In 2023, the Philippines recorded 2,594,000 internal displacements due to disasters and another 160,000 due to conflict. That is roughly the entire population of a city like Davao being uprooted in a single year, though the two numbers come from different triggers and rarely overlap neatly in official reports. The reality on the ground is messier: a typhoon can hit a region already destabilised by armed conflict, forcing families to flee not just rising water but also the threat of violence. Humanitarian agencies, however, still tend to treat these as separate crises, which creates gaps in how aid reaches the people who need it most.
This is the central tension in what researchers now call “complex displacement” — situations where climate shocks and conflict converge, making it nearly impossible to classify a displaced person as purely a “disaster evacuee” or a “conflict survivor.” The Philippines, ranked first globally for natural hazard risk in 2025, is a natural laboratory for this phenomenon. Understanding how the system responds — and where it fails — matters for anyone tracking the human cost of climate change in the country.
These figures only tell part of the story. The 2.5 million disaster displacements include people who returned home within weeks, but also those who never could because their land was destroyed or deemed unsafe. The 160,000 conflict displacements include families fleeing active hostilities in Mindanao, but also Indigenous communities pushed off ancestral lands by militarised development projects. The lines blur further when you consider that the Philippines is the deadliest country in Asia for environmental defenders, with 298 killed between 2012 and 2023. Many of those defenders were Indigenous Peoples resisting mining and energy projects on their ancestral domains — projects often framed as climate solutions by the government and corporations.
What Complex Displacement Actually Looks Like
The term “complex displacement” was developed to describe exactly these situations. A study published in Nature in 2025, based on 32 interviews with humanitarian practitioners in the Philippines, found that organisations rely on trigger-based, temporal, spatial, and precedent-based classifications to decide whether to respond. The problem is that these classifications were designed for simpler emergencies. When a community is simultaneously fleeing a typhoon and a counterinsurgency operation, the system struggles to assign responsibility.
One example from the research: Typhoon Tembin (locally named Vinta) in 2017 crossed major flashpoints affected by the Marawi Siege earlier that year. Communities already traumatised by conflict found themselves facing a natural disaster, and the humanitarian response had to navigate both security risks and damaged infrastructure. The study identified four major factors that influence whether organisations respond — government requests, operational presence, security, and logistics — and found that structural blind spots in each area can leave affected populations without assistance.
How Climate Disinformation Fuels Displacement
The connection between climate change and displacement is not just about stronger typhoons or rising sea levels. In the Philippines, a more insidious driver is climate disinformation — the deliberate spread of false or misleading narratives about environmental issues. A 2025 report by the Asia Centre identifies four key forms of this disinformation: the fabrication of Indigenous consent for projects, greenwashing of extractive industries, promotion of false climate solutions, and deflection of state and corporate accountability.
This dynamic was tragically illustrated on New Year’s Day 2026 in Barangay Cabacao, Occidental Mindoro. An aerial bombardment and strafing operation by the Armed Forces of the Philippines killed five civilians — three Mangyan-Iraya children and two student researchers — displaced 188 families, and led to the disappearance of 24-year-old Chantal Anicoche. State authorities, led by the National Task Force to End Local Communist Armed Conflict (NTF-ELCAC), justified the attack as a counterinsurgency operation. But Cabacao sits within a mineral-rich region where Indigenous resistance has long challenged the return of environmentally destructive mining operations, including those linked to Agusan Petroleum.
The Asia Centre report argues that climate disinformation provides the ideological backbone for this violence. By portraying extractive projects as “sustainable” or “necessary climate solutions,” and Indigenous opposition as “terrorism,” the state creates a narrative in which military coercion becomes acceptable. This is not a fringe phenomenon. The Philippine government’s “Whole-of-Nation” approach has institutionalised the militarisation of resource-rich Indigenous lands, and climate disinformation sustains this model by casting extractive development as climate action.
For context on how environmental degradation directly threatens food security and livelihoods in the Philippines, read our analysis of how pollution affects Filipino fisheries and food security.
What Gets Missed in the Response
The humanitarian system’s structural blind spots are not accidental. They emerge from how organisations are funded, mandated, and held accountable. Here are three specific gaps that the research highlights.
Trigger-Based Classification Fails When Triggers Overlap
Most humanitarian organisations classify displacement by its immediate cause — a typhoon, a flood, an armed conflict. This works well when the cause is clear. But when a community is displaced by a typhoon that also triggered landslides in a conflict-affected area, the classification becomes ambiguous. The Nature study found that practitioners often default to the trigger that fits their organisation’s mandate, leaving the other dimension of the crisis unaddressed. For example, a disaster-response agency might provide food and shelter but have no capacity to address the security concerns that prevent families from returning home.
Government Requests Can Block Access
One of the four major factors influencing humanitarian response is whether the government requests assistance. In the Philippines, the government has sometimes been reluctant to acknowledge the scale of displacement, particularly when it involves conflict or controversial development projects. The Asia Centre report notes that manipulated consultation processes — where Indigenous communities are pressured to “consent” to projects — are a form of disinformation that facilitates forced displacement. When the government does not request aid, or actively blocks it, humanitarian organisations are left with few options.
Security Constraints Create a Hierarchy of Suffering
Humanitarian organisations cannot operate where it is too dangerous. This sounds reasonable, but it creates a perverse outcome: the most severe displacement crises — those occurring in active conflict zones — are often the least served. The Nature study found that security was a major factor in organisational decisions to respond, and that this disproportionately affects Indigenous communities in remote, militarised areas. These are also the communities most vulnerable to climate impacts, as they often live in forested or coastal areas with limited infrastructure.
To understand how pollution compounds these vulnerabilities, see our report on pollution’s hidden health costs for Filipinos.
→ Scroll right to see all columns
| Classification Type | How It Works | Blind Spot |
|---|---|---|
| Trigger-based | Response determined by immediate cause (disaster vs. conflict) | Fails when causes overlap |
| Temporal | Response based on duration of displacement | Ignores cyclical displacement patterns |
| Spatial | Response based on geographic location | Misses cross-border or cross-region movement |
| Precedent-based | Response modelled on past similar events | Assumes next crisis will look like the last one |
What Can Be Done About Complex Displacement
There is no single fix for a problem this layered, but the research points to several practical steps that humanitarian organisations, policymakers, and affected communities can take. These are not theoretical — they are drawn from what practitioners on the ground have identified as gaps and potential solutions.
Adopt a Nexus Approach to Funding and Mandates
The Humanitarian-Development-Peace (HDP) Nexus was developed specifically to address contexts where humanitarian needs, climate change, and conflict coincide. In practice, this means funding programmes that are not siloed by sector — for example, a single grant that covers emergency relief, livelihood restoration, and conflict mediation in the same community. The Nature study found that organisations operating with HDP Nexus principles were better able to respond to complex displacement, but that most funding streams still enforce rigid categories. Donors and government agencies need to create flexible funding mechanisms that allow organisations to address multiple dimensions of a crisis simultaneously.
Strengthen Community-Led Early Warning Systems
Indigenous communities often have traditional knowledge about weather patterns and environmental changes that can complement scientific data. The International Organization for Migration (IOM) has developed tools like the Generating Renewable and Innovative Designs for Displacement (GRID) Briefer and Safe Rooms Briefer, which provide practical guidance for at-risk communities. But these tools are only effective if communities have the resources and autonomy to act on them. Strengthening community-led early warning systems means investing in local infrastructure, communication networks, and decision-making power — not just distributing pamphlets.
Combat Climate Disinformation Directly
The Asia Centre report makes clear that climate disinformation is not a side issue — it is a central driver of displacement. Countering it requires more than fact-checking. It requires legal protections for environmental defenders, accountability for state actors who spread false narratives, and media literacy programmes that help communities recognise when they are being manipulated. The report also recommends that international bodies and human rights organisations document and publicise cases where climate disinformation has led to displacement or violence, creating pressure for change.
Address the Root Causes of Conflict-Induced Displacement
In the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (BARMM), displacement is driven by a combination of climate shocks, armed conflict, and historical marginalisation. The IOM’s Comprehensive Assessment Report on Conflict-induced Displacement Situations in BARMM (May 2026) provides detailed data on these dynamics. Addressing root causes means supporting the peace process, investing in economic development that does not rely on extractive industries, and ensuring that Indigenous communities have secure tenure over their ancestral lands. Without these structural changes, displacement will continue to recur.
For a deeper look at how environmental crises unfold in specific regions, read about the toxic spill that polluted a Filipino river and its impact on local communities.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the difference between disaster displacement and conflict displacement? â–ľ
How does red-tagging lead to displacement? â–ľ
What is climate disinformation? â–ľ
Why is the Philippines so vulnerable to climate displacement? â–ľ
What is the HDP Nexus? â–ľ
How many environmental defenders have been killed in the Philippines? â–ľ
Closing Thoughts
The numbers on displacement in the Philippines are stark, but they only hint at the human reality behind them. Every statistic represents families who lost their homes, children who lost their schools, and communities that may never return to the land they once called home. The convergence of climate change and conflict is not a future scenario — it is happening now, in places like Occidental Mindoro and the Bangsamoro region. Addressing it will require not just better humanitarian systems, but a reckoning with the political and economic forces that drive displacement in the first place. If this was useful, you might also want to read how Filipinos are helping restore Manila Bay.
Sources
Fighting marine pollution to save the Coral Triangle — Explores another dimension of environmental crisis in the Philippines and what communities are doing to respond.
When Climate Lies Kill: Red-Tagging Indigenous Defenders in the Philippines. The Diplomat, 2026.
Complex displacement in the Philippines: humanitarian practitioner perspectives. Nature, 2025.
IOM Philippines Data and Resources. International Organization for Migration, 2025–2026.
