Table 3.

Data sources used in adaptation tracking research

Data sources	Context of use	Strengths	Limitations
National Communications to the UNFCCC	- Examine status of adaptation in annex 1 nations (Lesnikowski et al. 2011; Gagnon-Lebrun and Agrawala 2007) and globally (Lesnikowski et al. 2013) (creation of adaptation index) - Identify adaptation predictors globally (Lesnikowski et al. 2014)	- Standardized, systematic, transparent data collection - Regular reporting for annex-1 nations - National-level data globally - Accessible online in one location	- Not available for all nations - Primarily mitigation focused, limited detail on adaptation - Reporting bias - National focus
Published climate initiatives	- Assess climate preparedness in UK urban areas (Heidrich et al. 2013; Reckien et al. 2014) (creation of climate preparedness index)	- Detailed information on adaptation initiatives and programs - Widely available documents (in a high income context)	- Lack of standardization in reporting - Discrepancies in reports - Resource intensive: requires the identification, retrieval, and collation of documents
Website content	- Document civil society action on adaptation with regards health in Canada (Poutiainen et al. 2013) - Identify community based adaptation actions in Africa (Mannke 2011) - Identify OECD actions to prepare for impacts of climate change on infectious disease (Panic and Ford 2013)	- Detailed information on adaptation initiatives and programs - Diversity of adaptations reported and captured - Diversity of reporting scales - On-the-ground adaptation reporting	- Outdated content - Identification, retrieval and collation of information challenges - Lack of standardization - Reporting bias based on technological capacity - Varying detail on adaptation
UNFCCC Private Sector Initiative	- Scoping of the current state of adaptation in the private sector (Surminski 2013)	- Standardized reporting template - Information on private sector	- Limited coverage - Reporting bias - Limited detail on actions
Peer reviewed journal articles	- Characterize the nature and extent of adaptation globally (Berrang-Ford et al. 2011), in annex-1 nations (Ford et al. 2011), in high risks areas including the Arctic and mountain regions (Ford et al. 2014; McDowell et al. 2014), among households in the UK (Porter et al. 2014)	- Easily accessible, rapid assessment - High quality reporting from varying scales	- Reporting bias - Lack of standardization - Varying detail on adaptation
National Adaptation Strategies	- Evaluation of national level adaptation in the EU (Biesbroek et al. 2010; Massey and Bergsma 2008)	- Comparable - Standardized and systematic - National-level data	- National focus - Reporting bias to countries with high capacity - Data exists for European countries exclusively
Peer reviewed and grey literature	- Survey on the state of adaptation in the UK (Tompkins et al. 2010) - Survey on the state of adaptation in arid and semi-arid regions (Ford et al. 2014; Sud et al 2015; Bizikova et al 2015)	- Depth of information and diversity of adaptations captured - Diversity of conceptual frameworks	- Time requirements - Lack of standardization - Varying focus, detail, and quality
Legislation	- Number of laws with adaptation focus (Townshend et al. 2013)	- Broad scope - National-level data available globally	- Legislative approach not taken in all countries - Institutional contexts vary by nation - Formal laws not necessarily indicative of action
Surveys with policy makers	- Survey of elite policy makers in 36 EU nations to examine development of national level adaptation policies and practices (Massey et al. 2014)	- Document current state of action on adaptation - Standardization - Not limited by what is reported in documents - Depth of insights	- Challenge of getting sufficient response rate within and across nations - Time intensive