1. Toolkit Home
  2. Adaptation Pathways and Plan Alignment

Adaptation Pathways and Plan Alignment

Overview

There are many approaches to plan for uncertain futures in a changing climate, including assessing risk tolerance, undertaking scenario planning, and developing adaptation pathways. Each has benefits, challenges, and tradeoffs, and it is wise to consider a range of approaches and choose one or more that work well together and are most appropriate for the planning area. Risk tolerance and scenario planning are commonly used, but adaptation pathways is relatively new to hazard mitigation and climate adaptation planning. Although adaptation pathways represent an alternative to the traditional “predict-and-plan” method described in the California Adaptation Planning Guide (APG), much of the guidance provided in the APG also supports an adaptation pathways “monitor-then-act” approach. These approaches can, and often should, be combined to support more flexible planning.

DEFINITIONS

Scenario planning: a long-term planning approach in which planners consider a wide range of scenarios under diverse future conditions to inform decision-making.

Risk tolerance: In the context of climate planning, refers to the determination of the level of risk or uncertainty an entity is willing to accept.

Low/no regrets principle: suggests that actions taken would still have value even if future conditions are different from those projected.

Thresholds/Triggers: Used (sometimes interchangeably) to identify one or more measurable values or events representing future changes in conditions. These often reflect critical nodes or decision points where future pathways have flexibility to change. For examples of different ways triggers and thresholds are used, see the graphic “Timing Thresholds, Triggers, and Actions.”

Lead time: the time required to implement a change.

Maladaptation: adaptation choices that do more damage than the hazard itself.

Adapted from the Adaptation Planning Guide, Governor’s Office of Emergency Services and Adaptation Roadmap, San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission

The California Ocean Protection Council (OPC) defines adaptation pathways as a planning approach that addresses the uncertainty and challenges of sea level rise and climate change decision-making (such as uncertainty in the regulatory, political, economic, environmental, and sociocultural conditions of the future). This approach, also called phased adaptation, enables consideration of multiple possible futures and more robust analysis of the benefits and downsides of adaptation solutions across those futures (Adaptation Roadmap).

Adaptation pathways planning facilitates flexible and incremental decision making and investment through discrete, staggered steps over time, early action on low/no regrets strategies, and opportunities for continuous review to change approaches as more information becomes available. Phased planning can keep future options open, help avoid a maladaptive scenario where a community is “locked in” to an undesirable outcome, and support precautionary approaches when appropriate (planning and building capacity for the higher end of the range of possible sea level rise – see Critical Infrastructure at Risk).

Getting Started

The APG recommends a four-step process for beginning adaptation pathways:

  1. Determine the effect being addressed and specifically define a desired outcome or objective.
  2. Identify the potential adaptation strategies to address the effect and meet the objective.
  3. Evaluate and organize strategies.
  4. Assess the compatibility of potential strategies.

For additional details on these steps, explore the APG Adaptation Pathways chapter.

An illustrated graphic showing three examples of how the trigger/threshold concept of adaptation pathways can be used to time adaptation actions. In example 1, A trigger is used to indicate how close you are to a future threshold and indicates an action is needed. It shows that when planning in the short term, a trigger can be used as a metric indicating action is needed to avoid passing a critical threshold, such as "X feet of sea level rise is reached." This triggers a “Proactive” Action in the mid term: Actions triggered well before a critical threshold is passed. An action might be "Shoreline marshes are restored that can absorb future storm surge." This is taken well before a “Critical” Threshold is passed in the long term as sea levels rise; this is defined as "A threshold, also called a tipping point, that is highly undesirable to cross, after which adaptation is extremely difficult or no longer possible:" so this might mean, "At 2x feet of sea level rise, shoreline neighborhoods will be permanently flooded." Example 2 shows a similar scenario to example 1, but the trigger is used to indicate how close you are to a future threshold and indicates a decision between potential actions is needed. In advance of the critical threshold being crossed in the mid/long term, a metric is passed that triggers a decision and subsequent action well in advance. In example 3, it shows using a threshold and trigger interchangeably; this means that when an indicator used as a threshold is passed, it triggers a decision point or action that occurs in reaction to the threshold/trigger being crossed, rather than proactively in advance of the threshold.

For specific examples in practice, see the Adaptation Roadmap.

  • Start with low/no-regrets, “low hanging fruit” actions. These are actions you can quickly implement them in the near-term while leaving future options open, and they are often actions with strong benefits and few costs no matter what happens next.

  • Link near-term adaptation actions with pre-determined threshold events or conditions. A threshold triggers actions, planning, or decisions, and reflects a community’s vision, risk tolerance, local conditions, and best available information.

  • Implement a robust, well-resourced monitoring program to track thresholds. Monitoring changes in the environment and impacts to communities and infrastructure ensures timely decision-making. It is vital to identify and monitor suitable metrics, to facilitate timely and appropriate action when approaching a threshold.

  • Use adaptation pathways as a communications tool to encourage sustained community dialogue around tough adaptation decisions over time. The incremental and step-wise nature of adaptation pathways can show community members why and when it works best to employ certain strategies. Discussing adaptation pathways can create a space for collaborative, community-driven decision-making and foster broader community support and benefits.

Note: there are many variations in the ways various communities define thresholds, triggers, and other key terms. For example, the concept of “thresholds” is often used in ecological contexts to mean a critical tipping point, after which conditions may drastically or irreversibly change. These terms should be researched and explicitly defined locally to ensure a common and clear understanding when using adaptation pathways

CASE STUDY

The City of Santa Barbara developed a Sea Level Rise Adaptation Plan as part of the city’s efforts to update its Local Coastal Program, with funds from the Coastal Commission. The Plan builds on adaptation priorities the City identified in its Coastal Land Use Plan, Safety Element, and Hazard Mitigation Plan. The Adaptation Plan uses a phased approach, presenting a range of adaptation options to consider over time, and provides a framework for the City to monitor sea level rise impacts and reduce vulnerabilities as it reaches specific thresholds for action. The Plan also summarizes the economic and fiscal impacts of future coastal hazard conditions, and potential near-term actions in additional detail, including both immediate next steps and high priority actions that are critical to initiate in the next five years.

Another key element of phased adaptation pathways is balancing time-based planning with actual and expected risk (i.e., the potential timing and severity of anticipated impacts) and how specific actions will accrue short- and long-term benefits. This involves intentionally separating short-, mid-, and long-term adaptation strategies for consideration, and phasing how they are developed and implemented over time.

  • Solutions implemented in the near term should at minimum avoid compromising future solutions that would address longer term risks, and ideally generate both near- and long-term benefits. For example, if atmospheric rivers pose present-day and near-term risks, adaptations to these should be prioritized, but balanced with consideration for longer term impacts such as rising shorelines and severe flooding.

  • Some types of actions ought to be taken as soon as possible to address long-term risk. For example, projects to develop regional infrastructure may take decades before they begin reducing flood risk, but the long-term benefits may be immense.

  • Pathways in each phase should respond to a range of risk scenarios and balance time horizon-based actions with observed changes. While some actions are by necessity timebased, such as incorporating climate risk into a Housing Element 5- or 8-year update, others need to be nimbler: If sea levels rise faster than planned, or new information requires a change in approach, these strategies should not be tied to a specific time horizon, to allow flexibility to address updated scenarios. Close monitoring for thresholds can facilitate timely decisions and opportunities to re-evaluate, update, and re-prioritize pathways, and will help solutions be more responsive to real conditions and new information.

The form and detail of adaptation pathways will vary depending on the scope and time horizon of each plan, program and project. BCDC advises in the Adaptation Roadmap that “The use of adaptation pathways differs depending on the scale... At larger scales, more emphasis can be placed on broad conceptual ideas about the short and long-term options. The smaller the scale, the more detailed the approach can be, including specific actions and strategies.”

Look for adaptation pathways examples throughout each Plan section in the Plan Alignment Toolkit for tips and ideas for how this approach can be integrated across multiple plans and processes, while balancing varied regulatory contexts and diverse community priorities. The guidance related to adaptation pathways is informed by recommendations from the California Coastal Commission, Ocean Protection Council, San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission, Governor’s Office of Emergency Services, and Governor’s Office of Planning and Research. These tips complement the broader planning and coastal hazard resilience plan alignment information contained throughout, which are informed by a variety of federal, state, and local agencies, and other partners who contributed to this guide

Coastal Resilience Compass

Sea-level rise and other coastal hazards that will worsen with climate change require an integrated, collaborative approach. Learn more about plan alignment opportunities in the coastal zone of California.

Explore the guide