ABSTRACT

Debates around “Loss and Damage” (L&D) from anthropogenic climate change have expanded rapidly since the adoption of the Warsaw International Mechanism (WIM) in 2013. Despite the urgent need for scientific best practice to inform policies to avoid, minimize and address L&D, the nascent research field faces internal disagreements and lacks a coherent conceptual framing, which hinder scientific progress and practical implementation. We suggest that the most coherent, comprehensive and integrative approach to framing and dealing with L&D is by understanding it as resulting from a chain of failures or inabilities to maintain a Sustainable Development. Available theories of Sustainable Development give meaning and orientation to risk reduction efforts to avoid and minimize L&D, as well as to processes of L&D accounting and compensation; in particular clarifying “what should be sustained” when undertaking efforts to avoid, minimize or address residual L&D. However, different theories of Sustainable Development inevitably lead to different metrics to assess L&D and consequently different governance approaches when dealing with L&D, which has implications for future vulnerability and development. Our approach opens up new avenues for research, and has both conceptual and practical repercussions for the Paris Agreement and the global stocktake.

摘要

自 2013 年采用华沙国际机制 (WIM) 以来，围绕人为气候变化造成的“损失和损害”(L&D) 的争论迅速扩大。新兴的研究领域面临内部分歧，缺乏连贯的概念框架，阻碍了科学进步和实际实施。我们建议，制定和处理 L&D 的最一致、最全面和最综合的方法是将其理解为一系列失败或无法维持可持续发展的结果. 现有的可持续发展理论为避免和最小化 L&D 的风险降低努力以及 L&D 会计和补偿流程赋予意义和方向；特别是在努力避免、尽量减少或解决剩余 L&D 时澄清“应该维持什么”。然而，不同的可持续发展理论不可避免地导致评估 L&D 的指标不同，从而导致在处理 L&D 时采用不同的治理方法，这对未来的脆弱性和发展产生影响。我们的方法开辟了新的研究途径，并对《巴黎协定》和全球盘点产生了概念和实际影响。