BE stated that she did not feel that there were so many differences between Poland and Belgium. Similarly, R18_BE (Romania, female) noted environmental change in the region of origin, but she did not feel that it affected people’s lives, as: ‘in Romania, it was very hot in summer, and very cold in winter. Now, it’s almost like here. (…) but it’s no different than normally.’ In addition to the weather, participants missed many other things from their region of origin, primarily their social networks and the food.

Apart from impacting people’s migration drivers, weather conditions were considered when deciding on which destination to choose; however, these considerations were often subordinate to other migration motivations and intervening opportunities. This was the case for R33_NL, who migrated to participate in an international exchange program, and who indicated that she initially wanted to go to Norway or to Iceland:

R33_NL (Hungary, female): So, I don’t really like winter and cold, but I always wanted to visit these colder countries because they are very beautiful. They also have these cozy living rooms with blankets, I love this feeling, because I don’t really like the cold.

Weather was thus considered part of the lifestyle (see Salazar 2014). This was similarly the case for R36_NL, who, seeing the Netherlands as a central point in her plans, wanted to wait until after her retirement before temporarily migrating first to Portugal and then returning to Curaçao. R27_BE (DRCongo, male) nicely summed up this perspective by stating that weather patterns can be used to describe how it feels to live in a specific country. Furthermore, as shown by R28_BE, weather conditions do not matter so much when you do not have to depend on them for your livelihood:

R28_BE (Morocco, female): I don’t know, it’s nice going there, but of course, I am lucky that I have two countries: one country where I can enjoy the sun and living cheaply with nice people; and another country where everything is in order. You [researcher], as a Belgian cannot realize this, but I do. When I returned [from Morocco to Belgium], I thought: “back to order”.

This quote highlights how weather is interpreted by migrants after migration, and how this shapes people’s sense of belonging and place attachment to the immigrant country.

To conclude, weather and climatic conditions in the region of origin – especially when experiencing enduring drought and water scarcity – were mentioned as a reason for a shortage of jobs, which required people to migrate elsewhere searching for better employment opportunities (see Ou-Salah, Van Praag, and Verschraegen 2022; Van Praag et al. 2021). The local weather was often experienced as requiring immediate adaptation to the new immigrant country. This adaptation to the local weather evoked feelings of missing one’s homeland and a complicated sense of place attachment – at least during the colder winter months. In the following section, we discuss how these migration histories and trajectories further shaped future mobility decisions.

Future mobility risks and decisions

Social networks and social welfare

When reflecting upon future mobility decisions, original migration motivations (i.e. better standard of living, including health care, and better social networks) were also mentioned as reasons that complicated return migration and hindered the capacity to return or move elsewhere. Individual characteristics of the participants and family structures in which people live, such as being a divorced older female, were considered when reflecting upon future destinations and/or returning to one’s region of origin. This is in line with Findlay’s first principle (Findlay 2011), which states that most people prefer immobility over mobility. However, the findings also reveal the importance of migration capabilities. The fifth and sixth principles of Findlay’s framework thus also remain relevant. Family networks and structures are even more important for migrants, as they often rely on them for care when older and also want to be in close proximity to see their grandchildren. Attachment to a specific place enters into the picture when depending on social networks, both locally and transnationally. For example, R16_BE stated that having children – even if they were now adults – complicates any decision about moving and in fact has a binding force:

R16_BE (Morocco, female): We can’t return. We have children here. They have studied here. Later there will be grandchildren. We can’t. We can’t go everywhere. (…) My children have their own lives. If I go to Morocco, I am alone. If I stay here, I am also alone, but at least I have children that visit me here.

Relying on social networks and intergenerational or family care is deemed even more relevant as people age. Getting older complicates planning about any future move to another destination, as emphasized by R18_BE (Morocco, female): ‘not all days and months are the same. Today, I am good; tomorrow, I am not good, and I can’t continue without planning.’ R18_BE also stressed the lack of health care in Morocco:

R18_BE (Morocco, female): Especially for medication, as everyone is sick here, but in my country, medication is very expensive, even for diabetes, so that is very costly. I also have a disease, diabetes, I have a high cholesterol, I have so much medicine I receive from the doctor. If I move to Morocco, it will become hard, also financially.

The advantages of living in a social welfare state can be considered as constituting a ‘golden cage.’ Although some participants were otherwise free to return to their region of origin, their dependence on the positive sides of the health care system hindered them. This had consequences for participants’ wellbeing, as it gave them a feeling of having limited freedom:

R2_BE (Poland, female): My doctor has proposed a medical procedure, operations [on] my back. Back surgery. Two vertebrae to be removed, and replaced with plastic. This is impossible for me, because I have already been in rehabilitation for one year, and I am alone. The doctor said I won’t give you the guarantee that it will be ok. If the operation doesn’t succeed, then I become an invalid which is not ok because I am alone. And the doctor didn’t want to give me a guarantee. And, I have a depression, I want to go back.

She ended the group discussion saying: ‘In the end, health is everything!’ The consequences of feeling like ‘having no choice’ and ‘not being able to plan future move to another destination’ should not be underestimated. These ambivalent feelings are strengthened even more by racist experiences in Belgium and the Netherlands, and not feeling welcomed or accepted for whom they are by people of Belgian descent.

When considering future destinations and potentially migrating again, most participants referred to returning to their region of origin. The two main groups that had such plans were those who aimed to return after their retirement and a small but significant group of younger participants who feared global warming, and who reflected theoretically on the potential need to avoid climate risks.

Migration to region of origin after retirement

Many participants reflected upon whether they were willing to return to their country of origin after retiring. Warmer weather conditions were regarded as a positive incentive to spend time back in one’s country of origin, but this was not perceived as an asset at the economic level. For example, R28_BE helps her brother analyze water scarcity in various regions, assessing water levels and drought, and the lack of investment in agriculture by migrants. Despite all difficulties related to agriculture and increasing drought, she said that she wanted to return after retirement because of the nicer weather and culture:

R28_BE (Morocco, female): That’s everyone’s idea. Also, Belgians go to Spain, where you have the same weather as in Morocco, they buy a house and stay there. So, moving to Greece, the Mediterranean, the climate is nicer than here and it’s cleaner than here, that’s everybody’s dream [laughs]. I go to Morocco, as it is my country, Belgians go to Spain or Greece, as it’s also a European environment.

Being liberated from the need to worry about one’s means of economic livelihood after retirement also disconnected R28_BE from concerns about climate change in Morocco and its increasing impacts. This was also the case for R36_NL (Curaçao, female), who mentioned that she thinks about moving immediately after her retirement, although she said that she ‘still has to work a lot a lot. I might have to work until my 70s.’ She reflected on returning to Curaçao, but at the same time of exploring the world and enjoying greener spaces, such as France and Portugal, for a couple of months a year, then returning to the Netherlands, which is ‘in the middle of Europe, [from] which it is easy to visit other places in Europe but also to return to Curaçao.’ Thus, as mentioned by R28_BE and R29_BE, the sunny weather back home is attractive to migrants, or the cold weather is seen as a hindrance to enjoying life in Europe.

When returning to their region of origin after retirement, people tend to focus on how to have the best of both worlds. As many people have built up networks in Belgium/the Netherlands and are attached to them in a myriad of ways through children, jobs and living standards, returning to the region of origin is not that straightforward. For example, R27_BE, who comes from DRCongo and has young children, said he preferred his children to be educated in the Flemish education system, which he valued higher than the Congolese educational system. Due to his attachments in Belgium, he intended to spend shorter periods in DRCongo, setting up an NGO. Reflecting on locations where he might live should he go back, he stated that he could only live in Kinshasa:

R27_BE (DRCongo, male): Where I was born, in the Western part of DRCongo, that is almost … the countryside; that is not inhabitable. I mean: no electricity, no pure water. I won’t be able to live in those living conditions, (…) I would just die. Kinshasa, that is good, it’s a modern city, where I can live easily and do a couple of things. I have a project, an NGO, and then I would live there and execute the project, that’s it.

This project aims to contribute to the wellbeing of the Congolese population, working in different domains, starting with the medical sector by sourcing medicines and sending them to medical centers in DR Congo, before expanding the objectives of his NGO to deal with environmental factors, including the protection of the natural environment. However, the ties with his region of origin had slowly evaporated, and he felt he had become ‘a stranger’. Thus, he aimed only to return to a larger city temporarily, where he could spend time building new ties. He considered that returning or visiting with the entire family was not an option as it would be too expensive both in the short and long term.

Facing global warming and preventing climate risks

The climate and the weather were often mentioned in people’s narratives. Nonetheless, responses about expected global warming were concentrated on searching for places with better economic opportunities and resources to deal with climate adaptation. Many people were confronted with and puzzled about how to deal with this ‘wicked problem.’ In general, only a small proportion of this sample mentioned climate risks and linked this with future mobility decisions. The narrative of R16_BE (Morocco, female) is relevant here, as she was aware of environmental change and referred to difficulties due to water scarcity. She also aimed to reduce her own waste, avoid the use of plastic and recycle. She was a divorced woman, aged 57, who felt bound to Belgium due to her four children living here and difficulties of returning as a divorced woman. Moreover, reflecting on global warming gave her some ‘solastalgia’ (Albrecht 2005; Albrecht et al. 2007; Askland and Bunn 2018; Tschakert and Tutu 2010).

Realizing that one cannot stop global warming or its consequences led to feelings of distress. For example, R18_BE referred to a kind of ‘climate change stress’ or stress related to changes that cannot be anticipated or dealt with:

Interviewer: Do you often think about it [climate change]?

R16_BE (Romania, female): Yes (laughs) … it’s not pleasant to think about what could happen later on.

Interviewer: ‘And what exactly do you think of?’

R16_BE: Yes, there used to be ice in Greenland, and everything around the poles, and the polar bears, and there was ice everywhere, but now there is not that much ice any more (…), so it gives me a bit of stress. I don’t know, but for me that is really … .

Interviewer: ‘How do you feel about it?’

R16_BE: I don’t know what can happen and I panic because things don’t happen like before, everything is changing.

Interviewer: “Do you sometimes behave differently as a result or undertake particular action?

R16_BE: I don’t have a solution for the climate, but if someone suggests something I will follow them.

Interviewer: You mentioned the changes in Greenland, but is this also the case in Romania?

R16_BE: Yes, as I said before, in the winter it used to be really cold and in summer really warm, but now there is only summer for us, so it’s not… there used to be a lot of snow but now in winter there is hardly any snow, it is all gone. Now, we have two or three days of snow; that is really weird for us.

This kind of distress moves even beyond the concept of solastalgia (Albrecht 2005; Albrecht et al. 2007; Askland and Bunn 2018; Tschakert and Tutu 2010), which refers to the distress caused by the losses people experience due to environmental change. However, a number of participants highlighted that it was not necessarily a sense of loss that causes feelings of distress, but rather the anticipation of difficulties and changes that are about to come. For young people, in particular, climate change is already considered in their future relocation plans, as was the case for R34_NL, with Vietnamese heritage, who had moved from the United States to the Netherlands:

R34_NL (United States, female): So, it depends, some people in my environment who are still … let’s say, in illusion, they don’t really pay much attention to it. And I’m also mindful (laughs) not to overshare, but for people let’s say who are awakened to many of the illusions, maybe they themselves got through an awakening of who they are. Then, that’s where I can really have a deep conversation. And yeah, with those people I tell them the divine warned specific people in the past, like Noah, [so] many, many people know to prepare and that’s how I feel today actually. I’ve gotten the message and I’m going to prepare myself and my community, my loved ones, as much as I can without fear of what anybody thinks (laughs).

Interviewer: And how are you making these preparations?

R34_NL: First it’s to continue to work on myself. And become the best version of me, because when I can embody that then I can be the best of service to everybody else. And secondly, I’m actually considering warmer places to move to as well as places above sea level.

Interviewer: Okay, so you didn’t do great with the move to the Netherlands in that sense?

R34_NL: Well, I know I’m here for a reason as well. A different reason, but kind of connected as well. So, I wanna serve out that purpose before I relocate.

Interviewer: And where are thinking of relocating?

R34_NL: To Spain.

Interviewer: Okay, because it’s warmer, or how do you see that in terms of your preparation?

R34_NL: Well, the divine gave me an individual to look [up to]. Edgar Casey, have you ever heard of him? He prophesied, let’s say, a different Earth than we understand at the moment. And what does that mean? It means that he prophesied that water levels around the world will rise with a shift in the environment, just as they did 12,800 years ago. So, I looked at this map and I saw which places would be above sea level and so I chose based on that.

As R34_NL noted, she is young and inspired by what she calls ‘the divine,’ working as a spiritual healer, but she is very focused on future climate change and relocation to areas that are safer than the Netherlands.

In summary, the participants mainly reflected upon future destinations and/or returning to the region of origin, and thus longed for sunnier weather conditions. However, as reflected in Findlay’s (2011) first, fifth and sixth principles, social relationships and the welfare system in the immigrant country hindered return migration, and certainly permanent return migration. Returning to a place with more environmental hazards would occur, in most cases, only when someone had become less dependent on the environment (e.g. retirement) and the environmental hazards would not hinder life in the region to which they wish to move (e.g. water availability, no flooding, etc.). The accounts of a small but significant group of participants indicated that awareness of climate risks causes distress and that such risks are considered in future mobility decisions.

Discussion

Although recently, growing attention has been given to the forecasting or predicting of future mobilities (Boas and Wiegel 2021; Durand-Delacre et al. 2021; Stojanov 2006; Schewel et al. 2024), less insights are available on how environmental factors are considered in individuals’ future migration decisions. The present study aimed to understand how weather and climatic conditions are considered in migration decision-making in a very diverse group of migrants living in the Netherlands and Belgium. Growing awareness and impacts of global warming have been found to impact mobility decisions. This study began with the participants’ migrant histories and linked these to their reflections on the importance of environmental factors in future mobility decisions. Using Findlay’s (2011) analytical framework as a starting point, this study has contributed more insight into how environmental change plays a part in ongoing mobility decisions. The results of this study demonstrate the growing importance of raising awareness about global warming and informing people about climate risks, and providing tools for dealing with such risks, based on the capabilities of people. In addition, debates on environmental mobility require a more nuanced understanding of how people respond to climate risks and environmental change.

This study offers two main findings. First, most participants preferred to stay in Belgium or the Netherlands but frequently discussed their mobility decisions within their own circles (see also Ciobanu, Fokkema, and Nedelcu 2017; Findlay 2011). Environmental factors were mentioned as having had an impact on their own past migration trajectory, especially when it decreased employment opportunities (Van Praag et al. 2021; Ou-Salah, Van Praag, and Verschraegen 2022; Schewel et al. 2024). For many migrants, future migration or return was not a valid option, given their migration history, limited resources, and situation in the region of origin. Also, age and the life course cannot be overlooked when reflecting upon mobility decisions, and especially when considering environmental factors (de Jong and de Valk 2020; Kley 2011; Van Praag 2021).

After arrival in Belgium or the Netherlands, the weather conditions led many people to realize that they would have to adapt to the new living conditions in the new country. Weather conditions and climate are readily noticeable differences between countries, which require a change of lifestyle. As such, they are important factors in relation to making people feel at ease or not, and in developing a sense of belonging and place attachment in a new country. The climate and attachment to the natural environment in an immigrant country impacts people’s lives and sense of belonging to that country (Askland and Bunn 2018; Parks 2023; Peters, Stodolska, and Horolets 2016).

Second, when reflecting on future mobility decisions and migrant or return destinations, a significant number of participants thought of returning to their region of origin after retirement, regardless of the environmental conditions in that region (Constant and Massey 2002; Lundholm 2015; Yahirun 2009). On returning they would be economically independent and still enjoy welfare benefits from Belgium/the Netherlands. They expressed some concerns about being able to readjust to this region of origin, of finding new social networks and of missing family members (which is in line with the findings of Ciobanu, Fokkema, and Nedelcu 2017). Only a small group of participants considered rising sea levels and other environmental hazards, reflecting upon ‘better’ destinations to which to migrate. In these cases, climate change stress and solastalgia (Albrecht 2005; Albrecht et al. 2007; Askland and Bunn 2018; Tschakert and Tutu 2010) are referred to as concerning and as occupying their thoughts.

The findings revealed age differences in climate risk perceptions and mental health consequences. Older participants were more likely to be aware of environmental changes in their region of origin, which in some limited cases led to feelings of solastalgia. Younger participants felt greater urgency in facing these climate risks, leading to feelings of distress about the future. This group adjusted their mobility patterns to the climatic conditions of a specific region, without necessarily referring to their migration past.

These findings support Findlay’s theoretical framework as a valuable tool for understanding the past and future mobility decisions of a large number of people, especially people who had to migrate due to a complex set of migration drivers. The findings did not fully support its validity in gaining a better understanding of young people’s mobility decisions, who are feeling increasingly distressed due to growing climate awareness and who reflect on ‘habitable’ places to migrate to in the future. There was a huge variety and diversity within this sample, demonstrating the importance of considering factors such as transnational networks, welfare benefits, migrant benefits and communities, as well as safety and peace in the region of origin.

Future research and policy recommendations

Based on these findings, some future research recommendations can be made. First, migration studies could mainstream environmental factors, stressors and future climate risks more in ongoing investigations and research. Second, more attention could be paid to age and life course differences in environmental mobility decisions and trajectories (Van Praag 2021), especially since this is also relevant to how climate discourses are interpreted. More research with younger migrants could delve deeper into how they understand local and transnational climate discourses; how they perceive and experience climate risks; and how this leads to feelings of distress. Third, future research should assess how people reflect on future destinations within one specific migrant group with the aim of considering cultures of migration, migration histories and settlement patterns, migrant networks, the existing welfare system in the region of origin (Ciobanu, Fokkema, and Nedelcu 2017) as well as specific local climate-related changes and issues, place attachment (e.g. Parks 2023), and intangible remittances (Pinkow-Läpple and Möllers 2022). They could advance this understanding, using novel (visual/co-creative) methods (Van Praag 2021).

Policy and media recommendations can also be made based on the findings of this study. First, policy makers could pay more attention to creating a welcoming climate for migrants after arrival, including weather advice and the issue of ‘climatic care’ (e.g. how to deal sustainably with energy and specific weather events and conditions) to cope with local weather conditions. Second, policy makers and the media could provide clear information and be more specific when reporting about climate change. They should attempt to apply the global discourses on climate change to the local context and provide tools to deal with this information. Third, and finally, policy makers should invest in educational and health programs that help people deal with climate risks, fears and emotions related to climate stress.

Study limitations

The main set-up of this research was to explore how existing migration decisions further inspired future migration aspirations in a heterogeneous sample of migrants living in Belgium and the Netherlands. Despite the relevance of the findings for future theory development, some reflections need to be made on the study limitations. The heterogeneity of the sample and the variation in the numbers of people representative of age and region of origin could bias the findings. First, a large group of participants came from Morocco, many of whom migrated after the Second World War and came from rural areas that already experienced drought and water scarcity (Ou-Salah, Van Praag, and Verschraegen 2022). Especially when the sampling strategy focused on reaching older migrants living especially in the Antwerp area, the sample reflects existing migration patterns in this region. This could have biased the data, given the sensitivity to climate changes from this specific group, the strong migrant networks and (temporal) return migration (Timmerman et al. 2017). Second, the fieldwork in the Netherlands was limited compared to the Belgian fieldwork, as during the fieldwork, it rapidly became clear that the replication of the same research design would not sufficiently differ from the one in Belgium, due to the heterogeneity in the sample, in terms of age, migration history and region of origin. Third, there was some variation in the group sizes and set up of the interviews, related to how we could reach out to our sample. All (group) interviews and focus group discussions consisted of the same set of questions, but varied in the regards participants could go more in-depth into their individual stories. This research design was opted to include a wide variety of participants, who otherwise would not be prone in participating and include their voices as well. Some participants indicated that doing the interview together facilitated feeling comfortable during the interview, while for others this did not really matter.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Lore Van Praag

Lore Van Praag (Master, PhD Ghent University) is Assistant Professor at the Erasmus University of Rotterdam. Her research interests are social and ethnic inequalities, transnationalism, migration, environmental change, and diversity.

Sie-Long Cheung

Sie-Long Cheung is Assistant Professor at the Erasmus University Rotterdam. Her interest lies in the sociology of migrants, health, and intergenerational solidarity.

Appendix

Table A1. Participant characteristics.

Nr.	BE/NL	Country of birth	Main migration reason	Years since leaving country of birth	Year of birth	Gender	Profession in Belgium	Training
1	BE	Poland	Family reunification with political refugee	58	1950–1959	M	Photographer	Master’s in Photography
2	BE	Iran	Political refugee	13	Not disclosed	F	Stay at home partner	Secondary education
3	BE	Pakistan	Labour market migration	20	1960–1969	F	Researcher	PhD Media studies
4	BE	Pakistan	Labour market migration	25	1960–1969	M	Financial advisor	Master’s in Finance & Accounting; postgraduate Hospitality studies
5	BE	Southern India	Family reunification	16	1960–1969	M	Marketing communication manager	Master’s in Mass Communication, Marketing and Advertising 1 MBA
6	BE	Nepal	Family reunification	10	1970–1979	F	Nurse	Bachelor’s in Nursing
7	BE	Morocco	Labour market migration	Not disclosed	1970–1979	M	Unemployed	Not disclosed
8	BE	Morocco	Family reunification	Not disclosed	1980–1989	F	Unemployed	Not disclosed
9	BE	Morocco	Labour market migration	Not disclosed	1960–1969	M	Unemployed	Not disclosed
10	BE	Afghanistan	Political refugee	Not disclosed	1990–1999	M	Unemployed electrician	Secondary education
11	BE	Morocco	Family reunification	9	1960–1969	F	Unemployed	Secondary education
12	BE	Ghana	Family reunification	22	1960–1969	F	Unemployed	Secondary education
13	BE	Pakistan	Labour market migration	10	1970–1979	M	Unemployed/driver	Secondary education
14	BE	Poland	Labour market migration	14	1960–1969	F	Unemployed	Higher education
15	BE	India	Labour market migration partner	1.5	1970–1979	F	Unemployed	Higher education
16	BE	Morocco	Labour market migration	36	1960–1969	F	Invalid	Secondary education
17	BE	Nepal	Labour market migration	14	1970–1979	F	Cleaning officer	Secondary education
18	BE	Romania	Labour market migration	14	1960–1969	F	Invalid	Secondary education
19	BE	Romania	Labour market migration	Not disclosed	1960–1969	F	Unemployed	Not disclosed
20	BE	Morocco	Family reunification	18	1960–1969	F	Unemployed (call center)	Higher education
21	BE	Poland	Labour market migration	13	1970–1979	F	Unemployed	Higher education
22	BE	Yemen	Political refugee	3	1980–1989	M	Employed (not specified)	Secondary education
23	BE	Morocco	Labour market migration	35	1970–1979	M	Hairdresser	Secondary education
24	BE	Kyrgyzstan	Political refugee	10	1950–1959	F	Retired (cleaning lady)	Higher education
25	BE	Syria	Political refugee	7	1960–1969	M	Unemployed	Secondary education
26	BE	Italy	Family reunification	8	1970–1979	F	Model (academy)	Secondary education
27	BE	DR Congo	Education	35	1950–1959	M	Employee NGO sector	Higher education
28	BE	Morocco	Family reunification	14	1970–1979	F	Independent business owner	Secondary education (drop out)
29	BE	Morocco	Family reunification	33	1950–1959	M	Docker	Secondary education
30	NL	Pakistan	Labour market migration	1	1980–1989	M	Engineer	Higher education
31	NL	India	Education	1	1990–1999	M	Student	Higher education
32	NL	Syria	Political refugee	8	1980–1989	F	Unemployed/in training	Higher education
33	NL	Hungary	Education	1	2000–2009	F	Student	Higher education
34	NL	United States of America	Personal exploration and spirituality	4	1990–1999	F	Spiritual leader	Higher education
35	NL	Cape Verde	Labour market migration and family reunification	23	1960–1969	F	Not disclosed	Primary education
36	NL	Curaçao	Education	Not disclosed	1980–1989	F	Social worker	Higher education