Loss and Damage from Climate Change: Building Knowledge and Capacity in the Most Vulnerable Countries

Mitigation and adaptation are at the center of global climate negotiations. However, as climate change impacts become more frequent and more severe, these two well-accepted pillars of climate policy are not sufficient. Burgeoning damage and loss from climate change is inevitable, and it has become urgent to expedite international policy work on Loss and Damage (L&D) response. L&D has been identified as a policy action area within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) system; however, progress has been extremely slow. By undertaking a review of the current situation, including country-level examples from Bangladesh, Nepal, and Vanuatu, we consider the immediate needs of the most vulnerable countries and suggest high-priority actions to move forward. These actions include: 1. Clarifying conceptual dilemmas around loss and damage vis-à-vis adaptation, mitigation, and disaster risk reduction, demonstrating how L&D policy concepts can be implemented. 2. Assisting developing and vulnerable countries in undertaking diagnostic assessments with respect to loss and damage and identifying policy and institutional options to advance L&D at national and sub-national levels. 3. Facilitating knowledge-sharing among developing and most vulnerable countries with regard to policy, risk governance, response to Loss and Damage, and ensuring socially inclusive responses. 4. Helping create learning opportunities for key policy and research champions in vulnerable countries. 5. Helping develop a dedicated L&D financing system at national and sub-national levels. 6. Providing technical assistance to Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) to formulate a coherent approach to L&D negotiation within the UNFCCC system as well as enhanced representation of Loss and Damage situations for the Global Stocktake 2023 international conventions. 7. Building the Research and Development (R&D) capacity of national research and training groups in most vulnerable countries vis-à-vis comprehensive risk management, including how national institutions can deliver with respect to multiple outcomes including the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR), adaptation at large and L&D. 8. Developing and strengthening national database systems to facilitate loss and damage accounting and financial delivery

OECD principles on water governance in practice:an assessment of existing frameworks in Europe, Asia-Pacific, Africa and South America

Through the lens of the 12 OECD Principles on Water Governance, this article examines six water resources and water services frameworks in Europe, Asia-Pacific, Africa and South America to understand enhancing and constraining contextual factors. Qualitative and quantitative methods are used to analyze each framework against four criteria: alignment; implementation; on-ground results; and policy impact. Four main target areas are identified for improving water governance: policy coherence; financing; managing trade-offs; and ensuring integrity and transparency by all decision makers and stakeholders. Suggestions are presented to support practical implementation of the principles through better government action and stakeholder involvement.No Full Tex

Water: drought, crisis and governance in Australia and Brazil

Despite huge differences in population, household income and development levels, Australia and Brazil have some temporal convergences in their water governance systems. Over the last 20 years, both countries have significantly reformed their water policies and practices by introducing a legal foundation for more integrated and participatory catchment/basin management based on the best information available. A critical test of any water reform is how effective it is in meeting the challenges of extreme and unpredictable conditions of drought and floods, which are expected to increase under climate changes scenarios. This paper compared the contemporary water governance frameworks of Australia and Brazil in relation to three elements of Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM): integration, participation, and information/knowledge. We focused on insights from Brazil’s recent drought and Australia’s fluctuating water crises to derive lessons and recommendations for future changes. Among the main recommendations, we stress the need for both systems to improve effective participation and to embrace a more comprehensive approach to cope with water scarcity in future scenarios. Furthermore, water related decisions should be based on a transparent and well informed process, and take into account the lessons from similar situations worldwide in order to avoid unnecessary or ineffective measures. As demonstrated in the Australian case during the Millennium Drought, the most effective initiatives were those involving government, the private sector and society to achieve a more sustainable consumption pattern in all sectors. There is much to learn from the Brazilian and Australia experiences in water reforms and crises, but it is imperative to understand the social, economic and environmental context within which these took place. Continuing to develop the capacity and willingness of researchers and policy makers to work together can make an important contribution towards meeting the growing and spreading challenges in water resource management around the world