Loss and damage

What it means in practice

Loss and damage should be read as a development and impact term. Its meaning depends on the affected population, institutional context, geography, evidence base and power relationships involved.

In practice, users should state whose perspective is being considered, what outcome is intended and what limitations apply. That keeps loss and damage from becoming a broad claim detached from lived context or evidence.

Why it matters

Loss and damage matters because development language can influence funding, accountability, rights, participation and claims about impact. Clear wording helps readers distinguish aspiration, programme design, measured outcome and social context.

Common misconception

A common error is to use Loss and damage as universally positive without examining who benefits, who carries risk and who has voice in the decision.

Review questions

Who is affected, who decides and who is accountable? What evidence supports the claimed outcome? What local context or limitation should shape interpretation?

How it is used

Standard setters, scheme owners, certification bodies, auditors and organisations seeking assurance use “Loss and damage” in standards, certification, conformity assessment, audits, controls and assurance engagements.

In each case, the user should state the named standard or scheme, version, scope, criteria, assurance level and competent decision-maker; otherwise, the same term may be applied to materially different situations. In this context, it refers to harms from climate change that are not fully avoided through mitigation or adaptation.