Equalising the evidence base for adaptation and loss and damages
Friederike E. L. Otto and
Frederick Fabian
Global Policy, 2024, vol. 15, issue S5, 64-74
Abstract:
Since the UNFCCC Paris Agreement came into force after 2015 international climate policy rests on three pillars: mitigation, adaptation and loss and damage. However, while there are clear agreed‐upon metrics to measure emissions, base mitigation goals against and hold countries and companies accountable to, the evidence base for the impacts of climate change to inform adaptation and loss and damage is very different. There are no agreed‐upon metrics, nor are there guidelines or criteria to delineate the impacts of climate change from other drivers of losses and damages. This imbalance is reflected in the lack of ability to set and enforce goals. With a new body of scientific evidence introduced in the IPCC, we argue that this can change. Especially with an increasing number of climate litigation cases being recognised as a legitimate root to justice, and thus being given due consideration in courts, the imbalance in evidence could change and put adaptation and loss and damage on more equal footing with mitigation.
Date: 2024
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:
Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.13269
Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
HTML/Text
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bla:glopol:v:15:y:2024:i:s5:p:64-74
Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.blackwell ... bs.asp?ref=1758-5880
Access Statistics for this article
Global Policy is currently edited by David Held, Patrick Dunleavy and Eva-Maria Nag
More articles in Global Policy from London School of Economics and Political Science Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().