Feedbacks in risk frameworks

Risk is generally defined as threat times vulnerability, where sometimes vulnerability includes exposure and sensitivity, and some add adaptive capacity inside our outside vulnerability. And, adaptation options attempt to reduce vulnerability - which is more locally focused and short term, while mitigation points at threat, which is more global/regional and longer term. (Ie the Srex diagram). A frequent assumption (need to cite) is that vulnerability and resilience are two sides to the same coin - when you reduce vulnerability, you increase resilience (or vice a versa) but as we discussed before, and as taleb describes, in complex systems that depend on finer scale shocks, you can unintentionally reduce the resilience at a higher scale when you reduce vulnerability. Simply put, by reducing a local community's flood vulnerability you may be decreasing a region's resilience to flooding. This conception implies a feedback between adaptation and mitigation that is critical to consider when dealing with complex emergent patterns - do we need to consider an adaptation options' mitigative power? How does this cost/benefit play into the framework and ultimately the assessment?