Return
Vulnerability trade-offs and externalities of an ‘effective’ adaptation programme: why assessing adaptation effectiveness needs to consider the perceptions of target populations
M
B
C
S
J
DOI:10.1080/17565529.2026.2655419.png)
Abstract
En 中文
Adaptation interventions often struggle to assess effectiveness and sustain adaptive behaviours. This study examines whether incorporating target groups' perceptions throughout the project cycle can reduce intervention risks and identifies the challenges involved. Drawing on a Mexican agroforestry programme, we analyse perceptions of risk, tolerance, preferences and expectations among target populations, including perceived costs and benefits of observed and anticipated impacts. We triangulate interviews, focus groups, household surveys and national datasets to capture the views of both programme beneficiaries and the wider community. While agroforestry is widely perceived to reduce climate risk, we find substantial divergence between programme and population perspectives. Beneficiaries report short-term adaptation gains but also perceive long-term risks of ineffective, inefficient or maladaptive outcomes-concerns not reflected in the programme design-which may undermine sustained participation. Non-beneficiaries report being worse off in both relative and absolute terms due to economic, environmental and social changes attributed to the programme. The study also reveals significant limitations in national data systems for evaluating adaptation interventions, a timely issue given the need for indicators under the Global Goal on Adaptation. We conclude that mitigating adaptation risks requires programme flexibility, diverse data sources and continuous engagement with target communities throughout the project cycle.
Keywords:
Maladaptation
spillover effects
risk tolerance
Sembrando Vida
adaptation metrics
agroforestry
Journal
IF:
3.4
Papers:
1.1K
Citations:
3.1K
