As experiences of implementation of climate change adaptation are accumulating, there is a need to increase the understanding of negative effects that might occur and the capacity to assess them. Maladaptation in this context has remained elusively defined and sparingly used, and therefore difficult to apply. Based on a literature review, we identify the conceptual boundaries of maladaptation, assess how it can be used to analyse negative effects of adaptation policies and measures and propose a typology of maladaptation. We argue that maladaptation can be defined as a result of an intentional adaptation policy or measure leading to negative outcome(s) for the targeted or other actors. We note that the recognition of adaptation as an intentional action and the importance of setting clear spatial and temporal boundaries in analysing negative outcomes is key. The proposed typology of maladaptation distinguishes between three types of maladaptive outcomes-rebounding vulnerability, shifting vulnerability and eroding sustainable development.
Understanding climate risk is crucial for effective adaptation action, and a number of assessment methodologies have emerged. We argue that the dynamics of the individual components in climate risk and vulnerability assessments has received little attention. In order to highlight this, we systematically reviewed 42 sub-national climate risk and vulnerability assessments. We analysed the assessments using an analytical framework with which we evaluated (1) the conceptual approaches to vulnerability and exposure used, (2) if current or future risks were assessed, and (3) if and how changes over time (i.e. dynamics) were considered. Of the reviewed assessments, over half addressed future risks or vulnerability; and of these future-oriented studies, less than 1/3 considered both vulnerability and exposure dynamics. While the number of studies that include dynamics is growing, and while all studies included socio-economic aspects, often only biophysical dynamics was taken into account. We discuss the challenges of assessing socioeconomic and spatial dynamics, particularly the poor availability of data and methods. We suggest that future-oriented studies assessing risk dynamics would benefit from larger stakeholder involvement, discussion of the assessment purpose, the use of multiple methods, inclusion of uncertainty/sensitivity analyses and pathway approaches.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.