Podcast Summary

Podcast: New Books Network

Host: Dr. Hannah Pohl
Guest: Professor Lisa Vanhala, University College London
Episode: Governing the End: The Making of Climate Change Loss and Damage
Date: November 12, 2025

Episode Overview

This episode features a deep-dive conversation with Professor Lisa Vanhala about her 2025 book, Governing the End: The Making of Climate Change Loss and Damage, published by University of Chicago Press. The episode explores the emergence and evolution of “loss and damage” in global climate governance, the micro-politics inside UN climate negotiations, and the theoretical and ethnographic lenses that reveal how ambitious promises often fall short in implementation. The conversation is timed with the beginning of COP 30 in Belem, Brazil, illustrating the real-world relevance and urgency of the subject.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Author Introduction and Inspiration

• Lisa Vanhala’s background: Political science professor at UCL, appointed to the IPCC, co-leading a chapter on responses to climate change loss and damage.
• Motivation for the book:
  • Observed a “gap” between climate negotiation promises and actual implemented outcomes.
  • Sought to understand this through ethnography, moving beyond traditional political science interviews.
  • Chose loss and damage as it was an emerging “third pillar” of climate policy, beyond mitigation and adaptation.
  • “This book really, I think, traces how loss and damage has emerged as this third kind of pillar of climate action.” (C, 05:46)

2. Inside the Negotiation Room

• Atmosphere: Ethnographic accounts show how similar negotiation spaces feel year after year regardless of the global location (Bonn, Marrakesh, Egypt).
• Institutional “cookie-cutter” sameness contributes to a sense of deterritorialized governance.
• “...these chairs at the table where kind of country delegates have a right to sit...there’s this kind of politics around these chairs...” (C, 07:53)
• Observers’ presence, the politics of chair allocation, and the effect of closed-door negotiations on inclusion and transparency.

3. Title—‘Governing the End’

• Dual meaning:
  • Literal endings caused by climate change: lives, livelihoods, cultures, biodiversity.
  • Questioning whether climate governance has become an “end” in itself rather than a means to avert dangers.
  • “Climate governance is not meant to be an end in itself. It’s meant to be the means for addressing this problem that we call climate change.” (C, 10:52)

4. Defining ‘Loss and Damage’

• No official UNFCCC definition, and ambiguity serves some interests while marginalizing others.
• Generally refers to impacts that cannot be mitigated or adapted to.
• Encompasses both economic (e.g., infrastructure loss) and non-economic (e.g., life, health, community ties) impacts.
• “I have some issues with [the term] non-economic losses because it wraps up all the things that are most important and dear to many people… under this one big umbrella.” (C, 15:55)

5. Theoretical Lenses and Methodology

• Draws from Goffman (framing), Bourdieu (practices and power hierarchies), Sally Engel Merry (international organization ethnography).
• Identifies two main frames:
  • Risk and uncertainty perspective: Focuses on risk management, insurance, disaster risk reduction.
  • Justice and harm perspective: Centers on historical emissions, uneven vulnerability, and compensation/reparations.
• “What I try and do... is use Bourgieu’s understanding [of] how practices emerge and how they’re kind of shaped and reproduce certain power hierarchies within our system of global climate governance.” (C, 20:00)

6. Socio-Legal and Ethnographic Approach

• Looks at the micro-level behaviors—delaying tactics, procedural maneuvers—that undermine the high-level ambitions agreed at the COPs.
• Observed developed countries steering the agenda toward risk management, delaying finance discussions.
• “I have really kind of, I think clear examples in the empirical chapter... For example, a developing country negotiator... would make an intervention saying we need to... be talking about finance. And a developed country negotiator would change the subject or... call for a break.” (C, 24:35)

7. Turning Points in Loss and Damage Negotiations

• Key institutional milestones:
  • 2013: Warsaw International Mechanism on Loss and Damage (WIM).
  • 2015: Article 8 in the Paris Agreement refers to loss and damage, a contested inclusion.
  • 2019: Establishment of a technical body for vulnerable countries.
  • 2023: Agreement on a dedicated fund (though the amount pledged is modest compared to need).
• Distinction drawn between “thick” governance (meaningful, well-resourced action) and “thin” governance (symbolic reports, limited real impact).
• “What I try and show in the book is how each of these victories kind of isn’t quite as much as it seems at first glance...” (C, 29:10)

8. Focus on the Executive Committee (ExCom) of the WIM

• Observed how ExCom’s even balance between developed and developing country representation led to persistent gridlock and micro-level procedural wrangling.
• Notable moment: An hour spent debating the first question of a survey, raising questions about process vs. progress.
• Importance of researcher positionality and limited access in diplomatic settings.
• “The constant questioning: what am I seeing, what’s going on, and trying to probe and talk to people...” (C, 33:18)

9. Climate Change and Human Mobility (Migration)

• ‘Climate refugees’ is a media buzzword; the actual landscape is more complex.
• Human mobility has moved from an “adaptation” issue to a “loss and damage” issue in UNFCCC.
• Task Force on Displacement broadened to encompass all forms of mobility, not just displacement.
• Key policy framings:
  • Security threat
  • Protection of vulnerable people
  • Proactive, adaptive strategy
• Implementation relies heavily on unpaid or underfunded contributions from outside organizations, exposing chronic underfunding and strategic neglect by states.
• “At least at the time... there was really no voice of those with lived experience of migration or mobility within this group, I think really speaks volumes...” (C, 39:47)

10. Role of Funding in Climate Negotiations

• Recent progress: Loss and Damage Fund established relatively quickly (three years), but initial funding ($25 million) is minuscule compared to need (~$400 billion/year projected for developing countries).
• Lengthy wrangling about wording related to finance; rich countries emphasize “innovative” or private finance over public contributions.
• Ongoing debates about finance as legal obligation, solidarity, or charity.
• “In the years that I was watching this, there wasn’t even discussions about funding. There was discussions about how to discuss funding.” (C, 43:07)

11. Lisa Vanhala's Current and Future Work

• Applying lessons from global governance to local climate politics: Working with Islington Council in London on deliberative approaches to adaptation and resilience.
• Co-leading new IPCC chapter on responses to loss and damage, aiming to synthesize recent research for actionable policy insights.
• “I’m really, really excited to be working with the [IPCC] team...[to] make those lessons as constructive and as accessible as possible for policymakers…” (C, 47:09)

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On the Ethnography of Negotiations:
  “One of the things that is really striking... is how similar the rooms look year on year, even though you’re in really different places.” (C, 06:33)

• About Defining Loss and Damage:
  “The fact that... ambiguity serves some people’s and some countries’ interests and really further marginalizes other people.” (C, 12:43)

• On Power and Practice:
  “We see the tussle in... who’s going to win out. And that’s played out both in these kind of high politics moments... but also in the more stealthy behaviors and practices...” (C, 21:56)

• The Frustration of Implementation:
  “They spent almost an hour talking about the very first question of this survey. And that really made me think about: what is going on here?” (C, 32:38)

• Finance as a Focal Struggle:
  “There wasn’t even discussions about funding. There was discussions about how to discuss funding.” (C, 43:07)

Key Timestamps

• [02:18] – Lisa Vanhala introduces herself and motivations for the book
• [05:45] – Emergence of loss and damage as a third pillar of climate action
• [06:16-09:20] – Ethnography of negotiation rooms and their politics
• [09:30] – Meaning behind the book’s title, “Governing the End”
• [12:16-15:55] – Defining loss and damage, categories, and controversies
• [17:39] – Application of theoretical frameworks (Goffman, Bourdieu)
• [23:16] – Micro-politics and procedural dynamics in implementation postsummit
• [26:56-30:07] – Key milestones and turning points in loss and damage negotiations
• [30:25] – ExCom observations and dynamics
• [36:07] – Climate migration: debates, frames, and institutional gaps
• [42:06-45:58] – The politics of funding and finance mechanisms
• [46:12] – Future research directions: local climate politics and IPCC work

Tone & Speaker Style

• Lisa Vanhala speaks with clarity and calm, combining critical reflection with detailed, candid ethnographic observation. Her tone is at once scholarly, accessible, and quietly urgent, emphasizing both the intellectual and real-world stakes of climate policy struggles.
• Host Hannah Pohl facilitates with an engaged, academic curiosity, drawing out practical, theoretical, and personal elements throughout the conversation.

This episode offers a vital, sobering look at how climate change loss and damage policy is forged through institutions and inside rooms, revealing both the global governance machinery and persistent obstacles that shape the reality for vulnerable populations worldwide.