As I reach the final stretch of Harvard’s Business and Climate Change course, one message has really stuck with me, one that feels urgent and essential for anyone thinking about climate action: we can’t pick between adaptation and mitigation. We need both, and they must work hand in hand.
Throughout this course, I’ve seen how companies across industries are stepping up to tackle climate change. From reducing their greenhouse gas emissions to redesigning supply chains to be more sustainable, and from investing in cutting-edge green technologies to building resilience in their operations, there is no shortage of innovative efforts. But as I reflect on the lessons from the final module, it’s clear that mitigation and adaptation aren’t separate paths; they are deeply intertwined parts of one comprehensive climate strategy.
When They Work Together, Magic Happens
The most effective climate solutions are those that combine reducing the causes of climate change with preparing for its impacts. Take, for example, green buildings. Many companies are investing in low-carbon materials, energy-efficient designs, and renewable power sources to cut emissions; that’s mitigation in action. But these buildings also need to be resilient to floods, heatwaves, and storms, and adaptation in practice. By doing both, companies aren’t just solving today’s emissions problem; they’re future-proofing their assets and protecting communities from worsening climate risks.
Another great example is decentralized energy systems like solar microgrids. They not only reduce dependence on fossil fuels, cutting emissions, but they also provide reliable power during extreme weather events when centralized grids might fail. This dual benefit, emissions reduction plus resilience, is exactly the kind of synergy we need to aim for.
The Tension Between Adaptation and Mitigation
However, it’s not always a smooth ride. Sometimes adaptation efforts can inadvertently increase emissions if they’re not carefully planned. For example, a city installing widespread air conditioning to protect vulnerable populations during heat waves is doing something absolutely critical. But if that AC runs on coal-powered electricity, it could actually worsen climate change, undermining mitigation efforts.
This kind of tension highlights why long-term thinking is non-negotiable. Short-term fixes that help people survive immediate impacts must not come at the cost of making the bigger problem worse. Otherwise, what looks like resilience today might turn into vulnerability tomorrow.
What I’m Taking Away
At the end of the day, I believe it is pretentious of us to say ''Save the Planet", it will be fine, we have to save ourselves and future generations. Climate strategy isn’t a choice between protecting people and protecting the planet. These goals are already linked, inseparable. The companies and leaders that will succeed in the coming decades are those that see adaptation and mitigation as two sides of the same coin and act boldly on both.
Because mitigation without adaptation is naive. It’s like stopping the fire but not preparing for the next one.
And adaptation without mitigation is unsustainable. It’s like bailing water out of a sinking boat without patching the leak.
As I move forward, this integrated mindset will shape how I think about sustainability challenges and solutions. We can’t afford to prioritize one and ignore the other. Instead, we must weave both into our strategies—because the future demands nothing less.
— Morena
Check it out