I think the main points in this article are worth considering.

Regardless of whether climate change, however caused, has contributed greatly to refugee flows in the past, it will contribute greatly in the future. If the sea levels rise around Bangla Desh, we can expect those people to move to adjacent countries. This is merely one example.

The author’s point is that nothing we’re presently doing is addressing this problem adequately. I agree. Even aside from efforts to reduce human-induced climate change, what else should a small but rich nation be doing?

I know too little about current aid efforts to comment on specifics, but surely the focus has to be on improving education and infrastructure in the developing nations. At our expense. We must spend more, not less, on foreign aid, while recognising that there will always be disagreement about how well it is spent.

Experience has shown that the best contraceptive is wealth. Family sizes usually fall in societies which rise above a subsistence lifestyle. And no, I can’t quote figures on this; but I think the point is nevertheless valid.

What's missing in this analysis is the real villain of the piece: capitalism. Capitalism orchestrates population growth, climate change and the flow of refugees. The author talks about corruption as if our economic system suffered it as a blight, whereas "crony capitalism" is the normal state of affairs. "Corruption" is naked and crude in many countries (though capitalism makes it possible), whereas in the first world it's an institution. Profit begets power whose wielders in turn exert political influence in prospecting for more. "Corruption" in the West is evidenced in the vast disparities between the rich, the super rich and the rest--perceived by the majority as "normal". Crony capitalism is also evidenced in that despite our "democratic" societies, for the last few decades economic policy has been one-sidedly adjusted and geared towards this accumulating trend: political influence is overwhelmingly the the province of capitalists.
Until we address the underlying problem, a rapacious economic system which invariable impoverishes as many as it enriches, and which is beginning to devastate planetary systems, the "refugee problem" will continue to fret and bother our spoiled and benighted masses.

Well said Guy.
The problem, as always, is too many people.
Until we take steps to solve the problem and stop band aiding the symptoms we shall get no where.
We are breeding and eating ourselves out of house and home to the final conclusion.
Population growth rate means little while ever it is positive. Actual total numbers mean it all.
And the numbers are growing.
Homo Sapiens is but a virus in a planet sized Petri dish.

Phillip, the best contraceptive may indeed be wealth, but education of females is also a strong contender.

This has been demonstrated time and again in many lands and under a range of other circumstances.

A close third must be empowerment of women, ie allowing the females choice over such matters as their fertility and personal freedoms, including fair control over finances and giving them voices within their communities.

Nobody ever said that there is a single answer to all problems of the third world, let alone of the whole earth.

At last someone who recognizes that population growth is the underlying cause of the worlds environmental and social problems. Unless the world tackles population growth all other efforts are a waste of effort.

Some people like to create the impression that population is no longer a problem because fertility rates have come down in a lot of places. In fact, fertility rates haven't come down in Africa as expected, leading to a bigger UN medium population projection. A recent paper in the journal Science has the latest projections.

http://news.sciencemag.org/economics/2014/09/experts-be-damned-world-population-will-continue-rise

"To wit, there’s a 95% chance the world population will be between 9 billion and 13.2 billion by the year 2100, the team concludes online today in Science. Much of that growth, it found, will likely take place in Africa, whose population is estimated to rise from 1 billion to 4 billion by the end of the century. And, unlike projections from last decade, the new graphs show a steady increase through 2100 rather than a midcentury leveling off."

As shown by the graph, population growth is continuing in Asia and other places where fertility rates have already come down due to demographic momentum. A rapidly growing population has a pyramid-shaped age structure. Even with fertility dropping to replacement level or less, the births will take place in the huge young adult population and most of the deaths in the relatively tiny elderly generation. The population can go on growing for another 70 years before it stabilizes. This has little to do with people living longer.

The problem is that we are doing serious damage to our planetary life support systems even with the existing population. We are facing shortages or losses of arable land, fresh water, forests, fish stocks, biodiversity, cheap fossil fuels and minerals that are vital for our agriculture and technology, and capacity of the environment to safely absorb wastes. While wasteful consumption is part of the problem, according to the last Global Footprint Network atlas, the top billion people in the richest countries are responsible for 38% of the world's consumption. People must consume in order to survive and consume even more to have what we would consider a minimally decent standard of living. If the population is big enough, it doesn't matter if per capita consumption is low.