Key Themes in Climate Adaptation: A Literature Review of Global and Regional Climate Change Policies

I. Introduction

Climate change presents one of the most significant challenges of the 21st century, affecting natural ecosystems and human societies in increasingly severe ways. The consequences, including extreme weather events, rising sea levels, and biodiversity loss, have a particularly detrimental impact on vulnerable regions where socio-economic and environmental conditions exacerbate these risks (Ford et al., 2015).

Addressing these multifaceted challenges requires robust, context-specific adaptation strategies spanning from local to global frameworks. The urgency of focusing on adaptation policies stems from the complex and wide-ranging impacts of climate change, which not only pose environmental threats but also intensify existing socio-economic vulnerabilities in certain regions. In particular, the disproportionate burden faced by marginalized and resource-constrained areas underscores the importance of adaptation measures that promote both resilience and equity. Furthermore, the landscape of climate adaptation has evolved considerably over the past two decades, with diverse approaches emerging to address differences in governance structures, resource availability, and regional priorities (Braunschweiger & Ingold, 2023; Biesbroek et al., 2010). These developments highlight the need for comparative analyses to uncover the critical factors that shape effective adaptation policies and inform future strategies.

The diversity in adaptation policies reflects the range of responses needed to address unique challenges at different levels of governance. While global frameworks such as the Paris Agreement provide a foundation for international collaboration and shared climate goals, local and regional policies emphasize adaptation efforts tailored to specific socio-economic and environmental realities (Falkner, 2016). For example, European countries exhibit substantial variation in their adaptation strategies due to differences in governance models, economic priorities, and climate vulnerabilities (Swart et al., 2009). In regions like Africa and Asia, adaptation efforts face significant hurdles due to limited financial resources, governance challenges, and data constraints, which further underscore the importance of strategies that address these specific barriers (Ford et al., 2015). As such, comparative analyses across regions can shed light on the critical elements that influence policy effectiveness and reveal lessons for improving adaptation outcomes globally.

The evolution of climate adaptation research has increasingly focused on integrating diverse forms of knowledge, including local, traditional, and indigenous insights, into policy development to enhance resilience (Nalau et al., 2018). This inclusive approach seeks to ensure that adaptation strategies are culturally relevant and grounded in the experiences of the communities most affected by climate change. Moreover, the concept of multi-level governance has emerged as a key theme in adaptation policy, emphasizing the need to coordinate efforts across different administrative levels—from local governments to international organizations—to address interconnected climate impacts effectively (Kauffman & Hill, 2021). This coordination is particularly relevant in metropolitan areas, where the density of human activity and the complexity of social-ecological interactions intensify climate risks (Nocentini, 2024). Therefore, understanding how different governance levels can work together is crucial for building adaptive capacity.

Comparative studies reveal that adaptation strategies differ widely across contexts, illustrating the influence of specific environmental, economic, and political circumstances on policy design. In Germany, for instance, state-level adaptation efforts vary significantly, demonstrating a range of responses to climate risks that reflect each state’s unique context (King, 2022). Similarly, Southeast European countries exhibit a mix of adaptation approaches; while some align closely with broader European Union standards, others focus on locally tailored measures that address specific climate threats and resource limitations (Pietrapertosa, Khokhlov, & Salvia, 2018). These examples highlight the importance of regional characteristics in shaping adaptation policies and suggest that while global frameworks can offer general guidance, the success of adaptation often depends on localized strategies that respond to regional realities. Thus, understanding these variations is essential for crafting policies that are both effective and contextually appropriate.

Public participation and justice considerations have become central to the development of climate adaptation policies, as engaging communities in decision-making processes can significantly improve the equity and effectiveness of adaptation measures (Hügel & Davies, 2020). However, challenges remain in achieving meaningful participation, particularly for marginalized groups who may face barriers to involvement due to socio-economic and cultural factors. Furthermore, some adaptation policies have been critiqued for depoliticizing climate change by focusing on technical solutions while neglecting the underlying social and political dynamics that shape vulnerability (Remling, 2018). Addressing these limitations by incorporating justice considerations into adaptation planning is essential for ensuring that strategies are not only technically sound but also socially equitable, ultimately fostering more resilient communities.

Efforts to integrate disaster risk reduction (DRR) with climate adaptation have emerged as a promising approach to enhancing policy coherence and improving resilience outcomes (Islam et al., 2020). Although DRR and adaptation share many common goals, aligning the two fields remains challenging due to institutional differences and competing priorities. Local governments, for example, often struggle to implement integrated strategies because of a lack of coordination between disaster management and climate adaptation initiatives (Hoppe et al., 2014). However, when successfully combined, DRR and adaptation can reinforce each other, providing a comprehensive approach to managing climate risks that addresses both immediate hazards and long-term vulnerabilities. This integration is particularly important in regions prone to natural disasters, where disaster management practices can serve as a foundation for building adaptive capacity.

The integration of adaptation into urban planning and regional development has also gained traction, driven by the recognition that cities, with their dense populations and economic activities, are particularly susceptible to climate-related risks (Kythreotis et al., 2020). Urban areas are often on the front lines of climate impacts, making the inclusion of adaptation measures in city planning crucial for reducing vulnerabilities and enhancing resilience. By functioning as hubs for policy experimentation, cities provide valuable opportunities to test innovative adaptation strategies that, if successful, can be scaled up (Connop et al., 2016). In particular, integrating biodiversity-led urban green infrastructure (UGI)design into local planning and policy enhances cities’ capacity to address challenges such as urban overheating, flooding, air pollution, health, well-being, and biodiversity loss, ultimately strengthening urban resilience and functionality.

The concept of multi-level governance, which promotes the coordination of adaptation efforts across different policy levels and sectors, has gained traction as an effective approach for enhancing the implementation and coherence of adaptation strategies (Kauffman & Hill, 2021). By fostering collaboration between local, national, and international actors, multi-level governance can help align adaptation policies with broader development goals, ensuring that efforts are not fragmented or contradictory. This approach is particularly valuable in metropolitan areas, where governance structures are often complex and adaptation measures need to be integrated across various domains such as urban planning, transportation, and infrastructure development (Nocentini, 2024). Strengthening multi-level governance can thus contribute to more cohesive and impactful climate adaptation policies.

Despite the progress in climate adaptation research and policy development, significant gaps remain in integrating social equity and justice considerations into adaptation planning. In particular, European adaptation policies have been criticized for emphasizing technical solutions over addressing the social dimensions of vulnerability, limiting their potential to foster long-term resilience and reduce inequalities (Remling, 2018). Closing these gaps requires a more comprehensive approach that considers the social, cultural, and political factors influencing climate adaptation outcomes. By adopting a holistic perspective that goes beyond technical fixes, adaptation policies can better address the complex and interrelated challenges posed by climate change, ultimately leading to more sustainable and just solutions.

Systematic reviews of climate adaptation literature have underscored the need for robust evaluation methodologies to assess policy effectiveness and identify gaps in existing research (Ford et al., 2015; Islam et al., 2020; Cosoveanu et al., 2024).

These findings suggest that while global policies can set general standards, localized strategies that respond to the unique needs and circumstances of communities are crucial for successful adaptation. Thus, strengthening the feedback loop between policy evaluation and adaptation planning can facilitate the continuous improvement of strategies to better address evolving climate risks.

This paper aims to identify key themes in climate adaptation by conducting a comparative analysis of existing literature on global and regional climate change policies. The study seeks to uncover the factors that shape adaptation strategies across different contexts, with a focus on recent trends such as multi-level governance, public participation, and the integration of disaster risk reduction, as highlighted by Sietsma et al. in their 2021 study. Climate adaptation policies are broadly categorized into global and regional strategies due to variations in climate threats, ecosystem characteristics, and geographical contexts. Global policies emphasize international cooperation and standardization from a macro perspective, while regional policies focus on detailed implementation strategies tailored to the needs and environments of local communities.

Through a structured literature review, this study employs a multi-step approach: First, a comparative analysis of adaptation strategies in developed and developing regions is conducted. This is further refined through a series of regional case studies derived from literature. Finally, these findings are consolidated to extract key themes and address gaps in literature. By examining diverse contexts such as urban areas, developing regions, and Europe, this paper examines existing policy frameworks to provide insights and practical directions for future research aimed at supporting more effective adaptation strategies.

Ⅱ. Research method

In the literature collection phase, it is crucial to establish reliable databases and develop appropriate search strategies. To undertake this comprehensive review, this study primarily relied on publication databases—SpringerLink, ProQuest, JSTOR, EBSCOhost, Scopus, Web of Science, Wiley and ScienceDirect—as well as Google Scholar, to gather relevant literature on environmental policy, governance, and management across academic and scientific fields. Additionally, other literature found online was reviewed for its contribution to related topics.

This study adopted a literature extraction framework guided by the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. First, this study identified relevant literature through an initial search, removed duplicates, and conducted a primary screening based on abstracts. A full-text review was then carried out to determine which studies to include, and ultimately, this study extracted key information on climate change adaptation strategies from the final set of selected articles. To systematically collect essential information from each study, this study applied the checklist recommended by the PRISMA guidelines. The specific items included in this research are presented in <Table 1>.

<Table 1>

Key Parameters and Descriptions for Research

Additional details regarding this process are as follows. The search keyword design involved two approaches: basic keyword searches and Boolean searches. For the basic keyword searches, this study employed terms such as “climate adaptation,” “climate change policies,” “global adaptation strategies,” “regional adaptation,” and “policy frameworks.” For the Boolean searches, combinations like “climate adaptation AND policy” or “regional strategies AND adaptation” were used. Following the approach employed by Oztemel & Gursev (2020) for the basic keyword search, this study aimed to highlight the central aspects of climate adaptation and establish a definition that is widely accepted by both research and practical communities. In line with this objective, the review process began with a search for the term “climate adaptation,” followed by related keywords such as “Climate Change Policy,” “Regional Climate Strategies,” and “Climate Resilience.” For each term, the top 50 titles, abstracts, and keywords were independently analyzed to ensure the rigor and comprehensiveness of the study. A 15-year timeframe (e.g., 2009–2024) was set to ensure a focus on the most recent research. The screening process was divided into Inclusion Criteria and Exclusion Criteria. The Inclusion Criteria targeted studies centered on climate adaptation policies or strategies at both global and regional levels, based on quantitative or qualitative data-driven analysis. The Exclusion Criteria covered papers unrelated or minimally relevant to climate adaptation, conference proceedings and abstracts-only papers, as well as duplicate studies on the same topic. Drawing on these criteria, this study identified the major themes frequently discussed in literature and organized key policy themes at both global and regional scales in accordance with qualitative analysis guidelines. Finally, the results were presented in a structured format, summarized in table form.

Ⅲ. Results of Comparative Analysis in literature

1. Contrasting Approaches in Developed vs. Developing Regions

Climate adaptation policies vary significantly across developed and developing regions, primarily due to differences in economic resources, governance structures, and environmental conditions. In developed regions, adaptation policies often feature formal planning frameworks and are well-integrated into existing regulatory systems. For example, European countries like Finland and Italy have national adaptation strategies that emphasize sector-specific risks, including water management, agriculture, and energy infrastructure resilience (Juhola & Westerhoff, 2011). These countries benefit from a combination of technological solutions, such as advanced flood defense systems, and institutional capacities that allow for systematic climate risk assessments.

In the United States, adaptation measures are often implemented at the state and municipal levels, with local governments taking the lead in designing tailored responses to specific climate risks. For instance, coastal cities such as Miami and New York have invested in large-scale infrastructure projects to protect against sea-level rise and storm surges. These projects include the construction of sea walls and flood-resistant buildings, as well as the implementation of zoning regulations that restrict development in high-risk areas. This decentralized approach allows for flexibility in addressing local climate impacts but may also lead to inconsistencies in adaptation efforts across states (Griggs & Reguero, 2021).

Setzer and Benjamin (2020) highlight differences in climate adaptation strategies between developed and developing regions. In developed countries, climate litigation often aims to introduce new regulatory targets and elevate government ambitions for climate policy. In contrast, in developing countries, particularly in the Global South, litigation frequently relies on existing environmental laws and human rights frameworks as strategic tools to overcome financial and institutional constraints. In developing regions, the focus is on enforcing human rights and environmental protection through litigation that pressures governments to implement climate adaptation and mitigation policies. Cases in Pakistan and Colombia demonstrate how these lawsuits address implementation gaps and protect both human rights and the environment, focusing on immediate needs within limited resources. This reflects the approach of many developing regions where adaptation strategies prioritize pressing issues over long-term regulatory change. Conversely, in developed countries, climate litigation typically seeks to establish new regulatory goals and demands proactive government action on climate change. For instance, cases like the Urgenda case in the Netherlands require governments to set concrete carbon reduction targets, driving long-term structural changes in climate policy. This study underscores the regional specificity of climate adaptation, with developing countries framing litigation around human rights and ecosystem protection, while developed nations focus on carbon reduction and achieving policy-driven goals.

Additionally, in Southeast Asia, where climate risks are exacerbated by rapid urbanization and high population densities, adaptation policies frequently incorporate disaster risk reduction strategies. Countries such as the Philippines and Vietnam have developed national adaptation plans that emphasize infrastructure resilience, such as flood management systems and coastal zone protection. However, challenges such as inadequate regulatory enforcement, limited technical expertise, and fragmented governance structures can hinder the effectiveness of these policies (Francisco, 2008). The need for international cooperation to support capacity-building and technology transfer is critical in helping developing countries overcome these barriers.

The differences in adaptation strategies between developed and developing regions illustrate the importance of context-specific policies. While developed countries often implement sophisticated technological solutions and robust regulatory measures, developing regions tend to prioritize low-cost, community-based adaptation measures due to resource constraints. This contrast highlights the need for international support to enhance adaptive capacities in the Global South, as well as the potential for knowledge sharing between regions to promote more effective adaptation practices worldwide.

<Table 2> provides a comparative summary of the differences in climate adaptation strategies between developed and developing regions, highlighting the challenges and strategies each region faces.

<Table 2>

Comparison of Climate Adaptation Strategies in Developed and Developing Regions

2. Regional Approaches¹⁾

1) Europe

Overall, Europe’s climate adaptation strategies showcase the diversity of approaches driven by regional climate risks, resource availability, and policy priorities. While overarching EU frameworks offer valuable guidance, successful adaptation ultimately depends on tailored approaches that address each region’s specific needs and conditions. Cities like Rotterdam and Copenhagen lead with green infrastructure for stormwater management, while Southern European cities such as Barcelona focus on heatwave action plans to protect vulnerable populations. This blend of comprehensive frameworks with localized solutions exemplifies Europe’s dynamic response to climate adaptation challenges.

The European Union’s Climate Adaptation Strategy provides a cohesive framework encouraging collaboration among member states, facilitated by resources like the European Climate Adaptation Platform (Climate-ADAPT). This platform offers data, tools, and best practices, which support adaptation efforts at both national and local levels (Lenaerts et al., 2022). These resources have proven invaluable in fostering coordinated action, bridging the gap between policy development and on-the-ground implementation.

Urban adaptation strategies reveal the necessity for local specificity within broader frameworks. For instance, Northern European cities like Rotterdam and Copenhagen employ green infrastructure, including permeable surfaces and urban wetlands, to manage stormwater and mitigate urban heat island effects. In contrast, cities in Southern Europe, such as Barcelona, emphasize socially focused adaptation measures, including heatwave action plans and public awareness campaigns to protect vulnerable populations from climate-related health risks (Juhola & Westerhoff, 2011). These examples highlight how urban adaptation efforts reflect each region's unique environmental and social conditions.

Further European research underscores the importance of localized strategies in various domains, such as agriculture, coastal management, and regional planning. For instance, Iglesias and Garrote (2015) analyzed agricultural adaptation strategies for water management across Europe, focusing on how different countries respond to water scarcity amid climate change. Their findings emphasized the necessity of tailoring adaptation measures to local agricultural productivity needs. Similarly, Donatelli et al. (2015) examined adaptation strategies for three major European crops, analyzing responses under varying climate change scenarios and providing insights into necessary adjustments in the agricultural sector. These studies underscore the critical role of sector-specific strategies in ensuring effective adaptation across Europe. Local adaptation efforts by municipalities further underscore the importance of region-specific policies. Aguiar et al. (2018) reviewed adaptation measures by local governments across Europe, highlighting the significance of regional customization in policy development. Similarly, Pasimeni et al. (2019) explored the integration of urban mitigation and adaptation strategies in European cities, emphasizing the value of combining climate action with greenhouse gas reduction efforts in urban planning. These localized approaches enhance resilience and foster innovation in climate adaptation practices.

By integrating comprehensive EU frameworks with regionally tailored solutions, Europe demonstrates a multifaceted approach to climate adaptation. This dynamic interplay between top-down and bottom-up strategies ensures that diverse regional challenges are effectively addressed while maintaining a cohesive vision for climate resilience. Together, these efforts exemplify Europe’s capacity to adapt to an ever-changing climate through collaborative and localized action.

2) South America

South America presents unique challenges for climate adaptation, particularly in coastal regions that are vulnerable to sea-level rise and extreme weather events. Among the diverse approaches seen across the continent, Venezuela and Uruguay stand out as representative examples, showcasing how socioeconomic and environmental conditions shape adaptation strategies in distinct ways.

Uruguay’s adaptation strategy is notably structured, featuring a national coastal management plan that integrates climate adaptation with sustainable development objectives, such as fisheries management and tourism. A key feature of this plan is its emphasis on participatory governance, involving local communities in decision-making processes to ensure that adaptation measures are socially acceptable and economically viable. This inclusive approach aligns local adaptation efforts with national priorities, enhancing the coherence of adaptation policies across different levels of governance and promoting long-term sustainability. In contrast, Venezuela faces significant obstacles to implementing effective adaptation measures due to political instability and economic hardships. Adaptation efforts in Venezuela are often driven by community-based initiatives, such as establishing natural barriers with mangroves and coastal vegetation to bolster resilience in vulnerable areas. While these grassroots efforts demonstrate ingenuity and resilience, they are frequently hindered by limited institutional support and financial resources, restricting their scalability and long-term viability. The absence of a comprehensive national framework exacerbates these challenges, leaving local communities to navigate the complexities of climate adaptation largely on their own.

These contrasting case studies illustrate the diverse realities of climate adaptation in South America. While Uruguay’s structured strategy fosters alignment across governance levels, Venezuela’s fragmented efforts highlight the challenges of relying heavily on local actions without robust national support (Villamizar et al., 2017). Together, these examples underscore the critical need to link adaptation strategies with development goals, enabling a comprehensive approach that addresses both environmental and socioeconomic vulnerabilities. By integrating these dimensions, countries can work toward resilient and sustainable outcomes in the face of climate change.

3) Southeast Asia

In Southeast Asia, rapid economic growth and urbanization have led to increased exposure to climate risks, necessitating the integration of adaptation strategies into development plans. Among the countries in the region, Indonesia and Thailand stand out as representative examples, highlighting how national policies address climate impacts such as flooding, heatwaves, and sea-level rise. These nations have focused their adaptation efforts on infrastructure improvements, including flood control systems, seawalls, and resilient housing projects, which aim to mitigate the risks posed by natural disasters (Francisco, 2008). Despite these efforts, Southeast Asia’s adaptation strategies face significant challenges due to fragmented governance structures and insufficient coordination between national and local authorities, which hinder implementation. Vietnam exemplifies this issue, where national adaptation plans for the Mekong Delta set ambitious goals for reducing flood risks, yet local implementation remains inconsistent due to resource constraints and a lack of technical expertise. To address these gaps, community-based adaptation initiatives, such as raising awareness about flood preparedness and developing local early warning systems, have proven effective in complementing government-led efforts.

These examples underscore the importance of aligning policies across governance levels to ensure effective climate adaptation. As previously discussed, Venezuela and Uruguay highlight the diversity of adaptation strategies in South America. Similarly, the experiences of countries like Indonesia, Thailand, and Vietnam reveal the critical role of multi-level governance in Southeast Asia. Coordinated efforts between national and local governments, coupled with community-based initiatives, are essential to overcoming challenges and achieving sustainable outcomes in the face of climate change (Setzer & Vanhala, 2020).

4) Africa

Various studies on climate adaptation policies in Africa address unique regional climate challenges and offer diverse perspectives on policy development and implementation. These studies explore strategies in agriculture, public health, water resource management, indigenous knowledge, and policy integration, providing actionable insights to mitigate the significant environmental impacts of climate change across the continent.

A key area of focus is the role of indigenous knowledge in climate adaptation. Filho et al. (2023) evaluated the effectiveness and limitations of traditional knowledge systems in various African regions. While indigenous knowledge is recognized as a vital asset for enhancing adaptation, gaps in policy frameworks prevent its systematic and consistent incorporation. Addressing these gaps is seen as essential for bolstering community resilience and ensuring sustainable adaptation efforts.

Water governance also emerges as a critical challenge, particularly in ecologically fragile regions such as African lake areas and drylands. Okpara et al. (2018) proposed a policy framework that integrates climate adaptation, water governance, and conflict resolution. Fair distribution and effective governance of water resources are essential to addressing water scarcity and minimizing water-related conflicts, especially as climate change intensifies competition over these resources. Similarly, water scarcity in Southern Africa highlights the importance of adaptive water management policies. Ziervogel (2018) emphasized the integration of climate adaptation strategies into water governance to mitigate the growing impacts of climate change. These policies are crucial for ensuring sustainable water resource management and protecting vulnerable communities from worsening climate conditions.

Urban areas face unique challenges, as cities across Africa struggle with fragmented responses to climate change. Simon and Leck (2015) analyzed urban adaptation strategies, noting the urgent need for cohesive and inclusive policy approaches to reduce the impacts of climate change on infrastructure and economies. This study calls for significant improvements in urban adaptation policies to address growing urban vulnerabilities. In the agricultural sector, the potential of Climate-Smart Agriculture (CSA) is examined as a pathway for sustainable adaptation. Ndiritu and Da Silva (2021) explored the barriers to private sector investment in CSA projects in Sub-Saharan Africa, highlighting the essential role of policy support and incentives. These projects aim to mitigate climate impacts on agriculture while advancing sustainable development goals, underscoring the urgency of fostering robust adaptation strategies in this sector.

Governance and political complexity also play a significant role in shaping adaptation efforts. Lockwood (2013) reviewed climate adaptation policies in Sub-Saharan Africa, highlighting issues in policy design and implementation. The study stressed the importance of transparent and accountable governance structures and practical recommendations for fostering stronger interaction between policies and local communities. Engaged and participatory governance is emphasized as a cornerstone of successful adaptation.

Collectively considered, these studies underscore the necessity of crafting climate adaptation policies in Africa that are deeply informed by local contexts. Indigenous knowledge, transparent governance, and coordinated sectoral efforts are pivotal for achieving sustainable and effective outcomes. Integrating community engagement with robust policy frameworks can significantly enhance resilience and facilitate effective adaptation to the multifaceted challenges posed by climate change.

<Table 3> provides a comparative summary of climate adaptation strategies by region, highlighting each region's unique characteristics, key strategies, and relevant studies. A global comparison of policies across Europe, Africa, Southeast Asia, and South America is essential to understanding how diverse socio-economic conditions, environmental contexts, and governance structures shape adaptation efforts. This analysis reveals that Europe emphasizes multi-level governance and green infrastructure, Africa integrates indigenous knowledge and community-based approaches, Southeast Asia focuses on disaster risk reduction in urban settings, and South America addresses coastal resilience and resource constraints. Despite these differences, shared elements such as the importance of localized strategies within global frameworks, inclusive stakeholder engagement, and the integration of disaster risk management and climate adaptation highlight opportunities for cross-regional learning. These comparisons underscore the potential to synthesize regional successes into more effective and equitable global climate adaptation policies

<Table 3>

Comparative Summary of Climate Adaptation Strategies by Region

3. Key Themes in Climate Adaptation through the Literature Review

Effective climate adaptation requires coordination across various levels of government, spanning from local municipalities to national and international bodies. Multi-level governance frameworks enable alignment across these administrative scales, ensuring that local initiatives contribute meaningfully to broader national and international climate goals. For example, Setzer and Murieta (2020) highlight how the European Union's Climate Adaptation Strategy guides member states in developing national adaptation plans while also encouraging tailored local measures to address regional vulnerabilities. Decentralized decision-making plays a vital role within this structure by fostering collaboration and knowledge-sharing among diverse stakeholders. The case of Exeter, New Hampshire, demonstrates the benefits of aligning local adaptation planning with adaptive governance principles to enhance resilience against climate risks (Aytur et al., 2015). Polycentric governance, which incorporates multiple decision-making centers, further underscores the importance of overlapping jurisdictions and shared responsibilities across governance levels. Dorsch and Flachsland (2017) emphasize that this approach effectively addresses the interconnected nature of climate risks by ensuring vertical (across administrative levels) and horizontal (across sectors) coordination. Collaborative governance also helps overcome barriers such as limited resources and fragmented policy implementation by enabling regional policies to support local adaptation through funding, technical assistance, and regulatory frameworks. Public-private partnerships, including mechanisms like green bonds and resilience funds, play a critical role in financing adaptation projects, particularly in resource-constrained settings, while sharing technical expertise and best practices across sectors.

Incorporating diverse knowledge systems, including local, traditional, indigenous, and scientific knowledge, enhances the effectiveness and cultural relevance of climate adaptation strategies. This approach ensures that policies are technically sound, culturally appropriate, and capable of fostering acceptance and active participation from affected communities. Context-sensitive strategies highlight the necessity of tailoring adaptation measures to the socio-economic, cultural, and environmental characteristics of each region. For example, urban areas in Europe, such as Copenhagen, utilize green infrastructure to address flooding and mitigate urban heat islands (Jabbar, 2022). In contrast, Southeast Asian coastal regions, like the Philippines, focus on community-led mangrove restoration to enhance natural defenses against storm surges (Bandaranayake, 1998). Similarly, rural communities in Africa adopt Climate-Smart Agriculture techniques, integrating drought-resistant crops and agroforestry to sustain livelihoods in the face of environmental changes (Filho et al., 2023; Ndiritu & Da Silva, 2021; Ziervogel, 2018). These examples demonstrate that localized, participatory approaches grounded in regional realities effectively address immediate climate risks while fostering sustainable and inclusive adaptation efforts. Integrating indigenous knowledge systems (IKS) into policy frameworks further enhances community engagement and ensures that policies are aligned with local contexts. Chanza and Wit (2016) argue that IKS provides valuable insights into sustainable practices essential for adapting to local climate impacts. By leveraging traditional ecological knowledge, IKS contributes to modern governance frameworks, recognizing cultural diversity and promoting sustainability. Moreover, addressing the power dynamics within governance processes is crucial to ensuring that marginalized voices are heard. Vink et al. (2013) emphasizes the importance of considering both knowledge and power dimensions, cautioning that neglecting these factors can hinder the development of comprehensive and inclusive adaptation policies.

The integration of disaster risk reduction (DRR) with climate adaptation is pivotal in addressing immediate threats while preparing for long-term climate challenges. By combining DRR measures with adaptation strategies, policies can effectively manage current hazards and anticipate future risks. However, institutional challenges often arise, as disaster management responsibilities are typically assigned to emergency agencies focusing on short-term responses, while climate adaptation falls under environmental agencies prioritizing long-term planning (Rani et al., 2020). This separation can lead to fragmented efforts and a lack of coordinated strategies. Multi-sectoral collaborations and integrated governance frameworks are essential to bridge these gaps, facilitating data sharing and streamlining planning processes (Dolšak & Prakash, 2018). Bangladesh exemplifies the proactive integration of DRR and climate change adaptation (CCA) strategies. Shamsuddoha et al. (2013) detail how initiatives such as community-driven flood shelters and early warning systems enhance resilience to natural disasters, addressing both immediate and long-term climate risks. These efforts involve local communities and foster strong local governance, demonstrating how DRR and CCA can create sustainable, adaptive responses to current and future challenges.

Public participation is another critical element of equitable and effective climate adaptation policies. Involving communities in decision-making processes enhances the legitimacy of policies and fosters local ownership, which is crucial for successful implementation. Chu (2018) illustrates how local knowledge inclusion in Indore, India, faced challenges due to social hierarchies limiting the influence of disadvantaged groups. Overcoming such barriers requires comprehensive engagement with communities throughout the planning process, from risk assessments to policy implementation and monitoring. Participatory processes, such as public forums and stakeholder workshops, ensure that diverse perspectives are incorporated. Additionally, training and capacity-building initiatives empower marginalized communities to play an active role in shaping adaptation policies (Cinderby et al., 2021).

Urban areas are particularly vulnerable to climate risks due to their dense populations and significant infrastructure. As centers of economic activity, cities face challenges such as extreme weather events, sea-level rise, and heatwaves, making urban adaptation a critical component of climate resilience. Strategies often involve investments in infrastructure such as seawalls, stormwater management systems, and heat-mitigation measures (Maxwell et al., 2018). Leading cities like Copenhagen and Rotterdam have adopted green infrastructure solutions, including urban wetlands and permeable pavements, to manage stormwater and mitigate urban heat island effects. These initiatives also improve quality of life by increasing green spaces and supporting biodiversity. In contrast, cities in developing countries often focus on lower-cost, community-driven solutions due to financial constraints. For example, informal settlements in Manila and Dhaka employ localized initiatives like raised walkways and drainage systems to enhance flood resilience (Lamb & Vale, 2024). However, Kythreotis and Bristow (2017) caution against falling into a 'resilience trap' by focusing solely on short-term solutions. To avoid this, cities must adopt flexible governance frameworks that allow continuous policy adjustments based on evolving climate data and risks. Integrating long-term adaptation within broader urban development plans ensures that social resilience is developed alongside physical infrastructure.

<Table 4> summarizes these key themes, connecting them with case examples to provide a comprehensive understanding of climate adaptation strategies.

<Table 4>

Key Themes in Climate Adaptation

Ⅳ. Conclusion

This research examines climate adaptation strategies through diverse case studies and literature reviews, highlighting practical solutions to the complex challenges of climate change. The results underscore the need for context-sensitive approaches, multi-level governance, and international cooperation to strengthen resilience on various scales.

Case studies from Europe, Africa, Southeast Asia, South America, and other regions illustrate how adaptation strategies vary significantly based on climatic, socio-economic, and cultural contexts. Wealthier nations, such as Germany and the Netherlands, leverage advanced infrastructure and regulatory frameworks to manage flooding, while resource-constrained regions, including parts of Africa and Southeast Asia, rely on community-based approaches that incorporate local knowledge and prioritize cost-effective solutions, such as drought-resistant agriculture and water conservation. These findings underscore the critical importance of tailoring strategies to local realities, ensuring that interventions are both feasible and sustainable.

Governance structures are crucial in determining the effectiveness of adaptation policies. Decentralized systems, as observed in the United States, empower state and municipal governments to implement localized measures, such as flood defenses in Miami and New York. However, these approaches often lead to inconsistencies in implementation. In contrast, centralized frameworks, such as those employed by the European Union, provide cohesive policies and coordinated regional actions that foster synergy and efficiency. A balanced approach that combines the flexibility of localized initiatives with the consistency of centralized coordination is essential for achieving comprehensive and equitable outcomes.

Regional and international collaboration significantly bolsters adaptation strategies. Examples include European countries’ data-sharing initiatives and Uruguay’s participatory coastal management programs, which demonstrate the value of pooling resources and expertise to address shared challenges such as water scarcity and coastal erosion. Additionally, the integration of indigenous and local knowledge, particularly in agriculture and water management, enhances the cultural relevance and sustainability of adaptation measures. Community-based early warning systems and participatory decision-making processes further highlight the importance of engaging stakeholders to ensure the long-term success of adaptation initiatives.

A key theme emerging from the literature is the integration of disaster risk reduction (DRR) with climate adaptation strategies. This approach facilitates a systematic and long-term response to both immediate and future risks, as seen in Vietnam’s Mekong Delta, where resource and capacity constraints challenge the alignment of national policies with local actions. Strengthened coordination and capacity-building efforts are crucial to bridging these gaps and ensuring coherent implementation.

Additionally, this study emphasizes that integrating mitigation and adaptation strategies should be a cornerstone of future climate policies. By seamlessly combining these approaches, policymakers can create a comprehensive framework that not only addresses immediate climate risks but also mitigates long-term impacts. Climate adaptation measures, such as urban greening and improved agricultural practices, can simultaneously contribute to mitigation by enhancing carbon sequestration and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Conversely, mitigation strategies, such as renewable energy adoption and energy-efficient technologies, indirectly support adaptation by reducing the overall stress on ecosystems and infrastructure. This mitigation-adaptation interplay is central to building an integrated policy framework. Such a framework ensures not only the efficiency and comprehensiveness of climate actions but also their adaptability to the unique conditions and needs of each region. The synergies between mitigation and adaptation are indispensable for achieving holistic climate resilience, highlighting the necessity for this interplay to guide future strategies at both national and global levels.

In conclusion, this analysis underscores the importance of inclusive, context-sensitive strategies that integrate localized actions with broader governance frameworks. Effective climate adaptation requires a multi-level governance approach that combines international cooperation, resource-sharing, and the use of advanced technologies with community-driven initiatives that respect and incorporate local knowledge. By fostering collaboration, balancing local flexibility with centralized consistency, and addressing socio-economic disparities, nations can enhance resilience to climate change. These measures simultaneously promote social equity and sustainability on a global scale.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Ministry of Education of the Republic of Korea and the National Research Foundation of Korea(NRF-2022S1A3A2A01088589)

References

• Abarca-Alvarez, F. J., & Navarro-Ligero, M. L., 2019, European strategies for adaptation to climate change with the Mayors Adapt initiative by self-organizing maps. Applied Sciences, 9(18), 3859. [https://doi.org/10.3390/app9183859]
• Aguiar, F. C., Bentz, J., Silva, J. M. N., & Fonseca, A. L., 2018, Adaptation to climate change at local level in Europe: An overview. Environmental Science & Policy, 86, 65-74. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2018.04.010]
• Aytur, S. A., Hecht, J. S., & Kirshen, P., 2015, Aligning climate change adaptation planning with adaptive governance: Lessons from Exeter, NH. Journal of Contemporary Water Research & Education, 155(1), 42-55. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1936-704X.2015.03198.x]
• Bandaranayake, W., 1998, Traditional and medicinal uses of mangroves. Mangroves and salt marshes, 2, 133-148. [https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009988607044]
• Bauer, A., & Steurer, R., 2015, National adaptation strategies, what else? Comparing adaptation mainstreaming in German and Dutch water management. Regional Environmental Change, 15(3), 555-565. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-015-0763-8]
• Braunschweiger, D., & Ingold, K., 2023, What drives local climate change adaptation? A qualitative comparative analysis. Environmental Science & Policy, 145, 40-49. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2023.03.013]
• Biesbroek, G. R., Swart, R. J., Carter, T. R., Cowan, C., Henrichs, T., Mela, H., ... & Rey, D., 2010, Europe adapts to climate change: comparing national adaptation strategies. Global Environmental Change, 20(3), 440-450. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.03.005]
• Chanza, N., & De Wit, A., 2016, Enhancing climate governance through indigenous knowledge: Case in sustainability science. South African Journal of Science, 112(3-4), 1-7. [https://doi.org/10.17159/sajs.2016/20140286]
• Chu, E. K., 2018, Urban climate adaptation and the reshaping of state–society relations: The politics of community knowledge and mobilisation in Indore, India. Urban Studies, 55(8), 1766-1782. [https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098016686509]
• Cinderby, S., De Bruin, A., Cambridge, H., Muhoza, C., & Ngabirano, A., 2021, Transforming urban planning processes and outcomes through creative methods. Ambio, 50, 1018-1034. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-020-01436-3]
• Cosoveanu, F. S., Hegger, D., Mees, H., Buijs, J. M., Terpstra, T., & Driessen, P. P., 2024, The roles and unexplored potential of policy experimentation in climate adaptation governance: A systematic literature review. Environmental Policy and Governance. [https://doi.org/10.1002/eet.2127]
• Connop, S., Vandergert, P., Eisenberg, B., Collier, M. J., Nash, C., Clough, J., & Newport, D., 2016, Renaturing cities using a regionally-focused biodiversity-led multifunctional benefits approach to urban green infrastructure. Environmental Science & Policy, 62, 99-111. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2016.01.013]
• Dolšak, N., & Prakash, A., 2018, The politics of climate change adaptation. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 43(1), 317-341. [https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-102017-025739]
• Donatelli, M., Srivastava, A. K., Duveiller, G., Niemeyer, S., & Fumagalli, D., 2015, Climate change impact and potential adaptation strategies under alternate realizations of climate scenarios for three major crops in Europe. Environmental Research Letters, 10(7), 075005. [https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/10/7/075005]
• Dorsch, M. J., & Flachsland, C., 2017, A polycentric approach to global climate governance. Global Environmental Politics, 17(2), 45-64. [https://doi.org/10.1162/GLEP_a_00400]
• Droogers, P., & Aerts, J., 2005, Adaptation strategies to climate change and climate variability: a comparative study between seven contrasting river basins. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, Parts A/B/C, 30(6-7), 339-346. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pce.2005.06.015]
• Dupuis, J., & Biesbroek, R., 2013, Comparing apples and oranges: The dependent variable problem in comparing and evaluating climate change adaptation policies. Global Environmental Change, 23(6), 1476-1487. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.07.022]
• Falkner, R., 2016, The Paris Agreement and the new logic of international climate politics. International Affairs, 92(5), 1107-1125. [https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2346.12708]
• Filho, W. L., Wolf, F., Totin, E., & Zvobgo, L., 2023, Is indigenous knowledge serving climate adaptation? Evidence from various African regions. Development Policy Review, 41(4), e12664. [https://doi.org/10.1111/dpr.12664]
• Ford, J. D., Berrang-Ford, L., Bunce, A., McKay, C., Irwin, M., & Pearce, T., 2015, The status of climate change adaptation in Africa and Asia. Regional Environmental Change, 15, 801-814. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-014-0648-2]
• Ford, L., Pearce, T., & Ford, J. D., 2015, Systematic review approaches for climate change adaptation research. Regional Environmental Change, 15, 755-769. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-014-0708-7]
• Francisco, H. A., 2008, Adaptation to climate change: needs and opportunities in Southeast Asia. ASEAN Economic Bulletin, 7-19. [https://doi.org/10.1355/AE25-1B]
• Garrote, L., Iglesias, A., Granados, A., Mediero, L., & Martin-Carrasco, F., 2015, Quantitative assessment of climate change vulnerability of irrigation demands in Mediterranean Europe. Water Resources Management, 29, 325-338. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-014-0736-6]
• Greiving, S., & Fleischhauer, M., 2016, National climate change adaptation strategies of European states from a spatial planning and development perspective. In Climate Change and Sustainable Development (pp. 79-97). Taylor & Francis.
• Griggs, G., & Reguero, B. G., 2021, Coastal adaptation to climate change and sea-level rise. Water, 13(16), 2151. [https://doi.org/10.3390/w13162151]
• Hills, J. M., & Le Tissier, M. D. A., 2020, Comparative analysis of adaptation strategies for coastal climate change in North West Europe. Marine Policy, 104, 103524.
• Hoppe, T., van den Berg, M. M., & Coenen, F. H., 2014, Reflections on the uptake of climate change policies by local governments: facing the challenges of mitigation and adaptation. Energy, Sustainability and Society, 4, 1-16. [https://doi.org/10.1186/2192-0567-4-8]
• Hügel, S., & Davies, A. R., 2020, Public participation, engagement, and climate change adaptation: A review of the research literature. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 11(4), e645. [https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.645]
• Iglesias, A., & Garrote, L., 2015, Adaptation strategies for agricultural water management under climate change in Europe. Agricultural Water Management, 155, 113-124. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2015.03.014]
• Islam, S., Chu, C., Smart, J. C., & Liew, L., 2020, Integrating disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation: A systematic literature review. Climate and Development, 12(3), 255-267. [https://doi.org/10.1080/17565529.2019.1613217]
• Jabbar, M., Yusoff, M. M., & Shafie, A., 2022, Assessing the role of urban green spaces for human well-being: A systematic review. GeoJournal, 1-19.
• Juhola, S., & Westerhoff, L., 2011, Challenges of adaptation to climate change across multiple scales: a case study of network governance in two European countries. Environmental Science & Policy, 14(3), 239-247. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2010.12.006]
• Kauffman, N., & Hill, K., 2021, Climate change, adaptation planning and institutional integration: A literature review and framework. Sustainability, 13(19), 10708. [https://doi.org/10.3390/su131910708]
• King, J. P., 2022, Sixteen ways to adapt: a comparison of state-level climate change adaptation strategies in the federal states of Germany. Regional Environmental Change, 22(2), 40. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-021-01870-3]
• Kythreotis, A. P., & Bristow, G. I., 2017, The ‘resilience trap’: exploring the practical utility of resilience for climate change adaptation in UK city-regions. Regional Studies, 51(10), 1530-1541. [https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2016.1200719]
• Kythreotis, A. P., Jonas, A. E., & Howarth, C., 2020, Locating climate adaptation in urban and regional studies. Regional Studies, 54(4), 576-588. [https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2019.1678744]
• Lamb, Z. B., & Vale, L. J., 2024, The Equitably Resilient City: Solidarities and Struggles in the Face of Climate Crisis. MIT Press. [https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/14961.001.0001]
• Landauer, M., Haider, W., & Pröbstl-Haider, U., 2014, The influence of culture on climate change adaptation strategies: Preferences of cross-country skiers in Austria and Finland. Journal of Travel Research, 53(1), 96-110. [https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287513481276]
• Lenaerts, K., Tagliapietra, S., & Wolff, G. B., 2022, How can the European Union adapt to climate change?. Intereconomics, 57(5), 314-321. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10272-022-1071-4]
• Lockwood, M., 2013, What can climate-adaptation policy in Sub-Saharan Africa learn from research on governance and politics? Development Policy Review, 31(6), 647-667. [https://doi.org/10.1111/dpr.12029]
• Maxwell, K. J., Grambsch, A., Kosmal, A., Larson, L., & Sonti, N., 2018, Built environment, urban systems, and cities. In Impacts, Risks, and Adaptation in the United States: Fourth National Climate Assessment, Volume II (pp. 438–478). US Global Change Research Program. [https://doi.org/10.7930/NCA4.2018.CH11]
• Nalau, J., Becken, S., Schliephack, J., Parsons, M., Brown, C., & Mackey, B., 2018, The role of indigenous and traditional knowledge in ecosystem-based adaptation: A review of the literature and case studies from the Pacific Islands. Weather, Climate, and Society, 10(4), 851-865. [https://doi.org/10.1175/WCAS-D-18-0032.1]
• Ndiritu, S. W., & Da Silva, I., 2021, Unlocking climate finance potential for climate adaptation: Case of Climate-Smart Agricultural financing in Sub-Saharan Africa. In African Handbook of Climate Change Adaptation (pp. 1743-1759). Springer.
• Nocentini, M. G., 2024, The governance of climate adaptation in metropolitan regions: A systematic review of emerging themes and issues. Urban Climate, 55, 101944. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2024.101944]
• Okpara, U. T., Stringer, L. C., & Dougill, A. J., 2018, Integrating climate adaptation, water governance and conflict management policies in lake riparian zones: Insights from African drylands. Environmental Science & Policy, 79, 36-44. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2017.10.002]
• Oztemel, E., & Gursev, S., 2020, Literature review of Industry 4.0 and related technologies. Journal of intelligent manufacturing, 31(1), 127-182. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10845-018-1433-8]
• Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., ... & Moher, D., 2021, The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. bmj, 372. [https://doi.org/10.31222/osf.io/v7gm2]
• Pasimeni, M. R., Valente, D., & Zurlini, G., 2019, The interplay between urban mitigation and adaptation strategies to face climate change in two European countries. Environmental Science & Policy, 86, 46-53. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2019.02.002]
• Pietrapertosa, F., Khokhlov, V., Salvia, M., & Cosmi, C., 2018, Climate change adaptation policies and plans: A survey in 11 South East European countries. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 81, 3041-3050. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.06.116]
• Rani, W. N. M. W. M., Kamarudin, K. H., Razak, K. A., & Asmawi, Z. M., 2020, Climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction in urban development plans for resilient cities. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science (Vol. 409, No. 1, p. 012024). IOP Publishing. [https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/409/1/012024]
• Reckien, D., Flacke, J., Dawson, R. J., Heidrich, O., Olazabal, M., Foley, A., ... & Pietrapertosa, F., 2014, Climate change response in Europe: what’s the reality? Analysis of adaptation and mitigation plans from 200 urban areas in 11 countries. Climatic Change, 122, 331-340. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-013-0989-8]
• Remling, E., 2018, Depoliticizing adaptation: a critical analysis of EU climate adaptation policy. Environmental Politics, 27(3), 477-497. [https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2018.1429207]
• Reidsma, P., Ewert, F., Lansink, A. O., & Leemans, R., 2010, Adaptation to climate change and climate variability in European agriculture: the importance of farm level responses. European Journal of Agronomy, 32(1), 91-102. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2009.06.003]
• Setzer, J., & Benjamin, L., 2020, Climate litigation in the Global South: constraints and innovations. Transnational Environmental Law, 9(1), 77-101. [https://doi.org/10.1017/S2047102519000268]
• Setzer, J., & de Murieta, E. S., 2020, Transnationalization of climate adaptation by regional governments and the RegionsAdapt initiative. Global Sustainability, 3, e6. [https://doi.org/10.1017/sus.2020.6]
• Setzer, J., & Vanhala, L. C., 2020, Climate change litigation: A review of research on courts and litigants in climate governance. WIREs Climate Change, 11(3), e624. [https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.580]
• Shamsuddoha, M., Roberts, E., Hasemann, A., & Roddick, S., 2013, Establishing links between disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation in the context of loss and damage. UK DFID.
• Sietsma, A. J., Ford, J. D., Callaghan, M. W., & Minx, J. C., 2021, Progress in climate change adaptation research. Environmental Research Letters, 16(5), 054038. [https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/abf7f3]
• Simon, D., & Leck, H., 2015, Understanding climate adaptation and transformation challenges in African cities. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 13, 109-116. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2015.03.003]
• Swart, R. J., Biesbroek, G. R., Binnerup, S., Carter, T., Cowan, C., Henrichs, T., ... & Rey, D., 2009, Europe adapts to climate change. Comparing National Adaptation Strategies in Europe (No. 1). PEER. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.03.005]
• Vink, M. J., Dewulf, A., & Termeer, C., 2013, The role of knowledge and power in climate change adaptation governance: A systematic literature review. Ecology and Society, 18(4), 46. [https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-05897-180446]
• Villamizar, A., Gutiérrez, M. E., Nagy, G. J., Caffera, R. M., & Leal Filho, W., 2017, Climate adaptation in South America with emphasis in coastal areas: the state-of-the-art and case studies from Venezuela and Uruguay. Climate and Development, 9(4), 364-382. [https://doi.org/10.1080/17565529.2016.1146120]
• Ziervogel, G., 2018, Climate adaptation and water scarcity in Southern Africa. Current History, 117(799), 195-200. [https://doi.org/10.1525/curh.2018.117.799.181]