Climate change increasingly affects social, economic and ecological systems, particularly in the most vulnerable regions of the world. The most frequently promoted strategies for handling impacts are mitigation and adaptation. Despite employing these two approaches, 'loss and damage’ may still occur. Thus, a third strategic approach may be needed to help vulnerable communities deal with damage associated with climate impacts, which can take many forms including economic and non-economic loss. How to assess and manage ‘loss and damage’ (L&D) remains subject to contentious debate within climate change negotiations. There is still no clear and commonly accepted understanding of L&D consolidated in law or policy at the international level. In this article, it is confirmed that conflicting or unclear framing of L&D is one of the main explanations for the slow progress in accepting L&D as an important third approach – in addition to mitigation and adaptation – needed to measure and manage global impacts of climate change. This article analyses how L&D is currently framed in policy and institutional terms and identifies the main challenges to addressing it at the national and international levels. Better to understand the challenges of incorporating L&D into climate change strategies, the case of Bangladesh is examined.