Abstract
The performance of adaptation measures depends on their robustness against various possible futures, with varying climate change impacts. Such impacts are driven by both climatic as well as non-climatic drivers. Risk dynamics are then important, as the avoided risk will determine the benefits of adaptation actions. It is argued that the integration of information on changing exposure and vulnerability is needed to make projections of future climate risk more realistic. In addition, many impact and vulnerability studies have used a top-down rather a technical approach. Whether adaptation action is feasible is determined by technical and physical possibilities on the ground, as well as local capacities, governance and preference. These determine the hard and soft limits of adaptation. Therefore, it is argued that the risk metrics outputs alone are not sufficient to predict adaptation outcomes, or predict where adaptation is feasible or not; they must be placed in the local context. Several of the current climate risk products would fall short of their promise to inform adaptation decision-making on the ground. Some steps are proposed to improve adaptation modelling in order to better incorporate these aspects.