LOST AND DAMAGED IN THE UNFCCC

 

 

 

 

 

By: Luke Kemp

Deadlines

The 2015 deadline for the next climate agreement is providing the opportunity for the emergence of controversial political time bombs.   One of these potentially destructive issues is that of financially addressing loss and damages attributed to climate change.

The Three siblings

The idea is that countries suffering from the impacts ofclimate change can be aided through one of three interconnected mechanisms: international insurance; compensation and reparations; and risk management.   International insurance would cover impacts such as extreme weather events while compensation would be for slow-onset and progressive damages such as sea-level rise.  The idea is dear to both the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) and Least Developed Countries (LDCs), but it has not been easily discussed in the UNFCCC.

Battle-lines drawn…??

At COP18 the issue created a fissure between developed countries such as the United States and Australia, and the proponents of AOSIS and LDCs.  This almost resulted in a blocking of negotiations.   That scenario was narrowly avoided by putting off any decision on ‘institutional arrangements’ for loss and damages until COP19.

The controversy is primarily over the concept of compensation and reparations and any ‘institutional mechanism’ to address loss and damages.  There is a well-founded fear amongst developed countries that institutionalization of loss and damages or any reference to  ‘compensation’ or ‘reparation’ could denote legal responsibility and liability, creating the way for an avalanche of international litigation lawsuits.

Hardliners

But LDCs and AOSIS are adamant that funding for loss and damages cannot be counted as aid and streamlined under current arrangements.   Both sides are unwilling to back down on this issue, and there is no clear technical solution or compromise in sight.

Time bomb

Loss and damage may not be the sexiest issue on the COP19 agenda, but make no mistake that it is a political time bomb. The question is whether it will be defused before 2015 or if it explode, perhaps even in Warsaw.

Luke Kemp, Bachelor of Interdisciplinary Studies (Honours) (ANU), PhD Scholar (ANU)
Research Fellow, Ea rth System Governance Project
Fenner School of Environment and Society
Image Credit: rtcc.org