Cecilia has lived in Carahatas, a coastal village in Cuba, her entire life. Even as scientists predict that parts of her hometown may be underwater within 50 years due to rising sea levels, she refuses to leave. Like many locals, she believes her community can cope with climate change and flooding, despite government plans to gradually relocate residents to higher ground.
Carahatas is not alone. Across the world, communities face increasingly extreme weather events, including droughts, heat waves, landslides, floods, hurricanes, and tropical storms. While governments and experts often propose relocation as a solution, many people refuse to move. Why do they stay despite the risks?
A recent study led by Université de Montréal architecture professor Gonzalo Lizarralde sheds light on this question. Between 2016 and 2020, Lizarralde and his team studied four Latin American communities affected by climate disasters: Carahatas in Cuba, Yumbo and Salgar in Colombia, and Concepción in Chile. Funded by Canada’s International Development Research Centre, the research was published in the February 2024 issue of Emotion, Space and Society.
Their findings reveal that emotions fear, anxiety, anger, pride, and even reverence for nature play a crucial role in whether people choose to stay or leave when faced with climate risks.
Fear Alone Doesn’t Force People to Move
Governments and disaster-management agencies often assume that fear is the strongest motivator for action. Policies encourage people to reinforce their homes, relocate, or take out insurance based on the idea that they will want to avoid danger. However, Lizarralde’s research shows that fear alone is not enough.
In Carahatas, people do fear floods, but their biggest concerns are economic. Many wonder: Will moving mean losing my job? Will my financial situation worsen? These uncertainties outweigh the climate risks for many residents.
Similarly, in Yumbo and Salgar, crime, violence, and unemployment are bigger fears than natural disasters. People worry about immediate dangers rather than long-term climate threats. Anxiety over job loss and economic instability often prevents them from accepting relocation offers.
Pride, Anger, and Distrust in Authorities
Fear and anxiety are not the only emotional barriers to relocation. Many communities feel anger toward government authorities and distrust their proposed solutions.
For example, forced relocation to temporary housing is often met with resistance because residents feel abandoned by their governments. Many believe that officials do not truly understand their struggles or respect their way of life.
Pride is another major factor. In communities with limited resources, people have often built their homes themselves, sometimes even parts of the local infrastructure. While these homes may not be perfect some have leaky roofs or unstable foundations they represent years of hard work. Many refuse to leave behind something they built with their own hands.
“People know their houses have problems, but that doesn’t mean they want to tear them down or leave,” Lizarralde explains. “They are proud of what they’ve accomplished.”
This sense of achievement is often overlooked by decision-makers, who view informal settlements as unfit for living. “Authorities assume people should be eager to move to new apartments elsewhere, but study after study has shown that such initiatives often fail. People may accept the new homes, but it’s not what they really want,” he adds.
The Danger of Ignoring Emotions in Climate Policy
When policymakers fail to consider these emotions, they risk making poor decisions. “Until we take the time to understand people’s emotions and their attachment to the land, we will keep repeating flawed practices,” Lizarralde warns.
The study argues that emotions should be factored into disaster risk-reduction policies. Effective climate action requires legitimacy, trust, and empathy. Without these, governments will continue to face resistance from the communities they seek to protect.
Lizarralde points to recent climate disasters in Quebec as an example. The floods of 2017 and 2019 displaced thousands, but many people were reluctant to leave their homes despite repeated warnings. Their decisions were not just about risk they were deeply personal, influenced by emotions that policymakers often ignore.
A New Approach to Climate Relocation
To address climate risks effectively, governments need a new approach. This means:
- Understanding community concerns beyond just physical dangers.
- Engaging with locals rather than imposing top-down solutions.
- Respecting emotional ties to the land and existing homes.
- Building trust through transparent decision-making.
Climate change is forcing tough choices, but ignoring human emotions will only make the process harder. For people like Cecilia in Carahatas, the decision to stay or leave is not just about climate risks it’s about identity, community, and survival in more ways than one.