How Imaginaries Drive Climate Adaptation Plans

Our vision for the future influences our actions today. While it is widely recognised that climate risks are increasing, significant gaps remain in climate adaptation efforts and responses.

The 2025 study, “Contested adaptation futures: the role of global imaginaries in climate adaptation governance,” published in Sustainability Science, contends that how society and governments imagine the future, which the authors termed “imaginaries,” shapes how governments plan for and respond to climate change adaptation.

The authors argue that collective visions of desirable futures and imaginaries are crucial in climate adaptation planning and its execution. These imaginaries help determine priorities, influence political objectives, and shape tangible outcomes. They seek to alter practices, making them inherently involved in political discussions and often contested.

Produced through political struggles, these visions are disseminated through various forms of media intertwined with power dynamics and resistance. Furthermore, they affect how we produce, consume, and prioritise value, ultimately influencing current and future social interactions and spatial organisation and development.

Based on an in-depth exploratory review of academic and grey literature on adaptation, the study identified six distinct climate adaptation imaginaries, each with a brief description. Each imagination possesses unique characteristics and envisioned futures. While there are some overlaps, each represents a particular conception of an ideal future promoted by different governance actors advocating for various adaptation strategies.

Six climate adaptation “Imaginaries”:

1. Eco-Modern State. This concept describes a society that meets the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by promoting economic growth, adopting Western institutional models, and utilising technological advancements. It signals a revival of the state’s role, partly due to the difficulties in monetising adaptation. The primary actors in this vision are national and federal governments and local authorities.
2. Just Adaptation. This vision promotes adaptation as a strategy to create a society that is not only just and equitable but also culturally vibrant while staying within the planet’s ecological limits. The lead governance role for this adaptation is not clearly defined but leans towards civil society involvement.
3. Promethean (Green) Growth. This is characterised by an interconnected global society driven by economic growth. This approach relies on deregulated trade and is rooted in a belief that continuous innovation and economic expansion will eventually surpass and resolve our environmental challenges. Ultimately, this adaptation strategy is guided by market forces.
4. High-Tech Society. A society that deploys advanced technologies to address climate change without necessitating significant lifestyle alterations. Key actors in this adaptation strategy are scientists and advocates for a model where the state and market collaborate to finance innovation hubs, including university-based start-ups prioritising technical solutions. 
5. Human Stewardship. A society that profoundly values biodiversity and is committed to improving ecosystem protection. This managerial and utilitarian approach recognises a clear distinction between humans and nature. The primary governing authority in this model is the State.
6. Knowledge Society. A society relying on scholarly research anchoring adaptation strategies in the bedrock of scientific evidence. The academia leads governance.

Distinct political beliefs and values underpin these six prominent climate adaptation imaginaries, which the authors have studied and analysed. Each presents a unique future vision, complete with preferred adaptation strategies and key stakeholders.

As global climate risks continue to escalate, these imaginaries’ political and social contestation influences the priorities, outcomes, and actions governments take in response to climate change. By analysing six distinct climate adaptation imaginaries, the authors highlight the diversity of visions, each driven by unique values, governance actors, and underlying ethical beliefs.

While these imaginaries shape adaptation strategies and governance structures, they reinforce existing power dynamics and often perpetuate “business-as-usual” approaches. The study thus calls for a critical re-examination of dominant adaptation futures, urging more just and innovative strategies that challenge entrenched assumptions and lead to more sustainable climate responses.

Ultimately, how we envision the future will continue to determine how effectively we respond to the climate crisis today.