Equalising the evidence base for adaptation and loss and damages

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.