气候变化领域集成服务门户(CCPortal): Making sense of the politics in the climate change loss & damage debate

CCPortal

DOI	10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2020.102133
	Making sense of the politics in the climate change loss & damage debate
	Calliari E.; Serdeczny O.; Vanhala L.
发表日期	2020
ISSN	0959-3780
卷号	64
英文摘要	The Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage (L&D) associated with Climate Change Impacts (WIM) was established in 2013 to advance i) knowledge generation; ii) coordination and iii) support to address losses and damages under the UNFCCC. So far, the work undertaken by the WIM Executive Committee (ExCom) has focused on enhancing understanding and awareness of the issue and promoting collaboration with relevant stakeholders. Delivering on the WIM's third function on action and support has lagged behind, and ‘the political’ nature of L&D has often been blamed for this. Key terrains of contention among Parties have included the positioning of L&D governance vis-à-vis the adaptation space and struggles around state liability and compensation. As a way to facilitate discussion on implementation options, recent research has suggested de-politicising aspects of the L&D debate; yet we have very little insight into how the politics are understood within the realm of international L&D governance. This paper brings an analysis of ‘the political’ into the picture by identifying the complex and underlying issues that fuel contention within UNFCCC L&D negotiations. It gives centre stage to the way different framings of norms and material interests affect the debate, and challenges the tendency in current L&D literature to overlook the socio-historical and political underpinnings of this area of policy-making. We employ a qualitative multi-methods research design which draws on content analysis of 138 official Parties’ submissions and statements, 14 elite interviews with key current and former L&D negotiators and is built on a foundation of 3 years of participant observation at COPs and WIM meetings. We approach this data with a political ethnographic sensibility that seeks to explore how meanings are constructed within and across different sources of data. Our empirical results show that, rather than being a monolithic dispute, L&D catalyses different yet intertwined unresolved discussions. We identify five areas of contention, including continued disputes around compensation; conflicts on the legitimacy of L&D as a third pillar of climate action; tensions between the technical and political dimension of the debate; debates over accountability for losses and damages incurred; and the connection of L&D with other unresolved issues under the Convention. © 2020
英文关键词	International relations; Loss and damage; Multi-methods; Negotiations; Political ethnography; Politics; UNFCCC
语种	英语
scopus关键词	adaptive management; climate change; climate effect; compensation system; conference proceeding; empirical analysis; liability; political discourse; United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change; Mazowieckie; Poland [Central Europe]; Warsaw [Mazowieckie]
来源期刊	Global Environmental Change
文献类型	期刊论文
条目标识符	http://gcip.llas.ac.cn/handle/2XKMVOVA/142009
作者单位	University College London, Department of Political Science & School of Public Policy, United Kingdom; Climate Analytics, Berlin, Germany; Euro-Mediterranean Centre on Climate Change and Ca’ Foscari, University of Venice, Italy
推荐引用方式 GB/T 7714	Calliari E.,Serdeczny O.,Vanhala L.. Making sense of the politics in the climate change loss & damage debate[J],2020,64.
APA	Calliari E.,Serdeczny O.,&Vanhala L..(2020).Making sense of the politics in the climate change loss & damage debate.Global Environmental Change,64.
MLA	Calliari E.,et al."Making sense of the politics in the climate change loss & damage debate".Global Environmental Change 64(2020).