33 research outputs found
Making sense of the politics in the climate change loss & damage debate
The Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage (L&D) associated with Climate Change Impacts (WIM) was established in 2013 to advance i) knowledge generation; ii) coordination and iii) support to address losses and damages under the UNFCCC. So far, the work undertaken by the WIM Executive Committee (ExCom) has focused on enhancing understanding and awareness of the issue and promoting collaboration with relevant stakeholders. Delivering on the WIM’s third function on action and support has lagged behind, and ‘the political’ nature of L&D has often been blamed for this. Key terrains of contention among Parties have included the positioning of L&D governance vis-à-vis the adaptation space and struggles around state liability and compensation. As a way to facilitate discussion on implementation options, recent research has suggested de-politicising aspects of the L&D debate; yet we have very little insight into how the politics are understood within the realm of international L&D governance. This paper brings an analysis of ‘the political’ into the picture by identifying the complex and underlying issues that fuel contention within UNFCCC L&D negotiations. It gives centre stage to the way different framings of norms and material interests affect the debate, and challenges the tendency in current L&D literature to overlook the socio-historical and political underpinnings of this area of policy-making. We employ a qualitative multi-methods research design which draws on content analysis of 138 official Parties’ submissions and statements, 14 elite interviews with key current and former L&D negotiators and is built on a foundation of 3 years of participant observation at COPs and WIM meetings. We approach this data with a political ethnographic sensibility that seeks to explore how meanings are constructed within and across different sources of data. Our empirical results show that, rather than being a monolithic dispute, L&D catalyses different yet intertwined unresolved discussions. We identify five areas of contention, including continued disputes around compensation; conflicts on the legitimacy of L&D as a third pillar of climate action; tensions between the technical and political dimension of the debate; debates over accountability for losses and damages incurred; and the connection of L&D with other unresolved issues under the Convention
Climatic risks to adaptive capacity
Does climate change influence if societies will be better or worse equipped to reduce climatic risks in the future? A society’s adaptive capacity determines whether the potential of adaptation to reduce risks will be realized. Assumptions about the level of adaptive capacity are inherently made when the potential for adaptation to reduce risks in the future and resultant levels of risk are estimated. In this review, we look at the literature on human impacts of climate change through the lens of adaptive capacity. Building on evidence of impacts on financial resources as presented in the Working Group 2 (WG2) report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Sixth Assessment Report (AR6), we here present the methodology behind this review and complement it with an analysis of climatic risks to human resources. Based on our review, we argue that climate change itself adds to adaptation constraints and limits. We show that for more realistic assessments of sectoral climate risks, assumed levels of future adaptive capacity should — and can — be usefully constrained in assessments that rely on expert judgment, and propose avenues for doing so
Climate change adaptation options in farming communities of selected Nigerian ecological zones
This chapter examines the impacts of climate change on three tropical crops and assesses the climate change adaptation options adopted by rural farmers in the region. The study was conducted among farming communities settled in three major ecological zones in Nigeria. Over 37 years of data on rainfall and temperature were analyzed to examine climate change impacts on three major crops: rice, maize, and cassava. Farmers' adaptive capacity was assessed with a survey. Climatic data, crop yields, and survey data were analyzed using both descriptive and inferential statistics. The relation between rainfall/temperature and crop yields was examined using the Pearson correlation coefficient. Results show a high variation in the annual rainfall and temperature during the study period. The major findings from this research is that crops in different ecological zones respond differently to climate variation. The result revealed that there is a very strong relationship between precipitation and the yield of rice and cassava at p <0.05 level of significance. The results further showed low level of adaption among the rural farmers. The study concludes that rainfall and temperature variability has a significant impact on crop yield in the study area, but that the adaptive capacity of most farmers to these impacts is low. There is a need for enhancing the adaptation options available to farmers in the region, which should be the focus of government policies
Loss and damage livelihood resilience
Climate change Loss and Damage has emerged as a key challenge of the 21st century. This Policy Brief first frames the challenge and then introduces the Resilience Academy, highlighting 5 key insights that both feed the debate and inform action. Finally, it provides 5 recommendations to the Executive Committee of the Warsaw International Mechanism (WIM ExCom) for its 5-year work plan
Recommended from our members
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
Recommended from our members
How can event attribution science underpin financial decisions on loss & damage?
With climate extremes hitting nations across the globe, disproportionately burdening vulnerable developing countries, the prompt operation of the Loss and Damage fund is of paramount importance. As decisions on resource disbursement at the international level, and investment strategies at the national level, loom, the climate science community's role in providing fair and effective evidence is crucial. Attribution science can provide useful information for decision makers, but both ethical implications and deep uncertainty cannot be ignored. Considering these aspects, we articulate a vision that integrates established attribution methods and multiple lines of evidence within a coherent logical framework