Bridging the divide: Misinterpretations across climate and migration research

Two case studies illustrate the risks of misunderstanding across disciplines. The first is the East Africa Climate Paradox, where climate models project increased rainfall during the March–May long rains, while observations show a drying trend. This highlights how uncritical use of projections can mislead both science and policy.

The second is the Syria drought-conflict narrative, frequently cited as evidence of climate-driven migration. In fact, migration arose from a complex mix of climatic, political, social, and economic factors—climate being just one element.

The project advocates for more integrated, interdisciplinary research and offers concrete strategies to foster dialogue and mutual understanding across fields.