Loss and Damage as Development

Why is ‘loss and damage’ a non-starter at COP27? In my view, it is because ‘loss and damage’ is what ‘development’ is, has been, and perhaps may always be. 

Climate change marks the apex of Western ‘development’. The pathway to climate catastrophe is strewn with an endless number of catastrophic events that derive from the Western model of sovereign, independent states led by elites in fierce competition with each other and in endless negotiation with their subjects later to become citizens. Let us count up some of the ‘loss and damage’:

Within states:

• exploitation of labour/indentured servitude
• domination of ‘out groups’, minorities, women (racism, sexism, etc.)
• land grabbing
• dramatic alteration of landscapes such as wetlands
• environmental degradation
• toxic waste production
• genocide
• violence against women and LGBTQ+

Beyond borders:

• slavery
• genocide
• complete alteration of social relations to satisfy European needs and wants
• complete alteration of natural environments to satisfy European needs and wants

These actions resulted in countless wars, revolutions, civil wars, the creation of fragile and failing states, the creation of built environments unsuited to the natural environment, rapid population growth, migration, forced migration, ecosystem degradation, solid waste pollution, anomic violence, and, of course, a fairly good life for a narrow band of the human population, and extreme wealth for the very few. 

The whole thing holds together through a revolving set of narratives designed to justify the mess created over perhaps 500 years: e.g. the ‘Enlightenment’, the white man’s burden, progress, the Wealth of Nations, creative destruction, and so on. 

Which brings me to my main point: the current world disorder that privileges a few and punishes the many is a consequence of historical processes set in train long ago. The resulting ‘loss and damages’ — including those accruing from a changed climate —  cannot be totalled up. It is human history. In addition, as shown at every global gathering of every type, those who benefit the most are also the most uninterested in anything beyond reforms which ensure their place at the apex of human society: geoengineering and electric vehicles at best, business as usual at worst. As global political economy has become more and more unequal over the last 40 years, the myth of collective effort in support of common good has been replaced by a combination of help yourself (your poverty/predicament is your own fault) and alms for the poor (the rise of ‘big philanthropy’ aka conscience money meant to assuage the guilt of the 1% and stave off social revolution). 

People ‘fit in’ to the facts of life as best they can. We develop and/or latch onto new narratives to explain the benefits and costs of our daily lives, our place in social (dis)order. As John Donne said, ‘No man is an island’: people build alliances and coalitions at a variety of scales, from the neighbourhood to the globe, and mobilize in support of their stories, in pursuit of desired outcomes. Technological creativity, the social application of which often emerges out of military innovation, dramatically alters the socio-economic, socio-political and socio-ecological landscapes, giving rise to new constellations of social forces within, across and among states. The resulting material, institutional and ideational forms of power privilege some and penalize others, reordering the geography of joy and misery along ever evolving value chains of production and consumption. Narratives, models and methods emerge in response to the desire for understanding, prediction and control. There appear to be moments of calm — the ‘long boom’ — as long as one does not widen the view, to take in the whole. 

Is it any wonder that directing the physical, mental and emotional energy of this raucous, riotous, cacophony of human endeavour towards a place like Sharm el-Sheikh results in anything other than weak promises, tepid commitments, agitated finger pointing, smug complacency and crass duplicity? For those at the margins, the question remains: what is to be done? Shape your narrative, find your allies, define your methods, assemble your resources and get stuck in. Others are doing the same. Appeals to ethics will fail, as will attempts to assign blame.