How do you identify misconceptions about climate change adaptation?

I once had lunch with someone who had a brand new PhD. He informed me, rather glibly that, "Every business needs to be willing to go into the red to be green! If they go out of business, so be it!" An interesting position, but in my experience, environmental efforts in a business can add to the bottom line. I know this flies in the face of what a lot of consultants do, but if you want to get your clients to take on environmental efforts, start with programs that save them money. Then search for solutions that are more tailored to their specific business. Speaking of "common misconceptions..." One solution does not fit all businesses.

Adaptation is the strategy to live along with the positive or negative impacts of human induced climate change. During pre industrial ages the atmospheric green house gas like CO2 concentration was below 300 ppm. However, currently atmospheric CO2 concentration is above 400 ppm. Which is causing higher temperatures, unseasonal flooding, droughts in many places, hurricanes and typhoons at higher frequency. Such calamities are becoming more common. And human, animals, biodiversity are adapting to the changed living environments. Some species may thrive under new climate conditions and some species will be at risk of extinction. Adaptation is adjusting our lives with the changed conditions. Mitigation is reducing climate change by human acts.

Adaption and mitigation can be distinguished by the time frame, while mitigation can be acceptable as the short term action, adaption is a must requirement on long term action, for more clarity, mitigation actions can be the answer for climate change during the transition period to a more sustainable solutions and lifestyle, so while modern civilization still figure out and search for the permanent sustainable solutions, mitigation can be implemented to slow down the climate change and consequences. As example reducing carbon emission by stopping fossil fuel use 100%, is still unachievable immediately or on the short term, due to dependency on this fuel. Adaption to a sustainable modern civilization lifestyle is the final long term target.

Complementing, and somehow opposing Rami's opinion, I think mitigation is the proactive long-term solution that we want to achieve (reduce GHG emissions) and that we can start implementing right now and continue in the future, that is, it is a solution that has no time frame. On the other hand, adaptation is reactive, it involves adapting to the current and future scenario of climate change that affects the BAU. We can also start now and achieve the goal of continuing to operate in a changing world.

We will not be able to adapt nor to mitigate. This is climate denialism. To think that we can continue as we have, and that we will be able to either mitigate or adapt or both, is a false promise.

Adaptation is always framed as continuing to do what we do, but adapting to the new “normal” of increased extreme weather events, climate migration, etc. How we actually need to adapt is to change our energy consumption completely. Not replace fossil fuels with renewables, but fundamentally change our relationship with the natural world. Adaptation is rearranging deck chairs on the titanic. What will be too costly and complex is losing the planet entirely.

The Chinese say "the only thing permanent is change", and almost without realizing it we are always changing to adapt to the reality that surrounds us. The key is to have the flexibility and insight to understand what changes are necessary, to incorporate and implement them and achieve a successful adaptation. At a business level, this adaptation can begin by identifying what consumption is unnecessary or excessive and how it can be optimized. These are usually very low-cost solutions, such as implementing automatic controls or sensors, or simply indicators that are followed daily to understand how consumption is being done! Did you try? Will you try?

Is adaptation costly? Are the developing nations paying the price for the complex and adaptation mechanisms in climate change? Adaptation is a radical change and change comes with convenience and inconveniences. Most importantly, how does this radical change affect the government,people, business , way of doing things ,livelihood and human existence,biodiversity, human rights ? Adaptation will certainly work when approached in a 360 degrees approach.

The very concept of adaptation has a univocal relationship with its environment. If the environment changes (and it does constantly, whether we see it or not), strategies must change too, in order to continue adapting. If we do not identify these changes and do not implement the necessary strategies, sooner or later we will be disadapted, with greater or lesser consequences. The critical first step is to identify changes in 1) legal requirements, 2) contractual requirements, and 3) voluntarily assumed requirements, that impact us and require adaptive measures. Do you conduct this review on a periodic basis?

I totally agree with this contribution. Adaptation is not a one time all size fits all solution. It is the engagement of the appropriate controls and checks to ascertain the results. While this is done, there needs the voice of the stakeholders to identify with the changes influenced by the specific adaptive mechanism ,build around the experience to strengthen the interventions.

Just as teaching and learning are two different processes, and learning is not necessarily a direct consequence of teaching, so the changes promoted by senior management can be transformed (or not) into organizational changes, if they do not have the endorsement and trust of those who will carry the changes forward. An organization may decide to implement a cultural change (for example, changing the way it consumes energy), but if it is not attentive or willing to listen to what the members of the organization have to say, this change will not be implemented effectively. .

As a grassroot enabler and knowledge management lead in the climate change nexus , I agree with the idea of cross-disciplinary approach towards climate adaptation. Climate adaptation could be as local as applying building materials that withstands a possible flooding effect. Building raised granaries to protect Farm harvests from destruction from rains. Each innovation in climate adaptation should accommodate culture and traditions to where it is gonna be applied and as the colleague who has added their perspective into this has pointed out :learning and teaching cannot be assumed to have effectively taken place when each parties are not collaborative.