Catálogo de publicaciones - libros

This chapter reviews the implications of Loss and Damage (L&D) for decision-making with a special focus on the role of the physical sciences for decision support. From the point of view of climate science, the question regarding the estimation of losses and damages associated with climate change can be thought of in terms of two temporal scales: the present and the future. In both cases the aim is to establish the links between human-induced changes in climate and climate variability, the probability of occurrence of extreme meteorological events (e.g., rainfall), and the resulting hazard that causes losses and damages (e.g., flood). We review the approaches used to assess the hazard component of risk, with a special emphasis on identifying sources of uncertainty and the potential for providing robust information to support decision-making. We then discuss tools and approaches that have been developed in the context of Climate ChangeAdaptation (CCA) to deal with uncertainty from climate science in order to avoid a ‘wait and see’ mentality for decision-making. We argue that these can be applied to some parts of L&D decision-making, in the same way as suggested for CCA, since the challenges presented by the need to reduce and manage climate changelosses and damages are not very different from the ones presented by the need to adapt to climate change and variability. However additional challenges for decision-makers, particularly in the context of the underlying science, are posed by the compensation and burden-sharing components of L&D for climate impacts that are beyond mitigation and adaptation’s reach.

This chapter discusses integrated approaches to the management of risks related to extreme weather and climate change. This is done with the Loss and Damage (L&D) mechanism of the UNFCCC in mind. Relevant insights are provided for climate policy negotiators and policymakers on how risk management and adaptation interact with L&D solutions, and vice versa, on how L&D-related activities can support risk reduction and adaptation in vulnerable countries. Particular attention is devoted to how risk management can help society confront the impacts of weather disasters in relation to anthropogenic climate change. A holistic view of risk management is presented by discussing: the state-of-the art of risk assessment methods; (cost-benefit) evaluations of risk management options; household-scale risk reduction strategies; insurance schemes for residual risk and their relations with risk reduction; and the design of adaptation pathways to cope with uncertain timing and intensity of climate change impacts. Each topic is illustrated with concrete case studies. Finally, conclusions are drawn on the links between disaster risk management, climate adaptation and the L&D mechanism.

This chapter aims to inform the Loss & Damage debate by analysing the degree to which insurance can be used as a tool to explore and manage adaptation frontiers. It establishes that insurance can be used as a navigational tool around adaptation frontiers in three ways: First, by facilitating the exploration of adaptation frontiers by contributing to a framework for signalling the magnitude, location, and exposure to climate-related risks and providing signals when adaptation limits are approached. Second, by supporting actors in moving away from adaptation limits by improving ex-ante decision making, incentivising risk reduction and creating a space of certainty for climate resilient development. Third, by aiding actors in remaining in the tolerable risk space by facilitating financial buffering as part of contingency approaches. However, we also find that insurance against the risks of climate change in market terms possesses several limitations. We therefore suggest the embedding of insurance in a comprehensive climate risk management approach accompanied by other risk reduction and management strategies as key principle for any international cooperation approach to respond to climate change impacts.

This chapter looks at what we can learn about possible Loss and Damage (L&D) and finance needed to address it using economic Integrated Assessment Models (IAMs), which calculate economically optimal responses to climate changemitigation and adaptation in terms of maximising welfare (GDP) a few decades into the future. Interpreting modelled residual damages as unavoided L&D, a few results emerge from the analysis. First, residual damages turn out to be significant under a variety of IAMs, and for a range of climate scenarios. This means that if adaptation is undertaken optimally, there will remain a large amount of damages that are not eliminated. Second the ratio of adaptation to total damages varies by region, so residual damages also vary for that reason. Third, residual damages will depend on the climate scenario as well as the discount rate and the assumed parameters of the climate model (equilibrium climate sensitivity) as well as those of the socioeconomic model (damage functions). These uncertainties are very large and so will be any projections of residual damages in the medium to long term. The chapter raises other aspects that could influence estimates of L&D. An important one is that, since actual adaptation is very unlikely to be optimal, the amount of Loss and Damage may be influenced by the sources from which adaptation and Loss and Damage programs are financed. The level and structure of current limited financial resources is likely to result in adaptation that is significantly below the optimal level and thus result in significant L&D.

Pacific Island states occupy the top categories in the World Risk Index for natural hazards, with Vanuatu consistently at the Number One spot. For some low-lying island states climate change poses an existential threat, and the region is increasingly recognized as the most immediately vulnerable area to potential mass migrationand relocation due to climate change. This chapter aims to localise the global debate by focusing on the issue of Loss and Damage in Pacific SIDS. It also provides a commentary regarding the risk and options space in the PacificSIDS context where many of the livelihood activities are subsistence-based, reliant on the current climate and its variability, and already seriously disrupted by extreme weather events.

Potential land loss in Pacific island countries from rising sea levels raises many concerns regarding how nation states will continue to function politically and economically in the event of climate-induced relocation of their populations. This piece expands that conversation, addressing the impacts of relocation on cultural heritage, drawing on data from interviews with migrants from the Marshall Islands to the United States. The study seeks to understand the challenges and opportunities of cultural preservation among the Marshallese diaspora. Marshallese accounts of life in the United States indicate many opportunities for cultural preservation, particularly for those living in communities with large Marshallese populations, while also presenting challenges based on social, economic, and geographic differences between the U.S. and the Marshall Islands. Understanding the means through which Marshallese migrants maintain cultural traditions and the challenges current migrants face, can help us address potentially irreversible, but avoidable losses of cultural traditions in the event of mass displacement.

There has been increasing interest in the potential of effective science-society partnership models for identifying and implementing options that manage critical disaster risks “on the ground.” This particularly holds true for debate around Loss and Damage. Few documented precedents and little documented experience exists, however, for such models of engagement. We report on one such partnership, the Zurich FloodResilience Alliance, a multi-actor partnership launched in 2013 to enhance communities’ resilience to flooding at local to global scales. The program brings together the skills and expertise of NGOs, the private sector and research institutions in order to induce transformational change for managing flood risks. Working in a number of countries facing different challenges and opportunities the program uses a participatory and iterative approach to develop sustainable portfolios of interventions that tackle both flood risk and development objectives in synergy. We focus our examination on two cases of Alliance engagement, where livelihoods are particularly being eroded by flood risk, including actual and potential contributions by climate change: (i) in the Karnali river basin in West Nepal, communities are facing rapid on-set flash floods during the monsoon season; (ii) in the Rimac basin in Central Perucommunities are exposed to riverine flooding amplified by El Niño episodes. We show how different tools and methods can be co-generated and used at different learning stages and across temporal and agency scales by researchers and practitioners. Seamless integration is neither possible, nor desirable, and in many instances, an adaptive management approach through, what we call, a , can provide the boundary process that connects the different analytical elements developed and particularly links those up with community-led processes. Our critical examination of the experience from the Alliance leads into suggestions for identifying novel funding and support models involving NGOs, researchers and the private sector working side by side with public sector institutions to deliver community level support for managing risks that may go “beyond adaptation.”

Arcticclimate change is happening much faster than the global average. Arctic change also has global consequences, in addition to local ones. Scientific evidence shows that meltwater of Arctic sources contributes to sea-level rise significantly while accounting for 35% of current global sea-level rise. Arcticcommunities have to find ways to deal with rapidly changing environmental conditions that are leading to social impacts such as outmigration, similarly to the global South. International debates on Loss and Damage have not addressed the Arctic so far. We review literature to show what impacts of climate change are already visible in the Arctic, and present local cases in order to provide empirical evidence of losses and damages in the Arctic region. This evidence is particularly well presented in the context of outmigration and relocation of which we highlight examples. The review reveals a need for new governance mechanisms and institutional frameworks to tackle Loss and Damage. Finally, we discuss what implications Arcticlosses and damages have for the international debate.

This chapter presents a case study of setting up a national mechanism to address losses and damages in Bangladesh—a highly climate vulnerable country facing significant losses and damages, putting its domestic resources and expertise together to respond in a way that looks ahead and beyond the conventional responses to climate change. The efforts underway to establish the national mechanism build upon existing institutions and frameworks and are an example of collaboration across ministries, and a break-away from working in silos. The proposed mechanism is an attempt to embed climate change perspectives into disaster policymaking, to address the gaps in the current policy framework and to design a comprehensive system to for a stronger response to losses and damages from climate impacts. A national mechanism to address losses and damages not only responds to the needs within the country, it also reaffirms Bangladesh’s commitment to the national targets and indicators within the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030. Furthermore, the functions of the national mechanism replicate the work areas of the WIM, signalling Bangladesh’s commitments to the Paris Agreement. For a resource constrained LDC country, the efforts made by researchers, the development community and policymakers show resourcefulness, proactiveness and agency that can be replicated in countries facing similar vulnerabilities and resource constraints.

The civil law case brought forward in 2016 by the Peruvian Saúl Luciano Lliuya with the support of the NGO Germanwatch against the German energy company RWE is the first climate lawsuit in Germany. It addresses the question whether and how the biggest greenhouse-gas emitters, such as energy suppliers, may be held liable for losses and damages caused by climate change. Specifically, the plaintiff sued the company for a contribution to safety measures that help avoid the outburst of a glacial lagoon fuelled by glacial retreat linked to anthropogenic climate change. The requested support for necessary risk management measures at the lake to reduce the risk of flooding are commensurate with the causal contribution of the company’s share in historical CO emissions, approximately 0.5%. After having been rejected by a district court in November 2017, the Court of Appeals accepted the case and took it forward to the evidentiary phase. This decision marks the first time that a court acknowledged that a private company is in principal responsible for its share in causing climate damages. The lawsuit has raised the issue of responsibility of large energy companies, and other emitters of greenhouse gas emissions, for climate change in terms of liability for nuisance caused to private property. The acceptance of the case and its entering into the evidentiary phase has written legal history and the case may act as a model for lawsuits in other countries. Comparable legal bases for similar cases exist in numerous countries around the world. The decision thus may have implications for the responsibility of great emitters all around the globe in terms of communicating the relevant litigation risks to shareholders and building adequate financial reserves.