This report presents the results of a cost-benefit analysis examining climate change adaptation strategies on the coast of Mecklenburg Western Pomerania. The benefits incorporated are derived from a stated choice experiment conducted as part of a nationwide survey. Costs were derived from coastal protection regulations. The cost-benefit analyses were conducted for three adaptation scenarios prioritising different aspects of adaptation at the coast. The safety scenario focusses on widening beaches and heightening of dykes, while the nature scenario focusses on realignments along the coast, and the scenario recreation focuses on expanding beaches and slowing down erosion at cliffs. Overall, the results from the cost-benefit analysis, as well as the subsequently conducted sensitivity analysis, indicate that the adaptation measures would be beneficial to society. Even when accounting for a likely bias in the stated willingness-to-pay estimates and potential cost increases for the measures considered, the results remain stably positive. The main reason for this is the assumption that all households in Germany – around 41 million at the time of the survey – would pay for the adaptation measures. This is justified by the fact that all taxpayers in Germany already pay for coastal protection. However, how much they pay is the result of an administrative bargaining process and is not based on benefit estimates. Our results show how results from cost?benefit analyses together with non-market valuation can inform decision makers about the advantageousness of different adaptation measures from a societal perspective.