Really very hard to answer, but it is important to understand adaptation as a process; many times is a cluster of measures not only one and there are not only one recipe that can be apply in any specifical context because depend on the other proceses

Interesting quote and may be you are right "The climate will change and take care of itself without our help". So, should we stop doing to cope with climate change? or are we trying to avoid our responsibility to save our planet!! please not that, the most sufferer is the developing countries people for the climate change. so, how will you assess that?

We need to adapt taking into account both global and local perspectives. Beyond natural climate change and variability, the existence of contemporary induced changes, likely increased ENSO variability (and others), local variability and mainly extreme events are posing more damages (few advantages) than in the near-past. Regardless of how much this is natural/human-induced, the human, social, environmental and economic losses are negatively affecting communities and countries. What are global perspectives? To preserve the planet or the interests of the wealth depredatory nations? Think global act local......think local take into account the mother earth. Adaptation measures must be planned with the greatest participation, must be sustainable, priorite local urgent needs as much as  possible, and avoiding the illusion of big results. 

Certainly ENSO is not contemporary, it has likely ('?) increased over the last decades (since 1972) as compared to the preivos ones (1939-41 to 1972). The increase of exposure has been more important. The sum of natural changes, man-induced ones, natural (triggered by humans?) are posing more threats. We can increase our coping capacity regarding variability and extremes -at least to reduce relative impacts _ I agree it's more complicated to adapt to climate change. However climate will likely continue changing over the next near decades and adaptation measures combined with no-regret ones,  cwhich alltogether increases knowledge, monitoring, early warining, resilience of communities, systems sectors, people, are useful. We need to prioritise sustainable measures and strategies (both ecological and socioeconomic). Regardless of how climate change will be in 2050, we can be better prepared to reduce impacts. That is why local actions, thought on the basis of local needs and sustainability should be prioritised. The fact we are not sure of future climate changes and cycles, beyond each of us have different trust on climate models and the causes of change,must not be a driver of inaction. That is why the future must be incorporated into the present asking: What if? The benefit/cost ratio is key, not only economic, but environmental and human. Can we afford the cost? Global perspective is more mitigation-focused, local perspective is more cope/adapt/resilience-focused. Solutions for current environmental and climatic threats, impacts, or problems may integrate some "looking forward under changin conditions provided the cost is not excessive. We cannot sacrifice current generation for the future ones.....we must think of them. The balance is difficult to be achieved.  I do not think the climate decides where to go 100% indepently of humans, Good bye!  Good luck for all of you! All the best, Gustavo

I don't know!

Please keep eyes on my publication update. Hopefully I can upload my research paper which will be punished soon.  Hope you will get partial answer as it was based on food sector but obviously concerning cost and damage for climate change. Applying Commutable General Equilibrium  (CGE) Model we optimized what percentage of adaptation strategy might be taken in case of Malaysia. Since my paper is accepted so I'm not writing more here. Please wait until upload. Thank you.