Page - xix - in Loss and Damage from Climate Change - Concepts, Methods and Policy Options

List of Tables Table 1.1 Classifying losses and damages. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Table 2.1 Difference in policy priority depending on how adaptation and L&D are distinguished . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 Table 2.2 Overview of differences between analysing L&Dwithin a framing of compensatory justice and distributive justice . . . . . 45 Table 2.3 Indicative list ofmeasures for different categories of losses and damages. Note that listedmeasures are not exhaustive and that thesemeasures could apply under both compensatory or distributive justice framings . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 Table 2.4 Categorisation of the differentiated remedial responsibilities of countries to foster L&Dmeasures without exclusively relying on outcome responsibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 Table 3.1 Observed changes inweather extremes and attribution to human greenhouse gas emissions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 Table 3.2 Normalisation studies of weather-related disaster loss records . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 Table 3.3 Comparison of changes in extremeweather hazards (regardless of human contribution) and observed change in losses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 Table 4.1 Classifying loss and damage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 Table 6.1 Party/Grouping calling for compensation in the period 1991–2016 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172 Table 7.1 Legal responses, their challenges and potential next steps. . . . 198 Table 8.1 NELD impacts reported in the literature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209 Table 14.1 Residual damages across three IAMs: high damages-low discount rate (USD billion 2005) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 350 Table 14.2 Residual damages across three IAMs: low damages-high discount rate (USD billion 2005) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 351 Table 14.3 Adaptation and residual costs for selected regions (high damages-low discount rate) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 353 xxi