By Hina Lotia, Director Programmes, Programme Development Department, LEAD Pakistan. (Southasiadisasters.net issue No. 120, November 2014)
Loss and Damage as an issue was introduced in the mainstream climate dialogue since the 13th Conference of the Parties (COP) of UNFCCC, as a part of the Bali Action Plan. At COP 18 in Doha, parties decided to establish institutional arrangements to improve understanding, strengthen coordination and enhance action and support, to address the issue of loss and damage at COP 19 (UNFCCC, 2013). The need for national actions and research was also identified to help developing countries address this. In Warsaw (COP 19, 2014), institutional arrangements to address loss and damage were created by establishing the Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage (WIM) associated with Climate Change Impacts. It aims to enhance knowledge and understanding of approaches to address loss and damage; strengthen dialogue, coordination and coherence among relevant stakeholders and enhance action and support to address loss and damage (UNFCCC, 2014).
So far much of the debate and the work done by LDCs such as Bangladesh has been to deepen understanding and provide case studies on the fact that Loss and Damage are happening. These discussions have rather been generic but from an ecosystem-based perspective. Looking at the issue of Loss and Damage from an Urban viewpoint has not been taken up. The urban economic and non-economic losses and their impact on the population (lives and livelihoods), infrastructure, social (health, education, water supply and sanitation) and environment concerns has not been taken up at the global discourse. Basic scoping studies and assessments need to be undertaken to generate knowledge, help in creating awareness of linkages, institutions, capacities and responsibilities towards loss and damage in urban areas at the national, as well as state and sub state levels.
As far as the global dialogue is concerned, it looks like a leap forward from a developing country perspective. But certain pre requisites and challenges do remain to be conquered:
- There is no consensus on the definition of Loss and Damage. Some call it residual loss and damage (beyond climate change adaptation and mitigation). It has moved to also include slow onset hazards, other than impact of extreme events. In addition to the direct economic impact, non-economic losses have also been factored in the loss and damage framework.
- Research and information is needed on future climate change impacts and where adaptation and mitigation fail and loss and damage become evident. Where the limits of adaptation and mitigation lie?
- An important area that has not been researched thus far is how to assess and, more importantly, quantify loss and damage. How do you measure how much loss and damage has been made – keeping in mind all the component of the above-mentioned definitional components.
- Will the definition and measurement framework to assess loss and damage differ based on ecosystems, rural/urban dynamics and level of development within a country?
- What are the financial instruments available to address loss and damage? Is it additional or what is being offered under existing climate change funds (green climate fund, adaptation fund etc)
- How does the international mechanism translate at the national level? What kind of policies and frameworks need to be developed backed by evidence based research?
While we all gear up for COP 21 next year, hope that we have answers to some (if not all) of the questions. We hope that sound body of evidence and knowledge is generated to make a convincing case to support (technically and financially). Varied approaches to address loss and damage are
researched, understood and shared among relevant stakeholders for greater buy in.
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this piece are those of the author/s and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of AIDMI.
Donate