•We present a large-n global assessment of equity in adaptation responses•Paper examines the extent to which marginalized groups are considered in responses•Responses in Africa and Asia are more likely to consider equity than other regions•Increased attention to how equity is integrated into adaptation is urgently needed As climate change adaptation actions are increasingly undertaken worldwide, it is imperative that responses integrate considerations of equity in their planning and implementation. Early case studies have shown that adaptive land-use planning in cities across the world, hasve reproduced uneven risk exposure and socio-economic vulnerability when it does not consider who benefits or loses from adaptation. Yet there are no large-scale systematic assessments of how social equity is being integrated into implemented adaptations. Through an extensive examination of peer-reviewed research documenting adaptation responses, this article analyzes the extent to which eight historically marginalized social groups were considered in planning or implementation of adaptation across regions and sectors. This large-n assessment examines the global status of where, how, and to what extent social equity is incorporated into adaptation, providing a baseline against which future progress can be measured. Growing evidence suggests that climate adaptation responses that do not incorporate equity considerations may worsen inequality and increase vulnerability. Using data from a systematic review of peer-reviewed empirical research on adaptation responses to climate change (n = 1,682), we present an assessment of how social equity is considered in adaptation across regions, sectors, and social groups. Roughly 60% of peer-reviewed literature on adaptation responses considers social equity by reporting on which marginalized groups were involved in planning or implementation. Articles on responses in Africa and Asia and those focusing on poverty reduction most frequently considered social equity. Equity was less likely to be considered in adaptation responses in Europe, Australasia, and North America, as well as in literature focused on cities. Income-based inequity was more frequently considered than gender, age, or Indigenous status. Ethnic and racial minorities, migrants, and people with disabilities were rarely considered. Attention to the levels and forms in which equity is integrated into adaptation research and practice is needed to ensure just adaptation. Growing evidence suggests that climate adaptation responses that do not incorporate equity considerations may worsen inequality and increase vulnerability. Using data from a systematic review of peer-reviewed empirical research on adaptation responses to climate change (n = 1,682), we present an assessment of how social equity is considered in adaptation across regions, sectors, and social groups. Roughly 60% of peer-reviewed literature on adaptation responses considers social equity by reporting on which marginalized groups were involved in planning or implementation. Articles on responses in Africa and Asia and those focusing on poverty reduction most frequently considered social equity. Equity was less likely to be considered in adaptation responses in Europe, Australasia, and North America, as well as in literature focused on cities. Income-based inequity was more frequently considered than gender, age, or Indigenous status. Ethnic and racial minorities, migrants, and people with disabilities were rarely considered. Attention to the levels and forms in which equity is integrated into adaptation research and practice is needed to ensure just adaptation. IntroductionClimate change disproportionately affects the most marginalized groups in society while, in many cases, these groups have contributed the least to carbon emissions.1Althor G. Watson J.E.M. Fuller R.A. Global mismatch between greenhouse gas emissions and the burden of climate change.Sci. Rep. 2016; 6: 20281Crossref PubMed Scopus (132) Google Scholar, 2Martinich J. Neumann J. Ludwig L. Jantarasami L. Risks of sea level rise to disadvantaged communities in the United States.Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Change. 2013; 18: 169-185Crossref Scopus (81) Google Scholar, 3Thomas D.S.G. Twyman C. Equity and justice in climate change adaptation amongst natural-resource-dependent societies.Glob. Environ. Change. 2005; 15: 115-124Crossref Scopus (373) Google Scholar, 4Otto I.M. Reckien D. Reyer C. Marcus R. Masson V.L. Jones L. Norton A. Serdeczny O. Social vulnerability to climate change: A review of concepts and evidence.Reg. Environ. Change. 2017; 17: 1651-1662Crossref Scopus (103) Google Scholar, 5Reckien D. Creutzig F. Fernandez B. Lwasa S. Tovar-Restrepo M. Mcevoy D. Satterthwaite D. Climate change, equity and the Sustainable Development Goals: an urban perspective.Environ. Urban. 2017; Crossref Scopus (92) Google Scholar Due to the systemic sources and mechanisms of marginalization, these groups tend to have greater resource needs and fewer means to cope with climatic impacts compared with social groups that hold economic, political, or social advantages.6Hallegatte S. Rozenberg J. Climate change through a poverty lens.Nat. Clim. Change. 2017; 7: 250-256Crossref Scopus (146) Google Scholar,7Khan M. Robinson S. Weikmans R. Ciplet D. Roberts J.T. Twenty-five years of adaptation finance through a climate justice lens.Clim. Change. 2020; 161: 251-269Crossref Scopus (54) Google Scholar Without intentional and consistent attention to ensure equity in planning and implementation of adaptation for marginalized groups, climate change will likely exacerbate and reproduce existing inequities and vulnerabilities in society.8Adger W.N. Vulnerability.Glob. Environ. Change. 2006; 16: 268-281Crossref Scopus (3479) Google Scholar, 9Anguelovski I. Shi L. Chu E. Gallagher D. Goh K. Lamb Z. Reeve K. Teicher H. Equity impacts of urban land use planning for climate adaptation: critical perspectives from the Global North and South.J. Plan. Educ. Res. 2016; 36: 333-348Crossref Scopus (243) Google Scholar, 10Eriksen S. Schipper E.L.F. Scoville-Simonds M. Vincent K. Adam H.N. Brooks N. Harding B. Khatri D. Lenaerts L. Liverman D. et al.Adaptation interventions and their effect on vulnerability in developing countries: Help, hindrance or irrelevance?.World Dev. 2021; 141: 105383Crossref Scopus (116) Google Scholar For example, studies show that land-use planning for adaptation in cities across the world reproduces uneven risk exposure and socioeconomic vulnerability when it does not consider who benefits or loses from certain adaptation responses.9Anguelovski I. Shi L. Chu E. Gallagher D. Goh K. Lamb Z. Reeve K. Teicher H. Equity impacts of urban land use planning for climate adaptation: critical perspectives from the Global North and South.J. Plan. Educ. Res. 2016; 36: 333-348Crossref Scopus (243) Google Scholar, 10Eriksen S. Schipper E.L.F. Scoville-Simonds M. Vincent K. Adam H.N. Brooks N. Harding B. Khatri D. Lenaerts L. Liverman D. et al.Adaptation interventions and their effect on vulnerability in developing countries: Help, hindrance or irrelevance?.World Dev. 2021; 141: 105383Crossref Scopus (116) Google Scholar, 11Schipper E.L.F. Maladaptation: when adaptation to climate change goes very wrong.One Earth. 2020; 3: 409-414Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF Scopus (46) Google Scholar Researchers further document how adaptation responses such as coastal protection infrastructure,12Wiryomartono B. Capitalist Agenda behind the Seawall development in Jakarta Bay, Indonesia: the marginalization of urban poor.in: Wiryomartono B. Traditions and Transformations of Habitation in Indonesia: Power, Architecture, and Urbanism. Springer, 2020: 223-245Crossref Google Scholar expansion of green spaces,13Chu E. Anguelovski I. Roberts D. Climate adaptation as strategic urbanism: assessing opportunities and uncertainties for equity and inclusive development in cities.Cities. 2017; 60: 378-387Crossref Scopus (96) Google Scholar and managed retreat14Siders A.R. Social justice implications of US managed retreat buyout programs.Clim. Change. 2019; 152: 239-257Crossref Scopus (90) Google Scholar can disproportionately benefit wealthy and otherwise advantaged individuals. These adaptation benefits often come at the expense of poor and marginalized groups if adaptations do not intentionally prioritize marginalized groups or do not involve them in the planning and decision-making processes.9Anguelovski I. Shi L. Chu E. Gallagher D. Goh K. Lamb Z. Reeve K. Teicher H. Equity impacts of urban land use planning for climate adaptation: critical perspectives from the Global North and South.J. Plan. Educ. Res. 2016; 36: 333-348Crossref Scopus (243) Google Scholar,15Leichenko R. O’Brien K. Environmental Change and Globalization: Double Exposures. Oxford University Press, 2008Crossref Scopus (395) Google Scholar Moreover, the Paris Agreement establishes a mandate to consider marginalized groups in crafting adaptation responses.16UNFCCCThe Paris Agreement. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, 2015Google Scholar Tracking the equity dimensions not only of climate change impacts, but also of adaptation responses, is thus paramount to achieving climate justice.17de Coninck H. Revi A. Babiker M. Bertoldi P. Buckeridge M. Cartwright A. Dong W. Ford J. Fuss S. cade J.-C. Strengthening and implementing the global response.in: Global Warming of 1.5°C. IPCC, 2018Google Scholar,18Pelling M. Garschagen M. Put Equity First in Climate Adaptation. Nature Publishing Group, 2019Crossref Scopus (53) Google ScholarSystematic tracking of global-scale adaptation efforts is complicated, however; there is no single database that documents adaptation responses across the world, and there is no standardized method for conducting such a global-scale analysis.19Ford J.D. Berrang-Ford L. The 4Cs of adaptation tracking: consistency, comparability, comprehensiveness, coherency.Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Change. 2016; 21: 839-859Crossref PubMed Scopus (65) Google Scholar In lieu of a single large database, data sources such as peer-reviewed research, national adaptation assessments, gray literature, and adaptation planning documents have been considered to be acceptable (although imperfect) proxies for adaptation efforts on the ground.19Ford J.D. Berrang-Ford L. The 4Cs of adaptation tracking: consistency, comparability, comprehensiveness, coherency.Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Change. 2016; 21: 839-859Crossref PubMed Scopus (65) Google Scholar Despite these complexities, there have been increasing efforts to track adaptation at large scales (e.g., globally), typically analyzing planned or top-down adaptation responses. These large-n efforts commonly use content analysis to scrutinize primary documents (e.g., policies,20Reckien D. Flacke J. Dawson R.J. Heidrich O. Olazabal M. Foley A. Hamann J.J.-P. Orru H. Salvia M. De Gregorio Hurtado S. et al.Climate change response in Europe: what’s the reality? Analysis of adaptation and mitigation plans from 200 urban areas in 11 countries.Clim. Change. 2014; 122: 331-340Crossref Scopus (214) Google Scholar, 21Reckien D. Salvia M. Heidrich O. Church J.M. Pietrapertosa F. de Gregorio-Hurtado S. d’Alonzo V. Foley A. Simoes S.G. Lorencová E.K. How are cities planning to respond to climate change? Assessment of local climate plans from 885 cities in the EU-28.J. Clean. Prod. 2018; 191: 207-219Crossref Scopus (225) Google Scholar, 22Meerow S. Pajouhesh P. Miller T.R. Social equity in urban resilience planning.Local Environ. 2019; 24: 793-808Crossref Scopus (93) Google Scholar, 23Hughes S. A meta-analysis of urban climate change adaptation planning in the US.Urban Clim. 2015; 14: 17-29Crossref Scopus (69) Google Scholar, 24Shi L. Chu E. Debats J. Explaining progress in climate adaptation planning across 156 US municipalities.J. Am. Plann. Assoc. 2015; 81: 191-202Crossref Scopus (90) Google Scholar, 25Stults M. Woodruff S.C. Looking under the hood of local adaptation plans: shedding light on the actions prioritized to build local resilience to climate change.Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Change. 2017; 22: 1249-1279Crossref Scopus (36) Google Scholar, 26Woodruff S.C. Stults M. Numerous strategies but limited implementation guidance in US local adaptation plans.Nat. Clim. Change. 2016; 6: 796-802Crossref Scopus (134) Google Scholar, 27Conevska A. Ford J. Lesnikowski A. Harper S. Adaptation financing for projects focused on food systems through the UNFCCC.Clim. Policy. 2019; 19: 43-58Crossref Scopus (8) Google Scholar, 28Manuamorn O.P. Biesbroek R. Do direct-access and indirect-access adaptation projects differ in their focus on local communities? A systematic analysis of 63 Adaptation Fund projects.Reg. Environ. Change. 2020; 20: 1-15Crossref Scopus (5) Google Scholar legislative records,29Lesnikowski A. Ford J.D. Biesbroek R. Berrang-Ford L. A policy mixes approach to conceptualizing and measuring climate change adaptation policy.Clim. Change. 2019; 156: 447-469Crossref Scopus (22) Google Scholar project summaries from global climate change funds, or national reports to United Nations bodies30Gagnon-Lebrun F. Agrawala S. Implementing adaptation in developed countries: an analysis of progress and trends.Clim. Policy. 2007; 7: 392-408Crossref Scopus (60) Google Scholar,31Lesnikowski A.C. Ford J.D. Berrang-Ford L. Barrera M. Heymann J. How are we adapting to climate change? A global assessment.Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Change. 2015; 20: 277-293Crossref Scopus (86) Google Scholar) that describe adaptation initiatives and yield detailed information about the design of adaptation responses. But these approaches tend to be resource intensive and are challenging to scale up to a global level. Hence, systematic reviews of published research are becoming increasingly popular in the adaptation literature to assess emerging knowledge and gaps in the massive and rapidly expanding volume of research that examines responses to climate change impacts and vulnerability.32Minx J.C. Callaghan M. Lamb W.F. Garard J. Edenhofer O. Learning about climate change solutions in the IPCC and beyond.Environ. Sci. Policy. 2017; 77: 252-259Crossref Scopus (82) Google Scholar Although published research alone may not be able to holistically capture all of the adaptation responses being undertaken worldwide, these reviews aim to achieve transparency and replicability in their methods and universal inclusion of published research based on a specific research question.19Ford J.D. Berrang-Ford L. The 4Cs of adaptation tracking: consistency, comparability, comprehensiveness, coherency.Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Change. 2016; 21: 839-859Crossref PubMed Scopus (65) Google Scholar Findings from existing global-scale content analyses and systematic reviews generally indicate that adaptation responses are still largely in the planning and early implementation stage and that high-income and/or larger cities and countries tend to report greater progress on adaptation than low-income and/or small cities and countries.20Reckien D. Flacke J. Dawson R.J. Heidrich O. Olazabal M. Foley A. Hamann J.J.-P. Orru H. Salvia M. De Gregorio Hurtado S. et al.Climate change response in Europe: what’s the reality? Analysis of adaptation and mitigation plans from 200 urban areas in 11 countries.Clim. Change. 2014; 122: 331-340Crossref Scopus (214) Google Scholar,33Araos M. Berrang-Ford L. Ford J.D. Austin S.E. Biesbroek R. Lesnikowski A. Climate change adaptation planning in large cities: A systematic global assessment.Environ. Sci. Policy. 2016; 66: 375-382Crossref Scopus (159) Google Scholar,34Lesnikowski A. Ford J. Biesbroek R. Berrang-Ford L. Heymann S.J. National-level progress on adaptation.Nat. Clim. Change. 2016; 6: 261-264Crossref Scopus (107) Google ScholarTo our knowledge, no systematic review of peer-reviewed research has yet considered the question of whether and how equity is considered in adaptation responses across regions and sectors. Existing comparative research on the topic of equity relies on content analysis of adaptation plans and key planning documents, and tends to focus on one sector and/or region or specific implementation pathways.10Eriksen S. Schipper E.L.F. Scoville-Simonds M. Vincent K. Adam H.N. Brooks N. Harding B. Khatri D. Lenaerts L. Liverman D. et al.Adaptation interventions and their effect on vulnerability in developing countries: Help, hindrance or irrelevance?.World Dev. 2021; 141: 105383Crossref Scopus (116) Google Scholar,35Persson A. Remling E. Equity and efficiency in adaptation finance: initial experiences of the Adaptation Fund.Clim. Policy. 2014; 14: 488-506Crossref Scopus (57) Google Scholar Scholars have also produced a large number of in-depth studies exploring social equity in relation to adaptation, which constitutes a rich body of literature examining equity-related processes and outcomes in different contexts. This research aims to expand on and complement the findings from these studies by developing a global picture of whether, where, and how equity is being considered in adaptation responses. By adopting a systematic review approach to this question, we are able to examine equity considerations across regions and sectors.Drawing on data from the Global Adaptation Mapping Initiative (GAMI), an international collaborative project to systematically track and examine peer-reviewed research on human adaptation responses published since 2013 (n = 1,682 articles), we produced a large-n global assessment of how social equity is considered in peer-reviewed research on adaptation responses, providing a baseline against which future progress can be measured. GAMI asks: What is the evidence for human adaptation-related responses that can directly reduce risk, exposure, and/or vulnerability to climate change? To develop the dataset, the GAMI team identified about 50,000 articles from Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. The team then used a combination of machine learning and manual review to narrow the articles down for inclusion in the GAMI dataset. To be included, the article needed to (1) be climate change related, (2) report empirical data on adaptation-related responses (not conceptual or theoretical information or simulated responses), (3) report findings on how human systems are responding to climate change, (4) go beyond examining vulnerability or impacts assessment to document responses, (5) be published between 2013, the cutoff for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fifth Assessment Report, and 2019, and (6) report tangible responses that people have taken to reduce risks and vulnerabilities. A total of 1,682 articles were included in the final GAMI dataset, which were then coded for 70 variables (see full codebook in the supplemental information).We assessed aspects of equity and fairness in articles on adaptation responses through a justice framework composed of two components: procedural justice and distributive justice. Scholars have also identified additional components of justice, such as recognition justice, which are outside of this paper's scope. In the context of adaptation, procedural justice refers to the level and form of inclusion, participation, and influence of marginalized groups in all stages of the process, including decision-making, planning, implementation, and evaluation of initiatives.36Holland B. Procedural justice in local climate adaptation: political capabilities and transformational change.Environ. Polit. 2017; 26: 391-412Crossref Scopus (65) Google Scholar Distributive justice refers to the fair allocation of impacts and benefits intended to arise from adaptation.25Stults M. Woodruff S.C. Looking under the hood of local adaptation plans: shedding light on the actions prioritized to build local resilience to climate change.Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Change. 2017; 22: 1249-1279Crossref Scopus (36) Google Scholar,27Conevska A. Ford J. Lesnikowski A. Harper S. Adaptation financing for projects focused on food systems through the UNFCCC.Clim. Policy. 2019; 19: 43-58Crossref Scopus (8) Google Scholar,37Grasso M. An ethical approach to climate adaptation finance.Glob. Environ. Change. 2010; 20: 74-81Crossref Scopus (76) Google Scholar Since the structurally and historically constructed marginalization of individuals and communities often runs along lines of class, race, ethnicity, gender, indigeneity, and political status, these identities are important considerations when it comes to who is included in decision-making, whose voices and experiences matter, and who is affected positively or negatively by adaptation plans.We acknowledge the complexity in the equity and justice literature and recognize that the diversity of theories and definitions utilized across existing scholarship may not fit precisely within the categorizations presented in this framework. We also acknowledge the literature examining the causal relations and interconnected nature of these components and others, addressing issues such as whether broader participation in deliberations—a central element of procedural justice—leads to broader allocation of resources and reduction of harms—a central element of distributive justice.18Pelling M. Garschagen M. Put Equity First in Climate Adaptation. Nature Publishing Group, 2019Crossref Scopus (53) Google Scholar However, these examinations are outside of the scope of this paper.In this paper, we operationalize consideration of procedural justice as a binary variable indicating whether the article on adaptation response included socially marginalized groups in the planning process. We operationalize consideration of distributive justice as a binary variable indicating whether the article on adaptation response included socially marginalized groups in the implementation of initiatives. This variable on implementation captures the role of marginalized groups as both recipients of intended benefits of planned adaptation and implementers of autonomous adaptation initiatives themselves. Our variables draw from prior research that has conceptualized distributive justice to refer to equitable and just distribution in the provision of goods and services, as a critical step (although not sufficient) toward ensuring equity in outcomes.38Paavola J. Adger W.N. Fair adaptation to climate change.Ecol. Econ. 2006; 56: 594-609Crossref Scopus (372) Google Scholar,39Paavola J. Adger W.N. Justice and adaptation to climate change.Tyndall Cent. Work. Pap. 2002; 23: 37Google ScholarWe apply the justice framework through a quantitative analysis of the extent to which eight social categories commonly understood to experience marginalization and vulnerability to climate impacts (low-income groups, women, Indigenous peoples, elderly or young people, ethnic and racial minorities, and individuals with disabilities) are documented as intended participants in adaptation responses (distributive justice) and/or included as participants in the planning process (procedural justice). The eight categories of vulnerability used in this study are based on the groups identified by the IPCC reports, the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals prioritized groups, and existing academic literature on social marginalization and vulnerability (see experimental procedures for details). The quantitative analysis is supplemented with qualitative examples from the literature describing how these groups are included in responses. We also review how considerations of equity in peer-reviewed literature vary across regions of the world and across the following thematic areas identified as relevant categories by the IPCC:40Fifth assessment report - impacts, adaptation and vulnerability.https://archive.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg2/Google Scholar “Poverty, livelihoods, and sustainable development;” “Health, well-being, and communities;” “Cities, settlements, and key infrastructure;” “Food, fiber, and other ecosystem products;” “Water quality and sanitation;” and “Ocean and coastal ecosystems.” Finally, we also document how social equity is considered across types of adaptation responses (“behavioral/cultural responses,” “ecosystem-based responses,” “technological/infrastructure responses,” and “institutional responses”) (Table 1).While this paper examines how equity is considered in research on adaptation responses, this work does not directly measure or evaluate outcomes of adaptation responses. Through this dataset, we are not able to assess how adaptation responses bolster or hamper equitable outcomes for different social groups (or if they make no difference). Indeed, evaluating the effect of adaptation responses on vulnerability or equity is well documented to be methodologically complex and conceptually fraught.41Ford J.D. Berrang-Ford L. Biesbroek R. Araos M. Austin S.E. Lesnikowski A. Adaptation tracking for a post-2015 climate agreement.Nat. Clim. Change. 2015; 5: 967-969Crossref Scopus (81) Google Scholar Further, since adaptation is long term and there is limited monitoring and evaluation of adaptation outcomes, a large-n assessment of the equity in adaptation outcomes is not feasible due to these reporting limitations. Our analysis, hence, offers a necessary first step in characterizing how social equity is intentionally considered and integrated into adaptation responses globally, as documented in peer-reviewed literature.ResultsOver half of the articles in the GAMI assessment included social equity considerations in the adaptation response, either identifying at least one marginalized group in implementation (59%) or incorporating at least one group in planning (52%) (see Figure 1A) or both (48%). Low-income groups are the most frequently considered group (reported in 37% of articles, see Figure 1B), followed by women (20%), Indigenous peoples (10%), the elderly (8%), youths (5%), racial and ethnic minorities (4%), and migrants (4%). Individuals with disabilities are the least considered, with only 1% of articles including this group. The “Other” category captures characteristics of social disadvantage that are distinct from the eight categories and do not appear as frequently in the peer-reviewed literature. This includes, for example, groups marginalized due to marital status or assets (education, farm size, and land tenure).We also found a strong correlation between marginalized groups being integrated into planning and being included in implementation of adaptation responses in the peer-reviewed literature. That is, if members of groups experiencing vulnerabilities were involved in planning adaptation responses, then they were also highly likely to be included in the implementation of those responses (phi correlation coefficient [ϕ] = 0.699, p < 0.001). Correlations between integration in planning and inclusion in implementation were high across all groups (refer to the supplemental information for all scores).We also measured the extent to which adaptation responses reported in the literature consider multiple social groups. We computed ϕ coefficients in cases where articles reported at least two marginalized groups identified as involved in planning or included in implementation. Elderly and youth groups appear together most frequently in articles on adaptation responses (ϕ = 0.355 for being included in implementation), followed by the elderly and individuals with disabilities (ϕ = 0.308). Youth and women are similarly correlated (ϕ = 0.307), as are the elderly and women (ϕ = 0.301). Although low-income individuals are the most frequently discussed in the responses, income is only occasionally discussed in conjunction with another social group (ϕ < 0.1 for all groups except women and elderly). Further, while low-income and women are the two most frequently discussed groups in responses independently, they do not appear to be reported within the same adaptation response as much as other groups (ϕ = 0.201 for being included together in implementation).Global South adaptation most likely to integrate equityArticles documenting adaptation responses in Africa report marginalized groups as included in the implementation of adaptation more frequently than in other regions. Seventy-four percent of articles from Africa report at least one marginalized group as included in implementation of adaptation (see Figure 2A). Among these, low-income groups are most frequently included (in 55% of articles), followed by women (34%) and the elderly (11%) (see Figure 2B). Youth, migrants, ethnic minorities, and individuals with disabilities are considered in under 10% of adaptation responses reported. Further, logistic regression indicates that articles documenting adaptation in Africa are 2.3 times more likely to include equity in implementation of responses than articles documenting adaptation outside of Africa (p < 0.0001) (refer to the supplemental information for scores for other regions).Figure 2Consideration of socially marginalized groups across regionsShow full captionWhen at least one marginalized group is included in the response it is termed as “Equity considered” and if the responses do not consider any marginalized groups it is termed as “Equity not considered.”(A) Consideration of equity across regions (planning and implementation).(B) Consideration of each social group across regions (planning and implementation).View Large Image Figure ViewerDownload Hi-res image Download (PPT)In Asia and Small Island States, over half of the articles (59%) report responses that include at least one marginalized group in implementation of adaptation. In Asia, low-income groups (37%) are again most frequently reported, fo