Publication

Bangladesh is one of the countries most vulnerable to climate change, but has increasingly developed national capacity to address climate change impacts. Climaterelated hazards are expected to increase in frequency and intensity, however, and as such it is now becoming clear that adaptation will not be sufficient to avoid loss and damage caused by the adverse effects of climate change. At the global level the emergence and increasing prominence of loss and damage in the international climate negotiations is a result of the failure of both mitigation and adaptation efforts to minimise the impacts of climate change. While there is no universal definition of climate change it has been described as “impacts on human systems, which are often channelled through the negative impacts of climate change on natural systems” (UNFCCC, 2012a). The authors understand loss and damage to be current or future negative impacts of climate change that cannot be addressed by adaptation efforts. Loss can be thought of as irrecoverable negative impacts while damage can be characterised as those that can be recovered. In 2010, a work programme was created under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) to enhance understanding of loss and damage and the possible means to address it. The work programme has had the following three thematic areas: (1) Assessing the risk and current knowledge of loss and damage, (2) Exploring a range of approaches to address loss and damage, including impacts related to extreme weather events and slow onset event (3) Determining the role of the Convention, or the UNFCCC, in enhancing the implementation of approaches to address loss and damage. This technical paper addresses questions relating to thematic area 2.

 

Approaches to address loss and damage from both extreme events and slow onset processes can be divided into four categories. These include risk reduction, risk retention (social safety nets and contingency funds), risk transfer (insurance) and approaches to specifically target loss and damage from slow onset processes. Risk reduction measures can be structural or non‐structural in nature. Structural approaches can be expensive, but in general, investment in risk reduction measures is offset by the avoidance and reduction of loss and damage. Frequent flooding is responsible for significant loss and damage in Bangladesh and thus the focus of risk reduction approaches. Structural risk reduction methods for floods and storm surges include dykes, recognised as one of the most economical means for flood control. Over the last 50 years, the Bangladesh

 

Water Development Board (BWDB) has completed roughly 700 flood control, drainage and irrigation projects at a cost of about USD 3 billion. Other structural approaches undertaken include the construction of embankments and multi‐purpose cyclone shelters, reforestation efforts as well as the building of river closures to reclaim land from siltation.

 

Non‐structural risk reduction measures include risk identification, which allows relevant institutions to take the action needed to reduce impacts and early warning systems, which have recently undergone a re‐design to simplify them, reducing the number of agencies involved and increasing efficacy. Traditionally early warning systems have worked well at the district level, but not at the sub‐district level. There are also rehabilitation and relocation programs, which address issues like inadequate housing or weak emergency services and infrastructure. In general, there are some inadequacies in risk reduction measures. For example, many structural adaptation measures currently in place are not adequate to offset the risk of increasing loss and damage, especially with the level of predicted climate change. In addition, most of the flood and water management projects in Bangladesh were initiated without considering the needs of local beneficiaries. One risk reduction approach that seeks to address loss and damage concerns in conjunction with development needs is climate resilient agricultural development, which includes the development of saline tolerant crop varieties and the provision of agricultural emergency support, which has helped prevent post‐disaster crop loss. Given the predominance of livelihoods dependent on agriculture, as well as the way in which climate change threatens food security, approaches to address loss and damage must enhance agricultural productivity.

 

Recommendations for improving risk reduction efforts in order to address – and ultimately reduce – loss and damage include increasing the coverage of structural protection measures, implementing national plans, mainstreaming risk reduction into integrated land management projects to promote resilience and communicating early warnings in a way that is more easily understood by communities. Risk retention efforts focus on resilience building and providing a cushion when the impacts of climate change damage assets and result in the loss of livelihoods – and in some cases – lives. Risk retention initiatives currently underway in Bangladesh include food for work programmes and other social safety nets as well as emergency food distribution, a common method used in Bangladesh in the aftermath of extreme events.

 

There are some challenges associated with implanting risk retention approaches to address loss and damage in Bangladesh. Social safety net programmes are not always targeted to those who most need support. For example, a study by UNDP (2006) found that as much of 27 percent of the beneficiaries of social safety net programmes in Bangladesh are not living in extreme poverty. Corruption can also lead to less successful outcomes and those most in need do not always benefit from social safety net programmes. For example, a study by Morshet (2009) found that as much of 27 percent of the beneficiaries of social safety net programmes in Bangladesh are not living in extreme poverty. Recommendations for risk retention measures include better targeting of the extreme poor and enhanced monitoring of corruption.

 

The third approach to addressing loss and damage covered in this study is risk transfer, which shifts economic risks from an individual or organisation to an insurer. The transfer of risk is primarily done through insurance mechanisms, such as microinsurance. However, there are some significant barriers to implementing successful microinsurance programmes in Bangladesh including the extremely low penetration rate of insurance (0.9 percent) in the country. Crop insurance schemes have been implemented in the past in Bangladesh but have suffered extreme losses due to bad programme design, including universal premium levels. Most microinsurance schemes currently underway in Bangladesh are not cost‐effective and need external funding. Thus, the implementation of microinsurance as part of a package of approaches to address loss and damage will be challenging, but not impossible if the products are designed well. However, in order to protect insurers and re‐insurers international mechanisms to link the national to the international should be in place.

 

A fourth category of approaches to address loss and damage is specifically aimed at slow onset processes like sea level rise. The Cancun Agreements defines slow onset events as sea level rise, increasing temperatures, ocean acidification, glacial retreat and related impacts, salinisation, land and forest degradation, loss of biodiversity and desertification. In Bangladesh, sea level rise is projected to displace from 14 million to 30 million people given a one‐metre rise in sea level by 2100. Migration is one approach to address loss and damage from slow onset processes and covers a spectrum from forced displacement to voluntary, temporary migration to seek livelihood opportunities. In order to facilitate migration – both internally and internationally – proper policies will need to be in place to ensure migration helps address (and reduce) loss and damage, promote resilience, and enhance development.

 

There are also institutional and governance‐based approaches to address loss and damage. Good governance structures ensure appropriate responses to climate change induced loss and damage and disaster risk management and climate change adaptation should be integrated into a range of development activities. To build a national mechanism to respond to loss and damage, appropriate institutional mechanisms for enabling finance and technology transfers, as well as mainstreaming loss and damage into development programmes are needed.

 

Many effective adaptation and risk reduction measures are already being undertaken in the country, but gaps and challenges remain. None of the above outlined approaches can offset loss and damage risk individually. In addition, funding is critical and it remains to be seen if sufficient funding will come from developed countries and if so, if these funds will be accessible. Technology will be needed to facilitate and enhance the implementation of approaches to address loss and damage. The voices of local people at the community level must be involved in the national and international planning and decision‐making processes. Finally, good governance with regards to climate change and risk of loss and damage is critical in local, national, regional, and international forums.