Page - 139 - in Loss and Damage from Climate Change - Concepts, Methods and Policy Options

5 Attribution:HowIs ItRelevant forLoss… 139 forattributionscience inaL&DcontextwithaverybroadviewofwhatL&Dmight signify,includingalargerangeofactionstoaddresslossesanddamages,asidentified bydifferent stakeholders (Boydetal. 2017), forexampleadaptation, risk reduction, risk transfer, insurance, riskpooling, riskmanagement, recovery, rehabilitation,and compensation. 5.4.1 CatalysingAction Many papers, and stakeholder interviews, have highlighted an important role for attribution in catalysing action (Bouwer 2011; Surminski andLopez 2015; Parker etal.2017a).This refers toaction in termsofgreatermitigationambition,aswellas actions to better prepare for disasters. Stott andWalton (2013) highlight that attri- butionof extremeweather events couldhelp aid agencies to encouragepreparation fordisasters, and researchprojects arenowunderway todevelopattribution studies withDRRagencies topilot suchanapproach (www.climatecentral.org).Promoting mitigation could also be seen as an important element in relation toL&D.Several interviewees in theBoyd et al. (2017) study highlighted that one of the important goals of L&D negotiations is to heighten ambition to mitigate, in order to avoid impacts and risks. If the interviewees and commentators are correct, that attribu- tion evidence couldmotivatemitigation (see Parker et al. 2017a), presumably by demonstrating quantitative evidence and examples of howGHGs and aerosols are affectingpeople;thismotivatesfurtherattributionresearch,andalsofurthereffortsto communicate theresults inanunderstandableformforpolicy-makersandthepublic (followingexistingworke.g.wwa.climatecentral.org). 5.4.2 ProvidingEvidence forLiabilityandCompensation Themost frequentlydiscussedapplicationsofattributionscience forL&Darguably relate toliabilityandcompensation(Allen2003;Allenetal.2007;Stoneetal.2009; ThompsonandOtto2015;Parkeretal.2016,2017a;ThorntonandCovington2016). L&Dhasitsoriginsincallsfromsmall islandsstatesforsomeformofcompensation for climate change impacts, particularly sea level rise (Mace andVerheyen 2016), and L&D is sometimes still discussed with reference to some notion of a global compensation mechanism. In this context, attribution is often raised in terms of whether it could provide sufficient evidence for such amechanism (e.g.Craeynest 2010).Forexample,one interviewee fromBoydetal. (2017)’s studyexplained: “In order tohave a reliableL&Dcompensationmechanism,you’ll need tohave avery highconfidenceaboutthecausesofL&D,if thescienceisnot100%orclose, there’ll alwaysbe roomtocontest” (see similardiscussions inParker et al. 2017a).Forone stakeholder, attributionsciencewasevendescribedas thekey tounlocking liability: “we don’t have to enter the rooms on liability and compensation, those doors are