Brief communication: Sendai framework for disaster risk reduction – success or warning sign for Paris?

In March 2015, a new international blueprint for disaster risk reduction (DRR) has been adopted in Sendai, Japan, at the end of the Third UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction (WCDRR, 14–18 March 2015). We review and discuss the agreed commitments and targets, as well as the negotiation leading to the Sendai Framework for DRR (SFDRR) and discuss briefly its implication for the later UN-led negotiations on sustainable development goals and climate change

Review of Economic Instruments in Risk Reduction

Economic instruments (EI), such as subsidies, taxes and insurance-related options are at the heart of discussions regarding novel approaches for managing risk and adapting to climate change, including in the context of multi-stakeholder partnerships (MSP) between the private and public sectors. Although the attractiveness of reducing and managing disasters has long been demonstrated, there is underinvestment into disaster risk management (DRM). A number of factors, such as lack of comprehensive information and cognitive biases are important. In particular, financial constraints and moral hazard, i.e. adverse incentives provided by current arrangements for dealing with disasters rule high. In this line of thinking, instruments that provide a price signal for risk management and incentivize behavioural change hold high appeal to policymakers including the EU. Yet, little is known about such economic instruments, their mechanics, links to risk management and concrete application in the field of disaster risk management (and climate adaptation). Knowledge gaps exist particularly for conditions that create enabling environments for innovative market based EI. Among these are, e.g., the attractiveness for stakeholders in the context of MSP or institutional settings that are required to successfully and efficiently apply the EI. This report reviews key EI according to their potential for managing and incentivising risk management in the context of the ENHANCE project. The guiding questions for this review are: What economic instruments exist for managing disaster risk? How do they contribute to risk management? What innovative options re being discussed? How do case studies plan to discuss and assess economic instruments? The overall aim of this report is to develop an inventory of EI as they support risk management generally and their anticipated uptake in the ENHANCE cases studies. This report first discusses the methodology and the mechanics of EI. Next it presents the market-based and risk financing instruments; finally it concludes with a synthesis of our findings and next steps for the case studies, which are being carried out as part of the ENHANCE project

A typology of loss and damage perspectives

Loss and Damage (L&D) has been the subject of contentious debate in international climate policy for several decades. Recently, formal mechanisms on L&D have been established, but arguably through unclear language. This ambiguity is politically important, but researchers and practitioners require clearer understandings of L&D. Here we report on the first in-depth empirical study of actor perspectives, including interviews with 38 key stakeholders in research, practice, and policy. We find points of agreement and also important distinctions in terms of: the relationship between L&D and adaptation, the emphasis on avoiding versus addressing L&D, the relevance of anthropogenic climate change, and the role of justice. A typology of four perspectives is identified, with different implications for research priorities and actions to address L&D. This typology enables improved understanding of existing perspectives and so has potential to facilitate more transparent discussion of the options available to address L&D

Loss and damage and limits to adaptation: recent IPCC insights and implications for climate science and policy

Recent evidence shows that climate change is leading to irreversible and existential impacts on vulnerable communities and countries across the globe. Among other effects, this has given rise to public debate and engagement around notions of climate crisis and emergency. The Loss and Damage (L&D) policy debate has emphasized these aspects over the last three decades. Yet, despite institutionalization through an article on L&D by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in the Paris Agreement, the debate has remained vague, particularly with reference to its remit and relationship to adaptation policy and practice. Research has recently made important strides forward in terms of developing a science perspective on L&D. This article reviews insights derived from recent publications by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and others, and presents the implications for science and policy. Emerging evidence on hard and soft adaptation limits in certain systems, sectors and regions holds the potential to further build momentum for climate policy to live up to the Paris ambition of stringent emission reductions and to increase efforts to support the most vulnerable. L&D policy may want to consider actions to extend soft adaptation limits and spur transformational, that is, non-standard risk management and adaptation, so that limits are not breached. Financial, technical, and legal support would be appropriate for instances where hard limits are transgressed. Research is well positioned to further develop robust evidence on critical and relevant risks at scale in the most vulnerable countries and communities, as well as options to reduce barriers and limits to adaptation

Climate change adaptation to escape the poverty trap: role of the private sector

Climate change adaptation and poverty alleviation call for an integrated strategy, because poverty exacerbates the vulnerability to climate change and vice versa. The private sector, which has traditionally been excluded from adaptation planning, may contribute greatly to the development of an integrated strategy. Here, we identify the differences in adaptation trajectories between the private sector and communities by proposing a conceptual framework and report on a case study in a dryland area of China, where the private sector led a successful adaptation and poverty alleviation project. We found that their win–win strategy achieved both climate change adaptation and development, thereby helping a disadvantaged community to escape the poverty trap and achieve sustainable development. The private sector played a dominant role in the response, as this sector can adapt in ways that are not possible for governments or communities. We suggest that participatory governance that includes private-sector stakeholders is more likely to achieve sustainable development

Arabinogalactan-protein and pectin epitopes in relation to an extracellular matrix surface network and somatic embryogenesis and callogenesis in Trifolium nigrescens Viv

The formation of an extracellular matrix surface network (ECMSN), and associated changes in the distribution of arabinogalactan-protein and pectin epitopes, have been studied during somatic embryogenesis (SE) and callogenesis of Trifolium nigrescens Viv. Scanning electron microscopy observations revealed the occurrence of an ECMSN on the surface of cotyledonary-staged somatic embryos as well as on the peripheral, non-regenerating callus cells. The occurrence of six AGP (JIM4, JIM8, JIM13, JIM16, LM2, MAC207) and four pectin (JIM5, JIM7, LM5, LM6) epitopes was analysed during early stages of SE, in cotyledonary-staged somatic embryos and in non-embryogenic callus using monoclonal antibodies. The JIM5 low methyl-esterified homogalacturonan (HG) epitope localized to ECMSN on the callus surface but none of the epitopes studied were found to localize to ECMSN over mature somatic embryos. The LM2 AGP epitope was detected during the development of somatic embryos and was also observed in the cell walls of meristematic cells from which SE was initiated. The pectic epitopes JIM5, JIM7, LM5 and LM6 were temporally regulated during SE. The LM6 arabinan epitope, carried by side chains of rhamnogalacturonan-I (RG-I), was detected predominantly in cells of embryogenic swellings, whilst the LM5 galactan epitope of RG-I was uniformly distributed throughout the ground tissue of cotyledonary-staged embryoids but not detected at the early stages of SE. Differences in the distribution patterns of low and high methyl-esterified HG were detected: low ester HG (JIM5 epitope) was most abundant during the early steps of embryo formation and highly methyl-esterified form of HG (JIM7 epitope) became prevalent during embryoid maturation

Using a game to engage stakeholders in extreme event attribution science

The impacts of weather and climate-related disasters are increasing, and climate change can exacerbate many disasters. Effectively communicating climate risk and integrating science into policy requires scientists and stakeholders to work together. But dialogue between scientists and policymakers can be challenging given the inherently multidimensional nature of the issues at stake when managing climate risks. Building on the growing use of serious games to create dialogue between stakeholders, we present a new game for policymakers called Climate Attribution Under Loss and Damage: Risking, Observing,co-Negotiating (CAULDRON). CAULDRON aims to communicate understanding of the science attributing extreme events to climate change in a memorable and compelling way, and create space for dialogue around policy decisions addressing changing risks and loss and damage from climate change. We describe the process of developing CAULDRON, and draw on observations of players and their feedback to demonstrate its potential to facilitate the interpretation of probabilistic climate information and the understanding of its relevance to informing policy. Scientists looking to engage with stakeholders can learn valuable lessons in adopting similar innovative approaches. The suitability of games depends on the policy context but, if used appropriately, experiential learning can drive co-produced understanding and meaningful dialogue

Science for loss and damage. Findings and propositions

The debate on “Loss and Damage” (L&D) has gained traction over the last few years. Supported by growing scientific evidence of anthropogenic climate change amplifying frequency, intensity and duration of climate-related hazards as well as observed increases in climate-related impacts and risks in many regions, the “Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage” was established in 2013 and further supported through the Paris Agreement in 2015. Despite advances, the debate currently is broad, diffuse and somewhat confusing, while concepts, methods and tools, as well as directions for policy remain vague and often contested. This book, a joint effort of the Loss and Damage Network—a partnership effort by scientists and practitioners from around the globe—provides evidence-based insight into the L&D discourse by highlighting state-of-the-art research conducted across multiple disciplines, by showcasing applications in practice and by providing insight into policy contexts and salient policy options. This introductory chapter summarises key findings of the twenty-two book chapters in terms of five propositions. These propositions, each building on relevant findings linked to forward-looking suggestions for research, policy and practice, reflect the architecture of the book, whose sections proceed from setting the stage to critical issues, followed by a section on methods and tools, to chapters that provide geographic perspectives, and finally to a section that identifies potential policy options. The propositions comprise (1) Risk management can be an effective entry point for aligning perspectives and debates, if framed comprehensively, coupled with climate justice considerations and linked to established risk management and adaptation practice; (2) Attribution science is advancing rapidly and fundamental to informing actions to minimise, avert, and address losses and damages; (3) Climate change research, in addition to identifying physical/hard limits to adaptation, needs to more systematically examine soft limits to adaptation, for which we find some evidence across several geographies globally; (4) Climate risk insurance mechanisms can serve the prevention and cure aspects emphasised in the L&D debate but solidarity and accountability aspects need further attention, for which we find tentative indication in applications around the world; (5) Policy deliberations may need to overcome the perception that L&D constitutes a win-lose negotiation “game” by developing a more inclusive narrative that highlights collective ambition for tackling risks, mutual benefits and the role of transformation