I recently came across the following National Geographic article which addresses the issue of adaption to climate change. However, National Geographic tends to be pro-alarmist, so they haven't delved into the psychological complexities of tackling both issues of adaption and CO2 reduction simultaneously, although they agree both policies should be implemented.
As I see it, alarm or exaggeration is so frequently used throughout the history of humanity in order to control and motivate human behaviour. If describing the punishment for bad behaviour in this life, as horrible, eternal suffering in Hell after death, causes people to behave better in this life, then there is a justification for such assertions of eternal damnation, whether factual or not.
Likewise, if undeveloped countries in particular, but also some developed countries, do not use 'state-of-the-art' emission controls to reduce the levels of toxic emissions to negligible proportions, as is currently possible, then there is some justification in branding CO2 as a toxic emission which will cause devastating climate consequences, even though scientifically that is very uncertain.
We all want a clean atmosphere. CO2 is a clean and odorless gas, essential for all life, and the more the better, up to a certain point, of course. Drinking too much water can kill you.
The major problem, as I see it, is that the motivation for 'adaption' to climate change is in conflict with the motivation for reduction of CO2 emissions. The motivation for reduction of CO2 emissions relies upon the media creating the 'illusion' that all current extreme weather events are unprecedented and caused by rising CO2 levels.
The motivation for adaption would rely upon the media reporting that extreme weather events in the past have been as great or greater than current, 'so-called' record events, despite the lower concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere.
In other words, to galvanize the public, politically, to accept that we should spend billions of dollars in protecting ourselves from a repetition of previous extreme weather events that had nothing to do with human emissions of CO2, completely undermines the exaggerated narrative that all current extreme weather events are unprecedented, due to rising CO2 levels.
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/2019/01/communities-adapt-to-changing-climate-after-fires-floods-storms/"The spotty nature of adaptation efforts so far can be seen in the aftermath of Hurricane Michael—where one reinforced, raised home famously survived, nearly alone, along Mexico Beach, Florida, after the strongest Panhandle hurricane in at least 155 years. In the Camp Fire that devastated Paradise, California, and killed 85 people, a sprinkling of houses built and maintained to withstand embers survived, but—again—were the rare exception."
"Another source of concern is accumulating research revealing patterns of extraordinarily extreme weather through the last several thousand years in places now heavily built and populated. Scientists dissecting cores of layered ancient marsh and lake mud and other clues to past climate conditions have revealed spasms of frequent, powerful hurricanes even in past cooler periods around Puerto Rico, extreme hill-scouring rainstorms in Vermont, and century-long megadroughts in Ghana—meaning calamities that might be perceived as “unprecedented” are in fact simply rare, and thus unmeasured, threats."