Adaptation pathways have experienced growing popularity as a decision-focussed approach in climate adaptation research and planning. Despite the increasing and broadening use of adaptation pathways reported in the literature, there has not yet been a systematic attempt to review, compare and contrast approaches to adaptation pathways design and their application. In this paper we address this gap through a literature review of conceptual and applied studies of adaptation pathways in the context of climate change. Adaptation pathways started to be conceptualised in 2010. They have become recognised as sequences of actions, which can be implemented progressively, depending on how the future unfolds and the development of knowledge. A difference between scholars is whether pathways are understood as alternative sequences of measures to realise a well-defined adaptation objective, or as broad directions of change for different strategic aims or outcomes. Analysis of case studies on adaptation pathways development showed three clusters of approaches: (a) performance-threshold oriented, (b) multi-stakeholder oriented, and (c) transformation oriented approaches. These broadly correspond to three desired outcomes of pathways development: (i) meeting short and long-term adaptation needs, (ii) promoting collaborative learning, adaptive planning and adaptive capacity, (iii) accounting for complexity and long-term change, including a potential need for transformation. Yet, as of now there is little evidence of the utility of different approaches for pathways development in different decision contexts. Scholars appear to be guided more by how they understand the adaptation problem and by what approaches are known to them, than by the context of the case. Attention is needed on who defines objectives and outcomes for pathway development. Based on the review, we present a learning framework to guide systematic reflection about why and how adaptation pathways are developed. Lessons learned by application of the framework will enable refinement of pathways approaches to make full use of the potential in different decision contexts.

在气候适应研究和规划中，作为一种以决策为重点的方法，适应途径已越来越受欢迎。尽管在文献中报道了适应途径的使用越来越广泛，但是还没有系统地尝试审查，比较和对比适应途径设计及其应用的方法。在本文中，我们通过对气候变化背景下适应途径的概念和应用研究的文献综述来解决这一差距。适应途径于2010年开始概念化。它们已被视为一系列行动，可以逐步实施，具体取决于未来的发展方式和知识的发展。学者之间的区别在于，途径是被理解为实现明确定义的适应目标的替代措施序列，还是被理解为针对不同战略目标或结果的广泛变革方向。对适应途径发展的案例研究分析显示出三类方法：（a）以绩效-阈值为导向，（b）以多利益相关者为导向，和（c）以转化为导向的方法。这些大致对应于路径发展的三个预期结果：（i）满足短期和长期的适应需求，（ii）促进协作学习，适应性计划和适应能力，（iii）考虑复杂性和长期变化，包括潜在的转型需求。然而，到目前为止，几乎没有证据表明在不同的决策环境中使用不同方法进行途径开发的效用。学者似乎更多地是由他们如何理解适应问题和他们所知道的方法来指导的，而不是个案的背景。需要注意谁定义途径开发的目标和结果。在回顾的基础上，我们提出了一个学习框架，以指导系统地思考为什么以及如何开发适应途径。通过应用该框架获得的经验教训将有助于完善途径方法，以充分利用不同决策环境中的潜力。需要注意谁定义途径开发的目标和结果。在回顾的基础上，我们提出了一个学习框架，以指导系统地思考为什么以及如何开发适应途径。通过应用该框架获得的经验教训将有助于完善途径方法，以充分利用不同决策环境中的潜力。需要注意谁定义途径开发的目标和结果。在回顾的基础上，我们提出了一个学习框架，以指导系统地思考为什么以及如何开发适应途径。通过应用该框架获得的经验教训将有助于完善途径方法，以充分利用不同决策环境中的潜力。