Climate policy faces increasingly complex challenges that span multiple human decision scales in nature-society systems. Contemporary climate policy models, while valuable and increasingly versatile in handling spatial and temporal scales, struggle to capture interacting multiscale decisions on the socioeconomic side. This perspective draws attention to the power of coupling among different modeling families, taking integrated assessment models (IAM), computable general equilibrium models (CGE), and agent-based models (ABM) as examples. Recent computational advances, maturity of models, availability of data, and interdisciplinary expertise make model coupling an increasingly feasible, effective, and useful tool for climate policy analysis. We examine the unique contributions of each modeling approach, highlight synergies from uniting their strengths, and discuss alternatives to and conditions for coupling. In addressing methodological challenges, we present examples of effective coupling of IAM-ABM-CGE, emphasizing the importance of maintaining model integrity while enhancing policy relevance. By bridging human decision scales and leveraging complementary strengths, coupled models can provide nuanced insights into climate-economy interactions, ultimately supporting effective and equitable-not just efficient and optimal-climate policies.

Economic costs of climate change are conventionally assessed at the aggregated global and national levels, while adaptation is local. When present, regionalised assessments are confined to direct damages, hindered by both data and models’ limitations. This article goes beyond the aggregated analysis to explore direct and indirect economic consequences of sea level rise (SLR) at regional and sectoral levels in Europe. Using a dynamic computable general equilibrium model and novel datasets, we estimate the distribution of losses and gains across regions and sectors. A comparison of a high-end scenario against a no-climate-impact baseline suggests a GDP loss of 1.26% (€871.8 billion) for the whole EU&UK. Conversely our refined assessments show that some coastal regions lose 9.56–20.84% of GDP, revealing striking regional disparities. Inland regions grow due to the displaced demand from coastal areas, but the GDP gains are small (0–1.13%). While recovery benefits the construction sector, public services and industry face significant downturns. We show that prioritising recovery of critical sectors locally reduces massive regional GDP losses, at negligible costs to the overall European economy. Our analysis traces regional economic restructuring triggered by SLR, underscoring the necessity of region-specific adaptation policies that embrace uneven geographic impacts and unique sectoral profiles to inform resilient strategy design.