Climate litigation is increasingly a feature of international climate policy. However, loss and damage cases have mostly been unsuccessful due to tensions around uncertainty, attribution, and the relationship between climate change and extreme weather events. While there is consensus that Annex I Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) have contributed more to historical greenhouse gas emissions than non-Annex I Parties have, there is great reluctance on their part to take responsibility for loss and damage. Considering the shortcomings of climate litigation and the impasse in the UNFCCC, we propose an alternative, non-judicial approach to addressing loss and damage-restorative justice. Applying a four-stage framework, we draw on the experience of non-Annex I Parties in the Caribbean with Hurricanes Irma and Maria in 2017 to (1) argue that existing attribution models can help identify restorative justice cases; (2) scope a role for the Warsaw International Mechanism in process design and preparation; (3) make a case for truth and reconciliation conferences, and restitution, as part of the restorative dialogue; and (4) call for the integration of restorative justice norms into global climate governance as a pathway for progressing negotiations.

No abstract

The worldwide climate research community has talent, dedication, and a clear sense of knowledge gaps. It needs to close those gaps and convey its messages effectively to user communities.

No abstract

The successful design, implementation and management of the institutional arrangements for climate change adaptation are critical components of sustainable development. This is especially true for small island developing states (SIDS), a group of 58 countries spread across three main geographic regions, which are acknowledged as being disproportionately vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. In many instances, the dynamics of these arrangements in SIDS are poorly understood and documented. This study helps to fill this gap by identifying and analyzing “networks of action situations” through semi-structured interviews with 14 national and international climate change officials and practitioners in four SIDS (Comoros, Maldives, Seychelles, and Singapore) in the Atlantic and Indian Oceans region. We find that there are a few strategic actors involved in multiple, mutually reinforcing and sometimes conflicting arrangements, which are simultaneously being shaped and reshaped at different scales. We also find varying patterns of power, politics and participation that act as both drivers of and barriers to adaptation in these countries. By deconstructing institutional interlinkages and strategic feedback loops, this paper contributes to a broader understanding of the complexities of environmental governance in small jurisdictions.