Climate change, often discussed in terms of economic impacts, has far-reaching consequences that extend well beyond monetary measurements. While the Social Cost of Carbon (SCC) has been a useful tool in assessing the economic damages of carbon emissions, it falls short of capturing the Non-Economic Losses and Damages (NELDs) that climate change inflicts upon communities and ecosystems.
Broadly speaking, the SCC quantifies the future economic losses of each additional ton of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, which can be used as a tool to assess the policies designed for combating climate change. It evaluates monetary impacts, such as reduced agricultural productivity, increased healthcare expenses, and property damage from extreme weather events. However, when it comes to integrating NELDs in SCC, it gets a little tricky.
By definition, NELDs refer to the losses that are “not commonly traded in markets” [1]. Due to their intangibility and susceptibility to systematisation and quantification, NELDs have been overlooked in quantitative indicator-based evaluations, which has resulted in the current lack of a systematic understanding of them.
NELDs can include a wide range of social and ecological factors, such as direct or indirect threats to human health, culture and society, and the natural environment itself [2]. NELDs are an important factor when assessing SCCs for Small Island Developing States (SIDS) and developing countries that are vulnerable to the effects of climate change [3].
Failing to incorporate NELDs in such instances can lead to an underestimation of actual total losses and damages, which in turn could lead to inappropriate solutions/compensation mechanisms for the affected countries. Therefore, not only is it crucial to account for NELDs, but it is also important to devise mechanisms that aid in a holistic conceptualisation of NELDs, which in turn would bolster the aid efforts for SIDS and climate change-vulnerable developing countries.
When it comes to NELDs, relying on conventional epistemic authorities is not the right approach – local communities and indigenous groups face a disproportionate impact brought about by the impacts of climate change. Indigenous communities, for example, often possess deep ecological knowledge, which is passed down through generations. Furthermore, their involvement in understanding NELDs can also help to better conceptualise the social and cultural aspects of NELDs, thus aiding in the formulation of better adaptation strategies [4].
Epistemic authority is influenced by power dynamics, with dominant knowledge systems eclipsing others that are marginalised. There should be actions taken to correct these power disparities. Bringing together multiple knowledge systems and scientific skills can result in more comprehensive and culturally relevant NELD prevention methods. This method acknowledges that NELDs are profoundly social and cultural concerns in addition to being strictly scientific or technological problems. The inclusion of empirical-based methods, such as surveys and interviewing communities vulnerable to climate change would greatly help in a better understanding of NELDs.
Another issue associated with NELDs is their treatment as a national issue. Treating them as strictly national concerns eludes the opportunity for forging cooperative alliances and jointly tackling these problems. Furthermore, most of the SIDS and vulnerable countries from the Global South lack the resources to address NELDs on their own. If NELDs are only addressed at the national level, various nations may employ a variety of methods and policies, resulting in a fragmented response. This lack of cooperation may make it more difficult to combat NELDs on an international scale.
However, A one-size-fits-all transnational approach may not adequately account for the varying degrees of vulnerability and capacity among nations. Vulnerable countries may feel that their unique challenges and needs are not adequately considered, potentially exacerbating inequalities.
By blending local expertise and national policies with international cooperation, we can better address the nuanced and interconnected nature of NELDs on a global scale [5]. This approach acknowledges the importance of local context while leveraging the collective resources and expertise of the international community for a more effective response to NELDs. NELDs and climate change provide chances for international collaboration and diplomacy.
In conclusion, Non-Economic Losses and Damages (NELDs) stemming from climate change necessitate a holistic approach. Recognizing the importance of local knowledge, we must integrate it with national policies and foster international cooperation. This multifaceted strategy is essential to address the diverse and interconnected impacts of NELDs. It empowers indigenous communities and marginalized groups, ensures a socially and culturally sensitive response, and bridges gaps in understanding.
References
- United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. 2013. Non-economic losses in the context of the work programme on loss and damage. Available at
<http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2013/tp/02.pdf> - London School of Economics and Political Science. 2023. What is Non-Economic Loss and Damage (NELD)? LSE Grantham Institute. Available at
<https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/explainers/what-is-non-economic-loss-and-damage-neld/#:~:text=In%20contrast%2C%20non%2Deconomic%20loss,quantified%2C%20especially%20in%20financial%20terms.> - Vivekananda, J., & Rüttinger, L. 2015. Understanding the Compound Risks of Climate Change and Fragility. SIPRI. Available at
<https://www.sipri.org/sites/default/files/SIPRIYB16c12sI.pdf> - Dawson, N. M., B. Coolsaet, E. J. Sterling, R. Loveridge, N. D. Gross-Camp, S. Wongbusarakum, K. K. Sangha, L. M. Scherl, H.Phuong Phan, N. Zafra-Calvo, W. G. Lavey, P. Byakagaba, C. J. Idrobo, A. Chenet, N. J. Bennett, S. Mansourian, and F. J. Rosado-May. 2021. The role of Indigenous peoples and local communities in effective and equitable conservation. Ecology and Society 26(3):19. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-12625-260319
- Adger, W. N., Huq, S., Brown, K., Conway, D., & Hulme, M. 2003. Adaptation to climate change in the developing world. Progress in Development Studies, 3(3), 179–195. https://doi.org/10.1191/1464993403ps060oa.
A good summary about NELDs! Despite existing knowledge on the impacts of environmental pollution (often linked to the same causes of climate change) on human health, ecosystem services and biodiversity, little action to account for their impacts when dictating climate action is largely absent. I was particularly intrigued with the part which emphasized the importance of knowledge of indigenous and local communities. This part directly links it to Lluc’s post, where towards the end he implies that prevailing knowledge systems are driven majorly by metrics that can only describe human values that are quantifiable in economics – majorly via the GDP. Such an approach often undermines or completely ignores knowledge possessed by these communities. A scientist cum activist also recently emphasized me something on similar lines – even elite educational institutes often ignore knowledge possessed by local communities when it comes to environmental issues purely because they believe their “bookish” knowledge is superior to those possessed by the latter (a remnant of the colonizers’ mindset indeed!). Hence extending knowledge systems beyond current regimes to include other knowledge systems such as those possessed by local/indigenous communities is important for even appropriately framing climate action in the first place – as more often than not, these communities attach more non-economic values to resources and livelihood than the government or even top scientists sitting in elite institutions for that matter.