Loss and damage research for the global stocktake
Loss and damage research for the global stocktake
复制标题
全球盘点损失和损坏研究
DOI：
10.1038/s41558-020-0807-z
复制
发表时间：
2020
影响因子：
30.7
通讯作者：
P. Pringle
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Adelle Thomas;Olivia Serdeczny;P. Pringle
致编者：《巴黎协定》包含了全球盘点（GST）的概念，这是一个评估气候行动进展的过程。2023年的第一次商品及服务税将提供一个重要机会，审查在缓解、适应以及实施和支持手段方面取得的总体进展。部分由于小岛屿发展中国家（SIDS）和最不发达国家（LDCs）的大力倡导，其他专题领域——包括与避免、尽量减少和处理损失和损害（L&D）有关的努力——将成为这一进程的一部分2。然而，尽管自2010年以来关注L&D的文献有所增加（参考文献）。3,4)以及最近将其纳入IPCC报告和进程5，但在L&D方面仍存在重大研究空白，需要解决这些空白，以支持强有力的GST。首先，大多数L&D研究都是理论性的，侧重于从各种角度对L&D的概念化以及与其他政策框架的联系，实证研究明显较少4。虽然推进L&D的概念化很重要，但商品及服务税的重点是《巴黎协定》的实施以及加强行动和支持的机会。《联合国气候变化框架公约》（UNFCCC）本身在很大程度上侧重于提高对L&D的认识和加强对话，而在增加行动使发展中国家能够解决L&D6,7方面的进展要少得多。因此，迫切需要更多的经验信息，以帮助确定需要何种类型的行动和支持，哪些行动和支持在何种情况下起作用，以及如何提供这种行动和支持。自然科学和社会科学可以提供整个L&D范围的研究8，范围从潜在风险和预防性风险减少策略到观察到的影响和采取的反应性行动。其次，L&D研究没有以一种与UNFCCC L&D框架明确联系的方式呈现。例如，不到20%的L&D出版物利用了UNFCCC目前用于L&D活动分类的综合风险管理框架或参考了综合风险管理框架4。简单地使用表明研究与风险评估、减少、转移、保留或恢复有关的措辞，可能会增加其用于通知商品及服务税的可能性。此外，也有与L&D相关的研究，但没有使用特定的术语“损失和损害”。影响、风险、剩余风险和适应限制的研究与L&D密切相关。在摘要中明确使用这些术语或直接将结果与L&D联系起来是另一种简单但潜在有效的方法，可以增强与GST的相关性。此外，根据见解是否与缓慢发作或极端事件有关，以及是否描述了经济和非经济损失，对研究进行分类，将更有可能使它们被认为是相关的。转型适应的框架对如何定义和解释L&D也有潜在的影响，因此这两个概念之间的重叠值得进一步研究。第三，大多数关于学习与发展的研究来自发达国家，超过70%的学习与发展研究来自欧洲和北美的机构。需要更多来自发展中国家的研究，因为这在L&D的认识论和框架中起着作用。小岛屿发展中国家和最不发达国家一直大力支持将低收入和发展国家纳入《联合国气候变化框架公约》，至关重要的是，这些群体的经验和观点应在《全球服务指南》中得到充分体现。更系统地研究小岛屿发展中国家和最不发达国家特别是如何应对或未能应对L&D至关重要，包括加大努力将观测到的影响归因于人为气候变化10,11。这可能包括审议L&D术语如何反映和适用于最不发达国家和小岛屿发展中国家的实际情况。例如，由于适应方案越来越多地涉及权衡，不同利益攸关方对适应的限制可能有截然不同的体验，这表明可能需要更细致入微地应用术语12,13。进一步和更深入地综合非经济损失也将是有益的，特别是在适应能力受到限制迫使考虑采取更激进应对措施的情况下。商品及服务税将每五年征收一次。如果没有快速、大量和持续的减排，将意味着气候风险将继续上升，不可避免的减排和发展所占的比例将越来越大，尤其是在发展中国家。这意味着，按照目前的排放轨迹，将会有越来越多的关于L&D的报告。与《联合国气候变化框架公约》L&D框架相关的经验性研究，以及对小岛屿发展中国家和最不发达国家开展更多研究需求的回应，将有助于建立强有力的GST，反映在实现《巴黎协定》目标方面取得的进展。❐
To the Editor — The Paris Agreement includes the concept of a global stocktake (GST), a process by which progress on climate action is assessed1. The first GST in 2023 will provide a critical opportunity to review overall progress made on mitigation, adaptation and means of implementation and support. Due in part to strong advocacy by small island developing states (SIDS) and least developed countries (LDCs), additional thematic areas — including efforts related to averting, minimizing and addressing loss and damage (L&D) — will be part of the process2. However, despite the increase in literature focused on L&D since 2010 (refs. 3,4) and its recent inclusion in IPCC reports and processes5, there remain significant research gaps on L&D that need to be addressed to support a robust GST. First, most L&D research has been theoretical, focused on conceptualizations of L&D from a variety of perspectives and linkages to other policy frameworks, with significantly less empirical research4. While advancing conceptualization of L&D is important, the GST focuses on Paris Agreement implementation and opportunities for enhanced action and support. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) itself has largely focused on improving knowledge and strengthening dialogue about L&D, with considerably less advancements on increasing action to enable developing countries to address L&D6,7. Thus, there is a critical need for more empirical information to aid in identification of where and what type of action and support is needed, what works and in which contexts, and how such action and support can be delivered. Research can be provided from both the natural and social sciences along the entire L&D spectrum8, ranging from potential risks and preventive risk reduction strategies to observed impacts and reactive actions taken. Second, L&D research is not presented in a way that is clearly linked to the UNFCCC framing of L&D. For example, less than 20% of L&D publications utilize a framing of or refer to comprehensive risk management, which is currently used within the UNFCCC to categorize L&D activities4. Simply using wording that indicates the research relates to risk assessment, reduction, transfer, retention or recovery may increase the likelihood that it will be used to inform the GST. Additionally, there is research relevant to L&D but does not use the particular term ‘loss and damage’. Research on impacts, risks, residual risks and limits to adaptation are closely linked to L&D. Explicitly using these terms in abstracts or directly relating results to L&D is another simple but potentially effective way of enhancing relevance for the GST. Further, categorization of research according to whether insights relate to slow onset or extreme events, and whether economic and non-economic losses are described, would make it more likely that they are recognized as relevant. The framing of transformative adaptation also has potential implications for how L&D is defined and accounted for, and therefore the overlap between these two concepts is worthy of further investigation. Third, the majority of research on L&D has originated from the developed world, with over 70% of L&D studies coming from institutions in Europe and North America4. More research originating from the developing world is needed, as this plays a role in epistemologies and framings of L&D. SIDS and LDCs have been strong proponents of including L&D as part of the UNFCCC and it is critical that the experiences and perspectives of these groups are well represented in the GST9. More systematic research into how SIDS and LDCs in particular are coping or failing to cope with L&D is essential, including an increased effort in attributing observed impacts to anthropogenic climate change10,11. This might include consideration of how L&D terminology reflects, and is applied to, the contextual realities of LDCs and SIDS. For example, as adaptation options increasingly involve trade-offs, limits to adaptation may be experienced quite differently by different stakeholders, suggesting a more nuanced application of terminology may be required12,13. Further and deeper integration of non-economic losses would also be beneficial, particularly in situations where limits to adaptation are forcing consideration of more radical responses. The GST will be conducted on a five-yearly basis. Absent rapid, substantial and sustained emission reductions will mean that climatic risks will continue to rise with an increasing share of unavoidable L&D, particularly in developing countries. This means that on the current emissions trajectory there will be more and more to report on L&D. Research that is empirical, linked to UNFCCC framings of L&D and responds to the need for more research from SIDS and LDCs will contribute to a robust GST that reflects progress made towards achieving the goals of the Paris Agreement. ❐