DOI: 10.1080/14693062.2015.1124750
Scopus记录号: 2-s2.0-84940938843
论文题名: Stakeholder perceptions of event attribution in the loss and damage debate
作者: Parker H ; R ; , Boyd E ; , Cornforth R ; J ; , James R ; , Otto F ; E ; L ; , Allen M ; R
刊名: Climate Policy
ISSN: 1469-3062
EISSN: 1752-7457
出版年: 2017
卷: 17, 期: 4 起始页码: 533
结束页码: 550
语种: 英语
英文关键词: adaptation
; climate policy
; event attribution
; loss and damage
; probabilities
; UNFCCC
Scopus关键词: adaptive management
; carbon emission
; climate change
; climate effect
; decision making
; environmental policy
; greenhouse gas
; perception
; probability
; stakeholder
; United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
Scopus学科分类: nvironmental Science: General Environmental Science
; Earth and Planetary Sciences: Atmospheric Science
英文摘要: In 2013 the Warsaw International Mechanism (WIM) for loss and damage (L&D) associated with climate change impacts was established under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). For scientists, L&D raises questions around the extent that such impacts can be attributed to anthropogenic climate change, which may generate complex results and be controversial in the policy arena. This is particularly true in the case of probabilistic event attribution (PEA) science, a new and rapidly evolving field that assesses whether changes in the probabilities of extreme events are attributable to GHG emissions. If the potential applications of PEA are to be considered responsibly, dialogue between scientists and policy makers is fundamental. Two key questions are considered here through a literature review and key stakeholder interviews with representatives from the science and policy sectors underpinning L&D. These provided the opportunity for in-depth insights into stakeholders’ views on firstly, how much is known and understood about PEA by those associated with the L&D debate? Secondly, how might PEA inform L&D and wider climate policy? Results show debate within the climate science community, and limited understanding among other stakeholders, around the sense in which extreme events can be attributed to climate change. However, stakeholders do identify and discuss potential uses for PEA in the WIM and wider policy, but it remains difficult to explore precise applications given the ambiguity surrounding L&D. This implies a need for stakeholders to develop greater understandings of alternative conceptions of L&D and the role of science, and also identify how PEA can best be used to support policy, and address associated challenges. Policy relevance The WIM was established to address the negative impacts of climate change, but whether attribution evidence will be required to link impacts to climate change is yet to be determined, and also controversial. Stakeholders show little awareness of PEA and agreement on its role, which raises important questions for policy. Dialogue between policymakers, practitioners and scientists could help to build a broader understanding of PEA, to determine whether it is relevant, and facilitate both its development and WIM high level decision-making processes. © 2016 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. Citation statistics:
资源类型: 期刊论文
标识符: http://119.78.100.158/handle/2HF3EXSE/80288
Appears in Collections: 科学计划与规划
There are no files associated with this item.
作者单位: Department of Meteorology, University of Reading, Earley Gate, Reading, United Kingdom; Department of Geography and Environmental Science, University of Reading, Whiteknights, Reading, United Kingdom; NCAS-Climate, Department of Meteorology, University of Reading, Earley Gate, Reading, United Kingdom; Environmental Change Institute, University of Oxford, South Parks Road, Oxford, United Kingdom; Atmospheric, Oceanic and Planetary Physics, University of Oxford, Parks Road, Oxford, United Kingdom; Walker Institute, University of Reading, Earley Gate, Reading, United Kingdom
Recommended Citation:
Parker H,R,, Boyd E,et al. Stakeholder perceptions of event attribution in the loss and damage debate[J]. Climate Policy,2017-01-01,17(4)