Rohingya Refugees and Climate Change: A Double Crisis Bangladesh Cannot Face Alone
Bangladesh is confronting two interconnected challenges that demand urgent international attention: the prolonged Rohingya refugee crisis and the growing consequences of climate change. Individually, each represents a serious humanitarian and development concern. Together, they have created a complex crisis in which displacement, environmental degradation, poverty and climate vulnerability reinforce one another. As extreme weather events become increasingly severe, the lives and livelihoods of Rohingya refugees and their Bangladeshi host communities face additional uncertainty.
Since August 2017, Bangladesh has provided shelter to hundreds of thousands of Rohingya people fleeing persecution and violence in Myanmar. Almost a decade later, the crisis remains unresolved. According to UNHCR data updated on 30 September 2026, approximately 1.21 million Rohingya refugees are living in Bangladesh, including around 1.17 million in Cox’s Bazar and more than 33,000 on Bhasan Char. What initially emerged as an emergency humanitarian response has developed into one of the world’s most prolonged displacement challenges.
The geographical location of the refugee settlements makes this crisis particularly concerning. Cox’s Bazar, situated along Bangladesh’s southeastern coastline, and is highly exposed to intense monsoon rainfall, cyclones, flooding and landslides. Thousands of refugee shelters are constructed with temporary materials, leaving residents vulnerable to extreme weather. When heavy rainfall destabilizes hillsides, destroys shelters or damages sanitation facilities, families already displaced by conflict face the possibility of further displacement.
Climate change does not explain the Rohingya’s original forced displacement from Myanmar, which arose primarily from persecution, violence and denial of fundamental rights. However, climate change increasingly magnifies the risks they face after displacement. This distinction is essential for understanding the crisis and developing appropriate policy responses.
The concentration of a large refugee population in a geographically limited area has created significant environmental pressures. The expansions of settlements, demand for construction materials and historical reliance on firewood have contributed to vegetation loss, soil degradation and pressure on local ecosystems. While reforestation, alternative fuel programmes and environmental rehabilitation initiatives have helped address some of these problems, environmental vulnerability remains a continuing concern.
Vegetation plays a vital role in stabilizing slopes, retaining soil moisture and reducing surface runoff. Where natural vegetation has been removed, intense rainfall can accelerate soil erosion and increase landslide risks. Consequently, environmental degradation can worsen the consequences of climate-related hazards.
The implications extend beyond the refugee camps. Bangladeshi host communities in Ukhiya and Teknaf depend on local natural resources, agriculture, small businesses and informal employment. Environmental pressures, infrastructure demands and competition over limited resources can increase their economic vulnerability. It would be misleading to attribute every environmental or economic difficulty in Cox’s Bazar solely to the refugee presence. Climate change, existing poverty, land-use practices and inadequate infrastructure also contribute to these challenges. Effective solutions must therefore recognize the interconnected needs of refugees and host populations rather than creating competition between them.
Discussions of climate change often focus on physical destruction, including damaged houses, flooded roads and lost vegetation. Yet the financial consequences of climate shocks deserve equal attention. For vulnerable households, a flood or cyclone can trigger several simultaneous economic difficulties. Food and transportation costs may increase, income-generating opportunities may disappear, essential household assets may be damaged, and medical expenses may rise. Families with little savings or limited access to financial support can struggle to recover, even after the immediate disaster has passed.
Rohingya refugees are particularly vulnerable because their opportunities for regular employment, independent income generation and formal financial participation remain severely restricted. Their dependence on humanitarian assistance reduces their capacity to absorb unexpected financial shocks. For low-income Bangladeshi households living near the camps, climate disasters may also lead to income losses, depleted savings and increased borrowing. When household resources are already insufficient, repeated climate shocks can create a cycle of debt and economic insecurity.
This highlights an important policy issue: climate resilience cannot be measured only by the number of shelters repaired or trees planted. It must also be assessed through households’ ability to maintain food consumption, manage essential expenditure, protect productive assets and recover financially after disasters. Financial resilience should therefore become a more visible component of humanitarian and climate adaptation strategies. Climate-related disasters do not affect everyone equally. Women, children, older people and persons with disabilities frequently face greater challenges in crowded and resource-constrained settlements. Flooding and damage to sanitation facilities can threaten hygiene and public health. Disrupted access to safe drinking water increases health risks, while damaged roads can restrict access to medical services and humanitarian assistance. Children may lose access to education when learning facilities are damaged or displaced families must relocate. Women and girls may face additional safety and protection concerns when shelters are damaged, privacy is reduced or essential services become difficult to access. These challenges require climate adaptation strategies that integrate disaster preparedness with healthcare, education, gender-sensitive protection and community participation.
A climate-resilient refugee settlement is not merely one that can withstand heavy rainfall. It is one where vulnerable people can remain safe, receive essential services and preserve their dignity during and after environmental emergencies. Bangladesh has demonstrated considerable humanitarian commitment by accommodating such a large displaced population despite its own development and climate vulnerabilities. Nevertheless, managing a protracted refugee crisis cannot remain primarily the financial and administrative responsibility of a developing host country.
In May 2026, the United Nations and its partners appealed for $710.5 million to address the critical needs of Rohingya refugees and vulnerable Bangladeshi host communities. The 2025–2026 Joint Response Plan explicitly recognises disaster risk management and combating climate change as major strategic priorities. These priorities are encouraging, but they must translate into sustained investment rather than short-term emergency responses. International assistance should support climate-resilient shelter construction, improved drainage, slope stabilisation, afforestation, sustainable energy, water management and stronger early-warning systems. Special attention must also be given to environmental restoration in affected host communities.
At the same time, Bangladesh should receive additional international technical and financial support for managing the environmental consequences of prolonged displacement. Climate adaptation finance and humanitarian financing are not identical, and refugee-related assistance should not automatically be treated as climate finance. Nevertheless, stronger coordination between these financing mechanisms could improve the effectiveness of available resources.
After nearly a decade, a response based predominantly on emergency relief is insufficient to address the evolving challenges of the Rohingya crisis. A more sustainable approach should integrate humanitarian protection, environmental restoration, disaster risk reduction and economic resilience. First, environmental rehabilitation should be strengthened through scientifically designed reforestation, slope protection and watershed management. Such interventions can reduce disaster risks while restoring damaged ecosystems. Second, climate-resilient infrastructure should receive greater priority. Safe shelters, drainage systems, sanitation facilities and reliable access roads are essential for reducing the humanitarian consequences of extreme weather. Third, programmes that improve household resilience should be expanded within the applicable legal and policy framework. Skills development, financial literacy, community-based preparedness and appropriate livelihood opportunities can help reduce long-term aid dependence. For host communities, responsible access to savings, insurance and suitable financial services may strengthen their capacity to recover from climate shocks. Fourth, refugees and local residents must be meaningfully involved in designing and implementing adaptation programmes. Community participation can improve the relevance, acceptance and long-term effectiveness of interventions. Finally, greater emphasis should be placed on evidence-based policymaking. Universities, research institutions, development organisations and government agencies can collaborate to examine the relationships among climate exposure, household vulnerability, environmental conditions and financial resilience.
Such research could help identify which adaptation investments produce the greatest social and economic benefits for both refugee and host populations. The Rohingya crisis is fundamentally a matter of human rights, forced displacement and international responsibility. Climate change adds another layer of injustice to an already vulnerable population. People who have contributed very little to global greenhouse gas emissions are increasingly exposed to climate-related hazards. Meanwhile, Bangladesh, itself highly vulnerable to climate change, continues to shoulder a substantial humanitarian burden. This situation raises a broader question of global climate justice: who should bear the responsibility when communities already affected by conflict and poverty become increasingly vulnerable to environmental disasters?
The international community must recognize that climate vulnerability and forced displacement cannot always be addressed through separate policy frameworks. Coordinated humanitarian action, development cooperation and climate adaptation investment are necessary to prevent overlapping crises from becoming permanent conditions of human suffering.
Ultimately, the durable solution to the Rohingya crisis remains safe, voluntary, dignified and sustainable repatriation to Myanmar, when conditions permit and fundamental rights and security can be guaranteed. Climate adaptation initiatives in Bangladesh cannot substitute for this political and humanitarian objective. Until such conditions exist, however, both the refugees and the Bangladeshi communities hosting them deserve meaningful protection against growing climate risks. The world must not allow people who fled violence to become victims of another preventable tragedy. Protecting Rohingya refugees from climate-related disasters is not only a humanitarian obligation; it is a test of international solidarity, environmental responsibility and global justice.
The writer is an Associate Professor in the Department of Accounting and Information Systems at Jatiya Kabi Kazi Nazrul Islam University, Bangladesh.
