Assessing successful adaptation is, however, difficult . WGIII Section 1.6 summarises four broad analytic frameworks-aggregate efficiency, ethics and equity, transition dynamics, and psychology and politics-relevant to mitigation and concludes that failure to integrate understanding across them has been a fundamental reason for inadequate progress to date in reducing GHG emissions. While the four analytic frameworks used in WGIll also all contribute to the understanding of adaptation, an integrated view remains elusive because adaptation differs strongly from mitigation. In particular, the goals of adaptation are harder to define and measure than those for mitigation. The feasibility, effectiveness and success of many adaptation actions depend more strongly on context. A different, often more diffuse, set of actors are involved, and it is often hard to distinguish what activities count as adaptation.
IPCC
Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability
IPCC Report