Showing 1 - 2 of 2 Items

Date: 2021-01-01

Creator: Noelia Calcaño

Access: Open access

There will be 1.2 billion climate refugees by 2050 as ecological disasters precipitate mass migrations around the world. The U.S. does not legally recognize climate migrants as refugees, instead adhering to the 1951 UN Refugee Convention that limits the definition of a refugee to individuals facing political persecution. Despite failing to expand the definition of a refugee, the U.S. has accommodated migrants displaced by natural disasters through a series of ad hoc fixes, most notably “Temporary Protected Status.” In Central American countries that were granted TPS, we encounter the paradox of the U.S. employing environmental disasters to justify continued extensions of this temporary protection, while addressing chronic conditions in the region. The central question of this thesis is, has employing the environment as a catch-all tool for Temporary Protected Status protection expanded the de facto definition of a “refugee,” for Central American migrants impacted by climate catastrophes and if so, how? Though TPS fills a gap in US law by providing de facto protections to migrants fleeing environmental disasters, the environment is being used as a catch-all tool for more systemic economic and political vulnerabilities in Central America. The environment is a catch-all tool for continued protection only insofar as it is not recognized as political, yet it is getting harder to employ the environment as an apolitical driver of migration. The precarious foundation of TPS threatens the hundreds of thousands of Central Americans that depend on this program to live and work legally in the United States.

Date: 2022-01-01

Creator: Maynor Alberto Loaisiga Bojorge

Access: Open access

For most of their histories, Costa Rica and Honduras were primarily agricultural societies with little economic diversification. However, around 1990, after the implementation of Washington Consensus reforms, the economies of both nations began to diverge. Costa Rica’s economy rapidly expanded for the following 30 years, while Honduras remained stagnant. Through a New Institutional Economics approach, I argue that institutional differences between Costa Rica and Honduras are responsible for the impressive economic growth Costa Rica has been able to achieve in the past few decades. Specifically, early political developments in Costa Rica have deeply imbedded relatively egalitarian values into the population, helping shape formal and informal inclusive political institutions. Meanwhile, Honduras experienced the development of extractive political institutions, as political and economic power was heavily concentrated in the hands of a select few. These political institutions were crucial during the implementation stages of Washington Consensus reforms, as strong and inclusive political institutions attracted Foreign Direct Investment that helped propel the Costa Rican economy and materialize its position as an outlier in the region. In contrast, lack of institutional guarantees discouraged foreign investors from investing money into the Honduran economy. Through a deep dive into the political histories of both nations, from European discovery to modernity, I conclude that the political institutions of these Central American nations have determined their economic growth paths.