Voluntarily and Involuntarily Immobile Farmers under the Impacts of Climate Crisis in Turkey

My research* shows that most farmers have no intention to migrate (either from rural to rural or rural to urban) within the country because of climatic and non-climatic challenges. The rate of those who are planning to move is quite low - despite the worsening impacts of climate change and long-lasting structural problems in agriculture in Turkey. The latter include a lack of agricultural reform, aging rural populations, fragmented farming lands and overemphasis on capital-intensive agriculture for long years.
All three research sites grapple with climate change effects and primarily depend on agriculture. Let us now dive into farmers' firsthand experiences and migration intentions in three focused areas.

Indeed, each of the 111 farmers I have interviewed has experienced more than one of the impacts of climate change, be it water scarcity, drought, storm, flooding, or associated effects like a sharp increase in pests and depletion of underground waters. Regardless of regional differences, most of them also heavily complain about the climbing prices of electricity, fertilizers, and agricultural pesticides and uncertain market conditions deriving from supply chain disruptions and fluctuations in the price of agricultural commodities.

When I asked them why they were unwilling to migrate, most of them pointed out their belongings, familial ties, and attachment to their land, as in the case of the farmer mentioned above from Region A. So, their decision to move or not heavily depends on not only objective realities, including climatic and non-climatic challenges, but also their subjective understandings of moving, aspirations and anxieties when starting afresh in an unfamiliar environment, perceived risks and attachment to the original culture.

It may seem obvious that emotional and material attachment plays a key role in the decision of whether to leave one’s birthplace. But there are other factors playing an equally important role, if not more.

In short, it is now becoming increasingly clear that not only the objective reality of climatic factors combined with non-climatic factors account for decision-making behind mobility and immobility. The subjective understanding of staying and moving, belonging, culture, hope, and fear also matter. It is the case despite the gigantic image of climate change, which has entered a new phase for the whole globe.

The critical question here is, "How long can farmers resist not to move or quit farming?" To be more precise, how long will the current maladaptive practices of farmers (excessive increase in water use, pesticides, and chemical fertilizers) last? How will such tentative "solutions" "fix" the multifaceted problem we all face now of varying degrees? Genuine answers to these questions and the subsequent efforts to be made will likely determine not only the extent of climate change impacts on human mobility but also that of non-humans.