Framing Loss and Damage from climate change as the failure of Sustainable Development

Boda, Chad; Scown, Murray W.; Faran, Turaj; Nastar, Maryam; Dorkenoo, Kelly; Chaffin, Brian C.; Boyd, Emily

doi:10.1080/17565529.2020.1851640

Cited by 15 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To frame this review of L&D, we recognize that the global failure or inability to maintain a sustainable development, which includes efforts aimed at mitigating and adapting to climate change, is the underlying causal factor in the manifestation of L&D. As a result, approaches taken to avoid, minimize, or address L&D are influenced by the more general sustainable development strategies adopted which clarify what should be sustained when navigating tradeoffs between economic development and environmental conservation (Boda et al 2020). The main benefit of framing L&D from the perspective of sustainable development is that it provides a more comprehensive, coherent, and integrative framing of L&D than other approaches (i.e., risk-based) by aligning the normative aims of certain development strategies with L&D concepts, metrics, and forms of governance.…”

Section: Methods and Analysis: Identifying Corresponding Theories Of Sustainable Development In Landd Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Loss and damage from climate change and implicit assumptions of sustainable development

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Loss and damage from climate change, recognized as a unique research and policy domain through the Warsaw International Mechanism (WIM) in 2013, has drawn increasing attention among climate scientists and policy makers. Labelled by some as the “third pillar” of the international climate regime—along with mitigation and adaptation—it has been suggested that loss and damage has the potential to catalyze important synergies with other international agendas, particularly sustainable development. However, the specific approaches to sustainable development that inform loss and damage research and how these approaches influence research outcomes and policy recommendations remain largely unexplored. We offer a systematic analysis of the assumptions of sustainable development that underpins loss and damage scholarship through a comprehensive review of peer-reviewed research on loss and damage. We demonstrate that the use of specific metrics, decision criteria, and policy prescriptions by loss and damage researchers and practitioners implies an unwitting adherence to different underlying theories of sustainable development, which in turn impact how loss and damage is conceptualized and applied. In addition to research and policy implications, our review suggests that assumptions about the aims of sustainable development determine how loss and damage is conceptualized, measured, and governed, and the human development approach currently represents the most advanced perspective on sustainable development and thus loss and damage. This review supports sustainable development as a coherent, comprehensive, and integrative framework for guiding further conceptual and empirical development of loss and damage scholarship.

show abstract

Section: Methods and Analysis: Identifying Corresponding Theories Of Sustainable Development In Landd Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Loss and damage from climate change and implicit assumptions of sustainable development

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Sustainable development offers a fully comprehensive, integrative, and coherent approach to understanding and addressing anthropogenic climate change-driven impacts (Boda et al 2020). Multiple theories of sustainable development are (implicitly) informing research and practice in this area, each with a unique set of core concepts, evaluative criteria, informational requirements, and related policy prescriptions (Boda et al 2021).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Empirical evidence is required to understand the comparative advantages and disadvantages of competing DRR or loss and damage approaches at the broader level of development strategies and priorities, not only at the level of appropriate metrics and tactics within DRR. Indeed, DRR itself needs to be situated; that is, while DRR is indispensable as a toolbox for avoiding, minimizing, and addressing risks from CC, it generally lacks orientation regarding how such activities as mitigation, adaptation and addressing loss and damage from CC contribute to broader normative development strategies, which theories of sustainable development provide (see Boda et al 2020). These levels, however, are of course intertwined.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Forgotten coast, forgotten people: sustainable development and disproportionate impacts from Hurricane Michael in Gulf County, Florida

2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A central challenge for sustainable development is how societies are to avoid, minimize or address impacts from anthropogenic climate change. However, competing perspectives on “what should be sustained” lead to widely different understandings of what mitigation, adaptation and loss and damage entail and how best to approach them. We provide a novel conceptual and empirical comparison of two contrasting sustainable development-based approaches to the study of impacts from climate-related extreme events: Capital Theory and capability-based Human Development. We use our analysis of immediate residential property value and housing capacity impacts caused by Hurricane Michael in Gulf County, Florida, to demonstrate how the sustainable development theory used to assess and interpret impacts greatly affects the identification of whom and where is objectively “most impacted.” Through a comparison of the two approaches, we identify relative advantages and disadvantages, emphasizing that while both provide coherent, comprehensive, and integrative approaches to climate-related impact assessment, the capability approach is much less likely to lead researchers and practitioners to overlook the most disadvantaged communities when compared to Capital Theory.

show abstract

“…Sustainable Development (SD) offers a fully comprehensive, integrative and coherent approach to understanding and addressing anthropogenic climate change-driven impacts (Boda et al, 2020). Multiple theories of SD are (implicitly) informing research and practice in this area, each with a unique set of core concepts, evaluative criteria, informational requirements and related policy prescriptions (Boda et al, 2021).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Empirical evidence is required to understand the comparative advantages and disadvantages of competing DRR or loss and damage approaches at the broader level of development strategies and priorities, not only at the level of appropriate metrics and tactics within DRR. Indeed, DRR itself needs to be situated; that is, while DRR is indispensable as a tool box for avoiding, minimizing and addressing risks from CC, it generally lacks orientation regarding how such activities as mitigation, adaptation and addressing loss and damage from CC contribute to broader normative development strategies, which theories of SD provide (see Boda et al, 2020). These levels, however, are of course intertwined.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implicit Sustainable Development Theories Obscure Disproportionate Impacts from Climate-related Extreme Events: Example from Hurricane Michael and Housing Losses on Florida’s Forgotten Coast

Boda

Scown

Faran

2021

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A central challenge for sustainable development (SD) is how societies are to avoid, minimize or address impacts from anthropogenic climate change. However, competing perspective on “what should be sustained” lead to widely different understandings of what mitigation, adaptation and loss and damage entail and how best to approach them. We provide a novel conceptual and empirical comparison of two contrasting SD-based theoretical approaches to the study of impacts from climate-related extreme events: Capital Theory and Human Development. We use our analysis of immediate residential property value and housing capacity impacts caused by Hurricane Michael in Gulf County, Florida, to demonstrate how the theory used to assess and interpret impacts greatly affects the identification of whom and where is considered to be objectively “most impacted”. From our comparative analysis and discussion, we conclude that, while currently underutilized, Human Development is the more advanced approach to SD oriented climate-impact research and policy when compared to Capital Theory.

show abstract

Framing Loss and Damage from climate change as the failure of Sustainable Development

Cited by 15 publications

References 50 publications

Loss and damage from climate change and implicit assumptions of sustainable development

Loss and damage from climate change and implicit assumptions of sustainable development

Forgotten coast, forgotten people: sustainable development and disproportionate impacts from Hurricane Michael in Gulf County, Florida

Implicit Sustainable Development Theories Obscure Disproportionate Impacts from Climate-related Extreme Events: Example from Hurricane Michael and Housing Losses on Florida’s Forgotten Coast

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About