Adaptation Resilience

DISCLAIMER — Real Science, No Framework Bridge

Why no UTAC/CREP/AFET bridge: not only because the cited literature already provides the necessary quantitative structure -- a deliberate choice. This project's highly speculative AFET/UTAC experiments must never stand in the way of climate/ecology topics being accessible and usable to people who don't work inside that construct and aren't looking for renormalization groups. Real, checkable science, without the burden of an unproven framework. See PACKAGE_REGISTRY.md's "Why no UTAC/CREP/AFET bridge in the climate/ecology series" (2026-08-31) in the GenesisAeon workspace root for the full canonical note.

Status: Real, verified science + NO UTAC/CREP/AFET bridge

What this is

• Climate adaptation measures (early warning systems, resilient
• infrastructure, nature-based coastal defenses, resilient agriculture,
• resilient water resources) are consistently found to be strongly
• cost-effective, not merely defensive spending.
• Reguero et al. (2018, PLOS ONE 13(4), e0192132): for the US Gulf
• Coast, a cost-effective adaptation portfolio (benefit-to-cost ratio
• above 1) could prevent $57-101 billion in losses; nature-based options
• (wetland and oyster-reef restoration) alone avert more than $50 billion
• of this, with an average benefit-to-cost ratio above 3.5.
• Global Commission on Adaptation (2019, "Adapt Now"): investing $1.8
• trillion globally (2020-2030) across five priority areas could
• generate $7.1 trillion in net benefits, with benefit-to-cost ratios
• typically in the 2:1 to 10:1+ range across the reviewed literature.

What this is NOT

• Not a guarantee. Benefit-cost ratios are modeled projections under
• stated assumptions (discount rates, hazard scenarios, avoided-l

…

adaptation-resilience-utac

[](https://github.com/GenesisAeon) [](https://github.com/GenesisAeon/adaptation-resilience-utac/actions/workflows/ci.yml) [](https://www.python.org) [](LICENSE) [](https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.21798240)

GenesisAeon Package 95 — real climate adaptation cost-benefit science. Deliberately has no UTAC/CREP/AFET bridge — see DISCLAIMER.md.

For a plain-language explanation of the same topic (German, no jargon, written for general audiences), see WHITEPAPER.md.

What's real here

• Reguero et al. (2018, PLOS ONE): Gulf Coast nature-based adaptation
• (wetlands, oyster reefs) averts $50B+ in losses at an average
• benefit-to-cost ratio above 3.5.
• Global Commission on Adaptation (2019): $1.8T global adaptation
• investment (2020-2030) projected to generate $7.1T in net benefits.
• Documents the real "triple dividend" of adaptation: avoided losses,
• economic gains, and social/environmental co-benefits — see
• DISCLAIMER.md.

Quickstart

bash pip install adaptation-resilience-utac

```python from adaptation_resilience_utac import gca_global_bcr

print(gca_global_bcr()) # ~3.94 ```

Development

bash pip install -e ".[dev]" pre-commit install ruff check src tests mypy src pytest

Citation

See CITATION.cff and .zenodo.json.