Labour migrants, particularly women, stand at the centre of agrifood systems, disaster recovery, and environmental management, yet are often missing from the data and strategies designed to strengthen agrifood systems, disaster recovery, and environmental management. When national datasets, disaster management systems, and climate adaptation policies fail to capture migration status, it becomes difficult to build resilience that reflects real conditions on the ground. Making migrants visible within these systems is therefore essential for effective planning, fair protection, and genuinely climate-resilient futures.

When we looked closely at Ghana, Kenya, and Zimbabwe, migrants are not standing at the margins of food systems. Evidence shows that migrants plant and harvest crops, support export horticulture, work in markets, and keep food flowing into cities. In Ghana, this work is visible in the daily movement of the head porters (popularly known as kayayei), whose labour holds together the logistics of urban markets. In Kenya, migrants from arid and semi-arid regions support the tea and horticulture industries. While in Zimbabwe, seasonal workers sustain major crops like tobacco and maize and help communities re-establish essential services after extreme weather. Their contribution does not stop with food production.

Migrants are often among the first to help restore normality after floods, storms, or droughts. They clear debris, restore access roads, reopen market spaces, and help households relocate. These actions are critical for recovery, yet they rarely appear in disaster management records, which means the people who help rebuild are often absent from the very systems designed to guide future responses.

The same invisibility appears in environmental and climate resilience efforts. Migrants work in tree nurseries, land restoration, recycling, and off-grid maintenance to strengthen ecosystems and support climate adaptation. However, these roles are usually informal, with limited safety protections and little institutional recognition. Women, whose work sustains food markets, packhouses, and cross-border trading networks, face additional risks, including harassment, lack of childcare, and limited access to safe working spaces. Their participation is essential, but the structures around them offer little support.

Understanding why this invisibility persists leads back to two central challenges, such as data and governance. National labour surveys, agricultural records, and disaster registries rarely capture whether workers are internal migrants, seasonal labourers, or cross-border movers. Without this  information, policies struggle to account for the people who make these systems function. Governance structures reinforce this gap. Migration is typically managed by labour or interior ministries, while agriculture, climate, and disaster agencies operate separately. The result is a patchwork of policies that depend on migrant labour but do not formally include it.

Even with these challenges, the way forward is within reach. Strengthening existing data systems, integrating migration into climate and agricultural planning, ensuring gender-sensitive safeguards, and giving migrant associations a formal place in local decision-making are all practical steps that can bring policy frameworks closer to reality. When countries acknowledge migrants as active contributors, they strengthen their ability to anticipate risks, respond effectively to crises, and build long-term resilience.

In conclusion, the SAFE4ALL project is beginning to appreciate that migrants’ daily efforts hold together food systems, ecosystems, and community resilience. Migrants are helping to shape how societies adapt to climate change. The task now is to make their contributions visible, valued, and supported.