1. Climate Change Eras

Where we have also the knowledge mismatches in the norms when we talk about the climate change, it was when it was discussed in the 80s which was the first era from 80s to 2002 it was mostly focused on the greenhouse gas emissions. Where the most of the scientific community are involved, it is an environmental problem.

The first era of climate change discussion, which spanned from the 1980s to 2002, primarily focused on the issue of greenhouse gas emissions. This was a period where the scientific community dedicated significant efforts to understand and address climate change as an environmental issue. The emphasis was largely on identifying the sources of emissions and their impacts on global warming.

Think of this era as the early days of a doctor diagnosing a patient. Just like doctors focus on identifying the symptoms of an illness before treatment can begin, scientists in this era were trying to understand the symptoms of climate change—like rising temperatures and increasing carbon dioxide levels—before they could formulate solutions.

Whereas in the second era from 2000s this has been seen by the International agenda, and also the social dimension come into the picture where the social scientists and the development workers have increased their cooperation in the second era.

The second era of climate change dialogue commenced in the 2000s and marked a significant shift. It was no longer just an environmental problem; it became a part of the international agenda, recognizing the importance of social dimensions. In this period, social scientists and development workers collaborated more closely with environmental experts to address the multifaceted aspects of climate change, including its social impact.

Imagine a community coming together to address a major flood issue. Initially, engineers might only focus on the construction of dam systems, but then social workers step in to provide support for affected families. This cooperation resembles the collaboration of various fields during the second era: engineers (environmental scientists) and social workers (social scientists) bringing their expertise to tackle a common problem.

In the third era it also looks from the you know this has been felt by other countries and other regions. So this is become a question of global justice in the near future that is where the legal dimension came in third era which is, and this is where we need to talk about develop of certain legislative cultural and behavioral norms which determine the functioning of human society and how the interactions between nature and society were created.

The third era of climate change discussions introduced a broader perspective that recognized the association of climate issues with global justice. In this stage, there is a focus on the need for legal frameworks and behavioral norms that guide how societies function in relation to nature. It emphasizes how climate change affects vulnerable populations in various countries and the resources needed to address these inequalities.

Consider a school playground where some students are playing fair, while others are not. To ensure fairness, the teacher must set clear rules that everyone must follow. Similarly, the third era calls for governments and global bodies to create laws and regulations that ensure every country addresses its responsibilities and rights regarding climate change.

Also the knowledge mismatches when we talk about different scales, different data sets, different climate and risk scientist’s practitioners which they do not bring the transparent communication and collaboration and joint programming between various levels of actor’s, institutions, and agencies.

A key challenge discussed is the mismatch in knowledge across various scales and data sets regarding climate change. This challenge arises because different scientists and practitioners do not communicate or collaborate effectively. The absence of transparent communication leads to disconnected efforts and a lack of cohesive action among institutions and agencies involved in climate work.

Imagine a team project at school where students are assigned different parts: some are researching, while others are working on the presentation. If they don’t communicate effectively, the final project will be disjointed and may not make sense. This reflects the problem faced by climate scientists and agencies when they don't share knowledge and collaborate.

So to summarise whole aspect we see that differences and challenges we have disaster risk reduction and the climate change adaptation. This because it is aimed at the adaptation strategy which tells of scale mismatches because it is aimed at disaster event, it is a long term implications...

The content explains the need to integrate disaster risk reduction (DRR) with climate change adaptation (CCA). It points out the challenges that arise due to scale mismatches—where disaster planning often looks at immediate, short-term events, while climate adaptation requires long-term strategies. This gap can lead to ineffective responses to disasters and climate impacts.

Think of planning for a family road trip. If you only prepare for the first hour of travel without considering the entire journey, you might run out of gas or miss crucial stops along the way. Similarly, DRR focuses on immediate disasters, but CCA aims for a holistic view of long-term climate impacts, which requires careful planning.

--