1932

Abstract

Adaptation (i.e., actions that reduce the harms caused by climate change) is widely recognized as one of two pillars of climate action, along with mitigation (i.e., actions that reduce the concentrations of greenhouse gases which cause climate change). Action to date in both pillars is widely recognized as insufficient. This article argues that a major source of this deficiency of adaptation is ambiguity in the concept of adaptation, which hinders planning and implementation of action. The review traces the origins and consequences of this ambiguity and examines three major conceptual obstacles: the unclear relationship between adaptation and mitigation, the tendency to define adaptation by listing distinct types that are not directly comparable and hence difficult to measure, and a persistent separation of short-term and long-term perspectives that limits the ability to build from current action to transformation. The article identifies recent efforts that have addressed these obstacles, although new areas of concern have emerged, particularly maladaptation and Loss and Damage.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-environ-112320-095719
2022-10-17
2024-03-28
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/energy/47/1/annurev-environ-112320-095719.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-environ-112320-095719&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. 1.
    Zillman JW. 2009. A history of climate activities. WMO Bull 58:310
    [Google Scholar]
  2. 2.
    McCarthy JJ, Canziani OF, Dokken DJ, Leary NA, White KS, eds. 2001. Climate Change 2001: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Geneva: Intergov. Panel Clim. Change
  3. 3.
    Orlove B 2009. The past, the present, and some possible futures of adaptation. Adaptation to Climate Change: Thresholds, Values, Governance WN Adger, I Lorenzoni, K O'Brien 131–63 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  4. 4.
    Darwin C. 1859. On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life London: Murray
  5. 5.
    Dewey J. 1916. Democracy and Education: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Education New York: Macmillan
  6. 6.
    Durham WH. 1976. The adaptive significance of cultural behavior. Hum. Ecol. 4:289–121
    [Google Scholar]
  7. 7.
    Butzer KW. 1980. Adaptation to global environmental change. Prof. Geogr. 32:3269–78
    [Google Scholar]
  8. 8.
    Denevan WM. 1983. Adaptation, variation, and cultural geography. Prof. Geogr. 35:4399–407
    [Google Scholar]
  9. 9.
    Whittow J. 1987. Natural hazards—adjustment and mitigation. Horizons in Physical Geography MJ Clark, KJ Gregory, AM Gurnell 307–21 London: Palgrave
    [Google Scholar]
  10. 10.
    U. N. Gen. Assem 1972. Resolutions 2994/XXVII, 2995/XXVII, 2996/XXII. Declaration on the human environment 16 June )
    [Google Scholar]
  11. 11.
    World Comm. Environ. Dev 1987. Our Common Future Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
  12. 12.
    IUCN (Int. Union Conserv. Nat.) 1980. World conservation strategy: living resource conservation for sustainable development Rep. IUCN, UN Environ. Progr., World Wildl. Fund Gland, Switz:.
  13. 13.
    McGraw DM 2002. The story of the biodiversity convention: from negotiation to implementation. Governing Global Biodiversity JJ Kirton, K von Moltke, PG Le Prestre 8–38 London: Routledge
    [Google Scholar]
  14. 14.
    Orlove B, Lazrus H, Hovelsrud GK, Giannini A. 2014. Recognitions and responsibilities: on the origins and consequences of the uneven attention to climate change around the world. Curr. Anthropol. 55:3249–75
    [Google Scholar]
  15. 15.
    WMO (World Meteorol. Assoc.) 1986. Report of the international conference on the assessment of the role of carbon dioxide and of other greenhouse gases in climate variations and associated impacts Rep. 661 WMO Geneva:
  16. 16.
    WMO (World Meteorol. Assoc.) 2009 (1990). Final statement of the Second World Climate Conference. Environ. Conserv. 18:162–66
    [Google Scholar]
  17. 17.
    WMO (World Meteorol. Assoc.), UNEP (U. N. Environ. Progr.) 1992. Climate Change: The IPCC 1990 and 1992 Assessments Geneva: Intergov. Panel Clim. Change
  18. 18.
    United Nations 1992. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change New York: United Nations
  19. 19.
    Watson RT, Zinyowera MC, Moss RH, eds. 1995. Climate Change 1995: Impacts, Adaptations and Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group II to the Second Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  20. 20.
    Nakicenovic N, Alcamo J, Davis G, de Vries B, Fenhann J et al. 2000. Special Report on Emissions Scenarios: A Special Report of Working Group III of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  21. 21.
    Burton I. 1994. Deconstructing adaptation… and reconstructing. Delta 5:114–15
    [Google Scholar]
  22. 22.
    Pielke R, Prins G, Rayner S, Sarewitz D. 2007. Lifting the taboo on adaptation. Nature 445:7128597–98
    [Google Scholar]
  23. 23.
    Huq S, Reid H. 2004. Mainstreaming adaptation in development. Inst. Dev. Stud. Bull. 35:315–21
    [Google Scholar]
  24. 24.
    Ayers J, Dodman D. 2010. Climate change adaptation and development. I. The state of the debate. Prog. Dev. Stud. 10:2161–68
    [Google Scholar]
  25. 25.
    Adger WN, Arnell NW, Tompkins EL. 2005. Successful adaptation to climate change across scales. Glob. Environ. Change 15:277–86
    [Google Scholar]
  26. 26.
    Roberts JT, Weikmans R, Robinson S, Ciplet D, Khan M et al. 2021. Rebooting a failed promise of climate finance. Nat. Clim. Change 11:3180–82
    [Google Scholar]
  27. 27.
    Adger WN, Huq S, Brown K, Conway D, Hulme M. 2003. Adaptation to climate change in the developing world. Prog. Dev. Stud. 3:3179–95
    [Google Scholar]
  28. 28.
    Schipper ELF. 2006. Conceptual history of adaptation in the UNFCCC process. Rev. Eur. Comp. Int. Environ. Law 15:182–92
    [Google Scholar]
  29. 29.
    Newell R, Dale A, Roseland M. 2018. Climate action co-benefits and integrated community planning: uncovering the synergies and trade-offs. Int. J. Clim. Change 10:41–23
    [Google Scholar]
  30. 30.
    Choi C, Berry P, Smith A. 2021. The climate benefits, co-benefits, and trade-offs of green infrastructure: a systematic literature review. J. Environ. Manag. 291:112583
    [Google Scholar]
  31. 31.
    UN-OHRLLS (U. N. Off. High Rep. Least Dev. Ctries., Landlocked Dev. Ctries., Small Island Dev. States) 2006. Brussels Programme of Action: Addressing the Special Needs of the Least Developed Countries New York: United Nations
  32. 32.
    Barnett J, Dessai S. 2002. Articles 4.8 and 4.9 of the UNFCCC: adverse effects and the impacts of response measures. Clim. Policy 2:2/3231–39
    [Google Scholar]
  33. 33.
    Burton I, Huq S, Lim B, Pilifosova O, Schipper EL. 2002. From impacts assessment to adaptation priorities: the shaping of adaptation policy. . Clim. Policy 2:2/3145–59
    [Google Scholar]
  34. 34.
    Klein RJT, Schipper ELF, Dessai S. 2005. Integrating mitigation and adaptation into climate and development policy: three research questions. Environ. Sci. Policy 8:6579–88
    [Google Scholar]
  35. 35.
    Parry M, Canziani O, Palutikof J, van der Linden P, Hanson C, eds. 2007. Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  36. 36.
    Wilson C, Guivarch C, Kriegler E, van Ruijven B, van Vuuren DP et al. 2021. Evaluating process-based integrated assessment models of climate change mitigation. Clim. Change 166:1/23
    [Google Scholar]
  37. 37.
    Khan M, Robinson S, Weikmans R, Ciplet D, Roberts JT. 2019. Twenty-five years of adaptation finance through a climate justice lens. Clim. Change 161:2251–69
    [Google Scholar]
  38. 38.
    Holdren J, Bierbaum RM, MacCraken MC, Moss R, Raven PH 2007. Confronting climate change: avoiding the unmanageable and managing the unavoidable. Am. Sci. 95:31–5
    [Google Scholar]
  39. 39.
    Fung I. 2020. In pursuit. Annu. Rev. Earth Planet. Sci. 48:1–20
    [Google Scholar]
  40. 40.
    Robertson S. 2020. Transparency, trust, and integrated assessment models: an ethical consideration for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Clim. Change 12:1e679
    [Google Scholar]
  41. 41.
    United Nations 2014. Paris Agreement New York: United Nations
  42. 42.
    Field CB, Barros VR, Dokken DJ, Mach KJ, Mastrandrea MD et al., eds. 2014. Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  43. 43.
    Barros VR, Field CB, Dokken DJ, Mastrandrea MD, Mach KJ et al., eds. 2014. Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part B: Regional Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  44. 44.
    Bassett TJ, Fogelman C. 2013. Déjà vu or something new? The adaptation concept in the climate change literature. Geoforum 48:42–53
    [Google Scholar]
  45. 45.
    UNFCC (U. N. Framew. Conv. Clim. Change) Copenhagen Accord New York: United Nations
  46. 46.
    Falkner R. 2015. Towards minilateralism. Nat. Clim. Change 5:9805–6
    [Google Scholar]
  47. 47.
    Kissinger G, Namgyel T. 2018. NAPAs and NAPs in least developed countries Brief. 13 Eur. Capacit. Build. Initat. Oxford, UK:
  48. 48.
    Holler J, Bernier Q, Roberts JT, Robinson S 2020. Transformational adaptation in least developed countries: Does expanded stakeholder participation make a difference?. Sustainability 12:41657
    [Google Scholar]
  49. 49.
    Woodruff SC, Regan P. 2019. Quality of national adaptation plans and opportunities for improvement. Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Change 24:53–71
    [Google Scholar]
  50. 50.
    United Nations 2013. Warsaw international mechanism for loss and damage associated with climate change impacts Rep. United Nations Warsaw: https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/docs/2013/cop19/eng/l15.pdf
  51. 51.
    Bouwer LM, Linnerooth-Bayer J, Mechler R, Schinko T, Surminski S, eds. 2019. Loss and Damage from Climate Change: Concepts, Methods and Policy Options Cham, Switz.: Springer Int.
  52. 52.
    Ashe JW, Lierop RV, Cherian A. 1999. The role of the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) in the negotiation of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Reg. Environ. Change 18:82201–7
    [Google Scholar]
  53. 53.
    Calliari E, Serdeczny O, Vanhala L. 2020. Making sense of the politics in the climate change loss and damage debate. Glob. Environ. Change 64:102133
    [Google Scholar]
  54. 54.
    Pelling M 2011. The vulnerability of cities to disasters and climate change: a conceptual framework. Coping with Global Environmental Change, Disasters and Security HG Brauch, ÚO Spring, C Mesjasz, J Grin, P Kameri-Mbote et al.549–58 Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer
    [Google Scholar]
  55. 55.
    Field CB, Barros V, Stocker TF, Qin D, Dokken DJ et al., eds. 2012. Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation: A Special Report of Working Groups I and II of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  56. 56.
    Connelly A, Carter J, Handley J, Hincks S. 2018. Enhancing the practical utility of risk assessments in climate change adaptation. Sustainability 10:51399
    [Google Scholar]
  57. 57.
    Mach KJ, Mastrandrea MD, Bilir TE, Field CB. 2016. Understanding and responding to danger from climate change: the role of key risks in the IPCC AR5. Clim. Change 136:3/4427–44
    [Google Scholar]
  58. 58.
    Ribot J. 2011. Vulnerability before adaptation: toward transformative climate action. Glob. Environ. Change 21:41160–62
    [Google Scholar]
  59. 59.
    O'Neill BC, Kriegler E, Ebi KL, Kemp-Benedict E, Riahi K et al. 2017. The roads ahead: narratives for shared socioeconomic pathways describing world futures in the 21st century. Glob. Environ. Change 42:169–80
    [Google Scholar]
  60. 60.
    van Vuuren DP, Kriegler E, O'Neill BC, Ebi KL, Riahi K et al. 2014. A new scenario framework for climate change research: scenario matrix architecture. Clim. Change 122:373–86
    [Google Scholar]
  61. 61.
    O'Neill BC, Carter TR, Ebi KL, Edmonds J, Hallegatte S et al. 2012. Meeting report of the workshop on the nature and use of new socioeconomic pathways for climate change research Meet. Rep., Natl. Cent. Atmos. Res. Boulder, CO: http://www.isp.ucar.edu/socioeconomic-pathways
  62. 62.
    Nakicenovic N, Lempter R, Janetos AC, eds. 2014. Special issue: a framework for the development of new socio-economic scenarios for climate change research. Clim. Change 122:3)
    [Google Scholar]
  63. 63.
    Hewitson B, Janetos AC, Carter TR, Giorgi F, Jones RG et al. 2014. Regional context. See Ref. 42 1101–31
  64. 64.
    Riahi K, van Vuuren D, Kriegler E, Edmonds J, O'Neill B et al. 2017. The shared socioeconomic pathways and their energy, land use, and greenhouse gas emissions implications: an overview. Glob. Environ. Change 42:153–68
    [Google Scholar]
  65. 65.
    Shikla PR, Skea J, Calvo Buendia E, Masson-Delmotte V, Pörtner H-O et al., eds. 2020. Summary for policymakers. Climate Change and Land: An IPCC Special Report on Climate Change, Desertification, Land Degradation, Sustainable Land Management, Food Security, and Greenhouse Gas Fluxes in Terrestrial Ecosystems3–36 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  66. 66.
    Pörtner H-O, Roberts DC, Tignor M, Poloczanska ES, Mintenbeck K et al., eds. 2022. Summary for policymakers. See Ref. 83 5–35
  67. 67.
    Haasnoot M, Biesbroek R, Lawrence J, Muccione V, Lempert R, Glavovic B. 2020. Defining the solution space to accelerate climate change adaptation. Reg. Environ. Change 20:237
    [Google Scholar]
  68. 68.
    O'Neill BC, Carter TR, Ebi KL, Harrison PA, Kemp-Benedict E et al. 2020. Achievements and needs for the climate change scenario framework. Nat. Clim. Change 10:121074–84
    [Google Scholar]
  69. 69.
    Pachauri RK, Reisinger A, eds. 2007. Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Geneva: Intergov. Panel Clim. Change
  70. 70.
    Aldunce P, Beilin R, Handmer J, Howden M. 2014. Framing disaster resilience: the implications of the diverse conceptualisations of “bouncing back. .” Disaster Prev. Manag. 23:3252–70
    [Google Scholar]
  71. 71.
    Linkov I, Bridges T, Creutzig F, Decker J, Fox-Lent C et al. 2014. Changing the resilience paradigm. Clim. Change 4:6407–9
    [Google Scholar]
  72. 72.
    Barros VR, Field CB, Dokken DJ, Mastrandrea MD, Mach KJ et al., eds. 2014. Summary for policymakers. See Ref. 42 1–32
  73. 73.
    UNEP (U. N. Environ. Progr.) 2014. The Adaptation Gap Report 2014: A Preliminary Assessment Nairobi: UNEP
  74. 74.
    Biagini B, Bierbaum R, Stults M, Dobardzic S, McNeeley SM. 2014. A typology of adaptation actions: a global look at climate adaptation actions financed through the Global Environment Facility. Glob. Environ. Change 25:97–108
    [Google Scholar]
  75. 75.
    Weiler F, Klöck C, Dornan M. 2018. Vulnerability, good governance, or donor interests? The allocation of aid for climate change adaptation. World Dev 104:65–77
    [Google Scholar]
  76. 76.
    Khan M, Robinson S, Weikmans R, Ciplet D, Roberts JT. 2019. Twenty-five years of adaptation finance through a climate justice lens. Clim. Change 161:2251–69
    [Google Scholar]
  77. 77.
    Weikmans R, Roberts JT. 2019. The international climate finance accounting muddle: Is there hope on the horizon?. Clim. Dev. 11:297–111
    [Google Scholar]
  78. 78.
    Lloyd EA, Oreskes N. 2018. Climate change attribution: When is it appropriate to accept new methods?. Earth's Future 6:3311–25
    [Google Scholar]
  79. 79.
    Thomas MA, Rengers FK, Kean JW, McGuire LA, Staley DM et al. 2021. Postwildfire soil-hydraulic recovery and the persistence of debris flow hazards. J. Geophys. Res. Earth Surf. 126:6e2021JF006091
    [Google Scholar]
  80. 80.
    Beauchamp E, Motaroki L. 2022. Taking stock of the global goal on adaptation: from the Paris Agreement to the Glasgow–Sharm el-Sheikh work programme Work. Pap. Int. Inst. Environ. Dev. London: https://pubs.iied.org/20876iied
  81. 81.
    UNFCCC (U. N. Framew. Conv. Clim. Change) 2021. Glasgow–Sharm el-Sheikh work programme on the global goal on adaptation Decision CMA.3 UNFCCC Bonn, Ger:.
  82. 82.
    Int. Inst. Sustain. Dev 2015. Summary of the Bonn Climate Change Conference: 31 August–4 September 2015. Earth Negot. Bull. 12:6441–16 https://enb.iisd.org/events/bonn-climate-change-conference-august-2015/summary-report-31-august-4-september-2015
    [Google Scholar]
  83. 83.
    Pörtner H-O, Roberts DC, Tignor M, Poloczanska ES, Mintenbeck K et al., eds. 2022. Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  84. 84.
    Masson-Delmotte V, Zhai P, Pörtner H-O, Roberts D, Skea J et al., eds. 2018. Global Warming of 1.5°C: An IPCC Special Report on the Impacts of Global Warming of 1.5°C Above Pre-Industrial Levels and Related Global Greenhouse Gas Emission Pathways, in the Context of Strengthening the Global Response to the Threat of Climate Change, Sustainable Development, and Efforts to Eradicate Poverty Geneva: Intergov. Panel Clim. Change
  85. 85.
    Houghton JT, Ding Y, Griggs DJ, Noguer M, van der Linden PJ, eds. 2001. Climate Change 2001: Mitigation of Climate Change. The Scientific Basis: Contribution of Working Group I to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Geneva: Intergov. Panel Clim. Change
  86. 86.
    New M, Reckien D, Viner D, Adler C, Cheong SM et al. 2022. Decision making options for managing risk. See Ref. 83, chapter 17
  87. 87.
    Schipper LF, Revi A, Preston BL, Carr ER, Eriksen SH et al. 2022. Climate resilient development pathways. See Ref. 83, chapter 18
  88. 88.
    Jack CD, Jones R, Burgin L, Daron J 2020. Climate risk narratives: an iterative reflective process for co-producing and integrating climate knowledge. Clim. Risk Manag. 29:100239
    [Google Scholar]
  89. 89.
    Kasdan M, Kuhl L, Kurukulasuriya P. 2021. The evolution of transformational change in multilateral funds dedicated to financing adaptation to climate change. Clim. Dev. 13:5427–42
    [Google Scholar]
  90. 90.
    Werners SE, Wise RM, Butler JRA, Totin E, Vincent K. 2021. Adaptation pathways: a review of approaches and a learning framework. Environ. Sci. Policy 116:266–75
    [Google Scholar]
  91. 91.
    Tschakert P, Dietrich KA. 2010. Anticipatory learning for climate change adaptation and resilience. Ecol. Soc. 15:211
    [Google Scholar]
  92. 92.
    Jones JL, White DD. 2022. Understanding barriers to collaborative governance for the food-energy-water nexus: the case of Phoenix, Arizona. Environ. Sci. Policy 127:111–19
    [Google Scholar]
  93. 93.
    Nissan H, Goddard L, Coughlan de Perez E, Furlow J, Baethgen W 2019. On the use and misuse of climate change projections in international development. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Clim. Change 10:3e579
    [Google Scholar]
  94. 94.
    Howlett M. 2019. Procedural policy tools and the temporal dimensions of policy design: resilience, robustness and the sequencing of policy mixes. Int. Rev. Public Policy 1:127–45
    [Google Scholar]
  95. 95.
    Orlove B, Shwom R, Markowitz E, Cheong S-M. 2020. Climate decision-making. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 45:271–303
    [Google Scholar]
  96. 96.
    Wilson AJ, Orlove B. 2021. Climate urgency: evidence of its effects on decision making in the laboratory and the field. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 51:65–76
    [Google Scholar]
  97. 97.
    Yamin F 2021. The high ambition coalition. Negotiating the Paris Agreement: The Insider Stories H Jepsen, M Lundgren, K Monheim, H Walker 216–44 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  98. 98.
    Obergassel W, Arens C, Hermwille L, Kreibich N, Mersmann F et al. 2016. Phoenix from the ashes: an analysis of the Paris agreement to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Part II. Environ. Law Manag. 28:3–11
    [Google Scholar]
  99. 99.
    O'Brien K. 2012. Global environmental change. II. From adaptation to deliberate transformation. Prog. Hum. Geogr. 36:5667–76
    [Google Scholar]
  100. 100.
    Loorbach D, Frantzeskaki N, Avelino F. 2017. Sustainability transitions research: transforming science and practice for societal change. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 42:599–626
    [Google Scholar]
  101. 101.
    Hölscher K, Wittmayer J M, Loorbach D. 2018. Transition versus transformation: What's the difference?. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 27:1–3
    [Google Scholar]
  102. 102.
    Rickards L, Howden SM. 2012. Transformational adaptation: agriculture and climate change. Crop Pasture Sci 63:3240–50
    [Google Scholar]
  103. 103.
    Magnan AK, Chalastani VI. 2019. Towards a global adaptation progress tracker: first thoughts Work. Pap. 1 Inst. Sustain. Dev. Int. Relat./Univ Athens: https://www.iddri.org/sites/default/files/PDF/Publications/Catalogue%20Iddri/Document%20de%20travail/WP0119_global%20adaptation%20tracker_0.pdf
  104. 104.
    Hochachka G. 2021. Integrating the four faces of climate change adaptation: towards transformative change in Guatemalan coffee communities. World Dev 140:105361
    [Google Scholar]
  105. 105.
    Nalau J, Verrall B. 2021. Mapping the evolution and current trends in climate change adaptation science. Clim. Risk Manag. 32:100290
    [Google Scholar]
  106. 106.
    United Nations 2015. Summary report on the in-session workshop on long-term climate finance in 2015 Summ. Rep., United Nations New York: https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/docs/2015/cop21/eng/02.pdf
  107. 107.
    Morecroft MD, Duffield S, Harley M, Pearce-Higgins JW, Stevens N et al. 2019. Measuring the success of climate change adaptation and mitigation in terrestrial ecosystems. Science 366:6471eaaw9256
    [Google Scholar]
  108. 108.
    Owen G. 2020. What makes climate change adaptation effective? A systematic review of the literature. Glob. Environ. Change 62:102071
    [Google Scholar]
  109. 109.
    Shukla PR, Skea J, Slade R, Al Khourdajie A, van Diemen R et al., eds. 2022. Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  110. 110.
    Singh C, Iyer S, New M, Few R, Kuchimanchi B et al. 2022. Interrogating ‘effectiveness’ in climate change adaptation: 11 guiding principles for adaptation research and practice. Clim. Dev. 14:7650–64
    [Google Scholar]
  111. 111.
    UNFCCC (U. N. Framew. Conv. Clim. Change) 2020. Data for adaptation at different spatial and temporal scales Tech. Pap. UNFCCC Bonn, Ger:.
  112. 112.
    Smith JB, Schneider SH, Oppenheimer M, Yohe GW, Hare W et al. 2009. Assessing dangerous climate change through an update of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) “reasons for concern. .” PNAS 106:114133–37
    [Google Scholar]
  113. 113.
    Zommers Z, Marbaix P, Fischlin A, Ibrahim Z, Grant S et al. 2020. Burning embers: towards more transparent and robust climate-change risk assessments. Nat. Rev. Earth Environ. 1:10516–29
    [Google Scholar]
  114. 114.
    Pörtner H-O, Roberts DC, Masson-Delmotte V, Zhai P, Tignor M et al., eds. 2022. The Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate: Special Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  115. 115.
    Noble I, Olhoff A, Igual EA, Mechler R, Reckien D. 2014. A framework for identifying and measuring adaptation gaps. See Ref. 73 5–17
  116. 116.
    Magnan AK, Schipper ELF, Burkett M, Bharwani S, Burton I et al. 2016. Addressing the risk of maladaptation to climate change. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Clim. Change 7:5646–65
    [Google Scholar]
  117. 117.
    Berrang-Ford L, Siders AR, Lesnikowski A, Fischer AP, Callaghan MW et al. 2021. A systematic global stocktake of evidence on human adaptation to climate change. Nat. Clim. Change 11:989–1000
    [Google Scholar]
  118. 118.
    Araos M, Jagannathan K, Shukla R, Ajibade I, Coughlan de Perez E et al. 2021. Equity in human adaptation–related responses: a systematic global review. One Earth 4:101454–67
    [Google Scholar]
  119. 119.
    Ulibarri N, Ajibade I, Galappaththi EK, Joe ET, Lesnikowski A et al. 2022. A global assessment of policy tools to support climate adaptation. Clim. Policy 22:177–96
    [Google Scholar]
  120. 120.
    Turek-Hankins LL, Coughlan de Perez E, Scarpa G, Ruiz-Diaz R, Schwerdtle PN et al. 2021. Climate change adaptation to extreme heat: a global systematic review of implemented action. Oxf. Open Clim. Change 1:1kgab005
    [Google Scholar]
  121. 121.
    Leal Filho W, Totin E, Franke JA, Andrew SM, Abubakar IR et al. 2022. Understanding responses to climate-related water scarcity in Africa. Sci. Total Environ. 806:150420
    [Google Scholar]
  122. 122.
    Magnan AK, Anisimov A, Duvet V, Deenapanray S, Fall B et al. 2021. Global Adaptation Progress Tracker (GAP-Track) Pilot Study Rep., Inst. Sustain. Dev. Int. Relat Paris: https://www.iddri.org/en/publications-and-events/report/global-adaptation-progress-tracker-gap-track-pilot-study-report-2021
    [Google Scholar]
  123. 123.
    Anguelovski I, Shi L, Chu E, Gallagher D, Goh K et al. 2016. Equity impacts of urban land use planning for climate adaptation: critical perspectives from the Global North and South. J. Plan. Educ. Res. 36:3333–48
    [Google Scholar]
  124. 124.
    Sherman M, Berrang-Ford L, Lwasa S, Ford J, Namanya DB et al. 2016. Drawing the line between adaptation and development: a systematic literature review of planned adaptation in developing countries. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Clim. Change 7:5707–26
    [Google Scholar]
  125. 125.
    Sovacool BK. 2018. Bamboo beating bandits: conflict, inequality, and vulnerability in the political ecology of climate change adaptation in Bangladesh. World Dev 102:183–94
    [Google Scholar]
  126. 126.
    Schipper ELF, Ensor J, Mukherji A, Mirzabaev A, Fraser A et al. 2021. Equity in climate scholarship: a manifesto for action. Clim. Dev. 13:10853–56
    [Google Scholar]
  127. 127.
    Liverman D, von Hedemann N, Nying'uro P, Rummukainen M, Stendahl K et al. 2022. Survey of gender bias in the IPCC. Nature 602:789530–32
    [Google Scholar]
  128. 128.
    Shea MM, Thornton TF. 2019. Tracing country commitment to Indigenous peoples in the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. Glob. Environ. Change 58:101973
    [Google Scholar]
  129. 129.
    Ford JD, Cameron L, Rubis J, Maillet M, Nakashima D et al. 2016. Including Indigenous knowledge and experience in IPCC assessment reports. Nat. Clim Change 6:4349–53
    [Google Scholar]
  130. 130.
    Scheraga J, Grambsch A. 1998. Risks, opportunities, and adaptation to climate change. Clim. Res. 10:85–95
    [Google Scholar]
  131. 131.
    Pinsky ML. 2021. Diversification spins a heatwave safety net for fisheries. PNAS 118:3e2024412118
    [Google Scholar]
  132. 132.
    Orlove B. 2005. Human adaptation to climate change: a review of three historical cases and some general perspectives. Environ. Sci. Policy 8:6589–600
    [Google Scholar]
  133. 133.
    Barnett J, O'Neill S 2010. Maladaptation. Glob. Environ. Change 20:211–13
    [Google Scholar]
  134. 134.
    Eriksen S, Aldunce P, Bahinipati CS, D'Almeida MR, Isaac MJ et al. 2011. When not every response to climate change is a good one: identifying principles for sustainable adaptation. Clim. Dev. 3:17–20
    [Google Scholar]
  135. 135.
    Hill AC. 2021. The Fight for Climate After COVID-19 Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
  136. 136.
    Nightingale AJ. 2017. Power and politics in climate change adaptation efforts: struggles over authority and recognition in the context of political instability. Geoforum 84:11–20
    [Google Scholar]
  137. 137.
    Atteridge A, Remling E. 2018. Is adaptation reducing vulnerability or redistributing it?. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Clim. Change 9:1e500
    [Google Scholar]
  138. 138.
    Scoville-Simonds M, Jamali H, Hufty M. 2020. The hazards of mainstreaming: climate change adaptation politics in three dimensions. World Dev 125:104683
    [Google Scholar]
  139. 139.
    Eriksen S, Schipper ELF, Scoville-Simonds M, Vincent K, Adam HN et al. 2021. Adaptation interventions and their effect on vulnerability in developing countries: help, hindrance or irrelevance?. World Dev 141:105383
    [Google Scholar]
  140. 140.
    Work C, Rong V, Song D, Scheidel A. 2019. Maladaptation and development as usual? Investigating climate change mitigation and adaptation projects in Cambodia. Clim. Policy 19:Suppl. 1S47–62
    [Google Scholar]
  141. 141.
    Patashnik J. 2019. The trolley problem of climate change: Should governments face takings liability if adaptive strategies cause property damage?. Columbia Law Rev 119:51273–310
    [Google Scholar]
  142. 142.
    Schipper E. 2020. Maladaptation: when adaptation to climate change goes very wrong. One Earth 3:4409–14
    [Google Scholar]
  143. 143.
    Lahsen M, Ribot J. 2022. Politics of attributing extreme events and disasters to climate change. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Clim. Change 13:1e750
    [Google Scholar]
  144. 144.
    Schipper E, Eriksen S, Fernandez Carril L, Glavovic B, Shawoo Z 2020. Turbulent transformation: abrupt societal disruption and climate resilient development. Clim Dev 13:6467–74
    [Google Scholar]
  145. 145.
    Glavovic BC. 2021. Indigenous food systems resilience in small island states/large ocean states: climate resilient development in turbulent times Paper presented at U. N. Food Systems Summit Science Days Side Event, Massey Univ. Palmerston North, N. Z.: July 7
  146. 146.
    Whyte K. 2021. Against crisis epistemology. Routledge Handbook of Critical Indigenous Studies B Hokowhitu, A Moreton-Robinson, L Tuhiwai-Smith, C Andersen, S Larkin 52–64 New York: Routledge
    [Google Scholar]
  147. 147.
    Callison C. 2021. Refusing more empire: utility, colonialism, and Indigenous knowing. Clim. Change 167:3/458
    [Google Scholar]
  148. 148.
    Whyte K. 2017. Indigenous climate change studies: indigenizing futures, decolonizing the Anthropocene Course Notes, Engl. Lang 55 1-2 Mich. State Univ. Ann Arbor: https://kylewhyte.marcom.cal.msu.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2018/07/IndigenousClimateChangeStudies.pdf
  149. 149.
    Khan N. 2014. Dogs and humans and what Earth can be: filaments of Muslim ecological thought. HAU J. Ethnogr. Theory 4:3245–64
    [Google Scholar]
  150. 150.
    Khan N 2014. The death of nature in the era of global warming. Wording the World R Chatterji 288–99 New York: Fordham Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  151. 151.
    Lipset D. 2011. The tides: masculinity and climate change in coastal Papua New Guinea. J. R. Anthropol. Inst. 17:20–43
    [Google Scholar]
  152. 152.
    Sherpa P. 2014. Climate change, perceptions, and social heterogeneity in Pharak, Mount Everest Region of Nepal. Hum. Organ. 73:2153–61
    [Google Scholar]
  153. 153.
    Sherpa P. 2014. Flooded with memories in Nepal. GlacierHub Blog Sept. 4. http://glacierhub.org/2014/09/03/flooded-with-memories-in-nepal/
    [Google Scholar]
  154. 154.
    Findlater KM, Donner SD, Satterfield T, Kandlikar M. 2018. Integration anxiety: the cognitive isolation of climate change. Glob. Environ. Change 50:178–89
    [Google Scholar]
  155. 155.
    Nightingale AJ, Eriksen S, Taylor M, Forsyth T, Pelling M et al. 2020. Beyond technical fixes: climate solutions and the Great Derangement. Clim. Dev. 12:4343–52
    [Google Scholar]
  156. 156.
    Funder M, Mweemba CE. 2019. Interface bureaucrats and the everyday remaking of climate interventions: evidence from climate change adaptation in Zambia. Glob. Environ. Change 55:130–38
    [Google Scholar]
  157. 157.
    Orlove B, Milch K, Zaval L, Ungemach C, Brugger J et al. 2019. Framing climate change in frontline communities: anthropological insights on how mountain dwellers in the USA, Peru, and Italy adapt to glacier retreat. Reg. Environ. Change 19:51295–309
    [Google Scholar]
  158. 158.
    Brüggemann M, Rödder S, eds. 2020. Global Warming in Local Discourses, Vol. 1 How Communities Around the World Make Sense of Climate Change Cambridge, UK: Open Book
  159. 159.
    Dewan C. 2020.. ‘ Climate change as a spice’: brokering environmental knowledge in Bangladesh's development industry. Ethnos https://doi.org/10.1080/00141844.2020.1788109
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  160. 160.
    Wit S, Haines S. 2022. Climate change reception studies in anthropology. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Clim. Change 13:1e742
    [Google Scholar]
  161. 161.
    Kruczkiewicz A, Klopp J, Fisher J, Maron S, McClain S et al. 2021. Compound risks and complex emergencies require new approaches to preparedness. PNAS 118:19e2106795118
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-environ-112320-095719
Loading
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-environ-112320-095719
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error