A typology of loss and damage perspectives
(2017) In Nature Climate Change 7(10). p.723-729- Abstract
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... (More)
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.
(Less)
- author
- Boyd, Emily LU ; James, Rachel A. ; Jones, Richard G. ; Young, Hannah R. and Otto, Friederike E L
- organization
- publishing date
- 2017-09-29
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- in
- Nature Climate Change
- volume
- 7
- issue
- 10
- pages
- 7 pages
- publisher
- Nature Publishing Group
- external identifiers
-
- wos:000412007700019
- scopus:85032586533
- ISSN
- 1758-678X
- DOI
- 10.1038/nclimate3389
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- 2fd26dcb-f883-4471-a873-5296c8b2752b
- date added to LUP
- 2017-11-08 10:44:23
- date last changed
- 2025-07-10 04:39:50
@article{2fd26dcb-f883-4471-a873-5296c8b2752b,
abstract = {{<p>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.</p>}},
author = {{Boyd, Emily and James, Rachel A. and Jones, Richard G. and Young, Hannah R. and Otto, Friederike E L}},
issn = {{1758-678X}},
language = {{eng}},
month = {{09}},
number = {{10}},
pages = {{723--729}},
publisher = {{Nature Publishing Group}},
series = {{Nature Climate Change}},
title = {{A typology of loss and damage perspectives}},
url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nclimate3389}},
doi = {{10.1038/nclimate3389}},
volume = {{7}},
year = {{2017}},
}