140 STANFORD JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW 59:2 of individuals once their state ceases to exist as a factual or legal matter or both. The following part will examine some of the proposals to address the phenomenon of sinking states and the cascading consequences of those proposals. III. THE CASCADING CONSEQUENCES OF SINKING STATES Although there is some uncertainty regarding the timing and severity of sea level rise, the IPCC has concluded that sea level rise is certain to occur and will remain irreversible for hundreds if not thousands of years." From this starting point, this Article will proceed under the assumption that sinking states will continue to lose habitable territory and will likely lose their entire territory at some point in the future. In order to examine the cascading consequences of sinking states, it is necessary to examine some of the proposals for preserving the statehood of sinking states at risk of extinction in the event of a total loss of territory or permanent population. These include preserving and protecting existing territory, creating new territory, purchasing territory or having states cede territory, merging or associating with existing states, or evolving our understanding of a state to include some deterritorialized form. If it is not possible to preserve statehood per se, some have suggested preserving the international legal personality of the state, following the historical examples of the Holy See or the Sovereign Order of Malta. The primary proposals and illustrative frameworks are outlined below. Jane McAdam has argued that concerns over state extinction are in some ways overblown. 39 It might be possible, at least in the near term, for the population to stay on the island state through climate change adaptation measures that states are already undertaking. Such measures might include efforts to prevent the sea from encroaching on the territory or land reclamation that would reinforce or expand existing territory. The preservation of territory, even in a diminished or changed form, might allow the population to stay in situ and avoid losing two of the traditional defining characteristics of statehood. Some scholars have suggested that sinking states could create new territory for themselves through land reclamation or the creation of new artificial islands. Land reclamation has long been used by states to reinforce territory against the encroachment of sea water. States that are at risk of losing their territory could conceivably use land reclamation and other adaptation measures to preserve the existence of their territory. However, engaging in large-scale land reclamation or adaptation measures ' is incredibly costly.40 Given the low elevation of these states' existing territory and the projections that the sea will continue to rise over thousands of years, even if states could afford it or received funding, land reclamation and adaptation may be a time limited solution.4 38 IPCC, supra note 21, at 50 (noting that "it would take several centuries to millennia for the global mean sea level to reverse course even under large net negative emissions of carbon dioxide"). 39 McAdam, supra note 28, at 2 (arguing that "the focus on loss of territory as the indicator of a State's disappearance may be misplaced"). 40 The Maldives estimated that the cost of protecting "the inhabited Maldivian islands alone would cost up to $8.8 billion." Permanent Mission of the Republic of Maldives to the U.N., Information and Examples of State Practice on 'Sea-Level Rise in Relation to InternationalLaw': A Submission by the Republic of Maldives, at 16 (Dec. 31, 2019), https://perma.cc/W8SZ-XQB5. 41 ILA LISBON REPORT, supra note 28, at 29-30. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4321214