Intangible Losses, Damages and At-Risk Settlements: The Extent of Causality and Burden of Proof for Climate Related Loss and Damage in the Fiji Islands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article, a plethora of social, cultural, legal and policy related remedies for harm caused by climate related loss and damage (L&D) were examined, particularly in rural and remote Fiji Islands. The meaning of loss and damage, and its relationship to climate mitigation and adaptation, was discussed. The concept of causality and attempt are considered to expose some criteria that the law uses to test causation in the hope to subject these to a much-needed discussion of climate change and causation affecting international law, domestic law, and climate science. A probabilistic event attribution (PEA) is explored having crucial implications in the development of PEA. When vulnerabilities and thresholds are known, changing risks can be calculated ex ante and, therefore, changing risks can be forecasted. The improvement of the methods allows geographically very specific events to be anticipated and, thus, appropriate adaptation measures can be designed. It is considered (at a conceptual level) how those harmed by loss and damage in Fiji from human-induced climate change may pursue remedies against those who have contributed to the harm. Finally, this article explores what that evidence needs to be (extent of causality and burden of proof) for loss and the damages to be awarded. It is concluded by highlighting the values of probabilistic event attribution (PEA), and how vulnerabilities in Fijian communities continue to be a deep concern. Further work needs to be done with respect to social, cultural, and biological interconnectivity that concretely underlines the importance of climate change and how it diminishes well-being and cultural integrity of Indigenous people by affecting endemic plant species. Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) needs to be cognizant of social and cultural implications of forced migration. Causality and burden of proof within the legal context has its built-in complexities and, hence, it needs further research.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".