Seite - 41 - in Loss and Damage from Climate Change - Concepts, Methods and Policy Options
Bild der Seite - 41 -
Text der Seite - 41 -
2 TheEthicalChallenges in theContextofClimateLossandDamage 41
2.2 TwoApproaches toDistinguishBetweenAdaptation
andL&D
Some argue that the three pillars of climate policy at theUNFCCC level aremiti-
gation, adaptation, andL&D (see introduction byMechler et al. 2018; chapter by
Calliari et al. 2018).Whilemitigation can be distinguished from adaptation quite
easily (mitigation involves reducingGHGemissionsandenhancingsinksandreser-
voirswhereasadaptationinvolvestheprocesses,practices,andstructurestomoderate
potential negative impacts), L&Dismore challenging todifferentiate fromadapta-
tion.Nevertheless, we can adopt a standard definitionwhich helps to separate the
two: in a climate change context,L&Dmay refer to actionsdealingwith the resid-
ual,adverse impactsofclimatechangewhichremainaftermitigationandadaptation
measures have been adopted (Mace andVerheyen 2016).Wecall this the “beyond
adaptation” approach.This is similar towhat theparties to theUNFCCCacknowl-
edge inDecision2/CP.19whentheystate thatL&D“involvesmore than, thatwhich
canbe reducedbyadaptation” (UNFCCC2014).
In the literature, an alternative approach to the distinction is that adaptation
involves responses to keep risks within the range of tolerable risk whereas L&D
involves responses to risks that cannot be kept within the range of tolerable risks
andsobecome intolerable.Thismeans thatdespite adaptationmeasures these risks
exceedsociallynegotiatednormsorvaluesdefiningtolerability(Dowetal.2013a,b;
Wallimann-Helmer2015; seechapterbySchinkoet al. 2018).Wecall this the“risk
tolerance” approach.Depending onwhich of these approaches is chosen, different
kinds of responsibilities andmeasureswill become the primary focus of policy. In
the following,wefirst showwhythis is thecaseand thenarguewhyinsetting these
prioritiesbothapproachescomplement eachother.
The question of which responsibilities and measures the “beyond adaptation”
approachencompassescanbeelaboratedbyconsideringwhether theclimate-related
impacts cannot be avoided orwill not be avoided in the future by mitigation or
adaptation (Mace andVerheyen 2016). In the literature, this same distinction has
alsobeendiscussed in termsofunavoidable andunavoided impacts (Roderick and
Verheyen 2008). According to this approach, a key reason why some adaptation
measuresthatcouldhavebeentakenwillnotbetakenis thatactorsmaybesubject to
socio-economicconstraints.Typically,L&Dmeasuresarenot takendue toa lackof
internationalfinancing, implementation restrictions, or political constraints leading
to soft andhard limits (ChambweraandMohammed2014).The Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) sees soft limits if adaptation constraints can in
principle be overcome in contrast to hard adaptation limits,where constraints lead
to limits that cannotbeovercome(Kleinet al. 2014).
To illustrate this, imaginea scenario inwhichmembersof theAllianceofSmall
Island States (AOSIS), without international financing, may be unable to afford
large-scale beach renourishment needed to guard against the impacts of high sea
level rise. In turn, suchadaptationwouldbe takenwere there sufficientfinancial (or
other) resourcesavailable.Theimpactsassociatedwith the inability toconductsuch
Loss and Damage from Climate Change
Concepts, Methods and Policy Options
- Titel
- Loss and Damage from Climate Change
- Untertitel
- Concepts, Methods and Policy Options
- Autoren
- Reinhard Mechler
- Laurens M. Bouwer
- Thomas Schinko
- Swenja Surminski
- JoAnne Linnerooth-Bayer
- Verlag
- Springer Open
- Datum
- 2019
- Sprache
- englisch
- Lizenz
- CC BY 4.0
- ISBN
- 978-3-319-72026-5
- Abmessungen
- 16.0 x 24.0 cm
- Seiten
- 580
- Schlagwörter
- Environment, Climate change, Environmental law, Environmental policy, Risk management
- Kategorien
- International
- Naturwissenschaften Umwelt und Klima