Political and legal implications of defining ‘particularly vulnerable’ for the loss and damage fund
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21791852 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Guy Jackson (0000-0002-5474-8298, Lund University, corresponding author), Sakshi Sakshi (0000-0001-6617-0457, Newcastle University) |
| Year | 2024 |
| Pages | 1-10 |
| Publication date | 2024-07-14 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Climate and Development (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1756-5529 • E-ISSN: 1756-5537 |
| Publisher | Informa UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/17565529.2024.2361121 |
| OpenAlex | W4400614880 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 4 |
| References cited | 49 |
At COP27, Parties agreed to establish a fund for loss and damage. During the COP28 opening plenary, the Loss and Damage Fund was operationalised. Despite this progress, significant questions about access to funding remain unanswered. We engage with a key term in the decision texts – particularly vulnerable. How Parties frame and define the term ‘particularly vulnerable’ will influence funding allocation and devising eligibility or exclusion. We advance arguments against narrow, country-specific definitions of particularly vulnerable. To this end, we outline a brief history of the term particularly vulnerable and present insights from the existing climate fund allocations. We also engage with the emerging science of losses and damages, and critically unpack the implications of defining particularly vulnerable for loss and damage funding. We argue that it is possible to understand particularly vulnerable in a legally and politically just manner, while highlighting the limitations of excessive reliance or hopefulness around state actions, especially domestic remedies, in addressing vulnerability in specific communities. We recognise that the funds, as they have been pledged now, will not reach all vulnerable people. However, such limitation reinforces our argument that funding and support should be provided wherever vulnerability exists even if it increases liability of states
Development economics · Economics · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Sociology · Law · Legal principles and applications
Designs on Nature
The social construction of disaster risk
Vulnerability-based allocations in loss and damage finance
Settler Colonialism, Decolonization, and Climate Change
Climate Change 2014 Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability
A critical review of disproportionality in loss and damage from climate change
Loss and damage
Loss and damage from climate change
Climate change and Indigenous mental health in the Circumpolar North
The future of disaster risk management
Loss and Damage and limits to adaptation
Climate reparations
Allocation of aid for adaptation to climate change
A Road to Denial
Does funds-based adaptation finance reach the most vulnerable countries
Making sense of the politics in the climate change loss & damage debate
From knowledge to action
Global environmental change II
The concept of solidarity in the study of world politics
Vulnerability and the International Law Commission's Draft Articles on the Protection of Persons in the Event of Disasters
An emerging governmentality of climate change loss and damage
Core, periphery and (neo)imperialist International Relations
Reconstructing scale
Neoliberalising Nature
Performative Vulnerability
Relocating Modern Science
Unsettling the Coloniality of Being/Power/Truth/Freedom
Epistemic injustice and epistemic positioning
Coloniality and Modernity/Rationality
The Epistemic Decolonial Turn
| Citations per year | 4 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2025 - 2026 (2) |
| Highly cited | No |