We study a population of people who do not migrate from Himalayan communities of Uttarakhand, India, despite their livelihoods being already severely disrupted by climate change climate change and high outmigration has led to abandoned so-called ‘ghost villages’. Semi-structured interviews (n = 72) were held with affected communities, experts, and policymakers. Results show that motivations for immobility are shaped by place attachment; place-based resource advantages; social milieu; dependence on subsistence agriculture and gender roles. We find that immobility experiences are differentiated by gender, age and in situ resources. Those who stay are negatively impacted by migration via loss of labour in agriculture, changes in population size and composition, loss of community, in addition to the negative impacts of climate change. Our results are likely relevant on a global scale, to other subsistence smallholder communities who stay despite increasing climate risks. These populations will need gender-sensitive support to adapt in place.
Read the full article here.
