The debate on immigration cyclically returns to the center of the European political scene, with particular intensity in each electoral cycle. However, while we discuss immigration in defensive terms, Spain and Europe are advancing —not without difficulties— towards an ecological transition that will profoundly transform our economy and our labor market. What rarely enters public debate is that both processes are intimately connected.
Read more Smoker’s empathy
Spain simultaneously faces two structural transformations: the transition towards a decarbonized economy and the accelerated aging of its active population. According to the estimates of the National Integrated Energy and Climate Plan, the ecological transition could generate hundreds of thousands of new jobs this decade, especially in sectors such as renewable energies, energy rehabilitation of buildings, sustainable mobility, low-emission agriculture, or the circular economy. Meeting this demand is not just a matter of industrial or climate policy: it is increasingly a demographic issue.
Without wishing to reduce the debate around immigration to its instrumental dimension, as if the right to migrate were not absolute and we could only accept it when it generates positive economic or demographic effects, we cannot ignore, from a pragmatic perspective, that the reality of the Spanish labor market shows the extent to which immigration has become a structural factor of growth. Since 2019, three out of four new jobs created in Spain have been filled by immigrants, and their contribution to economic growth in recent years has been decisive. We are not facing a cyclical or marginal phenomenon, but a dynamic that cuts across key sectors of our economy.
However, acknowledging this reality does not mean ignoring the risks. The research developed by REd2RED “Migration and climate, challenges and opportunities in the eco-social transition,” which we support from the European Climate Foundation, clearly shows that, if not designed with a social justice perspective, climate policies can reproduce or even exacerbate existing inequalities. Immigrants face persistent barriers to accessing energy-efficient housing, affordable transport, public aid, or quality green jobs. These barriers not only affect their well-being but also limit the transformative potential of the transition itself.
Here a key question arises for public debate: do we want the ecological transition to be a shared project or a new source of conflict? The answer is not only ideological but fundamentally and deeply pragmatic. Integrating the immigrant population into the transition —through employment, training, and effective access to rights— is not only a matter of equity in a context where the reasons for immigration are increasingly related to the climate crisis, it is also a necessary condition for the transition to work.
Recent experiences show that approaches based on integration through contribution are particularly effective. Facilitating immigrants’ access to green jobs, recognizing skills through modular training and micro-credentials, and eliminating administrative barriers have a dual effect: they accelerate the ecological transition and strengthen social cohesion. Against narratives that present immigration as a cost, these policies show that it can be a lever for shared prosperity that reinforces social justice.
This approach is particularly relevant in a European context marked by the political instrumentalization of both the climate and immigration agendas. In too many countries, the Green Pact and immigration have become common targets of discourses that promise protection based on a retreat that is as ideological as it is cultural and identity-based. The risk is evident: if the ecological transition is perceived as an exclusionary project or one alien to social concerns, its legitimacy weakens.
Climate change has no borders, but the political debate remains trapped within them. While emissions, climate impacts, and value chains are global, we continue to discuss immigration as if it were an external anomaly and not a consequence —and also a lever— of this transformation. It is worth remembering that erecting discursive walls does not protect our economies or our societies, even less so in a wartime context that shows the geopolitical agony of the fossil world. Thinking about the ecological transition from closed frameworks is part of the problem itself. Thinking about it from cooperation, inclusion, and shared responsibility is part of the solution.
Read more Having children is for the rich
