'Loss
and damage' - the next frontier of climate change
As
climate change impacts grow in scale and frequency, developing countries
are now confronted with more damage and even permanent losses. In
December 2011, governments adopted a work programme under the United
Nations climate treaty and regional meetings were held for Africa
(June), Latin America (July), Asia and Eastern Europe (August), and
Small Island Developing States (October). These will provide inputs
to the decision on loss and damage to be adopted in Doha in November.
Below is the text of a Third World Network brief on lessons learned
from the regional meetings, key issues for Doha and recommendations
for future action on loss and damage.
Juan
P Hoffmaister and Doreen Stabinsky
Loss
and damage - a new reality for developing countries
THE
phrase 'loss and damage' refers broadly to the entire range of damage
and permanent loss 'associated with climate change impacts in developing
countries that are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects
of climate change' that can no longer be avoided through mitigation
nor can be avoided through adaptation.
The
loss and damage associated with climate change is expected to increase
over time, due to increase in frequency and magnitude of extreme weather
events, as well as impacts of slow-onset events. With current levels
of committed warming, we also face the risk of passing tipping points
of important climate system elements that may trigger a process of
abrupt and non-linear climate change. All vulnerable countries as
identified in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
(UNFCCC) are currently at risk from levels of loss and damage that
will have significant impacts on lives, livelihoods and the prospects
for sustainable development.
Relevant
lessons learned from the work programme and regional meetings
According
to the mandate from decision 7/CP.17 adopted by the Conference of
the Parties (COP) to the UNFCCC in 2011, the expert meetings were
to examine a range of approaches to address loss and damage associated
with the adverse effects of climate change, including impacts related
to extreme weather and slow-onset events.
Participants
at the regional meetings (Africa, Latin America, Asia and Eastern
Europe, and Small Island Developing States) discussed multiple approaches
to address loss and damage. They recognised that some approaches might
have synergies with adaptation efforts, while others will require
taking action through new arrangements and standalone approaches.
Many have concluded that obligations under the UNFCCC related to loss
and damage require attention by the Parties, and the regional meetings
so far have provided a unique window to contextualise local, national
and regional challenges in a manner whereby the Parties to the Convention
can decide adequate next steps at COP 18 in Doha, Qatar in November.
A
number of key lessons were learned through the work programme and
regional discussions:
1.
There are limits to adaptation. The continuing accumulation of greenhouse
gases in the atmosphere, the denial of historical responsibility by
developed countries, and the limited support that has been forthcoming
for adaptation, limit how much developing countries can do. Moreover,
there are real physical limits to adaptation, particularly to the
impacts of slow-onset processes. As temperatures and sea levels rise,
territories will become uninhabitable and unproductive. Soil moisture
levels will decrease to the point where cultivation of crops is no
longer viable in entire regions. Groundwater sources in coastal areas
will become too saline to provide drinking water for people living
there. Adaptation will become impossible on low-lying islands and
in the most arid regions; this will lead to permanent loss of lands,
livelihoods, and cultural resources.
2.
There are limitations to risk reduction, risk retention and risk transfer
approaches to loss and damage. Risk reduction, like adaptation, becomes
impossible after a certain point, for example, when a territory becomes
uninhabitable. Migration and planned relocation are only coping mechanisms
in that situation. Risk retention, when countries assume the costs
of damage and loss in national accounting, is not an option for many
countries. Risk transfer is a broad category of mechanisms to transfer
the cost of damage and loss to a third party, usually through some
form of insurance. There is potential for risk transfer and other
risk-sharing mechanisms like insurance to address a subset of losses
and damage; however, insurance works best for low-probability, high-impact
events. Insurance is not appropriate for events of 100% certainty,
such as sea level rise and increased temperatures.
3.
Both economic and non-economic shocks must be considered in both the
assessment of loss and damage and in the analysis of approaches to
address loss and damage. Examples of economic losses include structural
damage from floods or hurricanes, or crop loss due to drought or extreme
heat. Non-economic losses include cultural loss, loss of livelihoods
or territory, or species extinction. Some damage can be rehabilitated
(such as damage to infrastructure), while other damage and loss cannot
(e.g., cultural loss, loss of ecosystems, melted glaciers, loss of
human life). Traditional approaches to risk management to address
economic losses have been considered extensively in the context of
both climate change and other natural hazards. The UNFCCC work programme
needs to expand efforts to understand new approaches, including approaches
to address non-economic losses. The UNFCCC, as the policy-relevant
forum, must drive discussions on possible financial measures to assist
countries in coping with loss and damage, for example deferral of
payments to international institutions, debt relief, and other similar
measures, as well as measures to strengthen social safety nets to
support vulnerable groups and cope with non-economic losses.
4.
Loss and damage is an issue of equity. The countries most vulnerable
to loss and damage are not responsible for the climate change that
is destroying lives and livelihoods. Equity as the basis for defining
action is operationalised in Article 3.1 of the UNFCCC: 'The Parties
should protect the climate system for the benefit of present and future
generations of humankind, on the basis of equity and in accordance
with their common but differentiated responsibilities and respective
capabilities. Accordingly, the developed country Parties should take
the lead in combating climate change and the adverse effects thereof.'
5.
Distinctions can be made between avoidable and unavoidable losses.
Avoidable losses, as the name implies, can possibly be prevented with
anticipatory action. Avoidable losses are not always avoided, as countries
may decide to not act, or limited capacity may prevent action. But
many climate change impacts are unavoidable, including many slow-onset
changes. Examples of unavoidable losses are coral bleaching, sea level
rise, and temperature rise that leads to land being taken out of production.
6.
Loss and damage are fundamentally the result of climate impacts, not
inherent vulnerabilities. Vulnerability and risk drivers are not the
cause of losses: loss and damage result from climate impacts. Damage
and loss can be exacerbated due to underlying vulnerabilities, but
vulnerability is not the cause of drought or sea level rise. If an
old person slowly crossing a street is hit by a car, she is hurt by
the car, not by her underlying vulnerability of being old and walking
slowly. As codified in international law in Principle 2 of the Rio
Declaration on Environment and Development (1992), States have 'the
responsibility to ensure that activities within their jurisdiction
or control do not cause damage to the environment of other States
or of areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction.'
The
duty of States to abide by the 'no-harm' rule applies to the harm
caused from the historical accumulation of greenhouse gases. This
duty is not exonerated by the vulnerability of those affected, especially
when some of those vulnerabilities are due to uncontrollable or historical
circumstances, such as geophysical conditions, unfair global economic
conditions, structural conditions created under colonialism, etc.
In this context, it is worth noting that no group or country-category
is defined as more vulnerable to adverse impacts of climate change
than another under the Convention. Vulnerability is defined according
to geophysical conditions identified in the preamble of the UNFCCC,
while some articles identify the special needs that groups or country-categories
may experience arising from other issues.
7.
There is a need for specialised support for addressing impacts from
slow-onset processes. With COP decision 1/CP.16 adopted in 2010, Parties
agreed to consider slow-onset events in the work programme on loss
and damage. There is a list of impacts considered to be slow-onset
events:1 sea level rise, increasing temperatures, ocean acidification,
glacial retreat and related impacts, salinisation, land and forest
degradation, loss of biodiversity and desertification. (Slow-onset
events are further discussed below.)
However,
there are still some gaps in responding to the fullest extent to the
questions mandated by COP 17 to better understand the full range of
approaches and tools that can be used to address the risk of loss
and damage, at all levels and for a broad range of sectors and ecosystems,
considering both extreme weather events and slow-onset events. Approaches
such as national social protection measures, approaches drawing from
social capital, and others that could address concerns related to
non-economic losses need to be discussed in much more detail.
Key
topics for work post-Doha
The
regional meetings were instrumental in focusing on certain key issues
that help answer important questions needed for a successful COP 18
outcome: understanding approaches to address non-economic losses;
the challenge posed to sustainable development due to lost development
opportunities; the challenges and opportunities to support particularly
vulnerable countries through providing safety nets in the context
of loss and damage; and a contextualisation of the challenges and
opportunities of insurance and insurance-like mechanisms are among
the most important issues. Specific topics include the following:
1.
Loss and damage needs to be considered in the context of lost opportunities
to achieve sustainable development. Added to the existing challenges
of development are the challenges of mitigating and adapting to climate
change, and now of addressing loss and damage. Therefore, discussions
on loss and damage go beyond traditional approaches to disaster risk
management and adaptation, and in fact are principally concerned with
the additional burden to sustainable development caused by the failure
to reach the objective of the Convention to stabilise greenhouse gas
emissions. Therefore, discussions must include direct harm [i.e.,
the direct costs of actual (unavoidable) harms] and forgone development
(i.e., the costs of lost and diminished opportunities in developing
countries caused by having to forgo development options) from extreme
events and slow-onset events.
2.
Further consideration should be given to the limitations to risk reduction,
risk retention and risk transfer approaches to loss and damage and
alternatives. Over the past decade, policymakers and negotiators have
discussed a range of approaches to address loss and damage, from disaster
risk reduction to risk transfer and insurance. These existing approaches
should be further evaluated with a view to identifying gaps in addressing
the range of loss and damage.
For
example, a number of organisations are trying to design insurance
products that can reach and benefit the poorest agriculturalists,
such as weather index-based insurance. However, as noted above, insurance
works best for low-probability, high-impact events. Insuring climate
risks becomes less and less tenable when events become more frequent,
as premiums will rise accordingly. More frequent droughts, or high
temperatures that kill crops or livestock, will become less and less
insurable as these events increase in frequency with the rise in global
temperature. Insuring climate risks is also inappropriate for slow-onset
events that will occur with 100% probability, as mentioned above.
All these limitations to risk transfer approaches must be further
considered in the context of the work programme.
3.
The analysis of approaches to address loss and damage needs to consider
economic and non-economic dimensions, particularly in the context
of slow-onset events. Much attention has gone into the traditional
approaches to risk management to address economic losses, but the
work programme needs to redouble efforts to understand approaches
to address non-economic losses. The work programme needs to identify
actions to strengthen existing or identify new approaches to address
non-economic losses. Non-insurance mechanisms can provide the liquidity
needed for recovering from disaster shocks and provide capital for
prevention.2 However, the work programme still has not explored the
full potential of approaches to address non-economic losses at micro-,
meso-and macro-scales.
4.
Loss and damage requires consideration of approaches to address economic
shocks. Conventional insurance is generally not appropriate for slow-onset
climate impacts. Other instruments may be needed in this case. The
UNFCCC must drive discussions on how financial measures could be fostered
to assist countries in coping with loss and damage, for example deferral
of payments to international institutions, debt relief, and other
similar measures. Economies in particularly vulnerable countries rely
on climate-sensitive sectors, such as agriculture, fisheries, and
forests. Limited resources for coping with and recovering from climate
and socio-economic shocks and stresses threaten to derail efforts
for sustainable development.3
Dealing
with long-term challenges of slow-onset processes
Slow-onset
events, as noted in decision 1/CP.16, include sea level rise, increasing
temperatures, ocean acidification, glacial retreat and related impacts,
salinisation, land and forest degradation, loss of biodiversity and
desertification. These slow-onset 'events' - more appropriately termed
slow-onset processes, hazards or impacts - are an important element
in the conversation on loss and damage, distinct from extreme events.
Much
of the discussion on approaches to address loss and damage has focused
on extreme events, e.g., floods, drought and heat waves. As already
mentioned, risk transfer approaches are particularly appropriate for
certain types of extreme events, albeit taking into consideration
the limitations of such approaches.
Slow-onset
events will have significant and wide-ranging impacts on people's
lives and livelihoods and are irreversible in our lifetimes if temperatures
continue to rise. The losses that result from slow-onset processes
will affect many more people than extreme events over a long period
of time. As already discussed, because of the certainty of their occurrence
and because they are persistent and develop over time, they are not
amenable to many of the approaches currently under consideration for
addressing extreme events, such as index-based insurance. Moreover,
because these 'events' progress and increase in impact over time,
adaptation is a decreasingly viable option, as we noted earlier.
Parties
will need to undertake further work under the UNFCCC to enhance the
understanding of slow-onset processes, the types of loss and damage
associated with various types of slow-onset impacts, and how these
impacts might be addressed in multiple contexts. There is also a need
to enhance coordination and cooperation with other regional and multilateral
institutions. The mandate of the work programme requires Parties to
look at approaches for dealing with both climate change-related extreme
weather events and slow-onset hazards. However, up to this point,
the work programme has given much more consideration to the issues
raised by extreme events. This deficiency in identifying and evaluating
approaches to address slow-onset events must be recognised by COP
18 for future work.
Additional
to slow-onset events already identified, there is also a need to better
understand permanent state shifts and tipping points. For example,
long-term extreme droughts may actually signal a shift to states of
permanent aridity. State shifts are qualitative changes in the state
of a system. Such changes are often, though not always, irreversible.
While most often we think of state shifts in biological or climatological
terms, we can also consider socio-economic state shifts, brought about
when land is no longer able to produce food, to provide fodder for
animals, or when fisheries no longer provide enough fish for the fishing
communities dependent on them. These permanent shifts in state can
happen slowly or rapidly. The drying described above will result from
a slow shift in the temperature and precipitation regime. Major tipping
elements in the earth system, such as the annual West African and
Indian summer monsoons, the El Nino Southern Oscillation, or the Amazon
rainforest could be pushed towards tipping points that would bring
about more rapid state shifts with impacts felt at the global level.
The
work already achieved under the work programme supports the need to
move towards a systematic approach to address loss and damage, including
through specialised support for addressing impacts from slow-onset
processes and to observe and take appropriate action as tipping points
begin to be identified. The UNFCCC needs to find a way to systematically
support developing countries as they address slow-onset impacts, rather
than with an ad hoc humanitarian pledge approach, as has been historically
the case with major disasters in developing countries. Slow-onset
events will require action and measures to address loss as well as
to remediate and rehabilitate damage - to livelihoods, to both natural
and managed ecosystems, and other productive resources.
Juan
Hoffmaister is a researcher with the Third World Network. Doreen Stabinsky
is Professor of Global Environmental Politics at College of the Atlantic
in Maine, USA. Nathan Thanki contributed to the writing of this article.
Endnotes
1.
These impacts are listed in a footnote in decision 1/CP.16.
2.
FCCC/TP/2008/9, 2008. Mechanisms to manage financial risks from direct
impacts of climate change in developing countries - Technical Paper.
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Secretariat,
Bonn.
3.
FCCC/TP/2008/3, 2008. Physical and socio-economic trends in
climate-related risks and extreme events, and their implications for
sustainable development - Technical Paper. United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change Secretariat, Bonn.
The
need for systematic consideration and support on loss and damage
THE
current work of the work programme indicates that loss and damage
will grow to become a major issue affecting economies and livelihoods
in developing countries. A systematic approach to addressing
loss and damage could be achieved through establishing an international
mechanism to address loss and damage under the UNFCCC, as called
for by developing countries in negotiations. The mechanism would
be a facility to support developing countries' needs with respect
to loss and damage; drive enhanced understanding and means of
assessing loss and damage; facilitate coordination and cooperation
on addressing loss and damage around the world, including through
a compensation mechanism; and would be a means for the UNFCCC
to exercise leadership in coordinating a global response on
loss and damage. Below we briefly point out three of the elements
that such a systematic approach should address:
Extreme
events and slow-onset impacts are surpassing the capacities
of countries to cope, and the associated losses and damage require
new approaches. Because the Earth is slow to warm, accumulated
historical emissions will cause warming, and impacts, for years
to come - even if all emissions are halted immediately. We are
facing the risk of passing tipping points and triggering a process
of abrupt and non-linear climate change.
Finance
alone cannot adequately compensate people for the loss of family,
homes, territory, culture or livelihoods that will result from
radical changes in climate, whether at local, regional or global
levels. Approaches to address non-economic losses need to be
central to a holistic framework to support developing countries
in coping with loss and damage. This systematic approach needs
to give consideration and support to national and subnational
social safety nets and how to strengthen these approaches through
the Convention, which can tackle some of these non-economic
losses.
There
are limitations to humanitarian approaches to respond to disasters.
Traditional approaches to respond to emergencies, particularly
at the international level (e.g., pledge-based responses, ad
hoc bilateral support for recovery), are not sufficient to address
recurrent loss and damage. Therefore, there is a need to consider
relevant experience on financial and other measures to assist
developing countries affected by extreme losses, such as debt
relief and concessional loans. Such schemes could be designed
to help developing countries recover after terrible tragedies.
Relevant examples can be drawn from the devastating earthquake
in Haiti in January 2010, when a trust was created for international
debt relief efforts when countries meeting certain criteria
are hit by the most catastrophic of natural disasters. Such
debt relief and similar concessions can free up additional resources
to meet exceptional balance-of-payments needs created by the
disaster and the recovery, complementing direct financing at
preferential terms and in some instances concessional liquidity
support. There are other relevant experiences and approaches
that should be part of a range of approaches to address loss
and damage and where the Convention must take the lead.
|
Addressing
loss and damage and the needs of developing countries
THE
UNFCCC's Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI) will meet
in Doha and will make recommendations on loss and damage for
consideration by COP 18. A COP decision should contain several
elements, many of which have been already outlined by developing
countries in the negotiations. First, the COP should establish
an international mechanism to address loss and damage and determine
the process to elaborate on the modalities and other details
to make such a mechanism functional by COP 20. Additionally,
work similar to that already undertaken should continue in the
SBI, further examining some of the issues that have emerged
from the work programme and considering how to extend the work
to other appropriate bodies under the Convention. The COP 18
outcome should contain standalone elements and recommendations,
such as a request to the financial mechanisms and actions related
to capacity building. The COP could also establish pilot programmes
to address the needs of developing countries identified over
the course of the last two years, whether individually under
the Convention or in collaboration with other institutions.
A.
Addressing needs under the Convention
The
UNFCCC is the relevant policy forum to take concrete action
to address loss and damage, both under and outside the Convention,
and the COP must exercise its responsibility as such. The Convention
contains relevant principles for addressing loss and damage
that should be taken into consideration as Parties debate next
steps on loss and damage. For example, Article 3.3 of the Convention
states that: '...where there are threats of serious or irreversible
damage, lack of full scientific certainty should not be used
as a reason for postponing such measures.' This principle must
be applied consistently in the development of inputs for a COP
18 outcome.
1.
Elaboration of the modalities of an institutional mechanism
on loss and damage. Negotiations in Doha must focus on filling
the existing gaps in institutional and legal frameworks to address
loss and damage, including through an institutional mechanism
to address slow-onset impacts and other unavoidable damage.
An institutionalised process to address loss and damage needs
to be put in place, with roles assigned to the Adaptation Committee
(AC), and consideration of the matter taken up also under the
financial mechanism, including the Green Climate Fund (GCF).
The
decision establishing the mechanism should give guidance on
the governance and functions of the mechanism. As identified
by developing countries in Bonn, these functions could be:
a)
Assessment of loss and damage from the adverse effects of climate
change: The special needs of particularly vulnerable developing
countries must be accounted for in assessing the avoidable or
unavoidable nature of loss and damage from the adverse effects
of climate change. This role could include coordinating and
providing guidance on standards for assessing loss and damage,
such as guiding the data collection and analysis activities
of relevant institutions.
b)
Addressing loss and damage from the adverse effects of climate
change, including through a compensation and rehabilitation
fund: Unavoidable loss and damage from the adverse effects of
climate change may be addressed through risk-sharing mechanisms,
but total loss and damage from the adverse effects of climate
change will need to be redressed through compensation and rehabilitation
mechanisms. This role could include coordinating and supporting
technical assistance and action, and establishing and supporting
regional networks of collaborative partners within and external
to governments. It could also require dedicated support through
the GCF to facilitate approaches to address loss and damage
at the regional and national levels.
c)
Leadership and promotion of cooperation and coordination outside
the Convention: The mechanism should be situated under the umbrella
of the Convention and housed within the UNFCCC Secretariat,
where administrative support can be provided, with support and
guidance of a Board constituted by Party members and with involvement
of stakeholders. The Convention could under this mechanism take
systematic efforts to support responses to slow-onset damage,
link with UN institutions managing human mobility, coordinate
cross-boundary issues and resources, link with other UN convention
processes such as the Convention on Biological Diversity and
Convention to Combat Desertification, and other UN and international
organisations as appropriate.
2.
Role of the Adaptation Committee. The Adaptation Committee has
the duty to promote coherence on adaptation. Given the important
overlaps and synergies between adaptation and approaches to
address loss and damage, the AC can be asked to provide technical
support and guidance to the Parties with a view to facilitating
the implementation of adaptation activities in a manner that
fosters approaches to address loss and damage.
Similarly
in performing its role, inter alia, in strengthening, consolidating
and enhancing the sharing of relevant information, knowledge,
experience and good practices, at the local, national, regional
and international levels, taking into account, as appropriate,
traditional knowledge and practices, the AC could play an active
role in providing technical support and guidance to the Parties
on some of the work remaining specific to loss and damage. This
role could include the elaboration of modalities and technical
aspects of an international mechanism to address loss and damage,
as well as to provide recommendations to bodies of the Convention
and strengthen related work under the Convention.
Additionally,
the AC could be requested to play an active role and engage
actions necessary outside the Convention, in accordance with
its role of promoting synergy and strengthening engagement with
national, regional and international organisations, centres
and networks, in order to enhance the implementation of adaptation
actions, in particular in developing-country Parties, including
to identify and recommend appropriate actions to address emerging
needs and gaps, including outside the Convention. This work
could include matters related to engaging relevant stakeholders
in advancing agreed actions related to loss and damage, such
as other UN institutions and civil society. Some of the issues
to consider under this work can be matters related to, inter
alia, migration, disaster risk reduction, agriculture and fisheries.
For example, the AC could engage with the UN International Strategy
for Disaster Reduction where parallels might be sought with
the governance system for addressing impacts of extreme events
and identify common actions on disaster risk reduction and humanitarian
intervention as part of a proactive and reactive response to
loss and damage.
A
particular issue that could be tasked to the AC in the interim
is to further explore the multiple challenges for developing
countries in operating catastrophe insurance and alternative
non-market instruments. The work under the work programme to
date appears to identify this area as a gap. This work could
be done in collaboration with the SBI as part of a second phase
of the programme of work.
3.
Role of the SBI. A second phase of the programme under the SBI
could help maintain the momentum and focus on some of the emerging
issues under the current three themes, particularly employing
leadership from constituted bodies and subsidiary bodies. Such
an extension should in no way detract from a separate parallel
process for making the international mechanism to address loss
and damage operational by COP 20. The current work programme
has identified opportunities and challenges for developing countries
with respect to approaches to loss and damage, many of which
have been mentioned in this article. For example, additional
work focused on the implementation of approaches to address
slow-onset events could be a key element under a second phase
of the work programme on loss and damage, including on how insurance
and non-insurance tools could be employed to manage adverse
effects from slow-onset processes whilst longer-term solutions
are being explored. As noted, slow-onset processes will require
action and measures to address loss as well as to remediate
and rehabilitate damage - to livelihoods, to both natural and
managed ecosystems, and other productive resources. The SBI
could work to further elaborate approaches to address slow-onset
processes, particularly at national level. In this sense, collaboration
with the ongoing work on the development and implementation
of National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) could be timely. Additionally,
the SBI could also work in collaboration with experts and stakeholders
on how to strengthen social safety nets, such as social security
and other measures directed to responding to local and community
needs.
Similarly,
discussions on the elaboration of modalities for support of
NAPs, including on the identification of needs at national level,
require special consideration of elements related to work on
loss and damage. The assessment of loss and damage, in particular,
could be an element included in the formulation of NAPs, and
bodies under the Convention, as well as other experts involved
in the modalities, could collaborate in a second phase of the
work programme to make loss and damage part of such ongoing
work.
The
work under themes 1 and 2 of the loss and damage work programme
has begun to identify and better understand slow-onset processes.
This work could be continued with inputs of the work ongoing
in the UNFCCC's Subsidiary Body on Scientific and Technological
Advice (SBSTA) under Article 5, including to enhance understanding
of tipping elements and tipping points, and possible early warning
mechanisms for the potential triggering of key tipping elements,
both ecological as well as societal. Based on this enhanced
understanding, this collaboration between the SBI Loss and Damage
second phase could recommend appropriate actions.
The
SBI could also continue to explore macroeconomic tools to manage
loss and damage to create a buffer for developing countries,
as well as help the international community better plan for
financial needs associated with the additional challenge posed
by loss and damage. This work could complement, without pre-empting
or replacing the need, the work required for the elaboration
of the modalities of an institutional mechanism on loss and
damage discussed above.
4.
Role of the financial mechanism. The level of funding required
to prevent, manage, and compensate for loss and damage related
to slow-onset impacts varies greatly from country to country
and between regions, although it is clear that overall significant
amounts will be needed above and beyond financial needs for
adaptation. Therefore, there is an immediate need for consideration
of financial resources required related to loss and damage,
in order to develop a collective understanding of where overlaps
might occur with current adaptation finance and where there
may be unique needs. Clearly resources specific for loss and
damage will need to be new and additional to existing resources.
Discussions on finance for loss and damage must be integrated
into ongoing processes related to long-term finance.
To
fully adhere to the precautionary principle in the context of
loss and damage requires the support and implementation of proactive
approaches to manage slow-onset climate hazards. Allocation
of finance to specific actions related to loss and damage, particularly
where synergies with adaptation are not sufficient, must become
part of the conversation on long-term finance.
B.
Promoting cooperation and coordination outside the Convention
While
the UNFCCC is the relevant policy forum to take concrete action
to address loss and damage, there are many critical issues that
do not fall within its mandate and the scope of its work. Therefore,
the extent to which the Convention is able to achieve its objective
under Article 2 will have consequences for matters outside the
Convention, and the Convention should seek to collaborate with
other institutions to address such issues. As mentioned before,
the AC could be requested to play an active role and engage
in actions necessary outside the Convention, in accordance with
its role of promoting synergy and strengthening engagement with
national, regional and international organisations, centres
and networks, in order to enhance the implementation of adaptation
actions, in particular in developing-country Parties, including
to identify and recommend appropriate actions to address emerging
needs and gaps. The AC could be charged with carrying out an
element of a continued work programme on loss and damage focused
on external cooperation and coordination. Such work could include:
1.
Integrating the work of regional centres and networks. Regional
centres and networks could have an important role to play in
the assessment and addressing of loss and damage, enhancing
synergies related to research and regionally appropriate mechanisms.
The AC could incorporate this coordination into its work plan
with regard to the work related to regional centres. The role
that some institutions are already playing, such as the CCRIF
on regional risk transfer mechanisms, and SPREP and CCCCC supporting
research, modelling, and decision-making, as well as project
implementation, exemplifies the role that these actors could
have both in the context of an international mechanism, as well
as under a second phase of the SBI work programme.
2.
Climate change-induced displacement, migration and planned relocation.
The Adaptation Framework already calls for work on measures
to enhance understanding, coordination and cooperation with
regard to climate change-induced displacement, migration and
planned relocation, where appropriate, at the national, regional
and international levels.1 The COP has the capacity to make
recommendations to other international bodies along these lines;
the Doha outcome could specifically target this issue and call
for joint discussions with the UN High Commissioner for Refugees
and the International Organisation for Migration as part of
the SBI Loss and Damage Work Programme Second Phase, with the
collaboration of the AC. Existing international frameworks
dealing with issues of displacement and migration will need
to be expanded to handle movement resulting from the pressures
imposed by slow-onset processes.
3.
Making international finance respond to the loss and damage
context. The Convention, as the policy-relevant forum, has the
capacity to convene discussions on how financial measures could
assist countries in coping with loss and damage, for example
deferral of payments to international institutions, debt relief,
and other similar measures. Financial shocks and lost development
opportunities from the potential for large-scale economic disruption
brought on by slow-onset climate change hazards will require
significant coordination of international trade and investment
flows. Addressing loss and damage resulting from slow-onset
processes, in the context of sustainable development, will require
different approaches than those used to address financial shocks
resulting from extreme events. For example, slow-onset impacts
may permanently diminish the tourism industry in many developing
countries due to the loss of ecosystems, animal and plant diversity,
and other tourist-attracting resources. These issues need to
be considered as part of the Loss and Damage Work Programme
Second Phase, in collaboration with actors outside the UNFCCC,
and could be systematically addressed through the international
mechanism.
Endnote
1.
Decision 1/CP.16, paragraph 14(f).
|
Loss
and damage in Africa
A
REPORT by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
provides robust scientific information on what can be expected
from changes in weather and climate extremes in various regions
and sub-regions of Africa.1 Droughts have affected the Sahel,
the Horn of Africa, and Southern Africa particularly since the
end of the 1960s. The report finds that, in relative terms,
Africa (especially Madagascar and Mozambique) has the largest
increase in physical exposure to tropical cyclones. Damages
from tropical cyclones are perhaps most commonly associated
with extreme wind, but storm-surge and freshwater flooding from
extreme rainfall generally cause the great majority of damage
and loss of life. Additionally, projected sea level rise is
expected to further compound tropical cyclone surge impacts.
Future
impacts of changing climate extremes may result in a broad range
of impacts on both human and ecosystems including economic losses,
impacts on different sectors such as tourism and agriculture,
on urban settlements and on access to water. The IPCC report
also finds with high confidence that economic losses from weather-
and climate-related disasters are increasing, albeit with large
inter-annual variability.
Agriculture
is affected directly by both temperature extremes and rainfall,
and is the economic sector most vulnerable and exposed to climate
extremes in Africa. As average temperatures rise, so will heat
extremes. Crops, animals and humans have physiological limits
to the temperature extremes they can tolerate, and crop and
livestock productivity will decrease with increasing temperatures.
Moreover, increasing nighttime temperatures can also reduce
crop yields. Overall, significant yield reductions are anticipated
in most major crops and most major regions in Africa. Average
predicted production losses by 2050 for African crops include
22% in maize, 17% sorghum, 17% millet, 18% groundnut, and 8%
cassava.2 Yield loss due to changes in both temperature and
rainfall will seriously affect food security across the African
continent, threatening permanent loss and damage to both lives
and livelihoods.
Permanent
loss and damage from slow-onset disasters will go far beyond
economic loss - livelihoods will be lost, territory will have
to be abandoned, and migrants from non-productive lands will
lose both homes and community. In Egypt, almost 800,000 hectares
of land has already been lost in the Nile Delta due to sea level
rise and saline intrusion; an estimated 12-15% of the productive
land in the delta could be lost in the coming century, and 6-7
million persons may eventually be forced to migrate.3
'Low-lying
coastal areas and mega-deltas are major sources of environmentally
induced migration. This is particularly true in countries such
as Bangladesh and Viet Nam, and regions such as the Egyptian
Nile Delta and the Niger Delta in Nigeria. Those regions are
vulnerable to slow-onset environmental phenomena related to
sea level rise and change in precipitation patterns and are
also increasingly affected by natural disasters, such as hurricanes,
floods, storm surges, soil erosion and soil salinisation.'4
Many
people will be forced to move from affected areas, including
from low-lying islands and coastlines and from areas affected
by permanent changes to the ecosystems and other resources on
which they depend for their lives and livelihoods. According
to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs
(OCHA), the number of people impacted by natural disasters in
Africa has doubled in the past two decades, up from 9 million
in 1989 to nearly 17 million in 2008.5 Those most vulnerable
to climate change will be hardest hit, particularly in drought-prone
areas. Industrialised countries should do their fair share in
helping these people build new lives, and in some instances
accept their fair share of the people exiled from their homes
and countries by climate change. The complicated issue of displacement,
migration and planned relocation requires adequate and considered
attention, including further research and collaboration among
a range of relevant international institutions. The African
Union adopted the Convention for the Protection and Assistance
of Internally Displaced Persons in Africa (or Kampala Convention),
though it has not entered into effect. The Convention would
be the first legally binding regional treaty recognising the
multiple causes of internal displacement, establishing state
responsibilities for the protection and assistance of internally
displaced persons whose displacement is the result of 'natural
or human made disasters, including climate change.'6
Endnotes
1
IPCC. 2012. Summary for Policymakers. In: Managing the Risks
of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation
[Field, C.B., V. Barros, T.F. Stocker, D. Qin, D.J. Dokken,
K.L. Ebi, M.D. Mastrandrea, K.J. Mach, G.-K. Plattner, S.K.
Allen, M. Tignor, and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. A Special Report
of Working Groups I and II of the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, and
New York, NY, USA, pp. 1-19.
2
Schlenker, W. and D.B. Lobell. 2010. Robust negative impacts
of climate change on African agriculture. Environmental Research
Letters 5, doi:10.1088/1748-9326/5/1/014010.
3
Arab Republic of Egypt. 2010. Egypt National Environmental,
Economic and Development Study (NEEDS) for climate change. Ministry
of State for Environmental Affairs, Cairo.
4
Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights of Migrants. 2012.
Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights of Migrants
to the United Nations General Assembly. A/67/299.
5
UN OCHA. 2009. Climate change to accelerate displacement
in Africa, top UN official warns. New York. http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=32682#.UJIGvG25JE
6
African Union. African Union Convention for the Protection
and Assistance of Internally Displaced Persons in Africa. http://www.au.int/en/content/african-union-convention-protection -and-assistance-internally-displaced-persons-africa
|
Loss
and damage in Asia
RECENT
climate change events across Asia - including the 2010 floods
in Pakistan, 2011 floods in Thailand, worsening soil degradation
in Iraq, and the increasing loss of Himalayan glaciers - have
impacted millions of people and resulted in tragic loss of life
and livelihoods, with massive social, environmental and economic
costs. For example:
Widespread flooding in Pakistan in 2010 affected 20 million
people, killing 1,781,1 displacing millions, and damaging 1.6
million homes. The World Bank places the cost of damage at $10
billion ($5 billion in the agriculture sector) while the estimated
recovery and reconstruction needs range from $6.7 billion to
$8.9 billion.2 As well as damage to infrastructure, which affected
governance, education, energy, business and communications,
the flooding led to widespread health risks from malaria, cholera,
and severe malnutrition. With the economy heavily dependent
on agriculture, the economic impacts are grave: 5.3 million
jobs were lost, according to the International Labour Organisation
(ILO); growth dropped from a predicted 4.5% to -2%/-5%; and
the $55 billion International Monetary Fund (IMF) debt will
grow as Pakistan is forced to borrow in order to recover.3 The
2011 floods in Sindh and Balochistan further impeded recovery,
affecting 9 million people - most of whom were still suffering
from the previous devastating flooding - and inflicting $3.7
billion in damage, $1.8 billion to agriculture alone.4 Minimum
reconstruction costs amount to an additional $2.7 billion. Many
of those displaced by the 2010 floods remain so.
Flooding also afflicted Thailand in 2011, affecting more than
3 million people - killing over 700, destroying 766,267 homes
and inundating 1.3 million hectares of paddy.5 The UN Economic
and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (UNESCAP) estimated
that the total cost of damage and loss across all sectors was
1.425 trillion baht ($45 billion) and the cost of recovery around
$47.5 billion.6 Among others, the manufacturing sector reported
losses of over $31.7 billion, the agriculture sector $1.3 billion,
and the housing sector sustained losses estimated at $2.7 billion.
Seven major industrial estates were flooded, and the production
of cars and electronic goods was suspended, with knock-on effects
for global supplies, prices and labour. The World Bank estimated
that the economic impact would include a reduction in real GDP
growth of 1.1 percentage points. The flooded industrial estates
had an accumulative insurance of $19.5 billion, of which 30%
may be paid out.7
Himalayan glaciers, the crucial 'Water Towers of Asia', are
disappearing, with transformational implications for the 1.3
billion people making their livelihoods in the river basins
fed by the glaciers, including from predicted increases in winter
drought and summer floods. In Nepal, the annual costs of the
floods and landslides were $14.7 million between 2001 and 2007,
according to the World Bank.8 The droughts cost Nepal up to
30% of its rice yield in 2007, as well as electricity, which
would have otherwise been generated using hydro-power. As the
glaciers melt, they form glacial lakes, some of which are growing
so fast that they pose a threat of glacial lake outburst floods.
The cost of assets that are at risk of being lost to these floods
is between $1.8 and $8.7 million,9 not to mention the number
of lives at risk, and the potential loss of traditional knowledge
and practices developed in this unique part of the world.
In Syria, increased deserti-fication threatens food, water,
and job security. Across the region agriculture will continue
to bear the brunt of the impacts of desertification, with the
International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) estimating
an additional $241 million per year is needed to counteract
the effects on nutrition.10 The UN Food and Agriculture Organisation
(FAO) says that in Syria, 79% of the population is at risk from
desertification and that the projected agricultural production
capacity is likely to decrease by 16% in coming years.11 Given
that agriculture provides 30% of the workforce with employment
and 25% of the country's GDP, this drop in productivity is extremely
worrying: there is already 26% youth unemployment. The Syrian
government reported to the UN Convention to Combat Desertification
that it has seen a 61% decrease in pasture productivity and
estimates the loss of crops at 5.7 billion Syrian pounds per
year. Economic impacts are already evident; Syria now only produces
cotton for its domestic market.12 After a severe drought in
2006-09 led to basic crop yield dropping by 79% in some areas
and vegetation for grazing to disappear, 1.5 million people
migrated to urban centres as the income of severely affected
populations nosedived by 90%, according to the World Bank.13
Endnotes
1
Reliefweb
2
World Bank: Preliminary Damage and Needs Assessment (2010)
3
Brookings
4
Pakistan Government: Flood Impact Assessment (2011)
5
Wikipedia - original sources in Thai
6
UNESCAP: Thailand floods damage and loss assessment: lessons
learned
7
Guy Carpenter: Floods in Thailand
8
World Bank, GFDRR: Vulnerability, Risk Reduction and Adaptation:
Nepal
9
World Resources Report
10
IFPRI: Climate Change Impacts on Agriculture and Costs of
Adaptation
11
FAO 29th Regional Conference for the Near East: Implications
for Agriculture
12
IISD: climate change and conflict in the Middle East
13
World Bank Development Horizons First/Second Quarter 2010:
Climate Change: Middle East faces looming challenges
|
Loss
and damage in Small Island Developing States
RECENT
climate change events in Small Island Developing States provide
vivid examples of loss and damage. These events have affected
lives and livelihoods, with massive social, environmental and
economic costs. For example:
The 2010 hurricane season in the Caribbean was the third most
active hurricane season on record, with most number of named
storms, according to historical records.1 The economic impact
on the region became unmanageable, requiring countries to look
for support outside existing regional risk management mechanisms,
such as the Caribbean Catastrophe Risk Insurance Facility (CCRIF).
In the case of St. Lucia, for example, total damage after Hurricane
Tomas was estimated at about 34% of its total GDP,2 and the
country sought immediate assistance nearing $8.2 million in
the form of loans through the Rapid Credit Facility and the
Emergency Natural Disaster Assistance of the International Monetary
Fund.
Salinisation in the Marshall Islands and the associated decline
in agricultural yields have been reported over the last decade.
Extreme events such as droughts and tropical cyclones can lead
to increased salinity of soils, thus impairing food production.
Higher rates of erosion and coastal land loss are expected in
many small islands as a consequence of the projected rise in
sea levels. In the case of the Majuro Atoll in the Marshall
Islands, it is estimated that for a 1-m rise in sea level, as
much as 80% of total land could be lost to production.3 Production
of key staple crops has been disrupted by climatic extremes
such as typhoons and droughts, shifting consumption to imported
foods, putting pressure on the national economy and with implications
for nutrition and health.4 FAO also reports increasing pressure
on coastal and marine environments, a particular concern given
the role of seafood in the diet.
Three different slow-onset processes threaten coral reefs around
the world - sea level rise, an increase in ocean temperatures
and ocean acidification - as well as extreme warming periods
of shorter duration. Potential long-lasting or permanent impacts
on coral reefs from climate change are immensely troubling,
as reef fish provide fundamental food security for millions,
and developing countries earn substantial amounts of foreign
exchange from reef tourism. Extreme heat in 2010 put the world's
coral reefs under such severe stress that scientists feared
widespread die-offs, endangering not only the richest ecosystems
in the ocean but also these extremely important fisheries.5
Endnotes
1.
NOAA. 2012. 2010 Atlantic Season Hurricane Database. NOAA,
Maryland.
2.
IMF. 2010. Request for Disbursement Under the Rapid Credit
Facility and Emergency Natural Disaster Assistance - St Lucia.
International Monetary Fund, Washington, DC.
3.
IPCC Third Assessment Report, 2004.
4.
FAO. 2008. Climate Change and Food Security in (Pacific Island
Counties. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations,
Rome
5.
Gillis, J. 2010. Extreme heat bleaches coral, and threat
is seen. New York Times, 20 September.
|
Loss
and damage in Latin America
RECENT
climate change impacts from Latin America provide vivid examples
to consider in the current assessment of approaches to addressing
loss and damage:
Long-term drought in the northern states of Mexico has devastated
cattle herds and crops. Over the last 12 months, 350,000 head
of cattle starved to death in the state of Chihuahua alone.
Maize production in 2011 in Chihuahua dropped from 100,000 metric
tons to just 500 tons. The head of the Climate Change Programme
at the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM) in Mexico
City wondered, 'Is it really a drought, or the region's new
climate?' A permanent shift in the regional climate would mean
thousands of farmers losing use of their lands and their livelihoods.
Flooding in Colombia and Venezuela in 2010 left devastating
consequences for society, with hundreds dead, millions of people
homeless, and damage in the order of billions of dollars to
their economies. In Colombia alone, the government estimate
of the damage caused was up to $6 billion. The floods and landslides
affected 70% of the country and left homeless more than 2.2
million people.
Andean glaciers are rapidly receding, and this will continue
due to slow-onset temperature rise, with significant near-term
impacts, including impacts on mountain ecosystems, on water
supplies for major cities, and on farmers' livelihoods and food
security in Peru, Ecuador and Bolivia. As with other slow-onset
impacts, such as sea level rise and the associated salinisation
of aquifers, where access to freshwater is slowly eroded, the
right to development is at the same time actively undermined.
Rather than increasing options to improve livelihoods, life
in mountain areas becomes more and more unviable.
The region of Central America has been severely hit by extreme
events in the last few decades, washing away years of investment
in sustainable development. In 1998 Hurricane Mitch struck when
Central America was just recovering from the economic effects
of El Ni¤o 1997-98, whose floods, forest fires, and droughts
had weakened the countries' productive systems. Honduras and
Nicaragua were the hardest hit, but the damage spread through
the whole region. The Pan American Health Organisation reported
that this event left almost 10,000 dead, and destroyed almost
4,000 schools, 600 health centres and 1,800 water and sanitation
services. The recovery from this disaster took years, with some
areas still showing signs of the devastation today.
|
*Third
World Resurgence No. 264/265, August/September 2012, pp 38-47
|