10. Adaptation

This chapter, released in July 2026, is an addition to the Britain Talks Climate & Nature research published in September 2025. It combines brand new insights with findings detailed in our Insights Report and Communications Toolkit.

Included here is previously unpublished data collected as part of the Britain Talks Climate & Nature research in 2025 – as well as qualitative data from additional focus groups carried out across Britain and Northern Ireland in 2026.

Most people don’t distinguish between climate adaptation and mitigation when they are thinking about tackling climate change

Policy experts distinguish between climate adaptation and mitigation – and see them as separate, sometimes competing, priorities. Most members of the public do not see this distinction, or categorise efforts to address climate change according to these terms or concepts. 

This is partly because the terms aren’t in commonplace use. It’s also because, for most people, it is instinctive and sensible to both deal with the climate change impacts already happening, while at the same time reducing future impacts. Tackling climate change, for most people, means doing more of the things that fall under both categories.

When thinking about ‘climate adaptation’, most people aren't making a distinction from climate mitigation

While most people are supportive of specific policies, only half (51%) say they are clear on what ‘climate adaptation’ means. And only 40% think it sounds like a good thing.

Progressive Activists are the most likely segment to say they understand the term and Established Liberals the most likely to think it is a good thing. Rooted Patriots are the least likely to say they understand it and Traditional Conservatives the least likely to think it is a good thing.

Less than half of people in Britain understand the term ‘climate resilience’

Climate resilience is less widely understood, with 44% saying they are clear on what it means. 43% say they think it’s a good thing.  When discussing their perceptions of the terms ‘adaptation’ and ‘resilience’ in focus groups, many people described adaptation as something active (changing habits or building flood defences), whereas resilience to them is a passive trait (coping with the changes coming).

The way climate adaptation is framed makes a huge difference to how much people support it

As with other aspects of climate change, how we talk about and explain what this is makes a significant difference to people’s support for doing it. For example, across all segments, talking about investing time and money adapting now to prevent future loss was well received.

We see large differences across the segments when it comes to people’s enthusiasm for changing the way we live when adapting to climate change. Progressive Activists are keen to reshape the way we live in the future and Traditional Conservatives far more keen to protect the way we live now. This has a bearing on the extent to which people see adapting to climate change as an opportunity for dramatic change.

Most people want to see both adaptation and mitigation actions

When we asked people about their top priorities for “government policies that respond to climate change” they give roughly equal emphasis to actions that count as adaptation and mitigation.

Research from IPPR shows that only 5% of people in Britain want to prioritise adaptation alone, with the majority wanting to see both mitigation and adaptation measures put in place. This is reflected in the wide support of messages that focus on adaptation and mitigation together

 70% agree of people with this statement:

“The government needs to take climate change seriously – that means investing much more in renewable energy and other measures to reduce our emissions, while also preparing us for the worst impacts of climate change, such as by building better flood defences and making our homes more suited for the heat.”

As with all aspects of climate action, people’s feelings about climate adaptation are shaped by disillusionment and distrust

People across the UK are disillusioned with politicians and societal institutions. Many feel entirely overlooked by those in positions of power. The way people feel about climate adaptation specifically is influenced by this. 

As the impacts of climate change become more apparent every day, its impacts are increasingly part and parcel of people’s lives. For many, they are part of a long list of ways in which they are being let down. 

For some, when asked to focus on adaptation, it is interpreted as giving up

For people who feel most urgent and radical in relation to climate action, talk of focusing on adapting to climate change can spark very negative feelings. 

For experts climate adaptation is an active concept, focused on providing the support and intervention needed now. But for some within the Progressive Activist segment, it can feel like passively accepting climate change and letting it do its worst. It does not feel immediately compatible with addressing the causes of climate change.

People want to see the balance between people and nature restored

People in Britain are more concerned about the impact of climate change on nature and wildlife than anything else, and across segments there is a feeling that the balance between people and nature needs to be restored.

The idea that we should be ‘working with nature’ to adapt to a changing climate chimed across all segment focus groups, although it isn’t always clear to people how this works practically. Stories about planting trees to cool buildings and restoring floodplains to protect train lines combine these two important ideas – that we will meet people’s direct needs and that we will do it whilst benefitting nature.

Most people want to see both adaptation and mitigation actions, so don't force a separation between the two

Most people don’t distinguish between adaptation and mitigation. Most instinctively want governments to do more of both, and to do both in ways that make lives and communities better. Attempting to ‘educate’ people about the distinctions or asking them to focus on one over the other can backfire. And a singular adaptation focus can feel like giving up entirely.  

It is helpful and right that most people bring an instinctive both/and – rather than either/or – perspective. So, while the distinction between the two concepts may be important in policy, it is questionable whether this is a helpful lens to bring to public communication. 

Communicators should use and normalise this common sense ‘both/and’ story. Be wary about political attempts to force a separation between the two – and avoid legitimising that frame by using it. Be clear about the course of action that the vast majority of people in Britain want to see: adapting to the changing climate now while reducing risks for the future.

Show how tackling climate change makes lives and communities better, both by helping people adapt and reducing future harms

All action on climate change needs to help meet people’s needs – and it needs to feel like it is. Climate adaptation is no exception.

Just as people want to hear about solar panels benefitting schools and homes, they want to know about tree planting that reduces flood risks for communities, and actions that’ll help keep tracks cool so the trains keep running. They want specific, concrete examples, not abstract concepts. Things happening right now in local communities like theirs.

Be clear what investing time and money in the right things now could mean for people’s lives. Things like better housing that keeps us warmer in the winter and cooler in the summer. 

Balance talking about the climate impacts we’re all seeing with the healthier, safer future we can create. Connect action to the impacts we’re all seeing, like floods and heatwaves. But don’t stop there: paint a vivid and inviting picture of what could be.

Show how we can work with nature to protect nature

People care deeply about nature and support climate solutions that also help nature thrive. But there can be a sense that we face a choice between what’s better for the environment and what’s better for people’s lives right now.

Show how nature can help us adapt to the changing climate, and how it can help us reduce future risks. Use specific examples such as greening neighbourhoods to reduce the air temperature or restoring natural areas to reduce flooding or coastal damage. Pick relatable examples for your audience, focusing on what’s already happening in their local area or an area like theirs.

These solutions almost always lock away carbon and boost wildlife at the same time -working with nature is the perfect ‘both/and’ story for climate action.