Page - 55 - in Loss and Damage from Climate Change - Concepts, Methods and Policy Options

2 TheEthicalChallenges in theContextofClimateLossandDamage 55 Relying onMiller (2007) once again, there are at least three additional reasons allowingthedifferentiatedassignmentofremedialresponsibilitieswithoutrelyingon backward looking considerations of outcome responsibility. That is, reasons appli- cablewithin adistributive justice framing.First, and inmodificationof the already mentionedBPP, thosecurrentlybenefitting themost fromemissionscontributing to climate change aremost often those also financially and technologically best able to foster L&Dmeasures. Second, thosewith the best know-how to support one or severalofthethreecomponents(comprehensiveriskmanagement,riskfinancingand curativemeasures)ofacomprehensiveschemeofL&Dmeasuresmentionedbefore canmost efficiently andeffectivelyprovideassistance.Third, indigenousandother cultural knowledge sharedbycommunities affectednotonly leads to special duties amongthembutalsomighthelptoprovidemoreappropriateandeffectivesupport in practice. Inthecaseofmanycommunitiesandcountries, theassignmentofremedial responsibilitiesaccordingtothefirst tworeasonswillmostprobablyoverlapbecause bothdetermine thedevelopedcountryparties to theUNFCCCtobeunder remedial duty. The third reason, by contrast, probably identifies developing country parties; e.g.membersofAOSIS, tobeunder specified remedialduties. Followingon fromSect. 2.3 and independent of the reasons employed to assign remedial responsibilities, supportmustbedifferentiatedat least along the following two lines: (a)whether L&D is replaceable or not, and (b)whether L&Dmeasures shalltackleslow-onsetprocessesorsudden-onsetextremeevents(seeTable2.3).The discussionintheprevioussectionreveals that thefirst typeofdifferentiationroughly corresponds but is not identical with the distinction between economic and non- economicL&D.The second typeof differentiation largely correlateswithwhether L&D is insurable or not. These differentiations/categories need to be taken into accountbecauseacomprehensiveschemetoappropriatelytackleclimateL&Dmust ultimately differentiate responsibilities in an efficient and effectiveway in order to beconsidered just.Notably, in termsof support forL&D,pledgingfinance is likely not enough and probably not themost efficient and effective form of support for communitiesandcountriesinneedofassistance.Whatisfurtherneededisassistance in capacity building and technology transfer in order for these communities to be abletotakeactionallowingthemefficientlyandeffectivelytomediate thesocialand economiccostsof climateL&D. Transferof technologywithoutknow-howavailable tends tobe less effective. In order tobeeffective,weclaimthat a fairdifferentiationof responsibilitiesmustnot onlybefall thoseable to fosterL&Dmeasuresbutalso thosepotentiallyharmed.As alreadymentioned, the effectiveness ofmeasures is substantially increased if those profitingfromthemarealsoinvolvedintheir implementationandmaintenance.Sim- ilarly, shared indigenous or cultural knowledge especially in countries and regions facingsimilarrisksofL&Dcanbecomerelevantaswell.Webelievethatsuchtiesas well asgeographicproximitycansignificantly increase theefficiencyandeffective- ness of implementation andmaintenance ofmeasures (Wallimann-Helmer 2016). Furthermore, without transfer of know-how, pledging financemight contribute to unfairnesswhen it comes toapplying forfinancial support to implementL&Dmea- sures.Forinstance,thereisfarlessdetectedandattributedclimateeventsincountries