Making sense of the politics in the climate change loss & damage debate.
Making sense of the politics in the climate change loss & damage debate.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2020.102133
复制
发表时间：
2020-09
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Vanhala L
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Calliari E;Serdeczny O;Vanhala L
运用政治民族志敏感性可以帮助解开围绕L和D的政治。L和D不是一个铁板一块，但在《联合国气候变化框架公约》下催化了尚未解决的冲突。补偿是看得见的，但对不同的当事人意味着不同的事情。一些缔约方仍然质疑L&D作为气候行动的第三支柱。拆开政治可以提高审议的透明度。与气候变化影响有关的华沙损失和损害国际机制(L和D)成立于2013年，目的是促进：1)知识产生；2)协调；3)支持《气候公约》下的损失和损害处理。迄今为止，WIM执行委员会(执行委员会)开展的工作侧重于提高对这一问题的了解和认识，并促进与相关利益攸关方的合作。履行WIM的第三项行动和支持功能一直比较滞后，L发展公司的“政治”性质经常被指责为这一点。各方之间的关键争论包括L&D治理相对于适应空间的定位，以及围绕国家责任和赔偿的斗争。为了促进对实施方案的讨论，最近的研究建议将L与发展的辩论的各个方面去政治化；然而，我们对L&发展的国际治理领域内的政治是如何理解的却知之甚少。本文通过找出在《联合国气候变化框架公约》L和《联合国气候变化框架公约》谈判中引发争执的复杂和潜在的问题，将“政治”的分析带入了图景。它为不同的规范框架和物质利益影响辩论的方式提供了中心舞台，并挑战了当前L和D文学中忽视这一决策领域的社会历史和政治基础的倾向。我们采用了定性的多方法研究设计，该设计基于对138个官方政党的意见书和声明的内容分析，以及对现任和前任L&D谈判代表的14次精英访谈，并建立在对COPS和WIM会议三年参与者观察的基础上。我们以一种政治人种学的敏感性来处理这些数据，试图探索不同数据来源内部和之间的意义是如何构建的。我们的实证结果表明，L和D并不是一场铁板一块的争论，而是催化了不同但相互交织的未解决的讨论。我们确定了五个争议领域，包括围绕赔偿的持续争议；关于L&D作为气候行动第三支柱的合法性的冲突；辩论的技术和政治层面之间的紧张关系；关于对所造成的损失和损害的责任的辩论；以及L&D与《公约》下其他悬而未决的问题的联系。
Deploying a political ethnographic sensibility can help to unpack the politics around L&D. L&D is not a monolith, but catalyses unresolved clashes under the UNFCCC. Compensation is a visible one but means different things to different Parties. Some Parties still question L&D as a third pillar of climate action. Unpacking the politics can enhance transparency in deliberations. The Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage (L&D) associated with Climate Change Impacts (WIM) was established in 2013 to advance i) knowledge generation; ii) coordination and iii) support to address losses and damages under the UNFCCC. So far, the work undertaken by the WIM Executive Committee (ExCom) has focused on enhancing understanding and awareness of the issue and promoting collaboration with relevant stakeholders. Delivering on the WIM’s third function on action and support has lagged behind, and ‘the political’ nature of L&D has often been blamed for this. Key terrains of contention among Parties have included the positioning of L&D governance vis-à-vis the adaptation space and struggles around state liability and compensation. As a way to facilitate discussion on implementation options, recent research has suggested de-politicising aspects of the L&D debate; yet we have very little insight into how the politics are understood within the realm of international L&D governance. This paper brings an analysis of ‘the political’ into the picture by identifying the complex and underlying issues that fuel contention within UNFCCC L&D negotiations. It gives centre stage to the way different framings of norms and material interests affect the debate, and challenges the tendency in current L&D literature to overlook the socio-historical and political underpinnings of this area of policy-making. We employ a qualitative multi-methods research design which draws on content analysis of 138 official Parties’ submissions and statements, 14 elite interviews with key current and former L&D negotiators and is built on a foundation of 3 years of participant observation at COPs and WIM meetings. We approach this data with a political ethnographic sensibility that seeks to explore how meanings are constructed within and across different sources of data. Our empirical results show that, rather than being a monolithic dispute, L&D catalyses different yet intertwined unresolved discussions. We identify five areas of contention, including continued disputes around compensation; conflicts on the legitimacy of L&D as a third pillar of climate action; tensions between the technical and political dimension of the debate; debates over accountability for losses and damages incurred; and the connection of L&D with other unresolved issues under the Convention.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
2.7
作者：
Baiocchi, Gianpaolo;Connor, Brian T.
通讯作者：
Connor, Brian T.
影响因子：
4.8
作者：
Campbell, Lisa M.;Hagerman, Shannon;Gray, Noella J.
通讯作者：
Gray, Noella J.
影响因子：
30.7
作者：
Boyd, Emily;James, Rachel A.;Otto, Friederike E. L.
通讯作者：
Otto, Friederike E. L.
影响因子：
5.1
作者：
Calliari, Elisa
通讯作者：
Calliari, Elisa
影响因子：
30.7
作者：
Barnes, Jessica;Dove, Michael;Yager, Karina
通讯作者：
Yager, Karina