Abstract
Rising seas, scorching heatwaves and intensifying storms are no longer distant threats; they are reshaping where and how people live. Faced with these pressures, individuals and communities must navigate a fundamental question: should they move, or should they stay and adapt? To what extent do they have a choice? Much of the climate change–mobility literature frames this as a simple dichotomy: migration versus non-migration1, voluntary versus involuntary2. These distinctions emphasize the external drivers of mobility, often neglecting that the decision to migrate or stay is not merely a reactive response to external pressures, but is often a proactive, context-specific negotiation of opportunities, aspirations and identities in which people negotiate their futures (Box 1). Thus, migration and staying are not opposites; they can coexist as complementary strategies within broader ‘future-making’3. Future-making encompasses the choices and practices through which people pursue life aspirations shaped by cultural and personal imaginaries of success, security and a fulfilling life3. Recent research has begun to move beyond rigid binaries, exploring translocal livelihoods4, the thresholds of habitability5 and the importance of supporting stayers6. But it seldom investigates how these mobility decisions are inextricable from broader future-making aspirations and strategies and how migration and staying can be complementary practices embedded therein (Box 1). To address this gap, we propose a new concept of ‘tethered resilience’ that captures the simultaneous rootedness and mobility through which people negotiate risk and shape their futures.
