Strategic resilience: outlining a new government approach to climate change adaptation

The authors set out a new “strategic resilience” approach to climate change adaptation that would put the mission at the heart of government and give it the political muscle needed to set coherent agendas to confront transboundary risks. The authors also argue for new governance structures – and possibly new institutions – to reflect the primacy of this mission, with the ability to lead; steer finance and policy; orchestrate national-level coordination; and transcend narrow, traditional views of what constitutes the national interest.

Key messages of this report, include:

• A key objective for governments today should be to chart a course through an uncertain and complex world of polycrises to maximize justice and sustainability without risking conflict.
• Interlinked polycrises pose risks that ignore national borders, and they impose costs that erode the political and financial capital available to invest in preventing and preparing for climate-related shocks at the very time when these efforts are most needed.
• Relying on analysis of related literature and a case study of the UK, the authors argue that the situation presents an opportunity to take a more ambitious approach to climate change adaptation through a new paradigm of “strategic resilience” a term they define as building the capacity to withstand and recover from multiple,complex shocks while pursuing coherent, strategic national objectives.
• The authors argue that new governance structures – and possibly new institutions – are needed to reflect the primacy of this mission, with the ability to lead; steer finance and policy; orchestrate national-level coordination; and transcend narrow, traditional views of what constitutes the national interest.
• The authors suggest that such an approach offers a “third way” forward – between a strictly territorial approach to adaptation, and an already emerging and riskier securitization approach to adaptation dominated by defence logics, which has the potential to lead to less collaborative policies and less effective investments.