| 1. |
- Field, Christopher B., et al.
(författare)
-
Summary for Policymakers
- 2014
-
Ingår i: Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A: Global and SectoralAspects.. - 9781107415379 ; , s. 1-32
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
- James, Rachel A., et al.
(författare)
-
Attribution: How Is It Relevant for Loss and Damage Policy and Practice?
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Loss and Damage from Climate Change : Climate Risk Management, Policy and Governance - Climate Risk Management, Policy and Governance. - Cham : Springer International Publishing. - 9783319720258 - 9783319720265 ; , s. 113-154
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Attribution has become a recurring issue in discussions about Loss and Damage (L&D). In this highly-politicised context, attribution is often associated with responsibility and blame; and linked to debates about liability and compensation. The aim of attribution science, however, is not to establish responsibility, but to further scientific understanding of causal links between elements of the Earth System and society. This research into causality could inform the management of climate-related risks through improved understanding of drivers of relevant hazards, or, more widely, vulnerability and exposure; with potential benefits regardless of political positions on L&D. Experience shows that it is nevertheless difficult to have open discussions about the science in the policy sphere. This is not only a missed opportunity, but also problematic in that it could inhibit understanding of scientific results and uncertainties, potentially leading to policy planning which does not have sufficient scientific evidence to support it. In this chapter, we first explore this dilemma for science-policy dialogue, summarising several years of research into stakeholder perspectives of attribution in the context of L&D. We then aim to provide clarity about the scientific research available, through an overview of research which might contribute evidence about the causal connections between anthropogenic climate change and losses and damages, including climate science, but also other fields which examine other drivers of hazard, exposure, and vulnerability. Finally, we explore potential applications of attribution research, suggesting that an integrated and nuanced approach has potential to inform planning to avert, minimise and address losses and damages. The key messages are In the political context of climate negotiations, questions about whether losses and damages can be attributed to anthropogenic climate change are often linked to issues of responsibility, blame, and liability. Attribution science does not aim to establish responsibility or blame, but rather to investigate drivers of change. Attribution science is advancing rapidly, and has potential to increase understanding of how climate variability and change is influencing slow onset and extreme weather events, and how this interacts with other drivers of risk, including socio-economic drivers, to influence losses and damages. Over time, some uncertainties in the science will be reduced, as the anthropogenic climate change signal becomes stronger, and understanding of climate variability and change develops. However, some uncertainties will not be eliminated. Uncertainty is common in science, and does not prevent useful applications in policy, but might determine which applications are appropriate. It is important to highlight that in attribution studies, the strength of evidence varies substantially between different kinds of slow onset and extreme weather events, and between regions. Policy-makers should not expect the later emergence of conclusive evidence about the influence of climate variability and change on specific incidences of losses and damages; and, in particular, should not expect the strength of evidence to be equal between events, and between countries. Rather than waiting for further confidence in attribution studies, there is potential to start working now to integrate science into policy and practice, to help understand and tackle drivers of losses and damages, informing prevention, recovery, rehabilitation, and transformation.
|
|
| 7. |
- Lindenfors, Patrik, 1964-, et al.
(författare)
-
Sexual size dimorphism in mammals
- 2007
-
Ingår i: Sex, size and gender roles. - New York : Oxford University Press. - 9780199208784 ; , s. 16-26
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This chapter explores the pattern of sexual size dimorphism in mammals and the processes that underly its evolution. We find that, on average, male mammals are the larger sex (average male/female mass ratio 1.184), with males being at least 10% larger than females in over 45% of species. Most mammalian orders are also have male-biased sexual dimorphism, although some orders do not show any bias or are significantly female-biased (Lagomorpha). Sexual size dimorphism increases with body size across mammals (Rensch’s rule), suggesting that there are parallel selection pressures on both male and female size. We found support for the hypothesis that male-biased dimorphism relates to sexual selection on males through male–male competition for females. We draw this conclusion from a positive correlation between the degree of sexual selection, as indicated by mating systems and the degree of male biased size dimorphism. The degree of sexual selection was also positively correlated with male and female size across mammals. Further, a parallel selection pressure on female mass is identified in that age at weaning is significantly higher in more polygynous species, even when correcting for body mass. We also explore the processes maintaining smaller female size in sexually dimorphic species and confirm that reproductive rate is lower for larger females, indicating that fecundity selection selects for smaller females in mammals. Although the patterns we discuss hold across mammals as a whole, there is considerable variation across orders and many of these relationships are not significant. Further work is still needed to more closely investigate the pattern of sexual dimorphism and processes driving sexual dimorphism in different clades.
|
|
