CLIMATE CHANGE, FORCED MIGRATION AND BANDITRY IN CONTEMPORARY AFRICA: PATHWAYS, GOVERNANCE GAPS AND POLICY RESPONSES
Keywords:
climate change; forced migration; environmental mobility; banditry; pastoralism; resource governance; Africa; NigeriaAbstract
Climate change is intensifying environmental pressures on livelihoods across parts of Africa, where rain-fed agriculture, pastoralism, fisheries and other climate-sensitive activities support large populations. Drought, irregular rainfall, floods, heat stress and land degradation can reduce household income, undermine food security and contribute to mobility. In settings where public institutions are weak, land and water access is contested, livelihoods are insecure and armed actors operate with limited accountability, these pressures may interact with displacement and violent insecurity. This article examines the pathways connecting climate change, forced migration and banditry in contemporary Africa, with particular attention to the Sahel and Nigeria. It adopts a conceptual, narrative-review approach, synthesising pre-2022 climate assessments, migration research and scholarship on climate-conflict relationships. The analysis distinguishes environmental stress as a risk multiplier from direct explanations of criminal violence: climate change does not automatically produce migration, banditry or armed conflict. Outcomes depend on exposure, livelihood sensitivity, adaptive capacity, mobility options, political marginalisation, land governance, security provision and the political economy of violence. The article argues that treating mobile pastoralists or displaced people as inherently criminal is analytically inaccurate and can aggravate exclusion. Effective responses should combine climate adaptation, livelihood protection, negotiated land and water governance, accountable security, support for displaced communities, youth employment and cross-border cooperation. Long-term mitigation is also necessary, but emissions reduction alone cannot address immediate insecurity. The article concludes that climate-sensitive peacebuilding requires integrated policies that address both environmental vulnerability and the institutions that shape access to resources, protection and economic opportunity.