Page - 156 - in Loss and Damage from Climate Change - Concepts, Methods and Policy Options

156 E.Calliari et al. L&Dwouldnot feel asaunilateral concessiondevelopedcountriesmake tovulner- able ones: it would rather be about elaborating patterns of collective action on an issueofcommonconcern. Keywords LossandDamage ·AOSIS ·UNFCCC · International relations Neorealism ·Liberalism ·Constructivism 6.1 Foundations foranInternationalRelations’ Contribution to theDebate In recent years, the academic community hasmade important contributions to the Loss&Damage (L&D) debate, especially by (i) framing it through a disaster and climate riskmanagementperspective (Mechler et al. 2014;FeketeandSakdapolrak 2014; Birkmann andWelle 2015;Mechler and Schinko 2016); (ii) looking at the connection betweenL&Dand the limits to adaptation (Warner and van derGeest 2013, 2015); (iii) outlininghowattribution studies could support the assessment of L&D(Huggeletal.2013; Jamesetal.2014);and(iv)discussingL&D’sconnection with theconceptofstate responsibility in international law(TolandVerheyen2004; Verheyen2012, 2015;Mayer 2014;Mace andVerheyen2016). Someauthors have also provided historical overviews on the emergence of L&D in the international debate, analysed the roleof theUNFCCCinaddressing it, anddiscussed thepossi- ble implications of theWarsaw InternationalMechanism (WIM) (Huq et al. 2013; McNamara 2014;MathewandAkter 2015;Roberts andHuq2015; Stabinsky and Hoffmaister 2015).Against this background, contributionsbypolitical science and InternationalRelations(IR)scholarshavebeenalmostabsent (recentexceptionsare Johnson (2017),VanhalaandHestbaek (2016)andCalliari (2016a)). This is onlypartly surprising.Overall, limited attentionhasbeendevoted to cli- mate changewithin the discipline, especiallywhen considering adaptation-related issues (CrumpandDownie2015).While contributionsonmitigationare somewhat more common,where the need for international cooperation ismore evident, this is not the case for adaptation and its (possible) failures and limits (i.e., L&D).Yet, there are a number of reasonswhy the current discourse on adaptation and its lim- its/constraintsshouldbeofinterest tothoseexploringglobalpolicyandinternational power relations (Khan2016):These include the self-interest of states andhow ina globalised and interconnectedworld they are exposed to the effects of social, eco- nomic,political, environmental, and technologicalevents, evenwhenthoseoccur in a different corner of theworld. In addition, norms, values and justice imperatives also featureasabase forcollectiveactiononadaptation (BrownandWeiskel2002) andplayanevenmore important rolewhenconsideringL&D. MoreoverL&DprovidesaveryinterestingcasetobestudiedbyIRscholarsgiven the relevance of power dynamics in the climate changenegotiations setting and its complex, asymmetrical andmultilateral characteristics.Decision-makingunder the