Adaptation to climate change occurs largely through action at the local level, which is influenced by international and national levels of political and social organisation. This article explores the impact of discourse (the way in which knowledge, methods and rationalities are ‘framed’) at the international level on adaptation policy at the national and local level. The author reviews the history of the concepts of adaptation and vulnerability and their relation to development. Evidence from three different initiatives in Lesotho are used to demonstrate that projects can be either ‘decision-centric’ – which use climate change impact assessments as the basis of strategising adaptation action – or ‘institutional-centric’ – which use stakeholder consultations and indicator based surveys for understanding issues of resource use and access.It is found that a decision-centric framing favours projects focusing on technological solutions and reducing projected impacts. Conversely, institutional-centric framing tends to produce projects that more explicitly include governance issues.It is concluded that framings exert a significant influence on policy when linked to, for example, sources of funding for adaptation. The author argues that methods linked to the ‘decision-analytic' framing risk limiting the scope of effective adaptations.