DOI: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2020.102133
论文题名: Making sense of the politics in the climate change loss & damage debate
作者: Calliari E. ; Serdeczny O. ; Vanhala L.
刊名: Global Environmental Change
ISSN: 9593780
出版年: 2020
卷: 64 语种: 英语
中文关键词: International relations
; Loss and damage
; Multi-methods
; Negotiations
; Political ethnography
; Politics
; UNFCCC
英文关键词: 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]
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
Citation statistics:
资源类型: 期刊论文
标识符: http://119.78.100.158/handle/2HF3EXSE/168144
Appears in Collections: 气候变化与战略
There are no files associated with this item.
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
Recommended Citation:
Calliari E.,Serdeczny O.,Vanhala L.. Making sense of the politics in the climate change loss & damage debate[J]. Global Environmental Change,2020-01-01,64