Science for Loss and Damage. Findings and Propositions

The debate on "Loss and Damage" (L&D) has gained traction over the <br/>last few years. Supported by growing scientific evidence of anthropogenic climate <br/>change amplifying frequency, intensity and duration of climate-related hazards as <br/>well as observed increases in climate-related impacts and risks in many regions, the "Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage" was established in 2013 <br/>and further supported through the Paris Agreement in 2015. Despite advances, the debate currently is broad, diffuse and somewhat confusing, while concepts, meth <br/>ods and tools, as well as directions for policy remain vague and often contested. <br/>This book, a joint effort of the Loss and Damage Network - a partnership effort by <br/>scientists and practitioners from around the globe - provides evidence-based insight <br/>into the L&D discourse by highlighting state-of-the-art research conducted across <br/>multiple disciplines, by showcasing applications in practice and by providing insight <br/>into policy contexts and salient policy options. This introductory chapter summarises <br/>key findings of the twenty-two book chapters in terms of five propositions. These <br/>propositions, each building on relevant findings linked to forward-looking sugges <br/>tions for research, policy and practice, reflect the architecture of the book, whose <br/>sections proceed from setting the stage to critical issues, followed by a section on <br/>methods and tools, to chapters that provide geographic perspectives, and finally to a <br/>section that identifies potential policy options. The propositions comprise (1) Risk <br/>management can be an effective entry point for aligning perspectives and debates, <br/>if framed comprehensively, coupled with climate justice considerations and linked <br/>to established risk management and adaptation practice; (2) Attribution science is <br/>advancing rapidly and fundamental to informing actions to minimise, avert, and <br/>address losses and damages; (3) Climate change research, in addition to identifying <br/>physical/hard limits to adaptation, needs to more systematically examine soft limits <br/>to adaptation, for which we find some evidence across several geographies globally; <br/>(4) Climate risk insurance mechanisms can serve the prevention and cure aspects <br/>emphasised in the L&D debate but solidarity and accountability aspects need further <br/>attention, for which we find tentative indication in applications around the world; (5) <br/>Policy deliberations may need to overcome the perception that L&D constitutes a <br/>win-lose negotiation "game" by developing a more inclusive narrative that highlights <br/>collective ambition for tackling risks, mutual benefits and the role of Transformation.