Page - 120 - in Loss and Damage from Climate Change - Concepts, Methods and Policy Options

120 R.A. Jameset al. ing the influence of anthropogenic climate changeon specific losses anddamages. Scientific attribution studies usually take anthropogenic emissions as their starting point, and askwhat influence those emissions havehadon climate andweather. In policy discussions, attribution questions emerge fromquestions of how to address specificcasesof losses anddamages, andwhatproportionof the lossesordamages can be related to anthropogenic climate change. As we will outline in Sect. 5.3, at a local scale it becomes more challenging to understand how the influence of anthropogenic climate change interactswith natural variability inweather and cli- mate.Furthermore, theinfluenceofhazardsresultingfromlocalclimatechangesand extremeweathereventsonpeople(throughimpactsonhealth,water resources, food systems, infrastructure and beyond) interacts with awhole range of other drivers. These includethevulnerabilityandexposurecomponentsofcoupledhuman-natural systems (see chapters byBouwer 2018;Lopez et al. 2018 andBotzen et al. 2018). These complexities and uncertainties perhaps start to explainwhyquestions about attribution recur inUNFCCCnegotiations3: thereareobviousandpractical reasons toaskwhichL&Dis related toclimatechange,butnostraightforwardanswers. 5.2.2 QuestionswithPolitical Implications:Controversy andAmbiguity in theNegotiations The answers to attribution questions also have important political implications. AttributingspecificlossesanddamagestoGHGemissionsmightimplyresponsibility foremitters(potentiallyincludingcountries,regions,sectors,companies,andindivid- uals).Someof thestakeholderswe interviewed(seeBox5.2)highlighted thatmen- tionsofattribution in thenegotiationcontextwere likely tobepoliticallymotivated, associated with attempts to push for compensation for climate change impacts.4 They also suggested that the politicalmotivationsmight influence how attribution sciencewouldberepresented,i.e.negotiatorsmight“choosewhattheyknow”(Parker et al. 2017a).5Whendevelopedcountriesmentionattribution inUNFCCCnegotia- tions theymighthighlight theuncertaintyand imply inability toattribute lossesand 3RecurringquestionsaboutwhetherL&Dis related toclimatechange,andspecificallyaboutattri- bution,werewitnessedinourownparticipantobservationofUNFCCCdiscussions(seeBoydetal. 2017),notably includingonequote fromamemberof theExecutiveCommittee to theWIM“it’sa questionofattributionwhichwealwaysgetbackto”.Interviewees(seeBox5.2)alsocommentedon therecurringnatureofthetopicinUNFCCCdiscussions,forexample“there’salotofunproductive exchanges that say ‘howcanwebe sure this is related toanthropogenic changes,” explaining“it’s not anexplicit agenda item,but it alwayspopsup.” 4Forexample,one intervieweesaid“Whenyoutalkaboutattribution, there’san importantsenseof who’spayingfor itandwho’s toblame…people lookatattributionasawaytogetcompensation.” 5Another interviewee said, referring to attribution science: “I think therewill bedifferentways in which people interpret this and use this to getwhat theywant, and to avoid having to do/pay for things.”