External publications

Understanding loss and damage in West African climate policies: a comparative analysis of national approaches in five countries

Okunola, Olasunkanmi Habeeb / Susan S. Ekoh
External Publications (2026)

in: Climate Policy, first published 19.05.2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2026.2675272
Open access

Climate-induced Loss and Damage (L&D) is becoming a defining challenge for global climate governance, especially in West Africa, where adaptation limits are increasingly surpassed. Yet, the literature has largely overlooked how national governments in Africa conceptualize, operationalize, and govern L&D. Existing studies tend to focus on international finance debates or localized impacts, leaving a gap in understanding the national policy frameworks shaping L&D responses. This paper addresses this gap through a comparative analysis of five West African countries, Burkina Faso, Ghana, Nigeria, Senegal, and Sierra Leone, structured around four thematic dimensions: conceptual clarity, scope and depth of losses, policy integration, and institutional readiness.
Drawing on more than 60 official policy documents, including National Adaptation Plans, disaster frameworks, and climate legislation, the study applies an interpretive scoring framework and proposes a three-stage typology of L&D policy engagement (Nascent, Emerging, Integrated). The results show that Senegal and Ghana fall into the Emerging category, with partial recognition of L&D concepts but limited institutionalization in formal policy architecture. Nigeria, Burkina Faso, and Sierra Leone remain Nascent, where L&D is either subsumed under adaptation and humanitarian action or only referenced anecdotally. No country has yet reached the Integrated stage. Across all five cases, economic losses in agriculture and infrastructure are frequently reported, while non-economic losses such as displacement, cultural erosion, and psychological harm remain weakly specified. Institutional arrangements for L&D are fragmented in national frameworks, suggesting uneven preparedness for engagement with emerging international L&D governance mechanisms, including the Santiago Network and the Fund for responding to Loss and Damage.
The findings suggest that the absence of formal L&D strategies in many national policy documents may limit the visibility of irreversible climate impacts and complicate future claims-making in international arenas. By advancing a systematic baseline of how L&D is framed in national policies and introducing a heuristic typology for cross-country comparison, this study contributes conceptually, empirically, and policy-relevantly to debates on climate justice and the evolving governance of L&D in the Global South.
Key policy insights:
- Non-economic losses remain under-recognized in national climate policies, limiting justice-oriented approaches to L&D governance.
- Stronger integration of L&D across adaptation, disaster risk reduction, and development planning is needed to improve policy coherence and institutional coordination.
- Establishing dedicated L&D focal points, clearer institutional mandates, and links to existing risk-financing instruments could strengthen national engagement with emerging global L&D mechanisms.
- Embedding L&D more explicitly within NDCs, NAPs, and related reporting frameworks could improve strategic positioning within the FRLD and Santiago Network processes.

About the IDOS authors

Further IDOS experts