Loss and damage: a critical discourse analysis of Parties' positions in climate change negotiations
Loss and damage: a critical discourse analysis of Parties' positions in climate change negotiations
复制标题
DOI：
10.1080/13669877.2016.1240706
复制
发表时间：
2018-01-01
影响因子：
5.1
通讯作者：
Calliari, Elisa
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Calliari, Elisa
随着《巴黎协定》的通过，长达数年的与气候变化影响相关的损失和损害谈判(L和D)达到了一个里程碑，批准了2013年建立的华沙国际机制(WIM)的永久存在。WIM旨在促进知识收集、协调和支持，以解决与脆弱发展中国家的极端和缓慢发作事件有关的L与发展问题(第2/CP.19号决定)。尽管L是最近气候变化谈判中最具争议的问题之一，但在国际关系领域却鲜有引起关注。本文旨在通过重构发展中国家和发达国家在L问题上的谈判立场的产生和演变来弥补这一差距。它采用批评性语篇分析方法，建立在费尔克劳夫的批评语篇分析的三维框架之上，以第2/CP.19号决定为核心交际事件。这一决定一贯在三个不同的层面上进行分析：作为文本(微观尺度)；作为话语实践(中观尺度)；作为社会实践(宏观尺度)。分析利用了广泛的材料，包括以前的决定、高级别部分声明和缔约方提交的材料。它重建了各方对L与适应空间的定位(L&D作为适应的一部分，或作为适应之外的)的相互矛盾的观点，以及支持这些观点的科学、伦理和法律论点。它特别强调了在《巴黎协定》中列入关于L和D的一条具体条款之前，补偿问题在确定发展中国家影响《气候公约》进程的能力方面具有的战略重要性。尽管要求赔偿的呼声可能因华沙和巴黎谈判而失去势头，但该报辩称，它们的潜力远未耗尽。它们实际上意味着气候正义的更一般要求，而《气候公约》尚未处理这一要求。
The years-long negotiations on loss and damage (L&D) associated with climate change impacts reached a milestone with the adoption of the Paris Agreement, sanctioning the permanence of the Warsaw International Mechanism (WIM) created in 2013. The WIM aims at advancing knowledge gathering, coordination and support to address L&D associated with extreme and slow onset events in vulnerable developing countries (Decision 2/CP.19). Despite being among the most controversial issues to be recently treated in climate change negotiation, L&D has attracted little attention in the field of international relations. This paper aims at addressing this gap by reconstructing the emergence and evolution of the negotiating positions on L&D of developing and developed countries. It employs a critical discourse analytical approach and builds on Fairclough's three-dimensional framework for critical discourse analysis, taking decision 2/CP.19 as the core communicative event. Consistently, the decision is analysed at three different levels: as a text (micro-scale); as a discursive practice (meso-scale); and as a social practice (macro-scale). The analysis makes use of a wide range of materials including previous decisions, High Level Segment statements and Parties submissions. It reconstructs Parties' conflicting views on the positioning of L&D vis-a-vis the adaptation space (L&D as a part of, or as beyond adaptation) and the scientific, ethical and legal arguments employed to support these standpoints. It highlights, in particular, the strategic importance which the compensation argument' had in determining developing countries' capacity to influence the UNFCCC process up to the inclusion of a specific article on L&D in the Paris Agreement. While calls for compensation might have lost momentum as a result of the Warsaw and Paris talks, the paper argues that their potential is far from exhausted. They in fact imply a more general request for climate justice which the UNFCCC has not yet addressed.