Seite - 114 - in Loss and Damage from Climate Change - Concepts, Methods and Policy Options

114 R.A. Jameset al. evidence to support it. In this chapter, we first explore this dilemma for science- policydialogue,summarisingseveralyearsofresearchintostakeholderperspectives ofattributioninthecontextofL&D.Wethenaimtoprovideclarityaboutthescientific researchavailable, throughanoverviewofresearchwhichmightcontributeevidence about thecausal connectionsbetweenanthropogenicclimatechangeand lossesand damages,includingclimatescience,butalsootherfieldswhichexamineotherdrivers ofhazard, exposure, andvulnerability. Finally,weexplorepotential applicationsof attribution research, suggesting that an integratedandnuancedapproachhaspoten- tial to informplanning toavert,minimiseandaddress lossesanddamages.Thekey messagesare • In the political context of climate negotiations, questions about whether losses anddamages can be attributed to anthropogenic climate change are often linked to issuesof responsibility, blame, and liability. • Attributionsciencedoesnotaimtoestablishresponsibilityorblame,but rather to investigatedriversof change. • Attributionscienceisadvancingrapidly,andhaspotential to increaseunderstand- ingof howclimate variability and change is influencing slowonset and extreme weather events, andhowthis interactswithotherdriversof risk, includingsocio- economicdrivers, to influence lossesanddamages. • Overtime,someuncertainties inthesciencewillbereduced,as theanthropogenic climatechangesignalbecomesstronger, andunderstandingofclimatevariability andchangedevelops. • However, some uncertainties will not be eliminated. Uncertainty is common in science, and does not prevent useful applications in policy, butmight determine which applications are appropriate. It is important to highlight that in attribu- tion studies, the strengthof evidencevaries substantiallybetweendifferent kinds of slow onset and extremeweather events, and between regions. Policy-makers shouldnot expect the later emergenceofconclusiveevidenceabout the influence of climate variability and change on specific incidences of losses and damages; and, inparticular, shouldnot expect the strengthofevidence tobeequalbetween events, andbetweencountries. • Rather thanwaiting for furtherconfidence inattributionstudies, there ispotential to startworkingnow to integrate science intopolicy andpractice, to helpunder- stand and tackle drivers of losses and damages, informing prevention, recovery, rehabilitation, and transformation. Keywords LossandDamage ·Attribution ·Climatechange ·Science-policy interface