EN    EN EN 
 
EN    EN  COMMISSION OF THE E UROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
Brussels, 1.4.2009 
SEC(2009) 388 
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 
accompanying the  
 
WHITE PAPER 
 
Adapting to climate change: Towards a European framework for action 
    
SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT  
 
 
{COM(2009) 147 final} 
{SEC(2009) 386} 
{SEC(2009) 387} 
 
EN 2   EN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY  
1. INTRODUCTION  
This report is the executive summar y of the Impact Assessment Report1 on the Commission's 
White Paper on Adapting to Climate Change2, the objective of which is to develop further the 
discussion at European level of the effects of c limate change and to take steps to ensure that 
the EU and Member States are fully able to re spond at the levels of both policy definition and 
practical implementation of soluti ons, bearing in mind that most adaptation initiatives need to 
be taken at national, regional or local level. 
The Commission adopted a Green Paper on Adapta tion to climate change in Europe in 20073, 
which was followed by a broad public and inter-institutional consultation4. The Impact 
Assessment benefited from the 4th IPCC report5, the EEA/JRC/WHO report on the impacts of 
CC in Europe6 and from a long list of reports and re search projects on climate change impacts 
and adaptation. It is complemented by sectoral  papers on water, coasts and marine issues7, 
agriculture8 and health9. 
2. CLIMATE CHANGE ADAPTATION : A NEW AGENDA FOR PUBLIC POLICY  
2.1. Key Concepts 
Vulnerability  (IPCC,2007) is the degree to which a syst em is susceptible to, and unable to 
cope with, adverse effects of climate change , 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 se nsitivity, and its adaptive capacity (Figure 1). 
Conversely, resilience  (IPCC, 2007) is the ability  of such system to ab sorb disturbances while 
retaining the same basic stru cture and ways of functioning. 
This means that pro-active adap tation policies should not be restri cted to an analysis of the 
impact of Climate Change and the uneven sensitivity of different sectors, regions or social groups. For some sectors, regions and groups cl imate change might provide opportunities for 
innovations in processes, technology and governance.  
Biodiversity, ecosystems, the population and ec onomic agents may adapt autonomously, if 
other conditions are favourable, without interf erence from a central au thority moderating the 
                                                
 
1 SEC(2009) 387. The Impact Assessment report provides more  detail at sectoral and geographical level 
2 COM(2009) 147.  
3 COM(2007) 354, http://ec.europa.eu/en vironment/climat/adaptation/index_en.htm 
4 http://ec.europa.eu/environment/climat/adaptation/index_en.htm 
5 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 
6 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/ 
7 SEC(2009) 386. 
8 SEC(2009) 417. 
9 SEC(2009) 416. 
 
EN 3   EN final impact of climate change and also e xploiting climate change “opportunities”, whilst 
triggering another layer of economic, social  and environmental impact and shifting the 
climatic impact elsewhere.  
Figure 1 Conceptual diagram for climate cha nge vulnerability and adaptation. Source: EEA 
(2008). 
 
Planned adaptation measures will therefore be needed to provide a multi-sectoral approach  
aimed at improving the resilience of the natu ral and economic system  and/or facilitating 
specific adaptation, often with a medium- and long-term approach . Public action will also 
target the production of public good s and the provision of a level playing field for information 
on climate vulnerability and on costs and benefits of adaptation options. 
The major uncertainties over the future baseli ne for adaptation favour the implementation of 
flexible or adaptive management, assessing the r obustness of alternative strategies against a 
wide range of scenarios10. The analysis of the Impact Assessment is based on a holistic 
evaluation framework which goes beyond the dire ct impacts and economic repercussions of 
climate change, and takes on board the role of ecosystem services and the social dimension of climate change (Figure 2). This provides a basi s for the further integration of the existing 
information on the potential impacts that may occur given alternative projected changes in 
climate, without and with autonomous adapta tion. So far the knowledge is still extremely 
fragmented, and research  projects under the 6
th or 7th Framework Programme are progressing 
in defining a set of consistent scenarios designed for the furt her integrated assessment of 
adaptation and mitigation policies. 
                                                 
10 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 4   EN Figure 2: Chain of Potential Impacts from Cl imate Change. Source: DG Environment, based 
on based on (EEA, 2008) and (IPCC, 2007). Potentia l impacts are all impacts that may occur 
given a projected change in climate, 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
Storms
Floods
Water scarcity droughtsSpecies phenology
Water qualityForest fires
Soil degradationSpecies distribution
Permafrost/ice melting
Social Impacts
Health (Mortality, Morbidity, Labour productivity)
Distributive impacts (Social groups, Regions)
Resource conflicts
Migrations
Social fabric
Governance
Greenhouse 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
Storms
Floods
Water scarcity droughtsSpecies phenology
Water qualityForest fires
Soil degradationSpecies distribution
Permafrost/ice melting
Social Impacts
Health (Mortality, Morbidity, Labour productivity)
Distributive impacts (Social groups, Regions)
Resource conflicts
Migrations
Social fabric
Governance
Greenhouse gases 
concentration
Temperature (means & 
extremes)
Precipitation
(means & extremes)
Sea level rise
Ground level ozoneClimate Change Scenarios
 
2.2. Identifying the most vulnerable EU sectors and regions 
The most vulnerable areas in  Europe (EEA 2008) are Southe rn Europe, the Mediterranean 
Basin, Outermost regions and Arctic region. Furt hermore, mountain areas, in particular the 
Alps, islands, coastal and urban areas and de nsely populated floodplains are facing particular 
problems. In Northern and Western Europe a more complex balance between negative and 
positive effects is projected for moderate levels of climate change. 
The potential impact of Climate Change is higher  in sectors which rely on ecosystem services, 
water availability and climatic conditions, such  as agriculture and forestry, fisheries and 
aquaculture, energy and tourism.  
The most vulnerable groups (elderly people, chil dren, disabled, chronically  ill, etc) are likely 
to face greater difficulties in adapting. This  poses a potential problem of equity and 
distribution. It also raises th e issue of whether planned adapta tion should specifically try to 
target such groups, or apply a distributional an alysis to ensure an equitable adaptation 
strategy. While a lack of resour ces for the most vulnerable is often cited as a barrier to 
effective adaptation, other fina ncial mechanisms and market failures reduce the potential 
effectiveness of adaptation. 
Work is already ongoing at the European Comm ission to assess the feasibility and provide 
options for the design of a (set of) vulnerability  indicator(s), at sector al and regional levels, 
that could be used to assess further EU-wid e adaptation policy packages. It would require 
bringing together indicators at economic, social and environmenta l levels for different climate 
scenarios, to represen t the levels of risks that differe nt sectors and regions are facing. 
 
EN 5   EN 2.3. Need for a better co-ordination of action at different levels 
Some Member States are well advanced in their thinking on adaptation and already have 
policies in place, while others ar e still at the phase of identifying the problems or debating the 
direction that action sh ould take. In existing national adapta tion plans, it is recognised that 
coordination between Member States is needed and benefits in approa ching adaptation in an 
integrated, coordinated manner at EU level ar e recognised. The reasons  for taking action at 
EU level are set out below: 
• Climate change will result in cross-border impacts  and will require adaptation measures 
based on cooperation between different Member  States and coordination with relevant 
non-Member States (e.g. upstream  flood protection measures); 
• A sense of solidarity  must be enshrined in the adaptation strategy, as the effects of climate 
change will differ geographically  and be highly variable meani ng that the impact across the 
EU could vary considerably. 
• To avoid mal-adaptation  (adaptation action shifting the impact to or exacerbating the 
problem in another area, count ry, sector or social group) , it is often best to take action at 
cross-border or European level; 
• Climate change will have a major impact on sect ors that are well integrated at EU level 
through the single market and common policies . Adaptation can be taken into account in 
EU spending programmes  to complement the resources spent by the Member States. 
• As regards external action, the move toward s increased negotiating power at EU, rather 
than Member State, level may give the EU a leading role  in adaptation in some sectors. 
 
EN 6   EN 3. OBJECTIVES OF THE WHITE PAPER  
The specific objective of the Communication on Adaptation is to identify policy instruments 
at EU level and establish a work plan  for the short and medium term, by: 
– Improving the knowledge base on CC vulnerability  (impacts and adaptive capacity) and on 
the costs and benefits of adaptation options; 
– Ensuring early implementation of no-regret  and win-win measures and avoid mal-
adaptation, by mainstreaming ad aptation into EU policies; 
– Putting in place a process to be tter co-ordinate adaptation po licies and assess next steps, 
including launching a debate on future funding. 
4. SCREENING POTENTIAL OPTIONS  
In order to take forward the objectives set out above, two leve ls of options need to be 
distinguished: 
– The overall approach to pursue adaptation policy at any level. 
– The framework for action at EU level.  
4.1. Options for the approach to adaptation 
There will be a plethora of public adaptation st rategies, plans and projects, each one requiring 
an assessment of vulnerability and an evaluatio n of the cost and bene fit. It is, however, 
possible to classify adaptation options into  three broad categorie s based on the overall 
approach: 
• “Grey” infrastructure approaches , which are physical interv ention or construction 
measures using engineering services to make buildings and infrastructure  that are 
essential for the social and economic well-bein g of society more capab le of withstanding 
extreme events; 
• “Green” structural approaches , which contribute to increasing ecosystems' resilience  
and, while aiming to halt biodiversity loss and the degradation of ecosystem and restore 
water cycles, at the same time use the functi ons and services provided by the ecosystems to 
achieve a more cost-effective and sometimes mo re feasible adaptation solution than relying 
solely on grey infrastructure.  
• “Soft” non-structural approaches  are designing and applying policies and procedures, 
land-use controls, information dissemination, and economic incentives to reduce or prevent 
disaster vulnerability. They require more  careful management of the underlying human 
systems . 
 
EN 7   EN 4.1.1.  Assessment of options 
The diversity of vulnerability across EU-27 a nd sectors and the scope for adaptation options 
cannot be addressed in this Impact Assessment.  Moreover, this report does not select one 
preferred approach, as all 3 appr oaches defined above have to be  part of any policy portfolio.  
An assessment of the cost and benefit of adaptation  policies requires considering the full 
picture of EU and national measures (CAP a nd cohesion policy funds, e nvironmental, health 
and enterprise policies, etc.) and should consider how  re-focusing or reformulating a broad 
range of policies can help to make adaptation ac tion more cost-effective, quicker and flexible. 
The uncertainty inherent in climate change pr ojections can make it difficult to take early 
targeted action in all sectors. However, ear ly action can bring clear economic benefits by 
anticipating potential damages and minimising th reats to ecosystems, human health, economic 
development, property and infrastructure. For certain investment, which will still be fully 
operational when the impact of climate change c ould fully materialise, the current direction of 
climate change predictions should pl ay a role in decision-making now. 
Autonomous and planned adaptation options may trigger environmental costs , which will 
need to be addressed in sustainability assessments . In particular it is essential to perform an 
integrated assessment of mitigation and adaptation strategies: while mitigation strategies (both 
energy and land-use) should fully integrate their vulnerability to climate change, some options 
for adaptation (in particular water supply and cooling) merit a careful assessment. This 
confirms the importance of integrated land and water assessment to ensure the optimal allocation of scarce natural resources (land, wate r). Other environmental impacts must also be 
explored as soon as possible to design a su stainable adaptation policy and avoid “mal-
adaptation”. 
Regarding the social impact , a strategy for adapting to climate change has to be socially fair, 
especially regarding the cons equences on employment, equity  and distribut ion. A strong 
emphasis on human capital should be introduced ; ranging from awareness of the challenges 
linked with adaptation to climate change to invest ment in education and training to ensure that 
Europeans have the skills and competences to adapt to climate change . Adaptation strategies 
must facilitate structural changes when requi red and harness new opportunities for economic 
development and the creation of "green jobs", while acting in solidarity with vulnerable 
groups. 
4.1.2.  Prioritisation of adaptation measures 
There is a range of adaptation m easures that must be undertaken either beca use they pay off in 
the short term irrespective of uncertainties in forecasts (“no regret”); or because they are 
beneficial for both mitigation and adaptation ("win-win"): 
• Avoiding infrastructure development and building in high-risk areas (e.g. flood 
plains, water scarcity) when  locating or re-locating; 
• Designing infrastructures and buildings  to minimise energy and water 
consumption and improve the water retenti on and cooling capacity in urban areas; 
• Flood and coastal management that incl udes creating or re-establishing flood 
plains or salt marshes, which increase  flood/sea level rise management capacity 
and support biodiversity and ha bitat conservation objectives; 
 
EN 8   EN • Improving preparedness and contingency pl anning to deal with  risks (including 
climate). 
4.2. Options for action at EU level 
In light of the above objectives, there are thre e main “strategic” options for a future EU 
adaptation policy: 
– Option A (Baseline) implies that the development of adaptation strategies is 
restricted to autonomous adaptation and to action at national level, while EU policies 
are unchanged. This would expose a number of gaps and potential for mal-
adaptation. This option was therefor e discarded at an early stage 
– Option B (Incremental and responsive action towards an EU adaptation 
strategy) implies that the findings of  this report are used to take the EU adaptation 
strategy a step further. Priority would be  given to tapping th e potential of on-going 
initiatives, in particular at national level, or co-ordination and awareness raising schemes and to screen in de tail the whole range of EU policies and instruments, 
while putting in place the “governance” of the EU adaptation policy as a way to monitor progress and lay the ground for future action. 
– Option C (EU Adaptation Action Plan) would complement the former, by giving 
priority to new legislative initiatives to promote sustainable adaptation actions. 
National and regional adapta tion strategies would be revised and streamlined. 
However, the current level of uncertainty on vulnerability to impact and on the costs and benefits of adaptation measures does not allow setting out in advance a definitive blueprint for action. Moreover,  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 measures is of national or local competence.  Finally, this option is 
considered premature before political prio rities for the new multi-annual financial 
framework 2013-2020 have been set. 
Option B is selected given the current situati on, this option provides an adequate mix between 
the need for a strategic vision to  develop an EU adaptation polic y and the need for a flexible 
and responsive choice of policy priori ties. This corresponds therefore to a Short term 
strategy (up to 2012), starting 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 corresponding schemes by EU Member States 
driven from their obligation under the UNFCCC.  Assuming that autonomous or MS guided 
adaptation actions will take pl ace, it proposes the use of soft instruments and support action 
that in the short term can boost adaptation, prev ent some forms of mal-adaptation and create 
EU added value for the schemes. 
5. M
ONITORING AND EVALUATION  
The European Commission, together with the Eu ropean Environment Agency, has undertaken 
the development of Adaptation indicators, to provide information on the vulnerability of a 
certain sector or region and to give feedb ack on how policies and schemes are tackling the 
problems, evaluating their adequacy , efficiency and flexibility.  
 
EN 9   EN This European-wide key adaptation indicators ba sed on agreed defin itions will assist the 
Commission in reporting on the progress made and ensure a flexible approach to policy-
making. The first adjustment could take pl ace after the UNFCCC agreement on further 
mitigation actions have been concluded, as the level of ambition of further action to reduce 
emissions will influence the scale of adaptation across the EU. 
The reporting schemes will be defined at a late r stage. They will build on the Clearing House 
Mechanism, and will be based on a harmonise d approach to minimise the administrative 
burden.