How do mitigation and adaptation differ in environmental policy?

• A. Mitigation reduces emissions and stress on systems; adaptation improves resilience to climate impacts.
• B. Adaptation reduces emissions and stress on systems; mitigation improves resilience to climate impacts.
• C. Mitigation focuses on economic growth; adaptation focuses on legal compliance.
• D. Mitigation is about emergency response; adaptation is about environmental monitoring.

Answer: (A)

Mitigation and adaptation address climate change in different ways. Mitigation reduces greenhouse gas emissions and the stress climate change places on systems, aiming to limit the magnitude of future change. It includes actions like switching to renewable energy, improving energy efficiency, and protecting forests. Adaptation, by contrast, focuses on reducing vulnerability and increasing resilience to the impacts of climate change that are already occurring or expected, such as heat waves, floods, and droughts. This can involve building flood defenses, improving water management, adjusting buildings and infrastructure for higher temperatures, and preparing public health responses.

So the statement that mitigation reduces emissions and stress on systems, while adaptation improves resilience to climate impacts, best matches these approaches. The other ideas mix up the roles: adaptation is not primarily about reducing emissions, mitigation is not about emergency response, and broad claims like mitigation equals economic growth or adaptation equals legal compliance don’t reflect the policy aims.