Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorVillamayor-Tomas, S.
dc.contributor.authorBisaro, A
dc.contributor.authorMoull, K.
dc.contributor.authorAlbizua, A.
dc.contributor.authorMank, I.
dc.contributor.authorHinkel, J.
dc.contributor.authorLeppert, G.
dc.contributor.authorNoltze, M.
dc.date.accessioned2024-05-28T14:18:57Z
dc.date.available2024-05-28T14:18:57Z
dc.date.issued2024-12-01
dc.identifier.citationCommunications Earth and Environment: 5 (1): 214 (2024)es_ES
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10810/68222
dc.description.abstractEvidence on the effectiveness of climate change adaptation interventions in low- and middle-income countries has been rapidly growing in recent years, particularly in the agricultural and coastal sectors. Here we address the question of whether results are consistent across intervention types, and risk reduction versus development-related outcomes using a systematic review of 363 empirical observations published in the scientific literature. Generally, we found more evidence of risk reduction outcomes in the coastal sector than in the agricultural sector, and more evidence of development-related outcomes in the agricultural sector. Further, results indicate that nature-based solutions have the strongest positive effects for both the coastal and agricultural sectors. Social/behavioural interventions in the coastal sector show negative effects on development-related outcomes that will need to be further tested. Taken together, our results highlight the opportunity for development and climate adaptation practitioners to promote adaptation interventions with co-benefits beyond risk reduction, particularly in the case of nature-based solutions. © The Author(s) 2024.es_ES
dc.description.sponsorshipEvidence on the effectiveness of climate change adaptation interventions in low- and middle-income countries has been rapidly growing in recent years, particularly in the agricultural and coastal sectors. Here we address the question of whether results are consistent across intervention types, and risk reduction versus development-related outcomes using a systematic review of 363 empirical observations published in the scientific literature. Generally, we found more evidence of risk reduction outcomes in the coastal sector than in the agricultural sector, and more evidence of development-related outcomes in the agricultural sector. Further, results indicate that nature-based solutions have the strongest positive effects for both the coastal and agricultural sectors. Social/behavioural interventions in the coastal sector show negative effects on development-related outcomes that will need to be further tested. Taken together, our results highlight the opportunity for development and climate adaptation practitioners to promote adaptation interventions with co-benefits beyond risk reduction, particularly in the case of nature-based solutions. © The Author(s) 2024.es_ES
dc.language.isoenges_ES
dc.publisherCommunications Earth and Environmentes_ES
dc.relationinfo:eu-repo/grantAgreement/MCIN/CEX2019-000940-Mes_ES
dc.relationinfo:eu-repo/grantAgreement/MCIN/CNS2022-136063es_ES
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesses_ES
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/es/*
dc.titleDeveloping countries can adapt to climate change effectively using nature-based solutionses_ES
dc.title.alternativeDeveloping countries can adapt to climate change effectively using nature-based solutionses_ES
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlees_ES
dc.rights.holder© The Author(s) 2024es_ES
dc.rights.holderAtribución-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 3.0 España*
dc.relation.publisherversionhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s43247-024-01356-0es_ES
dc.identifier.doi10.1038/s43247-024-01356-0


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

© The Author(s) 2024
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as © The Author(s) 2024