Author
Abstract
Article 8 in the Paris Agreement is devoted exclusively to climate change-driven loss and damage. It follows that the planned ‘global stocktake’ of the Paris Agreement, which will assess progress toward reaching the Agreement’s goals, should also cover loss and damage. Determining how the assessment for Article 8 should be framed is a question that remains largely unexplored. Doing so is challenging for at least two reasons: the prevailing knowledge gaps in loss and damage research and the contentious nature of inter-governmental negotiations about loss and damage. This article identifies the key framing questions that ought to be answered in the context of Article 8, prior to conducting the ‘global stocktake’. Key among these framing questions are critical structural problems, stemming mainly from underrepresentation of Global South worldviews, and from major data gaps and methodological difficulties inherent to assessing progress with managing loss and damage. A ‘global stocktake’ of Article 8 provides a window of opportunity for making headway on the inter-governmental debate about loss and damage, and the direction of the research efforts that are needed to inform such debate. This article concludes by reflecting on the stakes that developing countries have in that window of opportunity. Key policy insightsImperfect as its output might be, the first global stocktake under the Paris Agreement can help identify and act upon the key barriers that today prevent us from conducting a comprehensive assessment of progress with regard to the goals of Article 8 on loss and damage.The global stocktake should not shy away from considering loss and damage, and should ideally conduct separate assessments for losses and for damages.Developing country governments can use the global stocktake to raise the profile of climate change-driven loss, which is comparatively under-researched, while promoting a concerted effort to fund high-quality domestic research.
Suggested Citation
Daniel Puig, 2022.
"Loss and damage in the global stocktake,"
Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(2), pages 175-183, February.
Handle:
RePEc:taf:tcpoxx:v:22:y:2022:i:2:p:175-183
DOI: 10.1080/14693062.2021.2023452
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:tcpoxx:v:22:y:2022:i:2:p:175-183. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/tcpo20 .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.