It is a perverse reality that countries and communities that have contributed least to the greenhouse gases that warm the planet suffer most – and are least equipped to deal with death and destruction. After a devastating year that left 37 million people facing hunger and starvation in the drought-stricken Horn of Africa and a third of Pakistan under water due to unprecedented rainfall, expect to hear a lot about loss and damage in Cop27. But what does it mean and why is it so controversial?

What is loss and damage?

Loss and damage refers to the irreversible economic and non-economic costs of both extreme weather events such as hurricanes, heat waves, drought and wildfires and slow-onset climate disasters such as sea-level rise and melting of glaciers. It’s about holding the biggest fossil fuel polluters responsible for the pain and suffering already caused by the climate crisis, and on top of securing climate finance for mitigation and adaptation to help developing nations prepare for what’s coming. Economic costs include the lives, livelihoods, homes, food systems and territory irrevocably lost, while the more difficult to quantify non-economic costs refer to the loss of culture, identity, sovereignty, human dignity, biodiversity and psychological well-being . The most severe losses and damages are felt by the poorest countries – generally those that have contributed least to global warming. As a result, loss and damage finance has become a central tenet in demands for climate justice, or, in other words, climate action that addresses the inequalities behind the climate crisis.

Why are we talking about it now?

Island nations and other climate-vulnerable countries began mounting losses and damage more than 30 years ago, but it has become an increasingly prominent and contentious issue at UN climate talks over the past decade or so as the speed, the magnitude and cost of global warming has become apparent. At the 2021 summit, Cop26 in Glasgow, a coalition of mainly developing countries representing six out of seven people in the world called on the countries most responsible for greenhouse gas emissions to pledge money for loss and damage. Unsurprisingly, perhaps, given the UK’s role as Cop26 chair, their call for fresh financial support under Article 9 of the Paris Agreement (in addition to adaptation and mitigation funds) was rejected amid backlash from the US, EU, Australia and others. Almost all references were removed in the final agreement, the Glasgow Climate Accord, and the Glasgow Dialogue was established instead, ostensibly to agree a clear path and process for financing loss and damage.

Who is for, who is against?

By and large, developing countries, which often negotiate and vote in a bloc called the G77, are in favor of it, as they are already suffering disproportionately irreversible damage. The wealthiest nations responsible for the vast majority of greenhouse gases since the industrial age – and who could therefore cough up – are against it. Exceptions include Denmark, which has pledged 100 million Danish kroner (£11.7 million) to developing countries for climate losses, the first EU country to do so, as well as Scotland and the Belgian Walloon region. At this year’s UN general assembly, UN chief Antonio Guterres described the loss and damage as a “fundamental issue of climate justice, international solidarity and trust” – adding that “polluters must pay” because “vulnerable countries need substantial action”. The most important stories on the planet. Get all the week’s environmental news – the good, the bad and the must-haves Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain information about charities, online advertising and content sponsored by external parties. For more information, see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our site and Google’s Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.Cop27: the climate carnage we faced this year – video

Will Cop27 be different?

Human rights groups criticized the decision to hold this year’s summit in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, because of the authoritarian regime’s terrible record on freedom of speech, protest and independent investigation. But it was Africa’s turn, and Egypt was singled out by African nations, in part because of its strong stance on losses and damages, and because of its respected negotiators, who they hope will follow Western delaying tactics. In a boost to developing countries, the losses and damages were highlighted in this year’s IPCC report, despite opposition from the US, whose main goal is to provide climate finance in the form of loans rather than grants. But Western economies are reeling from the pandemic and Russia’s war in Ukraine, and US climate envoy John Kerry made America’s position clear when he said a focus on loss and damage “could delay the our ability to do the most important thing of all. , which is [to] achieve sufficient mitigation to reduce the level of adaptation’. But it is expected to be one of the dominant topics at Cop27 and is a red line in the negotiations for many developing countries, including Pakistan, which chairs the G77, and China, which has been ravaged by floods and extreme heat this year. Pakistan’s climate minister, Sherry Rehman, told the Guardian: “We are at the forefront and intend to keep loss and damage and adaptation to climate disasters at the core of our arguments and negotiations. There will be no getting away from it.”