Loss and damage from climate change, recognized as a unique research and policy domain through the Warsaw International Mechanism (WIM) in 2013, has drawn increasing attention among climate scientists and policy makers. Labelled by some as the “third pillar” of the international climate regime—along with mitigation and adaptation—it has been suggested that loss and damage has the potential to catalyze important synergies with other international agendas, particularly sustainable development. However, the specific approaches to sustainable development that inform loss and damage research and how these approaches influence research outcomes and policy recommendations remain largely unexplored. We offer a systematic analysis of the assumptions of sustainable development that underpins loss and damage scholarship through a comprehensive review of peer-reviewed research on loss and damage. We demonstrate that the use of specific metrics, decision criteria, and policy prescriptions by loss and damage researchers and practitioners implies an unwitting adherence to different underlying theories of sustainable development, which in turn impact how loss and damage is conceptualized and applied. In addition to research and policy implications, our review suggests that assumptions about the aims of sustainable development determine how loss and damage is conceptualized, measured, and governed, and the human development approach currently represents the most advanced perspective on sustainable development and thus loss and damage. This review supports sustainable development as a coherent, comprehensive, and integrative framework for guiding further conceptual and empirical development of loss and damage scholarship.

中文翻译：

---

气候变化造成的损失和破坏以及可持续发展的隐含假设

气候变化造成的损失和损害在 2013 年被华沙国际机制 (WIM) 视为一个独特的研究和政策领域，引起了气候科学家和政策制定者越来越多的关注。一些人将其称为国际气候制度的“第三支柱”——连同减缓和适应——有人认为，损失和损害有可能促进与其他国际议程的重要协同作用，尤其是可持续发展。然而，为损失和损害研究提供信息的可持续发展的具体方法以及这些方法如何影响研究结果和政策建议在很大程度上仍未得到探索。我们通过对同行评审的损失和损害研究进行全面审查，对支持损失和损害奖学金的可持续发展假设进行系统分析。我们证明，损失和损害研究人员和从业人员使用特定指标、决策标准和政策规定意味着在不知情的情况下坚持不同的可持续发展基础理论，这反过来又会影响损失和损害的概念化和应用方式。除了研究和政策影响外，我们的评论表明，关于可持续发展目标的假设决定了如何对损失和损害进行概念化、衡量和治理，而人类发展方法目前代表了可持续发展的最先进观点，因此损失和损害损害。