Abstract
Adaptation assessment methods are compatible with the international risk management
standard ISO:31000. Risk management approaches are increasingly being
recommended for adaptation assessments at both national and local levels. Two
orientations to assessments can commonly be identified: top-down and bottom-up,
and prescriptive and diagnostic. Combinations of these orientations favor different
types of assessments. The choice of orientation can be related to uncertainties in
prediction and taking action, in the type of adaptation and in the degree of system
stress. Adopting multiple viewpoints is to be encouraged, especially in complex situations.
The bulk of current guidance material is consistent with top-down and predictive
approaches, thus is most suitable for risk scoping and identification. Abroad
range ofmaterial fromwithin and beyond the climate change literature can be used
to select methods to be used in assessing and implementing adaptation. The framing
of risk, correct formulation of the questions being investigated and assessment
methodology are critical aspects of the scoping phase. Only when these issues have
been addressed should be issue of specific methods and tools be addressed. The
reorientation of adaptation from an assessment focused solely on anthropogenic
climate change to broader issues of vulnerability/resilience, sustainable development
and disaster risk, especially through a risk management framework, can draw
from existing policy and management understanding in communities, professions
and agencies, incorporating existing agendas, knowledge, risks, and issues they
already face.