Climate Adaptation: A Political Imperative, Not Just a Technical Fix
As climate change continues to reshape our world, it's becoming increasingly clear that adapting to its impacts is no longer just a matter of technical fixes. The way we adapt will not only determine the future of our planet but also encode fundamentally different visions of society.
For decades, the focus has been on "stopping climate change," with efforts concentrated on reducing carbon emissions and mitigating the worst effects of global warming. While this approach has been successful in slowing the rate of warming, it's no longer sufficient to address the impacts of climate change that are already being felt.
As the material consequences of climate change become more apparent – from rising sea levels and extreme weather events to droughts and heatwaves – the need for a more comprehensive approach to adaptation becomes clear. This means not just strengthening infrastructure to withstand climate-related disasters but also transforming social institutions to manage the human impacts of climate change.
The problem is that adaptation has traditionally focused on environmental impacts, such as building seawalls to protect against sea level rise or retrofitting buildings to withstand extreme weather events. However, this narrow focus overlooks the critical question of how we will condition the way people experience the political impacts of climate change.
Will we allow property insurance markets to operate freely, leaving high-risk regions vulnerable to disaster? Or will we establish federal backup systems to protect workers who are forced to labor in extreme heat? These are not hypothetical questions – they have real-world implications that can make or break communities.
In the United States alone, a spike in non-renewal rates across the homeowners' insurance industry has created a national crisis. In 2023, UPS workers threatened a nationwide strike over on-the-job heat exposure, ultimately winning an agreement to install air conditioning in delivery trucks. The Biden administration's response to a drought that left the Colorado River's reservoirs at historic lows included paying $1.2 billion to Arizona, Nevada, and California to reduce their water usage.
These examples illustrate the need for a more comprehensive approach to adaptation that takes into account not only environmental impacts but also social and economic ones. Climate politics must move beyond technocratic frameworks to engage with the fundamental values and interests of society.
As Leah Aronowsky notes in her piece, climate migration has already become a genuine political struggle, with debates over green capitalism, democratic socialism, lithium nationalization, and coal phase-out compensation reflecting competing visions for the future. However, even these progressive agendas remain rooted in an emissions reductions framework that overlooks the need for transformative social change.
A truly comprehensive approach to adaptation would apply this same political imagination to climate impacts already transforming everyday life. It would recognize that climate adaptation is not a distinct technical challenge but rather continuous with ongoing political struggles.
The terrain of this struggle is beginning to take shape, with proposals like the Council on Foreign Relations' reforms to the property insurance market and the Climate and Community Institute's Housing Resilience Agencies offering stark contrasts in approach. One uses price signaling to prod people out of vulnerable areas, while the other commits public resources that enable them to stay safely.
The question is no longer whether we will adapt to climate change but how – and whose vision will prevail. As Leah Aronowsky emphasizes, this is not a zero-sum game between mitigation and adaptation; rather, it's about creating a politics of adaptation that can transform our institutions and reshape our society for the future.
As climate change continues to reshape our world, it's becoming increasingly clear that adapting to its impacts is no longer just a matter of technical fixes. The way we adapt will not only determine the future of our planet but also encode fundamentally different visions of society.
For decades, the focus has been on "stopping climate change," with efforts concentrated on reducing carbon emissions and mitigating the worst effects of global warming. While this approach has been successful in slowing the rate of warming, it's no longer sufficient to address the impacts of climate change that are already being felt.
As the material consequences of climate change become more apparent – from rising sea levels and extreme weather events to droughts and heatwaves – the need for a more comprehensive approach to adaptation becomes clear. This means not just strengthening infrastructure to withstand climate-related disasters but also transforming social institutions to manage the human impacts of climate change.
The problem is that adaptation has traditionally focused on environmental impacts, such as building seawalls to protect against sea level rise or retrofitting buildings to withstand extreme weather events. However, this narrow focus overlooks the critical question of how we will condition the way people experience the political impacts of climate change.
Will we allow property insurance markets to operate freely, leaving high-risk regions vulnerable to disaster? Or will we establish federal backup systems to protect workers who are forced to labor in extreme heat? These are not hypothetical questions – they have real-world implications that can make or break communities.
In the United States alone, a spike in non-renewal rates across the homeowners' insurance industry has created a national crisis. In 2023, UPS workers threatened a nationwide strike over on-the-job heat exposure, ultimately winning an agreement to install air conditioning in delivery trucks. The Biden administration's response to a drought that left the Colorado River's reservoirs at historic lows included paying $1.2 billion to Arizona, Nevada, and California to reduce their water usage.
These examples illustrate the need for a more comprehensive approach to adaptation that takes into account not only environmental impacts but also social and economic ones. Climate politics must move beyond technocratic frameworks to engage with the fundamental values and interests of society.
As Leah Aronowsky notes in her piece, climate migration has already become a genuine political struggle, with debates over green capitalism, democratic socialism, lithium nationalization, and coal phase-out compensation reflecting competing visions for the future. However, even these progressive agendas remain rooted in an emissions reductions framework that overlooks the need for transformative social change.
A truly comprehensive approach to adaptation would apply this same political imagination to climate impacts already transforming everyday life. It would recognize that climate adaptation is not a distinct technical challenge but rather continuous with ongoing political struggles.
The terrain of this struggle is beginning to take shape, with proposals like the Council on Foreign Relations' reforms to the property insurance market and the Climate and Community Institute's Housing Resilience Agencies offering stark contrasts in approach. One uses price signaling to prod people out of vulnerable areas, while the other commits public resources that enable them to stay safely.
The question is no longer whether we will adapt to climate change but how – and whose vision will prevail. As Leah Aronowsky emphasizes, this is not a zero-sum game between mitigation and adaptation; rather, it's about creating a politics of adaptation that can transform our institutions and reshape our society for the future.
but nobody ever talks about it like it's some kinda technical fix 
the whole discussion around slowing emissions vs adapting to impacts feels so outdated... isn't it time we focus on creating a society that can withstand climate change without even thinking about "mitigating" it? 
. We must address issues like property insurance markets, heat exposure in the workplace, and water usage management to create a more comprehensive approach to climate change 
.
. The debate around climate migration and competing visions for the future highlights the need for transformative social change 
.
. It's about creating a politics of adaptation that can transform our institutions and reshape our society 
.
I mean, have you guys noticed how climate change is like that one friend who always shows up late to the party? You're all trying to fix the air conditioning, but then your buddy's got sea level rise coming in for a visit uninvited 
. Get real, we need adaptation policies that are more than just technical fixes - I mean, how about some climate insurance for when your house gets flooded and you can't afford to move? 
And don't even get me started on the whole "we're gonna make climate change pay" thing... sounds like a bad joke 
.
the rising sea levels, droughts, heatwaves... and all that comes with 'em. Like what happens when insurance markets don't cover high-risk areas? Or when workers gotta deal with extreme weather on the job? We need a system that protects people's lives, not just buildings 
I gotta disagree with the whole "adaptation" thing... like, what's next? We're gonna start building seawalls around every single neighborhood just in case? 
It's just more government trying to tell us how to live our lives.
I'm not saying we should ignore the problem or anything, but do we really need all these fancy solutions that are gonna cost us a fortune? 
. It's not just about building seawalls or retrofitting buildings, it's also about how people will be affected by climate change in their daily lives 
. We need a more comprehensive approach that takes into account all the aspects of climate change 
. I'm loving the idea of creating a politics of adaptation that can transform our institutions and reshape our society for the future 
. It's not just about building seawalls or retrofitting buildings, we also need to think about how people will be affected by climate change in a social and economic way. For example, what happens when insurance markets don't cover extreme weather events? Or when workers are exposed to heat on the job without proper protection?