Page - 194 - in Loss and Damage from Climate Change - Concepts, Methods and Policy Options
Image of the Page - 194 -
Text of the Page - 194 -
194 F.SimlingerandB.Mayer
into consideration, if onlymarginally. Developed states agreed to the insertion of
elements of language containing constructive ambiguities which, without entirely
rejecting thedemandsofdevelopingstates, didnot fulfil themeither.
One such provision is the principle of “commonbut differentiated responsibili-
ties,”whichwasinsertedintheUNFCCCandintheRioDeclarationonEnvironment
andDevelopmentadoptedat thesametime(UNFCCC,art.3;RioDeclaration,prin-
ciple 7). Including theword “responsibility” gave some satisfaction to developing
states,butthewordcouldbeunderstoodalternativelyasagroundforreparationbased
onculpabilityor simplyanobligation tocooperatebasedoneachstate’s capacities.
Thus, the position of theUnited States, reflected on theirwritten statement on the
RioDeclaration,was that thisconcepthighlighted“thespecial leadershiproleof the
developedcountries,basedon[their] industrialdevelopment, [their]experiencewith
environmentalprotectionpoliciesandactions,and[their]wealth, technicalexpertise
and capabilities.” To avoid any doubt, theUnited States stated on record that they
didnot accept any interpretationof this concept “thatwould implya recognitionor
acceptance…ofanyinternationalobligationsor liabilities,oranydiminution in the
responsibilitiesofdevelopingcountries” (UnitedStates1992,para. 16).
Likewise, small islanddevelopingstatessecuredthe insertion in theUNFCCCof
aprovision recognising thedutyofdevelopedstates to“assist thedevelopingcoun-
try Parties that are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change
inmeetingcostsof adaptation to thoseadverse effects” (UNFCCC,art. 4(4)).This,
again,wasofa limitedavail. “Meetingcostsofadaptation”doesnotmean“meeting
[all] the costs of adaptation” (Bodansky 1993). The obligation accepted by devel-
oped stateswas simply one of contributing something to the costs of adaptation in
developingstates.
A streamof negotiations on climate change adaptation appeared, for long, as a
potential entrypoint for claims forcompensation for lossesanddamages.Since the
adoption of theUNFCCCanddespite the creation of an adaptation fundunder the
KyotoProtocol, internationalfinancial assistance toadaptation indeveloping states
has remained limited, especially when compared to financial assistant to climate
changemitigation (Buchner et al. 2015).Agrowing frustration of some advocates
ledthemtopushforadistinctconceptualframeworkwithininternationalnegotiations
onclimatechange,whereclaims for compensationcouldemerge.Yet, anymention
ofcompensationor reparationwasanon-starter.
7.5.2 TheWorkstreamandMechanismonLossandDamage
AworkstreamonL&Dwas initiated in2007 through theBaliActionPlanadopted
byadecisionof the13thSessionof theConferenceof theParties to theUNFCCC
(COP13). TheKyoto Protocol had just entered into force and, althoughmeasures
tomitigate climate changewere being designed or implemented, therewas a clear
sense thatmuchmore had to be done through future agreements.Accordingly, the
BaliActionPlanaimed“tolaunchacomprehensiveprocess toenable thefull,effec-
Loss and Damage from Climate Change
Concepts, Methods and Policy Options
- Title
- Loss and Damage from Climate Change
- Subtitle
- Concepts, Methods and Policy Options
- Authors
- Reinhard Mechler
- Laurens M. Bouwer
- Thomas Schinko
- Swenja Surminski
- JoAnne Linnerooth-Bayer
- Publisher
- Springer Open
- Date
- 2019
- Language
- English
- License
- CC BY 4.0
- ISBN
- 978-3-319-72026-5
- Size
- 16.0 x 24.0 cm
- Pages
- 580
- Keywords
- Environment, Climate change, Environmental law, Environmental policy, Risk management
- Categories
- International
- Naturwissenschaften Umwelt und Klima