EN    EN EN 
 
EN    EN  COMMISSION OF THE E UROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
Brussels, 1.4.2009 
SEC(2009) 387 
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 
accompanying the  
 
WHITE PAPER 
 
Adapting to climate change: Towards a European framework for action 
   
IMPACT ASSESSMENT  
  
{COM(2009) 147 final} 
{SEC(2009) 386} 
{SEC(2009) 388} 
 
EN 2   EN TABLE OF CONTENTS 
1. Introduction, procedural issues and c onsultation of interested parties ........................ 4 
1.1. Context and legal basis................................................................................................. 5 1.2. Stakeholder consultation .............................................................................................. 6 1.3. Scientific expertise...................................................................................................... .6  
1.4. Internal consultation..................................................................................................... 6 
2. Needs and limitations for early adaptation action at EU level..................................... 8 
2.1. Climate Change Adaptation: a new agenda for public policy...................................... 8 2.2. The need for indicators of vulnerability..................................................................... 15 2.3. Tackling insufficient knowledge and institutional weaknesses. ................................ 19 
3. Objectives of the White Paper.................................................................................... 26 3.1. General, specific and operational ob jectives.............................................................. 26 
3.2. Consistency with horizontal strategies....................................................................... 26 4. Options for adaptation approaches............................................................................. 29 4.1. Identification of planned adaptation options.............................................................. 29 4.2. Assessment of adaptation options .............................................................................. 30 5. Options for the EU framework for action .................................................................. 36 5.1. Identification of options for EU action ...................................................................... 36 5.2. Assessment of options for short-term EU action ....................................................... 39 5.3. Conclusions: towards an EU adaptation Strategy ...................................................... 41 6. Monitoring and Evaluation ........................................................................................ 41 6.1. Development of adaptation indicators ....................................................................... 41 6.2. Reporting on adaptation ............................................................................................. 42 7. Appendix.................................................................................................................... 45 
7.1. Support documents and References ........................................................................... 45 7.2. Glossary.................................................................................................................. .... 47 
7.3. Results of consultation on the Green Paper ............................................................... 53 7.4. Implementation of the recommendations of the Impact Assessment Board.............. 55 8. Annex 1 - The framework for integrated  assessment of adap tation policies ............. 57 
8.1. Climate change scenarios........................................................................................... 57 
 
EN 3   EN 8.2. Costs and Benefits of Adaptation............................................................................... 61 
9. Annex 2 – Cross Cutting Issues: Water,  Land, Biodiversity and Ecosystems........... 64 
9.1. Biodiversity.............................................................................................................. .. 64 
9.2. Water..................................................................................................................... ..... 67 
9.3. Soils and Land use ..................................................................................................... 70 10. Annex 3 - Sectoral Perspective .................................................................................. 76 10.1. Agriculture .............................................................................................................. ... 76 
10.2. Forests .................................................................................................................. ...... 81 
10.3. Fisheries and Aquaculture.......................................................................................... 88 10.4. Energy ................................................................................................................... ..... 92 
10.5. Infrastructures and Buildings ..................................................................................... 96 10.6. Industry and Services ............................................................................................... 101 10.7. Health ................................................................................................................... .... 105 
10.8. Coastal areas............................................................................................................ . 109 
10.9. External dimension................................................................................................... 112 11. Annex 4: Review of national adaptation plans ........................................................ 117 12. Annex 5: Actions included in the options for action at EU level in the Short-medium 
term .......................................................................................................................... 1 25 
12.1. Improving the knowledge base on climate ch ange impacts and ad aptive capacity . 125 
12.2. Mainstreaming in sectoral policies........................................................................... 126 12.3. Risk management instruments ................................................................................. 129 12.4. Funding review......................................................................................................... 13 0 
12.5. Put in place a process for a better co -ordination of adapta tion policies and the 
assessment of next steps........................................................................................... 132 
 
EN 4   EN 1. INTRODUCTION , PROCEDURAL ISSUES AND CONSULTATION OF INTERESTED PARTIES  
This report accompanies the Commission's White Paper on Adaptation to Climate Change. Its 
objective is to raise the profile of adaptation and to build a coherent approach at institutional 
level across the EU. The proposed EU Framewor k would complement and re-enforce Member 
States actions, particularly through existi ng funding channels, the provision of accurate 
climate information and appropriate guidance, ensuring that adaptation is integrated in 
important EU policy sectors and guaranteeing  solidarity between countries/regions. The 
White Paper adopts a phased approach: Phas e 1 (2009-2012) will lay the ground work for the 
preparation of a more comprehensive adaptation strategy for the EU to be implemented during 
phase 2 commencing in 2012. 
This report is first and foremost a taking-stock exercise, reviewing the literature and gathering 
the views of services and stakeholders, on the ba sis of the 2007 Green Paper. It is also meant 
to serve as a reference framework to develop an  EU adaptation policy in future. It is a cross-
cutting exercise and it is complemented by se ctoral papers on water, coasts and marine 
issues1, agriculture2 and health3.  
Chapter 1 explains briefly the process for the elaboration of both documents since the 
publication of the Green Paper on Adaptation in 20074 and the broad internal and external 
consultation. 
Chapter 2 defines key concepts such as imp acts, vulnerability and adaptive capacity. It 
identifies the uncertainties and the knowledge ga ps to be filled to establish priorities and 
monitor further action. It provides an overview of  the vulnerability of EU sectors, regions or 
groups, to Climate Change impacts. Taking into  account how national, regional and sectoral 
adaptation strategies already address some of these challenges, it evaluates the scope for EU 
action, focusing on mainstreaming adaptation  into EU policies and on the necessary co-
ordination of the different policy levels. 
Chapter 3 describes the objectives of the IA  and explains how th e general objective of 
promoting adaptation is translated into this co ntext to specific objectives i.e. of identifying 
priority adaptation measures and of defining an  action plan for the next 4 years. It also 
establishes operational objectives  corresponding to the key problem s identified in the previous 
section. 
This impact assessment is of a qualitative nature. A first set of options is presented in Chapter 
4, these refer to the overall adaptation appro aches, for which a proportionate assessment of 
the economic, environmental and social impacts is conducted to allo w a prioritisation of 
adaptation actions. 
A second set of options is presented in Chapter 5, which refers to the specific actions to be 
undertaken in the short term. These options ar e assessed with respect to the operational 
criteria defined in chapter 3, and with respect  to subsidiarity, knowle dge basis and resources 
aspects. 
                                                 
1 SEC(2009) 386 
2 SEC(2009) 417 
3 SEC(2009) 416 
4 COM(2007) 354 final, http://ec.europa.eu/environment/climat/adaptation/index_en.htm  
 
EN 5   EN Chapter 6 describes the monitoring and evaluati on actions to be undertak en in priority, to 
allow a further review of the action framework with respect to  the operational objectives 
defined in chapter 3. 
The analysis is based on the 2008 EEA/JRC/ WHO report on Climate Change Impacts5, and 
on a list of other reports and papers quoted in f ootnotes or detailed in  an appendix, together 
with a glossary and a report providing deta iled results on the public and stakeholder 
consultations on the Green Paper.  
Annex 1 provides further details on the framework for integrated assessment of adaptation 
policies, including recent estimates on adaptation costs from the literature. A more detailed 
analysis of climate change vul nerability, adaptation potential and the need for EU action is 
provided for environmental cross cutting issues (Annex 2) and at Sectoral or geographical 
level (Annex 3). Annex 4 provides an overview of National adaptation strategies. Annex 5 
provides details on the concrete measures that have been screened for the short-term EU 
action plan. 
An executive summary is presented in a separate document6. 
1.1. Context and legal basis  
The Commission adopted a Green Paper on adapting to climate change in Europe, 
recognizing that all parts of Europe will incr easingly feel the adverse effects of climate 
change. This is confirmed i.e. by the 4th IPCC report7 (IPCC, 2007) or the 2008t 
EEA/JRC/WHO report on the impacts of CC in Europe (EEA, 2008) and by the 2009 
international scientific congress on climate change8.  
The Green Paper was followed by a broad stakehol der consultation (see se ction 0). It was also 
the subject of opinions and resolutions by the Committee of the Regions9, the European 
Economic and Social Committee10 and the European Parliament11. There was general 
agreement on the need to exploit the synergie s between mitigation and adaptation efforts and 
to do more research and knowledge gathering on vulnerabilities and risks of climate change. 
The need to exchange best practices, the importa nce of subsidiarity, the crucial role of local 
and regional authorities and necessity to integrat e adaptation in all relevant EU policies were 
also highlighted. Other issues ra ised include: the need for grea ter awareness ra ising, the active 
participation of all administrations  and civil society in tackling this issue. They also stress the 
importance of protecting ecosystems and biodiv ersity and analysing current and future 
funding mechanisms to be more in line with the adaptation needs. They agree with the 
Commission on the need and the benefits of early action and share the Commission's view 
that although a 'one size fits a ll' approach would not be an adequate respon se, an action at EU 
                                                 
5 Impacts of Europe's changing climate - 2008 indicator-based assessment, EEA Report No 4/2008, 
http://reports.eea.europa.e u/eea_report_2008_4/en/  
6 Add ref 
7 Alcamo et al., Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working 
Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, available 
on http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/assessments-reports.htm 
8 “Climate Change: Global Risks, Challenges and Decisions" (10-12 March 2009 in Copenhagen, 
Denmark, http://climatecongress.ku.dk/ ) 
9 CdR 118/2007- 72th Plenary Session 28-29 November 2007 
10 CESE/2007/1702 of 12 December 2007 
11 B6/2008/131 of 10 April 2008 
 
EN 6   EN level coupled with action at all administrativ e levels, would yield significant added value 
compared to initiatives exclusiv ely taken by the Member States.  
1.2. Stakeholder consultation  
Following the publication of the Green Paper on adaptation to climate change, the 
Commission consulted widely with  stakeholders and the public in  developing this subsequent 
White Paper. From the feedback gathered thro ugh various channels (s ee Appendix), it was 
clear that stakeholders found it easier to iden tify problem areas than to propose concrete 
action. They also emphasised the importance of giving adaptation a high priority considering 
it in parallel with mitigation efforts, and th at more recognition should be given to the 
differences in vulnerability between sectors and geographical locations . For the respondents, 
the priority areas for the EU should be: 
• Environmental impacts notably: water manage ment (including methods  for tackling water 
shortages, water quality, flooding) , biodiversity and ecosystems. 
• Social impacts particularly health and diseas es, infrastructure resi lience, food security, 
social equity, migration and  
• Economic impacts notably: agricult ure and energy infrastructure.  
According to the feedback received, the Green Pa per gave too little attention to the following 
areas: communication and awareness raising, the importance of additional research and monitoring systems, an overarching strategi c vision demonstrating EU leadership, the 
importance of migration and social cohesion asp ects, the need for coordinating mitigation and 
adaptation strategies and the mechanisms for fi nancing adaptation efforts. Many stakeholders 
emphasised the cross-cutting role of biodiversity and ecosystems. 
Most stakeholders consider that the EU had a role to play in providing climate change 
information, appropriate guidance, financial su pport and technical e xpertise and suggested 
that the EU should develop a clear and strong strategic framework for adaptation across all 
sectors, addressing cross-border issues and coordinating action across  Europe, strengthening 
or extending existing EU frameworks and dire ctives to include adap tation while updating and 
harmonising existing structures. 
1.3. Scientific expertise 
The Impact Assessment has benef ited from input from various re ports and research projects 
on climate change impacts and adaptation (see  reference list in Appendix) produced by the 
IPCC, EU research programmes, EEA, intern ational organisations, national and regional 
authorities, the private sector and NGOs. 
1.4. Internal consultation 
In the preparations for the White Paper, ex tensive consultation took place within the 
Commission. Several informal inter service m eetings were organised (in September and 
December 2007, and in April, May and July 2008). These meetings were targeted to exchange 
information on ongoing activities by all Commissi on services related to climate change 
 
EN 7   EN adaptation12, including a report on the progress of the preparations for the White Paper. 
Furthermore, bilateral meetings with releva nt key services took place in April, May, 
November and December 2008. In these meeti ngs, ongoing activities related to adaptation 
were discussed in more detail and adaptati on options for consideration in the Impact 
Assessment were addressed. Various drafts of th e Impact Assessment were sent to the inter-
service group members for informal comments 
The Impact Assessment Board (IAB) has provided comments on three earlie r drafts of the IA 
report. The present impact assessment report in tegrates the IAB reco mmendations expressed 
in its final opinion, which are detailed in Appendix 4. 
                                                 
12 DGs AGRI, AIDCO, BUDG, COMM, DEV, EAC, EC FIN, EMPL, ENTR, ESTAT, JLS, JRC, MARE, 
MARKT, REGIO, RELEX, RTD, SANC O, SG, TRADE, TREN and the EEA. 
 
EN 8   EN 2. NEEDS AND LIMITATIONS FOR EARLY ADAPTATION ACTION AT EU LEVEL  
2.1. Climate Change Adaptation: a new agenda for public policy 
2.1.1.  The concepts of vulnerability and resilience 
Vulnerability (as defined in IPCC, 2007) is the de gree to which a system is susceptible to, and 
unable to cope with, adverse effects of clim ate change, including climate variability and 
extremes. Vulnerability (EEA, 2008 ) is a function of the character, magnitude, and rate of 
climate change and variation to which a system  is exposed, its sensitivity, and its adaptive 
capacity (see Figure 1). 
Figure 1 - Conceptual diagram for climate ch ange impacts, vulnerability and adaptation. 
Source: Isoard, Grothmann and Zebi sch (2008) quoted in EEA (2008) 
GHG Emissions
Potential IMPACTS
VULNERABILITY
ADAPTATIONSensitivity
Adaptive CapacityWillingness to 
adaptMitigation
Climate Change
ExposureSocio-economic 
& Institutional 
Capacity
-+ --
 
This means that pro-active adap tation policies should not  be restricted to the analysis of the 
impact of Climate Change across different sectors, regions or so cial groups, but should 
encompass the assessment of their uneven adapti ve capacity. In some cases climate change 
might provide opportunities for innovations in processes, technology and governance, but in 
others public action will be needed to address the vulnerability to CC impacts. 
The concept of resilience can be defined as the ability of a social or ecological system to 
absorb disturbances while retaining the same  basic structure and ways of functioning, the 
capacity for self-organ isation, and the capacity  to adapt to stress and change (IPCC, 2007). 
2.1.2.  Uncertainty 
The 4th IPCC report recalls that there are major un certainties in future climate projections, as 
well as in future socio-economic trends. Th e latter are important in determining the 
vulnerability of social and economic systems to climate change, as well as their adaptive 
capacity. There are also major unc ertainties over the future baseline for adaptation, i.e. in 
considering which emission and mitigation tr ajectory we are on. While the current EU 
 
EN 9   EN ambition level is to limit globa l climate change to 2 degrees  Celsius above pre-industrial 
levels13, this target is reliant on glob al action, and is associated with considerable uncertainty, 
i.e. the 50% global reduction in GHG outlined in the 2007 Communication has only a 50% chance of achieving the 2°C target. The 2009 in ternational scientific  congress on climate 
change confirmed that the (globally) worst- case IPCC 2007 scenario tr ajectories (or even 
worse) are being realised and there is a significant risk that many of the trends will accelerate, leading to an increasing risk of abru pt or irreversible climatic shifts. 
Figure 2 - Best values and likel y ranges of global mean warmi ng for the time horizon of 1900-
2099
14 relative to the control pe riod of 1980-99. (Source: IPCC 2007). 
 
It is therefore necessa ry to consider a wide range of scenarios in formulating possible 
adaptation policy. The available information is however still fragmented, and the 2008 
EEA/JRC/WHO report relies on different global scenarios and regional downscaling for about 
40 climate impact indicators. The report id entifies 3 basic types of uncertainty: 
                                                 
13 Communication of 10 January 2007, entitled: "Limiting Global Climate Change to 2 degrees Celsius - 
The way ahead for 2020 and beyond" [COM(2007) 2 final - Not published in the Official Journal]. 
14 The 21st century warming is shown as continuation of the 20th century simulations. Solid lines are 
multi-model global averages of surface warming (relative to 1980–1999) fo r three SRES (IPCC’s 
Special Report on Emissions Scenarios) marker scen arios (A2, A1B and B1). Shading denotes the ±1 
standard deviation range of individual model annual averages. The orange line, for the experiment 
where concentrations were held constant at year 2000 values, shows that we  are already committed to 
0.6 °C warming due to the past greenhouse gas emissions. The grey bars at right indicate the likely 
range assessed for the six SRES marker scenarios a nd the solid line within each  bar indicates the best 
estimate. The assessment of the best estimate and likely ranges in the grey bars includes the AOGCMs 
(Atmosphere-Ocean coupled General Circulation Model) in  the left part of the figure, as well as results 
from a hierarchy of independent models and observations. 
 
EN 10   EN – Incomplete knowledge : Responses in systems with high levels of complexity such as 
biological, social or economic systems are ve ry difficult to assess. Climate impacts can 
either be increased by other, non-climatic factors, or comp ensated by adaptation of the 
system, or internally compensated until a critical level of resilience is exceeded. 
– Insufficient observed trends : Observed data and trends fo r many of the impact indicators 
often lack the appropriate spatial and tempor al scale to provide the adequate level of 
information to properly develop and assess adaptation strategies. 
– Socio-economic developments . The most important sources of uncertainty are human 
behaviour, evolution of political systems, demographic, technologi cal and socio-economic 
developments. To address this issue requires us ing a set of global emission scenarios, such 
as the ones presented in the la st IPCC reports, and making use of consistent regional socio-
economic and climate change and impact projec tions as soon as they become available. 
Additionally, the tools for integrated assessment of adaptation policies are still much less 
advanced15 than those addressing mitigation. This delay is due to some extent to the 
misunderstanding and misinformation surrounding adaptation, perceived as a substitute for 
mitigation. However, adaptation integrated as sessment poses also methodological problems, 
such as up-scaling from the local to the re gional or national level, or measuring the 
vulnerability and the degree of adaptation. 
6th EU Research Framework Programme  (6FP) projects such as ENSEMBLES16 and 
ADAM17 are progressing in defining a set of consistent scenarios designed for the further 
integrated assessment of adaptation and mitiga tion policies. Initial research under 7th EU 
Research (FP) Framework Programme18 (7FP) will further address the quantification of 
damage and adaptation cost for global and regi onal emission scenarios. A description of the 
most relevant projects is provided in Appendix. 
2.1.3.  Potential Impacts of Climate Change in Europe 
In order to highlight the most relevant potenti al impacts of Climate Change, the feedbacks, 
the conflicts and synergies, an analytical fr amework has been defined based on the work of 
EEA (EEA, 2008) and OECD19 (OECD, 2008), as well as consistent with the work 
undertaken for the "Economics of Ecosystem and Biodiversity" study20 (TEEB, 2008) . This 
chain (which does not mean that impacts will occur subsequently) is represented in Figure 3, and is composed of 3 blocks: physical and mete orological impacts, impact s on biodiversity & 
ecosystems and their services, socio-economic impacts: 
Physical and meteorological impacts: 
                                                
 
15 Dickinson, T. (2007):The Compendium of Adaptation Models for Climate Change: First Edition; 
Environment Canada, Adaptation and Impacts Research Division 
16 http://www.ensembles-eu.org/   
17 www.adamproject.eu   
18 SEC(2008) 3104 
19 OECD, Economic Aspects of Adaptation to Climate Change - Costs Benefits and Policy Instruments; 
2008, available at www.oecd.org/env/cc/adaptation 
20 European Commission, 2008, The economics of ecosystems & biodiversity – an interim report, 
available at: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/biodiversity/economics/pdf/teeb_report.pdf 
 
EN 11   EN – Depending on global scenarios, annual average temperature in Europe would increase 
between 1° and 5.5°C over the 21st century, with strong distri butional pattern of warming 
across Europe (greatest warming predicte d for Southern Europe and Arctic) and 
differences between summer and winter. 
– Winter precipitation would increase in Nort hern Europe, summer precipitation would 
decrease in Southern Europe . There are still large uncert ainties on the magnitude and 
geographical details of the change. 
– Additional global sea level rise would be  between 0.18 and 0.59 m by 2100 (IPCC, 2007), 
although recent projections indicate a sea leve l rise that may exceed the IPCC upper limit. 
– Extreme events are becoming more frequent an d intensive even in the short term. Heavy 
precipitation events will become more freque nt. Dry periods are projected to increase 
especially in Southern Europe. For Europe as a whole, heat waves are projected to increase 
in frequency, intensity and duration. Projecti ons of future storminess are still very 
uncertain and model dependent. 
– The decreases of European glaciers and snow cover are projected to continue, while the 
decrease of ice sheets in Greenland and the Arct ic sea ice extent have accelerated the past 
years, although no reliable projections  for the future can yet be made. 
Figure 3 - Selected key potential impacts of Climate Change. Source: DG Environment based 
on (EEA, 2008), (OECD, 2008) and (TEEB, 2008). Potential impacts are all impacts that may occur given a projected change in cl imate, without considering adaptation. 
Atmosphere / 
cryosphere / sea
Ecosystem conditions 
and supporting services
Impact on Ecosystem services
Provisioning 
(Food, Freshwater, Wood/fiber, Fuel)
Regulating
(Climate, Flood, Diseases, Water purification)
CulturalEconomic impacts
Infrastructures and physical capital
(Damages, Losses)
Production and Consumption
(Processes, consumer behaviour, Growth potential,
Variability/disruptions activity)
Employment
St orms
Fl oods
Water scarcity droughtsSpecies phenology
Water qualityFore st fire s
Soil degradationSpecies distribution
Permafrost/ice melting
Social Impacts
Health (Mortality, Morbidity, Labour productivity)
Distributive impacts (Social groups, Regions)
Resource conflicts
Migrations
Social fabricGovernanceGreenhouse gases 
concentration
Temperature (means & 
extremes)
Precipitation
(means & extremes)
Sea level rise
Ground level ozoneClimate Change ScenariosAtmosphere / 
cryosphere / sea
Ecosystem conditions 
and supporting services
Impact on Ecosystem services
Provisioning 
(Food, Freshwater, Wood/fiber, Fuel)
Regulating
(Climate, Flood, Diseases, Water purification)
CulturalEconomic impacts
Infrastructures and physical capital
(Damages, Losses)
Production and Consumption
(Processes, consumer behaviour, Growth potential,
Variability/disruptions activity)
Employment
St orms
Fl oods
Water scarcity droughtsSpecies phenology
Water qualityFore st fire s
Soil degradationSpecies distribution
Permafrost/ice melting
Social Impacts
Health (Mortality, Morbidity, Labour productivity)
Distributive impacts (Social groups, Regions)
Resource conflicts
Migrations
Social fabricGovernanceGreenhouse gases 
concentration
Temperature (means & 
extremes)
Precipitation
(means & extremes)
Sea level rise
Ground level ozoneClimate Change Scenarios
 
These phenomena will, in turn, have a significant impact on European ecosystems conditions, 
and will lead to changes in ecosystems func tions and services, upon which society depends. 
The effects of climate change exacerbate the impacts of already exis ting factors including 
pollution, land-use changes and resources over-exploita tion, which may reduce the resilience 
of many ecosystems.  
 
EN 12   EN – Ecosystems play a direct role in climate regulation via physical, biological and chemical 
processes that control the fluxes of energy, water, and atmospheric constituents including 
greenhouse gases (for example th e storage of carbon in peatla nds and wetlands), and such 
services are likely to be affected. Terrestri al and marine ecosystems currently absorb 
roughly half of the anthropogenic CO2 emissions21. Continuing biodiversity loss and 
degradation of ecosystems may lead towards irreversible tipping points;  Ecosystem 
"provisioning services" such as the production of  food and materials, w ill also be affected, 
as will "regulating services such as flood protection, protection against soil erosion and nutrient re-cycling. 
– Climate change will cause clima tic zones to move, at a much faster rate than in the past. 
The potential distribution of Eur opean species is projected to shift by tens to hundreds of 
kilometres by the end of the century (dependi ng on the scenario). There are also additional 
– and largely unknown effects – related to the in cidence of pests and di seases establishing 
themselves in EU territory as the climatic c onditions change. Of large concern is also the 
potential for abrupt change when thresholds are exceeded. 
– Future changes in precipitation, combined w ith rising temperatures, will have impacts on 
water quality and quantity, affecting many sect ors. The percentage area under high water 
stress in Europe is likely to increase from  19% today to 35% by the 2070s due to climate 
change (IPCC, 2007), Water quantity issues will be efficiently addressed only if the functioning of the water cycle is fully considered. Permanent vegetation has a positive impact on the regulation of evaporation a nd significantly helps maintain the thermal 
stability on land. A lack of water in soil and atmosphere  leads to extreme thermal 
conditions. Soils saturated with  water and permanent vegetati on have a significant cooling 
effect and air-conditioning capability. Soils tr ansformed and drained for human activities 
have more difficulty to absorb rainwater. So il partially saturated with water can absorb 
water more efficiently than dried out soil 
– Water quality will also be influenced by climate change. High water temperature, low 
water flows and lower dilution of pollutants ma y affect aquatic ecosystems, drinking water 
and water based recreation activities. Sea level rise may increase saline intrusion in coastal 
aquifers. 
– Climate change also affects so il in a number of ways. This includes a potential decline in 
organic matter (and increased GHG emissions ), knock-on effects on water run-off (and 
increased flooding risk), lower soil moisture  (decreased water avai lability), increased 
erosion risk (increase in fl ood vulnerability), organic matte r decline, and salinisation. 
These effects will disrupt soil function: biomass production and decomposition; storing, 
filtering and transforming nutrients, substances and water; acting as a biodiversity sink and loss of soil biodiversity. 
A proper analysis of socio-economic imp acts requires innovative assessment methods: 
– The changes in ecosystem condition and services  will affect the produc tivity and business 
continuity of ecosystem-dependant sectors such as agriculture, forestry, fisheries, tourism. 
Some sectoral forecasts are available from research projects such as FP6 PESETA or 
                                                
 
21 Canadell et al., 2007 Contributions to accelera ting atmospheric CO2 grow th from economic activity, 
carbon intensity and efficiency of natural sinks, PNAS, 104 (47) : 18866 – 18870 
 
EN 13   EN ADAM (See Annex 3), but they tend to be ba sed on a limited set of parameters (e.g. for 
Agriculture, changes in hydrologic cycles, limits  for the use of fertilizers and impacts of 
extreme events (storms, floods) have still to be included in the modelling). The direction of 
net changes in fisheries is unpredictable, and changes in energy and tourism depend very 
much on potential modifications in consumer be haviour. Direct impact of climatic changes 
and extreme events on infrastructures and buildings on the one ha nd, and health on the 
other hand, can be subject to monetary valua tion subject to the definition of appropriate 
damage functions, but here again the potential  of ecosystem servi ces (flood regulation, 
local cooling, water purification, pest cont rol) has to be taken into account. 
– The increasing conflicting dema nd between different water and land users (agriculture, 
industry, and human consumption) will trigger negative social effe cts if there are no 
appropriate sustainable resource ma nagement measures in place. 
2.1.4.  Risk management, uncertainty and flexibility 
Significant investment will be needed to tackle climate change impacts, and the need for long-
term anticipation raise the que stion of efficiency of public  spending: governments expect 
decisions to be based on the ‘b est possible’ science. But the sc ience of climate prediction is 
unlikely to fulfil the expecta tions of decision-makers and, through over-precision, could 
potentially lead to mal-adaptation if misinterpr eted or used incorrectly. These epistemological 
limits to climate prediction should however not  be interpreted as a limit to adaptation22, and 
climate adaptation strategies can be developed in  the face of deep uncertainties. Society will 
even benefit much more from a greater und erstanding of the vulnerability of climate-
influenced decisions to large irreducible uncertainties than it will from extremely expensive attempts to increase the accuracy and precision of climate predictions. An alternative approach to the conv entional one based on climate pred iction would therefore focus on 
exploring how well strategies perform across wi de ranges of assumptions and uncertainties 
(Robust Adaptation Decision-Making). 
Figure 4 - Alternative approaches for uncertainty management (source Hulme, 2008) 
Predict-then-adapt approach Assess-risk-of-policy framework
Structure Problem
Characterise Climate 
Uncertainty
Design Adaptation
Evaluate Outcome
Outcome Optimised for ClimateStructure Problem
Propose Various 
Strategies
Assess Strategies 
Against a Wide Range 
of Qt/Ql Futures
Summarise Trade-
Offs Among 
Promising Strategies
Outcome Optimised for RobustnessPredict-then-adapt approach Assess-risk-of-policy framework
Structure Problem
Characterise Climate 
Uncertainty
Design Adaptation
Evaluate Outcome
Outcome Optimised for ClimateStructure Problem
Propose Various 
Strategies
Assess Strategies 
Against a Wide Range 
of Qt/Ql Futures
Summarise Trade-
Offs Among 
Promising Strategies
Outcome Optimised for Robustness  
Given the deep uncertainties associated with long term climate change impacts and other 
drivers of adaptation to climate change, robus t decision making methods are worth exploring, 
especially where there is a large portfolio of adaptation options available. This context also 
                                                 
22 Hulme M. (2008), “Is Climate Prediction a Limit to  Adaptation?”, Lecture at  European Commission, 22 
May 2008 - School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia. 
 
EN 14   EN favours the implementation of a flexible or ad aptive management, involving putting in place 
incremental adaptation options, rather than un dertaking large-scale adaptation all at once. 
These measures are mainly preparations towards,  or incremental introduction of, more costly 
or risky measures. They include the assessment  of further adaptation measures that makes 
sense today, but as part of a sequence of re sponses that also allows for incremental or 
directional change in future, as vulnerabili ty, knowledge, experience and technology evolve. 
This may also include delaying implementi ng specific (potentially harmful) adaptation 
measures while exploring options and build ing the necessary standards and regulatory 
environment. 
2.1.5.  Autonomous adaptation and the need for public intervention 
Structural changes are a contin uing process in all economies, societies and ecosystems, and 
climate change impacts will contribute to faster and more vigorous changes with corresponding challenges for ecosystems, popul ation, economic agents and policy-makers. 
Adaptation is defined
 as any adjustment in natural or human  systems in response to actual or 
expected climatic stimuli or their effects, which moderates harm or exploits beneficial 
opportunities (IPCC 2007). 
Biodiversity & ecosystems may adapt autonomousl y, if other conditions are favourable as 
autonomous adaptation will be limited by land use, dispersal ability and the availability of 
suitable habitat. A hierarchy of species respons es can be identified: behavioural responses 
(birds that stay longer in some areas, change their migration patterns or  don't migrate at all), 
population dynamic responses, adaptive genetic responses, spatial responses and macro 
evolutionary responses. 
Population and economic agents will also adapt to  climate change autonomously without 
interference from a centr al authority, moderating the final im pacts of climate change and also 
exploiting climate change “opportunities”, al though triggering another layer of economic, 
social and environmental impacts and shifting th e climatic impacts to other social, economic 
or environmental compartments. 
Natural system autonomous adaptation is obviously  exclusively reactive, as well as most of 
human system (change/relocation in activity, r econstructions). However,  there is room for 
anticipatory adaptation (e.g. crop diversific ation, insurance purchase, house design, etc.) 
which will depend very much on the level of information a nd perception of climate risks23. 
This triggers the need for action by public auth orities to provide a leve l playing field for the 
information on climate vulnerability and on costs and benefits of adaptation options. 
The need to develop adaptation strategies by cen tral authorities first emerges under imperfect 
market conditions, such as when externalities ap pear, when the adaptation measure is a public 
good, when the transaction costs related to adap tation are large, or when information is 
imperfect. 
– Climate change impact and some autonomous or planned adaptation actions will trigger 
additional externalities  (pollution, water scarcity, floods, coastal erosion, etc.) for which 
                                                 
23 AMICA (2005) Relation between Adaptation and Mitigation in Climate Change: AMICA - Adaptation 
and Mitigation - an Integrated Climate Policy Approach Thematic Working Group Flooding / Rivers / 
Water-balance in Urban Areas Kick off Meeting Dresden 7./8. Nov. 2005 Dr. Manfred Stock Potsdam 
Institute for Climate Impact Research 
 
EN 15   EN public intervention will be required for the further implementation of regulations or 
internalisation mechanisms. Conversely, adapta tion options will often trigger the provision 
of public goods , for which a payment mechanism could be envisaged. 
– Two factors seem to be of vital importance for the magnitude of the transaction costs . The 
first is the extent and characte r of the uncertainty about the impact of climate change, as 
uncertainty extends the room for diverging vi ews and conflicts of interest among agents. 
The second factor relates to th e fact that adaptation takes ti me, and substantial losses may 
accrue in the meantime. 
– Regarding information imperfections , education and information campaigns may be 
needed to facilitate the switc h to new production processes (e.g. drought-resistant species), 
whereas the use of current techniques (e.g. incr eased use of fertilizers) is likely to happen 
smoothly, without public intervention.  
– The degree of public intervention in adaptation strategy will also depend on 
predefined responsibilities , such as the public manageme nt of economic sectors, the 
degree of regulation and public financing, etc. 
Autonomous adaptation will be mainly driven by a sectoral and short-term perspective. 
Planned adaptation measures will therefore be needed to provide a multi-sectoral approach 
aimed at improving the adaptive capacity of the natural and economic system and/or 
facilitating specific adaptations, often in  a medium and long term perspective. 
2.2. The need for indicators of vulnerability 
2.2.1.  Distributive aspects of vulnerability 
The 4th IPPC Report and the Green  Paper identified the most vulnerable geographic areas in 
Europe as: Southern Europe a nd the Mediterranean Basin, mount ain areas, in particular the 
Alps, coastal zones, densely populated floodplains  and the Arctic region, though this does not 
mean that other areas will not be vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. During 2007-
2008 more work has emerged on potential impacts and economic effects of climate change in 
Europe (EEA 2008, EEA 200724; FP6 PESETA) which is of particular relevance for this 
impact assessment. The studies show the projected changes in climate (including extremes), compounded by other environmental changes and socio-economic development. Many of the climate change impacts are projected to be adve rse and to lead to economic costs (‘losses’), 
though there will also be economic benefits (gains). The studies also show a strong 
distributional pattern of effects predicted across Europe, with a significant trend towards more 
negative potential effects in South-eastern Europe and the Mediterranean (e.g. in relation to 
energy demand, agricultural product ivity, water availability, hea lth effects, summer tourism, 
ecosystems, etc). In northern and Western Euro pe a more complex balance between negative 
and positive effects is projec ted for moderate levels of climate change. The Outermost 
Regions (ORs) and overseas countries and terri tories (OCTs) already experience severe 
climate change impacts, and are precursors for what might happen on the main land. 
                                                
 
24 Climate Change: the Cost of Inac tion and the Cost of Adaptation. Technical Report 17/2007, available 
at http://reports.eea.europa.e u/technical_report_2007_13/e n/Tech_report_13_2007.pdf 
 
EN 16   EN At sectoral level25, the degree of adaptive capacity is uneven: 
– The agricultural sector has a long record of adapting to c limate variability. Adaptation 
measures will be mainly implemented at the farm level through short-term production decisions including adjustments in  planting dates, crop mixes, or  in the intensity of input 
use such as fertilizer or water abstracti on. However, these decisions will be largely 
influenced by the economic environment incl uding market conditions and public policies. 
– External factors such as globa lisation and demands for rationa lisation and prof itability are 
constraining the adaptive capacity in the forestry sector. There are significant differences across Europe in socio-economic conditions w ithin the sector (e.g. ownership structure, 
workers education level) that  will affect adaptive capacity. 
– The fisheries and aquaculture industries need  to develop their adaptive capacity even 
further in order to cope with  new conditions. The demand for aquaculture may increase as 
a result of decreasing available fishing resources. 
– In energy, southern European region will need to undertake more and more costly 
investments in electricity production. Throughout Europe there will be a need for increased 
investments in the distribution system to deal  with disruptions due to extreme events and 
changing demand and supply localisation. 
– In infrastructures & buildings , adaptation will require a st rong degree of innovation in 
materials and design, bioclimatic buildin gs, climate proofing, reduction of energy 
consumption, integrated approach to spatia l planning and location of infrastructure. 
– For tourism & industry, adaptation will require c hanges in period of operation, relocation 
of activities, development of  less climate-dependant supply chain. Insurance will have a 
great role to play in particular for SMEs. Adaptation will largely be autonomous, private 
and local, although public action may be needed to facilitate the re conversion of regions 
and economic activities impacted by climate change, to promote solutions favourable to 
both climate adaptation and to competitiveness, or to provide appropriate support for SMEs for managing climate risks properly. 
– Regarding Health, much adaptation can be achieved in the context of pursuing wider 
development objectives—for example, im proved health and education services. 
– Regarding nature conservation measures to ma intain diversity in a nd increase connectivity 
between nature conservation sites are necessary. 
The impacts of climate change are likely to fa ll heaviest on the more vulnerable parts of 
society who spend a higher proportion of their disposable incomes on basic needs such as 
housing, energy and food. This will also have an im pact on the social integration of migrants 
– both because environmental pressures (and in particular, the search for water) may drive 
migration into Europe from drought-hit areas ; and on the other hand because once inside 
Europe, migrants form part of the vulnerable groups most at risk. 
Adaptive capacity is often pos itively correlated with economi c development, thus access to 
efficient adaptation is greater for high-income groups and richer areas, and less for the poor, 
                                                
 
25 See Annex 3 for more details 
 
EN 17   EN and such effects are often compounded by levels  of awareness and access to information (as 
well as insurance).  
For some particularly vulnerable groups, thes e issues overlap, and more adverse impacts may 
be expected in some regions with lower econo mic development (which is often related to 
lower adaptive capacity). Indeed, several studies  have found strong dist ributional effects for 
vulnerability in Europe, e.g. in relation to health26 or coastal flooding risk27, where strong 
correlations between vulnerabili ty and socio-economic status/s ocial deprivation are founded. 
These inequalities are important in defining the baseline scenario, and in looking where 
planned adaptation policy might be need ed, e.g. in relation to solidarity.  
2.2.2.  Measuring adaptive capacity 
Adaptive capacity of ecosystems depends in their diversity and the availability of sufficient 
space. The greater the diversity the greater the ch ance, that traits are present which can cope 
with changing climatic conditions. Healthy ecos ystems have a greater adaptive capacity than 
degraded ecosystems. 
Adaptive capacity of human systems in cludes economic wealth, technology and 
infrastructure, information, knowledge and skills, institutions, equity and social capital. The 
vulnerability of a population is  also believed to depend on population density, level of 
economic development, food ava ilability, income le vel and distribution, local environmental 
conditions, pre-existing health status, and the quality of public health care28. 
Social and individual factors ac t as barriers to adaptation at both individual and collective 
decision-making levels29. There are various cognitive barri ers to adaptation including, for 
example, the observation that vuln erable individuals perceive th emselves to be powerless to 
act in the face of risk. At the policy level, ad aptation policies, like ma ny other areas of public 
policy, are constrained by inertia , cultures of risk denial, and other phenomena well known in 
policy sciences. These barriers are often not accounted for in programmes advocating 
technologically feasible, and apparently sustai nable, adaptation. While lack of resources for 
the most vulnerable is often cited as a barrier to effective adaptation, other financial 
mechanisms and market failures reduce poten tial efficacy of adaptation. Uncertainty in 
impacts may lead to increasing upward pr essure on insurance premiums and possible 
withdrawal of insurance cover in areas at risk  from catastrophic impacts. Finally threats to 
undervalued cultures, life styles, icons and places may also represent limits to adaptation and 
need to be explored further. 
                                                 
26 Menne, B., and Ebi, K.L. (eds) (2006) Climate ch ange and adaptation strategies for human health. 
WHO (Europe). 
27 Environment Agency (2006). Addressing Enviro nmental Inequalities: Flood Risk. SCHO0905BJOK-E-
P Science Report: SC020061/SR1. Authors: Gordon Walker, Kate Burningham, Jane Fielding, Graham 
Smith, Diana Thrush, Helen Fay. Availa ble at www.environm ent-agency.gov.uk 
28 World Health Organization (WHO, 2003), “Climate Change and Human Health – Risks and 
Responses”, available at: http://www.who.int/globalchange/climate/en/ccSCREEN.pdf  
29 Hulme et al. (2007) Limits and barriers to adaptation: four propositions. Tyndall Centre for Climate 
Change Research - Briefing Note  20, July 2007, available at: 
http://tyndall.webapp1.uea.ac.uk/publi cations/briefing_notes/bn20.pdf 
 
EN 18   EN 2.2.3.  Towards a vulnerability index 
Coarse estimates of vulnerability have been  generated by combini ng some measures of 
exposure (e.g. sea level rise, change in aver age temperature and precipitation) and some 
measures of adaptive capacity under a scenario-based approach30. 
Besides the general need for more knowledge (res earch) on the adaptati on subject, specific 
attention needs to be given to region-specific and applied resear ch because concrete measures, 
financing and transfers take plac e at these levels. At present, there are only a few regions that 
know more or less what they have  to expect in the future – bu t uncertainty is even higher due 
to lacking data and appropriate modelling. 
Some work has also already been re cently undertaken by DG Regional Policy31 to present the 
Climate Change impacts in the form of a synthetic index, combining information on 
vulnerability to drought, population affected by river floods and exposed to coastal erosion, 
exposure to climate change of the agri culture, fisheries and tourism sector. 
Work is already ongoing at DG Environment to assess the feasibility an d provide options for 
the design of a (set of) vulnerabi lity indicator(s), that could be  used to help preparing EU-
wide adaptation policy. It will require bringing together indicators at economic, social and environmental levels for different CC scenarios,  available at sectoral  and regional levels. 
2.2.4.  External dimension 
The impacts of climate change beyond the EU  are well documented although there are 
uncertainties related to the predictions. In IPCC 2007 information is now available across 
regions of the world concerning the nature of  future impacts. Water resources, freshwater 
ecosystems and access to drinking water are exp ected to be negatively affected. In Africa 
alone between 75 million and 250 million people are projected to be exposed to increased 
water stress due to climate change. Ecosyste ms and biodiversity will also undergo major 
changes to their structure and f unction and regions, which will of ten lead to a deterioration of 
the provision of ecosystem services on which human livelihoods depend. The expected reductions in crop yields are expected to reduce agricultural produ ction potential of 
developing countries, critically impacting food s ecurity. Rising sea levels will increase the 
relative vulnerability of coastal deltas, leading to in excess of 1 million people being potentially displaced from each of the three 3 larger global deltas (N ile, Ganges/Brahmaputra 
and Mekong). Climate change related impacts will also alter the geographic range and 
seasonality of certain vector- borne infections. Global security  could also be threatened by 
climate change as a result of impacts on access to water and food. It will have huge economic costs, aggravating poverty, wors ening health conditions, and pot entially increase competition 
for the control of resources. 
The EU, enlargement countries and ENP partners have a common strategic interest in further 
enhancing dialogue and cooperation on adaptation issues, as the area include some of the most 
vulnerable regions to climate change, where im pacts are expected to range from increased 
water stress due to droughts and water scarcity, to de gradation of soils, loss of arable land, 
flooding, salinisation and forest fires. This coul d lead to developments in the region which 
                                                
 
30 ATEAM (Advanced Terrestrial Ecosystem Analysis and Modelling ), project funded by the 5th 
Framework Programme, results available at http://www.pik-potsdam.de/ateam/ateam.html 
31 http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docoffic/working/regions2020/index_en.htm 
 
EN 19   EN would negatively affect the EU's enlargement and ENP policies objectiv es of promoting an 
area of prosperity, st ability and security. 
Scientific evidence has shown however that it will  be the poorest region s and countries in the 
world (particularly the least developed c ountries, Africa, and small island states32) that will be 
hit the earliest and hardest. Climate change is a serious challenge to poverty reduction in 
developing countries and threatens developmen t policy achievements. The weakest countries 
will have most difficulties with adapting to cl imate change, which may lead to less growth, 
more forced migration and possibly radicaliza tion and state failure causing internal and 
external security risks. Failure by the interna tional community to appropriately address these 
tensions may undermine multilateralism. Climate ch ange could lead to vast displacement of 
populations, including into regions close to Europe  or EU ultra-periphera l regions. Parts of the 
Mediterranean region being bot h a neighbouring region and susceptible to the effects of 
climate change is particularly important in this respect. 
2.3. Tackling insufficient knowledge and institutional weaknesses. 
2.3.1.  Review of national adaptation strategies 
Most EU Member States are actively taking meas ures to mitigate climate change. Integration 
of climate change adaptation in policy making is more recent, but most Member States have 
already started to take acti on on adaptation. Moreover, Artic le 4 of the United Nations 
Framework Convention on Climate Change33 to which the EU and all its Member States are 
parties, requires the formulation and implem entation of national and, where appropriate, 
regional programmes containing measures for climate change mitigation and adaptation as well as the obligation to coopera te in preparing to adapt to the impacts of climate change. 
In addition to the national communications to the UNFCCC, a number of Member States have 
recently produced national adaptation plans
34. Most of the reports are still a preparatory step 
towards a concrete adaptation strategy. Some Member States are well advanced in their 
thinking on adaptation, with po licies already in place while othe rs are still at the phase of 
identifying the problems or debating the di rection that their actions should take. 
More specifically, the following can be concluded from the national communications: 
• The majority of EU Member States have already implemented some kind of adaptation 
policy measures at national leve l, but there is also a large difference in progress among the 
countries. The overall state or level of ad aptation is generally low (if compared to 
mitigation activities), and most countries have yet to formulate a wide range of clear and 
implementable policy measures 
• As regards the aim of adaptation actions, four main categories could be identified: building 
adaptation capacity, reducing of risk and se nsitivity, increasing capacity to extreme or 
damaging events and exploiting the benefits of climate change (capitalizing on climatic 
conditions). It has been observed that, for all co untries, the objective of reducing risk is the 
one given the highest priority, but here ag ain there are differences in approaches. 
                                                 
32 Some of them being part of EU (Ultra-peripheral regions) 
33 See Commitments in paragraph 1 indents b and e, 
34 See annex 4. 
 
EN 20   EN • The impacts of climate change vary regiona lly and every country has its own national 
priorities, the national adaptati on strategies focus upon sectors of particular relevance and 
different countries consider di fferent sectors. At the same  time there are some sectors 
which hold importance in all re viewed strategies. Water management (in particular flood 
prevention) land use/agriculture and ecosystems ar e clearly considered to be a priority in 
the majority of strategies. Two diverging featur es are that biodiversity/ecosystems seems to 
be significantly more tackled in Northern  Europe; whereas for Central Europe food 
production and security is the most targeted ar ea. In all strategies, cross cutting themes are 
addressed, such as the need for awareness rising, the need for coordinated action at 
different levels and between Member States and coordinated research.  
A recent review of National Adaptation Strategies35 provides useful insights on the factors 
that have either contributed to or hamper ed the achievement of adaptation strategies. 
According to the study, political institutiona l problems may be a greater challenge then 
finding the appropriate technical solutions. The report also identifies important issues that 
should be taken into account for future deve lopments. The cross-level or cross-sectoral 
conflicts, as well as the need to take into acc ount the global dimensi on of adaptation problem, 
are areas for which EU c ontribution is essential. 
Table 1 – SWOT analysis of National Adap tation Strategies (NAS) (Source:PEER, 2009)  
  Contributing significan tly to achieving the 
NAS objectives  Hindering the achievement of the NAS 
objectives  
Related to historical 
conditions and 
institutional 
development of the 
NAS  (STRENGTHS) 
– Targeted research programmes 
– Planning for the implementation, 
monitoring and funding of adaptation 
– Planned coordination between sectors and 
administrative levels  (WEAKNESSES)  
– Lack of coordination between levels and 
sectors  
– Lack of adequate stakeholder involvement 
– Unclear responsibilities between 
administrative levels 
– Lack of context-specific adaptation 
knowledge  
Related to current and future conditions 
and developments 
external to the NAS  (OPPORTUNITIES) 
– Development and export of knowledge 
– Spill-over of policy integration and 
multilevel governance for non-climate 
policies (THREATS)  
– Cross-level conflicts 
– Cross-sectoral conflicts 
– Insufficient resources 
– Lack of public support 
– Impacts of global impacts (trade, migration, 
security) 
The baseline scenario has to include these current national respons es. Nevertheless, the 
Commission does not know all the ac tions already in place in the Member States at all levels, 
as there is no obligation to report to th e Commission such initiatives. Moreover, the 
Commission has not found any ex-ante assessment of the envisaged benefits and impacts of 
the measures currently being implemented in the Member States, therefore the analysis in the 
baseline scenario can only be  qualitative and quite general. 
2.3.2.  Adaptation at regional and local levels 
Adaptation to climate change is complex because the severity of the impacts will vary from 
region to region, depending on physical vulnera bility, the degree of socio-economic 
development, natural and human adaptive capacity, health services, and response 
mechanisms. To address this variability, multilevel governance is emerging involving all 
                                                 
35 "Europe adapts to climate change: status of developing National Adaptation Strategies", Partnership for 
European Environmental Research, to be published in 2009 (PEER, 2009). 
 
EN 21   EN actors from the individual  citizens and public authorities to th e EU level. Acti ons to adapt to 
climate change will need to be taken at a ve ry local level to match the specific conditions 
therein. Moreover, actions will be needed in areas where the competences lay with regional authorities. Therefore regions have  a very significant role to play for adaptation to climate 
change. 
Some regions or cities have already produced re gional adaptation strategies; others are in the 
process of doing so. Still many regions would benefit from assistance for capacity building 
and best practice sharing. During the discu ssion of the Green Pape r on adaptation, it was 
recognised that the lack of information, knowledge  and expertise at local and regional level 
and the lack of guidance to the local and regiona l authorities is, in part, a consequence of the 
uncertainties as regards the scale, timing and consequences of climate change, and hinders 
policy-making. 
This means that some co-ordina tion of regional and local adaptati on initiatives at the EU-level 
may be necessary in order to avoid major gaps, to provide strategic direction and to ensure a 
comprehensive and coherent approach to adaptation across the EU, especially in situations with trans-national linkages. The lack of in formation, knowledge and expertise at local and 
regional level and the lack of guidance to the local and regional authorities may hinder access 
and use of available tools. In this area the EU could also play an important role, by developing 
methodologies for assessing the impact and desi gning cost-effective adaptation policies. 
Finally, in light of the climate change challenge,  it is likely that local and regional authorities 
will have to bear the cost of developing and implementing adaptation strategies. A new 
context for solidarity and burden sharing will therefore emerge, and there will be the need for revising the framework for EU financial support to the regions to f acilitate adaptation. 
2.3.3.  The need for early action at EU level: es tablishing priorities for the White Paper 
In existing national adaptation pl ans it is recognised that coor dination between Member States 
is needed, and benefits in appr oaching adaptation in an integr ated, coordinated manner at EU 
level are recognised. Reasons for acti on at EU level are the following: 
• Climate change will result in trans-boundary impacts  and will require adaptation 
measures based on cooperation between different  Member States, as well as appropriate 
coordination with relevant non-Member Stat es. Climate change impacts with a trans-
boundary nature can be for example forest fi res, effects on migrat ory species, floods and 
infectious deceases. In addition, some adaptation measures may need to be taken in another 
Member State than the one who suffers the im pacts and would reap th e benefits; therefore 
there is a need for coordination  at EU level. This could be the case for taking flood 
protection measures upstream, where th ey may be more (cost-) effective. 
• Climate change will have different spatial effects and strong variability meaning that 
impacts across the EU could vary consider ably. There is a need to ensure that solidarity  is 
enshrined in the adaptation strategies, as it has to be ensured that he ones who are hit 
hardest by climate change will be able to adapt. Cohesion policy  can further contribute to 
address the consequences of new disparities between those regions which suffer most from 
climate change and those that can more easily cope with its impacts. The rural development policy also contributes to a bala nced territorial development of European 
rural areas, which socio-economic  disparities could amplify due  to uneven climatic effects 
on agricultural systems, fore stry and rural economies. 
 
EN 22   EN • Adaptation action should not lead to a shift in the impacts or exacerbating the problem in 
another area, country, sect or or social group. Such mal-adaptation  is often best addressed 
at trans-boundary or European level. In pa rticular, building wate r reservoirs, caputing 
groundwater or using techniques for ensuring precipitation wi ll increase water availability 
in a certain area at the expenses  of others, and may also not be  the most effective long-term 
solution on a larger scale. 
• Climate change will have strong impacts on sector s that are largely integrated at EU level 
through the single market and common policies . It makes sense to integrate adaptation 
goals into these policies (e.g. transport, ener gy networks, forestry, agriculture, water, 
biodiversity and fisheries). Th e lack of Community action could significantly damage 
Member States interest s and could hinder the internal market  (e.g. animal trade and 
infectious diseases). Coordinated action at EU level could overcome these disadvantages 
for taking action. 
• Adaptation can be taken into account in EU spending programmes  (e.g. cohesion, rural 
development, agriculture, fisheries, social  fund, research, external actions and the 
European Development Fund) to complement the resources spent by the Members States. 
• Due to the scale of any activity at EU level , actions can leverage greater results and 
magnify the efforts in capacity building, research, information and data gathering, 
knowledge transfer, exchange of best practi ce, development and cooperation. This will 
contribute greatly to a robus t knowledge base for policy making at all administrative 
levels. Intensive exchange of best adapta tion practices between Member States with 
comparable conditions, or further streamlining research efforts are clear-cut examples of 
this. 
• As regards external action, the increased negotiating power of the EU, rather than 
individual Member States, may confer a leading role to the EU  in adaptation in some 
sectors. Moreover, if climate change impact s have consequences for the EU economy, or 
the EU supply of critical goods (e.g. food, energy)  as a whole there is a need for oversight 
and responsibility at EU level to comp lement the actions at national level. 
2.3.4.  The baseline scenario for assessing EU framework for adaptation 
The baseline is dependent on se veral factors, being the implementation of the EU acquis, 
planned and existing policy instruments that addr ess adaptation at national or regional level 
(like national adaptation strategies), and au tonomous adaptation performed by ecosystems, 
social groups and economic sectors which will depend on their perception of climate risks and their adaptive capacity. At this stage the baseline is constrained to the short-medium term and is not linked to emission scenarios (which will  also depend on the extent to which mitigation 
efforts are materialising and ha ve a positive effect in lim iting temperature increase). The 
baseline explores therefore the risks and opportu nities under current EU legislative framework 
to highlight the need fo r additional early action: 
– Biodiversity : The current Natura 2000 network esta blishment and management provisions 
in the Directives may not be sufficiently dynamic to respond to the rapid changes to 
ecosystems induced by climate change. The crea tion of ecological networks in fragmented 
landscapes needs to happen sw iftly. Shifting bioclimatic zone s do not respect borders, and 
Member States need to act in a co-ordinated manner, as otherwise actions by one Member State may be jeopardised by those of a neighbou ring country. The inclusion of biodiversity 
 
EN 23   EN goals in other sectoral policies as a dvocated in the Biodiversity Action Plan36 is 
indispensable to ensure the achievement of nature conservation goals under changing 
climatic conditions. 
– Water  is by nature trans-nationa l and requires a coordinated approach within each river 
basin. Since 2000 water management the flagship  for addressing water management at the 
(international) river basin level is the Eu ropean Water Framework Directive, and the 
Floods Directive (2007) follows the same river basin approach to address flood risks. This 
offers a flexible framework for managing Eu rope's water, based on integrated water 
management. It also provides the principles  to set up water demand management measures 
and effective economic instruments to use wate r resources efficiently, which is extremely 
important for areas where water might be scarcer due to a changing climate. The 6 years planning cycle provided by th e Water Framework Directive offers the possibility to 
integrate climate change impacts. Full implementation of the Water Framework Directive is a priority in order to address mismanagem ent of water resources and is therefore a key 
tool for adaptation to climate change. Regard ing water scarcity a nd droughts, the annual 
European assessment will make possible to monitor the evolution of the issue across 
Europe on a regular basis. 
– Soil degradation can have trans-boundary cons equences (losses of soil organic matter 
impair achievement of the EU’s Kyoto Pr otocol targets, dams are blocked and 
infrastructure is damaged downstream by sediments from massive erosion further 
upstream, etc.). Therefore it is of outmost impo rtance to act at source to prevent damage 
and subsequent remedial actions, otherwise co sts to restore environmental quality may be 
borne by another Member State. The Comm ission adopted a Soil Thematic Strategy 
(COM(2006) 231) and the proposal for a So il Framework Direct ive (COM(2006) 232), 
which would heavily contri bute to this objective. 
– The Common Agriculture  Policy and its resources (both direct payments and rural 
development), as revised by the "Health Check ", provide a framework that can facilitate 
climate adaptation and adjustment of agricultura l practices at EU level. The challenge and 
opportunity for the EU and its Member States in the period up to the end of  2013 is to 
make the best possible use of the CAP tools available to support a sustainable adaptation 
and promote the role of ecosystem services. 
– The EU Forest  Action Plan is a framework fo r common action which proposes to 
encourage adaptation within the forestry sector , to enhance the protec tion of forests against 
forest fires and the increasing threat from ex treme weather events, as well as other factors 
affecting their health; Support for the sector and the possibility for adaptation actions is 
provided by Rural Development. 
– For Fisheries and Aquaculture , the integration of climat e change concerns and the 
development of the adaptation st rategies will take place th rough the reform of the Common 
Fisheries Policy (in 2012) a nd the adoption of the Aqu aculture Strategy (in 2009). 
– The Integrated Maritime  Policy (which second phase of implementation will be prepared 
in 2010), the Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) and the Maritime Spatial 
                                                 
36 Commission Staff Working Document SEC (2006) 621 Annex to the Commission Communication on 
"Halting the Loss of Biodiversity by 2010 – and beyond, sustaining ecosystems services for human 
wellbeing COM (2006) 216 
 
EN 24   EN Planning can play an important role in adap tation in maritime areas and coastal waters37. 
The Marine Strategy Framework Directive c ontributes to adaptation through reducing 
pressures placed on marine ecosystems so that the combined pressures do not push them to 
a point beyond which they are unable to recover. 
– For infrastructure, energy, industry or services  plans or projects, the Environmental 
Impact Assessment (EIA) Directive and the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) 
Directive traditionally consider the impact of  projects and policies on the environment. 
They will need to be updated to explicitly require the cons ideration of how changes in 
climate will affect the viability proposed pr ojects and policies (e.g. facing a disruption of 
the hydrological cycle). Other guidelines, legisl ations or norms should also be reviewed to 
take climate change vulnerability into account, such as TEN guidelines, Directive 2002/91/EC on the energy performance of buildings, Eurocodes, etc. 
– For Health , a recovery approach only dealing with  heat waves and cold bites cases when 
they arrive, only deal with infectious dis eases when the outbreaks occur (no preventive 
approach) is not sufficient in the long run. Human and Animal Health legislations, and 
surveillance mechanisms need to be updated to  better enable the Community to adapt to 
the possibly changing patterns. 
At a later stage, once integrated scenarios for adaptation and mitigation policies as suggested 
above become available, it will be possible to define the baseline under a further time horizon 
and review it regularly, once more information on mitigation agreements and achievements, climate change projections and impacts and im plementation of adaptation actions at various 
levels becomes available. 
2.3.5.  Impact on EU finances 
Private funding of adaptation measures will  concentrate on econo mically interesting 
investments, whereas investors lo cated in the most affected w eaker regions and sectors will 
have difficulties to obtain appr opriate funding for re-investment or risk coverage, and if so, 
only at relative high costs, deepening thus existing disparities or creating new ones.  
For the other regions, public funds will remain th e main source of assistance, in particular to 
compensate for damage and losses due to extr eme weather events. In a number of regions, 
less populated and economically less performing, of ten located in areas th at are particularly 
sensitive to climate change ri sks areas (coastal, mountainous), the costs to cover adaptation 
needs will be so huge that they exceed the cap acity of public funding. In  these regions, losses 
can take such massive dimensions also for the pr ivate sector that they raise eventually beyond 
the financial capacity of individual companies and businesses. Climate risks and the implementation of climate adjustment policies will accelerate the development of appropriate 
financial market instruments to finance longer te rm adaptation measures as  well as to alleviate 
the burden of individual cost coverage and to promote efficient risk sharing (risk transfer 
instruments, catastrophe bonds, debt financi ng schemes, public/private equity funds). 
However, these funding instruments make clea r distinctions between  regions, sectors and 
industries which are affected adversely a nd those that benefit from new business 
opportunities. The competition for funds is expected to increase. 
                                                
 
37 COM (2008) 791 
 
EN 25   EN Moreover there is a pressing need to ensure that current and future investments done with EU 
funds are compatible with the alterations that climate change  will bring about and prevent 
investments that will hinder our common efforts to mitigate and to adapt to climate change.  
Therefore there is a need to assess, in the co ntext of the preparation of the next multi-annual 
financial framework, how EU funding mech anisms can build-up further knowledge and 
support the Member States in thei r efforts to become more resilient to climate change impacts, 
thus ensuring the sustainability of Europe, whil e at the same time bearing in mind the need for 
additionality. 
Equally the EU funds are likely to be called upon to support ad aptation measures in a country 
who would not be the beneficiary of the positive effects of such measures and therefore may 
not be inclined to bear the costs (for instan ce anti flood measures to be taken in a Member 
State upstream to protect another Member State downstream). 
However, the lack of an accepted methodology fo r identifying and classifying adaptation and 
adaptation-related projects for accounting and ot her purposes is not onl y required to have an 
overview of the EU's current expenditure on adap tation and adaptation-related projects but is 
also necessary to establish future funding n eeds. This triggers the need for agreeing a 
methodology for calculating the costs of adapta tion, consistent with the work undertaken 
under the UNFCCC38 or by the OECD39. 
                                                 
38 UNFCCC (2007) Background paper on "Analysis of existing and planned investment and financial 
flows relevant to the development of effective and appropriate international response to climate change" available at: http://unfccc.int/cooperation_and_support/financial_mechanism/items/4053.php  
39 OECD (2008) Draft OECD Guide lines on Integrating Climate Change adaptation into Development and 
Coo-operation. COM/ENV/EPOC/DCD/DAC(2008)2. 
 
EN 26   EN 3. OBJECTIVES OF THE WHITE PAPER  
3.1. General, specific and operational objectives 
The general objective of adapting to climate ch ange is to cope with unavoidable climate 
change and reduce the cost of climate chan ge by both decreasing the vulnerability and 
enhancing the resilience of society, economy an d environment to climate change impacts.  
Taking into account the current knowledge on C limate change vulnerability and adaptation 
actions, and the specific institutional framewor k for the development of  EU adaptation policy, 
as described in the previous chapter, the sp ecific objective of this  report are twofold: 
– To highlight no-regret and win-win adaptation measures while identifying the risks of not 
sustainable adaptation practices 
– To establish a work plan for action at EU  level in the short and medium term.  
Against that background, and providing an analyt ical correspondence wi th the key 3 problems 
identified, the operational objectives - that will have to be addressed by the instruments included in the action plan and fu rther monitored - are threefold: 
– Improve the knowledge base on CC vulnerabil ity (impacts and adaptive capacity) and on 
the costs and benefits of adaptation options. 
– Ensure early implementation of identified no regret and win-win me asures and avoid mal-
adaptation by mainstreaming adaptation in EU policies 
– Put in place a process for a better co-ordina tion of adaptation policies and the assessment 
of next steps, including launching a debate for next multi-annual financial framework 
3.2. Consistency with horizontal strategies 
3.2.1.  Sustainable Development and Lisbon Strategies 
The long-term perspectives of both EU polic y on Adaptation to Climate Change and EU 
Sustainable Development Strategy
40 (SDS) make the link between them obvious. This is also 
consistent across all priority areas of the SDS: 
• Climate Change and Clean Energy: The strong potential synergies between CC adaptation 
and mitigation have been identified in the pr evious section, and convergences can be found 
in the building of a low carbon society which w ill target the most vulnerable segments of 
EU society and territory. 
• Sustainable Transport: The review of the vul nerability of transport infrastructure and 
management systems will have to be included as a key element for the sustainability of 
transport activity.  
                                                 
40 http://ec.europa.eu/sustainable/welcome/index_en.htm 
 
EN 27   EN • Sustainable Consumption and Production (SPC):  a lower dependence on water, energy and 
resources is at the heart of ambitious adaptation policies. SPC policy instruments such as 
eco-design and labelling will need to include Climate Adaptation challenge and can help to 
the transition of production and consum ption to a less vulnerable profile. 
• Conservation and Management of Natural re sources: The maintenan ce of biodiversity and 
ecosystems is essential for both ensuring their resilience to climate change impact and 
allowing the provision of ecosystem-based servi ces ("green infrastructure") as adaptation 
options alternative to "grey infrastructure ". Ecosystem-based services provide often 
multiple benefits including mitigation. 
• Public Health: Adaptation policy should address new public health challenges. Preventive 
public health policies and the reduction of health inequalities are essential elements for decreasing the vulnerability of population. 
• Social Inclusion, Demography and Migration. Building adaptiv e capacity should become 
an essential element of strategies for soci al protection and social inclusion. Moreover, 
Climate change may trigger s ubstantial demographic challe nges (migrations) which will 
have to be addressed. 
Adaptation policy, through a better knowledge of impacts, may help to create support for 
Climate Change mitigation and energy efficiency po licies, which is one of the 4 key priorities 
of the renewed Lisbon Strategy
41. Decreasing the vulnerability of  the economy, in particular 
SMEs which can be more affected e.g. by extrem e weather events, is a key convergence area 
between Adaptation policy and Lisbon strategy . Actions on research  & innovation and on 
investing in people will have to  be targeted to a better knowledge  of impacts at all levels, in 
decreasing vulnerability and in creasing resilience of nature, economic and social systems. 
An adaptation strategy must also be devel oped considering the Renewed Social Agenda42, 
which is based on a holistic approach to social policy and which calls for better 
mainstreaming of employment and so cial policies into all EU policies.   
3.2.2.  External Policy  
EU adaptation policy cannot be exclusively de fined in the narrow focus of EU territory. 
International cooperation on ad aptation should be strength ened through greater synergy 
between public and private actions and by promoting coherence amongst international processes and organisations.  
The EU is committed to the UNFCCC process wher e work is being carried out, in the context 
of the Nairobi Five-year programme of work  on impacts, vulnerability and adaptation to 
climate change (UNFCCC, 2006), the National Ad aptation Plans of Actions (NAPAs) and the 
Bali Action Plan (UNFCCC, 2007) . The Bali Action plan resu lting from the most recent 
COP/MOP meetings (Conference a nd Meeting of the Parties, D ec. 2007) rec ognizes that 
adaptation will need to be exp licitly included in a global post-2012 climate change agreement, 
currently being negotiated with the aim to r each an agreement in Copenhagen by the end of 
2009 (UNFCCC COP15). 
                                                
 
41 http://ec.europa.eu/growthandjobs/index_en.htm 
42 COM (412) of 2 July 2008 
 
EN 28   EN In view of the availability of  strong external instruments at  EU level, adaptation should be 
mainstreamed in the EU's policies and co-ope ration programmes. Mainstreaming of climate 
change into cooperation and development strate gies and programmes (“climate proofing”) are 
imperative in this regard. The complexity and global nature of the adaptation challenge calls 
for additional focus to be put on the coherence of our policies to ensure they are mutually supportive and blend in the proper policy mix. 
Adaptation should be mainstreamed  into all EU’s external polic ies. In trade policy adaptation 
should be incorporated, notably through the liberalisation of trad e in environmental goods and 
services and in the elaboration of Free Trade Agreements (FTAs). 
Progress towards the Millennium Developm ent Goals (MDGs) will enhance countries’ 
capacity to adapt to climate change. At the sa me time, however, the implications of climate 
change will significantly undermine progress toward s the MDGs .It is therefore crucial for the 
EU’s cooperation programmes and for third c ountries sustainable development, poverty 
alleviation and sectoral strategi es to take into account clim ate change adap tation needs in 
order to ensure that progress towards th e MDGs is sustained and sustainable. 
Failed adaptation can lead to security implicatio ns. The EU is therefore also stepping up its 
analysis and early warning systems and integrating climate change into existing tools such as 
conflict prevention mechanisms and security sect or reform. The effects of climate change on 
migratory flows should also be considered in the broader EU reflection on security, 
development and migration policies. 
Enhancing the EU’s dialogue and cooperation with neighbouring countries on adaptation 
issues is also in line with the aim of the Enlargement
 and European Neighbourhood policies  to 
work closely with partners to promot e prosperity, stability and security. 
 
EN 29   EN 4. OPTIONS FOR ADAPTATION APPROACHES  
In terms of adaptation approaches, choices have to be ma de about how to pursue adaptation 
policy further, and what should be the adaptation measures that should be either promoted or 
prevented. 
4.1. Identification of planned adaptation options 
Adaptation to climate change involves taking prac tical actions to either reduce vulnerability to 
climate risks (either th rough a reduction to the exposure to climate stress or an increase in 
adaptive capacity), or to exploit positive opportunities. There are numerous examples of typologies (OECD 2008).  
It is out of the scope of this  report to provide any detailed inventory and assessment of the 
adaptation options for each sector and region. Annex 1 provides detailed information on key adaptation options in each sect or (both autonomous actions  and those requiring public 
intervention). It is however pos sible to classify adaptation opti ons in 3 broad categories based 
on the overall approach: 
• “Grey” infrastructure approaches , corresponding to physical  interventions or 
construction measures and using engineering services to make buildings and 
infrastructure  essential for the social and economic well-being of society more capable of 
withstanding extreme events. 
– These approaches are focused on direct climate change impacts on infrastructure 
and buildings, such as cha nges in temperature and prec ipitations, floods, sea level 
rise, etc.  
– They target exercising a de gree of control over the envir onmental threat itself (e.g. 
flood control works: dams, dikes, levees),  or preventing the effects of climate 
change and variability (.g. increased ir rigation water, air conditioning, etc.). 
• “Green” structure approaches
43 are contributing to the increase of ecosystems resilience 
and, while addressing goals such as halting biod iversity loss, degradation of ecosystem or 
restoring water cycles, at the same time use the functions and services provided by the 
ecosystems to achieve a more costs effectiv e and sometimes more feasible adaptation 
solution than relying solely on grey infrastructures alternatives. Increasing the resilience of green infrastructures therefore can be cons idered as synergy and no regret actions. 
Examples are: 
– Using the cooling capacity
 of trees and other biomass,  in particular for densely 
populated urban spaces. 
– Preserving biodiversit y and ecosystems including multiple groups performing 
similar functions for restoring and maintaining resilience. Integrated agricultural 
                                                 
43 Healthy plants and animals & properly functioning na tural processes such as water cycle, food chain, 
etc.: see Benedict (2006), Green infrastructure: li nking landscapes and infrastructures / Mark A. 
Benedict, Edward T. McMahon. Island Press, 2006,  299 p. Available at: http--regserver.unfccc.int-
seors-file_storage-1w5hqo976pnsiyq.pdf  
 
EN 30   EN systems with a diversity of crops and surrounding ecological zones can provide 
strong defences in the face of weather extremes, pest infestations and invasive 
species. Un-even, mixed species forests are more resistant to storms and pests and have a lower fire risk, co mpared to monocultures. 
– Wetlands management
, enabling plants and animals to survive and helping 
wetland-dependent communities to adapt to  climate change, while at the same 
time providing through wetlands and salt marshes for natural barriers that allow managing increasing water flow, fl oods and storms over large areas.  
– Improving infiltration and retention of water
 into the soil and progressing towards 
soil saturation helping the restoration of  groundwater and surface water resources 
and therefore the developm ent of permanent vegetati on accompanied by cooler 
temperatures, contributing inter alia to mitigating climate change risks such as 
floods, droughts and heat waves.  
• “Soft” non-structural approaches , corresponding to design and application of policies 
and procedures, and employing i.a. land-us e controls, information dissemination, and 
economic incentives to reduce or prevent disast er vulnerability. They require more careful 
management of the underlying human systems . They include: 
• Economic instruments , which could play a particularly key ro le in adaptation 
(OECD 2008): insurance is a recurring instrument within the context of adaptive 
responses in a number of sectors, par ticularly agriculture; price signals and 
environmental markets, meanwhile, might be critical to adaptation within the 
context of many climate sensitive natural resources including water and ecosystems; public private partnerships, m eanwhile, could potentially play a very 
critical role in the financ ing and enhancing the climate resilience of infrastructure, 
where the costs of adaptation are high. 
• Gathering and sharing information (unde rtaking research on new technologies, 
new methods of adaptation and positive feedbacks; collecting and monitoring 
data, communication education and training initiatives to increase awareness, buy-
in and behavioural change );  
• Creating a supportive institutional framewor k (changing standards, legislation, 
and best practice guidance, and devel oping appropriate policies, plans and 
strategies);  
• Creating supportive social structures (cha nging internal organisational systems, 
developing resources to deliver th e adaptation actions , and working in 
partnership). 
4.2. Assessment of adaptation options 
The 3 approaches all have to be part of any adaptation policy portfoli o, therefore this report 
will not perform any choice between options. However, on the basis of the preliminary elements of assessment provided below, it is alre ady possible to highlight priority early action 
on adaptation that should be undert aken because 1) they would generate net social and/or 
economic benefits irrespective of whether or not anthropoge nic climate change occurs 
(otherwise known as “no regret” measures); or 2) because they have the desired result in 
 
EN 31   EN terms of minimising the climate risks or explo iting potential opportunities but also have other 
social, environmental or economic benefits (" win-win"). It is also  possible to identify 
adaptation measures for which there ar e important risks of mal-adaptation. 
4.2.1.  Economic aspects of adaptation 
Adaptation has an extremely important role in  reducing economic cost s of Climate Change. 
While adaptation has a cost, the information av ailable shows that adaptation significantly 
reduces the costs of inaction and in many cases has benefits that dramatically outweigh costs. 
However, there is very little quantified info rmation on the costs and benefits of adaptation , 
and further work is urgently needed to progress the evidence base, and provide the information needed to allow informed, cost-eff ective and proportionate adaptation in Europe. 
Annex 1 summarises the informa tion on the potential costs of  adaptation in Europe and 
globally, by looking at va rious studies, approaches, and estimates. 
The burden of financing the rea llocation of resources and new i nvestment will not fall only on 
the private sector: involvement of  the public sector will be need ed, especially in  the countries 
where the net economic impact of climate change  is expected to be negative, and/or in 
specific areas such as infrastructure provisi on (water, flood control), public goods (to address 
public health risks and to facilitate adaptation in  agriculture, forestry or  tourism) and subsidies 
(to facilitate the relocation of populat ion and activities)  
Abrupt climate change impacts would entail more significant fiscal interventions to help the 
private sector to adapt and address the economic and social consequences that could arise. An 
in-depth scenario analysis will have to be  performed to better understand how governments 
should tackle uncertainties and extreme events.  
The assessment of costs and benefits of ad aptation policies requires considering the full 
picture of both EU and national public in tervention (CAP and cohesion policy funds, 
environmental, health and enterp rise policies, etc.) and should c onsider how an inflexion or a 
reformulation of a broad range of policies may contribute to a more cost-effective, quicker 
and flexible adaptation.  
A study on the fiscal implications of climate ch ange adaptation has recently been launched by 
the Commission
44, and will assess the knowledge gaps and formulate key proposals in this 
area. Another study45 on the economic costs of climate change adaptation policies in EU 
coastal areas will also provide detailed  cost estimates over the coming months. 
There is a need for early action  when adapting to climate chan ge, particularly in certain 
sectors. Early action will bring clear economic benefits by anti cipating potential damages and 
minimizing threats to ecosystems, human h ealth, economic development, property and 
infrastructure. Reactive adaptation, often after a disaster, is considered far more costly. In all 
sectors, early action is therefore needed to raise awareness for climate change impacts and 
build capacity for taking the necessary adaptation measures. 
• Moreover, certain investments have a very l ong lifetime and will be fully operational when 
climate change impacts will fully materialise. For such investments, the current direction 
of climate change predictions should alre ady play a role in decision-making now.  
                                                 
44 http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/procurements_grants/call4tenders12327_en.htm   
45 http://ec.europa.eu/maritimeaffairs/climate_change_en.html   
 
EN 32   EN • Uncertainty in climate change  projections sometimes makes it difficult to take early 
targeted action in all sectors. But in genera l, adaptation actions that can provide several 
benefits and are sustainable and cost effective in the current situation should be part of the 
"early action" approach. 
4.2.2.  Synergies and trade-offs with  Climate Change Mitigation 
There has been some focus in the literature (see  Annex 1) on the need to define a policy mix 
between adaptation and mitigation. Indeed measur es for adaptation must not hinder the efforts 
or hamper the achievement of the objectives on mitigation. However, there are numerous examples of measures that are significant and beneficial both for climate change mitigation and adaptation: 
– Climate change adaptation and mitigation can come together  in the planning of urban 
areas, notably in locations that are vulnerabl e to climate change. This would both limit 
energy use (and associated GHG emissions) a nd also reduce exposure to the possible 
negative consequences of clim ate change (heat waves, floods , etc.). Reduced air pollution 
as a side effect of climate policies can lead to lower health impacts and consequently higher resistance to climate stresses. Th e same applies to ecosystem vitality. 
– Afforestation and reforestation enhance car bon sequestration and meanwhile may prevent 
erosion or flooding. However, the types of tr ees best suited to preventing flooding and 
protecting biodiversity may not be the most e ffective from a carbon sequestration point of 
view
46. The IPCC report (2007), states that "i n the long term a sustainable forest 
management strategy aimed at maintaining or  increasing forest carbon stocks, while 
producing an annual sustained yield of timber,  fibre or energy from the forest, will 
generate the largest sustained mitigation benefit". 
– In the fisheries sector, there is potential for energy savings of up to 20% by improving 
vessel and gear design and operation. If this is combined with a reduction in fleet capacity, it will contribute to healthier stocks and th erefore more climate resilient fish stocks. 
– Conservation and sustainable use of biodi versity and ecosystems and the reduction of 
environmental pressures lead to healthy ecosy stems, which are essential for any adaptation 
and mitigation strategy. 
There can also be some trade-offs. – Some technological adaptation options ma y trigger an increase in GHG emissions. 
Adaptation to changing hydrologic regimes and water availability will also require 
continuous additional energy input . Studies undertaken in the context of the follow-up of 
the Commission's 2007 Communication on Wate r scarcity and Droughts show that 
plugging the expected increas e of the gap between supply and demand in some 
Mediterranean countries – if demand is not addressed – may increase their energy 
consumption by 15-50%. Other adaptation options, such as coastal protection infrastructure 
                                                
 
46 If, in order to take advantage of improved growing conditions in Northern Europe, the area of tillage 
land is increased this is likely to lead to a loss of soil carbon and hence emissions of CO 2. However, 
there may be opportunities to sequester carbon on degr aded land or land in southern Europe, formerly 
used for crop production, on which due to lack of  moisture crop production is no longer viable.  
 
EN 33   EN and additional cooling requirements also increase energy use, often with associated GHG 
emissions, and thus increase the need for mitigation. 
– In the water sector, the development of hydropow er facilities can redu ce fossil-fuel-related 
energy use and reduce dependency on foreign en ergy imports. The associated water storage 
can also limit vulnerability to precipitati on variability, and if properly designed, not 
significantly hampering the ecosystem functi oning of the river. A high dependency on 
hydropower production in some re gions can lead to an increa se of the vulnerability to 
climate change due to decreased precipitations47 (IPPC 2008). 
– The use of forestry biomass contributes to mitigation by replacing fossil-intensive 
materials and energy. But there is need to harm onise this use with water availability, with 
the provision of non marketed ecosystem services (such as conservation of biodiversity and 
protection against avalanches or water pollu tion), and with mainta ining the carbon pools. 
In short, this recalls the need for an integrated assessment of mitigation and adaptation 
strategies. On the one hand, m itigation strategies (both ener gy and land-use) should fully 
integrate their vulnerability to climate chan ge. On the other one, adaptation options (in 
particular "technological ones") de serve a careful assessment. This confirms the importance of 
integrated land and water management strategies to ensure the optimal allocation of scarce 
natural resources (land, water). 
4.2.3.  Environmental impacts 
Climatic changes and autonomous and pla nned adaptation options may modify other 
environmental processes on ag ricultural land, which will need to be addressed in 
sustainability assessments. The diversity of vul nerability across EU-27 and sectors, and the 
scope for adaptation options can evidently not be addressed in the present document. There 
are however important aspects th at need to be explored as  soon as possible to design a 
sustainable adaptation policy, avoiding "mal-adaptation": 
– Autonomous adaptation actions  by farmers can counteract a nd even reverse some of the 
potential impacts of climate change which do not consider changes in agricultural 
management, technological progress and trends  to better farming practices adaptation. 
However in some cases, autonomous adaptati on options will also interfere with agri-
environmental processes, and could lead to an  increased use of pesticides to cope with 
more emerging and increasing pests, diseases  and weeds, an increased use of mineral 
fertilisers48 to compensate for a loss of soil fertility, an increase in irriga tion, as well as in 
extreme cases land abandonment (when changes in  climatic conditions or frequent extreme 
events difficult agricultural activity). Biotechnology developments, such as drought-
resistant varieties requiring less water, or varieties requiring less fertiliser may offer a solution for some problems, but will have to be used under application of the EU 
regulatory framework. 
                                                
 
47 IPCC (2008) Technical Paper on Climate Change and Water, April 2008, available at 
http://www.ipcc.ch/meetings/session28/doc13.pdf 
48 The implications of climatic changes on use of fer tilisers are very uncertain and will depend on the site-
specific effects on agriculture. While fertilisation could increase following expectations of better yields 
(and the contrary), the shortening of crop cycle in parts of Europe may lead to a decrease of nitrogen 
fertilisers. 
 
EN 34   EN – Increased forest productivity in some regions, together with provision s for climate change 
mitigation (increased use of biomass as a renewable energy source) may increase the stress on non marketed vital services (such as conser vation of biodiversity and protection against 
avalanches or water pollution). Lost forest ecosystem services (windbreaks, irrigation 
networks, large scale erosion protection, dams  and dikes) will often be substituted by 
building grey infrastructures to replace, wh ich may result in a mal-adaptation to be 
avoided. 
– Autonomous adaptation consists in adapting to  new and constantly changing conditions for 
fishing. This creates the risk of the deve lopment of unregulated fisheries and early 
measures need to be taken to manage emer ging fisheries, which will results more cost-
effective than try later to re verse over-fishing. The increased access in the Arctic due to 
reduced ice cover is a specific case of 'new ' resources becoming available to fisheries 
which need specific mechanisms to distribute access.  
– Adaptation of energy supply system to CC imp act may trigger building new infrastructure 
for the protection of existing infrastructure, as well as building new power plants and distribution grid. These projects will have substantial environmental impacts, to be addressed under environmental impact assessment, and should be compared with 
alternative solutions such as energy efficien cy improvement and infr astructure protection 
through green structural approach. 
– Regional and local authorities may plan to supp ort industry and services most affected e.g. 
by water or snow scarcity by financing i nvestments in water supply or snow-making 
equipments, together with helping relocating activities in more fa vourable areas. Both 
categories of projects will have substantia l environmental impacts, to be addressed under 
environmental impact assessment. 
– Finally, the building of infrastructure to pr otect from sea level rise or floods, while 
ensuring that land use can be orderly planne d, houses built and transport infrastructure 
maintained, tends to disturb the natural dyna mic nature of coastal and river systems. 
Maintenance costs are high and the ecosystem se rvices are negatively affected. Hence, we 
see in many countries a shift towards a more fl exible approach, that works with the natural 
processes instead of against it. Examples ar e the now often used sand nourishments, buffer 
zones (setback lines) and manage d realignment of the coast. 
The assessment of adaptation strategies must  take into account th e potential of green 
infrastructures and compare it with the potenti al impact of more "traditional" adaptation 
measures. Moreover, green infrastructures serv e multiple purposes (e.g. mountain forests are 
biodiversity rich, protect agai nst erosion, filter the air, se quester carbon, increase water 
holding capacity, fulfil nature c onservation goals and provide renewable raw materials). A 
good example is given by coastal or river protecti on: the building of infrastructure to protect 
from sea level rise or floods traditionally tends to reduce the flexibility of the coastline or of 
the river stream, so that land use can be orderly planned, houses built and transport infrastructure maintained. 
4.2.4.  The social impact of adaptation 
Adaptation to climate change will be effectiv e only when the adopted strategies seek to 
reduce the vulnerabilities of the various society groups, while  strengthen capacity building 
and awareness for the most vulnerable groups. A strategy for adapting policies to climate 
 
EN 35   EN change can only succeed if it is perceived as socially fair, notably through its employment and 
distributive consequences, so that this does not lead to further social divisions. This raises the 
issue of whether planned adapta tion should specifical ly try and target su ch groups, or apply 
distributional analysis to ensure  equitable adaptation strategies. 
The far reaching repercussions of  climate change, often also c onsidered as a "fundamental 
restructuring of our industrial society", and its expected enorm ous costs, can only be faced 
through a wider partnership which shares losse s and profits. To facilitate meaningful 
involvement of social partners in adapting to  climate change, the de bate should be engaged 
over similar time perspectives. Social partners ar e generally interested in a much shorter time 
frame than those envisaged in th e climate change debates. It would be helpful to provide a 
series of intermediate periods as stepping stones to deliver the desired objective in 50 to 100 
years as a structure for future  generations to build upon. A strategy for adapting to climate 
change has to be socially fair, notably thr ough its employment and distributive consequences 
and to include a strong notion of the importan ce of human capital. "Human capital" comprises 
aspects ranging from awareness for the challe nges linked with adaptation to climate change, 
starting from (pre-)school age, to  very concrete training and qua lification initiatives to make 
sure that Europe has the skills and co mpetences to adapt to climate change. 
4.2.5.  Prioritizing adaptation measures  
As mentioned above, the broad adaptation appro aches are not mutually exclusive, they all 
have to be taken into account when defining a portfolio of measures for adaptation, having as 
an objective the sustainability of adaptation st rategy. Adaptation options identified above will 
need to be further evaluated in terms of their contribution to risk mitigation or to increasing the resilience of system, as well as costs a nd ancillary benefits and technical feasibility. 
There is however a range of options that de liver the required adaptation and which also 
minimise the risks associated with implem entation even in the face of associated 
uncertainties. These options are normally referre d to as no-regrets and win-win options, and 
should be identified and se lected where possible.  
At this stage this report is only able to pr esent a preliminary assessment based on literature 
review and National Adaptation Strategies. Short term actions will allow a systematic 
assessment on costs and benefits, based on national/regional/sector al assessments and 
modelling 
(1) "No-regrets" options – adaptive measures whose socio-economic benefits exceed their 
costs whatever the extent of future clim ate change. Focusing on no-regrets options is 
particularly appropriate for the near term  as they can deliver obvious and immediate 
benefits and can provide experience on which to build further assessments of climate risks and adaptation measures. Such measures  will require investments but overall are 
at least cost neutral when th e immediacy of the targeted ri sks and realised benefits are 
considered. Examples (with a poten tial EU dimension) include:  
• Actions or activities directed at building adaptive capacity as part of an overall 
adaptive strategy; 
• Actions where short-term benefits of ad aptation justify ea rly action, e.g. with 
respect to current climate variability (OECD 2008);  
 
EN 36   EN • Avoiding infrastructure development and building in high-risk areas (e.g. flood 
plains, water scarcity) when locating or re-locating49; 
• Improving preparedness and contingency pl anning to deal with  risks (including 
climate); 
(2) "Win-win" options – adaptation measures th at have the desired result in terms of 
minimising the climate risks or exploiting potential opportunities but also have other 
social, environmental or economic benefits. Within the climate change context, win-
win options are often associated  with those measures or ac tivities that address climate 
impacts but which also contribute to mitigation or other social and environmental objectives. These types of measures includ e those that are introduced primarily for 
reasons other than addressing climate risks, but also deliver the desired adaptation benefits. Examples include: 
• The above mentioned measures providing synergies with mitigation policies 
(building design, urban planning, air polluta nt emission abatement, reforestation, 
reduction in fisheries fleet capacity). 
• Flood & coastal management that includes creating or re-establishing flood plains 
or salt marshes, which increase flood/sea level rise management capacity and 
support biodiversity and hab itat conservation objectives; 
• Improving the cooling capacity of building and in urban areas, while reducing soil 
sealing. 
An impact assessment of short-listed win-win me asures will need to be performed in the short 
term, to identify costs and benefits, including land use trade-offs, im pacts on biodiversity, 
social impacts, etc. 
5. O
PTIONS FOR THE EU FRAMEWORK FOR ACTION  
5.1. Identification of options for EU action 
A broad range of instruments that can be im plemented at EU level and cover the needs 
identified in section 2.3. has been examined, fr om the softer instruments to more prescriptive 
ones: 
– Communication / Awareness rais ing / Capacity building 
– Research and development (Innovation) 
– Guidelines, governance and co-ordination 
– Price signals, market -based in struments and private financing 
                                                 
49 This includes upgrading of infrastructure with long  lifetimes to reduce vulnerability. Even in the light of 
uncertainties it may be a better option to safeguard when investments have to be made anyway rather 
than to go ahead with business as usual and wait a nd see if potential threats materialise – and take a 
major write-off if they do and constr uct new less vulnerable infrastructure. 
 
EN 37   EN – EU Financing schemes 
– New regulation and standards 
A packaging according to the 3 operational obj ectives defined in Chapter 3 has been 
performed to define 5 sets, which will be used to build "strategic" options towards future EU adaptation policy.  
Table 2 - Instruments screening for the selected option 
 Operational objectives 
 #1: Improve the 
knowledge base  on 
climate change impacts 
and adaptive capacity #2: Ensure early 
implementation  of no regret 
and win-win measures and 
avoid mal-adaptation #3: Put in place a process for 
a better co-ordination of 
adaptation policies and the 
assessment of next steps 
Communication / 
Awareness raising / 
Capacity building n/a n/a 
Research and development 
(Innovation) n/a n/a 
Guidelines, governance and 
co-ordination Set #1 (knowledge base) 
Set #5 (co-ordination) 
New regulations and 
standards   Set #2 (mainstreaming) 
  
Price signals and market -
based instruments n/a Set #3 (risk management) n/a 
EU Financing schemes n/a Set #4 (preliminary review EU financing schemes) 
An important range for potential options was discarded at an early stage: it include any 
option implying  substantial changes in EU financing schemes, which cannot be foreseen 
under current multi-annual fina ncial framework, as well as  any option implying pre-
empting post 2013 multi-annual financial framework. 
As a result, three main options for short-te rm action at EU level have been defined. 
– Option A (Baseline) : this option would imply that the development of adaptation 
strategies is constrained to national le vel, while EU policies are unchanged.  
– Option B (process towards an EU adaptation policy) . This option would imply that the 
findings of the present report are used as a wa y for the EU adaptation policy to enter a new 
phase of definition. Priority would be given to tapping the potential of on-going initiatives, 
in particular at national level or co-ordinati on and awareness raising actions, and to screen 
in detail the whole range of EU policies an d instruments, while putting in place the 
"governance" of the EU adaptation policy as a way to monitor progress and lay the ground 
for future actions.  
– Option C (EU Adaptation Action Plan)  would complement the former, by giving priority 
to new legislative initiatives to promote sustainable adaptation actions in the areas identified in section 2.3. National and regiona l adaptation strategies would be revised and 
streamlined.  
– Table 3 provides more details on the concrete  instruments included in options B and C. 
More detail is provided in Annex 5. 
Table 3 – Detail of instruments for strategic options for EU adaptation 
 
EN 38   EN Set of actions Option B Option C 
#1 Improving 
the knowledge 
base on climate 
change impacts 
and adaptive 
capacity 
 1.1. Develop a consiste nt, comprehensive and 
regularly updated climate change and socio-
economic scenarios (projection data) for analysis 
across Europe.  
1.2. Build a structured info rmation dataset to better 
understand the territorial and sectoral distribution of 
vulnerability to climate change impacts. 
1.3. Set up a European wide Clearing House 
Mechanism (CHM) as a data repository and a 
platform for knowledge transfer. 
1.4. Provide targeted awareness-raising, 
communication, education and training on climate 
change impacts and adaptation. 
1.5. Cover knowledge gaps with 7th FP research 
projects, working upon analys is of climate change 
impacts at scales relevant to adaptation measures, 
identification of the limits to resilience, and 
investigation the potential of the ecosystem approach. 1.1. to 1.5. 
1.6. Resort to Article 169 of the EC Treaty to 
streamline EU and nati onal research agendas 
#2 Mainstream 
Climate 
Change 
adaptation in 
EU sectoral 
policies 
 2.1. In order to address cl imate change impacts fully, 
systematic Climate Change Health Checks for the 
sectors affected need to be undertaken periodically to 
address how climate change impacts are integrated in 
all Community policy areas and legislation and vice 
versa. 
2.2. Sectoral guideline s to integrate climate 
vulnerability considerations in the current policy and 
boost sustainable adaptation practices. 2.1, 2.2. 
2.3. When a preliminary impact assessment, 
with a strong emphasis on the knowledge base 
and subsidiarity & proportionality issues, would 
conclude that a voluntary or a market based 
approach will not yield the desired benefits and 
improvements, introduce legally binding 
obligation or harmonised standards across EU to 
achieve the objective of guaranteeing the 
sustainability of Europe in the face of climate 
change.  
#3 Financial Instruments for 
Risk 
management 
 3.1. Stimulate and support the insurance sector in the 
development of insurance schemes tailored to the 
needs of groups and sectors adaptation efforts to CC. 
3.2. Establish EU wide gui delines for designing and 
implementing schemes for Payments for Ecosystem 
Services (PES) and for stim ulating markets for these 
services (building-up the resilience of ecosystems & 
ecosystem-dependant econo mic sectors, financing 
adaptation measures based on green infrastructure). 3.1., 3.2. 
#4 Funding of 
Adaptation 
Actions under 
the EU 
Instruments 
and addressing 
Climate Change 
adaptation 
needs under 
the EU Funds 
Review 
 4.1 Increase the awareness on climate change impacts 
of the partners dealing with the management of EU 
funded programmes; Increase uptake of adaptation 
actions under the current EU financing instruments 
(2007-2013): 
4.2 Review the existing funding instruments to 
identify and improve their potential to be used for adressing climate change vulnerability; Include the 
climate change adaptation dimension in the 
Reporting on the use of EU funds 
4.4. Prepare Long term funding: The forthcoming 
budget review could assess further the available 
options for future adaptation funding in the multi-4.3. Climate proof Na tional and EU public 
funded investment and condition the EU funding 
to an assessment of the climate impact on the 
proposed investment.  
4.4. 
 
EN 39   EN Set of actions Option B Option C 
annual financial framework post 2013  
#5 Put in place 
a process for a 
better co-
ordination of 
adaptation 
policies. 5.1. In order to improve the coordination of 
adaptation strategies in the EU, establish a new 
network of National Adaptation Focal Points linked 
to Eionet 
5.2. Establish by 1 Sept ember 2009 an Impacts and 
Adaptation Steering Group (IASG) to strengthen co-
operation on adaptation. 
5.3 Encourage the development of National and/or 
Regional Adaptation Strategies  by all Member States 
by 2012, and provide guidance for their preparation 
(or possible review). 5.1, 5.2 and 5.3. 
5.4 Establish an EU legal framework for 
Adaptation Strategies, with strict deadlines and 
procedures and within that a Management 
Committee with executive powers to evaluate 
and assess the plans and to make 
recommendations to the Member States.  
5.2. Assessment of options for short-term EU action 
This section provides a proportionate assessment of the identified options, according to a set 
of specific criteria. The first three reflect th e operational objectives, and compare with the 
reference scenario:  
– How does the option improve the knowledge ba se on climate change impacts and adaptive 
capacity? 
– How does it ensure early implementation of no regret and win-win measures and avoid 
mal-adaptation 
– Does the option help to put in  place a process for a better co-ordination of adaptation 
policies and the assessment of next steps?  
In addition, the following screening cr iteria are reviewed for each option: 
– Subsidiarity : Does the option focus on trans-na tional aspects of climate change 
vulnerability or adaptation, be tter tackled at EU level under the current Treaty? Do the 
corresponding EU policy instruments not go beyond what is necessary to achieve the 
objectives? Can we demonstrate that the common  objectives can be be tter achieved by the 
Community action? 
– Knowledge base : Is this option based on a sound knowledge base and on scientific 
evidence? Which preparatory actions shoul d be foreseen? Will a detailed impact 
assessment be needed at a later stage? 
– Synergies, trade off and resources : is this option a pre-requisite for further action? Are 
there any alternative, or trade-off identifi ed at this stage? Would the option need a 
substantial reallocati on of resources or additional funding?  
Table 4 - Assessment of options for EU action 
 Option B Option C 
Operational 
Objective #1: 
Improve the 
knowledge base  on ☺ All these actions contribute to the improvement of the 
knowledge base needed for an  effective implementation 
of the other sets of options. They will provide an ☺ Same as option B 
 
EN 40   EN  Option B Option C 
climate change 
impacts and 
adaptive capacity acceleration and better focus of the on-going research 
activities, and build synerg ies and economies of scale 
between currently fragmented on-going or planned 
actions.  
Operational Objective #2: 
Ensure early 
implementation  of 
no regret and win-
win measures and 
avoid mal-
adaptation . The proposed system for monitoring and reporting on 
climate change impacts will help in gathering further 
knowledge irrespective of the impacts of climate change. 
Through the capacity building the cases for mal-
adaptation practices will be flagged. ☺ The option strengthens aspects of 
water savings, energy efficiency and 
protection of ecosystem services which 
would have positive effects on the 
overall use of natural resources in Europe 
irrespective of the effects of climate 
change. The streamlining or EU and 
national research agendas will allow to 
prevent further cases of mal-adaptation. 
Operational 
Objective #3: Put in 
place a process for 
a better co-
ordination of 
adaptation policies 
and the assessment of next steps ☺ Under the current situation, as detailed in the Problem 
Definition section, this option provides an adequate mix 
between the need for a strategic vision to develop an EU 
adaptation policy and the need for a flexible and 
responsive choice of policy priorities; it seeks to put in 
place the foundations on which to build future adaptation 
actions at various levels, while making the most of 
existing initiatives and insisting on good delivery and 
enforcement . This option would provide a strong 
political impetus to the EU adaptation 
policy, but such a top-down, legalistic 
approach would run the risk of an 
institutional and administrative 
stalemate, and would not allow developing an impact-driven and flexible 
approach to policy-making.  
Screening criteria #1: Subsidiarity 
screening criteria ☺ Capacity building, exchange of information and 
guidelines will not interfere with the competences of 
Member States, and the EU would have a coordinating 
role. No hard measures are proposed but rather 
integration of adaptation concerns in other policies . Some of the new legislation 
envisaged under this option address clear 
trans-boundary effects of climate change 
or adaptation policies as identified in 
Chapter 2, nevertheless a thorough 
subsidiarity analysis would be needed for 
the provisions therein. 
Screening criteria 
#2: Knowledge basis screening 
criteria ☺ All actions included in this  options can be undertaken 
with the adequate level of information. / The problem definition has 
highlighted the current level of 
uncertainty on the vulnerability to CC 
impacts and on the costs and benefits of 
adaptation measures. In such a context, it 
is increasingly difficult to set out in 
advance a definitive bl ueprint for action. 
The case for action at EU level (e.g. for 
land-use or forestry) needs to be assessed 
in a more systematic way, and a wide 
range of adaptation actions is of national 
or local competence. 
Screening criteria 
#3: Synergies, trade 
off and resources 
criteria ☺ All actions included in this  options can be undertaken 
under current budget framework, and will not require 
additional funding.  . The actions included in the Option C 
would have to be s ubject to an impact 
assessment. 
Options B provides a clear improvement agains t the Baseline for 2 out of 3 Operational 
objectives, as it falls short in  ensuring early implementation of no regret and win-win 
measures and avoid mal-adaptation. Option C also  does not provide a clear improvement with 
regard to the third operational objective (Put in place a process for a better co-ordination of 
adaptation policies and the assessment of next step s) as it triggers important risks from an 
institutional perspective and would not allow developing an  impact-driven and flexible 
approach to policy-making. On that basis, the screening criteria are essential for guiding the 
selection of options, and the 2nd screening crit eria (knowledge basis)  is determinant for 
 
EN 41   EN preferring option B at this stage, as the problem  definition has highlighted the current level of 
uncertainty on the vulnerability to CC impacts a nd on the costs and bene fits of most of the 
adaptation measures envisaged under Option C. 
5.3. Conclusions: towards an EU adaptation Strategy 
The selected option B correspond to short-term building blocks (up to 2012) for building an 
EU framework for action: the package starts wi th the current state of implementation of EU 
acquis (including ongoing initiatives that have not yet achieved their objectives) and the 
development of adaptation strategies and co rresponding actions by the EU Member States 
driven from their obligation under the UNFCCC. It assumes th at autonomous or MS guided 
adaptation actions will take pla ce, and proposes the use of cert ain soft instrument and support 
actions that in the short term  can provide some support to ad aptation and create EU value 
added for the actions. At this stage the main objective would be to raise awareness of the 
problem at all administrative levels and in all sectors, therefore the majority of the actions correspond to capacity and awareness building a nd communication of the issue to the major 
stakeholders and sectors; in a ddition this option calls for enhan ced efforts in research so to 
develop further the knowledge needed for propo sing specialised actions at national, regional 
or local level and to build pr oper responses from economy and so ciety. It should be noted that 
these capacity building a nd awareness raising acti ons should continue on the longer term as 
well.  
Option C is not formally discarded, as the measur es included in this option may be needed at 
some stage. But preparations for these include a precise assessment of: 
– The potential of overarching land use/ma nagement, biodiversity  and water related 
measures to strengthen c limate resilience of the EU. 
– The need for measures to prevent or mitigate e ffects of climate related disasters, targeting 
the most vulnerable sectors, areas and social groups. 
– The investment needs in the public and privat e sectors in relation to energy, transport, 
water and flood protection infrastructure. 
– The needs for adaptation investments in developing countries. 
6. M
ONITORING AND EVALUATION  
6.1. Development of adaptation indicators  
There is need to look towards developing adaptation indicators, that will effectively provide 
feedback on how well policies and actions are ta ckling the problems, evaluate their adequacy, 
efficiency and flexibility and that will assi st the Commission in reporting on the progress 
made, while helping any future modifi cations and policy adaptation needed.  
As a first step a set of process-based in dicators (monitoring progress in implementing 
adaptation measures) could be se t up to assess the progress acr oss the 3 operational objectives 
defined in chapter 3: 
– Degree of mainstreaming adaptation in EU policies 
 
EN 42   EN – Progress on the knowledge base on climate ch ange vulnerability and on the costs and 
benefits of adaptation options. 
– Progress in the co-ordinati on of adaptation policies. 
At a later stage, once more comprehensive info rmation become available, a set of outcome-
based indicators (i.e. measuring the effectiven ess of adaptation policie s) can be defined, 
which will help identifying the degree of implementation of no regret and win-win measures, as well as the risks of mal-adaptation. 
These adaptation indicators woul d complement the Climate Change Vulnerability Indicators 
that will be developed as part of the ac tions included in the selected option.  
Work has started at DG Environment and at the European Environmental Agency
50 for the 
development of adaptation indicators, which faces a number of complex challenges: clear 
objectives will have to be set for both their adaptation policies and their evaluation efforts. Initial practical solutions can be formulated by capitalising on links and overlaps with existing 
monitoring frameworks in climate-sensitive sectors. 
The benefits of developing indicators to monitor adaptation are considerable: 
– They provide a framework with potential to de velop links across sector s and at all levels 
through which to monitor and eval uate policy goal s and outcomes. 
– They provide a means to communicate with wider stakeholders. 
– They are an essential step towards mainstr eaming adaptation through links with related 
indicators (e.g. sustai nable development). 
The European Environment Agency, the Commi ssion's Joint Research Centre and the World 
Health Organization have a role to continue and expand their work in environmental monitoring across Europe. However, indicat ors of climate impacts extend beyond the 
environmental sector, and the development of indi cators therefore needs to take place in close 
collaboration with other key (i nternational) organisa tions as well. Appropriate research and 
development will be required, in tandem with  support processes (such as networks and 
training) to enable the adoption of indicator sets. Further inve stments in ICT tools such as 
integrated databases and models in the scope of monitoring of the adaptation progress should 
be made, and the proposed Clearinghouse Mechanis m plays an essential role in this area. 
6.2. Reporting on adaptation  
The process of adaptation to climate change increasingly moves into the policy cycles of 
national and regional governments in Europe. There will be an ongoing need for having 
readily available information on adaptation activ ities, including a quality  control mechanism, 
which can be made publicly available to facilitate the exchange  of knowledge and good 
practices. In addition, the sharing of information on adaptation measures at different levels is 
needed to coordinate between these levels.  
                                                
 
50 European Topic Centre on Air and Climate Ch ange (ETC/ACC), Climate change vulnerability and 
adaptation indicators, Technical Paper 2008/9, December 2008, available at: http://air-
climate.eionet.europa.eu/docs/ETCACC_ TP_2008_9_CCvuln_adapt_indicators.pdf   
 
EN 43   EN Taking as a basis the proposal of  several European Environmen t Protection Agencies in May 
2008, the following elements for the re porting framework can be identified: 
– Reporting on the existing adaptation plans a nd/or strategies, or th ose in preparation. 
This should include providing information on when such plans were  developed or are 
expected to be developed, as well as their objectives.  
– Reporting on the institutional and legal  framework for adaptation activities. This 
should include providing information on which public authorities have been given the mandate to undertake climate cha nge adaptation activities. It should also include providing 
information on any regulatory measures that f acilitate climate change adaptation activities. 
– Reporting on key climatic vulnerabilities, based on risk assessments, for instance, by 
region and sector. 
– Reporting on research programmes and databases that address climate change 
adaptation and risk assessments. 
– Reporting on policies and measures that are undertaken as ad aptation activities (both 
implemented and proposed). 
– Reporting on joint activities with other Member States and developing countries, 
including joint implementation of measur es, research activities or agreements.  
To achieve an efficient reporting mechanism and avoid duplication, a standardised and 
harmonised reporting framework wo uld be needed, including a European wide agreement on 
definitions and key adaptation indicators. A reporting mechanism on adaptation needs to be further elaborated and discussed w ith the relevant players, as it has to be coordinated with the 
development of the Shared E nvironmental Information Syst em (SEIS) and the proposed 
Clearing House Mechanism (CHM) on Adaptation which will contain the most up-to-date and 
state-of-the-art information a nd will be both easily accessible and useful for policy activities 
at different levels.  
It needs to be explored how it will be linked to the ongoing efforts to develop the Water 
Information System for Europe, a European Drought Observatory and a European Marine 
Observation and Data Network, and other Eu ropean Environmental Data Centres.  
A reporting framework is important  and needs not be overly co mplicated; duplication of work 
should be avoided by building upon other repor ting obligations, such as those under the 
Article 4 of UNFCCC
51. In addition, at COP15 in Copenhagen (2009), the UNFCCC may 
agree on a comprehensive Framework for Acti on on Adaptation (FAA). This FAA is also 
                                                 
51 Under this convention, a national communication needs to be submitted, including information on the 
expected impacts of climate change and an outline of the action taken to implement Article 4.1(b) and 
(e) of the convention with regard to adaptation. Pa rties are encouraged to use the Intergovernmental 
Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Technical Guide lines for Assessing Climate Change Impacts and 
Adaptations and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) Handbook on Methods for 
Climate Change Impacts Assessment and Adaptation Strategies. Parties may refer, inter alia, to integrated plans for coastal zone management, water resources and agriculture. Parties may also report 
on specific results of scientific research in the field of vulnerability assessment and adaptation. The 
signatory countries have to submit their reports by 1.1.2010. The reporting cycle is every 4 years 
 
EN 44   EN looking to advance further on the issue of monitoring, reporting and verification of the 
effectiveness of adaptation measures. 
A harmonised approach could reduce the ad ministrative burden and the uncertainties 
involved. Furthermore, it is important to bu ild on the competences already present in 
European statistical offices, including Eurostat. 
An annual report will be presented at the proposed Steering Group on Impacts and 
Adaptation. The first report will be issued in  Spring 2010 and will i.e. take stock of how the 
outcome of COP-15 influence the sc ale of the need for adaptation, or the results of studies or 
research projects that were not availabl e for the present Impact Assessment report.  
 
EN 45   EN 7. APPENDIX  
7.1. Support documents and References 
This Impact Assessment report is based on two key documents: the 4th Assessment Report of 
the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Ch ange (IPCC, 2007) and the EEA/JRC/WHO report 
'Impacts of Europe's changing climate' (EEA , 2008). Other sources ar e quoted in footnotes. 
The analysis is also based on a large number of research projects, mainly funded by the 5th 
and 6th EU Research Framework: 
– the FP5 PRUDENCE ( http://prudence.dmi.dk/ ) and FP6 ENSEMBLES ( http://ensembles-
eu.metoffice.com ) projects have provided a better knowledge of the earth-climate system 
and climate change forecasts at regional leve ls, including uncertainties (high-resolution 
climate change scenarios for 2071-2100 for Europe using an array of climate and impact models). 
– Effects on health, in particular of heat waves, have been st udied in the framework of the 
cCASHh (Climate change and adapta tion strategies for human health, 
http://www.euro.who.int/ccashh
), PHEWE (Assessment and prevention of acute health 
effects of weather conditions in Europe) and INTARESE ((Integrated Assessment of 
Health Risks of environmental stressors in Eu rope) projects. The mid-term review of the 
European Environment and Health Action Pl an (2004-2010) carried out in 2007 has also 
proposed health impacts of climate change  as one of the re search priorities. 
– An in-depth assessment of the impacts has been  performed on sectors like agriculture and 
water resources (CECILIA, http://www.cecilia-eu.org/ ) and vulnerability of ecosystems 
services (ATEAM, http://www.pik-potsdam.de/ateam/ ), and impacts and adaptation for the 
coastal sector (DINAS-COAST - Dynamic a nd Interactive Assess ment of National, 
Regional and Global Vulnerability of Coasta l Zones to Climate Change and Sea Level 
Rise, www.dinas-coast.net/ ).  
– Regional integrated assessment studies on impacts and adaptation (e.g. CIRCE, Climate 
Change and Impact Research: Mediterranean Region (see http://www.circeproject.eu ), or 
ASTRA - Developing Policies & Adaptation Stra tegies to Climate Change in the Baltic 
Sea Region (see http://www.astra-project.org/ ). 
– Improvement of management practices as reflected by the NeWater project 
(http://www.newater.info ), focusing on challenges of water management. 
– Assessing the policy options fo r mitigation and adaptation policy for Europe (ADAM, see 
http://www.adamproject.eu/ ), including considera tion of the role of adaptation in public 
policy, European country adaptation policy review and sector based assessment of 
adaptation decision making in practice. 
– Global dimension of climate change and adap tation, studying strategies outside Europe 
through projects such as AMMA ( http://www.amma-eu.org ). 
– The PESETA ( http://peseta.jrc.ec.europa.eu/index.html ) project, led by the JRC, has 
undertaken a multi-sector analysis of the imp acts and economic costs of climate change in 
 
EN 46   EN Europe, and adaptation responses, as well as  other JRC work progressing flood hazards 
and fire risk. 
– The ALARM project (see http://www.alar mproject.net) "Assessing Large Scale 
Environmental Risks" provides models and ma ps on climate change impacts and models 
for various policy scenarios. 
– The MACIS project (see http://www.macis-projec t.net/links.html) on "Minimisation of and 
Adaptation to climate change impacts on biodi versity" is to deliver  – amongst other - an 
assessment of proposed climate change adaptation and mitigation measures. 
– The COCONUT project (see http://coconut-p roject.net/objectives.html) "Understanding 
effects of land-use changes on ecosystems to  halt biodiversity lo ss due to habitat 
destruction, fragmentation and degradation" is to deliver - amongst other – a report on GIS 
database and identification of threatened ha bitats and land-use proj ections for the EU 25. 
– PICCMAT, a coordination and support action on mitigation of agricultural impact on 
climate changes ( http://www.climatechangeintellig ence.baastel.be/piccmat/index.php ). 
– ADAGIO (ending in June 2009), a coordination and suppor t action on adaptation of 
agriculture to climate change ( http://www.adagio-eu.org/ ) 
– Adaptation response across Member States must be informed by a coherent body of 
research and it is CI RCLE´s prime objective (see http://www.circle-era.net ) to contribute 
to such efforts by aligning national research  programmes. This process will be a strong 
support for the overall goal: Implementing a Eur opean Research Area (ERA) for the field 
of climate change. 
 
EN 47   EN 7.2. Glossary 
– Adaptation:  Adjustment in natural or human system s in response to actual or expected 
climatic stimuli or their effects, which modera tes harm or exploits beneficial opportunities. 
Various types of adaptation can be distingu ished, including anticipatory, autonomous and 
planned adaptation (IPCC, 2007): 
– Anticipatory adaptation:  Adaptation that takes place before impacts of climate 
change are observed. Also referre d to as proac tive adaptation. 
– Autonomous adaptation: Adaptation that does not constitute a conscious 
response to climatic stimu li but is triggered by ecol ogical changes in natural 
systems and by market or welfare changes in human systems. Also referred to as 
spontaneous adaptation. 
– Planned adaptation:  Adaptation that is the result of a deliberate policy decision, 
based on an awareness that conditions have changed or are about to change and that action is required to return to, maintain, or achieve a desired state. 
– Adaptation assessment:  The practice of identifying options to adapt to climate 
change and evaluating them in terms of cr iteria such as availability, benefits, 
costs, effectiveness, efficiency and feasibility. 
– Adaptation benefits:  The avoided damage costs or the accrued benefits following 
the adoption and implementation of adaptation measures. 
– Adaptation costs:  Costs of planning, preparing for, facilitating, and 
implementing adaptation measures , including transition costs. 
– Adaptive capacity  (in relation to climate change im pacts): The ability of a system 
to adjust to climate change (includi ng climate variability and extremes) to 
moderate potential damages, to take adva ntage of opportunities, or to cope with 
the consequences. 
– Adaptation policy framework/guidelines  - a structured process for developing adaptation 
strategies, policies, and measures to enhance and ensure human development in the face of 
climate change, including climate variability. The adaptation policy framework is designed to link climate change adaptation to su stainable development and other global 
environmental issues (UNDP, 2004
52). 
– Baseline/reference:  The baseline (or reference) is th e state against which change is 
measured. It might be a ‘current baseline’, in  which case it represents observable, present-
day conditions. It might also be a ‘future baseline’, which is a projected future set of conditions excluding the driving factor of in terest. Alternative interpretations of the 
reference conditions can give rise to multiple baselines.(IPCC, 2007) 
                                                
 
52 United Nations Development Programme on behalf of the Global Environment Facility, Adaptation 
Policy Frameworks (APF) for Climate Change: Develo ping Strategies, Policies and Measures, available 
at http://www.undp.org/climatechange/adapt/   
 
EN 48   EN – Capacity building:  In the context of climate change , capacity building is developing the 
technical skills and institutiona l capabilities in developing countries and economies in 
transition to enable their participation in a ll aspects of adaptation to, mitigation of, and 
research on climate change, and in the implementation of the Kyoto Mechanisms, etc. (IPCC, 2007). Capacity building involves creating the information and conditions (regulatory, institutional, mana gerial) that are needed befo re adaptation actions can be 
undertaken
53 
– Clearinghouse : In common language the term ‘cleari nghouse’ refers to ‘a central agency 
or entity for collecting and giving out information’. A Data Clearinghouse is an 
organization or an organisationa l framework that acquires, main tains, and distributes data 
or provides information services about data  for many different data users. Such an 
organization may also integrate the data, genera te the data, or perform other types of data 
processing functions.  
– Climate change:  Climate change refers to any change  in climate over time, whether due to 
natural variability or as a result of human activity. This usage differs from that in the United Nations Framework Convention on C limate Change (UNFCCC), which defines 
‘climate change’ as: ‘a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human 
activity that alters the composition of the gl obal atmosphere and which is in addition to 
natural climate variability observed over comp arable time periods’. See also climate 
variability. (IPCC, 2007) 
– Climate variability:  Climate variability refers to vari ations in the mean state and other 
statistics (such as standard deviations, statis tics of extremes, etc.) of the climate on all 
temporal and spatial scales beyond that of i ndividual weather events . Variability may be 
due to natural internal processes within the climate system (interna l variability), or to 
variations in natural or anthropogenic external forcing (external variability). See also climate change. (IPCC, 2007) 
– Ecosystem:  The interactive system formed from all living organisms and their abiotic 
(physical and chemical) environment within a given area. Ecosystems cover a hierarchy of 
spatial scales and can comprise the entire globe , biomes at the continental scale or small, 
well-circumscribed systems such as a small pond. (IPCC, 2007) 
– Ecosystem approach: The ecosystem approach is a strategy for the integrated 
management of land, water and living reso urces that promotes conservation and 
sustainable use in an equitable way. An ecosyst em approach is based on the application of 
appropriate scientific methodol ogies focused on levels of biological organisation, which 
encompass the essential structure, processes,  functions and interactions among organisms 
and their environment. It recognises that humans, with their cultural diversity, are an 
integral component of many ecosystems. The ecosystem approach requires adaptive 
management to deal with the complex and dynamic nature of ecosystems and the absence 
of complete knowledge or understanding of their functioning. Priority targets are 
conservation of biodiversity a nd of the ecosystem structure and functioning, in order to 
maintain ecosystem services. (IPCC, 2007) 
                                                
 
53 West, C.C. and Gawith, M.J. (Eds.) (2005) Measuring progress: Preparing for climate change through 
the UK Climate Impacts Programme. Available from www.ukcip.org.uk 
 
EN 49   EN – Ecosystem services:  Ecological processes or functions  having monetary or non-monetary 
value to individuals or society at large.  There are (i) supporti ng services such as 
productivity or biodiversity main tenance, (ii) provisioning serv ices such as food, fibre, or 
fish, (iii) regulating services  such as climate regulation or carbon sequestration, and 
(iv)cultural services su ch as tourism or spiritual and aesthetic appreciation. (IPCC, 2007) 
– Extreme weather event:  An event that is rare within its statistical reference distribution at 
a particular place. Definitions of ‘rare’ var y, but an extreme weather event would normally 
be as rare as or rarer than the 10th or 90th percentile. By definition, the characteristics of 
what is called ‘extreme weather’ may vary from place to place. Extreme weather events 
may typically include floods and droughts. (IPCC, 2007) 
– Exposure : is the nature and degree to which a system is exposed to significant climatic 
variations (IPCC, 2007). 
– Hazards : A physically defined climate event with the potential to cause harm, such as 
heavy rainfall, drought, flood, stor m and long-term change in mean climatic variables such 
as temperature (UNDP, 2004). 
– Human system:  Any system in which human organisa tions play a major role. Often, but 
not always, the term is synonymous with ‘soc iety’ or ‘social system’ e.g., agricultural 
system, political system, technological system, economic system; all are human systems in 
the sense applied in  the AR4. (IPCC, 2007) 
– Impacts  (climate change): the effects of climat e change on natural and human systems. 
Depending on the consideration of adaptation , one can distinguis h between potential 
impacts and residual impacts (IPCC, 2007): 
– Potential impacts : all impacts that may occur given a projecte d change in 
climate, without considering adaptation. This allows to a ssess all effects of 
climate change if no adaptation occurs for a specific sector or area. 
– Residual impacts : the impacts of climate cha nge that would occur after 
anticipatory, planned and autonomous adap tation. This would al low to assess the 
actual need for intervention for a specific sector or area. 
– Autonomous adaptation residual impacts : impacts that may occur given a 
projected change in climat e, considering only autonomous adaptation. This would 
allow to assess the actual need for public intervention for a specific sector or area 
– Indicators:  quantitative or qualitative parameters that provide a basis for assessing change, 
they are logically tied to stated policy goals and chart progress towards policy targets.  
– Index / indices:  An aggregate indicator. An index combines several observable 
variables into one. 
– Vulnerability Indicators : An observable variable that  provides some indication 
of the possible future harm a system of interest is facing 
– Adaptation indicators : A measure of progress towa rds the implementation of 
adaptation measures (process-based) or a measure of effectiveness of adaptation 
policies and activities in general (EEA, 2008) 
 
EN 50   EN – Infrastructure:  The basic equipment, utilities, pr oductive enterprises, installations and 
services essential for the development, opera tion and growth of an organisation, city or 
nation. (IPCC, 2007) 
– Large-scale singularities:  Abrupt and dramatic changes in the state of given systems, in 
response to gradual changes in  driving forces. For exampl e, a gradual increase in 
atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations may lead to such large-scale singularities as 
slowdown or collapse of the thermohaline circul ation or collapse of the West Antarctic ice 
sheet. The occurrence, magnitude, and timing of  large-scale singularities are difficult to 
predict. (IPCC, 2007) 
– Likelihood  – See probability 
– Measure : Technologies, processes, and practices that reduce  GHG emissions or effects 
below anticipated future levels. Examples of  measures are renewable energy technologies, 
waste minimization processes and public transport commuting practices (EEA, 2008). 
– Mitigation:  An anthropogenic intervention to redu ce the anthropogenic forcing of the 
climate system; it includes strategies to re duce greenhouse gas sources and emissions and 
enhancing greenhouse gas sinks. (IPCC, 2007) 
– "No regrets" policy:  A policy that would generate net social and/or economic benefits 
irrespective of whether or not anthropogenic climate change occurs. (IPCC, 2007) 
– Opportunity costs:  The cost of an economic activity  forgone through the choice of 
another activity. (IPCC, 2007) 
– Policies:  Objectives, together with the means of implementation. In an adaptation context, 
a policy objective might be drawn from the overall policy goals of the country – for 
instance, the maintenance or strengthening of fo od security. Ways to achieve this objective 
might include, e.g., farmer advice and inform ation services, seasonal climate forecasting 
and incentives for development of  irrigation systems (UNDP, 2004). 
– Probability:  the likelihood or possi bility of an event or outc ome occurring. Probability can 
range from being qualitative, using word descrip tions such as likely or highly confident, to 
quantified ranges and single estimates, depe nding on the level of understanding of the 
causes of events, historical time seri es and future conditions (UNDP, 2004). 
– Regional : Area covered by an administrative geogra phic unit below national level that is 
responsible for the development of the adap tation strategy (e.g. province, Länder, large 
cities). (IPCC, 2007) 
– Resilience:  The ability of a social or ecological system to absorb disturbances while 
retaining the same basic structure and wa ys of functioning, the capacity for self-
organisation, and the capacity to ad apt to stress and change. (IPCC, 2007) 
– Risk : The combination of the probability  of an event and its consequences54. Some climate 
change glossaries consider vulnerability a part of risk, for example the UNDP guidance 
                                                 
54 United Nations, International Strategy for Disa ster Reduction (UN/ISDR) Terminology on Disaster 
Risk Reduction (2009), available from http:// www.unisdr.org/eng/library/lib-terminology-eng.htm 
 
EN 51   EN defines climate related risk as the result of the interaction of physically defined hazards 
with the properties of the exposed systems, i. e., their sensitivity or (social) vulnerability. 
Risk can also be considered as the comb ination of an event, its likelihood, and its 
consequences, i.e., risk equals the probabi lity of climate hazard multiplied by a given 
system’s vulnerability (UNDP, 2004). 
– Scenario:  A plausible and often simplified descri ption of how the future may develop, 
based on a coherent and internally consistent set of assumptions about driving forces and 
key relationships. Scenarios may be derive d from projections, bu t are often based on 
additional information from other sources, sometimes combined with a ‘narrative 
storyline’. (IPCC, 2007) 
– SRES:  The storylines and associated popul ation, GDP and emissions scenarios 
associated with the Special Report on Emissions Scenarios (SRES) (Naki ćenović 
et al., 2000), and the resultin g climate change and sea-le vel rise scenarios. Four 
families of socio-economic scenario (A1, A2, B1 and B2) represent different world futures in two distinct dimensions: a focus on economic versus environmental concerns, and global versus regional development patterns.. (IPCC, 
2007) 
– Sensitivity : the degree to which a system is affect ed, either adversely or beneficially, by 
climate-related stimuli. The effect may be dire ct (e.g., a change in crop yield in response to 
a change in the mean, range, or  variability of temperature)  or indirect (e.g., damages 
caused by an increase in the frequency of co astal flooding due to s ea level rise (IPCC, 
2001). 
– Strategy : A broad plan of action that is implemented through policies and measures 
(UNDP, 2004). 
– Strategy to adapt to climate change: A general plan of action for addressing the 
impacts of climate change, including c limate variability and extremes. It may 
include a mix of policies and measures, se lected to meet the overarching objective 
of reducing the country’s vulnerabili ty. Depending on the circumstances, the 
strategy can be comprehensive at a nati onal level, addressing adaptation across 
sectors, regions and vulnerable populations , or it can be more limited, focusing on 
just one or two sectors or regions (UNDP, 2004). 
– Existing strategies (this project)– pro cedures that are formally adopted by 
governmental bodies, in form of plans of action or formally adopted processes. 
– Threshold:  The level of magnitude of a system pr ocess at which sudden or rapid change 
occurs. A point or level at which new propert ies emerge in an ecological, economic or 
other system, invalidating predic tions based on mathematical relationships that apply at 
lower levels (IPCC, 2007). 
– Uncertainty:  An expression of the degree to which a value (e.g., the future state of the 
climate system) is unknown. Uncertainty can re sult from lack of information or from 
disagreement about what is known or even knowable. It may have many types of sources, 
from quantifiable errors in th e data to ambiguously defined concepts or terminology, or 
uncertain projections of human behaviour. Un certainty can therefore be represented by 
quantitative measures (e.g., a range of valu es calculated by various models) or by 
 
EN 52   EN qualitative statements (e.g., reflecting the j udgement of a team of experts). See also 
confidence and likelihood (IPCC, 2007). 
– Vulnerability:  Vulnerability is the degree to which a system is susceptible to, and unable 
to cope with, adverse effects of climate cha nge, including climate variability and extremes. 
Vulnerability is a function of the character,  magnitude, and rate of climate change and 
variation to which a system is exposed, its  sensitivity, and its adaptive capacity (IPCC, 
2007). 
 
EN 53   EN 7.3. Results of consultation on the Green Paper 
In 2007 the European Commission published th e Green Paper COM (2007)354 ‘Adapting to 
climate change in Europe – Options for EU ac tion.’ This sets out the challenges which are 
faced and proposes a way in which the EU can tackle adaptation. The ch allenges of climate 
change are two-fold. Action is being taken to reduce the emissions of greenhouses gases that 
are responsible for the global warming observed in recent decades but some impacts are now unavoidable. Action must be taken to ensure that Europe is well adapted for the challenges 
our changing climate poses. 
The Green Paper has since been widely co nsulted upon. A major conference launching the 
public debate on adaptation in Europe  took place in Brussels on 3 July 2007. A web-based 
public consultation  was open from end of July 2007 until end of November 2007. Four 
regional workshops  took place in Finland, Portugal, UK and Hungary during the autumn of 
2007. The public consultation undertak en to date indicates that th ere is widespread support for 
the Green Paper and the need for urgent acti on on climate change adaptation. Responses to 
the twenty eight questions outlined in the body of the Green Paper provide further insight into specific policy and economic tools that the European Commission could choose to outline in the eventual White Paper.  
The questions set out in the Green Paper consider the impacts of climate change and the areas 
which should be considered as a priority for ac tion, reflecting on the diffe rent roles of the EU, 
national, regional, local author ities and the private sector. These were the questions which 
elicited the greatest number of responses, perhap s because they relate to the problems posed 
by adaptation rather than identifying solutions. The questions then consider the four pillars outlined in the Green Paper:  
– early-action; 
– external relations; 
– long-term action; and  
– the importance of stakeholder consultation. 
In response to the nine questions posed for the first pillar, stakeholders  have indicated their 
respective positions on issues ranging from ge neral EU adaptation policy to prospects for 
sustainable agriculture. In summary, the respon dents believe that the EU must develop an 
overarching framework which considers the inte rdependency of all sectors (including those 
typically considered outside th e environmental realm) and thei r respective adaptive capacity. 
Responses to the five questions related to the second pillar, in dicate that th ere is a broad 
recognition for the need to cons ider climate change impacts in  relations with neighbouring 
states, the developing world and other industrialized nations. Cons idering the issu es raised in 
relation to the first pillar, the respondents believe that the EU will need to have its own house 
in order prior to establishing itself as a worl d leader. The EU’s potenti al to mobilize global 
action is noted with some enthusiasm. Respon ses obtained for the th ree questions raised 
against the third pillar further underline the EU’s role as a centra l agency facilitating 
information exchange. These questions, and the responses to them, em phasize the need for 
further research into predictive climate change  models and their potentia l role in longer term 
climate change policy.  
 
EN 54   EN With respect to stakeholder consultation, re spondents clearly support existing efforts to 
consult with the general public. The total numbe r (and varied scope) of submissions received 
in response to this exercise cl early demonstrate this fact. Th e establishment of a European 
Advisory Group has been widely supported by stakeholders and respondents to the 
consultation.  
A report55 on the stakeholder consu ltation presents information obtained as part of a 
consultation exercise related to the Eur opean Commission’s Green  Paper COM (2007)354 
‘Adapting to climate change in  Europe – Options for EU acti on.’ This consultation exercise 
involved soliciting input from European stak eholders using three media: web-based 
submissions, more formalized written submissions and stakeholder workshops. With the consultation having come to a close in mid-December 2007 there is a need to assess the responses in order to support prog ress towards the White Paper.  
Furthermore, the Green Paper was also the subject of opinions an d resolutions by the 
Committee of the Regions, the European Economic and Social Committee and the European Parliament:  
– The Committee of the Regions has a dopted its opinion in November 2007 
(Rapporteur: Ms Twitchen )  
– The European Economic and Social has adopted its opinion in December 2007 
(Rapporteur Mr Osborn)  
– The European Parliament has adopted its  resolution on April 2008 (Rapporteur: Mr 
Sacconi)  
                                                
 
55 Available at http://ec.europa.eu/environment/climat/adaptation/index_en.htm 
 
EN 55   EN 7.4. Implementation of the recommendation s of the Impact Assessment Board 
The recommendations of the Board56 are based on an earlier version of the IA report57. The 
main changes performed in the current version ha ve been 1) the greater consistency given to 
the problem definition section to better support the set of objectiv es; 2) moving the analysis of 
adaptation approaches to the 2nd half of the report a nd assessing their economic, 
environmental and social impacts; 3) performi ng a structured assessment of policy options 
according to operational objectives and screening criteria. 
IAB recommendation (D 404) based on version 3 Impl ementation in version 4 sent to inter service 
consultation 
(1) The problem definition section needs to be better linked to the objectives.  
– The problem definition section shoul d analyse in more detail the 
problems which underpin the operational objectives (improving 
the knowledge base and co-ordination of adaptation policies). 
The IA report should analyse unde rlying drivers and take this 
analysis into account when proposing policy options. With 
regards to the knowledge base , the IA report should not only 
assess the quality of the science currently available (e.g. in 
terms of coherence and degree of detail of the models), but also 
state more clearly which level of quality is needed (to allow for 
better informed policy making),  and what actions would be 
necessary to encourage this evolution. Chapter 2 has been revised, and provide more details 
on the mentioned problem. More information can also 
be found in Annex 1, as well as in DG RTD document 
(SEC(2008) 3104) 
– The practical implications of differences in the science on 
adaption and that on mitigation, in particular relating to the 
timing of necessary investments, should be made more explicit.  This topic is cove red in Annex 1. 
– Similarly, in relation to the co-ordination of adaptation policies 
among Member States and institutions, the IA report should 
analyse existing mechanisms and their deficiencies and provide 
examples of the impact and negative spill-overs that a lack of 
co-ordination may have on the vulnerability to climate change.  This is done in section 2.3, based e.g. on recent works 
from PEER (2009) 
– Additionally, the IA needs to clarify how autonomous 
adaptation has been integrated into the baseline, including the 
adaptation by businesses and indi viduals, and the impact that 
this may have on the vulnerability assessment.  Clarified in section 2.3.3. 
– Finally, the discussion on green and grey infrastructure should 
be moved to the section of the IA dealing with policy options Done, moved to Chapter 4. 
The justification for the selection of the win-win/no regret actions is 
currently insufficient and should be strengthened.  At this stage this report is only able to present a 
preliminary assessment based on literature review and 
National Adaptation Strategies such as UK-CIP. 
There is no information available allowing going 
further in terms of structured or quantitative 
assessment. Short term actions will allow a systematic 
assessment on costs and benefits, based on 
national/regional/sectoral assessments and modelling. 
2) The IA report should better justify choice of the short term 
measures proposed in  section 4.2.  All actions included in se lected option B can be 
undertaken under current budget framework, and will 
                                                 
56 http://www.cc.cec/iab/i/docs/opinions/ 2009/climate_change_second_env.tif   
57 Available on http://www.cc.cec/iab/i/docs/meeti ng_docs/2008/adaptation_ia_v3.doc  (main report) and 
http://www.cc.cec/iab/i/docs/meeting_docs/ 2008/adaptation_ia_v3___annexes.pdf  (annexes) 
 
EN 56   EN IAB recommendation (D 404) based on version 3 Impl ementation in version 4 sent to inter service 
consultation 
– The IA report should clarify to what  extent the list is exhaustive 
and to what extent proposed meas ures might be competing with 
each other, e.g. for the same budgetary resources, and would 
therefore need to be assessed from a cost-efficiency perspective. not require additional fundi ng. A detailed analysis on 
the resource and cost-efficiency aspects of the 
potential measures is included in Annex 6. 
– Additionally, the discussion on risk management should be 
expanded and not limited to insurance only As explained during the IAB meeting, the report also 
contemplate non-commercial risk management tools, 
the most evident being the set of vulnerability 
indicators. 
– The three assessment criteria ( knowledge base, subsidiarity, 
synergies/trade-offs) should be r econsidered or at  least better 
defined, to allow a more consis tent screening of the proposed 
measures.  This has been reviewed a nd improved in section 5.2 
(3) Impacts of the policy options need to be assessed 
– At least a qualitative assessment of the impacts of the proposed 
measures should be presented, and used subsequently for the 
selection of preferred options or sub-options.  The new chapters 4 and 5 provides a quantitative 
assessment of both sets of options (overall adaptation 
approaches and short-term  scope for EU action) 
– The IA needs to assess the expected impacts of the policy 
options. This should be done both for general policy options (no 
new EU action, an action plan, white paper) as well as for more 
detailed measures discussed cu rrently in section 4.2.  The main report focuses on the comparison of general 
policy options. In order to k eep the length of the IA 
report closer to the IA guidelines standards, the 
detailed assessment of some concrete measures is 
provided in Annex 6. 
– In line with the proportionality rule, the assessment can to a 
large extent be qualitative. Economic, social and environmental 
impacts should nevertheless be clearly presented.  Economic, environmental and social impacts of broad 
adaptation approaches is addressed in section 4.2. 
– Identification of further impact  assessment work for future 
actions should be provided.  This is addressed in the conclusions of Chapter 5. 
– This assessment of impacts shoul d be used as the basis for 
comparing policy options.  This is done in Chapter 5. 
 
 
EN 57   EN 8. ANNEX 1 - THE FRAMEWORK FOR INTEGRATED ASSESSMENT OF ADAPTATION 
POLICIES  
8.1. Climate change scenarios 
This report integrates the key messages on climate change impacts from the 2008 
EEA/JRC/WHO report 'Impacts of Europe's changing climate'58, complementing it with 
numerous other sources, in order to perform and analysis of the need for early action at EU 
level, taking into account th e likely impacts of autonomous polic y actions, including national 
adaptation policies and strate gies. Other main sources of  input than the mentioned 
EEA/JRC/WHO report are quoted and are described in Appendix 7.1: 
Despite efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and the EU target to prevent temperatures 
from increasing to more than 2°C above pre-industrial levels59, impacts of climate change in 
Europe and across the globe can already be perceived: 
• Between 1901 and 2005, average temperatures in  Europe rose by 0.9°C (IPCC, 2007), i.e. 
slightly higher than the global average. Th e increase of th e annual average temperature 
from pre-industrial towards 2007 for the European land area has been 1.2°C and eight of the last 12 years (1996 – 2007) in Europe were in the 12 warmest years since 1850. Europe has warmed more than the global average. 
• In recent years, warming has occurred at a considerably higher rate (+0.4°C/decade for 
1979 to 2005) than the longer-term average.  
• Temperatures are increasing more in winter than summer, and there has been increasing 
variability in daily temperature (due to an increase in warm extremes).  
• Changes in precipitation (rainfall) have been more variable across Europe.  
• Mean winter precipitation is increasing in mo st of Atlantic and nor thern Europe, while in 
the Mediterranean area, annual rainfall has been decreasing in  the east, but remaining static 
in the west. Annual precipitation trends in the 20th century s howed an increase in northern 
Europe (10 – 40%) and a decrease in some parts of southern Europe (up to 20%), and mean 
winter precipitation has increase d in most of the Western an d northern Europe (20 – 40%). 
• Across Europe in general, there has been an increase in the amount of  rain falling on wet 
days (heavy precipitation events).  
• Sea-level rise has been observed, with, gl obally, a rise of 195 mm between 1870 and 2004, 
equivalent to average sea-level rise of  1.7 ± 0.3 mm per year in the 20th century
60. In 
Europe rates of sea-level change ranges from  -0.3 mm/year to 2.8 mm/year in the previous 
                                                 
58 Impacts of Europe's changing climate - 2008 indicator-based assessment, EEA Report No 4/2008, 
http://reports.eea.europa.e u/eea_report_2008_4/en/  
59 Communication of 10 January 2007, entitled: "Limiting Global Climate Change to 2 degrees Celsius - 
The way ahead for 2020 and beyond" [COM(2007) 2 final - Not published in the Official Journal]. 
60 Church, J. A., and N. J. White "A 20th century acceleration in global sea-level rise", Geophys. Res. 
Lett., http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2006/2005GL024826.shtml 
 
EN 58   EN century and recent results from satellites and tide-gauges indicated an accelerated average 
rate of global SLR of about 3.1 mm/y ear in the previous 15 years.  
• North Sea waters have warmed by 1.1°C over the past 30 years. Sea surface temperature 
(SST) is increasing at a faster rate in Europ ean seas than in the global oceans and the rate 
of increase is larger in the northern European seas and smaller in the Mediterranean Sea. In 
the past 25 years sea surface temperature in all European seas has been increasing at a rate 
that is roughly 10 times faster than the average over  more than a century  (high confidence). 
• Cold extremes have become less frequent in Europe, while the freque ncy of hot days has 
almost tripled between 1880 and 2005 and the number of warm extremes doubled. 
• For Europe as a whole, the in tensity of precipitation extremes like heavy rain events has 
increased in the past 50 years, even for areas with a decrease in mean precipitation such as 
Central Europe and the Mediterranean. Howeve r, the proportion of Europe experiencing 
extreme and/or moderate meteorological dr ought conditions has not changed significantly 
during the 20th century. Storminess in Europe has shown a considerable  variation over the 
past century, but with no long-term trend. 
There is now increased understa nding of anthropogenic warming and cooling influences on 
climate, and as the observations above, unequivocal warming of the climate system (IPCC, 2007). There is also a much bette r understanding of future clim ate change, advanced through 
a broader range of models (IPCC, 2007). This in cludes regional climate change projections for 
the period 2071-2100 (PRUDENCE) in Europe. The change in European summer and winter 
temperature are shown in Figure 5 for the IPCC SRES B2 and A2 scenarios for the 2080s
61. 
The projections of future climate change show: – Projected increases in annual av erage temperature in Europe this century is 1 - 5.5°C (best 
estimate) with the greatest warming over easte rn and northern Europe in winter, and over 
south-western and Mediterrane a n  E u r o p e  i n  s u m m e r .  T h e r e is therefore a strong 
distributional pattern of warming across Europe, i.e. be tween North and South and also 
differences between summer and winter. The greatest warming is predicted for Southern 
Europe and the Artic. 
– Projections for the end of the 21st century whic h suggest an additional global sea level rise 
of 0.18 to 0.59 m above the level over the period 1980-2000 (IPCC, 2007). 
– Models project an increase in winter precip itation in northern Europe and a decrease in 
summer precipitation in southern Europe. However, there are uncertainties on the 
magnitude and geographical details of the change.  
                                                
 
61 The IPCC’s Special Report on Emissions Scenarios (SRE S) provides a range of storylines (taking into 
account potential demographic change, economic deve lopment, and technological change) to consider 
future emissions of greenhouse gases, and projected climate changes. In the A2 scenario, where the 
focus is on national enterprise, global emissions are assumed to increase more significantly, leading to 
approximately a tripling of average CO2 concentrations  by the end of this century, compared to the pre-
industrial concentration. The B2 storyline focuses on lo cal stewardship and results in approximately a 
doubling of the atmospheric CO2 concentration (and can be very approximately considered to be equivalent to a mitigation scenario in terms of stab ilisation levels). These emissions scenarios translate 
to a global mean temperature incr ease in 2071-2100 of 3°C for A2 and 2.2°C for B2, relative to 1961-
1990. 
 
EN 59   EN Figure 5: Changes in annual mean temperat ure and precipitation by 2071-2100 relative to 
1961-1990 under the B2 and A2 scenario. Source Prudence, based on HadCM3. 
 
Change in annual mean temperature  by 2080s, 
B2 scenario  
Change in annual mean temperature  by 
2080s, A2 scenario 
 
Change in annual mean precipitation  by 2080s, 
B2 scenario Change in annual mean precipitation  by 
2080s, A2 scenario 
– For Europe as a whole, it is likely  that heavy precipitation events will become more 
frequent. Dry periods are projected to in crease especially in Southern Europe. 
– For Europe as a whole heat waves are projected to increase in frequency, intensity and 
duration, whereas winter temperature variability  and the number of cold  and frost extremes 
will further decrease. European regions projec ted to be most affected are the Iberian 
Peninsula, central Europe incl uding the Alps, the eas tern Adriatic seab oard, and southern 
Greece. 
– Projections of future stormine ss are still very uncertain a nd model dependent, though some 
models indicate a slight decrease in the number of storms a nd an increase of the strength of 
the heaviest storms, and projections show a significant increase of storm surge elevation 
for the continental North Sea and South East England. 
The EEA/JRC/WHO report also looks  at indicators to track tre nds and projections for the 
cryosphere (permanent or seasonal snow and ice deposits on land, in the seas, in rivers and 
lakes and in the ground (permafrost)). In Eur ope, the most vulnerable areas are the high 
mountain areas, and the Arctic. It reports: 
– The vast majority of glaciers in the European  glacial regions are in retreat. Since 1850, 
glaciers in the European Alps have lost appr oximately two thirds of  their volume, with 
clear acceleration since 1985. Glaci er retreat is projected to continue. A 3°C warming of 

 
EN 60   EN average summer air temperature could reduce the currently existing glacier cover of the 
European Alps by some 80 %. Glacier retr eat has consequences for river flow.  
– The northern hemisphere's snow cover extent has decreased at a rate of 1.3% per decade 
during the last 40 years. Model simulations project widespread  reductions of extent and 
duration of snow cover in Europe over the 21st century. 
– The sea ice extent in the Arctic has declined at an accelerating rate, especially in summer. 
The record low ice cover in September 2007 was roughly half the size of the normal 
minimum extent in the 1950s. The summer ice is  projected to continue to shrink and may 
even disappear at the height of the summ er melt season in the upcoming decades. There 
will still be substantial ice in  winter. The ice loss from the Greenland ice sheet increased in 
the 1990s from a near balance to approxima tely 100 billion tons lost per year. 
– A warming of mountain permafrost in Europe  of 0.5-1.0°C has been observed during the 
recent 10-20 years. Present and projected atmospheric warming will lead to wide-spread thaw of mountain permafrost. 
When considering adaptation, future socio-econ omic scenarios are also extremely important, 
as they determine the vulnerab ility of social and economic sy stems to climate change. The 
future socio-economic projections may lead to  a significant change in vulnerability or 
exposure, as well as adaptive capacity. In many cases they will lead to increases in 
vulnerability even without climate change, for ex ample, the impact of extreme events such as 
floods or storms will be determined by the increas ed future wealth of potential infrastructure 
affected, but also changes in re lation to location related to land-use, even without climate 
change. Socio-economic scenarios also determine the global GHG emissions leading to the range of emissions scenarios used in the climate models. 
It also must be stressed that there are major uncertainties in the future trends, and their 
distribution at higher levels of  disaggregation. With all figures presented in this paper, it is 
highlighted that there is considerable climat e model variability, especially in relation to 
precipitation projections. There is also much  wider underlying uncertainty on the level of 
change, not least with respect to variation in clim ate sensitivity. 
Finally, there are also major uncertainties over the future baseline from which to consider 
adaptation, i.e. in defining the effect of exis ting and planned policies and considering which 
emission and mitigation trajectory we are on. Wh ile there is an existing EU ambition level to 
limit global climate change to 2 degrees Celsius, this target is predic ated on global action, and 
is associated with considerab le uncertainty. For the latter,  the global 50% reduction by 2050 
in GHG outlined in the EC’s 2 de gree paper has only a 50%  chance of achieving this target. It 
is therefore necessary to consider a wide range of projections in formulating possible 
adaptation policy. 
However, all scenarios and proj ections indicate a number of ch anges that can be expected 
with high confidence. Average temperatures w ill rise; summers are likely to become drier, 
particularly across southern Eu rope; winters are likely to be wetter, with more heavy rain 
likely. 
 
EN 61   EN 8.2. Costs and Benefits of Adaptation 
The economic impacts of climate change in Eu rope were recently reviewed for by the EEA 
(EEA, 2007) and the OECD (OECD, 2008). These reports show that there is still little 
quantified information on the costs and benefits  of adaptation, and that most studies are 
constrained to a few sectors (primarily coasts  in the FP6 PESETA project) and only take 
account of a limited sub-set of climate change effects. There is an emerging literature in 
Europe, however, and more comprehensive es timates are appearing with the FP6 ADAM 
project, which results will be publicly available during 2009. Some advanced findings are however presented below. In general, the be nefits of adaptation are very large, and 
significantly reduce the costs of inaction. In most cases, the co sts of inaction in the early 
period (2010 to 2040) are low. 
When discussing costs and benefits  of adaptation, it is important  to define exactly what is 
included in the different estimate s (Figure 6). It is also necessa ry to consider the effect of 
socio-economic change, as this defines the ac tual future baseline to compare costs and 
benefits against. In many cases, this is not made explicit.  
Figure 6 - Costs and benefits of adaptation (Source: Boyd and Hunt, 2006
62) 
 
Some sectoral estimates ha ve been provided in the co ntext of ADAM and PESETA 6th FP 
projects: 
– Coasts: Because human activities are historic ally gathered near low-lying coasts for 
commodity reasons, the stakes could be high:  in the Netherlands, 60% of the population 
live in so-called low elevation coastal zones63. It is estimated64 that, with about 89,000 km 
                                                 
62 Boyd, R. and Hunt, A., 2006. Climate Change Cost Assessments Using the UKCIP Costing 
Methodology. July 2006. Report for Stern Review, UK HMT. 
63 McGranahan G, Balk D, Anderson B (2007) The risi ng tide: assessing the risks of climate change and 
human settlements in low elevation coastal zones. Environ Urban 19(1):17–37 
64 EEA (2006), The changing faces of Europe’s co astal areas, EEA Report No 6/2006, European 
Environment Agency, Copenhagen. 
 
EN 62   EN of coastline, 68 million people could be affected  by sea level rise in the European Union. 
Economies relying on agriculture will suffer the most from sea level rise65. Moreover, 
adaptation cost may be high relative to the GDP of  coastal areas, as it is not guaranteed that 
protection costs will be absorbed fully at national level. Some redistribution effect of the losses from regions with relatively high dama ges to regions with relatively low damages 
may happen, implying that even countries with out a coastline are likely to bare some 
burden of sea level rise due to  spill over effects. Regarding the potential role played by 
adaptation in coastal systems in Europe, early results from the PESETA study
66 suggests 
that both physical and economic impacts ca n be largely reduced. PESETA has used the 
DIVA model, developed unde r the 5th FP DINAS-COASTS67 project, which allows a 
comparison of the consequences of climate ch ange in coastal systems without adaptation 
and with optimal adaptation, ac cording to a cost-benefit framework. The range of impact 
estimates is large due to the uncertainty of the projected sea level rise. Under the A2 scenario, without adaptation around 2000 to  17000 km2 of land in Europe could be 
permanently lost by 2085, also leading to  0.1 to 1.3 million people undergoing coastal 
floods every year. Those physical effects are va lued at a cost of 12 to 18 billion/year. 
When hard adaptation measures are consider ed the land loss fall to less than 1000 km2, 
and the residual economic cost to around one billion/year. The economic costs of the 
adaptation measures are some one  billion/year, to be added to the residual damages. . 
– Health: The human health analysis of the PES ETA project has not expl icitly analysed the 
costs and benefits of adaptation but has considered the potential role of acclimatisation via autonomous physiological and behavioural changes in individu als or populations. 
Acclimatisation can significantly reduce the te mperature-related effects of climate change. 
However, there is not an explicit cost attach ed to acclimatisation and further research is 
needed in this respect. Accounting only for the climate change induced effect on mortality, 
i.e. ignoring the influence of  the change of the socioeconom ic scenario (mainly population 
growth and ageing), the PESETA project estimat es that under the A2 SRES scenario and 
Hirham/HadAM3H climate models, average annual heat-related mo rtality for the 2071-
2100 period would be around 100 000 without  acclimatisation, and around 18 000 with 
acclimatisation. It should be noted that the PE SETA human health study has not taken into 
account heat waves. 
– The PESETA agriculture, river flood and ener gy studies have not made a cost-benefit 
assessment of adaptation. 
There is not much data on costs of adaptation available in Member States. The recently 
published recommendations from the Dutch Delta  Commission estimate that protecting the 
coast and the entire low lying part of the Neth erlands against the consequences of climate 
change involves a cost of 1.2 to 1.6 billi on Euros per annum until 2050, and 0.9 to 1.5 billion 
Euros per annum in the period 2050–2100. 
Other studies have tried to estimate the costs of adaptation, based on simple metrics and 
investment flows. These estimates do not look at  the costs of inaction, or the benefits of 
adaptation.  
                                                
 
65 Bosello F., Lazzarin M., Roson R. , Tol R.S.J., «Economy-Wide Esti mates of the Implications of 
Climate Change: Sea Level Rise», Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei, Note di Lavoro 96, 2004: http://www.feem.it/Feem/Pub/Publica tions/WPapers/WP2004-096.htm  
66 http://peseta.jrc.ec.europa.eu/docs/Costalareas.html   
67 http://www.dinas-coast.net/ 
 
EN 63   EN – The UNFCCC has estimated the following globa l investment and financial flows into 
adaptation by 2030, with a proportion of inve stment in OECD countries (developed 
countries) between $21 and 104 bill ion/year, though this is mos tly infrastructure. On the 
basis of a proportion 30% of GDP for EU- 27, this would equates to around $6 to 31 
billion. Note that to estimate this more accu rately future GDP flows would be needed 
(UNFCCC, 2007). 
– The Stern Review estimated that additional costs of ma king new infrastructure and 
buildings more resilient to climate change in  OECD countries could range from $15 – 150 
billion each year (0.05 – 0.5 % of GDP), with higher costs possible with the prospect of 
higher temperatures in the future (Stern, 2006 ). This approach can be used to scope 
European costs of adaptation. Based on EU27 GDP in 2006 (€11.606bn), costs of 
adaptation (making new infrastructure and build ings more resilient to climate change) are 
estimated between €5.8 and €58bn. Alternatively, if  it is assumed that Europe invests 20% 
of GDP in fixed capital, and one-quarter of  this goes into construction, and the extra 
investment to make this climate resilient will  be 1 – 10 %, then costs of adaptation (extra 
investment in construction) would be be tween €4.6 and €46.4 bn. These are alternative 
estimates of the same likely investment, rather than additive. The values at the top end are 
reflective of a future, larger climate cha nge scenario. For example, they could be 
considered to reflect the potential costs to wards 2100, in a scenario without successful 
mitigation. The lower values are likely to be mo re representative of an earlier time period, 
e.g. the 2030s (note that in these earlier time  periods, the estimates will not vary much 
between business as usual and mitigation scenarios). 
Finally, there are figures on cost of inaction and cost of adaptati on coming from top-down 
integrated assessment model (DICE/RICE, FUND, MERGE, PAGE, etc.) which do not 
properly reflect the strong bottom-up character of adaptation measures68. These models lack 
the level of spatial detail necessary to identify  the costs and benefits of adaptation measures, 
which is better provided by pro cess-oriented models with considerable physical detail.  
These models are mainly used for calculati ng an optimum policy-mix between adaptation and 
mitigation, but this depends crucially on the assumptions in the model, and especially on the discount rate and the level of future damages.  As it is suggested by the early outcomes of 
ADAM research project
69, the effects of including different  adaptation scenarios within IAMs 
(to identify optimal policy mix) are minor compar ed to the range of uncertainty within these 
models.  
Against that background, efforts should be focu sed the analysis (e.g. to build on the modelling 
framework developed for the UNEP GEO-4 or OECD Environmental Outlook 2030) on the assessment of vulnerability and distributive aspect s, under a wide range of climate scenarios. 
At EU level, the modelling effort could be  focused on identifying no-regret and win-win 
adaptation actions, focusing on increasing the re silience of ecosystems and socio-economic 
systems. This means focusing on the furthe r development of land-use and hydrological 
models, bringing together ecosystem  services modelling (green infrastructure, water, etc.) at 
small scale detail (1 or 10 km2 grid) with  a strong socio-economic  component providing 
regional and sectoral details (sectoral models such as CAPRI, Transtools, etc.). 
                                                
 
68 OECD working document ENV/EPOC/GSP(2008)17  
69 www.adamproject.eu, results to be published in 2009 
 
EN 64   EN 9. ANNEX 2 – CROSS CUTTING ISSUES : WATER , LAND, BIODIVERSITY AND ECOSYSTEMS  
9.1. Biodiversity 
9.1.1.  Impacts 
The impacts of climate change on European biodiversity/ecosystems are complex and include 
temperature increases, shifts in climatic zone s, melting of snow and ice, sea level rise, 
droughts, floods and other extreme weather events . Particularly vulnerable areas include the 
Mediterranean (from water scarcity and heat st ress), coastal zones due to pressure from sea 
level rise, mountain regions and the Arctic.  
In the Arctic, perennial sea ice is thinning and being replaced by seasonal ice. Tundra habitats 
are likely to become highly fragmented and re duced in extent as northward movement is 
limited by the Arctic Ocean. On its southern border, tundra will be replaced by coniferous 
boreal forest and scrublands. The reduction in tundra and associated permafrost will reduce 
the reflectance of solar radiation and may increase the incidence of wildfires. Warming is also 
expected to release carbons stored in the permafrost.  
The biodiversity of Europe's mountain tops has been identified as bein g very vulnerable to 
climate change, as snow cover reduces and ambient temperature increases. The snow pack on many mountains is close to its melting point and particularly se nsitive to temperature change. 
The Alps will experience warmer, wetter wint ers and dryer summers, and have already 
witnessed the displacement of cold-adapted species as lower altitude species move uphill. 
Mediterranean biodiversity/ecosystems are also vulnerable and will suffer from water scarcity 
and heat stress. 
Climate change will also act upon and often a ggravate the impacts of other pressures on 
biodiversity/ecosystems, such as overexplo itation, habitat fragment ation, degradation and 
loss, and invasive species. 
Climate change will cause clima tic zones to move. In conseque nce, the potential distribution 
of European species is projected to shift by te ns to hundreds of kilometres by the end of the 
century (depending on the scenario used). The success of this movement will depend on various factors: the capacity of a species to migrate (e.g. migration will be easier for birds 
than for plants), the connectivity within the land scape structure (i.e. availability of stepping 
stones and/or habitat networks), and the presence  of receptor habitats within the new climate 
range of a species. This is obviously problematic in dens ely populated areas and highly 
fragmented agricultural landscapes. 
The potential future range for most European speci es is likely to be smaller in extent than 
their current range, and some species found in Eu rope will have no potential range by the end 
of the century. For certain species, there will  be no overlap between their potential future 
range and their current range, making the threat of extinction more likely. The area of 
appropriate climate range for many Alpine and Arctic species will decrease dramatically. 
Climate change and its consequences presen t one of the most im portant threats to 
biodiversity/ ecosystems and their functions and services. The current rate of change is far 
beyond that imposed by global climatic changes o ccurring in the evoluti onary past. The rate 
of change will exceed the ability of many species to adapt, especially as landscape 
 
EN 65   EN fragmentation may restrict movement. Natural sy stems are vulnerable to such changes due to 
their limited adaptive capacity. 
Changes in ecosystem composition and struct ure have important implications for the 
interactions between the biosphere and the clim ate system, as well as for ecosystem services 
on which society depends. Climate change is disrupting species intera ctions and ecological 
relationships, and also threatens managed ecosystems on which many sectors, including 
agriculture, forestry, fish ery and tourism, rely. 
Warm winters and extended growing seasons ha ve resulted in large population increases of 
pests. Normally, ecological processes keep pr edator-prey relationships in balance, but 
asynchrony in these relationships  may result in a breakdown of this delicate balance and an 
explosion in pest species. Weakened by drought  and wilted by heat, crops become more 
susceptible to pests. For example, climate-stress ed forests are infested faster and widespread 
climate and disease-induced forest dieback is a plausible scenario in many areas. 
As biodiversity is impacted by climate cha nge, so the resilience of the ecosystems can 
decline. Ecosystems with low resilience may reach thresholds at which abrupt change occurs. Biodiversity loss, ecosystem degradation and co nsequent changes in ecosystem services can 
lead to a decline in human well being. For exam ple the decline in the resilience of the salt 
marsh ecosystems will results in the loss of co astal protection services against storm surge 
that together with the sea level rise, could create socio- economic impacts in low lying 
coastlines. Furthermore, the degradation of the associated wetland habitats will have negative 
implications for resident and migratory bird pop ulations, and may result in the loss of tourist 
potential and the subsequent decline in ec onomic benefits for coastal communities.  
Temperature increase exerts further stress on freshwater and marine ecosystems (see other 
sections), compounding current over-exploitatio n and pollution. In the oceans acidification 
adds an additional pressure. 
Ecosystems play a direct role in climate re gulation through physical, biological and chemical 
processes that control fluxes of energy, wate r, and atmospheric c onstituents including 
greenhouse gases. Peatlands and wetlands provi de the largest below ground store of carbon 
and tropical forests dominate above ground storage in  biomass. Boreal forests, grasslands and 
agricultural land also play an important role . The oceans and terr estrial ecosystems are 
currently providing an important  service to humanity by ab sorbing about half of the 
anthropogenic CO
2 emission. However, the combined effects of climate change and 
associated disturbance and othe r drivers of change including  pollution, land-use changes and 
over-exploitation may reduce the resilience of ma ny ecosystems during this  century and affect 
their role in climate regulation. Although our de tailed knowledge is limite d, there is certainty 
about the existence of multiple positive and negative feedbacks between biodiversity-ecosystems and climate. These feedbacks are ge nerally non-linear and have the potential to 
produce large undesirable effects, particularly at  the regional level. Th ese feedbacks, though 
agreed to be significant, are not included in present climate change models because of the 
high uncertainties. Therefore the current scenario s for temperature increase are likely to be 
underestimates. 
9.1.2.  External Dimension 
The areas outlined above are also relevant for the external dimension, not least due to the 
potential shift in climatic zones and potential distribution of European species moving to areas 
 
EN 66   EN outside the EU. The demand for ecosystem services  within Europe (e.g. provisioning services) 
will also affect pressures on biodiversity-ecosystems outside the EU. These external effects need to be further explored. 
9.1.3.  Adaptive capacity 
Table 5- Potential planned adaptation options for Biodiversity / Ecosystems 
Type of action Description 
Share losses  n/a 
Mitigate the threat  Preserving an ab undance of organisms (plants, animals,  micro-organisms) and multiple groups 
performing similar functions is important for main taining resilience. A di versified portfolio of 
"insurance" species provides back-up if some speci es decline. Crucially higher genetic and species 
diversity tends to make ecosystems more resistant and resilient to disturbance. This is because species 
are likely to be present with characteristics that will enable the ecosystem to adjust to change and to 
maintain the provision of critical services such as  water purification. Biodi versity provides flexibility 
and insurance and spreads risks across temporal and spatial scales. This is valid for both managed and 
unmanaged systems. Integrated agricultural syst ems with a diversity of crops and surrounding 
ecological zones can provide strong defences in the face of weather extremes, pest infestations and 
invasive species. 
Prevent effects  Introduce a biodiversity/ecosystems complia nce check in a reinforced spatial planning to increase 
flexibility of managed and natural systems to accomm odate and adapt to climate change including by 
reducing other pressures on biodiversity/ecosystems ar ising from habitat convers ion, over- harvesting, 
pollution and invasive alien species and by devel oping appropriate management and structure of the 
wider landscape and seascape. 
Change land use. Strengthen nature conservation measures to  conserve biodiversity/ecosystems in the future. Areas will 
have to be reserved for this purpose. Sufficiently la rge habitats must be provided to protect domestic 
and endemic species. Newly arrived ‘ non-native’ species can help to ma intain ecosystems, but they can 
also pose threats and need to be observed closel y. Habitat mosaics should be created in landscapes 
where land management practice has led to the absen ce of sufficient suitable patches of unaltered or 
semi-natural habitat, thus ensuring permeability of  the landscape and the required network connectivity. 
Connectivity may be achieved by establishing ecologica l linkages or by maintain ing specific habitats to 
assist movement of species through an inhospitable environment. 
Maintain ecosystem function/services. For example,  protecting upper-catchment forests and restoring 
wetlands can reduce the risks from climate-related floods and droughts, thereby protecting people's 
welfare and helping to minimise the loss of life, properties and other assets. These investments are 
likely to be highly cost-effective relative to structural alterna tives such as dams and dykes. 
Also, preserve and restore floodplains, including revers ion of arable land to flood meadows; promote 
climate-friendly agricultural use of peatlands and m oorlands; and improve microclimate in urban areas 
by maintaining and increasing green  spaces and fresh-air corridors.  
Change location of economic 
activities. n/a 
Capacity Building Investigate synergistic effects of climate change and other pressures on biodiversity and ecosystems. 
Investigate biodiversity/ecosystems underlying climate re gulation services, in particular feedbacks that 
might work in our favour.  
Build awareness of the links between biodiversity/ ecosystems and climate, and emphasise the large 
potential synergies when addressing biodiversity loss and climate change in an integrated manner. 
9.1.4.  Need for early action at EU level 
The shifting of bioclimatic zone s is already happening. Theref ore the creation of ecological 
networks in fragmented landscapes (where la nd management practice has led to the absence 
of sufficient suitable patches of unaltered or se mi-natural habitat) need s to happen swiftly to 
half the further loss of Europe’s biodiversit y. Shifting bioclimatic  zones do not respect 
borders. This means we need to act in a co-o rdinated manner, as otherwise actions by one 
Member State may be jeopardised by those of a neighbouring country. 
 
EN 67   EN Positive feedbacks and healthy ecosystems are esse ntial for any strategy to adapt to climate 
change. Continuing, accelerating lo ss of biodiversity will compro mise the long term ability of 
ecosystems to regulate climate, may accelerate and amplify climate warming and could lead 
to additional, unforeseen and poten tially irreversible shifts in the earth system. Urgent action 
now to halt further loss  and degradation of biod iversity will help to maintain future options 
for reducing the extent of climate change and managing its impacts. Failing on the biodiversity targets and contin uing degradation of ecosystems compromises our efforts for 
emission reduction. 
9.2. Water 
9.2.1.  Impacts 
Freshwater resources have the potential to be strongly impacted  by climate change. Water is a 
critical core sector and climate change will a ffect the water cycle and water ecosystems, and 
also the function and operation of existing water infrastructu re (including hydropower, inland 
navigation, irrigation systems, drinking water supply and waste water treatment). Water is 
also important in energy supply and in tourism (see Annex 3). 
Changes in water demand strongly depend on econom ic growth and societal development, as 
well as patterns of demand change from other sectors. Climate change may exacerbate the 
impacts of already existing st resses, such as impacts from households, more intensified 
economic activity and (unsustainable) land use ch ange. Water-related climate drivers, such as 
floods and droughts will affect ma ny sectors and combined with wa ter availability, makes this 
a clear cross-cutting issue. 
Future changes in precipitati on, combined with rising temper atures, will have impacts on 
water quality and quantity, affecting many sector s. Limited water availability poses a problem 
in many parts of Europe, and this is likely to increase because of climate change (high 
confidence). IPCC (2007) predict that the percenta ge area under high wate r stress in Europe is 
likely to increase from 19% t oday to 35% by the 2070s due to climate change, with the 
additional number of people affected to be between 16 and 44 million. A particular concern here is the strong pattern of water availability across Europe, with the predicted declines 
greatest in the Mediterranean and Southern Europe.  
Such effects are compounded by the general incr ease in wealth and the generally hotter and 
longer summers increasing overall water demand (e .g. cooling water, ir rigation, water for 
recreational and tourism activities). Additional water demand for agriculture and industry will 
conflict with the additional demands for hu man consumption. Some of the autonomous 
adaptation responses will involve detrimental effects. Increased risk of (illegal) groundwater 
abstraction might result in redu ced levels of aquifers, whilst  increased desalinisation will 
increase energy use.  
Poor water quality will also be exacerbated by climate change. For example, rising water 
temperatures will affect aqua tic ecosystems considerably, conflicting with demands from 
other sectors, like tourism or industries for c ooling water. High water temperature, low water 
flows and therefore less dilution of pollutant s may have severe consequences for drinking 
water and recreation activi ties related to water. Because of s ea level rise, saline intrusion in 
coastal aquifers may increase, affecti ng the suitability for drinking water.  
 
EN 68   EN Predictions of more intense and more frequent  flood events and related economic losses were 
documented in the earlier infrastructure and coastal zones section. Building and high value 
agriculture in flood-prone areas is  still continuing. This, together  with climate change related 
changes in the precipitation regime, is contribu ting to higher flood levels. In other places, the 
natural retention capacity of the river basin is decreasing continuously. This may pose a 
particular problem in urbanised areas, where th e retention capacity of the surface area may not 
be able to cope with more intense precipitation events, possi bly leading to flooded urbanised 
areas and overflows of sewerage systems.  
9.2.2.  External dimension 
As Europe shares river basins with non-Europe an countries, Europe will be affected by any 
unsustainable water management practices impl emented outside its boun daries, and European 
activities will be felt outside its borders.  
It is also anticipated that water availability wi ll be one of, if not the key effect, affecting 
neighbouring countries and regions. 
9.2.3.  Adaptive capacity 
Deforestation and a large development of agri culture and urbanization have affected the 
infiltration of water at local level, increased the runoff of rainwater (with secondary effects 
like erosion of soil and nutrient flows), lowe red groundwater recharge and reduced water 
availability for vegetation as well as eva poration. For some regions, without action, the 
process can lead to desertification.  
In some agricultural regions, the development of drainage combined with irrigation has 
resulted in the disappearance of natural vegeta tion, emergence of salty soil and reduction of 
yields. In some cases, alterations  and regulations of rivers with the shortening of their total 
length have tended to worsen th e situation by accelerating the runoff of water from land and 
lowering land's ability to retain water. In ur ban areas, the mass use of cement and asphalt 
predominate. Rainwater is of ten carried away th rough public sewage ne tworks, instead of 
saturating the soil and ecosystems. By draining th e environment in which citizens live, water 
availability decreases an d results in secondary e ffects: growth in temper ature in cities, fall in 
atmospheric humidity and overall worsening of environment quality with possible health 
impacts. 74% of the European population lives in towns and this proportion is still expected to 
increase (80% by 2020). 
Wetlands are vulnerable to climate change but , if properly managed, also have a certain 
resilience to climate impacts and maintain services of value to climate adaptation (Wetlands International (2007)). Their capacity to withst and and mitigate certain environmental changes, 
enables plants and animals to survive and helps wetland-dependent communities adapt to climate change. The role of wetlands in relation to water flows and storms, greatly increases their relevance to global adaptation efforts.  As buffers between la nd and sea or between 
upstream and downstream areas, wetlands are able  to reduce climate impacts many kilometres 
away. Therefore, wetland management is justified as a tool that is rele vant to strategies for 
reducing climate change impacts in all region s of the world. Furthermore, restoration of 
already degraded wetland systems can be dem onstrated to be a cost effective tool in 
adaptation strategies. For example, the re-estab lishment of services su ch regulation of floods 
through wetland restoration along  rivers can increase the environmental security of 
downstream communities.  
 
EN 69   EN Wetlands exert a strong influence70 on the hydrological cycle, a nd management of wetlands 
must be an important part of catchment mana gement to reduce impacts of climate change. 
Where wetlands reduce floods, recharge groundwa ter and increase dry season flows, wetland 
hydrology is working in sympathy with wa ter-resources managers and flood-defence 
engineers. Where wetlands ha ve high evaporation demands or generate flood-runoff, they 
may create or exacerbate water management pr oblems. Whatever the hydrological functions 
they perform, decisions on wetland conservation will inevitably be taken in a wider context and will also depend on water scarcity and on other functions, such as human health, fisheries, navigation, recreation, cultural he ritage and biodiversity. Wetla nd management must therefore 
be an integral part of water body management if one is to mitigate succes sfully the impacts of 
climate change in terms of floods , ensuring minimum water flows. 
Table 6- Potential planned adaptation options for Water 
Type of action Description 
Mitigate the threat  Water suppl y measures (desalinisation) 
Certain land use practices that enhance flood risks sh ould be addressed, for example by an obligatory 
climate change related long term assessment of the ri sks related to certain land uses in a river basin and 
coastal area to floods, both to reduce the potential damage  of assets at risk as well as to ensure better 
use of land for reduction of the flood hazards 
Prevent effects  Water demand management. As a first step, improved incorporation of curre nt climate variability into 
water-related management would make adaptation to future climate change easier.  
Water management should turn from focusing on m eeting the increasing demand and protecting people 
from extremes of floods and drought, to protecti on of water resources in an integrated manner 
Change land use. Land management and land planning need to adapt in orde r to progress towards optimally water 
saturated land. A stable water cycle is required. Ba sic ecological functions like the return of water and 
vegetation to land need to be reintroduced. The abilit y of land to retain water needs to be improved. 
This can be achieved by the restoration of wetlands. The priority should be to keep rainwater in places 
where it falls, particularly in areas with signifi cant impacts due to human activities. An improved 
infiltration of water into the soil and progress to wards soil saturation will help the restoration of 
groundwater and surface water res ources and therefore the devel opment of permanent vegetation 
accompanied by cooler temperatures. Efforts need to ta ke place everywhere but more particularly in hot 
spots like highly cultivated areas and highly populat ed areas. Action includes technological measures 
like improvement of surfaces to help  soil infiltration, anti-erosion meas ures, use of vegetation borders, 
grassy lands, limiting of non-ve getation hard surfaces in built-up areas, replacing impermeable areas 
with permeable ones, avoiding clear-c utting of forests, ensuring the quality and structure of forests, etc. 
Zoning and land planning need to evolve in order to  make the development of such measures possible 
and effective. Many actors have re sponsibility in this respect: public authorities in charge of overall 
land planning, developers of build ing areas, construction companies, banks and insurance companies. 
A report for DG Environment71 has provided quantitative da ta on impact of desalination 
development to address water scarcity in th e next three decades. Under the worst case 
scenario, energy requirements for desalination and transport woul d be equivalent to 43% of 
Greece’s total energy production, 20% of Spain’s a nd 16% of Cyprus and Bulgaria’s energy 
production. Under more optimistic assumptions about desalination technology, these amounts 
would fall by over 50%. Looking at EU level, total energy use from desalination and water transport would range from an equivalent of 3% to 7% of total power production in 2030 of € 
8.5 to € 15 billion/year. 
                                                
 
70 Mike Acreman technical note for DG Environment on Hydrological functions of wetlands, 2008. 
71  Available at http://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/quantity/scarcity_en.htm 
 
EN 70   EN 9.2.4.  Need for early action at EU level 
Water management is a trans-boundary issue. Wate r is by nature trans- national and requires a 
coordinated approach within ea ch river basin. This situation means that any action taken 
upstream of a river basin in a given country wi ll have direct impacts downstream of the river 
basin in other countries. The abse nce of a coherent approach coul d lead to increasing conflicts 
between countries or regions in the context of cl imate change, be it scarcer water, more floods 
or impacts on water quality. Upstream regions could be tempted to carry on their economic 
development without looking into the problem s that this may cause downstream. For 
example, an increase in abstraction from water resources regardless of the downstream 
context could leave downstream regions with se rious problems of water shortage. Further, 
developing activities that minimise the re tention capacities upstream, might lead to 
unnecessary floods downstream. These effects will have  to be addressed at river basin scale.  
Since 2000 water management the flagship for addressing water management at the 
(international) river basin leve l is the European Water Framew ork Directive, and the Floods 
Directive (2007) follows the same river basin appr oach to address flood risks. There is also 
other water legislation at the European leve l, thus factoring climate change in water 
management is a key priority at European level. 
Furthermore, the many links between wa ter ecosystems and water-dependent users 
(agriculture, navigation, energy, tourism, etc) also justifie s action at European level. 
Early action is needed to build capacity to adapt in the water sector, but also in other sectors 
that are water dependent (agriculture, transp ort, energy, tourism, industry, etc). Extreme 
events like floods and droughts ar e already a problem in Europe  now, but their frequency and 
intensity will be exacerbated by climate cha nge. Damages from these events are potentially 
large and justify early action. Mo reover, recovery of natural wa ter systems from unsustainable 
use (e.g. over-abstractio n of groundwater aquifers) may take a long time and need to be 
prevented.  
9.3. Soils and Land use 
9.3.1.  Impacts 
Land use refers to the terrestrial natural a nd managed ecosystems systems and includes soil, 
vegetation, other biota and the ecological and hydrological pr ocesses in this system.  
Territorial and spatial dimensions are important.  
There are increasing pressures for land in Eur ope. Land is a limited resource and is currently 
sought by urbanisation, agricultu re, bio-energy production, fo restry, nature conservation, 
recreation and tourism, industry and infrastruc ture. Therefore, there are competing demands 
for land, which in some places in Europe is becoming scarcer. 
Land-use change is one of the relevant factors among the determ inants of climate change and 
the relationship between the two is interdepen dent as changes in la nd-use may impact the 
climate whilst climatic change will also influence opportunities for future land-use. 
 
EN 71   EN Some research projects72 have assessed the impacts of clim ate and market changes on agrarian 
land use in Europe. The main conclusion was that the effects of technology and market 
change are more pronounced than the effect of climate change. A wide variability in regional 
production in Europe is predicted, due to diffe rences in productivity and competitiveness of 
regions. Surplus of land is predicted in the gl obal economic scenario SRES A1 and a shortage 
of land in the regional environmental scenario B2. 
Some land-use changes, led by economic and social considerations  are increasing our 
vulnerability to climate change by rendering infra structures and ecosystems more fragile. This 
is the case for instance of the urbanisation in floo d plains or the change of forest and grassland 
to arable land.  
On average the sealed area, the area of the so il surface covered with an impermeable material, 
is around 5% of the total area in Member States73. In many European co untries the built-up 
area increased by 25 to 75% in the period 1950-1980. During 1990-2000 the sealed area in 
EU15 increased by 6%74, and the demand for both new construction due to increased urban 
sprawl and better transport infrastructures continues to rise75.Soil sealing through urbanisation 
dominates in the more densely populated re gions and major industr ial areas of Western 
Europe, in particular Belgium, Denmark and th e Netherlands, where 16-20% of the surface is 
built up. Sealing results in the creation of a hor izontal barrier between the soil, air and the 
water and thus has several severe  consequences such as disrup tion of gas, water and energy 
fluxes, increased flood risks, reduced groundwater  recharge, increased wa ter pollution (due to 
runoff water from housing and traffic areas being normally  unfiltered and potentially 
contaminated with harmful chemicals), loss in  soil and terrestrial biodiversity (due to 
fragmentation of habitats). 
The river Rhine has already lost four-fifth of its natural floodplai ns and similarly in the river 
Elbe only 15% of the natural flood plains remain76. This increases the damage caused by 
floods, as the buffering function of  flood plains has been lost. 
Moreover, in many cases the land uses approved are irreversible and preclude in the future 
any other land use, which limits significantly the possibilities to adapt in changing climatic conditions. 
The following climate change predicti ons impact specifically on soil: 
• Organic matter decline due to increased temperatures leading to increased GHG emissions 
from soil
77. However, moisture is needed for minera lization of soil organic matter to take 
                                                 
72 Wageningen UR, presentation available at http://www.zalf.de/home_ip-
sensor/conference/08_pdf/Audimax_02_Hermans_IALUC_Berlin_Apr08.pdf  . See also ATEAM 
http://www.pik-potsdam.de/ateam/ateam_final_report_sections_5_to_6.pdf   
73 Land accounts for Europe 1990-2000, EEA Report 11/2006 
74 Land accounts for Europe 1990-2000, EEA Report 11/2006  
75 Urban Sprawl in Europe - the ignored challenge, EEA Report 10/2006  
76 Internationalen Kommission zum Schutz der Elbe (IKSE):  Abschlußbericht über den Stand der 
Durchführung der im „Ersten Aktionsprogramm (Sofortprogramm) zur Reduzierung der 
Schadstofffrachten in der Elbe und ihrem Einzugsgebiet“ enthaltenen Maßnahmen (1996); BMU 2002: Arbeitsschritte zur Verbesserung de s vorbeugenden Hoch wasserschutzes ) 
77 P. H. Bellamy, P. J. Loveland, R. I. Bradley, R. Murray Lark and G. J. D. Kirk, Carbon losses from all 
soils across England and Wales 1978–2003, Nature  437, 245-248 (2005); M.D.A. Rounsevell, F. Ewert, 
 
EN 72   EN place and increased dry periods may, to some extent, counteract the direct effects of 
increased temperature. 
• Less soil organic matter may also mean more water run off (with in creased flooding risks 
in case of extreme weather events) and less so il moisture (when there is too little soil 
moisture, rain-fed crops and natural vegetation wilt). Degraded ecosystems have lower water retention capacity. This  aggravates the situation. 
• Increased erosion risks due to changing rainfall intensity and patterns as well as 
management practices, resulting in more seve re floods (roughly in th e Northern part of 
Europe) and droughts (roughly in the Southern part).  
• Organic matter decline due to increased ra te of breakdown as decreased rainfall and 
increased evapo-transpiration lead to aerobic conditions leading to oxidation – leading to 
oxidation of peat bogs 
78. 
• Increasing soil temperatures may give rise to  a more favourable habitat for sub-tropical 
soil-borne pathogens 
• Change in soil biodiversity (spe cies level, food web) due to both raising temperatures and 
changing rainfall intensity and patterns – maybe not so much a problem but no doubt a 
change – leading to changes in agriculture and nature.  
• Salinisation due to intensified irrigation as a result of droughts and due to intrusion of 
seawater and brackish ground water in coasta l areas as a result of sea level rise 
• Desertification affecting the Me diterranean regions of the EU  due to exacerbation of its 
environmental drivers (erosion, salinisation a nd soil organic matter (SOM) decline) as a 
result of climate change leading to farmi ng becoming extremely diffi cult, decreasing rural 
income and land being abandoned79. 
• Disruption of the soil functions: biomass pr oduction and decomposition;  storing, filtering 
and transforming nutrients, substances and wa ter; acting as carbon sink and loss of soil 
biodiversity. 
Some impacts will be very specific for certain parts of Europe, whilst other will materialise 
more generally: 
• Loss of soil organic matter resulting in increased GHG emissions from soil: while 
increased temperatures are like ly to promote a gene ral trend to reduced SOM, the extent 
of the decrease will depend upon the soil moisture regime and also on land use. Under grass or other permanent crops increased pr oductivity from longer growing seasons and 
CO
2 enrichment will lead to increased returns of  organic matter to soil. No direct impact 
                                                                                                                                                         
I. Reginster, R. Leemans and T.R. Carter, Future  scenarios of European agricultural land use: II. 
Projecting changes in cropland and grassland.  Agric. Ecosyst. Environ.  107 (2005), pp. 101–116 
78 see: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6972504.stm , or: Evans, M. Warburton, J. and Yang, J. 
Sediment Budgets for Eroding Blanket Peat Catchm ents: Global and local im plications of upland 
organic sediment budgets; Geomorphology 79 (1-2) 45-57 (2006) 
79  Jacqueline Karas: Climate Change and the Mediterranean Region. Gr eenpeace report (1997): 
http://archive.greenpeace.org/climat e/science/reports/fulldesert.html  
 
EN 73   EN on the population in general is predicted; the agricultural and forest ry sectors would be 
affected. 
• Loss of soil organic matter resulting in a re duction of soil moisture holding capacity (i.e. 
the water stored in the soil within reach of  plants) and decreased water storing capacity, 
which means that rain-fed crops will be mo re drought-susceptible. However, this impact 
will often be only marginal as soil water-hol ding capacity is determined mainly by the 
physical texture of the soil. This is likely to affect most areas, but not  those in which total 
rainfall is forecast to increase as increased so il moisture reduces the rate of organic matter 
breakdown. 
• Increased erosion risks due to changing rainfall  intensity and patterns resulting in more 
severe floods (in the Northern part of Eu rope) and droughts (in the Southern part): 
flooding may affect the population in low area s/flood plains in N-EU  as well as all 
economic sectors and ecosystems. Droughts/in creased erosion will affect agriculture, 
forestry and ecosystems throughout S-EU  
• Organic matter decline due to increased oxidation of peat soils: will affect the specific 
high value peat ecosystems in N-EU (notably in IE, UK, SE, FI, NL, DE) and agriculture 
in these areas  
• Change in soil biodiversity (spe cies level, food web) due to both raising temperatures and 
changing rainfall intensity and patterns: will af fect agriculture (Northward shift of crops 
grown; crop yields will ra ise in N-EU and drop in S-EU ; change in pests and pests 
control; soil fertility minerals management) ecosystems and nature conservation. However, the predominance of sandy soils of li mited fertility in N Europe mean that the 
potential increases in crop yields from a longer growing season and increased CO2 
concentrations may not be realised.  
• Salinisation due to intensified irrigation as a result of droughts and due to intrusion of 
seawater and brackish ground water in coastal areas as a result of sea leve l rise: will affect 
agricultural productivity in  drought affected areas 
• Desertification will spread within the Medite rranean regions of the EU: decreasing crop 
productivity may result in (further) marginalisation of  land and general landscape 
degradation, thus affecting the agricultural se ctor and ecosystems. Through a vicious cycle 
it may finally end in land abandonment, t hus affecting the popul ation in general. 
• The disruption of soil functions will affect all economic sect ors: agriculture (through soil 
fertility), forestry, nature  conservation, but also dr inking water supply etc. and 
ecosystems.  
9.3.2.  Adaptive Capacity 
Climate Change aggravates la nd scarcity (need for food and biofuels  production, need for 
natural areas and water manage ment, sea level rise, floods an d land abandonment), and reduce 
choices and opportunities. Some  changes are irreversible 
In Europe, most of the land is  privately owned, therefore th ere are many choices that are 
going to be made by the landowners as they real ise the effects of clim ate change. Additionally 
the local authorities and regional authorities in charge of spatial planning will also carry out a 
 
EN 74   EN planned adaptation when they perceive the ef fects of changing patte rns in rain fall and 
temperatures.  
One of the major roles of land us e planning in the future will be to define best practice models 
for land use according to the soil characteristics  and derived soil functions. The most obvious 
land use changes appear due to urbanization processes and the cons truction of transport 
infrastructure. Through this process, soil cons ervation and runoff and erosion processes may 
receive appropriate responses 
Table 7- Potential planned adaptation options for Land Use 
Type of action  Description 
Share losses  Support the rural economies of desertificati on affected and threatened re gions to limit/avoid land 
abandonment by keeping agricultural pr oduction and soil management viable 
Repay damage caused by flooding (directly or through insurance) 
Mitigate the threat  Reduce/avoid the loss of soil organic ma tter by adapting existing cultiva tion practices (e.g. ploughing in  
crop residues, using "green manuri ng") and supporting the use of soil improvers and organic fertilisers 
(e.g. compost and manure) 
Control erosion by choosing from a wide range of existing measures 
Control organic matter decline due to increased er osion of peat by raising the ground water table 
Control salinisation resulting from irriga tion by optimizing i rrigation techniques 
Mitigating salinisation by cha nging to more halophytic crops 
Prevent effects  Reduce/avoid the loss of soil organic matte r by adapting existing cultivation practices (e.g. ploughing in 
crop residues, using "green manuri ng") and supporting the use of soil improvers and organic fertilisers 
(e.g. promote the use of compost and manure made from municipal green waste) 
preventing erosion by choosing from a wide range of existing measures 
preventing salinisation resulting from irri gation by optimizing irrigation techniques 
preventing organic matter decline by adding (external)  organic matter (manure, compost, sludge etc.) 
contribute to halting biodiversity loss by changing crops and by allowing species to move , this 
enhancing the connectivity between nature conservation sites such as Natura 2000) 
Change land use. preventing organic matter decline by c onverting cropland into permanent grassland or forest 
Preventing organic matter decline du e to increased erosion of peat by phasing out agricultural land 
use/dehydration and convert into natural areas 
Enhance connectivity at different scales allo wing species to move and habitats to shift 
Avoid or limit soil sealing to keep soil functions intact  to the extent possible, notably the water retention 
capacity 
Given that land is a limited natural resource, b ecoming increasingly scarce given the demand that are 
arising, the same principles which are applied to ot her scarce resources ought to be applied to land use: 
more rational use of the land, the need to recycle the land, the need to act on the increasing demand 
Change location of economic 
activities. Relocate human activities in areas with a high flood risk, by moving those to higher ground 
Capacity Building Adapt to climate change by providing the popula tion with information and education on changing 
conditions. 
 
EN 75   EN 9.3.3.  Need for early action at EU level 
The EU has a major role in supporting the econ omic, social and enviro nmentally sustainable 
development of its regions through the structural funds. Moreover the EU has committed itself to ensure a territorial cohesion which will be put to the test with the unequal distribution 
of impacts of climate change. The decisions ta ken on land use planning can in many cases be 
irreversible, leading to the need to incor porate as soon as possible climate proofing 
considerations and long term considerations in the land use planning and spatial planning. 
Soil degradation affects other environmental areas for which Community legislation exists. 
Indeed, soil is interlinked with air and water in such a way that  it regulates their quality and 
soil functions enormously contri bute to areas such as biodiv ersity and coastal management. 
Thus soil degradation brought a bout by climate change will have  cascade impacts on all these 
environmental media. 
There are substantial trans-boundary impacts:  soil, though generally immobile, is not 
completely so and therefore degradation in one Member State or region can have trans-
boundary consequences. Losses of soil organi c matter in one Member State impair 
achievement of the EU’s Kyoto Protocol target s. Dams are blocked and infrastructure is 
damaged downstream by sediments from massi ve erosion further up stream in another 
country. Therefore it is of outmost importanc e to act at source to prevent damage and 
subsequent remedial actions, otherwise costs to  restore environmental quality may be borne 
by another Member State.  
Effects of local land-use changes on climate ch ange can be perceived at regional or even 
global scale, making clear i.e. the need for EU  action in co-ordinated  planning of land use, 
water and ecosystems. Around the Mediterranean Sea, the existence of  a feedback cycle 
towards desertification by land use changes (d eforestation), leading to large trans-boundary 
side effects, is suggested by numerous EC  Research Projects (Millán 2007). Land-use 
changes, combined with air pollution, trigger changes and pe rturbations to the hydrological 
cycle, resulting locally in the loss of summer storms and tipping the regional climate towards 
desertification and drought. This propagates to the whole basin and adjacent regions, and 
ultimately to the global climate system , through other mechanisms, involving: 
– An increase in Mediterranean cyclogene sis in autumn-winter through cumulative 
(greenhouse) heating of the sea surface by the water vapour and the pollutants (ozone) accumulated over the sea 
– The export of the accumulated water vapour and pollutants to other re gions at the end of 
each 3-10 day accumulation-recirculation cycle, which can contribute to summer floods in 
Central-Eastern Europe and 
– Changes in the evaporation-precipitation bala nce over the Mediterranean, which increases 
its salinity and drives the Atlantic -Mediterranean salinity valve. 
 
EN 76   EN 10. ANNEX 3 - SECTORAL PERSPECTIVE  
10.1. Agriculture 
10.1.1.  Impacts 
Agriculture is a climate sensitive sector, and will be affected by climate change, both 
positively and negatively.  
The assimilation of atmospheric CO 2 by photosynthesis is requi red for biomass production. 
The opening of plant stomata is regulated by the concentration of CO 2 and therefore 
atmospheric CO 2 concentrations affect plant transpiration (the smaller the concentration of 
CO 2, the more the stomata need to be open and the greater will be the loss of water. As result, 
in theory, plants growing in increased CO 2 conditions will produce more biomass and 
consume less water, and will therefore be less drought-sensitive. However, there are only a very limited number of these experiments worldwide, hence the uncertainty in the model outputs. In addition, since increased CO
2 concentrations will be accompanied by increased 
temperature, especially at night, photorespira tion will increase and hence some of the extra 
carbohydrate assimilated will be lost. 
Changes in hydrological regimes will lead to differences in water needs by agriculture. 
Decreased availability of water may lead to cr ops suffering moisture stress, insufficient water 
being available for irrigation, pos sible risks of reduced water qua lity, increased risk of soil 
salinization and conflic ts between users.  
For crop production, a change in the seasonality of precipitation may be even more important 
than a change in the annual total. The water regime  of crops is also vulnerable to a rise in the 
daily rate and potential seasonal pattern of evapotranspiration, brought on by warmer 
temperature, drier air, or windi er conditions. Interannual variabil ity of precipitation is a major 
cause of variation in crop yields and yield qua lity. Crop yields are most likely to suffer if dry 
periods occur during critical developmental stages. In most grain crops, flowering, 
pollination, and grain-filling are especially se nsitive to water stress. Management practices 
offer strategies for growing crops in water-s carce conditions. For exam ple, the effects of 
drought can be minimized by early planting of cultivars with rapid rates of development; 
fallowing and weed control can help to  conserve moisture in the soil. 
By reducing vegetative cover, droughts exacerba te wind and water erosion, thus affecting 
future crop productivity. Increasing demand fo r water is likely to lead to increased 
groundwater abstraction and depletion of thos e resources. The likelihood of these risks 
occurring is reported as high. 
Excessively wet years may also cause yield dec lines due to waterlogging and increased pest 
infestations. High soil moisture in humid areas can also hinder field operations. Intense bursts 
of rainfall may damage younger plants and prom ote lodging of standing crops with ripening 
grain. The extent of crop damage depends on the duration of precipi tation and flooding, crop 
developmental stage, and air and soil temperatures. 
Of course, the impacts of medium and long-term  climate change on agri culture and forestry 
are difficult to analyse separately from other in fluences (e.g. the effects of policies, market 
influences and technological development) rela ted to management. Some care must also be 
taken when making general comme nts at the macro-regional levels, due to the specific 
 
EN 77   EN climate, soil, and agricultural management analysis, which is extremely diversified. 
Nonetheless, some broad trends  in projections are emerging.  
Potential positive impacts of climate change on agriculture in Europe in general are related to 
longer growing seasons and new cropping opportunities in Northern  Europe (high confidence) 
from temperature change, and more efficient us e of water as well as potential increased CO 2 
fertilization of plants throughout Europe. Hence the inte raction of these fact ors in response to 
a change of climate will have different impacts in different parts of Europe. 
However, these possible benefits are counterba lanced by potentially negative impacts that 
include increased water demand and periods of  water deficit, loss of soil carbon content, 
increased pesticide requirements and crop da mages and less cropping opportunities in some 
regions in Southern Europe. There are likely to  be more general negative effects from extreme 
events across Europe, especially from the in tensification of the hydr ological cycle (summer 
heat, heavy precipitation events and floods, storms ). In some parts of Europe, e.g. the north-
west, rainfall is forecast to increase in wint er but decrease in summer, hence this may lead, 
even within the same region, to increased freque ncy of drought in summer and floods in 
winter. 
Several studies show the likely spatial patterns outlined above, with a strong distribution of 
projected yield changes across Europe. IPCC (2007) summarises that climate-related 
increases in crop yields are expected mainly in northern Europe, the south-central European 
plain and in the south of European Russia, while the largest reductions of all crops are 
expected in the in the Iberian Peninsula, th e UK, Benelux countries, north-west France and 
the south-west Balkans. The 6th FP PESETA project also project s regional yield changes for 
the 2020s to 2080s, with indications of the spatia l pattern of changes in agriculture yields 
across Europe under different scen arios, and show results unde r an A2 scenario by the 2080s 
that are similar to reported by IPCC (2007).  Pote ntial increases in yields in Nordic countries 
and in east-central Europe, will be accompanied by productivity decreases in Southern parts 
of Europe, which are among the larger producers. The overall assessment, at least in the next 
decades (for low levels of temperature increase ) is that the effects of climate change and 
increased atmospheric CO 2 are expected to lead to overall small increases in European crop 
productivity. However, these pote ntial benefits in northern Eur ope will not always be fully 
realisable due to other limiting factors, the oc currence of extreme events or impacts to other 
resources (e.g. increased soil erosion due to  temperature increase, insufficient water 
availability and in particular the inferior quali ty of the soil resources in the Nordic and Baltic 
regions compared with those of Western and some  parts of Southern Europe) and they will in 
some cases require additional investment in equipment and training. These changes are summarised below. 
Autonomous adaptation actions by farmers can  counteract and even reverse some of the 
potential impacts of climate change which do not consider cha nges in agricultural 
management, technological progress and trends  to better farming practices adaptation. 
However in some cases, autonomous adaptati on options will also in terfere with agri-
environmental processes, and could lead to an in creased use of pesticides to cope with more 
emerging and increasing pests, diseases and weed s, an increased use of mineral fertilisers
80 to 
                                                 
80 The implications of climatic changes on use of fer tilisers are very uncertain and will depend on the site-
specific effects on agriculture. While fertilisation could increase following expectations of better yields 
(and the contrary), the shortening of crop cycle in parts of Europe may lead to a decrease of nitrogen 
fertilisers. 
 
EN 78   EN compensate for a loss of soil fertility, an incr ease in irrigation, as well as in extreme cases 
land abandonment (when changes in climatic conditions or frequent extreme events difficult agricultural activity). In the long-term, as c limate impacts become higher, ecosystems could 
be affected by the changes, particularly from land abandonment, and significant NATURA 
2000 areas and other High Nature Value areas managed by agriculture could be at risk.  
Positive effects can also be expected from a range  of adaptation responses of farmers, such as 
more diversified crop rotations and farm activitie s, increased use of organic fertilisers, and 
land use changes. The projected improvement of productivity of pastures  in northern-western 
humid regions could lead to conversion of temp orary pastures to permanent with a favourable 
effect for carbon sequestration. Fa rmer's management decisions in response to climatic 
changes will be largely influenced by the ec onomic environment including market conditions 
and the policy environment, including  training and advice opportunities. 
Further efforts to improve and implement better plant protection and fertilisation 
management, and to improve the efficiency of  water use are needed to avoid potential 
environmental pressures. Development of Eur opean agricultural research is necessary as 
promotion of innovation and technology transfer  are crucial for improving adaptive capacity 
of the sector and deliver good adaptation. 
Biotechnology developments, such as drought-resi stant varieties requir ing less water, or 
varieties requiring less fertiliser may offer a solution for some problems, but will have to be used under application of the EU regulatory framework.  
The changes could also have wide r social effects, for examples  in regions where whole local 
rural population could be affected if the farmland was abandoned, or if the farming 
profitability reduced substantiall y. These impacts may be particul arly serious in EU southern 
regions such as Spain and Greece where larger  proportions of the popul ation are engaged in 
agriculture than is the case for NW Europe. Below, the main impacts are represented in 
different categories. 
10.1.2.  External dimension 
There will also be agricultural and economic  consequence for Europe from changes in 
agricultural productivity in other countries. The impacts of climate cha nge will lead to a 
change in agricultural productivity in many areas; while impacts on world food prices are 
difficult to predict, due to uncertainty over future demand, emergence of new cultivars and production technologies, there is a general expectat ion that world food prices will tend to rise 
in response to a warmer climate
81. Under some scenarios a nd models, there could be 
significant declines in agricultural produc tivity in many world regions, increasing the 
incentive to farm new areas in Europe, and to generally increase farming intensity, which will 
put pressure on the environment in Europe.  
The IPCC predicts that climate change will increase the global number of people at risk of 
hunger marginally, compared with overall large reductions due to socio-economic 
development. Nonetheless, the prospect of f ood shortages, and related concerns about food 
security, may bring a new element into WTO di scussions as some countries seek greater 
                                                 
81  Parry et al., Effects of climate change on glob al food production under SRES emissions and socio-
economic scenarios - Global Environmenta l Change 14 (2004) 53–67, available at 
http://www.undp.org/gef/adapta tion/docs/foodproduction.pdf 
 
EN 79   EN control over their agricultural ma rkets and exports. The extent of problems relating to food 
security will depend not only on climate change  , but also on other aspects of demand and 
supply, such as changes in dietary habits (m eat needing much more land to produce than 
cereals), and demand for energy, including biof uels, which can compete with food production 
for a limited land supply.  
Consequences for other countries of the adapta tion measures which may be taken in Europe 
are not so obvious and would need to be furt her explored. There may be greater market 
opportunities for third country e xporters in sectors which come  under pressure in Europe.  
The consequences for other countries from climate impact in Europe will depend on the 
overall impact on Europe's capacity to produce food. Some regions should see new 
opportunities to produce, or yields  increase, but others may see output under pressure. There 
is a risk of greater fluctuations  in productivity in Europe, as else where, with the risk of more 
volatile agricultural prices, w ith economic and social effect s. Under some scenarios and 
models, there is likely to be a tightening of the world market fo r cereals and other agricultural 
produce, but the impact of these changes will depend on the relative ch anges in imports and 
exports from Europe.  
10.1.3.  Adaptive capacity 
Currently agriculture is begi nning to adapt autonomously. Ac tions include use of various 
water resources for areas that experience dro ughts or shortages (like water from tertiary 
treatment facilities, or abstraction of ground wa ter independently of planned water harvesting. 
Changes to crops is also taki ng place by substituting mainly tree crops in the South EU or 
looking to more heat resistant less water-dem anding crops and/or varieties. Change in 
irrigation practices that may lead to water conservation and avoidance of losses may also 
happen to the degree that the needed invest ments will be subsidised. The degree of 
autonomous adaptation is expected to be variab le. A major driver will be the capacity building 
of farmers and advisory services to provide  support for autonomous adaptation, planning 
support by the authorities and fina ncial resources, while Southern  Europe is expected to be 
engaged in much more serious adaptation efforts.  Central European agricu lture is expected to 
adapt mid-term to risks related to flood preven tion. Agricultural insurance may help to cover 
extreme weather related risks, like fires, floods, droughts and storm/hale. 
In some cases, autonomous adaptation options will include an increased use of pesticides to 
compensate for more emerging and increasing pests,  an increased use of mineral fertilisers to 
compensate for a loss of soil fert ility due to climate change, and an increas e in irrigation. This 
may lead to further water scar city, a decrease in water qualit y, biodiversity loss or a reduced 
resilience to flooding. Land abandonment is an  extreme adaptation option, when economic 
and climatic constraints don't allow the furthe r use of land for agricu ltural production without 
substantial public subsidies. 
In any case, considering technology developmen t put the impact of climate change in 
perspective82. The strategy for climate ch ange responses in agriculture needs to  be consistent 
with safeguarding food security, viability of rural areas and the provision of environmental 
services. The challenge for agriculture over the coming years is the need to meet the demand 
                                                 
82  Ewart et al., Assessing impacts and adaptation of Eu ropean agriculture to chan ges in climate and market 
conditions, presentation from the Food Security an d Environmental Change Conference, Oxford, 2-4 
April 2008 available at http://www.gecafs.o rg/documents/GECAFS_Oxford_Reidsma.pdf 
 
EN 80   EN from increasing number of people – most of whom are in developing countries and will also 
suffer from worsened climatic conditions – while  at the same time, conserving the local and 
global environment in the face of growing pressures associated with socio-economic development and climate change, that can exacerbate the current limited soil and water 
resources. 
Table 8- Potential planned adap tation options for agriculture 
Type of action Description 
Share losses  Agricultural production is cos tly to insure because the potential losses are so high in relation to income.  
Insurance has a role to play, but it runs the risk of  moral hazard: any approach to sharing risks would 
have to incorporate safeguards to avoid inciti ng recklessness, which may itself be bad for the 
environment e.g. continuing to grow crops requiri ng irrigation, despite a significant risk of water 
shortages leading to crop failure – instead of gr owing less valuable crops which do not rely on 
irrigation. 
Mitigate the threat  Changes in land use/management could atte nuate some of the agronomic e ffects of climate change e.g. 
using frequently floodable land for gr azing instead of arable production.  
Allowing farm land improvements to revert can also help, e.g. by allowing field drainage to go into 
disuse, the field will be flooded more (with signi ficant agronomic costs) but it will contribute to 
downstream sectors/population by playing a water ab sorption role and enhance ecosystem resilience 
There are also ways to affect the climate locally e.g. shield crops from wind by tree planting, and 
possibly, on a larger scale, increase  rainfall locally by tree planting.  
These changes can come at a substantial agronomic cost. So it may be necessary to provide incentives 
in cases where there is market failure to produce the public good. 
Prevent effects  Many changes in agricu ltural practice can help to attenuate the impacts of climate change on the sector. 
Here are just a few examples e.g. changes from irrigated to non-irrigated crops; changes to crops 
needing irrigation less in dry periods; changes in crop varieties to withstand dr ought or pests or other 
pressures; changes in cropping patterns e.g. avoi ding monoculture, going for longer rotations, taking 
sensitive crops out of the rotation; changes in tillage practices; changi ng to systems which may be more 
resilient e.g. mixed farming, or ganic farming. In addition these measures potentially contribute to 
biodiversity conservation and enhancing ecosystem reliance 
Reduce/avoid soil degradation (loss of organic ma tter, erosion, salinisati on) by adapting existing 
cultivation practices (e.g. ploughing in  crop residues, using "g reen manuring"), the use of soil improvers 
and organic fertilisers (e.g. compost and manure), optimizing irrigation tec hniques and changing to 
more halophytic crops, raising the ground water table 
In almost all cases, these changes will result in in creased costs/loss of prof its: in many cases, the 
replacement system is closer to traditional farmi ng systems, which were generally abandoned for sound 
economic reasons. However, some of these changes (e.g. minimum tillage) may result in little or no loss 
of income, or in longer term benefits e.g. to so il quality. Besides their contribution to conserving 
biodiversity, thus enhancing ecosy stem resilience essential for adaptation could be rewarded 
Change land use. Agricultural land use if often more favourable  than other potential land uses in terms of climate change 
adaptation (e.g. better a farmed flood plain than one which has been concreted over). Some change of 
land use will happen in any case as a result of climat e change, and of economic drivers, leading to the 
abandonment of some agricultural land; but this will be  in areas where it is environmentally damaging 
rather than favourable, and cannot be expected to contribute to climate change mitigation.  
Preventing organic matter decline by converting cropland into permanent grassland or forest 
In certain cases the shift from agri culture to purely environmental serv ices may be justified. This is 
often most cost-effective if achieved by public land purchase, but can also be achieved under long-term 
land management contr acts with land owners. 
Change location of economic 
activities. This will to some extent happen spontaneously as a result of climate change ; however, agriculture can 
only take place in suitable conditions (climate, soil, water availability). 
Capacity Building Farmers are expected to take a number of  anticipatory measures relating to climate change adaptation 
on their own initiative. However, as substantial ch anges will be needed in many farming systems, 
farmers’ efforts could be enhanced and made more environmentally responsive, by the use of training 
 
EN 81   EN Type of action Description 
and farm advisory instruments, and by the explicit inclusion of climate change adaptation goals in the 
existing CAP instruments and in the rural development strategies of the Member States. As an 
anticipatory approach is desirable, both economically  and environmentally, an early policy response in 
both cross compliance and in Rural Development is highly desirable; and an early response by 
MS/Regions to help farmers adapt in an  anticipatory way is also advisable. 
10.1.4.  Need for early action at EU level 
In the EU, the Common Agricult ure Policy and its resources (bot h direct payments and rural 
development) provides a framework that can faci litate climate adaptation and adjustment of 
agricultural practices at EU level. Further c onsideration of climate change impacts and the 
adaptation needs has to be given in the CAP  and non CAP instruments (especially 
environmental regulations or directives that apply to farmers). In regions where reduced 
resource availability requires priorities to be set, it is important to have instruments which can avoid adaptation action in the agricultural sector to negatively contributing to climate change 
or other environmental problems. Moreover, the climate change mitigation potential, and 
other ecosystem services contributing to adapta tion could be further considered in the CAP. 
In some regions of Europe the potential effect s of climate change are starting to be very 
visible. We have suffered floods , droughts, heat waves. The agri cultural sector  is already 
suffering many of the consequences. Hence for this  very climate-sensitive sector early action 
is needed to prevent further damages and costs. 
10.2. Forests 
10.2.1.  Impacts 
Climate change will bring many and complex eff ects for forests in different bio-climatic 
regions of the EU. Possible future responses  of forests to climate change include: 
– Increased risk of biotic (pests and diseases) and abiotic (drought/storm s/fires) disturbances 
to forests health. 
– Increased frequency of extreme weather events  (storms, floods and droughts) leading to 
high risk of fire erosion probl ems, and damages to stands. 
Simulation of the IPCC SRES A1B scenario for the period 2070-2100 shows a general trend 
of a south-west to north-east shift the ecologi c conditions suitable for any given forest type 
potentially leading to natural afforestation in  places where temperature was a limiting factor 
and/or massive dieback in mature sta nds that are not adapted anymore.  
In a large part of Europe, forestry represents  an important economic sector and also provides 
potential for carbon sequestration. Forests cover 44% of the land area of Europe (1 billion 
hectares) representing one quarter of the global forest area. Over past centuries, land clearance 
in Europe led to signif icant deforestation. However, this tr end has been reversed and over the 
past 15 years, forest area in Europe has increased by some 13 million hectares. The wood volume in European forests amounts to 112 billion m
3 and is increasing, with harvesting still 
falling behind increment. Productio n of wood from European forests is increasing and more 
than 4 million people work in the forestry sector  (1.1% of total employment in Europe). More 
than 20% of European forests are manage d primarily to provide non-timber ecosystem 
services such as water and soil protection and protected forests now amount to 5% of total 
forest area. However, forests in Europe ha ve suffered severe stor ms, droughts and fires, 
 
EN 82   EN amounting to the loss of hundreds of thousands of hectares in some years. These forests will 
continue to be affected by climate and climate change, in terms of thei r distribution, function 
and species composition.  
Overall, projections of the net effects of climate change on forestry are complex (EEA, 2008). 
Tree growth may be enhanced by  some processes (including CO 2 fertilisation, warmer winter 
weather and longer growing s easons, and reduced cold related damage), but might be 
negatively affected by others (s uch as from reduced summer ra infall in some areas, wind-
storm damage, spring frost damage and elevated  ozone concentrations). IPCC (2007) report 
that forest area or suitability in Europe might be expected to expand in the north, but contract in the south.  
The impacts of climate change ar e likely to vary greatly between  regions. In the northwest of 
Europe, where water supplies are, typically, non-limiting, growth rates are likely to be 
enhanced by a combination of rising carbon dioxide leve ls in the atmosphere, warmer winters 
and longer growing seasons, and increased nutri ent availability as a result of atmospheric 
deposition and increased soil mineralisation. This  contrasts with southern Europe and the 
Mediterranean region, where more frequent and severe summer droughts are likely to lead to 
reduced productivity, more extensive forest fire s and, ultimately, to desertification in some 
areas. Species choice and the biodiversity associ ated with forests will also be affected. A 
changing climate is also likely to mean that th e levels of damage caused by existing forest 
pathogens and pests changes, while new pests and pathogens, whether introduced by mankind 
from other parts of the world or moving throug h Europe as climate change progresses, have 
the capacity to cause serious damage to  both protection and production forests. 
An important issue that transcends policies relevant to both climate change mitigation and 
adaptation is the permanence of carbon stocks in  forests. In southern Europe, the principal 
carbon stocks are in forest biomass, while in many boreal forest s, the soils contain 
significantly more carbon than tree biomass. In both cases, these carbon st ocks are vulnerable 
to the direct (and indirect) eff ects of climate change (lowering of water table, retreat of 
permafrost and forest fires, desertification, re spectively). Adaptation of  management practices 
should be considered to help pr otect these carbon stores, thus contributing to climate change 
mitigation.   
Forests, and forest flora and fauna, will need to  adapt to new climatic conditions (temperature, 
humidity, precipitation, winds) as well as to extreme events (storms, droughts, floods). Forests 
are likely to experience general stress caused by changing climatic conditions to which they 
are poorly adapted. The single most important determinant of the natural distribution of 
forests is climate, followed by soil conditions  and hydrology (although th e latter two are also 
heavily influenced by climate). Forests have evol ved with the climate, gradually shifting their 
composition and structure as climate has change d over the millennia, due to their inherent 
adaptive capacity. Young forests that are adapted to today's climate will live under sub-optimal conditions in the relatively near future , and therefore may experience stress. This is 
likely to lead to changes in growth, health, biodiversity and stability, and will be exacerbated 
by a projected increase in extreme weather events . However, the mechanisms that have acted 
 
EN 83   EN in the past under natural climate change will also contribute in the future to the adaptation to 
human-driven climate change83. 
Damage to forests will also occur due to extr eme weather events. Projections indicate an 
increasing frequency of extreme weather events in the future. This is partly caused by changes 
in the mean climate (frequency of  hot days, enlargement of the fire prone area or lengthening 
of the fire season) and by increased variability (increased amplitude of changes, leading to 
unusual weather patterns). Extreme events such as storms can damage or destroy trees and 
stands, whilst droughts can make forests more vulnerable to secondary impacts (e.g. increased 
risk of fire and vulnerability to biotic damage). 
Forestry is a sector with long life-times: stands established now  should be able to withstand 
the next 50-100 years. Estimates from a JRC study forecast84 that according to a typical +4° 
scenario, the ecological conditions where a given tree species now grows will shift 
somewhere between 500 and 1000 km north by 2100, though this does not mean that forests 
will be able to make these shift.  
Changes in mean climate (especially temperature)  will have serious imp lications for forests, 
but the increased variability (lik ely occurrence of extreme events  and associated uncertainty) 
is probably more important: For example, even  if long term precipitation projections are 
rather uncertain, more variability is very li kely, and extended drought s or major floods are 
more likely to be caused by increased variabi lity. Expected increase in the frequency of 
drought periods in central and southern Europe is  likely to influence an d alter the growth and 
competitive ability of certain tree species as was clear following the drought of 2003 for 
beech85. Increasing extreme weather events have a major long-term effect on forestry-reliant 
communities in Northern Europe86. 
The net effects of climate change on forests are complex and not yet well understood. While a 
new long term equilibrium may be reached in Eur ope, if climate stabilisation targets are met, 
the transition period is likely to be marked by  a range of negative impacts (above), with these 
being exacerbated by outbreaks of pests and di seases in stressed environments. However, it 
should be noted that the impacts of climat e change will vary geographically throughout 
Europe, with forest fires likely to dominate in  southern Europe and the limited diversity of 
tree species in boreal forests enhancing the ri sk of significant pest and disease impacts. 
Furthermore, evidence to date suggests that productivity in northern and central Europe has 
increased and is likely to continue to increase, where water won't be the main limiting factor, as a result of warmer winters, rising CO
2 levels and increased soil mineralisation rates. 
10.2.2.  External dimension 
Outside Europe similar factors are likely to be at play. Globally, forestry production is 
estimated to change only modestly with climat e change in the short and medium term (IPCC, 
                                                 
83  EFI, 2008. Impacts of Climate Change on European Forests and Options for Adaptation, Report to the 
DG Agriculture and Rural Development, available from 
http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/analysi s/external/euro_forests/index_en.htm   
84 Casalegno et al. Modelling Current and Future Distribution of European Forest Categories. Proceedings 
of the 6th European Conference on Ecological Modelling. November 27-30, 2007. Trieste – Italy, 
available at http://doga.og s.trieste.it/doga/echo/ecem07/ Main/27Nov/casalegno.pdf 
85 ICP Forests Technical Report, 2004, availabl e at http://www.icp-for ests.org/RepTech.htm 
86 Lange et al., BALANCE: an attempt to assess c limate change impacts in the Barents Sea Region, 
Climatic Change, Volume 87, Numbers 1-2 / mars 2008 
 
EN 84   EN 2007), however, in the case of the ma jor tropical forest basins ther e is a risk of drastic rather 
than gradual change in the longer-term. Give n these uncertainties the impact of climate 
change on the timber trade flows to and from Europe is difficult to predict. IPCC (2007) 
identified the significant abatement potential of the forestry sector. By  2030 the capacity to 
contribute to emissions reductions amounts to  some 3 GtC per annum. Although sequestration 
resulting from afforestation and reforestation contributes to this abatement potential, fossil 
fuel substitution benefits, both direct (sourc e of renewable energy) and indirect (timber 
replacing GHG-intensive materials) through sust ainable forest manageme nt, has the potential 
to play a larger role in most regions of the world. 
This mitigation potential, coupled to the urgent  need for global efforts to address climate 
change, will provide an economic driver for climate change adaptation, while also 
determining – to some extent – the species that are planted in afforestation and reforestation programmes. In this context, adaptation and m itigation are linked and it will be important to 
consider adaptation when developing mitigation strategies. The potential for large volumes for biomass and bioenergy to be produced from forestry crops represent a particularly strong 
driver for forestry-based mitigation that is like ly to lead to the widespread planting of fast-
growing non-native species. It wi ll be important to ensure that these are compatible with the 
local environment and play a role in helping both biodiversity and the landscape to adapt to 
climate change through not diminishing the eco system services provided by alternative land 
covers. This approach is achie vable and, indeed, extensive Eucal yptus plantations in southern 
Europe are FSC certified.   
10.2.3.  Adaptive Capacity 
For forestry, autonomous (or partially autonomous)  actions have been identified. This list of 
measures is not intended to be exhaustive, but to outli ne the type of meas ures that might be 
considered. They focus on forestry/environmental measures that will achieve social, economic 
and environmental outcomes. Specific social and economic measures are not considered 
outside of those principles incorporated with in Ministerial Conferen ce on the Protection of 
Forests in Europe (MCPFE)
87 and standards for sustainable forest management: 
• (Partially autonomous) Facilitate natural regene ration and forest growth in northern regions 
or high elevation areas (where low temperat ures had been a limiti ng factor for growth) 
causing a shifting of the tree limit towards areas h itherto covered by grasslands or tundra.   
• (Partially Autonomous) Increase diversity in forest (at genetic, spec ies, age, stand and 
landscape levels). This may require explicit changes to forestry policy, respecting the 
principle of subsidiarity, as genetic diversification and the planting of species outside of 
their current natural range. At a more practical le vel, measures such as conversion to 
continuous cover systems of management  will promote structural diversity. 
• (Partially Autonomous) Favour more resilient species. Again, this may require changes to 
forestry/biodiversity policy at global/EU/national level.  If non-native species are 
considered – either as a dive rsification measure in semi-natural forest or for commercial 
reasons in production forests/plantations, it is im portant to consider pos sible future impacts 
on on biodiversity. These impacts may include ri sks of invasiveness, the introduction of 
pests and diseases, inability to support loca l fauna and flora and incompatibility with 
                                                 
87  www.mcpfe.org 
 
EN 85   EN existing natural/semi-natural ecosystems. Risk s associated with su ch introductions should 
consider the impacts of climate change on such risks. 
• (partially Autonomous) Enlarge woodlands  and utilise topograp hical and edaphic 
heterogeneity in the landscape. The resilience of individual species to climate change is 
dependent on soil type, aspect and microc limate. Heterogeneity in the landscape may 
allows individual species to be retained if  their specific requirements are considered. 
Larger woodland units also contain a larg er and more varied genepool, promoting 
evolutionary adapta tion processes.  
• (Partially autonomous) Adapt management sy stems. Forest management has developed 
over time to accommodate extreme climatic events including wildfires and storms. 
Decision support tools are availa ble but may need updating to reflect the projections of 
climate change. Fire and wind ri sk management plans may also need adapting to reflect the 
changing climate, ensuring that infrastructure is  in place to cope with  extreme events when 
they occur. At a practical level, a more flexible approach to management (adaptive 
management) will accommodate the impacts of climate change as they occur if supported by appropriate monitoring and guidance. For example, rotation length may need to be 
reduced to reflect increasing growth rates in northern Europe; fertiliser applications may 
change in response to changing growth rates and soil mineralisation rates; the planting 
window may need to change in response to changes in dormancy a nd water availability; 
and promoting regeneration through stand manage ment and controlling agents that prevent 
regeneration will enhance the adaptive capacity  of semi-natural woodland ecosystems.  
• (Intervention required) Lands cape approach to adaptati on. The ecosystem services 
provided by forests can contribu te to adaptation at the lands cape level through the creation 
of habitat networks (aidi ng species migration and adap tation of biodiversity), flood 
alleviation and large-scale er osion protection. Such services provided by forests can 
provide a more holistic appro ach to adaptation that contri butes to wider sustainable 
development objectives than ‘grey infrastructu re’. However, such an approach requires 
careful targeting and an appropr iate planning framework to ensu re that it is effective and 
maximises available resources. 
• (Intervention required) Maintain and enhance forest monitoring. The development of 
climate change adaptation strategies and acti on plans is dependent on (a) identification of 
the impacts of climate change and (b) reporting on the success of adaptation measures. Both are dependent on a effective and comprehensive monitoring framework for forests including surveillance of the impacts of exis ting and introduced fore sts pests, pathogens 
and invasive species. 
• (Intervention required) Comm unication, education, training and awareness raising. In 
many instances, climate change  adaptation can be consider ed as embedding knowledge of 
predicted climate change with in good forest management pr actices. Awareness-raising and 
communication of appropriate adaptation measur es are therefore an integral part of 
adaptation. Communication of th e likelihood and far-reaching imp acts of forest fires in 
southern Europe – coupled to awareness raisi ng of the risks to the public and the need for 
fire management plans to the sector – is  a good example of implementation of this 
measure. 
 
EN 86   EN A recent study demonstrated88 that mankind is significantly influencing the carbon balance of 
temperate and boreal forests, either directly (through forest  management) or indirectly 
(through nitrogen deposition). 
Given the high degree of uncertain ty about the nature and dir ection of changes the best  
adaptation strategy is to keep as many options open as possible, which calls for diversity at 
species, age structure, stands and landscape levels. However, it will  take at least a full rotation 
(from decades to well over a century) to alte r the species composition of forests on the 
landscape level unless measures are taken to alte r the composition before forests reach the age 
of regeneration (e.g., in the case of young forests falling victim of calamities). Measures to 
adapt the composition of existing forests represen t the greatest challenge to the sector, with 
appropriate measures largely restricted to ad justments to existing good practice. For this 
reason, where opportunities for adaptation aris e, early action is therefore crucial. 
Table 9- Potential planned adaptation options for forestry 
Type of action Description 
Share losses  We could refer to reforestation and reconstruction ope rations after large storms, many 
countries must have material on this. Put strate gies in place to deal with large volumes of 
timber coming to market. 
Mitigate the threat  As the forest mic roclimate is able to substantially compensate for macroclimatic changes, 
there is an added need for continuous-cover mana gement, especially in semi-natural forests 
where natural regeneration is feasible (possi bly requiring control of herbivore populations) 
(and desirable). Reducing other pressures including air pollution, habitat fragmentation and 
invasive non-native species w ill also make forests more resilient to climate change 
Prevent effects  Diversified structures at the stand level (diversified species and age structure), may be 
difficult to implement because slow growth means long term investments, which may go 
against the short-term economic gains requir ed by some commercial forestry operators. 
Prevention measures (changes species composition, genetic diversity, reduction of fuel loads 
to counter the threat of forest fires) are po ssible. The protective functions of forests are 
increasingly important in the co ntext of climate change – fo r example flood alleviation and 
soil erosion control. 
Change land use. Diversif ied management approaches  at the landscape level 
Changing land use to forest (afforestation) may be  highly desirable for habitat restoration, to 
ensure connectivity (corridors) and to partia lly compensate losses of existing forests. 
Creating new forest through sequestration in growing biomass and the potential for timber 
and woodfuel to substitute directly and indirectly for fossil fuels. 
Protect biodiversity hotspots and climatic refugia. Such areas of special micro-climate that 
have allowed the survival of pockets of earl ier vegetation through pa st climatic changes 
(normally connected to geographical features lik e caves, isolated hills, valleys) are likely to 
do so again in the future. 
Change location of economic 
activities. Changing land use may be an option under extr eme circumstances (site  becoming unsuitable 
for forests), otherwise it is generally not desirable 
Communication, education and 
awareness raising In many instances, climate change adaptation can be  considered as embedding knowledge of predicted 
climate change within good forest management practices. Awareness-raising and communication of 
appropriate adaptation measures are theref ore an integral part of adaptation. 
Regulation and public If measures consistent with climate cha nge adaptation (for example, the requirement to address genetic 
                                                 
88 Magnani et al., The human footprint in the carbon cy cle of temperate and boreal  forests, Nature 447, 
849-851 
 
EN 87   EN procurement and structural diversity) were introduced in to Forestry Standards operating in Member States, the 
requirement for certification, particularly through public procurement, would promote the uptake of 
appropriate ‘no-regret’ actions. 
Capacity Building Preventive measures are likely to be of modest cost and may even save costs in the medium 
run but this longer term reasoning however requires integrated fo rest management and 
consolidation of ownership structures. The f act that wood and biomass are becoming more 
expensive and that increased pr oductivity is needed, could be harnessed as an incentive to 
address fragmentation of forest ownership, long-time regarded as a major obstacle in 
economic terms. Supporting forest owner a ssociations (FOA) and promoting shared 
management could be among th e most important measures. 
Forest monitoring at EU level. In order to monitor the damages to (and the migration of) 
forests and issue clear policy me ssages, national forest invent ories (NFI) must include new 
criteria (such as forest health , growth, diversity of tree sp ecies and ground vegetation, water 
and element budgets, reforestati on/afforestation rates) and en sure their assessments are 
consistent/compatible/c omparable with their counterpar ts in other Member States. 
The research community needs to gain better  understanding of genes and seeds flows in 
forest ecosystems in order to learn how to fa cilitate such flows for adaptation (e.g. corridors 
or "stepping stones"). Research can also contri bute to improvements in  forest management 
and better targeting of intervention to achieve landscape scale adaptation. 
10.2.4.  Need for early action at EU level 
A number of commitments have been made by Member States and the European Commission 
in MCPFE, which reflect the need for action on European forests, including adaptation to 
climate change.  
The EU EU Forest Action Plan89 provide direction for forest ry policy, while respecting the 
principle of subsidiarity to allow Member Stat es to implement specific actions that reflect 
local/regional environmental, so cial and economic circumstances. Importantly the Action Plan 
contains an Action directly relevant  to climate change adaptation: " Key action 6: Facilitate 
EU compliance with the obligations on clim ate change mitigation of  the UNFCCC10 and its 
Kyoto Protocol and encourage adaptation to the effects of climate change. […] The 
Commission will continue to support research, training and studies on the impact of and adaptation to climate change. The Member Stat es are invited to work on assessing the 
impacts of climate change, to raise awaren ess and to exchange experience, as well as to 
promote activities for mitigation and adaptation. " 
Rural Development refers to both MCPFE and the EU Forestry Strategy and funds already 
provide for a wide range of forest related possi bilities, including support for restoration or re-
establishing forests damaged by natural disaster s/forest fires and for afforestation in support 
of a range of climate change objectives. It will,  however, , be important to ensure that such 
measures introduced through Rural Development do not address adaptation (or mitigation) in isolation, but contribute to all asp ects of sustainable development.  
The forest sector has a crucial role to play in EU and global efforts to both mitigate climate 
change and protect biodiversity. This will requi re that adaptation measures are implemented 
to ensure both the productive capacity and ec osystem functions of European forests .are 
maintained. Unlike most other sectors, the planni ng horizon of forestry stretches from decades 
to centuries requiring that actions  are taken now or in the near future to ensure the adaptive 
capacity of forests as climate change progresses.  Actions must also be appropriate to both the 
current and future climate and reflect considerable uncertainty in the climate of the future. 
                                                
 
89  COM(2006) 302 final 
 
EN 88   EN The argument that this uncertainty should dela y action is not a tena ble position given the 
urgency for action. It does, however, mean that no regret actions should be sought that focus 
on increasing resilience, reducing other pressu res including atmospheri c pollution and forest 
degradation and embedding knowledg e of the likely impacts of climate change in sustainable 
forest management practice.   
In some regions of Europe the effects of climat e change are starting to become evident and an 
increasing frequency of devastating forest fires have been record ed recently in both northern 
and southern Europe. Some less visible imp acts of climate change are also becoming 
apparent, including declining crown condition in some species . Early action is required for 
this climate-sensitive sector to prevent further damages and costs. To support such early 
action, it is important to monito r the impacts of climate change on forests as they arise to both 
demonstrate the need for action and to inform  developing adaptation strategies and action 
plans, as outlined in the EU Forestry strategy.  National Forest Inventories can contribute to 
such monitoring efforts, as can EU instruments such as Life Plus under which ring-fencing for 
forest-related activitie s could be considered. 
10.3. Fisheries and Aquaculture 
10.3.1.  Impacts 
The future impacts of climate change are expect ed to result in a number of changes in the 
abiotic (i.e. sea level, sea temperature, acid ity, salinity, stratificat ion, light, and possibly 
thermohaline circulation) and biotic (i.e. prim ary production, food webs, et c) conditions of the 
sea. It is generally accepted that the reproductive success of marine organisms depends almost exclusively on these environmental conditions , and so these will affect fisheries.  
However, fishing is a "harvest ing" activity (rather than a "cropping" one involving seeding 
and nurture), and human activities also aff ect the reproductive su ccess and abundance and 
distribution of marine organisms. Climate change is an additional pressure on fish stocks whose resilience is low, because of the impact  of fishing activities and, to a lesser extent, 
pollution or physical destruction of habitats. 
The impacts of climate change are al ready being observed in European Seas
90. As outlined in 
the section 2.2.1, sea surface temperatures in Eur ope are rising, and this increase has led to 
many marine organisms in the European Seas app earing earlier in their seasonal cycles than in 
the past (EEA, 2008), for example, some species have moved forward in their seasonal cycle 
by 4-6 weeks (high confidence). These changes have important consequences for the way 
organisms within an ecosystem interact and ul timately for the structur e of marine food-webs 
at all trophic levels, including fisheries. In a ddition, many species of fish and plankton have 
shifted their distributions north ward, and sub-tropical species ar e occurring with increasing 
frequency in European waters whilst sub-arctic species are moving northwards. As examples: 
there has been a major northward movement of warmer water plankton in the north-east 
Atlantic (1100 km over the past 40 years) and a similar retreat of  colder water plankton to the 
north (EEA, 2008) and this will have an impact on distribution of fish in that region (high 
confidence); rate of north-ward movement of a particular species, the sailfin dory, has been 
                                                 
90 Halpern et al., 2008, A Global Map of Human Impact on Marine Ecosystems, available at 
www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/319/5865/948/DC1 
 
EN 89   EN estimated at about 50 km/year (high confidence). Such changes affect the composition of 
local and regional marine ecosystems.  
These observed changes in dist ribution, and the ones that are likely to occur with future 
climate change do not necessarily reduce the overall fishery potential, but might lead to 
changes by region or changes in the co mmercial value by region. Recent studies91 have shown 
that the northward movement of southerly spec ies has caused species richness to increase in 
the North Sea. However, this increase ma y have negative ecological and socio-economic 
effects; the three large species that have decr eased their range the most in the North Sea are 
all commercially relevant species, while only one of the five most increasing species and less 
than half of the all the species  that expanded their range are of  commercial value. A climate 
change induced shift from large to smaller speci es is thus likely to reduce the value of North 
Sea fisheries. The changes in distribution may also affect the management of fisheries and 
have implications for allocations of quotas. 
The other impacts of climate change on fisher ies potentially include food chain effects, 
diseases, and for marine ecosystems, increased ocean acidity, though the levels of catch (and 
sustainability) of commercial fisheries are like ly to remain a more direct factor affecting 
fisheries. The changes from climate are ther efore likely to increase the vulnerability of 
fisheries. 
It is too early to ascertain a ny actual impact of climate chan ge on abundance of commercial 
stocks, because fishing (resource exploitation) dominates the pressure exerted over marine 
biodiversity. It is also not currently possible to  predict whether northward shifts in distribution 
will have a positive or a negative effect on tota l fisheries production With time, such effects 
are expected to be more directly observabl e, though further changes in distribution and 
potentially the abundance of marine species ar e likely. Further work is needed, however, to 
establish causal relations between changes in stocks and climate change parameters. These changes are likely to include: 
• Changes in the abundance and distribution of fishes and zooplankton, related to changes 
in sea temperature. Fish communities will move in order to reach areas where the temperature is within their tolerance range.  
• Rising sea temperatures could allow some inva sive species to become more frequent in 
EU waters, related to changes in temperature too. New species  may be better adapted and 
displace autochthonous communities. 
• Changes in the food webs' components, resulting in changes of geographical 
distributions: fishes migrate, following their prey. 
• In a few situations e.g. early re treat of sea ice in Arctic areas, there may be increases in 
fish catch
92. 
• There are other factors in relation to regi onal seas, e.g. temperat ure is projected to 
increase and run-off to the Mediterranean Sea to decrease; for the Baltic sea, both 
                                                 
91  Hiddink, J.G. & ter Hofstede, R. (2008) Climate induced increases in species richness of marine fishes. 
Global Change Biology 14: 453-460, available at http://www.bangor.ac.uk/~ossc06/ 
92 Impacts of a Warming Arctic –synthesis report of the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment, 2004, 
available at http://www.acia.uaf.edu/ 
 
EN 90   EN increasing run-off and decreasing frequency of Atlantic inflow is likely to decrease 
salinity (EEA, 2008), in turn affecting sea ice cover an d stratification – the latter may 
impact on commercially releva nt regional cod fisheries.  
These projected changes in the location and avai lability of fish stoc ks will have strong 
economic impacts, as well as localised employmen t and social consequences, in coastal areas 
where fishing activities constitute the most important source of revenue. However, the marine environment offers less barriers to dispersal of species in response to climate change than the 
terrestrial environment, i.e. marine species ge nerally have a larger potential for migration 
(autonomous adaptation). 
As with other activities, environmental drivers may affect the outcome of aquaculture, namely 
as regards the availability of adequate resour ces upon the exploitation of which aquaculture is 
developed, such as clean water, feed, etc. Li kely impacts of climate change on marine and 
freshwater aquaculture may be  both negative and positive. Negative impacts include stress 
due to increased temperatures and oxygen dema nds; increased suscepti bility to pathogens; 
uncertain supply of freshwater; sea level raise; extreme whethe r events such as flooding and 
storm. On the other hand, positive impacts would include increased growing seasons, growth 
rates, feed conversion and productivity for some species; as well as opportunities for new 
species. Deeper knowledge, data and resear ch on the impacts of  climate change on 
aquaculture are needed in relation to mari ne and freshwater ecosystems and social and 
economic consequences for the industry  
10.3.2.  External dimension 
One illustration of external action in fisher ies is the commitment of the Community to 
contributing to the sustainable development of fishing activities at the international level 
(WSSD /Johannesburg). This commitment needs to be strengthened via bilateral fisheries 
agreements, regional Fisheries Organisations an d the UN Convention on the law of the Sea. 
Ambitious agreements at global level are a key ad dition to any action at European level, as the 
fisheries market is a global market and the recovery  of fish stocks in the European seas is only 
relevant if this happens at the global scale as well. There may be extern al factors if important 
commercial species migrate out of EU waters. 
10.3.3.  Adaptive Capacity 
Autonomous adaptation consists in adapting to new and constantly changing conditions for 
fishing. Fish species will occur in  areas where they did not occur before. This creates the risk 
of the development of unregulated fisheries and early measures need to be taken to manage 
emerging fisheries, which results a more cost -effective approach than try to reverse over-
fishing at a later stage.  
The potential adaptation actions are: – Maintain (or rebuild) resilience of marine ecosystems and fisheries. This means that we 
should do effectively what we try to do anyway - to redu ce the fishing pressure and 
fisheries impacts on ecosystem. Climate chan ge is an added stress on marine ecosystems 
and fish stocks on top of ove r-fishing, pollution etc.  Climate change th erefore makes the 
need to reduce fishing pressure even more ur gent. The first priority is therefore to do 
effectively what we try to do already to move to sustainable fisheries – to reduce overall 
fishing pressure and reduce capacity 
 
EN 91   EN – Ensure that adequate measures will be taken as changes app ear by developing a 
responsive and responsible decision framewor k . Climate change has highlighted that 
we have been operating within  a false mindset of nature  being constant - climate 
change and considerations of ecosystem li nkages require management to be adaptive 
in a changing environment. Proper monitoring and scientific analysis needs to be in 
place which enables early warnings of change s and also of regime shifts. However, 
warnings about regime shifts are very diffi cult to get because science does not have 
good methods to identify such shifts in th e early stages. Management plans must be 
made such that they are adaptive. This is what we already are trying to do with most 
recent plans. The discussion paper for the ne xt cod recovery plan does specifically 
mention the changing environment as a r eason to propose a new approach. We need 
to develop a responsible and responsive decision process whic h do not lead to 
complacency in times of little change  and can react rapidly when required. 
– Prepare response to distribution issues as fish stocks change distribution or new 
fishing conditions appear. Questions of di stributions of access will be raised in 
international fora as the geographical dist ribution of stocks change. We need to 
discuss and get decision rule s for this early on, preferably  before the changes in the 
sea have taken place. Another case is ’new’ stocks, when fish species occur in areas 
where they did not occur before. This cr eates the risk of the development of 
unregulated fisheries and early measures need to be taken to manage emerging 
fisheries – it is difficult to  reverse overfishing. We must establish mechanisms which 
introduces regulation (and dist ribution of access) in such cases. The increased access 
in the Arctic due to reduced ice cover is a specific case of 'new' resources becoming available to fisheries which need mechanisms  to distribute access. We need to use a 
sort of precautionary appro ach, not to repeat the same kind of activity that led to 
current overfished situation. 
Table 10- Potential planned adaptation options for fisheries and aquaculture 
Type of action Description 
Share losses  Compensations for decreased productivity 
Taxes on ecological costs of fish, charges 
Mitigate the threat  Switch to new species 
Increase imports 
Reduce production inefficiencies and waste 
Improve efficiency of fishing operations by more energy effective fishing gear and methods and by 
removing overcapacity in the fleet 
Reduce fishing pressure 
Prevent effects  A formulation of the best choice generally accepted is that the resilience of marine ecosystems vis-à-vis 
climate change should be increased with a view to  making it easier for them to endeavour the changes 
induced by human activities and to re cover to a "normal" situation. 
Since fishing itself is the most important pressure, it should be managed in a way that the cumulative 
effects of all pressures diminish, with the aim to  allow the recovery up to an adequate level of 
resilience. That is, fisheries manage rs should increasingly take into co nsideration the impacts of climate 
change and ensure the lowering of the impact of fi shing activities in particular. This option could be 
applied to many (not to say all) commercial stocks. Allocate species combinations and access at 
ecosystem level 
 
EN 92   EN Type of action Description 
Change location of economic 
activities. Development aquaculture 
Capacity Building Changes in consumer preferences , eco-labelling and certification 
10.3.4.  Need for early action at EU level 
Fish communities do not know borders, although fi shing activities are t horoughly organized at 
national, European and worldwide levels.  
Marine ecosystems (including also commercial st ock s) affected by climate change spread 
over maritime frontiers, and the level of the actions required to tackle climate change are likely to do so. If, on top of th at, one takes into account that fisheries management measures 
fall within the Common Fisheries Policy, an exclusive EU competence, the European 
dimension comes out as an  undisputed playing field. 
Taking into consideration the poor status of commercial stocks, ear ly action is needed to cope 
with additional pressures from climate change on fisheries. Scientific agencies assess each 
year whether the stocks are at risk that their future reproduction will be compromised, i.e. 
whether they are outside "safe biological limits ". Largely because of inaccurate catch reports, 
the state of some 57% of st ocks is unknown. Of those stocks  for which the state is known 
68% are at high risk of depl etion, and only some 32% of st ocks are known to be fished 
sustainably. In 88% of stocks, ove rfishing is so serious that more fish would be caught if there 
was less fishing. This number is way above the situation outside th e EU where the global 
average is 25% of stocks being overfished. Some  19% of stocks are in such bad state that 
scientists advise  that there should be no fishing.  
There is also overcapacity in the fishing fl eet with too many vessels chasing a dwindling 
resource. This leads not only to poor economic s abut also to poor energy-efficiency.  
Adding climate change stress on top of this means that there is an urgent need to reduce the 
overall fishing pressure on marine ecosystems and to reduce the overcapacity in the fishing 
fleet in order to contribute both to a lower fishing pressure and to lower greenhouse gas 
emissions. 
It is an integral aspect of the precautionary approach that fisheries should be conducted in a 
way which is robust to environm ental change and thus that fish stocks should never be 
exploited to a point where they are not resilient to environmental change
93. 
10.4. Energy 
10.4.1.  Impacts 
Climate change (and most of subsequent mitigati on or adaptation options) is expected to have 
a direct effect on both the suppl y and demand side for energy 
                                                 
93  COM(2008)187 final 
 
EN 93   EN 10.4.1.1.  Energy supply 
The changing climate may have significant e ffects on most energy technologies, particularly 
affecting hydro-electric resource, and water abst raction availability fo r cooling of thermal 
plants: 
– Decreased precipitation is expected to have a negative impact on the el ectricity generation 
sector where rivers provide c ooling water. Power stations may have to be shut down when 
water temperatures exceed certain threshol ds. Electricity producti on has already been 
reduced in various localised locations in Europe during very warm summers. This will 
affect countries which use the largest percenta ges of abstracted water for cooling in energy 
production. Rising temperatures an d lower river levels may co mbine to result in a lower 
efficiency of thermal power plants, due to higher power demand for pumps to maintain 
desired condensing temperatures and due to ch anges from wet to dry cooling towers. Note 
that these effects may coincide with  periods of high demand for cooling.  
– The share of hydropower to the total electricity  generation (excluding generation from 
pump storage) was 9.3% in 2006 for EU-2794. If Norway and Switzer land are also included 
in this calculation the share would be 13.1%. In creasing precipitation in countries north of 
the Alps and Portugal, as well as melting glaciers in the Al ps may increase run-off water 
and increase the potential for hydro electricity  generation. Even in countries with little 
change in the annual amount of precipitation, patterns are changing which may result in 
varied run-off and water resource availabili ty for hydro generation du ring extended periods 
of low precipitation. In Med iterranean/Black Sea countries , hydropower generation is 
likely to suffer from reduced annual precipit ation, due to changing climate patterns. The 
projected change in river runoff due to climat e change is estimated to increase hydropower 
production by up to 25 % or more in norther n Europe and decrease it by about 25 % or 
more in the south (EEA, 2008) and the hydropower potential in the continent is expected to 
decline by 6% by the 2070s.95. Dam safety may be affect ed under changed climatic 
conditions with more frequent extrem e flows and possibly natural hazards 
– Higher temperatures and atmospheric CO 2 concentrations in modera te climates (north of 
the Alps) may be beneficial for the growth of  biomass. This may favour electricity/fuel 
generation from agricultural crops, manure and wood chips. However, reduced water 
availability or extreme events in some regi ons, notably in Southern Europe, might have 
detrimental effects on crop yields and therefor e the potential for growth of biomass for 
energy purposes. 
– Efficiency of photovoltaic plants  could slightly be  reduced due to higher temperatures, 
particularly during heat waves,  though climate could also have  other effects (e.g. increased 
or decreased cloud cover at different times). 
– Increasing average wind velocities improve the electricity output of wind converters. 
However, the extent of increasing wind veloci ties for Europe is still unknown, and higher 
frequencies of heavy storms may negatively a ffect total annual wi nd power generation.  
– Extreme weather events, including storms, da mage electricity transmission lines. These 
may be vulnerable to incidences of increased  storm frequency or magnitude from climate 
                                                 
94  Eurostat's 'Yearly Energy Statistics 2006'  
95  IPCC Fourth Assessment Report WG II, Chapter 12, p.556. 
 
EN 94   EN change. Climate change is also likely to re sult in (albeit limited) electricity transmission 
losses due to higher average temperatures. Increased temperature and heat waves may 
increase the resistance of power  lines. The vulnerability of electricity transmission may 
vary across different member states and regions  depending on the age of this infrastructure, 
the nature (e.g. overhead or underground cab ling) and the remoteness of regions.  
10.4.1.2.  Energy demand 
Energy use for space heating is currently much higher than use for cooling in Europe 
(particularly in the North). Future projections suggest reductions in winter heating demand, 
but increases in summer cooling (EEA, 2008). However there are strong distributions of 
effects between regions in Europe. Both hea ting and cooling demand changes will be driven 
by autonomous adaptation in the absence of pl anned policy, and will be affected by wider 
socio-economic and technical trends, as well  mitigation policy, affecting demand. The IPCC 
WGII Europe Chapter reports reductions in winter heating demand of 10% by 2030 in the 
south-east Mediterranean regi on and 20-30% by 2100 in Finla nd under a business as usual 
scenario – though the reductions will be lo wer in the longer-term projections under a 
mitigation scenario. These reductions are most significant for Northern countries due to the high levels of winter heating.  Conversely, it reports increa ses in summer cooling demand, 
with examples of up to around 30% increase  by 2030 and 50% increase by 2080s in some 
Mediterranean countries, again under a business as  usual scenario. These increases are also 
important in relation to mitigation efforts. Th ese demand changes are expected to be largely 
autonomous, though they will be affected by socio-economic trends (e.g. population, housing 
density and insulation, design, planning, efficienc y, income). There may also be an emerging 
issue of increased energy demand for wa ter supply (pumping, desalination, etc). 
The net change in European energy demand is uncertain, but there will be strong 
distributional patterns, with si gnificantly reduced sp ace heating demand in northern Europe 
compared to significantly increased space coolin g demand in Southern Europe. The actual net 
economic costs are more complex to estimate, as winter heating demand is primarily from fossil fuel use, whilst summer cooling is from el ectricity, and there may be additional issues 
of peak electricity demand across Europe, especial ly in Southern Europe in the summer. This 
may result in serious problems for the grid dimensions.  
There may also be some supply-demand linka ges. Increasing summer peaks for cooling, 
combined with heat extremes, will potentially change plant margins, requiring extra system 
capacity to meet peak summer ex tremes (with higher prices for marginal electricity at peak). 
The electricity supply mix and distribution systems will be important here, and could have potentially positive or negative effects, e.g. the availability of renewables for peak supply 
(intermittency) or decentralised energy might in some cases exacerbate these peak issues (though it might have other benefits in relati on to lower vulnerabilities to other supply 
disruptions).
 
10.4.2.  External dimension 
There are linkages with other ex ternal generation networks (e .g. non EU European countries), 
and external electricity produc tion and transmission (e.g. Maghreb ). Moreover, security of 
supply maybe an important external issue, for example with the potential effects of climate 
change on infrastructure supplying Europe su ch as international ga s supply pipelines and 
impacts on fossil fuel extraction in areas that supp ly Europe. These external effects need to be 
 
EN 95   EN further explored. The potential impact of pe rmafrost melting on gas supply from Russia is 
also a topic which needs to  be explored in detail. 
10.4.3.  Adaptive capacity 
Table 11- Potential planned adaptation options for Energy 
Type of action Description 
Share losses  Insurance products for energy infrastructu re to incentivise rapid recovery of energy services. 
The social, social, economic, or environmental losses as a result of a crippled energy infrastructure 
system may be too great for any private capacity to  undertake remediation therefore responses to be 
coordinated through public structures, as  in the case of natural disasters.  
Mitigate the threat  Anticipate demand ch anges to ensure that sustainable buildi ngs incorporate adapta tion considerations. 
Promote efficient cooling systems where these are necessary. 
Improve multi-site coordination  
Adapt nuclear plants maintenance planning by reducing coastal planned shutdown for maintenance 
during summer periods 
Invest and install extreme peak load facilities, or  alternatives (storage, better connectivity between 
grids) 
Prevent effects  CCA criteria on new investments. New regulation policy to ensure sustainable generation and 
distribution 
Change land use. Promote decentralised sustainable en ergy generation where appropr iate to local conditions. 
Change location of economic 
activities. The location of energy supply will move to less vulne rable locations (areas not affected by sea level 
rise, floods, decrease water availability, change s in water quality, extreme weather events, etc.) 
More decentralised or disperse d energy supply infrastructure may be used to reduce risk.  
Major investments in relocation and reinforc ement of the Energy Grid and connections 
Capacity Building Review vulnerability of current and planned power gene ration and distribution systems within and 
outside of EU for all energy flows to, from and w ithin EU, including potential future changes in plant 
production (including intermittency), peak supply, and pl ant margins, at cross sectoral level (including 
demand from new sectors such as water). 
New market players may see opportunities for new ty pes of energy supply investment in a more 
vulnerable energy market.  
Review energy mix for mitigation and RES targets: focus on energy efficiency 
Enhancing commercial deals with high consumers for reducing loads 
Enhance capacity of staff to anticipate and plan fo r extreme events and rapid reaction response plans 
The adaptation of energy supply system to CC im pact may trigger building new infrastructure 
for the protection of existing infrastructure,  as well as building new power plants and 
distribution grid. These projects will have substantial environmen tal impacts, to be addressed 
under environmental impact assessment, and shoul d be compared with alternative solutions 
such as energy efficiency improvement and infr astructure protection th rough green structural 
approach. 
 
EN 96   EN 10.4.4.  Need for early action at EU level 
As mentioned before, there are solidarity issues  in relation to demand issues, because of the 
strong distributional pattern of future demand change. 
There is a need for further re search to improve understanding of the inter-re lations between 
projected climate change scenarios, impact s (including humidity) and electricity demand 
There is a need for building adaptive capacity in  the energy sector and mainstreaming climate 
change throughout EU energy polic y (including supply choices) 
The need for trans-boundary co-o rdination and of greater inte r-connections between regions 
and countries to help electricity flows. There is a role for co-o rdination of network regulators. 
There is a need to encourage i nnovation in terms of energy storag e or building design to store 
energy, as well as smarter grids and systems to use energy more effectively.  
As regards the security of s upply (increase resilience energy sy stem), there is a need to 
increase the resilience of existing ener gy infrastructure and ensuring new energy 
infrastructure is resilient to future cl imate impacts, including extreme events; 
As regards the trans-boundary dimension of wa ter management aspects,  there is: need to 
consider water supply for energy in the perspe ctive of changes in overall water availability / 
trade off with other uses (see water section) 
There are links with mitigation and it is neces sary to avoid mal-adaptation (through energy 
policy or autonomous responses) that would cause an increase in energy consumption and 
GHGs emissions (e.g. air conditioning) 
Early action is needed to build capacity to ad apt in the energy sector. Energy infrastructure 
(plant and transmission) has long life-times, and so climate risk needs to be considered and 
integrated as early as possible. Some autonom ous adaptation is already taking place, so there 
is a need to assess situation, highlight issues  with member states, and address trans-boundary 
issues. 
10.5. Infrastructures and Buildings 
The main vulnerability of the bui lt environment including infrastructure is to extreme events 
(floods and storm events, sea level rise, coastal er osion rates, and to a lesser extent also heat-
waves and droughts). These pose a specific thr eat to the urban environment, and may 
particularly materialise in coastal areas and ri ver basins. It is likely that extreme weather, 
including heavy precipitation will  increase in freque ncy and intensity in Europe, though the 
most severe effects are expected  in the second half of the century. Coas tal zones in Europe 
contain large populations. One third of the Eur opean Union (EU) population is estimated to 
live within 50 km of the coast,  and some 140,000 km2 of land is currently within 1 m of sea 
level (EEA, 2006). Climate change is an additiona l pressure and will impact in the frequency 
and/or intensity of extreme weather events, such  as storms and associated storm surges, as 
well as sea level rise. 
Infrastructure and building are likely to be able  to withstand climate changes within a given 
set of boundaries and thresholds , enabling some resilience in relation to climate changes. 
However, planned options are re quired to deal with market fa ilures (infrastructure provision 
 
EN 97   EN as public good, principal agent problem in buildings, etc.) and to face more extreme climate 
scenarios. Whilst some new building may ha ve some integrated adaptation measures 
(improved insulation, more air-conditioning, water harvesting), the location and site of buildings may not take into account the impacts of climate change on the site itself (for example when building on flood plains). Autonom ous changes in buildi ngs are not likely to 
be able to cope with, nor necessarily take in to account the more erratic or extreme climate 
changes, such as increased frequencies of extreme events. In the case of these events losses are more likely to be incurred. 
As pointed out in Nordregio (2007)
96, there may be advantages s ecuring functionality rather 
than on protecting individual infrastructures, in ot her words in extending critical infrastructure 
protection to critical infrastruc ture resilience (CIR), of which CIP is an important part. This 
concept is based on the statement that complete protection can never be guaranteed, that a small amount of extra protection might introduce a large amount of additi onal costs, that very 
often, achieving the desired level of protection is simply not cost-effective in relation to the 
actual threats. " What is especially import ant here is to create "s ocietal resilience" capacity 
relying on joint efforts, traini ng, continuity planning etc, of the whole society, including 
communities and businesses "
97. 
Climate change damages to Europe's infrastr ucture and buildings may affect the proper 
functioning of the European internal market (e.g. closure of ports, airports, road and rail 
infrastructure). Infrastructure networks ar e often trans-boundary and therefore adaptation 
needs to be coordinated. Furthermore, there is  a significant amount of EU funds available for 
infrastructure projects, in which climate adapta tion considerations shou ld be integrated. As 
infrastructure and building investments may have a long lifetime (>50 year s), and so are likely 
to experience a changing climate. Climate main streaming for new infrastructure and buildings 
will most likely be cost-effective and proportionate. 
10.5.1.  Impacts 
The main potential vulnerability of the built en vironment and infrastructure is from extreme 
events, such as floods and stor m events, and to a lesser exte nt also heat-waves and droughts 
and to their impacts on soil stability (landslides, coastline erosion). These extreme events will 
affect all regions, but pose a specific threat to the urban environment, where infrastructure and 
the built environment are most concentrated. Climate-related hazards will mostly increase, although changes will vary geographically (v ery high confidence) (IPCC, 2007). Socio-
economic factors are instrumental in the vulnerability to climate impacts from these extremes, 
including changes to population growth, occ upancy, land-use policy, ec onomic growth, etc. 
In Europe, 64 % of all loss events since 1980 are directly attributable to weather and climate 
events (storms, floods and heat-waves) and 25 % ar e attributable to wild fires, cold spells, 
landslides and avalanches, which may also be linked to weather and climate; 95 % of the 
overall losses of catastrophic events result from these weat her and climate related events 
(EEA, 2008). Overall losses caused by weather a nd climate related events have increased 
during the period 1980-2007 from a decadal aver age of less than €7.2 billion (1980-1989) to 
                                                
 
96  Nordregio Report 2007:5 Towards a Baltic Sea Regi on Strategy in Critical Infrastructure Protection, 
Christer Pursiainen (ed.) with the assist ance of Patrick Lindblom and Per Francke 
97  Boin and McConnell (2007) Preparing for Critical Infrastructure Breakdowns: The Limits of Crisis 
Management and the Need of Resilience. Contingencies and Crisis Management, Volume 15 Number 1, 
March 2007, pp. 50-59. in: Nordregio (2007)  
 
EN 98   EN about €13.7 billion (1998-2007). However, while overall losses resulting from weather and 
climate related events have increased clearly duri ng the last 27 years, be tter reporting, social 
change and economic development (land-use cha nges) are mainly responsible for increasing 
losses (high confidence). The most important  economic losses are from flooding. The 2002 
flooding of Austria, the Czech Republic, Germany, Slovakia and Hungary resulted98 in overall 
losses of about € 16.8 billion and insu red losses of about €3.4 billion.  
It is very likely that extreme weather such as heat waves, droughts and heavy precipitation 
will increase in frequency and intensity in Europe, for example (EEA, 2008) project that the hydrological cycle will increase the occurrence and frequency of fl ood events in large parts of 
Europe (medium confidence), even though that estimates of changes in flood frequency and 
magnitude remain highly uncertain. Within th e next 20 years projected changes in the 
intensity and frequency of extreme events- depending on the time scale and hazard- remain 
uncertain. The most severe e ffects of human-caused climate change are expected in the 
second half of the century. Some preliminary estimates
99 indicate that annual flood losses in 
Europe could rise to €100 – 120 billion (tenfo ld) by the end of the century. More detailed 
disaggregated work under the PESETA project has modelled changes in river flows in a 
changing climate in Europe, studying two rive r catchments (Upper Dan ube and Meuse) in 
detail. For the Upper Danube the estimated tota l damage of a 100-year flood is projected to 
rise by around 19 % from current levels unde r a low emission scenario (B2) by 2100, and 
40% (an increase of €18.5 billion) under a high em ission scenario (A2). The number of people 
affected in the Upper Danube is projected to increase by 242,000 (around 11%) for the A2, 
and 135,000 (around 6%) for the B2 scenario.  
Coastal zones in Europe contain large human  populations and signifi cant socioeconomic 
activities related to infrastruc ture and buildings. Section 10.8 d eals specifically with coastal 
zones. Climate change is an additional pressure  and is likely to have significant impacts on 
coastal zones, particularly via changes in the frequency and/or intens ity of extreme weather 
events, such as storms and associated  storm surges, and sea level rise.  
There are projections that the losses from extrem e European storms will increase by at least 
5% to €25 – 30 billion by the 2080s (ABI, 2005), and Swiss Re estimate that in Europe the costs of a 100-year storm event could doubl e by the 2080s with clim ate change ($50/€40 
billion in the future compared  with $25/€20 billion today).  
The effects of heat extremes and drought have important effects on buildings and 
infrastructure (including transport infrastruc ture), and the recent hot summers have been 
linked to large economic damages associated w ith building and infrastructure from ground 
subsidence (high confidence). Notwithstanding th e absence of a general trend in Europe as a 
whole, the EEA (2008) report considers that  climate change has likely increased the 
frequency and/or severity of droughts in some regions (medium confidence). It also reports 
that climate change is project ed to increase the frequency an d intensity of droughts in many 
regions in Europe due to higher temperatur es, decreased summer precipitation, as well as 
more and longer dry spells (high confidence) particularly for southern and south-eastern 
Europe – discussed further in the cross sect oral water section. Heat extremes may be 
particularly important in larger urban areas, because of exacerbation of the existing ‘urban 
                                                
 
98 Münchener Rück, 2008 
99 Association of British Insurers, Financial Risks of Climate Change, June 2005, available at 
http://www.abi.org.uk/Display/ File/Child/552/Financial_Ri sks_of_Climate_Change.pdf 
 
EN 99   EN heat island effect’. There will be  increased fire risks or wider fi re risk areas, which are likely 
to be particularly important for the Mediterran ean region in relation to significant increase of 
fire potential, an enlargement of the fire pr one area and a lengthening of the fire season. 
Average temperature changes may also affect build ing and infrastructure. In some areas of the 
Alps, the gradual warming of permafrost and su bsequent increased ground instability will also 
have implications for existing buildings and infrastructure. 
There are distributive effects in relation to the impacts of climate change. Coastal regions 
across Europe and large plains in Central Eu rope are more vulnerable to flooding impacts 
than other regions, whilst the risk of storm related damages are higher in north-west Europe. 
These effects will have greater  impacts on socially deprived  groups, which will often be 
compounded because of their higher vulnerability  and lower adaptive capacity. Deprived 
groups have lower levels of flood awareness, for example, and so are likely to be less well 
prepared. Social capital is also thought to be weaker in deprived areas and so provides less of 
a resource to deal with the flood and consequence. 
It is also probable that more frequent, intens e or unpredictable extrem e climate events will 
increase insurance claims, which is likely to tr anslate into higher risk  premiums and possibly 
to increased levels of uninsured and under-insured  assets. The rising cost of insurance is likely 
to have significant equality effects. Uninsured and under-ins ured households and businesses 
are likely to be those with lower adaptive cap acity, further exacerbating the vulnerability of 
high-risk companies and communities. The aut onomous response of insurance markets will 
therefore cause inequalities throughout Europe, both on an inter- and intra-MS level. 
10.5.2.  External dimension 
Port infrastructures are among the most vulnerable to climate change impacts (sea level rise 
and subsidence in some regions, higher frequenc y of violent storms and flooding) and this 
may affect the growth and geographical distributi on of global freight transport. This external 
effects need to be further explored. 
10.5.3.  Adaptive Capacity 
As explained in OECD (2008), Infrastructure is  a high-valued asset which is particularly 
vulnerable to climate change on account of its long lifetime over which climate change impacts will become progressively more pr onounced. Adaptation costs for infrastructure, 
therefore, could have two interlinked but differe nt meanings: 1) the costs of infrastructural 
solutions that serve as adaptations in many c limate sensitive sectors or regions; and 2) the 
costs of "climate-proofing" infrastructure itself  to the impacts of climate change. With regard 
to the former perspective, many of the cost es timates for adaptation in coastal zones, water 
resources, energy, and (to some extent) agricultu re are in fact, infras tructure costs. This 
includes costs of protective struct ures in coastal zones, storage or irrigation infrastructure for 
agriculture and water supply, as we ll as energy supply infrastructure. 
Table 12- Potential planned adaptation options for Infrastructure and buildings 
Type of action Description 
Share losses  Insurance schemes for key infrastructure in vulnerable areas 
Green-Building insurance 
 
EN 100   EN Type of action Description 
Public infrastructure e.g. road, shared water ways, bridges etc. ma y incur losses met by insurance or 
public purse.  
Specific financial support for coastal regions 
Mitigate the threat  Coasts: in creased investments in coast protection promo ting a combination of ‘hard’ (defences) and 
‘soft’ (managed realignment or re treat) adaptation measures. This combination of coastal management 
will increase coastline inundation in specified locations. 
Prevent effects  Review climate resilien ce (water availability, sea level rise and floods, extreme weather events) of the 
transport network and the need to update it 
Review of integrity of other infrastructure, prope rty and defence assets in terms of resistance and 
resilience to climate impacts. 
More requirements for urban pla nning (e.g. prohibition of building in flooding areas, more space for 
ecosystems and water retention to reduce flash floodi ng, green spaces for passive  shading) – coordinate 
with proposals for land use 
Buildings: adapting planning and building codes to ensure minimum adaptation standards for new build 
to include site selection, mate rials and techniques ; new markets for climate-proof existing and new 
buildings,, material and products;  
Educating building owners and occupiers on what to  consider in relation to preventing impacts on 
private buildings.  
Water/Energy efficient passively ve ntilated buildings and urban green space management to reduce heat 
stress (urban heat island effect, water resources) 
Change land use. Soft adaptation measures such as “maki ng space for water” through manage d retreat option and altering 
land use at the coast. This can bring benefits to bi odiversity, i.e. creation of  new saline habitats to 
replace existing inter-tidal habitats curre ntly at risk due to sea-level rise. 
Review land-use planning and manage ment to better integrate risks and constraints on buildings and 
infrastructure related to climate change. 
Change location of economic 
activities. Relocation of critical vulnerable in frastructures and buildings which provide essential services to 
communities.  
Capacity building Investment appraisal procedures and plan/infrastruc ture assessment should be updated to integrate 
potential Climate change impacts (e.g. longer planning horizon, in cluding climate change impacts). 
Availability and training of the wo rkforce in the sector are challe nging pre-requisites for adaptation; 
public policies (building codes, urba n planning) have a key role in dr iving adaptation in this sector. 
10.5.4.  Need for early action at EU level 
There is a need for trans-boundary coordination,  e.g. in relation to floods and an assessment 
of key vulnerable zones needs to be undertak en and trans-boundary i ssues addressed and 
highlighted to affected member states. 
Climate change damages may affect the proper functioning of the European internal market 
(e.g. closure of ports, airports ) and infrastructure networks  are often trans-boundary and 
therefore adaptation needs to be coordinated. 
Climate change resilience needs to be mainstream ed into major investments in infrastructure, 
financed by the EU  
The uneven distribution of damages needs to be addressed, related to the European solidarity 
principle. 
 
EN 101   EN Early action is needed to build capacity to adapt in the infrastructure and buildings sector. 
– Infrastructure and building investments may have an extreme long lifetime (>50 
years), and so are likely to experience a changing climate. Climate mainstreaming for 
new infrastructure and buildings will most  likely be cost-effective and proportionate. 
– Many existing buildings are not resilient to current weather and associated impacts, 
therefore the need for consid ering existing buildings is re quired and will take time to 
establish and implement. Without such polic ies and programmes, th e vulnerability of 
such buildings will increase over time as the impacts of climate change increase. 
– Early planning for new infrastructure and di splacement of vulnerable infrastructures 
would enable the related investments to take place over a long period in an orderly 
manner (reacting to disasters is usually more costly than anticipating and preparing for them). 
10.6. Industry and Services 
10.6.1.  Impacts 
10.6.1.1.  Tourism 
Mass summer tourism is closely associated with clim ate, in terms of the s ource of tourists and 
their preferred destination. At present, the pr edominant (summer) touris t flows in Europe are 
from north to south, to the coastal zone. The Mediterranean region is the world’s most popular 
holiday region: it attracts some 120 million vi sitors from Northern Europe each year, the 
largest international flow  of tourists on the globe and their spending is in excess of 100 billion 
Euros (EEA, 2008). There is also a major wi nter sports tourism industry in Europe, 
contributing close to EUR 50 billion in annual turnover to the economy of Alpine countries
100. 
Coastal and mountain tourism are the segments th at are most vulnerable to climate change in 
Europe. 
The effect of climate change (EEA, 2008) is likely to make outdoor activities in northern 
Europe more attractive, while summer temper atures and heat waves in the Mediterranean, 
potentially exacerbated by limited water availability, may lead to  a redistribution or a seasonal 
shift in tourism away from the current summer peak, either to a bi-mod al distribution either 
side of the summer peak, or a transfer to ot her more northerly regions of Europe, which 
become more attractive, as shown in m odelling work within the PESETA project101. The 
potential shift in the major flows of tourism w ithin the EU will be important in regions such 
as some Mediterranean regions, where tour ism is a dominant economic sector, though 
autonomous adaptation responses will be critical. 
There are projected reductions  in snow-cover over  the 21st century (IPCC, 2007), which will 
affect the winter sports indus try in Europe and its financial viability, because of the 
availability of natural snow or suitable conditions for ma king snow. The OECD (2007) report 
that the number of snow reliable  ski areas in Austria, France,  Germany, Italy, and Switzerland 
are projected to drop from approximately 600 to 500 if temperatures rise by 1°C, to 
                                                 
100 OECD, 2007 - Climate Change in  the European Alps: Adapting Wint er Tourism and Natural Hazards 
Management, available at http://www.oecd.org 
101 http://peseta.jrc.ec.europa.eu/docs/Tourism.html 
 
EN 102   EN approximately 400 if temperatures rise by 2°C, and to approximately 200 in a +4°C scenario. 
Note that some autonomous adaptation (snow machines) by winter sport resorts may impact 
on the availability of fresh wa ter and increase energy use.  
There is also an issue of cultural heritage and the potential threat of climate change (which 
includes but is wider than tourism alone). Th is is an emerging area, though it is clearly 
important for many European cities.  
10.6.1.2.  Industry 
The most vulnerable industries  are (IPCC, 2007) those in coasta l and river flood plains, those 
whose economies are closely linked with climate- sensitive resources (such as agricultural and 
forest product industries, water demands and to urism), and those in areas prone to extreme 
weather events (see infrastructure section). This may lead to an increased risk for buildings and production assets, further needs in insurances  and increased related financial costs. Water 
scarcity is likely to increase the difficulty and cost of using water resources, with important 
consequences for resource-intensive industries su ch as food and paper industries in affected 
regions. There is a decline of industrial water ab straction in OECD countr ies in recent years, 
which is primarily the result of increased water use efficiency but may al so reflect a shift of 
water-intensive industries (for other reasons, like other industr ies exposed to international 
competition) to third countries. However, the emergence of new water-intensive industries 
(e.g. certain types of biofuel production) or the growing importance of existing water-
intensive industries such as electronics will be conditioned by water availability and be 
subject to delocalisation to areas without water stress.  
Small and Medium-sized Enterprises may have more difficulties than larger companies to 
assess the risks and consequences of climate change for their business. 
There are also a set of wider issues related to  the concentration of economic activity in the 
industry sector. These include potential effects that climate change may have on the physical 
assets used for economic production and/or serv ices, on the costs of ra w materials and inputs 
to economic production, on the subsequent costs to businesses, and thus on competitiveness 
(or comparative advantage) and wider economic  performance, and employment patterns. 
There are also the wider issues for the financial service and insurance sectors.  
10.6.2.  External dimension 
For EU services and industry in general, the ex ternal dimension may be positive: the need for 
expertise and technologies to support adaptation measures th roughout the world should create 
many opportunities for EU companies to deve lop outside Europe, export or transfer 
technologies and know-how. This should be partic ularly the case in the water sector (urban 
water supply including development of desalin ation, technologies for water saving and re-
use), energy sector, construc tion (design and engineering activities) and insurance.  
Opportunities and threats also exist from internati onal competitors in the tourism industry. 
There are potential external dimensions for tourism, with some studies predicted large 
increases in global tourism (i.e. visitors to Europe) due to population and economic growth in 
the rest of the world, but also competition for European tourists. This might be particularly 
important in relation to winter snow sports. A dditional visitors may add to existing pressures 
(e.g. water availability) in some regions.  
 
EN 103   EN 10.6.3.  Adaptive Capacity 
The most relevant autonomous adaptation resp onse will be for tourism activity: If summer 
remains the predominant season for tourism activities in Europe, major shifts of tourist flows may eventually occur from the Mediterranean to more northern areas in Europe as an 
autonomous adaptation. However, other societal  changes (e.g. ageing population), may allow 
for a more flexible timing of  holidays among a large share of the population, offsetting some 
of these changes, and other studies show strong overall increases in tourism in Europe from 
international tourists (an important external di mension), thus it is the rate of growth by sub-
region that is affected, as well  as a greater shift towards domestic tourism in regions with 
increasing attractiveness, although these also po se sustainability and environmental problems 
(such as energy related emissions, water use) and these are likely to increase in the short term. 
These responses do have economic costs, for exam ple, in France almost half a billion Euros 
were spent between 1990 and 2004 on artificial s now-making installations, while in Austria, 
approximately EUR 800 millions were spent between 1995 and 2003. The introduction of these machines is also driven by other socio- economic factors (increas ing the reliability of 
resorts to increase revenues and expand their ski areas beyond previous natural limits),  
Autonomous adaptation from industry and services  most affected by wate r or snow scarcity 
will be in the short term to increase investme nt in water supply or snow-making equipments, 
together with relocation of activities in more fa vourable areas. Both categories of projects will 
have substantial envi ronmental impacts, to be addr essed under environmental impact 
assessment. 
Against that background, planned adaptation options can be considered to ensure the 
competitiveness of European industry and servic es, and mitigate potential environmental and 
social side-effects. 
Table 13- Potential planned adaptation options for Industry and Services 
Type of action Description 
Share losses  For all activities located in vulnerable areas (c oastal zones, flood plains, re gions vulnerable to drought), 
insurance schemes may be the first option, at least in  the short term, resulting in  higher financial costs 
and/or higher liabilities if risks are not pr operly assessed and covered by insurances 
Mitigate the threat  in the short term, ski resorts are likely to increase investments in snow-making equipments, develop 
high-mountain extensions (cost esti mates included in OECD paper); 
Prevent effects  Improve climate risk assessment in strate gic decisions such as production investments, location of 
activities. 
Assist SMEs in correctly assessing risks and adaptation actions 
Further increase the efficiency in the use of ra w materials, water and energy in the production 
processes" (this is a measure beneficial both for m itigation and adaptation). We have recently adopted a 
Communication on "Innovative and Sustainable Forest-based Industries in the EU" COM(2008)113 that 
has as one of its main policy obj ectives "Further improving resour ce efficiency in the use of raw 
material". - We think the "autonomous adaptation"  will lead to innovation in efficient energy and 
materials technology (add it in table 18). 
Change land use.  Change location of economic 
activities. in the longer term, abandon a number or ski locations  (locations in the Alps are likely to be more 
affected than Scandinavia); for Mediterranean countri es, shift the touristic season to spring and autumn 
(may mean reduction of mass tourism due to summer holidays, focus on richer customers); additional 
investments for water supply and sanitation, redir ection of beach tourism to regions bordering the 
Atlantic, North and Baltic Seas  
 
EN 104   EN Type of action Description 
Accompany relocation of water/ energy intensive activities 
Capacity Building Review vulnerability 
Research into new technologies and new methods of adaptation for businesses, in particular in risk 
assessment and management, build ing design, materials and equi pments, water management and 
treatment, production processes saving water and energy. 
Promote the flexibility of tourists a nd institutions such as school holiday 
10.6.4.  Need for early action at EU level 
As adaptation for the tourism sector will largel y be autonomous, private and local, there is not 
a clear role for EU action in planned adaptation. However, in some areas, there are links with 
cross cutting themes which will involve touris m. This includes the use of EU funds for 
tourism related infrastructure or development,  and in wider policy a ppraisal such as in 
strategic environmental assessment.  
– most impacts (see above) are trans-boundary, e. g. floods, storms, snow availability, heat-
weaves. 
– it should not be forgotten that tourism is a major employer and important economic sector 
in some regions or sub-regions. 
The impacts of climate change are likely to di ffer significantly between regions and economic 
sectors. Industries have the re sponsibility to assess and manage  the risk related to climate 
change for their activities, and to integrate th is risk in their decisi on making and financial 
management, for example to plan for new i nvestments or anticipate on the relocation or 
climate-proofing of industrial facil ities. As the difficulty is high er for SMEs to properly assess 
and manage their risks, an appropriate support should be given by Member States and may be 
part of planned national adapta tion. In addition to this autono mous or planned adaptation, the 
scale of adaptation measures and possible impa cts on the regional cohesion in the European 
Union justifies EU action to: 
– facilitate the conversion of regions and ec onomic activities impacted  by climate change; 
– promote solutions favourable to both adaptation  to climate change and to competitiveness, 
with the development of innovative a nd less resource-inten sive activities. 
Tourism development often implies very significan t investments in infrastructure and services 
and requires a high degree of certainty, therefore ear ly action is needed to incorporate as soon 
as possible climate proofing cons iderations and long term planni ng and to build  capacity to 
adapt in the tourisms sector. More generally, early adaptation is needed as some sector restructuring or relocation may be needed. Earl y planning and support meas ures are likely to 
be more cost-effective than late or reactive measures. Early planning by public authorities, 
including land-use planners and permitting authorit ies, would also facili tate the autonomous 
adaptation by other economic actors and reduce the risk of increased disparities between 
regions or social groups affected by climate change. 
This is particularly the case for resource-intensive industries,  such as the food industry, pulp 
and paper, chemistry or energy production, where clear and stable messages by the permitting authorities, including in the framework of the implementation of the Integrated Pollution 
 
EN 105   EN Prevention and Control Directive, should al low orderly and cost-effective adaptation 
measures by the concerned industries (such as th e relocation of unsustainab le activities), thus 
reducing the ultimate economic and social cost for the regions in which these industries are 
located. 
10.7. Health 
10.7.1.  Impacts 
Climate change is likely to affect human healt h, either directly rela ted to the physiological 
effects of heat and cold, or in directly, for example, through the increased transmission of food 
or vector-borne disease, or through other climate change eff ects like flooding. These health 
changes will have economic consequences, e.g. th rough medical costs, lost time at work, and 
less obvious costs that can be estimated by appro aches including willingness to pay to avoid 
pain and suffering. An increase in some of th ese impacts has already been observed over the 
recent decades in Europe (e.g. the summer heat waves in 2003 alone are estimated102 to have 
led to in excess of 35 000 premature deaths and possibly as many as 70 000). There are also 
other potential impacts from climate change on  health through indirect  pathways affecting 
other sectors discussed in this  annex (e.g. water, food, etc). 
The primary concern in Europe is related to h eat related mortality and morbidity, from annual 
temperature increases and heat extremes103, though these are also influenced by socio-
economic changes from population growth, age di stribution (the aging European population) 
and other factors. In EU count ries, mortality is estimated to  increase by 1–4% for each one-
degree rise in temperature. The PESETA pr oject estimates that heat related mortality104 could 
rise by 30000 deaths per year by the 2030s  and 50,000 to 110,000 deaths per year by the 
2080s, depending on the scenario (B2 and A2 -business as usual,  respectively, low 
confidence). However, autonomous adaptation w ill be important here as populations will 
partly acclimatise to future temperatures. With autonomous adaptation factored in, the 
numbers above are estimated at around 5000 deat hs per year in the 2030s and 20,000 deaths 
per year in the 2080s (A2, low confidence), w ith estimated economic costs of €10 to 20 
billion/year. There is a very st rong distributional pattern in th e impacts, and the elderly are 
most at risk of death from heat-stroke and cardiovascular, renal, re spiratory and metabolic 
disorders105. Whilst total deaths are strongly related to population, the change in death rates 
are much greater in Southern and South-Easter n Europe, not least due to the greater warming 
signal in these regions. It is also highlighted th at heat related health concerns themselves are 
likely to drive interactions with en ergy use and air conditioning for cooling. 
In addition, climate sensitive infectious diseases, such as food borne disease like Salmonella, 
have the potential to increas e under a changing climate. Some emerging work (PESETA, 
based on Kovats, 2003) shows that the disease bur den in Europe could be significant, with 
potentially an extra 20 000 cases per year by the 2030s and 25,000 to 40,000 cases per year by the 2080s (though these may significantly underestim ate the numbers by a factor of ten or 
                                                
 
102  Robine J-M et al. Death toll exceeded 70,000 in  Europe during the summer of 2003. Comptes Rendus 
Biologies, 2008, 331(2):171–178. 
103  Note that there will also be a reduction in cold related mortality in Europe, which will be at least as 
great as the increase in heat related mortality,  though this is less important for adaptation.  
104 Heat waves have not been considered 
105  WHO Regional Office for Europe, Heat-health action plans - Guidance (2008) available at: 
http://www.euro.who.int/document/e91347.pdf 
 
EN 106   EN more, due to under-reporting of current cases), and estimated economic costs (with under-
reporting factored in) of several billion Euro a year. As mentione d in the recent report from 
the FAO106 (2008) "Climate change: implications  for food safety", other food-borne 
pathogens could have an increase impact: there is potential for increased mycotoxin 
contamination, algal blooms/biotoxins in fish ery products and environmental contaminants 
with significance to the food chain. Autonomous  adaptation would be expected to reduce 
these numbers, though there is also a strong role for planned adaptation.  
There is the potential for changes in vector borne disease – though these are more important 
in relation to external contex t (outlined below). The IPCC (2007)  projects that climate change 
could lead to changes in infectious disease transmission by vectors such as mosquitoes and 
ticks, as a result of changes in  their geographic ranges, seas ons of activity and population 
sizes, though socio-economic factors are also important, including the movement of people 
and goods, and changes in land use. While some climate change related models estimate a 
potential increase of malaria risk in parts of Europe, there is agreement that the risk of 
transmission of malaria related to localized c limate change is very small, especially where 
there is adequate health se rvices and management of mosquito control (EEA, 2008). 
Nonetheless, new challenges can emerge, as w ith the Chikungunya virus outbreak in Europe; 
and the presence of a suitable vector might allo w for future local outbreaks. There are also 
observed changes in vector dist ribution - the limit of tick dist ribution in the EU is shifting 
northwards and to higher altitudes: and a shift towards milder winters may enable expansion of the range of Lyme disease. Similarly, the vector-borne disease leishmaniasis, transmitted by sandflies, has been  reported in vector hosts further nor th, and there are reports of changes 
in the geographical distribution of  the sandfly vector. The role of  climate change in the future 
epidemiology of other di seases is uncertain.  
While flooding is the most frequent weather rela ted risk in Europe, the number of direct 
deaths and injuries is low, and likely to remain  so even with projected increases in riverine 
and coastal flooding. However, flood events do have important effects on wider well bring 
(mental health, stress and depression). The PESETA study has estimated the wider health 
risks of coastal flooding in Europe (see coasta l section), and estimates – in the absence of 
adaptation – that these indirect health effect s could have economic costs of €0.8 to 1.4 billion 
per year by the 2080s (B2 and A2 scenarios respectively, with high sea level rise)  
A number of water related issues are also important (see also other sections). Heavy 
precipitation has been linked to a number of  drinking water outbreaks (from mobilising 
pathogens or water contamination), and water borne diseases may rise with increases in 
extreme rainfall. Reductions in summer water flows may increase the potential for contamination. Higher water temperatures may also  result in increased occurrence of harmful 
algal blooms, and increase the faecal bacteria and incidence of pathogens, which could affect 
drinking water intakes and wate r bodies used for recreation.  
Finally, there are a number of other emerging hea lth issues from climate change in Europe, 
where quantification and valuation have not been  explored on a Europe wide based. A warmer 
climate may also have important effects on air qu ality in Europe, in te rms of concentrations 
and dispersion of air pollutants.  Whilst air pollution levels have reduced dramatically in 
recent decades in Europe, the health risks of ai r pollution are still significant, primarily from 
                                                
 
106  FAO, Climate Change: Implications for Food Safety, Rome, 2008, available at 
http://www.fao.org/docrep/010/i0195e/i0195e00.htm 
 
 
EN 107   EN particulate matter and ozone, see the Thematic  Strategy on Air Pollution. Climate change has 
some potential to affect air pollution, leading to a possible increase in respiratory diseases and 
mortality, though these changes wi ll be strongly determined by future air quality policy and 
climate policy (mitigation). The effects of climate change are most likely to be important in relation to ozone – a major pollu tant in many parts of Europe. The EEA (2008) reports that 
climate variability and change ha s contributed to an increase in  ozone concentration in central 
and South-Western Europe, and the climate-induced increase in ozone levels might hinder 
current ozone abatement. There may also be correlations between heat waves and high air 
pollution more generally that have implications  for health. There are no detailed projections 
for the future effects of climate change on air pollution in Europe - and even recent studies on 
air pollution (e.g. TSAP) have not factored in how climate change  might influence air quality 
levels
107. Nonetheless, there are some  individual country studies wh ich suggest this could be 
important, for example, it has been estimated for the UK that there could be around 800 additional ozone-related deaths by 2020 per year  due to climate change (UK Department of 
Health and Health Protection Agency, 2008), and US studies indicate potentially significant 
increases in ozone concentrations and related mortality (5%) from climate change (5%) by the 
2050s.  
There may be changes in solar ultraviolet (UV)  radiation from climate changeand in turn 
changes in induced cortical cataracts, cuta neous malignant melanoma and sunburn . Higher 
ambient temperatures will influence clothing choices and time spent outdoors, potentially 
increasing UV exposure in some regions and de creasing it in others.(IPCC, 2007) though this 
will be strongly influenced by behaviour. There is also the potential for the seasonality and 
length of allergic disorders (‘hay fever’) to change  under a future climate, with implications of 
direct costs in terms of over the counter medicat ions for allergic rhinitis, and wider economic 
costs to individuals. Finally, ther e will be a range of indirect  health effects from climate 
change acting on other health determinants. 
The health effects of climate change will be un evenly distributed across regions of Europe. 
Health and well being are also strongly related to socio-economi c drivers, such as income, 
housing, employment, education and lifestyle. In combination with climate change, these will 
alter health inequities within  and between countries, and lead to uneven distribution and 
additional stresses for lower income groups and certain vulnerable groups, e.g. children, the 
elderly, and those with existing illness. As an  example the evidence on current heat related 
mortality has been shown to have strong socio-economic dependence. For some effects, e.g. heat related and air pollution rela ted mortality, there is a greater vulnerability for the elderly, 
and there maybe additional factors for this gr oup in relation to socio-economic status. These 
inequality issues are even more pronounced in re lation to external fact ors (effects outside the 
EU). 
10.7.2.  External 
dimension 
Climate-induced changes in the potential dist ribution of malaria an d other vector borne 
diseases are projected mainly in poor and vulne rable regions globally. In Europe localised 
outbreaks are possible in areas, even in cases where the disease has been eradicated, but vectors are still present. A majo r factor here will be the external dimensi on, either from risk 
from Europeans travelling in ende mic areas, or through migration. 
                                                
 
107  There are an estimated 21000 premature deaths from ozone each year in the EU, as well as over an 
estimated 100 millions respiratory symptoms days, see the TSAP.  
 
EN 108   EN 10.7.3.  Adaptive Capacity 
Table 14- Potential planned adaptation options for Health 
Type of action Description 
Mitigate the threat  Revised air and water quality controls e.g.  tighter controls on emissions leading to ozone formation. 
Increased frequency of microbiological  testing of foods and other measur es to mitigate the risk of food 
poisoning. 
Development of heat health action plans (heat-wav e early warning and public health response), the 
strengthening of emergency medical services, improve ment of climate-sensitive disease surveillance, 
and actions to increase accessibility to key determinan ts of health, such as clean water, energy and 
sanitation. 
Prevent effects  Much adaptation can be achieved in the context of pursu ing wider development objectives—for 
example, improved health and education services. 
The maintaining / strengthening of public health infr astructure is often viewed as the “most important, 
cost-effective and urgently needed ” adaptation strategy. This include s the reinforcement of public 
health policies that recognise climate risk, public health training, more effective surveillance and 
emergency response systems, and sustainable preven tion and control programs. Education of public and 
health professionals. 
As vulnerability to climate change can be exacerbate d by other stresses, including lack of preparedness 
or high burden of disease, it is important to include risks from climate into pub lic health policies, thus 
strengthening health services' preparedne ss and enhancing inte rnational cooperation 
Change land use. Greening urban areas, Green roofs 
Change location of economic 
activities. It is advisable for critical activities for public health  (water treatment works; energy supply; hospitals) 
to be based in locations at less risk from extreme weather events. 
Capacity Building The main determinants of a communi ty’s adaptive capacity are: economic wealth, technology, 
information and skills, infrastructure, institutions, an d equity. Adaptive capacity is also a function of 
current population health status and pre-existing disease burdens. 
So far, little research has been conducted on estimatin g the cost of the curren t climate sensitive disease 
burden, or of health-specific adaptation strategies. 
Research and sharing and implem entation of best practice in building design to minimise excess 
temperatures within buildings. 
Monitor changes in vector-borne disease distribution 
Research on physical and mental stressors in old ag e (links the aging popula tion and climate change). 
10.7.4.  Need for early action at EU level  
The appropriateness of various  adaptation measures depends on local circumstances, taking 
into consideration the projected severity of the effect considered, the degree to which the 
population is affected, the age distribution of the population, th e level of distribution of 
economic resources, the proportion of population living in urban centres, the type of, housing 
and the systems in place (if any) to protect vulnerable groups. 
While most of adaptation measur es regarding health would be most appropriate at national, 
regional and local level, it has to be taken into considerati on that some impacts are trans-
boundary (e.g. floods, storms, disease spread) and in  extreme cases, could temporarily affect 
the proper functioning of the European internal market (food availability  / security) and so 
action needs to be undertaken at EU level; in addition, in  case of severe damages the 
European solidarity principle should be applied. There are also specific health related areas with strong EU competence, e.g. in relation to air and water quality. 
 
EN 109   EN Improvement of international surveillance syst ems are needed to facilitate national and 
regional preparedness to epidemic-prone diseas e and to reduce their vulnerability to them 
Economies of scale could be made with respect the exch ange of information; in this respect, 
EU action would be most appropriate in terms of: 
– Building adaptive capacity 
– Coordinating early warning systems, 
– Setting up a comprehensive communication strategy 
– Reviewing and, where necessary, up dating relevant EU legislation 
– Supporting key actions with a vi ew to ensure that the spec ificities of particularly 
vulnerable groups are taken into account  within the policy making process. 
In general, early adaptation actions with re gard to health would be relevant when: 
– action measures have already been shown to be effective under curr ent climate conditions; 
– severe impacts are possible (for exampl e, high mortality from heat waves); 
– multisectoral alliances, partnerships and networks are in place; 
– adaptation measures have a long lead time (for  example, changing infrastructure to reduce 
the extent of an urban heat island effect); 
– decisions have long-term effects (for example, building settlements in areas that are at risk 
of flooding); and 
– there is a need to reverse trends that thr eaten adaptive capacity in the health sector. 
10.8. Coastal areas 
The impacts of climate change on coastal zones have been mentioned in other parts of the 
report. However, because of thei r importance, the effects on coas ts are also reported in this 
separate section. 
Coastal zones in Europe contain large human  populations and signifi cant socioeconomic 
activities. They also support diverse ecosystems that provide important habitats and sources of 
food, as well as providing other ecosystem serv ices. One third of the European Union (EU) 
population is estimated to live within  50 km of the coast, and some 140,000 km2 of land is 
currently within 1 m of sea level (EEA, 2004).  
Significantly inhabited coastal ar eas in countries such as the Netherlands, England, Denmark, 
Germany and Italy are already below normal hi gh-tide levels, and more extensive areas are 
prone to flooding from storm surges. Climate change  is an additional pressure and is likely to 
have significant impacts on coastal zones, partic ularly via sea level ri se and changes in the 
frequency and/or intensity of extreme weather ev ents, such as storms and associated surges. 
The most threatened coastal environments within  Europe are deltas, low-lying coastal plains, 
islands and barrier islands, beaches, coastal wetl ands, and estuaries. Direct impacts from sea 
 
EN 110   EN level rise include inundation and displacement of wetlands, lowlands, coastal erosion, 
increased storm flooding and damage, increased sa linity in estuaries and coastal aquifers, and 
rising coastal water tables and impeded draina ge. Potential indirect impacts include changes 
in the distribution of bottom sediments, change s in the functions of coastal ecosystems and 
impacts on human activities. 
There are emerging estimates of the potential ph ysical impacts (area lo st, people flooded) and 
economic costs to coastal sectors in Europe from  sea level rise and from storm events. There 
have also been recent studies of the exposed assets in major European coastal cities (port cities).  
– Results using the DIVA database and mode l produced from the DINAS-COASTS DG 
research have been developed for Europe  in the PESETA project. Under the A2 
scenario, without adaptation around 2000 to 17000 km
2 of land in Europe could be 
permanently lost by 2085, also leading to  0.1 to 1.3 million people undergoing coastal 
floods every year. Those physical  effects are valued at a co st of 12 to 18 billion/year. 
When hard adaptation measures are consider ed (dike building and beach nourishment) 
the land loss fall to less than 1000 km2, and the residual economi c cost to around one 
billion/year. The economic costs of th e adaptation measures are some one 
billion/year, to be added to the residual damages. The optimal protection level is 
determined by the equalisation of marginal costs and benefits. Tw o hard, engineering 
adaptation measures are considered. First of all, dikes are built to protect the coast. The costs of dikes are compared  to the benefits in terms of lower sea flood damages, 
river flood damages, salinisation costs and migration costs. The second measure is 
beach nourishment, which is decided by comp aring the nourishment costs (basically a 
function of cubic metre of sa nd) with its benefits. The benefits depend on agriculture 
land value if there are not tourists, and in case there are tourists, the benefits depend 
on the number of tourists  and their expenditure. 
– Recent work for the OECD
108 has also looked at current a nd future major coastal cities 
with sea level rise (0.5 metres global aver age) and storm surge, and assessed exposure 
to a 1 in 100 year flood event, looking at  population and asset value exposed now and 
with sea level rise in 2100 for Amsterdam, Rotterdam, Hamburg, London, Copenhagen, Helsinki, Marseille, Athens, Napoli (Naples), Lisbon, Porto, Barcelona, 
Stockholm, and Glasgow. For these cities , the exposed population rise from 2.3 
million to 4.0 million, and the exposed assets from $360 to $2220 billion (though the values are dominated by London, Amsterdam, and Rotterdam). 
In addition, the coastal zones of Europe are important in t ourism potential and recreational 
value (see tourism and industry section), and the role of seas  and oceans are essential for 
ecosystem services including fisheries (see releva nt section) and climat e regulation, as well as 
for transportation. Coastal areas will also have interactions with water availability, either a 
source of water (desalination) or from the potential risks of salinisation affecting water 
sources in coastal regions.  
                                                
 
108 OECD (2007) Screening study: Ranking Port citie s with high exposure and vulnerability to Climate 
Extremes. Interim analysis: Exposure Estimates. ENV/EPOC/GSP(2007)11, prepared by Nicholls, R.J., 
Hanson, S., Herweijer, C., Patmore, N., Hallegatte, S., Corfee-Morlot J., Chateau, J., and Muir-Wood, 
R. 
 
EN 111   EN Finally, there are specific biodiversity-ecosy stems issues for Europe’s coastline, with 
projected climate change and sea le vel rise a particular threat to coastal ecosystems, especially 
those in the Baltic, Mediterranean and Black Seas (see ecosystems section). These habitats 
could be severely reduced or disappear during the 21st century because of the low tidal range 
in these areas and the limited scope for onshore migration. Alcamo et al (2007) report that 
sea-level rise is likely to cause an inland mi gration of beaches and the loss of up to 20% of 
coastal wetlands. In addition, risi ng sea levels may cause saline intrusions on aquifers in the 
coastal areas. 
Traditionally, most shore-line management po licies tend to reduce the flexibility of the 
coastline, to minimize its natural dynamics becau se of the inconvenience it raises for human 
activities. Seawalls and dykes are measures that try to fix the co astline so that land use can be 
orderly planned, houses built and harbours maintain ed. But there are also clear disadvantages 
to this kind of management. Maintenance co sts are high and the ecologically important 
gradients from land to sea have  disappeared. Hence, we see in many countries a shift in 
thinking about sustainable management of the co astal zone towards a more flexible approach, 
which works with the natural processes instead of  against it. Examples are the now often used 
sand nourishments, buffer zones (setback lines ) and managed realignm ent of the coast. 
A problem with the application of the concept of resilience in this context is that most coasts 
are evolving systems and do not necessarily are in equilibrium (Klein et al., 1998). Because of 
this, resilience should refe r preferably to coasta l functions: compatibility  and adaptability of 
uses to coastal erosion management which allows  natural fluctuations of the coastline. The 
CONSCIENCE project109 focused on a pragmatic way to de velop resilience indicators and 
indices. 
Coastal protection and other adaptation strategies  are being implemented to avoid or diminish 
threats from climate change impacts. The Floods Directive110 provides the legal instrument on 
flood risk management, requiring Member States to  carry out certain meas ures such as risk 
assessment, mapping, risk reduction measur es etc, including coastal floods.  
For years, MS have implemented coastal defence programmes which budgets are been 
increased to better tackled the new threats posed by climate change. Infrastructure (dikes, locks, etc.) in the Netherlands have been dime nsioned to last for 50 years taking into account 
the worst-case IPCC scenario. Th ey are re-assessed every 5 years by the local authority to see 
whether the structure still meets the design criteria. Most defences were built with a precautionary approach and are currently well within safety limits even though they were 
designed before the current concerns with gl obal warming. They are expected to provide 
sufficient protection for well over 50 years. The local authorities are also required to leave room for future reinforcements of sea defe nces taking into account 200-year level rise. 
Guidelines in England and Wales have been have been issued
111 recommending sea-level rise 
be taken into account in flood a nd coastal defence projects gran t aided by the Department for 
Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra). 
                                                 
109  CONSCIENCE 6th FP Project, see http://www.conscience-eu.net 
110  Directive 2007/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October on the assessment 
and management of flood risks entered into force on 26 November 2007 
111  Flood and Coastal Defence Appraisal Guidance FC DPAG3 Economic Appraisal Supplementary Note to 
Operating Authorities – Climate Change Impacts October 2006 
 
EN 112   EN However, climate change adaptation is not alwa ys considered within the coastal management 
plans of national or sub-national governments. A ccording to information presently held by the 
Commission, climate change impacts, adaptatio n and their economic perspectives are only 
considered in the design of the coastal infrastr ucture projects in a few Member States and the 
costs of the options differ widel y. Relatively little is known about the costs and the benefits of 
the adaptation options and uncertainty levels ar e very high, partly because effective adaptation 
measures are highly dependent on specific, geogr aphical and climate risk factors as well as 
institutional, political an d financial constraints.  
In this light, many recent studies112 highlight the need for further work to target the 
assessment of risk management strategies, mo st notably the cost and effectiveness of 
adaptation options.  
The promotion of coherent and integrated planni ng and management tools of the maritime and 
coastal areas can provide the a ppropriate instruments to better manage activities that compete 
for the same space while, at the same time, provides the needed provision to incorporate 
climate change adaptation in the planning. In th is regard, a new maritime spatial planning 
framework is being analysed at EU level, while , at the same time, the important role of the 
networks of exchange of knowledge and best practices in ICZM that currently exist is 
promoted. 
The EU needs to accurately forecast climate change and reduce uncertainties in 
oceanographic forecasts. It is needed to bring forward the introduction of effective climate or 
weather forecasts which would be  of benefit to nearly all economic activities. To this end, 
deeper research, long-term datasets and high resolution prediction models will help to better know and better predict impacts of  climate change. Joint calls on marine research projects in 
the FP7 context should be applied for climate change studies addressing a complexity of 
interrelated factors that can not be analysed  independently. The EU's Global Monitoring for 
Environment and Security (GMES) initiativ e will ensure continuity in space-based 
measurements and a progressive improvement in the delivery of services based on them. The 
European Marine Observation and Data Netw ork (EMODNET), proposed as part of the 
maritime policy, will focus on improving access to researchers and service providers to existing data, identifying gaps and proposi ng what further monitoring is required.  
10.9. External dimension 
In addition to the external aspects of climat e change impacts in Europe, or on how the EU 
transfers problems outside the re gion, this section very briefly describes the global climate 
change impacts and possible implications to global security.  
10.9.1.  Global climate change impacts  
The observations and potential future impacts of  climate change outside the EU have been 
recently documented (see working group II, summary for policy makers, IPCC, 2007). The IPCC report cites observational evidence from all continents that shows that many natural systems are being affected by regional climate changes, particularly temperature increases, 
and that other effects of regional climate ch anges on natural and human environments are 
                                                
 
112  "Ranking port cities with exposures and vulnerability to climate extremes" OCDE Environment 
Working Paper nº 1. January 2008. 
 
EN 113   EN emerging, although many are difficult to discern due to adaptation a nd non-climatic drivers. It 
also reports on potential future impacts.  
Clearly the potential effects vary by region, but as an overall summary (summarised from 
WGII summary, IPCC, 2007): 
– Freshwater resources. By mid-century, water availability is projected to decrease by 10-
30% over some dry regions at mid-latitudes and in the dry tropics, some of which are presently water-stressed areas. Drought-affected areas are likel y to increase (in extent). 
Heavy precipitation event are very likely to increase in frequency, increasing flood risk. 
– Ecosystems. The resilience of many ecosystems is likely to be exceeded  this century by an 
unprecedented combination of climate change, other disturbances, and other global change drivers (e.g., land-use change, over-exploitation) . Changes to ecosystems are predicted to 
have predominantly negative consequences for biodiversity, and ecosystem goods and services. Approximately 20-30% of  plant and animal species are likely to be at increased 
risk of extinction if increases in global average temperature exceed 1.5-2.5°C. Increases 
above this are expected to lead to major changes in ecosystems structure and function.  
– Agriculture. Crop productivity is projected to increase slightly at mid- to high latitudes (for 
local mean temperature of up to 1-3°C de pending on the crop), and then decrease beyond 
that in some regions. At lower latitudes, es pecially seasonally dry and tropical regions, 
crop productivity is projected to decrease for even small local temperature increases (1-
2°C), which would increase th e risk of hunger. Globally, th e potential for food production 
is projected to increase with increases in lo cal average temperature over a range of 1-3°C, 
but above this it is projected to decrease. Moreover, increases in the frequency of droughts 
and floods are projected to affect loca l crop production negatively, especially in 
subsistence sectors at low latitudes. 
– Sea level rise. Many millions more people are projected to be flooded every year due to 
sea-level rise by the 2080s. T hose densely-populated and lo w-lying areas where adaptive 
capacity is relatively low, and which already face other challenges such  as tropical storms 
or local coastal subsidence, are es pecially at risk. he numbers a ffected will be largest in the 
mega-deltas of Asia and Africa (e.g. potentially in excess of 1 million people potentially displaced by sea level trends (IPCC, 2007) in  the Nile delta, the Ganges /Brahmaputra 
delta and the Mekong delta by 2050), while sma ll islands are especially vulnerable. 
– Health. Climate change-related exposures are likel y to affect the health  status of millions 
of people, particularly those with low adap tive capacity. For these groups, this includes 
potential effects from increases in malnutriti on and consequent disord ers, increased deaths, 
disease and injury due to heatwaves, floods , storms, fires and dr oughts, the increased 
burden of diarrhoeal disease, a nd the altered spatial distributi on of some infectious disease 
vectors. Studies in temperate areas project some benefits (e.g. fewer deaths from cold 
exposure), but overall it is e xpected that these benefits wi ll be outweighed by the negative 
health effects of rising temp eratures worldwide, especially  in developing countries. In 
relation to vector borne disease, climate change  is expected to have  some mixed effects, 
such as a decrease or increase in the range a nd transmission potential of malaria in Africa. 
It is also clear that the imp acts of future climate change wi ll be mixed across regions. The 
main impacts of climate change damage (at least in the short to medium term, and under 
stabilisation scenarios) will be felt in developing countries (IPCC, 2007), and within the 
 
EN 114   EN poorer regions. Climate change is a serious challenge to poverty reduction in developing 
countries and threatens to undo development gain s. There are several reasons for this: many 
of the greatest impacts of climate change are projected to occur in these countries; their 
economies rely more on climate-sensitive activities; and many operate close to environmental and climatic tolerance levels. The effects are li kely to be greatest for the poor persons within 
these countries, and they potentially exacerbate  inequities in health status and access to 
adequate food, clean water, and other resources . Poor communities in these countries depend 
highly on the direct use of local  natural resources. They have restricted choice for their 
livelihoods and limited capacity to cope with climate variability a nd natural disasters. 
Furthermore, the ability to adapt for these countries and communities is likely to be more limited because of technical, econom ic and institutional limitations.  
10.9.2.  Impacts on global security  
Global security could be potentially threatened by the impacts of climate change in a number 
of ways. 
– Conflict over resources: Climate change will a lter rainfall patterns and reduce available 
freshwater in certain regions (see above), a nd increasing water shorta ges have the potential 
to lead to conflict. Agricultu ral productivity is expected to  drop worldwide above certain 
temperatures under some scenarios and models (as outlined above), and in such 
projections, there are potential concerns over food security, pa rticularly in less developed 
countries. These potential effects will be mo re intense in areas under strong demographic 
pressure, and have the potential to exacerbate  existing conflicts over depleting resources, 
especially where access to thos e resources is politicised.  
– Economic Damage (risks to coastal cities and critical infrastructure): Coastal zones are 
home to about one fifth of th e world population, a number set to rise in the years ahead. 
Mega-cities, with thei r supporting infrastructure, such as port facilities, ar e often located 
by the sea or in river deltas. Sea-level rise and the increase in the frequency and intensity of extreme events (e.g. storm and sea surge) pose a serious threat. Recent work (OECD, 
2007) estimates that by the 2070s , the total population expose d to a 1 in 100 year flood 
event could grow more than threefold to  around 150 million people globally due to the 
combined effects of climate change (sea-leve l rise and increased storminess), subsidence, 
population growth and urbanisation, with the asset exposure gr owing even more 
dramatically by more than ten times current levels to roughly 9% of  projected annual GDP 
in this period. The risks are likely to increase most in developing countries and by 2070, 9 
of the top 10 cities exposed to coastal fl ooding in terms of population exposure are in 
Asian developing countries. In countries where development levels remain lower, increases 
in disasters and humanitarian crises will lead to increased pressure on the resources of donor countries, includi ng capacities for emergency relief operations.  
– Loss of territory and border disputes: Recedi ng coastlines and submergence could result in 
loss of territory, particularly for countries su ch as small island states. Disputes over land 
and maritime borders and other territorial rights are possible. Existing international law, particularly the Law of the Sea, may prove in adequate in resolving territorial and border 
disputes. A further dimension of competition fo r energy resources will be in potential 
conflict over resources in Artic region which will become exploitable as a consequence of global warming. Desertification could increase migration and conflicts over territory and 
borders, particularly when mu ltiple factors, e.g. poor governance, conflict, are in play 
 
EN 115   EN (fragility) and climate change may be an add itional influence on the political stability of 
countries and regions.  
– Environmentally-induced migration: Those pa rts of the populations that already suffer 
from poor health conditions, significant unemp loyment or social ex clusion are rendered 
more vulnerable to the effects of climate cha nge, which could amplify or trigger migration 
within and between countries. The UN predicts  that there will be approximately 50 million 
"environmental" migrants by 2020, though there is  a low confidence associated in these 
numbers. Climate change is  one of the potential factor s in this phenomenon. Some 
countries that are extremely vulnerable to climate change are already calling for its 
international recognition. Environmentally-i nduced migration may in crease conflicts in 
host, transit and destination ar eas, for internally displaced people and external migration. 
Europe might also expect in creased migratory pressure.  
– Pressure on international govern ance: The multilateral system is  at potential risk if the 
international community fails to address the threats outlined above. Climate change 
impacts could fuel the politics of resentment  between those most responsible for climate 
change and those most affected by it. Imp acts of climate mitigation policies (or policy 
failures) could thus drive political tension na tionally and internationally. The potential rift 
not only divides North and South but there will  also be a South - South dimension, e.g. as 
the Chinese and Indian share of global emissi ons rises. The already burdened international 
security architecture will be put under increasing pressure. 
10.9.3.  Need for early action at EU level  
The EU is bordered by and imports goods and natural resources from countries, which are not 
resilient to existing let alone future impacts of climate change. The EU will be indirectly 
affected by failure of these countries to adapt to climate change partic ularly if the frequency 
of extreme events increases.  
Adaptation presents a particular challenge fo r policy makers around the world, given the 
environment of uncertainty with limited informa tion regarding the actual  timing and scale of 
the consequences. At the same time, conseq uences of climate change are increasingly 
worrying and represent parameters that must be  integrated, as soon as possible, in the 
planning, budgeting and executing phases of ex ternal policy making. The EU acknowledges 
that more work needs to be done urgently to  forecast, analyse, and communicate the actual 
consequences and associated adap tation costs in partner countries.  Integrating adaptation 
policies, programmes and aid programmes inte rnationally requires understanding of (non-
climate related) priorities of  other countries and establis hing new dialogues on adaptation. 
There is a lack of conclusive studies on climate change and migr ation patterns: it is currently 
difficult to put numbers on future flows of disp laced people due to impacts of climate change, 
since non-climate drivers are also important (g overnment policy, resilience to natural disaster 
etc.). There are no reliable estimates of the numb ers affected, and this is a research priority. 
There are wider issues on defi nitions and obligations of th e international community under 
international law in relation to migration status. 
Being responsible for most of  the historic accumulation of  anthropogenic greenhouse gas 
emissions in the atmosphere, developed countries will need to support adaptation actions in developing countries. Adaptation will be fundame ntal in securing the achievement of the UN 
Millennium Development Goals after 2015, especial ly in sub-Sahara Af rica. The EU has the 
 
EN 116   EN possibility through its development and coope ration funds to compensate for the unequal 
distribution of climate impacts, to support deve loping countries in their efforts to adapt to 
climate change. 
Just as it has in Europe, the EU can have a coordination role to foster trans-boundary 
cooperation among developing countries to combat  jointly the impacts of climate change 
The EU has a very strong position to support de veloping countries capacity building, research, 
information and data gathering, knowledge and t echnology transfer exchange of best practice.  
Many developing countries are already suffering very dramatically the consequences of 
climate change and there is a need to improve their resilience and thei r capacity to adapt and 
mitigate the effects as early as possible to avoid further negative consequences and higher costs. There is a need for immediate and ur gent action on adaptati on and to ensure the 
availability of both financial and technological resources, by  supporting action on adaptation 
in the most vulnerable countries , in particular to Least Deve loped Countries, Small Island 
Developing States and Africa.  
 
EN 117   EN 11. ANNEX 4: REVIEW OF NATIONAL ADAPTATION PLANS  
In addition to the national communications to the UNFCCC, a number of Member States have 
recently produced national adaptation plans. Fo r the purpose of this Impact Assessment, 
relevant reports containing information on adapta tion at national level have been reviewed for 
the Denmark, Finland, France, Netherla nds, Spain, Hungary, Germany and United 
Kingdom113. In addition to these publicly available reports, some more Member States are 
currently preparing national stra tegies, which may become availa ble in the coming months. In 
addition, in some Member States adaptation stra tegies are available at regional level. These 
have not been reviewed at this stage. 
Table 15: Overview of nation al adaptation strategies, plans or programmes in the EU 
Member 
State Impacts, vulnerability & 
adaptation assessments NAS 
under 
preparati
on NAS 
adopted link (copy from either EEA or table 
below) 
Austria StartClim reports (2003-2009) 
Anpassungsstudie   http://www.austroclim.at/index.php?id=40  
http://www.umweltnet.a t/article/archive/70
98 
Belgium Sustainable Spatial Development  
(SSD) 2012   
Bulgaria  Second National Action Plan on 
Climate Change 2005-2008   http://www2.moew. government.bg/recent_
doc/international/climate/NAPCC_Final_E
nglish.doc 
Cyprus     
Czech Rep. National Programme to Abate the 
Climate Change Impacts in the 
Czech Republic
 2009  http://www.env.cz/AIS/web-pub-
en.nsf/$pid/MZPOBFKFL7JL/$FILE/N%
C3%A1rodn%C3%AD_program_EN.pdf  
http://www.env.cz/AIS/web-
en.nsf/pages/Climate_Change 
Denmark Ministry of Climate and Energy  2008 http://www.kemin.dk/NR/rdonlyres/1247B5C0-
0BAD-464A-9997-
2EAB952D9494/56490/klimatilpasningsstrategi.
pdf 
www.klimatilpasning.dk  
Estonia ASTRA 2009  www.astra-project.org 
Finland FINADAPT 
  2005 http://www.ymparisto. fi/default .asp?conten
tid 
                                                 
113  Although the UK does not have a specific “UK strategy” as such, the Government (DEFRA) plays a 
leading role, acting as co-ordinator for the many strategies being developed at regional and local levels.  
This includes in particular liaising closely with  the authorities in Wales, Scotland and Northern 
Ireland who are also developing strategies. DEFRA ensures coherence between the strategies and 
elaborated the Adaptation Strategy for England “ Adapting to Climate Change in England" – released in 
July 2008.   
 
EN 118   EN Member 
State Impacts, vulnerability & 
adaptation assessments NAS 
under 
preparati
on NAS 
adopted link (copy from either EEA or table 
below) 
=227544&Ian=EN 
http://www.mmm.fi/a ttachments/5eWDKv
eQh/5h0aZ7Iid/Files/CurrentFile/ 
Finlands_national_adaptation_srtrategy_jul
kaisu.pdf 
France Gestion et impacts du changement 
climatique (GICC)  2007 http://www.ecologie.gouv.fr/adaptation-au-
changement.html 
Germany KomPass;  
Klimazwei; KLIMZUG  2008 http://www.anpassung.net  
http://www.klimazwei.de  
http://www.bmu.de/english/climate/downloads/d
oc/42841.php   
Greece Ministry of Environment & Athens 
Academy   www.minenv.gr/w elcome_en.html 
Hungary VAHAVA  2008 http://www. kvvm.hu/cimg/documents/nes0
80214.pdf 
Ireland ERTDI; CCRP 
National Climate Change Strategy   http:// www.environ.ie/en/ PublicationsDocu
ments/FileDownLoad,1861,en.pdf  
http://www.epa.ie 
Italy    http:// www.conferenzacamb iamenticlimati
ci2007.it  
http://www.apat.gov.it/site/en-GB 
Latvia ASTRA 2009  http:// www.vidm.gov.lv/eng  
http://www.astra-project.org 
Lithuania ASTRA   http://www.astra-project.org 
Luxembourg     
Malta Global Environment Facility 
(GEF)   http://www.mepa.org.mt/environment/inde
x.htm?climate_change/mainpage.htm&1 
Netherlands National Pr ogramme for Spatial 
Adaptation to Climate Change 
(ARK), CcSP, Knowledge for 
Climate  2008 http://www.vrom.nl/pagina.html?id=2706
&sp=2&dn=7222  
http://vrom.nl/pagina.html?id=2706&sp=2
&dn=7502  
http://www.climatecha ngesspatialplanning.
nl 
Poland     
Portugal SIAM   www.siam.fc.ul.pt/siam.html 
Romania National Stra tegy and National 
Action Plan on Climate Change 2009  www.mmediu.ro  
 
EN 119   EN Member 
State Impacts, vulnerability & 
adaptation assessments NAS 
under 
preparati
on NAS 
adopted link (copy from either EEA or table 
below) 
2005-2007 http://www.mmediu.ro/departament_mediu
_en/climate_ change.htm 
Slovakia     
Slovenia     
Spain ECCE + Impacts on coastlines  2006 http://www.mma.es/portal/secciones/cambio_cli
matico/areas_tematicas/impactos_cc/eval_impac
tos.htm  
http://www.mma.es/portal/secciones/cambio_cli
matico/areas_tematicas/impactos_cc/imp_cost_e
sp_efec_cc.htm  
http://www.mma.es/portal/secciones/cambio_cli
matico/areas_tematicas/impactos_cc/pnacc.htm  
Sweden SWECLIM;  SWECIA; 
CLIMATOOLS   http://mistras.internetborder.se/mistra/english/re
searchresults/researchprogrammes/completedpro
grammes/sweclimswedishregionalclimatemodell
ingprogramme.4.1eeb37210182cfc0d680007760
.html  
http://www.mistra.org/mistra/english/researchres
ults/researchprogrammes/activeprogrammes/mis
trasweciaclimateimpact sandadaptation.4.a79128
5116833497ab800017356.html  
http://www.foi.se/FOI/Templates/ProjectPage__
__5846.aspx   
http://www.sweden.gov.se/sb/d/574/a/96002   
www.regeringen.se/s b/d/8756/a/91682  
United 
Kingdom UK National Risk Assessment + 
UKCIP studies  2008 http://www.ukcip.org.uk/  
http://www.defra.gov.uk/adaptation 
www.defra.gov.uk/Environm ent/climatechange/
uk/legislation/index.htm  
 
 
EN 120   EN Details for adopted National Adaptation Strategies 
Member 
State   
Title Strategy for Adaptation to Climate Changes in Denmark 
Year 2008  
Level of 
progress The strategy, published by the Danish Government, proposes measures in 
several sectors. All relevant author ities and sectors are expected on an 
ongoing basis to monitor and act when they see it necessary to mitigate the 
impacts of climate change . Some measures refer sp ecifically to adjustment 
of the existing EU legal framework, or to the need for more regional trans-boundary action.  After the launching of the strategy 1) a Coordination 
Forum on Adaptation with representatives  from relevant ministeries, the 
municipalities and the regions has been created. This Forum is responsible 
for coordination and co-operation across  sectors and authorities, 2) a new 
information centre on adaptation in the Ministry of Climate and Energy is 
responsible for the new web-portal and 3) a coordination unit for research in adaptation KFT) under one of th e major Danish universities, the 
University of Aarhus, has been created.  Many adaptation measures are 
already taking place in different sect ors, at national and local level. 
Sectors 
addressed Water Management, Agriculture, Biod iversity/ecosystems, Forestry, 
Fisheries, Human Health, Coastal Zones, Energy, Land use, 
Insurance/finance, Construction, Nature and Nature Management, Planning, Emergency and Rescue Services 
Instruments / 
themes 
addressed Coordinated research, Knowledge and information sharing, Financing 
adaptation, Planning tools, Coordinated action across MS/stakeholders Denmark 
Internet link 'Strategi for tilpasning til klimaændringer i Danmark': 
http://www.kemin.dk/da-
DK/KlimaogEnergipolitik/DanskKlimaogEnergipolitik/Klimatilpasningsst
rategien/Documents/klimatilpasningsstrategi_03032008.pdf 
 
 
EN 121   EN  
Title Finland's National Strategy for Adaptation to Climate Change 
Year 2005 
Level of 
progress The strategy describes climate change vulnerability and potential impacts 
in a range of different  sectors and su ggests measures to improve adaptive 
capacity in these sectors. The objective of the National Adaptation 
Strategy is to reduce the negative cons equences of climate change as well 
as to take advantage of its potential opportunities. Ministries are responsible for the implementation of the NAS in their own fields of 
activity. Some ministries have started to prepare sectoral assessments and 
action plans to include adaptation into policies that fall within their responsibility. 
Sectors 
addressed  Agriculture and Food production, Forestry, Fisheries, Reindeer and Game 
Husbandry, Water Resources, Biodiversity, Industry, Energy, Transport, 
Land Use and Communities, Building, Health, Tourism and Recreation, and Insurance. 
Instruments / 
themes 
addressed Mainstreaming (incorporation of climate change into all relevant sector 
policies), observation and warning systems,, research and development, 
insurance systems, using opportunities Finland 
Internet link http://www.mmm.fi/attachments/5eWDKveQh/5h0aZ7Iid/Files/CurrentFil
e/Finlands_national_adaptation_srtrategy_julkaisu.pdf 
Title National Climate Strategy 2008-2025 
Year 2008 
Level of 
progress The strategy, developed by the Ministry of the Environment and Water of 
Hungary, indicates that the proposed measures in the document have to be 
integrated in activities of every sector as well as in every relevant 
government decision. The implementation of the Strategy will be ensured by National Climate Change Programme s elaborated and updated every 2 
years. It is planned to establish a Climate Change Committee, a 
consultative body that will bring together, among others, members of the 
government, Hungarian Academy of Science, an ombudsman and 
environmental NGOs.  
Sectors 
addressed Water Management, Agriculture, Biodiversity/ecosystems, Transport, 
Industry, Forestry, Human Health, Energy, Land use, Insurance/finance  
Instruments / themes 
addressed Awareness-raising, International Cooperation, Mainstreaming adaptation 
in policy, Observation/warning syst ems, Knowledge sharing, Planning 
tools, Coordinated action across MS/stakeholders, Financing Hungary 
Internet link http://www.kvvm.hu/cimg/documents/nes080214.pdf 
 
EN 122   EN  
Title National adaptation strategy to climate change 
Year 2007 
Level of 
progress The National Adaptation Strategy, written by the National Observatory 
(ONERC) is the result of an extensive consultation in which representatives of different activities and civil society were involved,  
highlighting France’s main priorities. The National Adaptation Strategy 
contains only recommendations, which will probably be translated into a real National Adaptation Plan, comprising concrete proposals for measures 
and action in 2010 or 2011.
 The 2007 “G renelle de l’environment” 
provides further follow-up. 
Sectors 
addressed Agriculture, energy and industry, transport, building and housing, tourism, 
banking and insurance, towns; cross-cutting approaches through water, risk prevention, health and biodiversity. 
Instruments / 
themes 
addressed develop knowledge, improve the observation system, inform and train all 
stakeholders, make them aware of the adaptation's stakes, develop adapted 
approaches for territories, finan ce adaptation actions, use legal and 
regulation tools, put forward determined approaches and dialogue with 
private stakeholders, take into account sp ecifics of overseas territories and, 
finally, take part in international exchanges. France 
Internet link http://www.ecologie.gouv. fr/adaptation-au-changement.html 
Title National Programme on Climate Adaptation and Spatial Planning 
Year 2008 
Level of 
progress The programme formulates guiding principles and does not explicitly 
identify sector-specific adaptation measures; instead it adopts an 
innovative and inter-sectoral approach which places spatial planning at the 
heart of the adaptation strategy.  The National Implementation Agenda 
“Make Space for Climate”, which is cu rrently under development and is 
scheduled for publication in early 2009, describes how the strategy will be 
implemented. 
Sectors 
addressed Water Management, Agriculture, Biodiversity/ecosystems, Transport, 
Tourism, Industry, Energy, Land use, Public Health 
Instruments / themes 
addressed Awareness raising, Identifying knowledge gaps, Mainstreaming adaptation 
in policy, Knowledge sharing, Coordi nated action across MS/stakeholders Netherlands 
Internet link http://www.vrom.nl/pagina.html?id=2706&sp=2&dn=7222 
 
EN 123   EN  
Title National Plan for adaptation to Climate Change 
Year 2006 
Level of 
progress The Plan has been drafted by the Commission for the Coordination of 
Climate Change Policies and the National Climate Board. The Plan intends to provide continuous support to all the interested stakeholders in assessing 
the climate change impacts in Spain in  their respective sectors/ systems of 
interest. In addition, it will bring together all the knowledge and available elements, tools and methods of assessment with the aim of ensuring the 
involvement of all stakeholders, thereb y defining the best climate change 
adaptation options. 
Sectors addressed Water Management, Agriculture, Biodiversity/ecosystems, Mountainous 
regions, Transport, Tourism, Industry, Forestry, Coastal zones, Human 
Health, Energy, Land use, Insurance/finance, Hunting and continental 
fishing, Soils, Marine ecosystems and Fisheries, Construction and Urbanisation 
Instruments / 
themes 
addressed Awareness raising, Mainstreaming adaptation in policy, Knowledge 
sharing, Planning tools, Coordinated action across MS/stakeholders Spain 
Internet link ‘Plan Nacional de Adaptación al Cambio Climático': 
http://www.mma.es/secciones/cambio_c limatico/areas_tematicas/impactos
_cc/pdf/pna_v3.pdf 
Title Adapting to Climate Change in England - a Framework for Action 
Year 2008 
Level of 
progress  The development of a NAS by the gov ernment has been preceded by four 
key stages: the establishment of the UK Climate Impacts Programme 
(UKCIP) in 1997, the UK Climate Change Programme in 2000, the 
publication of the Consultation over the Adaptation Policy Framework and 
the adaptation provisions within the Climate Change Bill in 2008. The 
cross-government ‘Adapting to Climate Change’ (ACC) Programme is led by the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra). In 
Phase 1 (2008- 2011) the necessary groundwork to implement Phase 2 is 
developed, which should from 2012 implement a statutory National Adaptation Programme, as required by  the Climate Change Bill, reporting 
progress to Parliament on a regular basis.  
Sectors 
addressed  Flood management, water resources, coastal erosion, high temperatures, 
biodiversity conservation 
Instruments / themes 
addressed Providing evidence, raising awareness,  ensuring and measuring progress, 
embedding adaptation United Kingdom 
Internet link 
 
http://www.defra.gov.uk/environmen t/climatechange/adapt/pdf/adapti
ng-to-climate-change.pdf 
 
EN 124   EN  
Title National Climate Change Adaptation Strategy 
Year 2008 
Level of 
progress The strategy has been adopted in late 2008; a national action plan is to be 
delivered by 2011 setting out i.a. pr inciples and criteria for prioritising 
requirements for action,  prioritisation of federal measures, an overview of 
concrete measures by other actors,  information about financing, especially 
through integration of adaptation in existing assistance programmes, suggested concepts for progress review, and  further development 
of the strategy and next steps. 
Sectors 
addressed  
 health, construction, water management and flood protection, soil, biodiversity, agriculture, horticulture, fi sheries, energy, finance, transport, 
industry, tourism and spatial planning 
Instruments / 
themes addressed new governance structures as catal yst for an integrated adaptation 
approach (i.a. an interministerial working group), an extended participation process which increases integration be tween industry, local authorities and 
other actors from the various fields by means of discussions between 
specialists, conferences, consultative bodies, expert committees, improvement of the knowledge base by  an extensive research programme 
comprising i.a. the development of meaningful vulnerability indicators 
and, subsequently, a comprehensive monitoring system that integrates 
existing systems of bio- and soil monitoring Germany 
Internet link http://www.bmu.de/files/pdfs /allgemein/application/pdf/das_gesamt.pdf  
http://www.bmu.de/files/pdfs/allgemei n/application/pdf/das_zusammenfas
sung_en.pdf  
http://www.bmu.de/klimaschutz/downloads/doc/42783.php  
 
 
EN 125   EN 12. ANNEX 5: ACTIONS INCLUDED IN THE OPTIONS FOR ACTION AT EU LEVEL IN THE 
SHORT -MEDIUM TERM  
This annex present more details on the actions envisaged under Options B and C, and includes 
an additional screening of some sub-options. 
12.1. Improving the knowledge base on climate change impacts and adaptive capacity 
6 actions have been considered to tackle the first operational objective: 
– Action 1.1. Development of consistent, co mprehensive and regularly updated climate 
change and socio-economic scenarios (projec tion data) for analysis across Europe. This 
could build upon existing re search and ensure con tinuity and commitment to the supply of 
core data needed for adaptation whilst at the same time highlighting the uncertainties that 
need to be retained and represented in the EU climate data. It re quires improving the link 
between atmospheric, land use and socio-eco nomic models, at global, EU and regional 
scale; developing options for adaptation strate gies and measures  at sectoral and cross-
sectoral level and the assessment of their ecological, social a nd economic potential, 
benefits and costs and identify options for initi al no regret measures as starting point for 
adaptation avoiding costly mal-adaptation. Th is requires ensuring  interdisciplinary 
cooperation to link the different research a pproaches to sustainable development.  
– Action 1.2. Build a structured information data set to better understand the territorial and 
sectoral distribution of vulner ability to climate change impacts (vulnerability being defined 
as a function of 1) the exposure to CC impa cts, 2) the sensitivity and 3) the adaptive 
capacity of a system or a territory. The approach would be threefold: 
– Vulnerability assessment of the energy an d transport networks overall EU, with 
view to provide elements for further strategic choices with regard to infrastructure building and security in service provision, following extreme events. 
– Regional vulnerability indices 
– Sectoral focus on changes in sustainabi lity of production and consumption under 
various climate scenarios 
– Action 1.3. Setting up a European wide Clearing House Mechanism (CHM) as a data 
repository and a platform for knowledge transf er on impacts, adaptation measures in place 
and best practices, contribu ting to the Shared Environmental Information System
114 
(SEIS). Its purpose would be to  promote understanding of c limate change impacts across 
Europe and to equip stakeholders to ad apt and it could include: communication and 
dissemination of scientific research on imp acts to enable planned proactive adaptation 
action; exchange of adaptation best practice in or between sectors or regions; tools and 
guidance for adaptation strategies. This initia tive interlinks with GMES for obtaining better 
information on the state of the environment, to  point out past and current trends on climate 
including the likeli hood of extreme events and cl imate-related disasters." 
                                                 
114  COM(2008)46final 
 
EN 126   EN – Action 1.4. Provision of targeted awaren ess-raising, communi cation, education and 
training on climate change impacts and adaptati on: This might include campaigns aimed at 
European citizens, recommendati ons to Member States to bu ild capacity among all parties 
involved. A strategy for adaptation must in clude a strong notion of the importance of 
human capital. 'Human capital' comprises aspects ranging from awareness for the 
challenges linked with adaptation to climate chan ge, starting from (pre-)school age, to very 
concrete training and qualification initiatives to  make sure that Europe has the skills and 
competences to adapt to climat e change. With the European Social Fund (ESF), the EU has 
an instrument that provides Member States a nd regions with the opportu nity to invest in 
human capital. The current programming period 2007-2013 calls for ESF co-funded 
interventions in this area. ER DF and Cohesion Fund also supp ort capacity building through 
various means going from direct financial s upport. Awareness raising should be facilitated 
also through other EU Funds (Structural, Rural developmen t, Development, research), 
thereby ensuring that advice and training is pr ovided to foster good autonomous adaptation 
by public authorities, third countries, individuals and economic operators. The 
development of Knowledge and Innovation Communities (KICs) within the framework of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT)
115 would also represent a key 
element for further research on adaptation, a nd generally for sustai nable economic growth 
across Europe. 
– Action 1.5. The Green Paper already identified a large number of areas which will be 
considered in the research agenda of the EU. Research activities should also focus on 
developing countries. Nevertheless a numbe r of additional knowledge gaps should be 
worked upon: (1) - Further improvement of th e quality and coverage of the analysis of 
climate change impacts for major sectors at sc ales relevant to adaptation measures (2) - 
Identification of the limits to resilience beyond which human systems and ecosystems are 
no longer capable to maintain th e required functions and provid ing the needed services to 
society (3) -Investigation of how  to use the ecosystem approach can be used for adaptation 
efforts as alternative to infrastructure projects. 
– Action 1.6. Define a strategic research agenda , with a focus on climate change adaptation 
research, building on the achievements of the existing ERA-Net schemes to propose cross-national research schemes a nd by the pooling of national public funding through ERA-
NET+. In addition to the RTD Framework progr amme, the prioritisation of climate change 
adaptation research is necessa ry in other Community and European schemes which support 
research related activities such as research ex changes and networks of scientists, such as 
the EUREKA and COST programmes supporte d by the European Council. This action 
would need to be assessed in more details at a later stage: the Commission will choose the appropriate instruments available for EU wi de or regional mitigation and adaptation 
research (including potential implementation of  Article 169 of the Treaty by building on 
ongoing initiatives and joint programming efforts defined and implemented). 
12.2. Mainstreaming in sectoral policies 
– Action 2.1. In order to addre ss climate change impacts to the full extent, systematic 
Climate Health Checks  need to be undertaken peri odically on how c limate change 
impacts are integrated in all Community pol icy areas and legislation and vice versa. 
Although this impact assessment already proposes  short-term actions in policy areas where 
                                                
 
115 : http://ec.europa.eu/eit/  
 
EN 127   EN serious impacts will occur (see below) , more detailed checks are needed to address the 
ability of policies in place to address CC imp acts and adaptation needs. This will entail an 
initial health check of those European policie s (current and specifically planned policies to 
respond to CC impacts and adaptation needs) across the Commission. It  should include an 
assessment of how policies affect  Europe's vulnerability to cl imate change (vulnerability 
mapping), as well as how climate change might affect the success of policies. It is a necessary precursor to mainstreaming polic ies to CC response and to integrate both 
mitigation and adaptation to climate change  actions into the corresponding sectoral 
policies. These periodic checks and assessments  can precede the begi nning of a new policy 
circle (like for instance a new budgetary period) or be tailored  to timelines of other policy 
circles (reviews of Strategies, Action Plans,  Regulations and Directives), or can be 
performed to support reviews (either mid-term or full reviews) of key sectoral policies 
(CAP). The checks should based on progress ma de to the knowledge base and will take on 
board feed from reporting on response of the po licies and progress made to adapt to CC on 
the basis of established indi cators, whether possible.  
– Action 2.2. On the basis of the baseline identifi ed in section 2, soft short-term measures 
can already be identified to mainstreaming ad aptation into sectoral policies, implementing 
the principles for sustainable adaptation iden tified in section 5. They would consist in 
guidelines addressing the following topics:  
– Integrate the effects of climate change in the management of Natura 2000 sites 
– Integrate climate impact considerations in the river basin management plans and 
in the implementation of the Floods Directive. Develop guidance on effective water pricing. Assess the need for further m easures to enhance water efficiency in 
agriculture, households and buildings. Explore the pot ential for policies and 
measures to boost ecosystem storag e capacity for water in Europe. 
– Ensure that climate change is taken into account in the framework of the 
Integrated Maritime Policy, the Marine St rategy Framework Directive and in the 
reform of the Common Fisheries Policy. 
– Integrate climate change adaptation aspect s in policies such as in the Strategic 
Energy Review, the Common Transport Policy. 
– Supporting Member States in mainstreaming adaptation to climate change in the 
implementation of the Directive on E nvironmental Impact Assessment and the 
Directive on Strategic Environmental Assessment. 
– Develop new EU Guidelines for State Aids geared to adaptation to climate change 
in order to prevent mal-adaptation. Develop guidance for State Aids in 
Agriculture such as for irrigation proj ects and irrigation technology, and rather 
favour projects that make more water/en ergy savings, integrate adaptation in land 
reclamation projects. 
– Explore ways, with the WHO, to ensure adequate surveillance and control of 
health impacts of climate change such as epidemiological surveillance and the 
control of communicable diseases or effects of extreme events. 
 
EN 128   EN – Promote further health governance and co-o rdination with specific focus on core 
EU competences: infectious diseas es, UN conventions, Animal health 
– Communication/Green Paper due to be adopted in 2010 outlining a long term 
commitment and proposing 3 options to im prove forest protection at EU level. 
– Develop guidelines for climate proofing spat ial planning  integrated with land and 
water management and nature conserva tion, addressed to local and regional 
authorities in order to secure, inter al ia, the connectivity of ecosystems, the 
sustainable management of soils and in gene ral the  use of "green infrastructures" 
(allow for natural water retention, exploit the cooling and filtering capacities, protecting its qualitie s and carbon content, avoid eros ion and leaching, etc.) an 
fully exploit a proper functioning, pr ovision, and recognition, of ecological 
services (agriculture, forestry, ecosystems). 
– Mainstreaming adaptation in the EU external policies , notably development 
cooperation, security and migration actions while ensu ring that: 1) bilateral and 
regional agreements (e.g. Country and Regional Strategy Papers) include a climate change vulnerability assessment a nd 2) the effects of climate change in 
migratory flows are considered in th e broader EU reflection on security, 
development and migration policies. Main streaming adaptation in the EU's trade 
policy, notably in the libera lisation of trade in envir onmental goods and services 
and in FTAs. Ensuring that external EU  policy actions and instruments make a 
substantial contribution to adaptation in  third countries. These include water 
management (the EU Water Initiative a nd the EU-ACP Water Facility), energy, 
desertification, biodiversity, forests, coastal erosion, disaster prevention, 
agriculture and health. 
– Action 2.3. When a preliminary impact asse ssment, with a strong emphasis on the 
knowledge base and subsidiarity & proportional ity issues, would conclude that a voluntary 
or a market based approach will not yield the desired benefits and improvements, introduce legally binding obligation or harmonised standa rds across EU to achieve the objective of 
guaranteeing the sustainability of Europe in the face of climate change. The areas in which 
this assessment would be performed are: 
– Biodiversity: addressing adaptation issues not  only to Natura 2000 sites but also in 
the wider country and seaside and underpinning the establishment and 
management of a green infrastructure to tackle climate change impacts. 
– Land Use and Land Management: recommendi ng or ensuring that any revision of 
the land use and spatial planning programs includes and assessment of the climate 
change impacts in the area and that the decisions reflect the adaptation needs, aiming, in particular, at minimising negative impacts on soil functions, 
maintaining/enhancing soil organic ma tter, improving water retention, and 
protecting biodiversity. Ensuring a better mana gement of land as a scarce resource 
suffering multiple and competing demands and could include concepts of recycling of land, increasing multifunctiona l land use: flexible landscapes that 
would provide the necessary space and el ements for the green infrastructure, 
acting on the demand of land use, and how to foster dual or multi -purpose of land: e.g. agricultural/ flood plain / nature/recreation. 
 
EN 129   EN – Water efficiency in buildings.  
– Revision of EIA/SEA Directives to ensure  that plans and projects falling under 
this scope require climate proofing as a pre-condition. 
– Revision of Decision No 2119/98/EC setti ng up a network for the epidemiological 
surveillance and control of communicable diseases 
12.3. Risk management instruments 
Climate change risks and extreme events can be reduced using market or non-commercial 
means involve strategic planning to factor in th e probability of risk as well as measures to 
strengthen the preparedness of key institu tions. Risk reduction measures have been 
implemented using financial security (insuran ce) products. Making creative use of insurance 
and financial security products, like captives, bonds, etc. is a pro-active means of planning for 
and dealing with the adverse impacts of climat e change that can complement other adaptation 
measures and can increase the uptake of adaptation actions. Increasing their use and 
promoting their development should be part of  an adaptation strate gy, but should duly take 
into account possible impacts of social and te rritorial exclusion. Due to the cross-boundary 
effects of climate change, there may be benef its in promoting EU wide insurance solutions 
versus national or local schemes.  Joining a financial or insurance scheme is a private decision 
however in some cases it may be necessary th at certain private actors/sectors (like those 
providing public or utility services, critical infrastructures or sectors very vulnerable to 
weather conditions) are covere d under a standard weather-rel ated compulsory insurance 
product.  
As highlighted by (OECD, 2008), " From a public policy point of  view, the main issue is 
whether the adaptation action taken by the insurance industry resu lts in the righ t outcome in 
terms of the availability  and level of cover and the distribution of risks. […] First, as long as 
climate impacts are uncertain, insurance com panies, which are risk-averse themselves, will 
overcharge for climate risk or refuse coverage of risks that might otherwise be insurable. 
Second, budget constraints, inertia and cultura l factors will prevent people from adapting 
fully in the short-term, especi ally if the optimal response is relocation. Third, insurance cover 
is by no means universal. Among poor households and in poor countries in particular it can 
be patchy ."  
In this context 3 sub-options for promoting the role of insurance in EU adaptation policy have 
been identified: 
– Insurance fostering: Stimulate and support of the insuranc e sector in the development of 
insurance schemes tailored to the needs of groups and sectors adaptation efforts to CC. 
– Insurance taking-up: Support society to insure against sp ecific risks rela ted to extreme 
weather events and especially support insu rance uptake by key sectors more vulnerable 
than others to climatic variations, like agriculture and forestry (awareness, market availability, or guidelines, co-fin ancing may be made available).  
– Compulsory Insurance: Assess the feasibility of introducing compulsory insurance for 
climate related adverse impacts, e.g. flooding, heat-waves, etc.  
Due to the cross-boundary effects of climate change, there may be benefits in promoting EU-
wide insurance options as opposed to nationa l or local schemes. Undoubtedly, taking up 
insurance is a private decision, however it may be necessary that certain private actors/sectors 
 
EN 130   EN (such as those providing public services, critical  infrastructures or sect ors very vulnerable to 
climate conditions) are covered by compulsory, but  affordable for companies and especially 
SMEs, standard weather-related insurance. In cases where insurance products are not 
available, for example for buildings locate d in flood plains, public ly supported insurance 
schemes may be required. The econo mic analysis and transfer efficiency effects of insurances, 
is a very complex subject; this has been largel y studied in the case of agricultural insurances, 
specifically in the context of the CAP Health  check. The conclusion of the assessment was 
that an EU-wide scheme for protecting farm sector  against climatic risks is unfeasible at this 
stage. Subsidizing insurance premiums would be  immensely expensive; questions of "moral 
hazard" and the efficiency of transfer can be seriously questioned for the subsidy of 
premiums. The option proposed by the Commission in  the CAP Health check has been to give 
increased flexibility to MS to support the up -take of insurance products. It is therefore 
proposed to mirror this assessmen t in the remaining sectors. 
– Action 3.1. Within the context of using risk management techniques for addressing the 
sharing of climate change ri sks and facilitate better and more acute adaptation, the 
Commission will examine further the potential for insurance and other financial security products to complement adaptatio n measures and to function as  risk sharing instruments. 
The Commission will seek to work together with the insurance and financial services 
industry in order to stimulate and support of the insurance se ctor in the development of 
insurance schemes tailored to the needs of sp ecific groups and sectors adaptation efforts to 
CC. The further work planed on vulnerability in dicators for areas and se ctors could help to 
this regard. Furthermore, work on adaptation co sts for relevant policy areas, but also costs 
to be accrued because of inaction or from putting in place non-appropriate solutions can provide input for future financ ial decisions and adoption of financial security practices.
 
In any adaptation framework, consideration should be given to the role of specialised Market 
Based Instruments (MBIs), to develop accompa nying specialised MBIs and to encourage, 
where appropriate, public-private partnerships. This can enable the sharing of investment, the 
spreading of the risk, reward and responsibilitie s between the public and private sector in the 
delivery of adaptation action. Public budgets can be relieved from coping alone with 
remediation after climate catastrophes and w ith all the investments needed for adaptation 
efforts. MBIs can be used in relation to the industry allowing greater flexibility in meeting 
objectives and thus lower overall compliance cost s. MBIs have proven that they can provide 
firms with an incentive, in the longer term , to pursue technological innovation to further 
reduce adverse impacts on the environment (“dyna mic efficiency”). Furthermore, experience 
gained with MBIs, suggest that  they can support employment wh en used in the context of 
environmental tax or fiscal reform. Exampl es of MBIs include incentive schemes for 
protecting ecosystem services or for projects th at enhance the resilience of ecosystems and 
economic sectors in the form of Paym ents for Ecosystem Services (PES). 
– Action 3.2. There is a need to  strengthen the role of i nnovative funding mechanisms for 
adaptation. In the context of the Wh ite Paper, it is proposed to establish EU wide 
guidelines for designing and implementing schemes for Payments for Ecosystem 
Services (PES)  and for stimulating markets for these services (building-up the resilience of 
ecosystems & ecosystem-dependant economic sectors, financing adaptation measures 
based on green infrastructure). 
12.4. Funding review 
The following actions have been iden tified with regard to financing: 
 
EN 131   EN – Action 4.1. Increase the awareness on climate cha nge impacts of the partners dealing with 
the management of EU funded programmes; Increase uptake of adaptation actions under 
the current EU financing instruments (2007-2013): 
– The Commission should encourage the MS that when they revise their current 
Operational Programmes they should mainstream adaptation. The Commission 
could create a communication initiative to  encourage and to create awareness 
among the managers of the funds. 
– Further promote the use of Rural Development Funds to support agriculture 
contribution to protection and enhancemen t of green infrastructure, such as 
develop connectivity, with a view to facilitating species migration in response to climate change, involving wider land us e planning, including trans-boundary 
collaboration, support crops cha nge to more resilient ones. 
– Option 4.2. Review the existing funding instrument s to identify and improve their potential 
to be used for addressing climate change vulnerability; include the climate change adaptation dimension in the Reporting on the use of EU funds.  
– There are opportunities for providing specific guidance for best use of the 2007-
13 CP instruments to support CC ad aptation. A Commis sion Communication 
could substantially help in this dire ction, by ensuring that adaptation and 
mitigation of climate change is mainstreamed in the Operational Programmes and by presenting key adaptation actions that provide "no-regret" measures, while proposing ways to incorporate them in current planning processes.  
– Effort should also be made to ensure th at the guidelines for the Trans European 
Energy Networks incorporate an assessment of the impacts of climate change in the production and distribution of energy in  Europe and build on an assessment of 
the vulnerability of critical energy infras tructure to climate change. This can be 
addressed in a follow up of the Strategi c Energy Review and the SET Plan. Also 
the guidelines for Trans European Trans port Networks should look to incorporate 
an assessment of the impacts of climate change.  
– The revision of the current Funding Guidelin es needs to be done in an appropriate 
way to ensure that adaptation and mitigation of climate change will be mainstreamed in the Operational Programmes. The implications of making a climate impact assessment a mandatory condition for projects which receive significant EU funding shoul d be studied in depth.  After the development of 
methodologies and standards, take climate proofing into account when reviewing the TEN-T, TEN-E guidelines and a dopting guidance on investments under 
Cohesion Policy 
– Making the reduction of fishing capacity (e ither through decommission of ships or 
with reduction in fishing gear) an obligat ory measure in the European Fisheries 
Fund (EFF) with specific targets per countr y. This measure, supported by the EFF, 
should be done through structural reform measures in the context of the Fisheries 
policy revision. 
– Option 4.3. Climate proofing National and EU pub lic funded investment can be examined 
as well as the possibility  to condition the funding to an asse ssment of the c limate impact on 
 
EN 132   EN the proposed investment. Regarding EU fu nding, for Agriculture, the current RD 
regulation for 2007-2013 do not give support to new irrigation project s or areas but to 
improvements in current irrigated areas, wate r savings technologies and practices. This 
could be further done for various  sectors, where the climate change resilience of projects 
and measures proposed under EU funding pr ogrammes could be assessed, for instance 
tourism investments should avoid spending un der the SF for tourism projects that are 
unsustainable in the longer term (e.g. ski f acilities in low land Al pine areas). Another 
positive aspect in this direction is the current application of this provision in the field of housing, where the ERDF recently started providing support for climate proofing (i.e. energy efficiency and renewable energies) of housing projects contributing to social 
cohesion. 
– Option 4.4. Prepare Long term funding: The forthcoming budget review could assess 
further the available options for future ad aptation funding in the multi-annual financial 
framework post 2013 such as the amount of the funds that should be used for adaptation, the need for dedicated adaptation funding m echanisms and the links with funding of 
mitigation activities and international Adaptation actions in a post 2012 global climate agreement. This action requires quite a lo t of prior information and knowledge on 
relevance of climate change challenge for EU  funded measures. Thus preparatory actions 
for this option should include a dialogue with MS management author ities (or potentially 
through a dedicated Adaptation Committee), climate experts, exchange of information (maybe through a platform consolidating the information available), training, improved use 
of existing programme management control and monitoring tools.  
12.5. Put in place a process for a better co-ord ination of adaptation policies and the 
assessment of next steps. 
The elaboration of an EU Adap tation strategy requires collecti ng and sharing information for 
the MS and regions/local authorities as th e basis for decisions about further action. 
In view of current provisions  of Article 4 of the UNFCCC, Member States need to adopt 
national or regional adaptation strategies a nd the Commission will them who have not yet 
done so, to adopt it by 2012 at the latest. On top of this, 4 potential actions have been identified 
– Action 5.1. In order to improve the coordination of adaptation strategies in the EU, a new 
network of National Adaptation  Focal Points could be established or  alternatively could 
be linked to existing networks and instrument s, e.g. Eionet. This would involve either 
supporting the creation of national bodies deali ng with CC adaptation or stimulating the 
take-up of actions by existing national bodies, which will function as focal points for the dissemination of know-how and best practices, pl us will contribute to the development of 
National Strategies. 
– Action 5.2. An Impacts and Adaptation Steering Group (IASG)  could be created 
composed of representatives from the EU Me mber States involved in  the formulation of 
national adaptation programmes and measures and from the Commission who will provide the secretariat. The Steering Group would be  supported by a number of technical groups, 
who will deal specifically with developments in key sectors (agriculture, biodiversity, water, energy, etc.). The Steering Group wo uld play a role in developing the EU 
framework in order to fac ilitate the ongoing development of the EU strategy and the 
preparation of national adapta tion strategies by the Memb er States. The Steering Group 
 
EN 133   EN would also consider the appropr iate level at which actions s hould be best implemented. In 
the initial phase the Steering Group would fo cus on monitoring progress in strengthening 
the knowledge base, in particular the setting up of the Clearing House Mechanism.  The 
Steering Group would provide a coordinated approach to: bu ilding the evidence base on 
the impacts of climate change, assessing the ri sks of climate change for the EU, the scope 
for increasing climate resilience, a nd costing the risks and opportunities. 
– Action 5.3. Some regions or cities have already produced regional adaptation strategies . 
For less advanced regions, however, there coul d be the need to provide assistance for 
capacity building and best prac tice sharing. This would will  ensure an increase of 
institutional and social awaren ess, and achieve solidarity obj ectives while allowing a cost-
efficient use of public and EU resources. Base d on a review of exis ting regional adaptation 
strategies, a definition of contents for the strategies and guidelines for implementation will be provided, and the link with potential support at EU  level will be assessed.  
– Action 5.4. Establish an EU legal framewor k for Adaptation Strategies, with strict 
deadlines and procedures and within that a Management Co mmittee with executive powers 
to evaluate and assess the plans and to ma ke recommendations to the Member States. 
It is also proposed to fully exploiting the Global Climate Change Alliance to strengthen 
dialogue with developing countries and impl ement concrete pilot adaptation programs.