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.

中文翻译：

---

损失和损害观点的类型学

数十年来，损失与损害（L＆D）一直是国际气候政策中争议不断的话题。最近，已经建立了有关L＆D的正式机制，但是可以说是通过不明确的语言。这种歧义在政治上很重要，但是研究人员和从业人员需要对L＆D有更清晰的了解。在这里，我们将对演员的观点进行首次深入的实证研究，其中包括对38位研究，实践和政策方面的主要利益相关者的访谈。我们在以下方面找到了共识，也发现了重要的区别：L＆D与适应之间的关系，强调避免与解决L＆D，人为气候变化的相关性以及正义的作用。确定了四种观点的类型，对研究重点和解决L＆D的行动有不同的含义。这种类型有助于更好地理解现有观点，因此有可能促进对解决L＆D的可用方案进行更透明的讨论。