Responding to global change represents an unprecedented challenge for society. Decision makers tend to address this challenge by framing adaptation as a decision problem, whereby the responses to impacts of change are addressed within existing decision processes centred on defining the decision problem and selecting options. However, this ‘decision-making perspective’ is constrained by societal values and principles, regulations and norms and the state of knowledge. It is therefore unsuitable for addressing complex, contested, cross-scale problems. In this paper we argue that simply broadening the decision-making perspective to account for institutions and values is not enough. We contend the decision-making perspective needs to be connected with a broader ‘decision-context perspective’ that focuses on how the societal system of decision processes affects the manner in which a particular problem is addressed. We describe the decision context as an interconnected system of values, rules and knowledge (vrk). The interaction of systems of vrk both creates and limits the set of practical, permissible decisions; the types of values, rules and knowledge that influence the decision and the capacity for change and transformation in the decision context. We developed a framework to analyse the interactions between values, rules and knowledge and their influence on decision making and decision contexts of adaptation initiatives, and applied it retrospectively to three projects on adaptation to sea-level rise. Our analysis revealed: (1) specific examples of how interactions between vrk systems constrained existing framings of decision making and the development of options for coastal adaptation; (2) limitations in the adaptive management strategies that underpinned the projects and (3) how the linked systems of vrk can allow adaptation practitioners to structure adaptation as a process of co-evolutionary change that enables a broader set of social issues and change processes to be considered. Adaptation projects that focus on the decision context represent a pragmatic alternative to existing decision-focused adaptation. By using the vrk model to diagnose constraints in decision processes, we show how the reframing of adaptation initiatives can reveal new approaches to developing adaptation responses to complex global change problems

With the rapid development of climate change adaptation over recent decades, a considerable amount of evidence has been collected on maladaptation associated with climate change adaptation initiatives, particularly in terms of risk transfer and risk substitution. Increasing our understanding of maladaptation is important for avoiding negative outcomes of adaptation project implementation. However, maladaptation has received limited research attention. Previous research has focused on frameworks that can assist in defining and avoiding maladaptive risk and be applied to adaptation initiative planning processes. Adaptation may cause more significant influences on spatial land change than the direct effect of climate change does. Identifying the adaptation consequences that are likely to result in maladaptation is crucial. A combination of spatial land analysis and climate change analysis can be used for the aforementioned identification. However, empirical case studies on methods that can assess and evaluate the risk of maladaptation by integrating spatial and temporal aspects in a land spatial modeling tool have not been conducted. The present study aimed to fill this research gap by exploring the existing knowledge on maladaptation to climate change. We examined the interaction among spatial analysis, evaluated maladaptation frameworks, and project design to extend our conceptual understanding on maladaptation to climate change. We adopted a systematic review method that involved considering several questions including the following: (a) What are the definitions and categories of maladaptation? (b) What methods and theoretical frameworks exist for the assessment and evaluation of maladaptive risk? (c) How have climate-related research communities considered issues of maladaptation? (d) What are the experimental studies on land use change that can be referred to for minimizing maladaptive risks in future adaptation planning? In conclusion, further research on maladaptation should integrate spatial land analysis methods to facilitate the identification and avoidance of maladaptive risk in the initial stage of adaptation planning.

Climate change impacts, sea level rise, and changes to the frequency and intensity of storms, in particular, are projected to increase the coastal land and assets exposed to coastal erosion. The selection of appropriate adaptation strategies requires an understanding of the costs and how such costs will vary by the magnitude and timing of climate change impacts. By drawing comparisons between past events and climate change projections, it is possible to use experience of the way societies have responded to changes to coastal erosion to inform the costs and selection of adaptation strategies at the coastal settlement scale. The experience of implementing a coastal protection strategy for the Gold Coast’s southern beaches between 1964 and 1999 is compiled into a database of the timing, units, and cost of coastal protection works. Records of the change to shoreline position and characteristics of local beaches are analysed through the Bruun model to determine the implied sea level rise at the time each of the projects was completed. Finally, an economic model updates the project costs for the point in the future based on the projected timing of sea level rise and calculates a net present value (NPV) for implementing a protection strategy, per km, of sandy beach shoreline against each of the four representative concentration pathways (RCP) of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to 2100. A key finding of our study is the significant step-up in expected costs of implementing coastal protection between RCP 2.6 and RCP 8.5—from $573,792/km to $1.7 million/km, or a factor of nearly 3, using a social discount rate of 3%. This step-up is by a factor of more than 6 at a social discount rate of 1%. This step-up in projected costs should be of particular interest to agencies responsible for funding and building coastal defences.

Integrated coastal zone management (ICZM) has been widely adopted by Australian states as the preferred basis for addressing the negative impacts of development on the social and environmental values of the coast. Given the ongoing failure to arrest the declining condition of social and environmental values of the Australian coast and mounting pressures of growing population and climate change there is growing interest to alternative approaches to ICZM. This paper reports on a case study of Queensland’s Gold Coast where despite an established ICZM policy recreational surfers continued to see their values for the coast threatened and damaged by government sanctioned development. As an alternative to ICZM surfers successfully repositioned their values within the coastal development policy agenda by establishing a partnership with government to develop a surfing institutional structure.