Editing IPCC:AR6/SROCC/Chapter-2 (section)

== 2.4 International Policy Frameworks and Pathways to Sustainable Development ==

<div id="article-2-4international-policy-frameworks-and-pathways-to-sustainable-development-block-1"></div>

The governance of key resources that are affected by climate-related changes in the cryosphere, such as water, is a relevant aspect for climate resilient sustainable development in mountains at the catchment level (Section 2.3.1.4). In this section, we address broader policy frameworks that are expected to shape a solution space through global action. An important development since AR5, at the global level, is the adoption of key frameworks that include the Paris Agreement (UNFCCC, 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r1033|1033]]</sup> ), UN 2030 Agenda and its SDGs (UN, 2015), and the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR, 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r1034|1034]]</sup> ), which call for integrated and coordinated climate adaptation action that is also relevant for and applicable in mountain regions.

In international climate policy, the importance of averting, minimising and addressing loss and damage associated with adverse impacts of climate change is articulated in the Paris Agreement under Article 8, more specifically (UNFCCC, 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r1035|1035]]</sup> ). However, despite evident impacts of climate change on the mountain cryosphere (Section 2.3.2), there is ''limited evidence'' or reference in the literature to loss and damage for mountains, globally (Huggel et al., 2019 <sup>[[#fn:r1036|1036]]</sup> ). With already committed and unavoidable climate change, its effects on the high mountain cryosphere (Section 2.2) and related impacts and risks (Section 2.3), substantial adverse effects are expected in the coming decades (Huggel et al., 2019 <sup>[[#fn:r1037|1037]]</sup> ), especially at high emission scenarios, which renders this issue a relevant aspect for planning climate resilient development in mountains. At least in one region, a concrete example for responding to and translating the Paris Agreement in a transboundary mountain setting, is reported. In 2015, through policy measures afforded by the Alpine Convention for the European Alps, the ministers for the environment of the Alpine countries established the Alpine Climate Board, who at the XV Alpine Conference in April 2019, presented a climate target system that includes strategic targets for ‘climate-resilient Alps’ (Hojesky et al., 2019 <sup>[[#fn:r1038|1038]]</sup> ). The implementation and monitoring of these initiatives, however, remains to be assessed on an evidentiary basis. Furthermore, mechanisms afforded through the workplan of the Warsaw International Mechanism, specifically its work area under ‘Non-economic loss and damage’, are prospects relevant to address impacts to cultural and intrinsic values associated with losses in the high mountain cryosphere (UNFCCC Secretariat, 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r1039|1039]]</sup> ; Serdeczny, 2019 <sup>[[#fn:r1040|1040]]</sup> ).

Monitoring and reporting on progress towards sustainable development through the implementation of the SDGs (UN, 2015) is receiving some research attention in the context of mountain regions (Rasul and Tripura, 2016; Gratzer and Keeton, 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r1041|1041]]</sup> ; Bracher et al., 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r1042|1042]]</sup> ; Wymann von Dach et al., 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r1043|1043]]</sup> ; Kulonen et al., 2019 <sup>[[#fn:r1044|1044]]</sup> ; Mishra et al., 2019 <sup>[[#fn:r1045|1045]]</sup> ), noting key mountain specific considerations to improve the conditions under which the SDGs may serve a purpose in the mountain context. For example, previous research has identified a need for disaggregated data for SDG indicators and targets at subnational scales, with relevant area units that are both within country boundaries and/or across borders in transboundary settings (Rasul and Tripura, 2016; Bracher et al., 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r1046|1046]]</sup> ; Wymann von Dach et al., 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r1047|1047]]</sup> ). Furthermore, the use of non-standardised proxy data can further limit the potential for comparisons between countries and within regions (Bracher et al., 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r1049|1049]]</sup> ; Kulonen et al., 2019 <sup>[[#fn:r1050|1050]]</sup> ). On substance, assessments of the economic performance of livelihood options, combined with robust socioeconomic data for mountain systems, are still lacking in many parts of the world, compromising the ability for meaningful comparison and aggregation of data and knowledge for monitoring and reporting on progress of SDGs at regional or global scales (Gratzer and Keeton, 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r1051|1051]]</sup> ).

Disasters associated with natural hazards in high mountains are placing many communities and their potential for sustainable development at risk (Wymann von Dach et al., 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r1052|1052]]</sup> ; Keiler and Fuchs, 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r1053|1053]]</sup> ; Vaidya et al., 2019 <sup>[[#fn:r1054|1054]]</sup> ). The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030 (UNISDR, 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r1055|1055]]</sup> ) offers a global policy framework under which risks, including climate change, can be accounted for and addressed at national scales. However, there is ''limited evidence'' in monitoring and reporting on progress on targets therein (Wymann von Dach et al., 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r1056|1056]]</sup> ), particularly in systematically reporting on root causes of disasters in high mountains and associated compounded risks and cascading impacts, and even more so when accounting for impacts related to climate change. Technical guidelines available for the high mountain context provide complementary means to monitor and report on the effectiveness of measures to reduce associated risks with changes in the cryosphere (e.g., GAPHAZ, 2017).

Other relevant frameworks include the Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, enacted to protect the planet’s most significant and irreplaceable places from loss or damage (UNESCO, 1972 <sup>[[#fn:r1057|1057]]</sup> ). In it, conservation strategies are listed that aim at preserving natural and cultural heritage across regions, including sites that contain glaciers (Section 2.3.6), and are suggested as means to further support efforts towards the promotion of knowledge, collective cultural memory and climate policy (Bosson et al., 2019 <sup>[[#fn:r1058|1058]]</sup> ).

Overall, there are promising prospects through international policy frameworks to support governance and adaptation to climate-related changes in the mountain cryosphere whilst addressing sustainable development, with evidence suggesting that treaties and conventions are relevant enablers to support cooperation and implementation at the mountain region scale (Dinar et al., 2016 <sup>[[#fn:r1059|1059]]</sup> ). However, there is ''limited evidence'' to systematically assess for effectiveness in addressing specific challenges posed by changes in the mountain cryosphere, globally.

<span id="key-gaps-in-knowledge-and-prospects"></span>