Climate change: "adapting" is easier said than done

A recent UN report has highlighted the issue of so-called "maladaptation" to climate change, i.e. a situation in which measures taken to combat climate change end up (unintentionally) worsening the consequences, primarily due to poor planning. This is a problem that technical figures and experts are increasingly taking into account.

Any measure to combat climate change carries a certain degree of risk, but it is often very challenging to identify manifestation of such risk. Endeavouring to identify issues preventively through non-conventional approaches such as those offered by sociology can help science to limit the impact of the climate crisis on societies and ecosystems, thus safeguarding numerous lives.

The report in question, prepared by the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), the leading international body on the climate emergency, revolves around this concept of climate maladaptation. For a better understanding it can be useful to consider different types.

First of all, there is the infrastructural type, which can be linked to the example of Kiribati in the central Pacific, where in the 2000s a government plan sponsored by the United Nations to build infrastructure protecting against the sea’s action actually led to erosion on another part of the coast. Maladaptation of an institutional nature can be seen in the events in California between 2007 and 2009. During a period of intense drought it was noted that a series of support measures and loans to farmers to cover the losses suffered actually reduced their ability in the long term to adopt alternative practices to successfully overcome subsequent water crises.

The third and final type of climate maladaptation is behavioural, and an example of this was seen in Ghana. During a season without rains many farmers leave their jobs in the fields entirely to look for other work. Later the rains return yet the required skills are no longer to be found in the labour market to guarantee a successful harvest.

The cases of climate maladaptation analysed teach us, amongst other things, that measures to combat the consequences of global warming cannot adopt the same approach for any context. Often, those responsible for planning and defining actions live far from the areas in which they are implemented and completely overlook feedback or worries of the local population, notes the IPCC report. On the contrary, development of mitigation strategies should give greater consideration to the specific critical environmental issues of the local area in which action is to be taken, as well as typical social and cultural aspects, contributing to the creation of action plans that are clear in all regards.

It is generally good practice to carry out detailed consultation with local people, also gathering qualitative data on their knowledge of the place and possible social consequences of specific climate-related upheaval. In this sense, the social sciences can offer a useful input, such as anthropology and sociology, despite not being traditionally associated with research into climate change. The research group that drafted the report in fact adopted this approach, with 250 individuals from a very broad spectrum of different fields.