Explore the vast range of titles available.

Assessing global progress on human adaptation to climate change is an urgent priority. Although the literature on adaptation to climate change is rapidly expanding, little is known about the actual extent of implementation. We systematically screened >48,000 articles using machine learning methods and a global network of 126 researchers. Our synthesis of the resulting 1,682 articles presents a systematic and comprehensive global stocktake of implemented human adaptation to climate change. Documented adaptations were largely fragmented, local and incremental, with limited evidence of transformational adaptation and negligible evidence of risk reduction outcomes. We identify eight priorities for global adaptation research: assess the effectiveness of adaptation responses, enhance the understanding of limits to adaptation, enable individuals and civil society to adapt, include missing places, scholars and scholarship, understand private sector responses, improve methods for synthesizing different forms of evidence, assess the adaptation at different temperature thresholds, and improve the inclusion of timescale and the dynamics of responses.Determining progress in adaptation to climate change is challenging, yet critical as climate change impacts increase. A stocktake of the scientific literature on implemented adaptation now shows that adaptation is mostly fragmented and incremental, with evidence lacking for its impact on reducing risk.

Traditionally, ecosystem restoration has focussed on standard ecological indicators like water or habitat quality, species population abundance or vegetation cover to determine success. However, there is growing interest in how restoration might impact people and communities. For example, researchers have documented positive socio‐ecological links between restoration and human well‐being indicators like property value, natural hazard mitigation, recreation opportunity and happiness. Furthermore, public health benefits from restoration have been linked to public support for programmes. Drawing from this research, the United Nations declared 2021–2030 the ‘Decade of Ecosystem Restoration’ and set a goal to promote more socio‐ecological goals in ecosystem restoration. Nonetheless, there is still a lack of information on the extent to which restoration practitioners consider well‐being because many granting programmes only require ecological goals and monitoring. To explore how restoration practitioners design, implement and measure the success of their projects, we used the federally funded Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI) as a case study. Since 2010, GLRI has awarded over $3.5 Billion to over 5300 projects across the midwestern United States, but it does not presently require human well‐being considerations. We performed an online survey targeting project managers with a sample of GLRI projects (N = 1574). We received 437 responses and found that almost half set a human well‐being goal, and more than 70% of those who did believe they reached it. In comparison, 90% of project managers believed they met their ecological goals. These documented perceptions of positive impacts for both people and nature suggest that restoration may already transcend traditional indicators and monitoring for socio‐ecological metrics could capture many ‘unseen’ benefits. Therefore, we recommend that ecosystem restoration programmes adopt a socio‐ecological lens to document the full extent of their restoration outcomes. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

The salinization of freshwater-dependent coastal ecosystems precedes inundation by sea level rise. This type of saltwater intrusion places communities, ecosystems, and infrastructure at substantial risk. Risk perceptions of local residents are an indicator to gauge public support for climate change adaptation planning. Here, we document residential perspectives on the present and future threats posed by saltwater intrusion in a rural, low-lying region in coastal North Carolina, and we compare the spatial distribution of survey responses to physical landscape variables such as distance to coastline, artificial drainage density, elevation, saltwater intrusion vulnerability, and actual salinity measured during a synoptic field survey. We evaluate and discuss the degree of alignment or misalignment between risk perceptions and metrics of exposure to saltwater intrusion. Risk perceptions align well with the physical landscape characteristics, as residents with greater exposure to saltwater intrusion, including those living on low-lying land with high concentrations of artificial drainages, perceive greater risk than people living in low-exposure areas. Uncertainty about threats of saltwater intrusion is greatest among those living at higher elevations, whose properties and communities are less likely to be exposed to high salinity. As rising sea levels, drought, and coastal storms increase the likelihood of saltwater intrusion in coastal regions, integrated assessments of risk perceptions and physical exposure are critical for developing outreach activities and planning adaptation measures.

Coastal communities are increasingly threatened by climate change globally and efforts to build resilience have focused primarily on urban areas and beach tourism destinations. However, rural coastal communities are facing the same threats, but adaptation is challenged by higher poverty rates, out-migration, and lack of social services. Additionally, lower tax bases and the lack of high value properties limit the ability to plan locally. Further, climate justice research has documented historical development patterns in which minority communities, dating back to the reconstruction era occupy some of the lowest-lying and most highly flood-prone land now highly susceptible to sea level rise. Efforts to assess coastal resilience have focused primarily on economic metrics like cost-benefit analysis but have yet to consider the inherent resilience within a community; as such, assessment measures that capture stakeholder’s perceptions of adaptive capacity are needed. Using multiple methods, this research developed and tested the Rural Coastal Community Resilience framework (RCCR) to capture perceptions of adaptive capacity on the low-lying Albemarle Pamlico Peninsula of eastern North Carolina. With the goal of creating a framework useful for engagement and information sharing, the research sought to develop an assessment with accessible vocabulary and concepts for stakeholders. A literature review of resilience in socio-ecological systems was conducted to develop themes for adaptive capacity, which then informed a semi-structured interview protocol for initial engagement in 2015. These themes were the focal indicators of adaptive capacity in the RCCR framework, which considers vulnerability and resilience as two ends of a spectrum that can assess adaptive capacity. In 2016, the RCCR framework was tested in focus group research to explore how the RCCR framework can be employed in outreach and engagement efforts that also measure perceptions of adaptive capacity using pre- and post-survey assessments and nominal group processes. In 2017, a modified drop-off/ pick-up residential survey was conducted to predict stakeholder’s perceptions of risk in the future to coastal hazards. Additionally, the RCCR framework was used in focus group research within minority communities in 2017 to document unique barriers and challenges to adaptation using a climate justice analytical lens. We found that climate science information and dialogue focused on the RCCR framework increased perceived adaptive capacity in predominately-white communities while it lowered perceived adaptive capacity in African American communities. Specific instances of perceived climate injustices were also found in the minority communities concerning a) the lack of inclusion in government procedure at multiple scales (procedural justice), b) an unequal distribution of flooding impacts (distributive justice), and c) disparaging views of certain communities that lead to a lack of recognition of their unique flood management needs (recognitional justice). Additionally, multiple linear regression models revealed that adaptive capacity is an important predictor of perceived risk to climate change threats. Specifically, the more resilient residents perceived their community, the less at risk they considered themselves to be, which highlights that residents may equate climate change adaptation to previous flood recovery experiences and, thereby, obscure the gravity of sea level rise projections. Several failed local outreach attempts to share planning information and our own unsuccessful outreach attempt to boost perceived adaptive capacity in diverse communities highlight the need for an audience analysis (i.e., determining preferred modes of communication) to achieve effective dissemination of climate science and climate change risk information. Documented low climate change literacy also points to a need to mainstream sea level rise messaging, as isolated and diverse rural communities are predominately unaware that their lands are projected to be inundated. More inclusive government outreach is needed to avoid cases of negligence for failing to inform vulnerable coastal populations of impending threats.