Executive Summary

With the world being marred by the increasing frequency and intensity of extreme weather events, the focus should be on addressing the consequent climate-related impacts that are commonly referred to as “loss and damage”. According to the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO), the world, on average, has experienced a weather- or climate-related disaster every day over the past 50 years, leading to daily losses amounting to over USD 202 million (WMO 2021). “Loss and Damage”¹ describes the manifestation of adverse climate change impacts that cannot be avoided either through adaptation or mitigation efforts (UNEP 2014). However, in the absence of mutually agreed-upon definitions and methodologies to assess L&D, what ensues is a lack of clarity, consistency, and coordination on targeted climate action.

In 2013, the UNFCCC set in motion the Warsaw International Mechanism (WIM) to address loss and damage associated with climate change impacts (Rai and Acharya 2020). In 2015, the Paris Agreement provided further recognition of the issue in Article 8², alongside mitigation and adaptation, giving it the place it deserved. However, currently, much of the discussion still focuses on adapting to the increasing effects of climate change even as irreparable disruptions to ecosystems and communities continue to occur.

In light of such climate reality, the inclusion of L&D in the Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) can help ensure that the issue receives necessary attention while building the case for stronger climate action. With this in mind, we conduct an in-depth literature review where we map all the latest NDCs submitted by countries for mentions of “L&D” and highlight issues, gaps, and challenges with recommended actions for policymakers to address loss and damage globally.

Figure ES1 uncovers insights on major gaps and challenges in the L&D debate.

Our analysis reveals several fundamental gaps and challenges leading to slow progress in international negotiations on L&D. We highlight the key gaps:

• Data and information gap
  • Lack of a common and standard definition
  • Limited focus on non-economic loss and damage
  • Poor technical expertise to measure and quantify loss and damage
  • Lack of empirical data
• Lack of integrated approaches and coherence in the current L&D institutional ecosystem
• Poor mobilisation of L&D finance
• Absence of a unified framework to address loss and damage

Overview of existing gaps and challenges

As we move ahead, actions to address these gaps must be implemented urgently and at scale, alongside adaptation efforts. Further, nations must include targets and measures relevant to L&D in formal communications. Since the Paris Agreement recognises L&D as a separate issue from mitigation and adaptation, Annex-I (developed countries) and Non-Annex-I (developing nations) countries can and must include information on the same⁴. This can also serve as an input to the Global Stocktake (GST) process⁵. It is important to note that loss and damage reporting under the new Enhanced Transparency framework is encouraged; however, deliberation of loss and damage in the GST is mandatory. Hence, providing this information in the GST can improve and accelerate the process as well as strengthen the demand for corrective measures. Thus, the discourse around L&D must not be restricted to siloes but should be in symphony with the larger debate on action against climate change.