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}
Date: 2009-04-01
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: climate change, environmental cooperation, environmental protection, farming sector, health service, quality of life, quality of the environment

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN 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 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Introduction, procedural issues and consultation of interested parties ........................ 4 

Context and legal basis................................................................................................. 5 

Stakeholder consultation .............................................................................................. 6 

Scientific expertise ....................................................................................................... 6 

Internal consultation..................................................................................................... 6 

Needs and limitations for early adaptation action at EU level..................................... 8 

Climate Change Adaptation: a new agenda for public policy...................................... 8 

The need for indicators of vulnerability..................................................................... 15 

Tackling insufficient knowledge and institutional weaknesses. ................................ 19 

Objectives of the White Paper.................................................................................... 26 

General, specific and operational objectives.............................................................. 26 

Consistency with horizontal strategies....................................................................... 26 

Options for adaptation approaches............................................................................. 29 

Identification of planned adaptation options.............................................................. 29 

Assessment of adaptation options .............................................................................. 30 

Options for the EU framework for action .................................................................. 36 

Identification of options for EU action ...................................................................... 36 

Assessment of options for short-term EU action ....................................................... 39 

Conclusions: towards an EU adaptation Strategy ...................................................... 41 

Monitoring and Evaluation ........................................................................................ 41 

Development of adaptation indicators ....................................................................... 41 

Reporting on adaptation ............................................................................................. 42 

Appendix .................................................................................................................... 45 

Support documents and References ........................................................................... 45 

Glossary...................................................................................................................... 47 

Results of consultation on the Green Paper ............................................................... 53 

Implementation of the recommendations of the Impact Assessment Board.............. 55 

Annex 1 - The framework for integrated assessment of adaptation policies ............. 57 

1. 

1.1. 

1.2. 

1.3. 

1.4. 

2. 

2.1. 

2.2. 

2.3. 

3. 

3.1. 

3.2. 

4. 

4.1. 

4.2. 

5. 

5.1. 

5.2. 

5.3. 

6. 

6.1. 

6.2. 

7. 

7.1. 

7.2. 

7.3. 

7.4. 

8. 

8.1. 

Climate change scenarios........................................................................................... 57 

EN 

2 

   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. 

12. 

Annex 4: Review of national adaptation plans ........................................................ 117 

Annex 5: Actions included in the options for action at EU level in the Short-medium 
term .......................................................................................................................... 125 

12.1. 

Improving the knowledge base on climate change impacts and adaptive capacity . 125 

12.2.  Mainstreaming in sectoral policies........................................................................... 126 

12.3.  Risk management instruments ................................................................................. 129 

12.4. 

Funding review......................................................................................................... 130 

12.5. 

Put in place a process for a better co-ordination of adaptation policies and the 
assessment of next steps........................................................................................... 132 

EN 

3 

   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 Framework would complement and re-enforce Member 
States  actions,  particularly  through  existing  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: Phase 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 basis 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  sectoral  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  impacts,  vulnerability  and  adaptive  capacity.  It 
identifies  the  uncertainties  and  the  knowledge  gaps  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  the  general  objective  of 
promoting  adaptation  is  translated  into  this  context  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 problems 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  approaches,  for  which  a  proportionate  assessment  of 
the  economic,  environmental  and  social  impacts  is  conducted  to  allow  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  are  assessed  with  respect  to  the  operational 
criteria defined in chapter 3, and with respect to subsidiarity, knowledge basis and resources 
aspects. 

1 
2 
3 
4 

SEC(2009) 386 
SEC(2009) 417 
SEC(2009) 416 
COM(2007) 354 final, http://ec.europa.eu/environment/climat/adaptation/index_en.htm 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Chapter  6  describes  the  monitoring  and  evaluation  actions  to  be  undertaken  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 footnotes or detailed in an appendix, together 
with  a  glossary  and  a  report  providing  detailed  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  vulnerability,  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  increasingly  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 stakeholder consultation (see section 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 synergies 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 importance of subsidiarity, the crucial role of local 
and regional authorities and necessity to integrate adaptation in all relevant EU policies were 
also highlighted. Other issues raised include: the need for greater awareness raising, the active 
participation of all administrations and civil society in tackling this issue. They also stress the 
importance  of  protecting  ecosystems  and  biodiversity  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 all' approach would not be an adequate response, an action at EU 

5 

6 
7 

8 

9 
10 
11 

Impacts  of  Europe's  changing  climate  -  2008  indicator-based  assessment,  EEA  Report  No  4/2008, 
http://reports.eea.europa.eu/eea_report_2008_4/en/ 
Add ref 
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 
“Climate  Change:  Global  Risks,  Challenges  and  Decisions"  (10-12  March  2009  in  Copenhagen, 
Denmark, http://climatecongress.ku.dk/) 
CdR 118/2007- 72th Plenary Session 28-29 November 2007 
CESE/2007/1702 of 12 December 2007 
B6/2008/131 of 10 April 2008 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                 
level  coupled  with  action  at  all  administrative  levels,  would  yield  significant  added  value 
compared to initiatives exclusively 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  through  various  channels  (see  Appendix),  it  was 
clear  that  stakeholders  found  it  easier  to  identify  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  that  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 management (including methods for tackling water 

shortages, water quality, flooding), biodiversity and ecosystems. 

•  Social  impacts  particularly  health  and  diseases,  infrastructure  resilience,  food  security, 

social equity, migration and  

•  Economic impacts notably: agriculture and energy infrastructure.  

According to the feedback received, the Green Paper gave too little attention to the following 
areas:  communication  and  awareness  raising,  the  importance  of  additional  research  and 
monitoring  systems,  an  overarching  strategic  vision  demonstrating  EU  leadership,  the 
importance of migration and social cohesion aspects, the need for coordinating mitigation and 
adaptation strategies and the mechanisms for financing 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  support  and  technical  expertise  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 directives to include adaptation while updating and 
harmonising existing structures. 

1.3. 

Scientific expertise 

The Impact Assessment has benefited from input from various reports and research projects 
on  climate  change  impacts  and  adaptation  (see  reference  list  in  Appendix)  produced  by  the 
IPCC,  EU  research  programmes,  EEA,  international  organisations,  national  and  regional 
authorities, the private sector and NGOs. 

1.4. 

Internal consultation 

In  the  preparations  for  the  White  Paper,  extensive  consultation  took  place  within  the 
Commission.  Several  informal  inter  service  meetings  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  Commission  services  related  to  climate  change 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
adaptation12,  including  a  report  on  the  progress  of  the  preparations  for  the  White  Paper. 
Furthermore,  bilateral  meetings  with  relevant  key  services  took  place  in  April,  May, 
November  and  December  2008.  In  these  meetings,  ongoing  activities  related  to  adaptation 
were  discussed  in  more  detail  and  adaptation  options  for  consideration  in  the  Impact 
Assessment were addressed. Various drafts of the Impact Assessment were sent to the inter-
service group members for informal comments 

The Impact Assessment Board (IAB) has provided comments on three earlier drafts of the IA 
report. The present impact assessment report integrates the IAB recommendations expressed 
in its final opinion, which are detailed in Appendix 4. 

12 

DGs AGRI, AIDCO, BUDG, COMM, DEV, EAC, ECFIN, EMPL, ENTR, ESTAT, JLS, JRC, MARE, 
MARKT, REGIO, RELEX, RTD, SANCO, SG, TRADE, TREN and the EEA. 

EN 

7 

   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 degree to which a system is susceptible to, and 
unable  to  cope  with,  adverse  effects  of  climate  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  change  impacts,  vulnerability  and  adaptation. 
Source: Isoard, Grothmann and Zebisch (2008) quoted in EEA (2008) 

Mitigation

-

GHG Emissions

Climate Change

Exposure

Sensitivity

Socio-economic 
& Institutional 
Capacity

Willingness to 
adapt

Potential IMPACTS

Adaptive Capacity

VULNERABILITY

-

-

+

ADAPTATION

This means that pro-active adaptation policies should not be restricted to the analysis of the 
impact  of  Climate  Change  across  different  sectors,  regions  or  social  groups,  but  should 
encompass  the  assessment  of  their  uneven  adaptive  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-organisation, and the capacity to adapt to stress and change (IPCC, 2007). 

2.1.2.  Uncertainty 

The 4th IPCC report recalls that there are major uncertainties in future climate projections, as 
well  as  in  future  socio-economic  trends.  The  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  uncertainties  over  the  future  baseline  for  adaptation,  i.e.  in 
considering  which  emission  and  mitigation  trajectory  we  are  on.  While  the  current  EU 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
 
ambition  level  is  to  limit  global  climate  change  to  2  degrees  Celsius  above  pre-industrial 
levels13, this target is reliant on global 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  international  scientific  congress  on  climate 
change  confirmed  that  the  (globally)  worst-case  IPCC  2007  scenario  trajectories  (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 abrupt or irreversible climatic shifts. 

Figure 2 - Best values and likely ranges of global mean warming for the time horizon of 1900-
209914 relative to the control period of 1980-99. (Source: IPCC 2007). 

It  is  therefore  necessary  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 identifies 3 basic types of uncertainty: 

13 

14 

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]. 
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)  for  three  SRES  (IPCC’s 
Special Report on Emissions Scenarios) marker scenarios (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 and 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 

9 

   EN 

 
 
                                                 
–  Incomplete  knowledge:  Responses  in  systems  with  high  levels  of  complexity  such  as 
biological,  social  or  economic  systems  are  very  difficult  to  assess.  Climate  impacts  can 
either  be  increased  by  other,  non-climatic  factors,  or  compensated  by  adaptation  of  the 
system, or internally compensated until a critical level of resilience is exceeded. 

–  Insufficient observed trends: Observed data and trends for many of the impact indicators 
often  lack  the  appropriate  spatial  and  temporal  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, technological and socio-economic 
developments. To address this issue requires using a set of global emission scenarios, such 
as the ones presented in the last IPCC reports, and making use of consistent regional socio-
economic and climate change and impact projections 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  assessment  poses  also  methodological  problems, 
such  as  up-scaling  from  the  local  to  the  regional  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  mitigation  policies.  Initial  research  under  7th  EU 
Research  (FP)  Framework  Programme18  (7FP)  will  further  address  the  quantification  of 
damage and adaptation cost for global and regional 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  potential  impacts  of  Climate  Change,  the  feedbacks, 
the conflicts and synergies, an analytical framework 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 meteorological impacts, impacts on biodiversity & 
ecosystems and their services, socio-economic impacts: 

Physical and meteorological impacts: 

15 

16 
17 
18 
19 

20 

Dickinson,  T.  (2007):The  Compendium  of  Adaptation  Models  for  Climate  Change:  First  Edition; 
Environment Canada, Adaptation and Impacts Research Division 
http://www.ensembles-eu.org/  
www.adamproject.eu  
SEC(2008) 3104 
OECD, Economic Aspects of Adaptation to Climate Change - Costs Benefits and Policy Instruments; 
2008, available at www.oecd.org/env/cc/adaptation 
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 

10 

   EN 

 
                                                 
–  Depending  on  global  scenarios,  annual  average  temperature  in  Europe  would  increase 
between 1° and 5.5°C over the 21st century, with strong distributional pattern of warming 
across  Europe  (greatest  warming  predicted  for  Southern  Europe  and  Arctic)  and 
differences between summer and winter. 

–  Winter  precipitation  would  increase  in  Northern  Europe,  summer  precipitation  would 
decrease  in  Southern  Europe.  There  are  still  large  uncertainties  on  the  magnitude  and 
geographical details of the change. 

–  Additional global sea level rise would be between 0.18 and 0.59m by 2100 (IPCC, 2007), 
although recent projections indicate a sea level rise that may exceed the IPCC upper limit. 

–  Extreme events are becoming more frequent and intensive even in the short term.  Heavy 
precipitation  events  will  become  more  frequent.  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.  Projections  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 Arctic 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 climate, without considering adaptation. 

Atmosphere / 
Atmosphere / 
cryosphere / sea
cryosphere / sea

Greenhouse gases 
Greenhouse gases 
concentration
concentration

Temperature (means & 
Temperature (means & 
extremes)
extremes)

Precipitation
Precipitation
(means & extremes)
(means & extremes)

Storms
Storms

Sea level rise
Sea level rise

Ecosystem conditions 
Ecosystem conditions 
and supporting services
and supporting services

Species phenology
Species phenology

Species distribution
Species distribution

Forest fires
Forest fires

Water quality
Water quality

Floods
Floods

Permafrost/ice melting
Permafrost/ice melting

Soil degradation
Soil degradation

Ground level ozone
Ground level ozone

Water scarcity droughts
Water scarcity droughts

s
s
o
o
i
i
r
r
a
a
n
n
e
e
c
c
S
S
e
e
g
g
n
n
a
a
h
h
C
C
e
e
t
t
a
a
m
m

i
i
l
l

C
C

Economic impacts
Economic impacts

Infrastructures and physical capital
Infrastructures and physical capital
(Damages, Losses)
(Damages, Losses)
Production and Consum ption
Production and Consum ption
(Processes, consumer behaviour, Growth potential,
(Processes, consumer behaviour, Growth potential,
Variability/disruptions activity)
Variability/disruptions activity)
Employment
Employment

Impact on Ecosystem services
Impact on Ecosystem services

Provisioning 
Provisioning 
(Food, Freshwater, W ood/fiber, Fuel)
(Food, Freshwater, W ood/fiber, Fuel)
Regulating
Regulating
(Climate, Flood, Diseases, Water purification)
(Climate, Flood, Diseases, Water purification)
Cultural
Cultural

Social Impacts
Social Impacts

Health (Mortality, Morbidity, Labour productivity)
Health (Mortality, Morbidity, Labour productivity)
Distributive impacts (Social groups, Regions)
Distributive impacts (Social groups, Regions)
Resource conflic ts
Resource conflic ts
Migrations
Migrations
Social fabric
Social fabric
Governance
Governance

These phenomena will, in turn, have a significant impact on European ecosystems conditions, 
and will lead to changes in ecosystems functions and services, upon which society depends. 
The  effects  of  climate  change  exacerbate  the  impacts  of  already  existing  factors  including 
pollution, land-use changes and resources over-exploitation, which may reduce the resilience 
of many ecosystems.  

EN 

11 

   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 the storage of carbon in peatlands and wetlands), and such 
services  are  likely  to  be  affected.  Terrestrial  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, will also be affected, 
as  will  "regulating  services  such  as  flood  protection,  protection  against  soil  erosion  and 
nutrient re-cycling. 

–  Climate change will cause climatic zones to move, at a much faster rate than in the past. 
The potential distribution of European species is projected to shift by tens to hundreds of 
kilometres by the end of the century (depending on the scenario). There are also additional 
– and largely unknown effects – related to the incidence of pests and diseases establishing 
themselves in EU territory as the climatic conditions change. Of large concern is also the 
potential for abrupt change when thresholds are exceeded. 

–  Future changes in precipitation, combined with rising temperatures, will have impacts on 
water quality and quantity, affecting many sectors. 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  and  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 vegetation have a significant cooling 
effect and  air-conditioning  capability.  Soils transformed and drained for human activities 
have  more  difficulty  to  absorb  rainwater.  Soil  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 may affect aquatic ecosystems, drinking water 
and water based recreation activities. Sea level rise may increase saline intrusion in coastal 
aquifers. 

–  Climate change also affects soil 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  availability),  increased 
erosion  risk  (increase  in  flood  vulnerability),  organic  matter  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 impacts requires innovative assessment methods: 

–  The changes in ecosystem condition and services will affect the productivity 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  accelerating  atmospheric  CO2  growth  from  economic  activity, 
carbon intensity and efficiency of natural sinks, PNAS, 104 (47) : 18866 – 18870 

EN 

12 

   EN 

 
                                                 
ADAM (See Annex 3), but they tend to be based 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 behaviour. Direct impact of climatic changes 
and  extreme  events  on  infrastructures  and  buildings  on  the  one  hand,  and  health  on  the 
other  hand,  can  be  subject  to  monetary  valuation  subject  to  the  definition  of  appropriate 
damage  functions,  but  here  again  the  potential  of  ecosystem  services  (flood  regulation, 
local cooling, water purification, pest control) has to be taken into account. 

–  The  increasing  conflicting  demand  between  different  water  and  land  users  (agriculture, 
industry,  and  human  consumption)  will  trigger  negative  social  effects  if  there  are  no 
appropriate sustainable resource management 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  question  of  efficiency  of  public  spending:  governments  expect 
decisions to be based on the ‘best possible’ science. But the science of climate prediction is 
unlikely  to  fulfil  the  expectations  of  decision-makers  and,  through  over-precision,  could 
potentially lead to mal-adaptation if misinterpreted 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  understanding  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  conventional  one  based  on  climate  prediction  would  therefore  focus  on 
exploring  how  well  strategies  perform  across  wide  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
Predict-then-adapt approach Assess-risk-of-policy framework

Structure Problem
Structure Problem

Structure Problem
Structure Problem

Characterise Climate 
Characterise Climate 
Uncertainty
Uncertainty

Propose Various 
Propose Various 
Strategies
Strategies

Design Adaptation
Design Adaptation

Evaluate Outcome
Evaluate Outcome

Assess Strategies 
Assess Strategies 
Against a Wide Range 
Against a Wide Range 
of Qt/Ql Futures
of Qt/Ql Futures

Summarise Trade-
Summarise Trade-
Offs Among 
Offs Among 
Promising Strategies
Promising Strategies

Outcome Optimised for Climate
Outcome Optimised for Climate

Outcome Optimised for Robustness  
Outcome Optimised for Robustness

Given  the  deep  uncertainties  associated  with  long  term  climate  change  impacts  and  other 
drivers of adaptation to climate change, robust 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 

13 

   EN 

 
                                                 
favours the implementation of a flexible or adaptive management, involving putting in place 
incremental  adaptation  options,  rather  than  undertaking  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  responses  that  also  allows  for  incremental  or 
directional change in future, as vulnerability, knowledge, experience and technology evolve. 
This  may  also  include  delaying  implementing  specific  (potentially  harmful)  adaptation 
measures  while  exploring  options  and  building  the  necessary  standards  and  regulatory 
environment. 

2.1.5.  Autonomous adaptation and the need for public intervention 

Structural  changes  are  a  continuing  process  in  all  economies,  societies  and  ecosystems,  and 
climate  change  impacts  will  contribute  to  faster  and  more  vigorous  changes  with 
corresponding  challenges  for  ecosystems,  population,  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  autonomously,  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  responses  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 central authority, moderating the final impacts of climate change and also 
exploiting  climate  change  “opportunities”,  although  triggering  another  layer  of  economic, 
social and environmental impacts and shifting the 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,  reconstructions).  However,  there  is  room  for 
anticipatory  adaptation  (e.g.  crop  diversification,  insurance  purchase,  house  design,  etc.) 
which  will  depend  very  much  on  the  level  of  information  and  perception  of  climate  risks23. 
This triggers the need for action by public authorities to provide a level playing field for the 
information on climate vulnerability and on costs and benefits of adaptation options. 

The need to develop adaptation strategies by central authorities first emerges under imperfect 
market conditions, such as when externalities appear, when the adaptation measure is a public 
good,  when  the  transaction  costs  related  to  adaptation  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 

14 

   EN 

 
                                                 
public  intervention  will  be  required  for  the  further  implementation  of  regulations  or 
internalisation mechanisms. Conversely, adaptation 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 character of the uncertainty about the impact of climate change, as 
uncertainty extends the room for diverging views and  conflicts of interest among agents. 
The second factor relates to the fact that adaptation takes time, and substantial losses may 
accrue in the meantime. 

–  Regarding  information  imperfections,  education  and  information  campaigns  may  be 
needed to facilitate the switch to new production processes (e.g. drought-resistant species), 
whereas the use of current techniques (e.g. increased 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 management 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  and  the  Mediterranean  Basin,  mountain  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 adverse 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 productivity, water availability, health effects, summer tourism, 
ecosystems, etc). In northern and Western Europe a more complex balance between negative 
and  positive  effects  is  projected  for  moderate  levels  of  climate  change.  The  Outermost 
Regions  (ORs)  and  overseas  countries  and  territories  (OCTs)  already  experience  severe 
climate change impacts, and are precursors for what might happen on the main land. 

24 

Climate Change: the Cost of Inaction and the Cost of Adaptation. Technical Report 17/2007, available 
at http://reports.eea.europa.eu/technical_report_2007_13/en/Tech_report_13_2007.pdf 

EN 

15 

   EN 

 
                                                 
At sectoral level25, the degree of adaptive capacity is uneven: 

–  The  agricultural  sector  has  a  long  record  of  adapting  to  climate  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  abstraction.  However,  these  decisions  will  be  largely 
influenced by the economic environment including market conditions and public policies. 

–  External factors such as globalisation and demands for rationalisation and profitability are 
constraining the adaptive capacity in the forestry sector. There are significant differences 
across  Europe  in  socio-economic  conditions  within  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  strong  degree  of  innovation  in 
materials  and  design,  bioclimatic  buildings,  climate  proofing,  reduction  of  energy 
consumption, integrated approach to spatial 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  reconversion  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, improved health and education services. 

–  Regarding nature conservation measures to maintain diversity in and increase connectivity 

between nature conservation sites are necessary. 

The  impacts  of  climate  change  are  likely  to  fall  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 impact 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  positively  correlated  with  economic  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 

16 

   EN 

 
                                                 
and such effects are often compounded by levels of awareness and access to information (as 
well as insurance).  

For some particularly vulnerable groups, these issues overlap, and more adverse impacts may 
be  expected  in  some  regions  with  lower  economic  development  (which  is  often  related  to 
lower adaptive capacity). Indeed, several studies have found strong distributional effects for 
vulnerability  in  Europe,  e.g.  in  relation  to  health26  or  coastal  flooding  risk27,  where  strong 
correlations between vulnerability and socio-economic status/social deprivation are founded. 
These  inequalities  are  important  in  defining  the  baseline  scenario,  and  in  looking  where 
planned adaptation policy might be needed, 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 chance, that traits are present which can cope 
with changing climatic conditions. Healthy ecosystems have a greater adaptive capacity than 
degraded ecosystems. 

Adaptive  capacity  of  human  systems 
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 availability, income level and distribution, local environmental 
conditions, pre-existing health status, and the quality of public health care28. 

includes  economic  wealth, 

Social  and  individual  factors  act  as  barriers  to  adaptation  at  both  individual  and  collective 
decision-making  levels29.  There  are  various  cognitive  barriers  to  adaptation  including,  for 
example, the observation that vulnerable individuals perceive themselves to be powerless to 
act in the face of risk. At the policy level, adaptation policies, like many 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  sustainable,  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  potential  efficacy  of  adaptation.  Uncertainty  in 
impacts  may  lead  to  increasing  upward  pressure  on  insurance  premiums  and  possible 
withdrawal  of  insurance  cover  in  areas  at  risk  from  catastrophic  impacts.  Finally  threats  to 
undervalued cultures, lifestyles, icons and places may also represent limits to adaptation and 
need to be explored further. 

26 

27 

28 

29 

Menne,  B.,  and  Ebi,  K.L.  (eds)  (2006)  Climate  change  and  adaptation  strategies  for  human  health. 
WHO (Europe). 
Environment Agency (2006). Addressing Environmental Inequalities: Flood Risk. SCHO0905BJOK-E-
P Science Report: SC020061/SR1. Authors: Gordon Walker, Kate Burningham, Jane Fielding, Graham 
Smith, Diana Thrush, Helen Fay. Available at www.environment-agency.gov.uk 
World  Health  Organization  (WHO,  2003),  “Climate  Change  and  Human  Health  –  Risks  and 
Responses”, available at: http://www.who.int/globalchange/climate/en/ccSCREEN.pdf  
Hulme  et  al.  (2007)  Limits  and  barriers  to  adaptation:  four  propositions.  Tyndall  Centre  for  Climate 
Change 
at: 
July 
http://tyndall.webapp1.uea.ac.uk/publications/briefing_notes/bn20.pdf 

Research 

available 

Briefing 

2007, 

Note 

20, 

- 

EN 

17 

   EN 

 
                                                 
2.2.3.  Towards a vulnerability index 

Coarse  estimates  of  vulnerability  have  been  generated  by  combining  some  measures  of 
exposure  (e.g.  sea  level  rise,  change  in  average  temperature  and  precipitation)  and  some 
measures of adaptive capacity under a scenario-based approach30. 

Besides  the  general  need  for  more  knowledge  (research)  on  the  adaptation  subject,  specific 
attention needs to be given to region-specific and applied research because concrete measures, 
financing and transfers take place at these levels. At present, there are only a few regions that 
know more or less what they have to expect in the future – but uncertainty is even higher due 
to lacking data and appropriate modelling. 

Some work has also already been recently 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 agriculture, fisheries and tourism sector. 

Work is already ongoing at DG Environment to assess the feasibility and provide options for 
the  design  of  a  (set  of)  vulnerability  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  expected  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.  Ecosystems  and  biodiversity  will  also  undergo  major 
changes to their structure and function and regions, which will often 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  production  potential  of 
developing  countries,  critically  impacting  food  security.  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 (Nile, 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, worsening health conditions, and potentially 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  impacts  are  expected  to  range  from  increased 
water  stress  due  to  droughts  and  water  scarcity,  to  degradation  of  soils,  loss  of  arable  land, 
flooding,  salinisation  and  forest  fires.  This  could  lead  to  developments  in  the  region  which 

30 

31 

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 
http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docoffic/working/regions2020/index_en.htm 

EN 

18 

   EN 

 
                                                 
would  negatively  affect  the  EU's  enlargement  and  ENP  policies  objectives  of  promoting  an 
area of prosperity, stability and security. 

Scientific evidence has shown however that it will be the poorest regions and countries in the 
world (particularly the least developed countries, 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 development policy achievements. The weakest countries 
will have most difficulties with adapting to climate change, which may lead to less growth, 
more  forced  migration  and  possibly  radicalization  and  state  failure  causing  internal  and 
external security risks. Failure by the international community to appropriately address these 
tensions may undermine  multilateralism.  Climate  change could lead to vast displacement of 
populations, including into regions close to Europe or EU ultra-peripheral regions. Parts of the 
Mediterranean  region  being  both  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 measures to mitigate climate change. Integration 
of climate change adaptation in policy making is more recent, but most Member States have 
already  started  to  take  action  on  adaptation.  Moreover,  Article  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  implementation  of  national  and,  where  appropriate, 
regional  programmes  containing  measures  for  climate  change  mitigation  and  adaptation  as 
well as the obligation to cooperate 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 plans34. 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  policies  already  in  place  while  others  are  still  at  the  phase  of 
identifying the problems or debating the direction 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 level, but there is also a large difference in progress among the 
countries.  The  overall  state  or  level  of  adaptation  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  sensitivity,  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 countries, the objective of reducing risk is the 
one given the highest priority, but here again there are differences in approaches. 

32 
33 
34 

Some of them being part of EU (Ultra-peripheral regions) 
See Commitments in paragraph 1 indents b and e, 
See annex 4. 

EN 

19 

   EN 

 
                                                 
•  The  impacts  of  climate  change  vary  regionally  and  every  country  has  its  own  national 
priorities, the national adaptation strategies focus upon sectors of particular relevance and 
different  countries  consider  different  sectors.  At  the  same  time  there  are  some  sectors 
which hold importance in all reviewed strategies. Water management (in  particular  flood 
prevention) land use/agriculture and ecosystems are clearly considered to be a priority in 
the majority of strategies. Two diverging features 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 area. 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  hampered  the  achievement  of  adaptation  strategies. 
According  to  the  study,  political  institutional  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  developments.  The  cross-level  or  cross-sectoral 
conflicts, as well as the need to take into account the global dimension of adaptation problem, 
are areas for which EU contribution is essential. 

Table 1 – SWOT analysis of National Adaptation Strategies (NAS) (Source:PEER, 2009)  

Contributing  significantly  to  achieving  the 
NAS objectives  

Hindering  the  achievement  of  the  NAS 
objectives  

Related  to  historical 
and 
conditions 
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 

–  Lack 

administrative levels 
of 
knowledge  

context-specific 

adaptation 

Related 
to  current 
and  future  conditions 
and 
developments 
external to the NAS  

(OPPORTUNITIES) 

–  Development and export of knowledge 
–  Spill-over  of  policy 
integration 
and 
for  non-climate 
multilevel  governance 
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  responses.  Nevertheless,  the 
Commission does not know all the actions already in place in the Member States at all levels, 
as  there  is  no  obligation  to  report  to  the  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  vulnerability,  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 

20 

   EN 

 
  
                                                 
actors from the individual citizens and public authorities to the EU level. Actions to adapt to 
climate  change  will  need  to  be  taken  at  a  very  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 regional 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  discussion  of  the  Green  Paper  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 regional 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-ordination of regional and local adaptation 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  information,  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  designing  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 facilitate adaptation. 

2.3.3.  The need for early action at EU level: establishing priorities for the White Paper 

In existing national adaptation plans it is recognised that coordination between Member States 
is needed, and benefits in approaching adaptation in an integrated, coordinated manner at EU 
level are recognised. Reasons for action 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  States.  Climate  change  impacts  with  a  trans-
boundary nature can be for example forest fires, effects on migratory 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 impacts and would reap the benefits; therefore 
there  is  a  need  for  coordination  at  EU  level.  This  could  be  the  case  for  taking  flood 
protection measures upstream, where they may be more (cost-) effective. 

•  Climate  change  will  have  different  spatial  effects  and  strong  variability  meaning  that 
impacts across the EU could vary considerably. 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  balanced  territorial  development  of  European 
rural areas, which socio-economic disparities could amplify due to uneven climatic effects 
on agricultural systems, forestry and rural economies. 

EN 

21 

   EN 

 
•  Adaptation action should not lead to a shift in the impacts or exacerbating the problem in 
another area, country, sector or social group. Such mal-adaptation is often best addressed 
at  trans-boundary  or  European  level.  In  particular,  building  water  reservoirs,  caputing 
groundwater or using techniques for ensuring precipitation will 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 sectors 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,  energy  networks,  forestry,  agriculture,  water, 
biodiversity  and  fisheries).  The  lack  of  Community  action  could  significantly  damage 
Member  States  interests  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  practice,  development  and  cooperation.  This  will 
contribute  greatly  to  a  robust  knowledge  base  for  policy  making  at  all  administrative 
levels.  Intensive  exchange  of  best  adaptation  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 impacts 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 complement the actions at national level. 

2.3.4.  The baseline scenario for assessing EU framework for adaptation 

The  baseline  is  dependent  on  several  factors,  being  the  implementation  of  the  EU  acquis, 
planned and  existing policy instruments that  address adaptation at national or  regional level 
(like  national  adaptation  strategies),  and  autonomous  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  have  a  positive  effect  in  limiting  temperature  increase).  The 
baseline explores therefore the risks and opportunities under current EU legislative framework 
to highlight the need for additional early action: 

–  Biodiversity: The current Natura 2000 network establishment and management provisions 
in  the  Directives  may  not  be  sufficiently  dynamic  to  respond  to  the  rapid  changes  to 
ecosystems induced by climate change. The creation of ecological networks in fragmented 
landscapes needs to happen swiftly. Shifting bioclimatic zones 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 neighbouring country. The inclusion of biodiversity 

EN 

22 

   EN 

 
goals  in  other  sectoral  policies  as  advocated  in  the  Biodiversity  Action  Plan36  is 
indispensable  to  ensure  the  achievement  of  nature  conservation  goals  under  changing 
climatic conditions. 

–  Water  is  by  nature  trans-national  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  European  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  Europe'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 water 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  the  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 mismanagement of water resources and is therefore a key 
tool  for  adaptation  to  climate  change.  Regarding  water  scarcity  and  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  consequences  (losses  of  soil  organic  matter 
impair  achievement  of  the  EU’s  Kyoto  Protocol  targets,  dams  are  blocked  and 
infrastructure  is  damaged  downstream  by  sediments  from  massive  erosion  further 
upstream, etc.). Therefore it is of outmost importance to act at source to prevent damage 
and subsequent remedial actions, otherwise costs to restore environmental quality may be 
borne  by  another  Member  State.  The  Commission  adopted  a  Soil  Thematic  Strategy 
(COM(2006)  231)  and  the  proposal  for  a  Soil  Framework  Directive  (COM(2006)  232), 
which would heavily contribute 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 agricultural 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  for  common  action  which  proposes  to 
encourage adaptation within the forestry sector, to enhance the protection of forests against 
forest fires and the increasing threat from extreme 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  climate  change  concerns  and  the 
development of the adaptation strategies will take place through the reform of the Common 
Fisheries Policy (in 2012) and the adoption of the Aquaculture 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 

23 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Planning can play an important role in adaptation in maritime areas and coastal waters37. 
The  Marine  Strategy  Framework  Directive  contributes  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  consideration  of  how  changes  in 
climate will affect the viability proposed projects and policies (e.g. facing a disruption of 
the hydrological cycle). Other guidelines, legislations 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  diseases  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 implementation of adaptation actions at various 
levels becomes available. 

2.3.5. 

Impact on EU finances 

Private  funding  of  adaptation  measures  will  concentrate  on  economically  interesting 
investments,  whereas  investors  located  in  the  most  affected  weaker  regions  and  sectors  will 
have  difficulties  to  obtain  appropriate  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 the main source of assistance, in particular to 
compensate  for  damage  and  losses  due  to  extreme  weather  events.  In  a  number  of  regions, 
less  populated  and  economically  less  performing,  often located in areas that are particularly 
sensitive  to  climate  change  risks  areas  (coastal,  mountainous),  the  costs  to  cover  adaptation 
needs will be so huge that they exceed the capacity of public funding. In these regions, losses 
can take such massive dimensions also for the private 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 term 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  financing  schemes,  public/private  equity  funds). 
However,  these  funding  instruments  make  clear  distinctions  between  regions,  sectors  and 
industries  which  are  affected  adversely  and  those  that  benefit  from  new  business 
opportunities. The competition for funds is expected to increase. 

37 

COM (2008) 791 

EN 

24 

   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 context of the preparation of the next multi-annual 
financial  framework,  how  EU  funding  mechanisms  can  build-up  further  knowledge  and 
support the Member States in their efforts to become more resilient to climate change impacts, 
thus ensuring the sustainability of Europe, while at the same time bearing in mind the need for 
additionality. 

Equally the EU funds are likely to be called upon to support adaptation 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  instance  anti  flood  measures  to  be  taken  in  a  Member 
State upstream to protect another Member State downstream). 

However, the lack of an accepted methodology for identifying and classifying adaptation and 
adaptation-related projects for accounting and other purposes is not only required to have an 
overview of the EU's current expenditure on adaptation and adaptation-related projects but is 
also  necessary  to  establish  future  funding  needs.  This  triggers  the  need  for  agreeing  a 
methodology  for  calculating  the  costs  of  adaptation,  consistent  with  the  work  undertaken 
under the UNFCCC38 or by the OECD39. 

38 

39 

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  
OECD (2008) Draft OECD Guidelines on Integrating Climate Change adaptation into Development and 
Coo-operation. COM/ENV/EPOC/DCD/DAC(2008)2. 

EN 

25 

   EN 

 
                                                 
3. 

OBJECTIVES OF THE WHITE PAPER 

3.1. 

General, specific and operational objectives 

The  general  objective  of  adapting  to  climate  change  is  to  cope  with  unavoidable  climate 
change  and  reduce  the  cost  of  climate  change  by  both  decreasing  the  vulnerability  and 
enhancing the resilience of society, economy and environment to climate change impacts.  

Taking  into  account  the  current  knowledge  on  Climate  change  vulnerability  and  adaptation 
actions, and the specific institutional framework for the development of EU adaptation policy, 
as described in the previous chapter, the specific 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 analytical correspondence with the key 3 problems 
identified,  the  operational  objectives  -  that  will  have  to  be  addressed  by  the  instruments 
included in the action plan and further monitored - are threefold: 

–  Improve the knowledge base on CC vulnerability (impacts and adaptive capacity) and on 

the costs and benefits of adaptation options. 

–  Ensure early implementation of identified no regret and win-win measures and avoid mal-

adaptation by mainstreaming adaptation in EU policies 

–  Put in place a process for a better co-ordination 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  policy  on  Adaptation  to  Climate  Change  and  EU 
Sustainable Development Strategy40 (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 previous section, and convergences can be found 
in the building of a low carbon society which will target the most vulnerable segments of 
EU society and territory. 

•  Sustainable  Transport:  The  review  of  the  vulnerability  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 

26 

   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 consumption to a less vulnerable profile. 

•  Conservation and Management of Natural resources: The maintenance of biodiversity and 
ecosystems  is  essential  for  both  ensuring  their  resilience  to  climate  change  impact  and 
allowing  the  provision  of  ecosystem-based  services  ("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  adaptive  capacity  should  become 
an  essential  element  of  strategies  for  social  protection  and  social  inclusion.  Moreover, 
Climate  change  may  trigger  substantial  demographic  challenges  (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 policies, which is one of the 4 key priorities 
of the renewed Lisbon Strategy41. Decreasing the vulnerability of the economy, in particular 
SMEs which can be more affected e.g. by extreme 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 increasing resilience of nature, economic and social systems. 

An  adaptation  strategy  must  also  be  developed  considering  the  Renewed  Social  Agenda42, 
which  is  based  on  a  holistic  approach  to  social  policy  and  which  calls  for  better 
mainstreaming of employment and social policies into all EU policies.  

3.2.2.  External Policy  

EU  adaptation  policy  cannot  be  exclusively  defined  in  the  narrow  focus  of  EU  territory. 
International  cooperation  on  adaptation  should  be  strengthened  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 where 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 Adaptation Plans of Actions (NAPAs) and the 
Bali  Action  Plan  (UNFCCC,  2007).  The  Bali  Action  plan  resulting  from  the  most  recent 
COP/MOP  meetings  (Conference  and  Meeting  of  the  Parties,  Dec.  2007)  recognizes  that 
adaptation will need to be explicitly included in a global post-2012 climate change agreement, 
currently being negotiated with the aim to reach an agreement in Copenhagen by the end of 
2009 (UNFCCC COP15). 

41 
42 

http://ec.europa.eu/growthandjobs/index_en.htm 
COM (412) of 2 July 2008 

EN 

27 

   EN 

 
                                                 
In  view  of  the  availability  of  strong  external  instruments  at  EU  level,  adaptation  should  be 
mainstreamed  in  the  EU's  policies  and  co-operation  programmes.  Mainstreaming  of  climate 
change into cooperation and development strategies 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 policies. In trade policy adaptation 
should be incorporated, notably through the liberalisation of trade in environmental goods and 
services and in the elaboration of Free Trade Agreements (FTAs). 

Progress  towards  the  Millennium  Development  Goals  (MDGs)  will  enhance  countries’ 
capacity to adapt to climate change. At the same time, however, the implications of climate 
change will significantly undermine progress towards the MDGs .It is therefore crucial for the 
EU’s  cooperation  programmes  and  for  third  countries  sustainable  development,  poverty 
alleviation  and  sectoral  strategies  to  take  into  account  climate  change  adaptation  needs  in 
order to ensure that progress towards the MDGs is sustained and sustainable. 

Failed adaptation can lead to security implications. 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 sector 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 promote prosperity, stability and security. 

EN 

28 

   EN 

 
4. 

OPTIONS FOR ADAPTATION APPROACHES 

In terms of adaptation approaches, choices have to be made 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 practical actions to either reduce vulnerability to 
climate  risks  (either  through  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  sector  (both  autonomous  actions  and  those  requiring  public 
intervention). It is however possible to classify adaptation options in 3 broad categories based 
on the overall approach: 

•  “Grey” 

infrastructure  approaches,  corresponding 

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. 

to  physical 

–  These approaches are focused on direct climate change impacts on infrastructure 
and buildings, such as changes in temperature and precipitations, floods, sea level 
rise, etc.  

–  They target exercising a degree of control over the environmental threat itself (e.g. 
flood  control  works:  dams,  dikes,  levees),  or  preventing  the  effects  of  climate 
change and variability (.g. increased irrigation water, air conditioning, etc.). 

•  “Green” structure approaches43 are contributing to the increase of ecosystems resilience 
and, while addressing goals such as halting biodiversity 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  effective  and  sometimes  more  feasible  adaptation 
solution than relying solely on grey infrastructures alternatives. Increasing the resilience of 
green  infrastructures  therefore  can  be  considered  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  biodiversity  and  ecosystems  including  multiple  groups  performing 
similar  functions  for  restoring  and  maintaining  resilience.  Integrated  agricultural 

43 

Healthy plants and animals & properly functioning natural processes such as water cycle, food chain, 
etc.:  see  Benedict  (2006),  Green  infrastructure:  linking  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 

29 

   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, compared 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, floods 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  development  of  permanent  vegetation  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-use  controls,  information  dissemination,  and 
economic incentives to reduce or prevent disaster vulnerability. They require more careful 
management of the underlying human systems. They include: 

•  Economic  instruments  ,  which  could  play  a  particularly  key  role  in  adaptation 
(OECD 2008): insurance is a recurring instrument within the context of adaptive 
responses  in  a  number  of  sectors,  particularly  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, meanwhile, could potentially play a very 
critical role in the financing and enhancing the climate resilience of infrastructure, 
where the costs of adaptation are high. 

•  Gathering  and  sharing  information  (undertaking  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  framework  (changing  standards,  legislation, 
and  best  practice  guidance,  and  developing  appropriate  policies,  plans  and 
strategies);  

•  Creating  supportive  social  structures  (changing  internal  organisational  systems, 
in 

the  adaptation  actions,  and  working 

to  deliver 

developing  resources 
partnership). 

4.2. 

Assessment of adaptation options 

The 3 approaches all have to be part of any adaptation policy portfolio, therefore this report 
will  not  perform  any  choice  between  options.  However,  on  the  basis  of  the  preliminary 
elements of assessment provided below, it is already possible to highlight priority early action 
on  adaptation  that  should  be  undertaken  because  1)  they  would  generate  net  social  and/or 
economic  benefits  irrespective  of  whether  or  not  anthropogenic  climate  change  occurs 
(otherwise  known  as  “no  regret”  measures);  or  2)  because  they  have  the  desired  result  in 

EN 

30 

   EN 

 
terms of minimising the climate risks or exploiting potential opportunities but also have other 
social,  environmental  or  economic  benefits  ("win-win").  It  is  also  possible  to  identify 
adaptation measures for which there are important risks of mal-adaptation. 

4.2.1.  Economic aspects of adaptation 

Adaptation has an extremely important role in reducing economic costs  of Climate Change. 
While  adaptation  has  a  cost,  the  information  available  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  information  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-effective and proportionate adaptation in Europe. 
Annex  1  summarises  the  information  on  the  potential  costs  of  adaptation  in  Europe  and 
globally, by looking at various studies, approaches, and estimates. 

The burden of financing the reallocation of resources and new investment will not fall only on 
the private sector: involvement of the public sector will be needed, 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 provision (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 population 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  adaptation  policies  requires  considering  the  full 
picture  of  both  EU  and  national  public  intervention  (CAP  and  cohesion  policy  funds, 
environmental, health and enterprise policies, etc.) and should consider 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 change adaptation has recently been launched by 
the  Commission44,  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  change,  particularly  in  certain 
sectors. Early action will bring clear economic benefits by anticipating potential damages and 
minimizing  threats  to  ecosystems,  human  health,  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 long lifetime and will be fully operational when 
climate change impacts will fully materialise. For such investments, the current direction 
of climate change predictions should already play a role in decision-making now.  

44 
45 

http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/procurements_grants/call4tenders12327_en.htm  
http://ec.europa.eu/maritimeaffairs/climate_change_en.html  

EN 

31 

   EN 

 
                                                 
•  Uncertainty  in  climate  change  projections  sometimes  makes  it  difficult  to  take  early 
targeted  action  in  all  sectors.  But  in  general,  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 measures 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  vulnerable  to  climate  change.  This  would  both  limit 
energy  use  (and  associated  GHG  emissions)  and  also  reduce  exposure  to  the  possible 
negative consequences of climate 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. The same applies to ecosystem vitality. 

–  Afforestation and reforestation enhance carbon sequestration and meanwhile may prevent 
erosion  or  flooding.  However,  the  types  of  trees  best  suited  to  preventing  flooding  and 
protecting biodiversity may not be the most effective from a carbon sequestration point of 
view46.  The  IPCC  report  (2007),  states  that  "in  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 therefore more climate resilient fish stocks. 

–  Conservation  and  sustainable  use  of  biodiversity  and  ecosystems  and  the  reduction  of 
environmental pressures lead to healthy ecosystems, which are essential for any adaptation 
and mitigation strategy. 

There can also be some trade-offs. 

–  Some  technological  adaptation  options  may  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  Water  scarcity  and  Droughts  show  that 
plugging  the  expected  increase  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 CO2. However, 
there may be opportunities to sequester carbon on degraded 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 

32 

   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 hydropower facilities can reduce fossil-fuel-related 
energy use and reduce dependency on foreign energy imports. The associated water storage 
can  also  limit  vulnerability  to  precipitation  variability,  and  if  properly  designed,  not 
significantly  hampering  the  ecosystem  functioning  of  the  river.  A  high  dependency  on 
hydropower  production  in  some  regions  can  lead  to  an  increase  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 harmonise this use with water availability, with 
the provision of non marketed ecosystem services (such as conservation of biodiversity and 
protection against avalanches or water pollution), and with maintaining the carbon pools. 

In  short,  this  recalls  the  need  for  an  integrated  assessment  of  mitigation  and  adaptation 
strategies.  On  the  one  hand,  mitigation  strategies  (both  energy  and  land-use)  should  fully 
integrate  their  vulnerability  to  climate  change.  On  the  other  one,  adaptation  options  (in 
particular "technological ones") deserve 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  planned  adaptation  options  may  modify  other 
environmental  processes  on  agricultural  land,  which  will  need  to  be  addressed  in 
sustainability  assessments.  The  diversity  of  vulnerability  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  that  need  to  be  explored  as  soon  as  possible  to  design  a 
sustainable adaptation policy, avoiding "mal-adaptation": 

–  Autonomous  adaptation  actions  by  farmers  can  counteract  and  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  adaptation  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 irrigation, 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 

48 

IPCC  (2008)  Technical  Paper  on  Climate  Change  and  Water,  April  2008,  available  at 
http://www.ipcc.ch/meetings/session28/doc13.pdf 
The implications of climatic changes on use of fertilisers 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 

33 

   EN 

 
                                                 
–  Increased forest productivity in some regions, together with provisions for climate change 
mitigation (increased use of biomass as a renewable energy source) may increase the stress 
on non marketed vital services (such as conservation 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,  which  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  development  of  unregulated  fisheries  and  early 
measures  need  to  be  taken  to  manage  emerging  fisheries,  which  will  results  more  cost-
effective  than  try  later  to  reverse  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 impact 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  efficiency  improvement  and  infrastructure  protection 
through green structural approach. 

–  Regional and local authorities may plan to support industry and services most affected e.g. 
by  water  or  snow  scarcity  by  financing  investments  in  water  supply  or  snow-making 
equipments,  together  with  helping  relocating  activities  in  more  favourable  areas.  Both 
categories of projects will have substantial environmental impacts, to be addressed under 
environmental impact assessment. 

–  Finally,  the  building  of  infrastructure  to  protect  from  sea  level  rise  or  floods,  while 
ensuring  that  land  use  can  be  orderly  planned,  houses  built  and  transport  infrastructure 
maintained,  tends  to  disturb  the  natural  dynamic  nature  of  coastal  and  river  systems. 
Maintenance costs are high and the ecosystem services are negatively affected. Hence, we 
see in many countries a shift towards a more flexible approach, that works with the natural 
processes instead of against it. Examples are the now often used sand nourishments, buffer 
zones (setback lines) and managed realignment of the coast. 

The  assessment  of  adaptation  strategies  must  take  into  account  the  potential  of  green 
infrastructures  and  compare  it  with  the  potential  impact  of  more  "traditional"  adaptation 
measures. Moreover, green infrastructures serve multiple purposes (e.g. mountain forests are 
biodiversity  rich,  protect  against  erosion,  filter  the  air,  sequester  carbon,  increase  water 
holding  capacity,  fulfil  nature  conservation  goals  and  provide  renewable  raw  materials).  A 
good example is given by coastal or river protection: 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  effective  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 

34 

   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 adaptation should specifically try and target such groups, or apply 
distributional analysis to ensure equitable adaptation strategies. 

The  far  reaching  repercussions  of  climate  change,  often  also  considered  as  a  "fundamental 
restructuring  of  our  industrial  society",  and  its  expected  enormous  costs,  can  only  be  faced 
through  a  wider  partnership  which  shares  losses  and  profits.  To  facilitate  meaningful 
involvement  of  social  partners  in  adapting  to  climate  change,  the  debate  should  be  engaged 
over similar time perspectives. Social partners are generally interested in a much shorter time 
frame  than  those  envisaged  in  the  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 through its employment and distributive consequences 
and to include a strong notion of the importance of human capital. "Human capital" comprises 
aspects ranging from awareness for the challenges linked with adaptation to climate change, 
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 climate change. 

4.2.5.  Prioritizing adaptation measures  

As  mentioned  above,  the  broad  adaptation  approaches  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 strategy. 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 and ancillary benefits and technical feasibility. 

There  is  however  a  range  of  options  that  deliver  the  required  adaptation  and  which  also 
minimise  the  risks  associated  with  implementation  even  in  the  face  of  associated 
uncertainties. These options are normally referred to as no-regrets and win-win options, and 
should be identified and selected where possible.  

At this stage this report  is  only  able  to present 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/sectoral  assessments  and 
modelling 

(1) 

"No-regrets" options – adaptive measures whose socio-economic benefits exceed their 
costs whatever the extent of future climate 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 the immediacy of the targeted risks and realised benefits are 
considered. Examples (with a potential EU dimension) include:  

•  Actions  or  activities  directed  at  building  adaptive  capacity  as  part  of  an  overall 

adaptive strategy; 

•  Actions  where  short-term  benefits  of  adaptation  justify  early  action,  e.g.  with 

respect to current climate variability (OECD 2008);  

EN 

35 

   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  planning  to  deal  with  risks  (including 

climate); 

(2) 

"Win-win"  options  –  adaptation  measures  that  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 activities that address climate 
impacts  but  which  also  contribute  to  mitigation  or  other  social  and  environmental 
objectives.  These  types  of  measures  include  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 pollutant 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 habitat conservation objectives; 

•  Improving the cooling capacity of building and in urban areas, while reducing soil 

sealing. 

An impact assessment of short-listed win-win measures will need to be performed in the short 
term,  to  identify  costs  and  benefits,  including  land  use  trade-offs,  impacts  on  biodiversity, 
social impacts, etc. 

5. 

OPTIONS FOR THE EU FRAMEWORK FOR ACTION 

5.1. 

Identification of options for EU action 

A  broad  range  of  instruments  that  can  be  implemented  at  EU  level  and  cover  the  needs 
identified in section 2.3. has been examined, from the softer instruments to more prescriptive 
ones: 

–  Communication / Awareness raising / Capacity building 

–  Research and development (Innovation) 

–  Guidelines, governance and co-ordination 

–  Price signals, market -based instruments 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  and  see  if  potential  threats  materialise  –  and  take a 
major write-off if they do and construct new less vulnerable infrastructure. 

EN 

36 

   EN 

 
                                                 
–  EU Financing schemes 

–  New regulation and standards 

A  packaging  according  to  the  3  operational  objectives  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 

base 

Improve 

#1: 
knowledge 
climate  change 
and adaptive capacity 
Set #1 (knowledge base) 

the 
on 
impacts 

Operational objectives 

#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 

n/a 

n/a 

n/a 

n/a 

Set #2 (mainstreaming) 

Set #5 (co-ordination) 

n/a 

n/a 

Set #3 (risk management) 

n/a 

Set #4 (preliminary review EU financing schemes) 

/ 
/ 

raising 

Communication 
Awareness 
Capacity building 
Research  and  development 
(Innovation) 
Guidelines,  governance  and 
co-ordination 
New 
standards  
Price  signals  and  market  -
based instruments 
EU Financing schemes 

regulations 

and 

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  financial  framework,  as  well  as  any  option  implying  pre-
empting post 2013 multi-annual financial framework. 

As a result, three main options for short-term action at EU level have been defined. 

–  Option  A  (Baseline):  this  option  would  imply  that  the  development  of  adaptation 

strategies is constrained to national level, 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 way 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-ordination and awareness raising actions, and to screen 
in  detail  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 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 regional 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 

37 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Option C 

1.1. to 1.5. 

1.6.  Resort  to  Article  169  of  the  EC  Treaty  to 
streamline EU and national research agendas 

Set of actions 

Option B 

#1 
Improving 
the  knowledge 
base  on  climate 
change  impacts 
and 
adaptive 
capacity 

1.1.  Develop  a  consistent,  comprehensive  and 
regularly  updated  climate  change  and  socio-
economic  scenarios  (projection  data)  for  analysis 
across Europe.  

1.2.  Build  a  structured  information  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. 

Provide 

awareness-raising, 
targeted 
1.4. 
communication,  education  and  training  on  climate 
change impacts and adaptation. 

1.5.  Cover  knowledge  gaps  with  7th  FP  research 
projects,  working  upon  analysis  of  climate  change 
impacts  at  scales  relevant  to  adaptation  measures, 
identification  of 
resilience,  and 
investigation the potential of the ecosystem approach. 

limits 

the 

to 

#2  Mainstream 
Climate 
Change 
adaptation 
EU 
policies 

in 
sectoral 

2.1. In order to address climate 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  guidelines 
integrate  climate 
vulnerability considerations in the current policy and 
boost sustainable adaptation practices. 

to 

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, 
binding 
obligation or harmonised standards across EU to 
achieve 
the 
sustainability  of  Europe  in  the  face  of  climate 
change.  

the  objective  of  guaranteeing 

introduce 

legally 

Financial 
#3 
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. 

3.1., 3.2. 

3.2.  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). 

#4  Funding  of 
Adaptation 
Actions  under 
EU 
the 
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): 

4.3.  Climate  proof  National  and  EU  public 
funded investment and condition the EU funding 
to  an  assessment  of  the  climate  impact  on  the 
proposed investment.  

4.4. 

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 
the 
Reporting on the use of EU funds 

in 

4.4.  Prepare  Long  term  funding:  The  forthcoming 
budget  review  could  assess  further  the  available 
options  for  future  adaptation  funding  in  the  multi-

EN 

38 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
Set of actions 

Option B 

Option C 

annual financial framework post 2013  

#5  Put  in  place 
a  process  for  a 
co-
better 
ordination 
of 
adaptation 
policies. 

to 

improve 

5.1.  In  order 
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  September  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. 

legal  framework  for 
5.4  Establish  an  EU 
Adaptation  Strategies,  with  strict  deadlines  and 
procedures  and  within 
that  a  Management 
Committee  with  executive  powers  to  evaluate 
and 
to  make 
plans 
recommendations to the Member States.  

assess 

and 

the 

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  the  operational  objectives,  and  compare  with  the 
reference scenario:  

–  How does the option improve the knowledge base 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 criteria are reviewed for each option: 

–  Subsidiarity:  Does  the  option  focus  on  trans-national  aspects  of  climate  change 
vulnerability  or  adaptation,  better  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 better achieved by the 
Community action? 

–  Knowledge  base:  Is  this  option  based  on  a  sound  knowledge  base  and  on  scientific 
evidence?  Which  preparatory  actions  should  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  identified  at  this  stage?  Would  the  option  need  a 
substantial reallocation of resources or additional funding?  

Table 4 - Assessment of options for EU action 

Option B 

Option C 

Operational 
#1: 
Objective 
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 

39 

   EN 

 
 
Option B 

Option C 

climate 
impacts 
adaptive capacity 

change 
and 

acceleration  and  better  focus  of  the  on-going  research 
activities,  and  build  synergies  and  economies  of  scale 
between  currently  fragmented  on-going  or  planned 
actions. 

(cid:46) 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. 

Operational 
#2: 
Objective 
Ensure 
early 
implementation  of 
no  regret  and  win-
win  measures  and 
avoid 
mal-
adaptation 

Operational 
Objective #3: Put in 
place  a  process  for 
better 
a 
co-
of 
ordination 
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 

criteria 
Subsidiarity 

Screening 
#1: 
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 

criteria 
Knowledge 
screening 

Screening 
#2: 
basis 
criteria 

☺ All actions included in this options can be undertaken 
with the adequate level of information. 

☺  The  option  strengthens  aspects  of 
water  savings,  energy  efficiency  and 
protection  of  ecosystem  services  which 
the 
would  have  positive  effects  on 
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. 

(cid:46)  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 
administrative 
and 
institutional 
stalemate, 
allow 
and  would 
developing an impact-driven and flexible 
approach to policy-making.  

not 

the  new 

(cid:46)  Some  of 
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. 

level 

current 

definition 

problem 
the 

(cid:47)  The 
has 
highlighted 
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 blueprint 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.  

(cid:46) The actions included in the Option C 
would  have  to  be  subject  to  an  impact 
assessment. 

Options  B  provides  a  clear  improvement  against  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  steps)  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  criteria  (knowledge  basis)  is  determinant  for 

EN 

40 

   EN 

 
 
preferring option B at this stage, as the problem definition has highlighted the current level of 
uncertainty  on  the  vulnerability  to  CC  impacts  and  on  the  costs  and  benefits  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 with 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  actions  by  the  EU  Member  States 
driven from their obligation under the UNFCCC. It assumes that autonomous or MS guided 
adaptation actions will take place, and proposes the use of certain soft instrument and support 
actions  that  in  the  short  term  can  provide  some  support  to  adaptation  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 and communication of the issue to the major 
stakeholders  and  sectors;  in  addition  this  option  calls  for  enhanced  efforts  in  research  so  to 
develop further the knowledge needed for proposing specialised actions at national, regional 
or local level and to build proper responses from economy and society. It should be noted that 
these capacity building and awareness raising actions should continue on the longer term as 
well.  

Option C is not formally discarded, as the measures 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/management,  biodiversity  and  water  related 

measures to strengthen climate resilience of the EU. 

–  The need for measures to prevent or mitigate effects of climate related disasters, targeting 

the most vulnerable sectors, areas and social groups. 

–  The  investment  needs  in  the  public  and  private  sectors  in  relation  to  energy,  transport, 

water and flood protection infrastructure. 

–  The needs for adaptation investments in developing countries. 

6. 

MONITORING 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 tackling the problems, evaluate their adequacy, 
efficiency  and  flexibility  and  that  will  assist  the  Commission  in  reporting  on  the  progress 
made, while helping any future modifications and policy adaptation needed.  

As  a  first  step  a  set  of  process-based  indicators  (monitoring  progress  in  implementing 
adaptation measures) could be set up to assess the progress across the 3 operational objectives 
defined in chapter 3: 

–  Degree of mainstreaming adaptation in EU policies 

EN 

41 

   EN 

 
–  Progress  on  the  knowledge  base  on  climate  change  vulnerability  and  on  the  costs  and 

benefits of adaptation options. 

–  Progress in the co-ordination of adaptation policies. 

At a later stage, once more comprehensive information become available, a set of outcome-
based  indicators  (i.e.  measuring  the  effectiveness  of  adaptation  policies)  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 would complement the Climate Change Vulnerability Indicators 
that will be developed as part of the actions included in the selected option.  

Work  has  started  at  DG  Environment  and  at  the  European  Environmental  Agency50  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 develop links across sectors and at all levels 

through which to monitor and evaluate policy goals and outcomes. 

–  They provide a means to communicate with wider stakeholders. 

–  They  are  an  essential  step  towards  mainstreaming  adaptation  through  links  with  related 

indicators (e.g. sustainable development). 

The European Environment Agency, the Commission's Joint Research Centre and the World 
Health  Organization  have  a  role  to  continue  and  expand  their  work  in  environmental 
monitoring  across  Europe.  However,  indicators  of  climate  impacts  extend  beyond  the 
environmental sector, and the development of indicators therefore needs to take place in close 
collaboration  with  other  key  (international)  organisations  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  investments  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 Mechanism 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 activities, 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  Change  (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 

42 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Taking as a basis the proposal of several European Environment Protection Agencies in May 
2008, the following elements for the reporting framework can be identified: 

–  Reporting on the existing adaptation plans and/or strategies, or those 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 change adaptation activities. It should also include providing 
information on any regulatory measures that facilitate 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  adaptation  activities  (both 

implemented and proposed). 

–  Reporting  on  joint  activities  with  other  Member  States  and  developing  countries, 

including joint implementation of measures, research activities or agreements. 

To  achieve  an  efficient  reporting  mechanism  and  avoid  duplication,  a  standardised  and 
harmonised reporting framework would 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 with the relevant players, as it has to be coordinated with the 
development  of  the  Shared  Environmental  Information  System  (SEIS)  and  the  proposed 
Clearing House Mechanism (CHM) on Adaptation which will contain the most up-to-date and 
state-of-the-art information and 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 European Environmental Data Centres.  

A reporting framework is important and needs not be overly complicated; duplication of work 
should  be  avoided  by  building  upon  other  reporting  obligations,  such  as  those  under  the 
Article  4  of  UNFCCC51.  In  addition,  at  COP15  in  Copenhagen  (2009),  the  UNFCCC  may 
agree  on  a  comprehensive  Framework  for  Action  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.  Parties  are  encouraged  to  use  the  Intergovernmental 
Panel  on  Climate  Change  (IPCC)  Technical  Guidelines  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 

43 

   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  administrative  burden  and  the  uncertainties 
involved.  Furthermore,  it  is  important  to  build  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 scale of the need for adaptation, or the results of studies or 
research projects that were not available for the present Impact Assessment report. 

EN 

44 

   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 Change (IPCC, 2007) and the EEA/JRC/WHO report 
'Impacts  of  Europe's  changing  climate'  (EEA,  2008).  Other  sources  are  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  levels,  including  uncertainties  (high-resolution 
climate change scenarios for 2071-2100 for Europe using an array of climate and impact 
models). 

change 

(Climate 

–  Effects on health, in particular of heat waves, have been studied in the framework of the 
cCASHh 
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 Europe)  projects.  The  mid-term  review  of  the 
European Environment and Health Action Plan  (2004-2010) carried out in 2007  has also 
proposed health impacts of climate change as one of the research priorities. 

adaptation 

strategies 

human 

and 

for 

–  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  and  Interactive  Assessment  of  National, 
Regional  and  Global  Vulnerability  of  Coastal  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  Strategies  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 for mitigation and adaptation policy for Europe (ADAM, see 
http://www.adamproject.eu/),  including  consideration  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  adaptation,  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 impacts and economic costs of climate change in 

EN 

45 

   EN 

 
Europe,  and  adaptation  responses,  as  well  as  other  JRC  work  progressing  flood  hazards 
and fire risk. 

–  The  ALARM  project 

(see  http://www.alarmproject.net)  "Assessing  Large  Scale 
Environmental  Risks"  provides  models  and  maps  on  climate  change  impacts  and  models 
for various policy scenarios. 

–  The MACIS project (see http://www.macis-project.net/links.html) on "Minimisation of and 
Adaptation to climate change impacts on biodiversity" is to deliver – amongst other - an 
assessment of proposed climate change adaptation and mitigation measures. 

–  The  COCONUT  project  (see  http://coconut-project.net/objectives.html)  "Understanding 
effects  of  land-use  changes  on  ecosystems  to  halt  biodiversity  loss  due  to  habitat 
destruction, fragmentation and degradation" is to deliver - amongst other – a report on GIS 
database and identification of threatened habitats and land-use projections for the EU 25. 

–  PICCMAT,  a  coordination  and  support  action  on  mitigation  of  agricultural  impact  on 
climate changes (http://www.climatechangeintelligence.baastel.be/piccmat/index.php). 

–  ADAGIO  (ending  in  June  2009),  a  coordination  and  support  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  CIRCLE´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 European Research Area (ERA) for the field 
of climate change. 

EN 

46 

   EN 

 
7.2. 

Glossary 

–  Adaptation:  Adjustment  in  natural  or  human  systems  in  response  to  actual  or  expected 
climatic stimuli or their effects, which moderates harm or exploits beneficial opportunities. 
Various types of adaptation can be distinguished, including anticipatory, autonomous and 
planned adaptation (IPCC, 2007): 

–  Anticipatory adaptation: Adaptation that takes place before impacts of climate 

change are observed. Also referred to as proactive adaptation. 

–  Autonomous  adaptation:  Adaptation  that  does  not  constitute  a  conscious 
response  to  climatic  stimuli  but  is  triggered  by  ecological  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  criteria  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, 
implementing adaptation measures, including transition costs. 

facilitating,  and 

–  Adaptive capacity (in relation to climate change impacts): The ability of a system 
to  adjust  to  climate  change  (including  climate  variability  and  extremes)  to 
moderate  potential  damages,  to  take  advantage  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  sustainable  development  and  other  global 
environmental issues (UNDP, 200452). 

–  Baseline/reference:  The  baseline  (or  reference)  is  the  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  interest.  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: Developing Strategies, Policies and Measures, available 
at http://www.undp.org/climatechange/adapt/  

EN 

47 

   EN 

 
                                                 
–  Capacity building: In the context of climate change, capacity building is developing the 
technical  skills  and  institutional  capabilities  in  developing  countries  and  economies  in 
transition  to  enable  their  participation  in  all  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,  managerial)  that  are  needed  before  adaptation  actions  can  be 
undertaken53 

–  Clearinghouse: In common language the term ‘clearinghouse’ refers to ‘a central agency 
or  entity  for  collecting  and  giving  out  information’.  A  Data  Clearinghouse  is  an 
organization or an organisational framework that acquires, maintains, and distributes data 
or  provides  information  services  about  data  for  many  different  data  users.  Such  an 
organization may also integrate the data, generate 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  Climate  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  global  atmosphere  and  which  is  in  addition  to 
natural  climate  variability  observed  over  comparable  time  periods’.  See  also  climate 
variability. (IPCC, 2007) 

–  Climate  variability:  Climate  variability  refers  to  variations  in  the  mean  state  and  other 
statistics  (such  as  standard  deviations,  statistics  of  extremes,  etc.)  of  the  climate  on  all 
temporal  and  spatial  scales  beyond  that  of  individual  weather  events.  Variability  may  be 
due  to  natural  internal  processes  within  the  climate  system  (internal  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  resources  that  promotes  conservation  and 
sustainable use in an equitable way. An ecosystem approach is based on the application of 
appropriate  scientific  methodologies  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  and  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 

48 

   EN 

 
                                                 
–  Ecosystem services: Ecological processes or functions having monetary or non-monetary 
value  to  individuals  or  society  at  large.  There  are  (i)  supporting  services  such  as 
productivity or biodiversity maintenance, (ii) provisioning services such as food, fibre, or 
fish,  (iii)  regulating  services  such  as  climate  regulation  or  carbon  sequestration,  and 
(iv)cultural services such 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’ vary, 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, storm and long-term change in mean climatic variables such 
as temperature (UNDP, 2004). 

–  Human system: Any system in which human organisations play a major role. Often, but 
not  always,  the  term  is  synonymous  with  ‘society’  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  climate  change  on  natural  and  human  systems. 
Depending  on  the  consideration  of  adaptation,  one  can  distinguish  between  potential 
impacts and residual impacts (IPCC, 2007): 

–  Potential  impacts:  all  impacts  that  may  occur  given  a  projected  change  in 
climate,  without  considering  adaptation.  This  allows  to  assess  all  effects  of 
climate change if no adaptation occurs for a specific sector or area. 

–  Residual  impacts:  the  impacts  of  climate  change  that  would  occur  after 
anticipatory, planned and autonomous adaptation. This would allow 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 climate, 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  towards  the  implementation  of 
adaptation  measures  (process-based)  or  a  measure  of  effectiveness  of  adaptation 
policies and activities in general (EEA, 2008) 

EN 

49 

   EN 

 
–  Infrastructure:  The  basic  equipment,  utilities,  productive  enterprises,  installations  and 
services  essential  for  the  development,  operation  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  example,  a  gradual  increase  in 
atmospheric  greenhouse  gas  concentrations  may  lead  to  such  large-scale  singularities  as 
slowdown or collapse of the thermohaline circulation 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  reduce  the  anthropogenic  forcing  of  the 
climate system; it includes strategies to reduce 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 food security. Ways to achieve this objective 
might  include,  e.g.,  farmer  advice  and  information  services,  seasonal  climate  forecasting 
and incentives for development of irrigation systems (UNDP, 2004). 

–  Probability: the likelihood or possibility of an event or outcome occurring. Probability can 
range from being qualitative, using word descriptions such as likely or highly confident, to 
quantified  ranges  and  single  estimates,  depending  on  the  level  of  understanding  of  the 
causes of events, historical time series and future conditions (UNDP, 2004). 

–  Regional: Area covered by an administrative geographic unit below national level that is 
responsible  for  the  development  of  the  adaptation  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  ways  of  functioning,  the  capacity  for  self-
organisation, and the capacity to adapt 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  Disaster  Reduction  (UN/ISDR)  Terminology  on  Disaster 
Risk Reduction (2009), available from http://www.unisdr.org/eng/library/lib-terminology-eng.htm 

EN 

50 

   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  combination  of  an  event,  its  likelihood,  and  its 
consequences,  i.e.,  risk  equals  the  probability  of  climate  hazard  multiplied  by  a  given 
system’s vulnerability (UNDP, 2004). 

–  Scenario:  A  plausible  and  often  simplified  description  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  derived  from  projections,  but  are  often  based  on 
additional  information  from  other  sources,  sometimes  combined  with  a  ‘narrative 
storyline’. (IPCC, 2007) 

–  SRES:  The  storylines  and  associated  population,  GDP  and  emissions  scenarios 
associated with the Special Report on Emissions Scenarios (SRES) (Nakićenović 
et  al.,  2000),  and  the  resulting  climate  change  and  sea-level  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 affected, either adversely or  beneficially, by 
climate-related stimuli. The effect may be direct (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  coastal  flooding  due  to  sea  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  climate  variability  and  extremes.  It  may 
include a mix of policies and measures, selected to meet the overarching objective 
of  reducing  the  country’s  vulnerability.  Depending  on  the  circumstances,  the 
strategy  can  be  comprehensive  at  a  national  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)–  procedures  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 process at which sudden or rapid change 
occurs.  A  point  or  level  at  which  new  properties  emerge  in  an  ecological,  economic  or 
other  system,  invalidating  predictions  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  result  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  the  data  to  ambiguously  defined  concepts  or  terminology,  or 
uncertain  projections  of  human  behaviour.  Uncertainty  can  therefore  be  represented  by 
quantitative  measures  (e.g.,  a  range  of  values  calculated  by  various  models)  or  by 

EN 

51 

   EN 

 
qualitative  statements  (e.g.,  reflecting  the  judgement  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 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  sensitivity,  and  its  adaptive  capacity  (IPCC, 
2007). 

EN 

52 

   EN 

 
7.3. 

Results of consultation on the Green Paper 

In 2007 the European Commission published the Green Paper COM (2007)354 ‘Adapting to 
climate  change  in  Europe  –  Options  for  EU  action.’  This  sets  out  the  challenges  which  are 
faced and proposes a way in which the EU can tackle adaptation. The challenges 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  consulted  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 undertaken to date indicates that there is widespread support for 
the  Green  Paper  and  the  need  for  urgent  action  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 action, reflecting on the different roles of the EU, 
national,  regional,  local  authorities  and  the  private  sector.  These  were  the  questions  which 
elicited the greatest number of responses, perhaps 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  general  EU  adaptation  policy  to  prospects  for 
sustainable  agriculture.  In  summary,  the  respondents  believe  that  the  EU  must  develop  an 
overarching  framework  which  considers  the  interdependency  of  all  sectors  (including  those 
typically considered outside the environmental realm) and their respective adaptive capacity. 

Responses  to  the  five  questions  related  to  the  second  pillar,  indicate  that  there  is  a  broad 
recognition  for  the  need  to  consider  climate  change  impacts  in  relations  with  neighbouring 
states, the developing world and other industrialized nations. Considering the issues 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 world leader. The EU’s potential to mobilize global 
action  is  noted  with  some  enthusiasm.  Responses  obtained  for  the  three  questions  raised 
against  the  third  pillar  further  underline  the  EU’s  role  as  a  central  agency  facilitating 
information  exchange.  These  questions,  and  the  responses  to  them,  emphasize  the  need  for 
further research into predictive climate change models and their potential role in longer term 
climate change policy.  

EN 

53 

   EN 

 
With  respect  to  stakeholder  consultation,  respondents  clearly  support  existing  efforts  to 
consult with the general public. The total number (and varied scope) of submissions received 
in  response  to  this  exercise  clearly  demonstrate  this  fact.  The  establishment  of  a  European 
Advisory  Group  has  been  widely  supported  by  stakeholders  and  respondents  to  the 
consultation.  

A  report55  on  the  stakeholder  consultation  presents  information  obtained  as  part  of  a 
consultation  exercise  related  to  the  European  Commission’s  Green  Paper  COM  (2007)354 
‘Adapting to climate change in Europe – Options for EU action.’ This consultation exercise 
involved  soliciting  input  from  European  stakeholders  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 progress towards the White Paper.  

Furthermore,  the  Green  Paper  was  also  the  subject  of  opinions  and  resolutions  by  the 
Committee of the Regions, the European Economic and Social Committee and the European 
Parliament:  

–  The  Committee  of  the  Regions  has  adopted  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 

54 

   EN 

 
                                                 
7.4. 

Implementation of the recommendations 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 have been 1) the greater consistency given to 
the problem definition section to better support the set of objectives; 2) moving the analysis of 
adaptation  approaches  to  the  2nd  half  of  the  report  and  assessing  their  economic, 
environmental  and  social  impacts;  3)  performing  a  structured  assessment  of  policy  options 
according to operational objectives and screening criteria. 

Implementation  in  version  4  sent  to  inter  service 
consultation 

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) 

IAB recommendation (D 404) based on version 3 

(1)  The  problem  definition  section  needs to  be better  linked  to the 
objectives.  

–  The problem definition section should 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  underlying  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. 

–  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 covered 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  individuals,  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 
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. 

in 

2)  The  IA  report  should  better  justify  choice  of  the  short  term 
measures proposed in section 4.2.  

All  actions  included  in  selected  option  B  can  be 
undertaken under current budget framework, and will 

56 
57 

http://www.cc.cec/iab/i/docs/opinions/2009/climate_change_second_env.tif  
Available  on  http://www.cc.cec/iab/i/docs/meeting_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 

55 

   EN 

 
                                                 
IAB recommendation (D 404) based on version 3 

–  The IA report should clarify to what extent the list is exhaustive 
and to what extent proposed measures 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. 

–  Additionally,  the  discussion  on  risk  management  should  be 

expanded and not limited to insurance only 

–  The  three  assessment  criteria  (knowledge  base,  subsidiarity, 
synergies/trade-offs)  should  be  reconsidered  or  at  least  better 
defined,  to  allow  a  more  consistent  screening  of  the  proposed 
measures.  

(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.  

Implementation  in  version  4  sent  to  inter  service 
consultation 

not require additional funding. A detailed analysis on 
the  resource  and  cost-efficiency  aspects  of 
the 
potential measures is included in Annex 6. 

As explained during the IAB meeting, the report also 
contemplate  non-commercial  risk  management  tools, 
the  most  evident  being  the  set  of  vulnerability 
indicators. 

This has been reviewed and improved in section 5.2 

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 currently in section 4.2.  

The main report focuses on the comparison of general 
policy  options.  In  order  to  keep  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  should  be  used  as  the  basis  for 

This is done in Chapter 5. 

comparing policy options.  

EN 

56 

   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 the likely impacts of autonomous policy actions, including national 
adaptation  policies  and  strategies.  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.  The  increase  of  the  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 most of Atlantic and northern 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 showed an increase in northern 
Europe (10 – 40%) and a decrease in some parts of southern Europe (up to 20%), and mean 
winter precipitation has increased in most of the Western and 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, globally, 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  century60.  In 
Europe rates of sea-level change ranges from -0.3 mm/year to 2.8 mm/year in the previous 

58 

59 

60 

Impacts  of  Europe's  changing  climate  -  2008  indicator-based  assessment,  EEA  Report  No  4/2008, 
http://reports.eea.europa.eu/eea_report_2008_4/en/ 
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]. 
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 

57 

   EN 

 
                                                 
century and recent results from satellites and tide-gauges indicated an accelerated average 
rate of global SLR of about 3.1 mm/year 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 European 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 frequency of hot days has 

almost tripled between 1880 and 2005 and the number of warm extremes doubled. 

•  For Europe as a whole, the intensity 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.  However,  the  proportion  of  Europe  experiencing 
extreme and/or moderate meteorological drought 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  understanding  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 better understanding of future climate change, advanced through 
a broader range of models (IPCC, 2007). This includes 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 2080s61. 

The projections of future climate change show: 

–  Projected increases in annual average temperature in Europe this century is 1 - 5.5°C (best 
estimate) with the greatest warming over eastern and northern Europe in winter, and over 
south-western  and  Mediterranean  Europe  in  summer.  There  is  therefore  a  strong 
distributional  pattern  of  warming  across  Europe,  i.e.  between  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 which 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  precipitation  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 (SRES) provides a range of storylines (taking into 
account potential demographic change, economic development, 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 local 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 stabilisation levels). These emissions scenarios translate 
to a global mean temperature increase in 2071-2100 of 3°C for A2 and 2.2°C for B2, relative to 1961-
1990. 

EN 

58 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Figure  5:  Changes  in  annual  mean  temperature  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 increase 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  projected  to  be  most  affected  are  the  Iberian 
Peninsula, central Europe including the Alps, the eastern Adriatic seaboard, and southern 
Greece. 

–  Projections of future storminess are still very uncertain and model dependent, though some 
models indicate a slight decrease in the number of storms and 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  trends  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  Europe,  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  approximately  two  thirds  of  their  volume,  with 
clear acceleration since 1985. Glacier retreat is projected to continue. A 3°C warming of 

EN 

59 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
average  summer  air  temperature  could  reduce  the  currently  existing  glacier  cover  of  the 
European Alps by some 80 %. Glacier retreat 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  summer  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 approximately 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-economic scenarios are also extremely important, 
as  they  determine  the  vulnerability  of  social  and  economic  systems  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 example, the impact of extreme events such as 
floods or storms will be determined by the increased future wealth of potential infrastructure 
affected,  but  also  changes  in  relation  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  climate  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 climate sensitivity. 

Finally,  there  are  also  major  uncertainties  over  the  future  baseline  from  which  to  consider 
adaptation, i.e. in defining the effect of existing and planned policies and considering which 
emission and mitigation trajectory we are on. While there is an existing EU ambition level to 
limit global climate change to 2 degrees Celsius, this target is predicated on global action, and 
is associated with considerable uncertainty. For the latter, the global 50% reduction by 2050 
in GHG outlined in the EC’s 2 degree 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  projections  indicate  a  number  of  changes  that  can  be  expected 
with  high  confidence.  Average  temperatures  will  rise;  summers  are  likely  to  become  drier, 
particularly  across  southern  Europe;  winters  are  likely  to  be  wetter,  with  more  heavy  rain 
likely. 

EN 

60 

   EN 

 
8.2. 

Costs and Benefits of Adaptation 

The economic impacts of climate change in Europe 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  estimates  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  benefits  of  adaptation  are  very  large,  and 
significantly  reduce  the  costs  of  inaction.  In  most  cases,  the  costs  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  estimates  (Figure  6).  It  is  also  necessary  to  consider  the  effect  of 
socio-economic  change,  as  this  defines  the  actual  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, 200662) 

Some  sectoral  estimates  have  been  provided  in  the  context  of  ADAM  and  PESETA  6th  FP 
projects: 

–  Coasts:  Because  human  activities  are  historically  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 

63 

64 

Boyd,  R.  and  Hunt,  A.,  2006.  Climate  Change  Cost  Assessments  Using  the  UKCIP  Costing 
Methodology. July 2006. Report for Stern Review, UK HMT. 
McGranahan G, Balk D, Anderson B (2007) The rising tide: assessing the risks of climate change and 
human settlements in low elevation coastal zones. Environ Urban 19(1):17–37 
EEA  (2006),  The  changing  faces  of  Europe’s  coastal  areas,  EEA  Report  No  6/2006,  European 
Environment Agency, Copenhagen. 

EN 

61 

   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  damages  to  regions  with  relatively  low  damages 
may  happen,  implying  that  even  countries  without  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 study66 suggests 
that  both  physical  and  economic  impacts  can  be  largely  reduced.  PESETA  has  used  the 
DIVA  model,  developed  under  the  5th  FP  DINAS-COASTS67  project,  which  allows  a 
comparison of the  consequences of climate change  in  coastal  systems  without  adaptation 
and with optimal adaptation, according 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  valued  at  a  cost  of  12  to  18  billion/year. 
When  hard  adaptation  measures  are  considered  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 PESETA project has not explicitly analysed the 
costs and benefits of adaptation but has considered the potential role of acclimatisation via 
autonomous  physiological  and  behavioural  changes  in  individuals  or  populations. 
Acclimatisation can significantly reduce the temperature-related effects of climate change. 
However,  there  is  not  an  explicit  cost  attached  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 socioeconomic scenario (mainly population 
growth and ageing), the PESETA project estimates that under the A2 SRES scenario and 
Hirham/HadAM3H  climate  models,  average  annual  heat-related  mortality  for  the  2071-
2100  period  would  be  around  100  000  without  acclimatisation,  and  around  18  000  with 
acclimatisation. It should be noted that the PESETA human health study has not taken into 
account heat waves. 

–  The  PESETA  agriculture,  river  flood  and  energy  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  Netherlands  against  the  consequences  of  climate 
change involves a cost of 1.2 to 1.6 billion 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 

66 
67 

Bosello  F.,  Lazzarin  M.,  Roson  R.,  Tol  R.S.J.,  «Economy-Wide  Estimates  of  the  Implications  of 
Climate  Change:  Sea  Level  Rise»,  Fondazione  Eni  Enrico  Mattei,  Note  di  Lavoro  96,  2004: 
http://www.feem.it/Feem/Pub/Publications/WPapers/WP2004-096.htm  
http://peseta.jrc.ec.europa.eu/docs/Costalareas.html  
http://www.dinas-coast.net/ 

EN 

62 

   EN 

 
                                                 
–  The  UNFCCC  has  estimated  the  following  global  investment  and  financial  flows  into 
adaptation  by  2030,  with  a  proportion  of  investment  in  OECD  countries  (developed 
countries)  between  $21  and  104  billion/year,  though  this  is  mostly  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  accurately  future  GDP  flows  would  be  needed 
(UNFCCC, 2007). 

–  The  Stern  Review  estimated  that  additional  costs  of  making  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 buildings 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  between  €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  change  scenario.  For  example,  they  could  be 
considered  to  reflect  the  potential  costs  towards  2100,  in  a  scenario  without  successful 
mitigation. The lower values are likely to be more 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  adaptation  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 process-oriented models with considerable physical detail.  

These models are mainly used for calculating 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 project69, the effects of including different adaptation scenarios within IAMs 
(to identify optimal policy mix) are minor compared to the range of uncertainty within these 
models.  

Against that background, efforts should be focused 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 aspects, 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  resilience  of  ecosystems  and  socio-economic 
systems.  This  means  focusing  on  the  further  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 
69 

OECD working document ENV/EPOC/GSP(2008)17 
www.adamproject.eu, results to be published in 2009 

EN 

63 

   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  zones,  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  stress),  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  reduced  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  being  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 sensitive to temperature change. 
The  Alps  will  experience  warmer,  wetter  winters  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  aggravate  the  impacts  of  other  pressures  on 
biodiversity/ecosystems,  such  as  overexploitation,  habitat  fragmentation,  degradation  and 
loss, and invasive species. 

Climate change will cause climatic zones to move. In consequence, the potential distribution 
of European species is projected to shift by tens 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  landscape  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  densely  populated  areas  and  highly 
fragmented agricultural landscapes. 

The  potential  future  range  for  most  European  species  is  likely  to  be  smaller  in  extent  than 
their current range, and some species found in Europe 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  present  one  of  the  most  important  threats  to 
biodiversity/  ecosystems  and  their  functions  and  services.  The  current  rate  of  change  is  far 
beyond that imposed by global climatic changes occurring in the evolutionary past. The rate 
of  change  will  exceed  the  ability  of  many  species  to  adapt,  especially  as  landscape 

EN 

64 

   EN 

 
fragmentation may restrict movement. Natural systems are vulnerable to such changes due to 
their limited adaptive capacity. 

Changes  in  ecosystem  composition  and  structure  have  important  implications  for  the 
interactions between the biosphere and the climate system, as well as for ecosystem services 
on  which  society  depends.  Climate  change  is  disrupting  species  interactions  and  ecological 
relationships,  and  also  threatens  managed  ecosystems  on  which  many  sectors,  including 
agriculture, forestry, fishery and tourism, rely. 

Warm  winters  and  extended  growing  seasons  have  resulted  in  large  population  increases  of 
pests.  Normally,  ecological  processes  keep  predator-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-stressed 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  change,  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 consequent changes in ecosystem services can 
lead  to  a  decline  in  human  well  being.  For  example  the  decline  in  the  resilience  of  the  salt 
marsh  ecosystems  will  results  in  the  loss  of  coastal  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 populations, and may result in the loss of tourist 
potential and the subsequent decline in economic benefits for coastal communities.  

Temperature  increase  exerts  further  stress  on  freshwater  and  marine  ecosystems  (see  other 
sections),  compounding  current  over-exploitation  and  pollution.  In  the  oceans  acidification 
adds an additional pressure. 

Ecosystems play a direct role in climate regulation through physical, biological and chemical 
processes  that  control  fluxes  of  energy,  water,  and  atmospheric  constituents  including 
greenhouse  gases.  Peatlands  and  wetlands  provide  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  terrestrial  ecosystems  are 
currently  providing  an  important  service  to  humanity  by  absorbing  about  half  of  the 
anthropogenic  CO2  emission.  However,  the  combined  effects  of  climate  change  and 
associated disturbance and other drivers of change including pollution, land-use changes and 
over-exploitation may reduce the resilience of many ecosystems during this century and affect 
their role in climate regulation. Although our detailed knowledge is limited, there is certainty 
about  the  existence  of  multiple  positive  and  negative  feedbacks  between  biodiversity-
ecosystems  and  climate.  These  feedbacks  are  generally  non-linear  and  have  the  potential  to 
produce large undesirable effects, particularly at the regional level. These feedbacks, though 
agreed  to  be  significant,  are  not  included  in  present  climate  change  models  because  of  the 
high  uncertainties.  Therefore  the  current  scenarios  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 

65 

   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  

Prevent effects  

Change land use. 

Preserving  an  abundance  of  organisms  (plants,  animals,  micro-organisms)  and  multiple  groups 
performing  similar  functions  is  important  for  maintaining  resilience.  A  diversified  portfolio  of 
"insurance"  species  provides  back-up  if  some  species  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.  Biodiversity  provides  flexibility 
and insurance and spreads risks across temporal and spatial scales. This is valid for both managed and 
unmanaged  systems.  Integrated  agricultural  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. 

Introduce  a  biodiversity/ecosystems  compliance  check  in  a  reinforced  spatial  planning  to  increase 
flexibility of managed and natural systems to accommodate and adapt to climate change including by 
reducing other pressures on biodiversity/ecosystems arising from habitat conversion, over- harvesting, 
pollution  and  invasive  alien  species  and  by  developing  appropriate  management  and  structure  of  the 
wider landscape and seascape. 

Strengthen nature conservation measures to conserve biodiversity/ecosystems in the future. Areas will 
have  to  be  reserved  for  this  purpose.  Sufficiently  large  habitats  must  be  provided  to  protect  domestic 
and endemic species. Newly arrived ‘non-native’ species can help to maintain ecosystems, but they can 
also  pose  threats  and  need  to  be  observed  closely.  Habitat  mosaics  should  be  created  in  landscapes 
where  land  management  practice  has  led  to  the  absence  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 ecological linkages or by maintaining 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 alternatives such as dams and dykes. 

Also,  preserve  and  restore  floodplains,  including  reversion  of  arable  land  to  flood  meadows;  promote 
climate-friendly agricultural use of peatlands and moorlands; and improve microclimate in urban areas 
by maintaining and increasing green spaces and fresh-air corridors.  

Change 
activities. 

location  of  economic 

n/a 

Capacity Building 

Investigate  synergistic  effects  of  climate  change  and  other  pressures  on  biodiversity  and  ecosystems. 
Investigate biodiversity/ecosystems underlying climate regulation 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  zones  is  already  happening.  Therefore  the  creation  of  ecological 
networks in fragmented landscapes (where land management practice has led to the absence 
of sufficient suitable patches of unaltered or semi-natural habitat) needs to happen swiftly to 
half  the  further  loss  of  Europe’s  biodiversity.  Shifting  bioclimatic  zones  do  not  respect 
borders.  This  means  we  need  to  act  in  a  co-ordinated  manner,  as  otherwise  actions  by  one 
Member State may be jeopardised by those of a neighbouring country. 

EN 

66 

   EN 

 
Positive feedbacks and healthy ecosystems are essential for any strategy to adapt to climate 
change. Continuing, accelerating loss of biodiversity will compromise the long term ability of 
ecosystems to regulate climate, may accelerate and amplify climate warming and could lead 
to additional, unforeseen and potentially irreversible shifts in the earth system. Urgent action 
now to halt further loss and degradation of biodiversity will help to maintain future options 
for  reducing  the  extent  of  climate  change  and  managing  its  impacts.  Failing  on  the 
biodiversity  targets  and  continuing  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 affect the water cycle and water ecosystems, and 
also the function and operation of existing water infrastructure (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 economic growth and societal development, as 
well  as  patterns  of  demand  change  from  other  sectors.  Climate  change  may  exacerbate  the 
impacts  of  already  existing  stresses,  such  as  impacts  from  households,  more  intensified 
economic activity and (unsustainable) land use change. Water-related climate drivers, such as 
floods and droughts will affect many sectors and combined with water availability, makes this 
a clear cross-cutting issue. 

Future  changes  in  precipitation,  combined  with  rising  temperatures,  will  have  impacts  on 
water quality and quantity, affecting many sectors. 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 percentage area under high water stress in Europe is 
likely  to  increase  from  19%  today  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 increase in wealth and the generally hotter and 
longer  summers  increasing  overall  water  demand  (e.g.  cooling  water,  irrigation,  water  for 
recreational and tourism activities). Additional water demand for agriculture and industry will 
conflict  with  the  additional  demands  for  human  consumption.  Some  of  the  autonomous 
adaptation responses will involve detrimental effects. Increased risk of (illegal) groundwater 
abstraction  might  result  in  reduced  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  aquatic  ecosystems  considerably,  conflicting  with  demands  from 
other sectors, like tourism or industries for cooling water. High water temperature, low water 
flows  and  therefore  less  dilution  of  pollutants  may  have  severe  consequences  for  drinking 
water and recreation activities related to water. Because of sea level rise, saline intrusion in 
coastal aquifers may increase, affecting the suitability for drinking water.  

EN 

67 

   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 contributing 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 the retention capacity of the surface area may not 
be able to cope with more intense precipitation events, possibly leading to flooded urbanised 
areas and overflows of sewerage systems. 

9.2.2.  External dimension 

As Europe shares river basins with non-European countries, Europe will be affected by any 
unsustainable water management practices implemented outside its boundaries, and European 
activities will be felt outside its borders.  

It  is  also  anticipated  that  water  availability  will  be  one  of,  if  not  the  key  effect,  affecting 
neighbouring countries and regions. 

9.2.3.  Adaptive capacity 

Deforestation  and  a  large  development  of  agriculture  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),  lowered  groundwater  recharge  and  reduced  water 
availability  for  vegetation  as  well  as  evaporation.  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 vegetation, 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 the situation by accelerating the runoff of water from land and 
lowering  land's  ability  to  retain  water.  In  urban  areas,  the  mass  use  of  cement  and  asphalt 
predominate.  Rainwater  is  often  carried  away  through  public  sewage  networks,  instead  of 
saturating the soil and ecosystems. By draining the environment in which citizens live, water 
availability decreases and results in secondary effects: growth in temperature 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 withstand 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  land  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  relevant  to  strategies  for 
reducing  climate  change  impacts  in  all  regions  of  the  world.  Furthermore,  restoration  of 
already  degraded  wetland  systems  can  be  demonstrated  to  be  a  cost  effective  tool  in 
adaptation strategies. For example, the re-establishment of services such regulation of floods 
through  wetland  restoration  along  rivers  can  increase  the  environmental  security  of 
downstream communities.  

EN 

68 

   EN 

 
Wetlands exert a strong influence70 on the hydrological cycle, and management of wetlands 
must  be  an  important  part  of  catchment  management  to  reduce  impacts  of  climate  change. 
Where wetlands reduce floods, recharge groundwater and increase dry season flows, wetland 
hydrology  is  working  in  sympathy  with  water-resources  managers  and  flood-defence 
engineers.  Where  wetlands  have  high  evaporation  demands  or  generate  flood-runoff,  they 
may create or exacerbate water management problems. 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 heritage and biodiversity. Wetland management must therefore 
be an integral part of water body management if one is to mitigate successfully 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 supply measures (desalinisation) 

Certain land use practices that enhance flood risks should be addressed, for example by an obligatory 
climate change related long term assessment of the risks 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 current climate variability into 
water-related management would make adaptation to future climate change easier.  

Change land use. 

Water management should turn from focusing on meeting the increasing demand and protecting people 
from extremes of floods and drought, to protection of water resources in an integrated manner 

Land  management  and  land  planning  need  to  adapt  in  order  to  progress  towards  optimally  water 
saturated land. A stable water cycle is required. Basic ecological functions like the return of water and 
vegetation  to  land  need  to  be  reintroduced.  The  ability  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  significant  impacts  due  to  human  activities.  An  improved 
infiltration  of  water  into  the  soil  and  progress  towards  soil  saturation  will  help  the  restoration  of 
groundwater  and  surface  water  resources  and  therefore  the  development  of  permanent  vegetation 
accompanied by cooler temperatures. Efforts need to take place everywhere but more particularly in hot 
spots  like  highly  cultivated  areas  and  highly  populated  areas.  Action  includes  technological  measures 
like improvement of surfaces to help soil infiltration, anti-erosion measures, use of vegetation borders, 
grassy  lands,  limiting  of  non-vegetation  hard  surfaces  in  built-up  areas,  replacing  impermeable  areas 
with permeable ones, avoiding clear-cutting 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  responsibility  in  this  respect:  public  authorities  in  charge  of  overall 
land planning, developers of building areas, construction companies, banks and insurance companies. 

A  report  for  DG  Environment71  has  provided  quantitative  data  on  impact  of  desalination 
development  to  address  water  scarcity  in  the  next  three  decades.  Under  the  worst  case 
scenario,  energy  requirements  for  desalination  and  transport  would  be  equivalent  to  43%  of 
Greece’s total energy production, 20% of Spain’s and 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 
71  

Mike Acreman technical note for DG Environment on Hydrological functions of wetlands, 2008. 
Available at http://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/quantity/scarcity_en.htm 

EN 

69 

   EN 

 
                                                 
9.2.4.  Need for early action at EU level 

Water management is a trans-boundary issue. Water is by nature trans-national and requires a 
coordinated  approach  within  each  river  basin.  This  situation  means  that  any  action  taken 
upstream of a river basin in a given country will have direct impacts downstream of the river 
basin in other countries. The absence of a coherent approach could lead to increasing conflicts 
between countries or regions in the context of climate 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  problems  that  this  may  cause  downstream.  For 
example,  an  increase  in  abstraction  from  water  resources  regardless  of  the  downstream 
context  could  leave  downstream  regions  with  serious  problems  of  water  shortage.  Further, 
developing  activities  that  minimise  the  retention  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 level is the European Water Framework Directive, and the Floods 
Directive (2007) follows the same river basin approach to address flood risks. There is also 
other  water  legislation  at  the  European  level,  thus  factoring  climate  change  in  water 
management is a key priority at European level. 

Furthermore,  the  many  links  between  water  ecosystems  and  water-dependent  users 
(agriculture, navigation, energy, tourism, etc) also justifies 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,  transport,  energy,  tourism,  industry,  etc).  Extreme 
events like floods and droughts are already a problem in Europe now, but their frequency and 
intensity  will  be  exacerbated  by  climate  change.  Damages  from  these  events  are  potentially 
large and justify early action. Moreover, recovery of natural water systems from unsustainable 
use  (e.g.  over-abstraction  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 and managed ecosystems systems and includes soil, 
vegetation,  other  biota  and  the  ecological  and  hydrological  processes  in  this  system.  
Territorial and spatial dimensions are important.  

There are increasing pressures for land in Europe. Land is a limited resource and is currently 
sought  by  urbanisation,  agriculture,  bio-energy  production,  forestry,  nature  conservation, 
recreation  and  tourism,  industry  and  infrastructure. 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 determinants of climate change and 
the  relationship  between  the  two  is  interdependent  as  changes  in  land-use  may  impact  the 
climate whilst climatic change will also influence opportunities for future land-use. 

EN 

70 

   EN 

 
Some research projects72 have assessed the impacts of climate 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 differences in productivity and competitiveness of 
regions. Surplus of land is predicted in the global 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 infrastructures and ecosystems more fragile. This 
is the case for instance of the urbanisation in flood plains or the change of forest and grassland 
to arable land.  

On average the sealed area, the area of the soil surface covered with an impermeable material, 
is around 5% of the total area in Member States73. In many European countries 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  regions  and  major  industrial  areas  of  Western 
Europe, in particular Belgium, Denmark and the Netherlands, where 16-20% of the surface is 
built  up.  Sealing  results  in  the  creation  of  a  horizontal  barrier  between  the  soil,  air  and  the 
water and thus has several severe consequences such as disruption of gas, water and energy 
fluxes, increased flood risks, reduced groundwater recharge, increased water 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 floodplains 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 predictions impact specifically on soil: 

•  Organic matter decline due to increased temperatures leading to increased GHG emissions 
from soil77. However, moisture is needed for mineralization of soil organic matter to take 

72 

73 
74 
75 
76 

77 

at 

UR, 

available 

presentation 

http://www.zalf.de/home_ip-
.  See  also  ATEAM 

Wageningen 
sensor/conference/08_pdf/Audimax_02_Hermans_IALUC_Berlin_Apr08.pdf 
http://www.pik-potsdam.de/ateam/ateam_final_report_sections_5_to_6.pdf  
Land accounts for Europe 1990-2000, EEA Report 11/2006 
Land accounts for Europe 1990-2000, EEA Report 11/2006 
Urban Sprawl in Europe - the ignored challenge, EEA Report 10/2006 
Internationalen  Kommission  zum  Schutz  der  Elbe  (IKSE):    Abschlußbericht  über  den  Stand  der 
Durchführung  der 
(Sofortprogramm)  zur  Reduzierung  der 
Schadstofffrachten in der Elbe und ihrem Einzugsgebiet“ enthaltenen Maßnahmen (1996); BMU 2002: 
Arbeitsschritte zur Verbesserung des vorbeugenden Hochwasserschutzes ) 
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, 

im  „Ersten  Aktionsprogramm 

EN 

71 

   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 increased flooding risks 
in  case  of  extreme  weather  events)  and  less  soil  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  severe  floods  (roughly  in  the  Northern  part  of 
Europe) and droughts (roughly in the Southern part).  

•  Organic  matter  decline  due  to  increased  rate  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 (species 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 coastal areas as a result of sea level rise 

•  Desertification  affecting  the  Mediterranean  regions  of  the  EU  due  to  exacerbation  of  its 
environmental  drivers  (erosion,  salinisation  and  soil  organic  matter  (SOM)  decline)  as  a 
result of climate change leading to farming becoming extremely difficult, decreasing rural 
income and land being abandoned79. 

•  Disruption of the soil functions: biomass production and decomposition; storing, filtering 
and  transforming  nutrients,  substances  and  water;  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 likely to promote a general 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  productivity  from  longer  growing  seasons  and 
CO2 enrichment will lead to increased returns of organic matter to soil. No direct impact 

78 

79  

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 
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  Catchments:  Global  and  local  implications  of  upland 
organic sediment budgets; Geomorphology 79 (1-2) 45-57 (2006) 
Jacqueline  Karas:  Climate  Change  and  the  Mediterranean  Region.  Greenpeace  report  (1997): 
http://archive.greenpeace.org/climate/science/reports/fulldesert.html 

EN 

72 

   EN 

 
                                                                                                                                                         
on  the  population  in  general  is  predicted;  the  agricultural  and  forestry  sectors  would  be 
affected. 

•  Loss of soil organic matter resulting in a reduction 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 more drought-susceptible. However, this impact 
will  often  be  only  marginal  as  soil  water-holding  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 soil 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  Europe)  and  droughts  (in  the  Southern  part): 
flooding  may  affect  the  population  in  low  areas/flood  plains  in  N-EU  as  well  as  all 
economic  sectors  and  ecosystems.  Droughts/increased  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 (species level, food web) due to both raising temperatures and 
changing rainfall intensity and patterns: will affect agriculture (Northward shift of crops 
grown;  crop  yields  will  raise  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 limited 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 level rise: will affect 
agricultural productivity in drought affected areas 

•  Desertification  will  spread  within  the  Mediterranean  regions  of  the  EU:  decreasing  crop 
productivity  may  result  in  (further)  marginalisation  of  land  and  general  landscape 
degradation, thus affecting the agricultural sector and ecosystems. Through a vicious cycle 
it may finally end in land abandonment, thus affecting the population in general. 

•  The disruption of soil functions will affect all economic sectors: agriculture (through soil 
fertility),  forestry,  nature  conservation,  but  also  drinking  water  supply  etc.  and 
ecosystems.  

9.3.2.  Adaptive Capacity 

Climate  Change  aggravates  land  scarcity  (need  for  food  and  biofuels  production,  need  for 
natural areas and water management, sea level rise, floods and land abandonment), and reduce 
choices and opportunities. Some changes are irreversible 

In  Europe,  most  of  the  land  is  privately  owned,  therefore  there  are  many  choices  that  are 
going to be made by the landowners as they realise the effects of climate change. Additionally 
the local authorities and regional authorities in charge of spatial planning will also carry out a 

EN 

73 

   EN 

 
planned  adaptation  when  they  perceive  the  effects  of  changing  patterns  in  rain  fall  and 
temperatures.  

One of the major roles of land use 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  construction  of  transport 
infrastructure. Through this process, soil conservation 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  desertification  affected  and  threatened  regions  to  limit/avoid  land 
abandonment by keeping agricultural production and soil management viable 

Repay damage caused by flooding (directly or through insurance) 

Mitigate the threat  

Reduce/avoid the loss of soil organic matter by adapting existing cultivation practices (e.g. ploughing in 
crop residues, using "green manuring") 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 erosion of peat by raising the ground water table 

Control salinisation resulting from irrigation by optimizing irrigation techniques 

Mitigating salinisation by changing to more halophytic crops 

Prevent effects  

Reduce/avoid the loss of soil organic matter by adapting existing cultivation practices (e.g. ploughing in 
crop residues, using "green manuring") 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 irrigation 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 converting cropland into permanent grassland or forest 

Preventing  organic  matter  decline  due  to  increased  erosion  of  peat  by  phasing  out  agricultural  land 
use/dehydration and convert into natural areas 

Enhance connectivity at different scales allowing 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, becoming increasingly scarce given the demand that are 
arising, the same principles which are applied to other 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 
activities. 

location  of  economic 

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  population  with  information  and  education  on  changing 
conditions. 

EN 

74 

   EN 

 
9.3.3.  Need for early action at EU level 

The EU has a major role in supporting the economic, social and environmentally 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 taken on land use planning can in many cases be 
irreversible,  leading  to  the  need  to  incorporate  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  contribute  to  areas  such  as  biodiversity  and  coastal  management. 
Thus soil degradation brought about 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  organic  matter  in  one  Member  State  impair 
achievement  of  the  EU’s  Kyoto  Protocol  targets.  Dams  are  blocked  and  infrastructure  is 
damaged  downstream  by  sediments  from  massive  erosion  further  upstream  in  another 
country.  Therefore  it  is  of  outmost  importance  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  change  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  (deforestation),  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  perturbations  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  cyclogenesis  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 regions 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 balance over the Mediterranean, which increases 

its salinity and drives the Atlantic-Mediterranean salinity valve. 

EN 

75 

   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  CO2  by  photosynthesis  is  required  for  biomass  production. 
The  opening  of  plant  stomata  is  regulated  by  the  concentration  of  CO2  and  therefore 
atmospheric  CO2  concentrations  affect  plant  transpiration  (the  smaller  the  concentration  of 
CO2, 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  CO2  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  CO2  concentrations  will  be  accompanied  by  increased 
temperature,  especially  at  night,  photorespiration  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 crops suffering moisture stress, insufficient water 
being  available  for  irrigation,  possible  risks  of  reduced  water  quality,  increased  risk  of  soil 
salinization and conflicts 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 windier conditions. Interannual variability of precipitation is a major 
cause of variation in crop yields and yield quality. 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  sensitive  to  water  stress.  Management  practices 
offer  strategies  for  growing  crops  in  water-scarce  conditions.  For  example,  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  exacerbate  wind  and  water  erosion,  thus  affecting 
future  crop  productivity.  Increasing  demand  for  water  is  likely  to  lead  to  increased 
groundwater  abstraction  and  depletion  of  those  resources.  The  likelihood  of  these  risks 
occurring is reported as high. 

Excessively wet years may also cause yield declines 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 promote lodging of standing crops with ripening 
grain. The extent of crop damage depends on the duration of precipitation and flooding, crop 
developmental stage, and air and soil temperatures. 

Of course, the impacts of medium and long-term climate change on agriculture and forestry 
are  difficult  to  analyse  separately  from  other  influences  (e.g.  the  effects  of  policies,  market 
influences  and  technological  development)  related  to  management.  Some  care  must  also  be 
taken  when  making  general  comments  at  the  macro-regional  levels,  due  to  the  specific 

EN 

76 

   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 use of water as well as potential increased CO2 
fertilization of plants throughout Europe. Hence the interaction of these factors in response to 
a change of climate will have different impacts in different parts of Europe. 

However,  these  possible  benefits  are  counterbalanced  by  potentially  negative  impacts  that 
include  increased  water  demand  and  periods  of  water  deficit,  loss  of  soil  carbon  content, 
increased pesticide requirements  and  crop damages 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  intensification  of  the  hydrological  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 winter but decrease in summer, hence this may lead, 
even  within  the  same  region,  to  increased  frequency  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,  the  UK,  Benelux  countries,  north-west  France  and 
the south-west Balkans. The 6th FP PESETA project also projects regional yield changes for 
the  2020s  to  2080s,  with  indications  of  the  spatial  pattern  of  changes  in  agriculture  yields 
across Europe under different scenarios, and show results under an A2 scenario by the 2080s 
that are similar to reported by IPCC (2007).  Potential 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 CO2 are expected to lead to overall small increases in European crop 
productivity.  However,  these  potential  benefits  in  northern  Europe  will  not  always  be  fully 
realisable due to other limiting factors, the occurrence 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 quality 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  changes  in  agricultural 
management,  technological  progress  and  trends  to  better  farming  practices  adaptation. 
However  in  some  cases,  autonomous  adaptation  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 fertilisers80 to 

80 

The implications of climatic changes on use of fertilisers 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 

77 

   EN 

 
                                                 
compensate  for  a  loss  of  soil  fertility,  an  increase  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 climate 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  activities,  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 temporary pastures to permanent with a favourable 
effect  for  carbon  sequestration.  Farmer's  management  decisions  in  response  to  climatic 
changes will be largely influenced by the economic 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  European  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-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.  

The changes could also have wider 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 substantially. These impacts may be particularly serious in EU southern 
regions such as Spain and Greece where larger proportions of the population 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  change  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 expectation that world food prices will tend to rise 
in  response  to  a  warmer  climate81.  Under  some  scenarios  and  models,  there  could  be 
significant  declines  in  agricultural  productivity  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  food  shortages,  and  related  concerns  about  food 
security,  may  bring  a  new  element  into  WTO  discussions  as  some  countries  seek  greater 

81  

EN 

Parry  et  al.,  Effects  of  climate  change  on  global  food  production  under  SRES  emissions  and  socio-
economic 
(2004)  53–67,  available  at 
http://www.undp.org/gef/adaptation/docs/foodproduction.pdf 

-  Global  Environmental  Change  14 

scenarios 

78 

   EN 

 
                                                 
control  over  their  agricultural  markets  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  (meat  needing  much  more  land  to  produce  than 
cereals), and demand for energy, including biofuels, which can compete with food production 
for a limited land supply.  

Consequences for other countries of the adaptation measures which may be taken in Europe 
are  not  so  obvious  and  would  need  to  be  further  explored.  There  may  be  greater  market 
opportunities for third country exporters 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 elsewhere, with the risk of more 
volatile  agricultural  prices,  with  economic  and  social  effects.  Under  some  scenarios  and 
models, there is likely to be a tightening of the world market for cereals and other agricultural 
produce, but the impact of these changes will depend on the relative changes in imports and 
exports from Europe.  

10.1.3.  Adaptive capacity 

Currently  agriculture  is  beginning  to  adapt  autonomously.  Actions  include  use  of  various 
water  resources  for  areas  that  experience  droughts  or  shortages  (like  water  from  tertiary 
treatment facilities, or abstraction of ground water independently of planned water harvesting. 
Changes  to  crops  is  also  taking  place  by  substituting  mainly  tree  crops  in  the  South  EU  or 
looking  to  more  heat  resistant  less  water-demanding  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  investments  will  be  subsidised.  The  degree  of 
autonomous adaptation is expected to be variable. 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  financial  resources,  while  Southern  Europe  is  expected  to  be 
engaged in much more serious adaptation efforts. Central European agriculture is expected to 
adapt mid-term to risks related to flood prevention. 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 fertility due to climate change, and an increase in irrigation. This 
may lead to further water scarcity, a decrease in water quality, biodiversity loss or a reduced 
resilience  to  flooding.  Land  abandonment  is  an  extreme  adaptation  option,  when  economic 
and climatic constraints don't allow the further use of land for agricultural production without 
substantial public subsidies. 

In any case, considering technology development put the impact of climate change in 
perspective82. The strategy for climate change 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 European agriculture to changes in climate and market 
conditions,  presentation  from  the  Food  Security  and  Environmental  Change  Conference,  Oxford,  2-4 
April 2008 available at http://www.gecafs.org/documents/GECAFS_Oxford_Reidsma.pdf 

EN 

79 

   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 adaptation options for agriculture 

Type of action 

Description 

Share losses  

Agricultural production is costly 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  inciting  recklessness,  which  may  itself  be  bad  for  the 
environment  e.g.  continuing  to  grow  crops  requiring  irrigation,  despite  a  significant  risk  of  water 
shortages  leading  to  crop  failure  –  instead  of  growing  less  valuable  crops  which  do  not  rely  on 
irrigation. 

Mitigate the threat  

Changes in land use/management could attenuate some of the agronomic effects of climate change e.g. 
using frequently floodable land for grazing instead of arable production.  

Prevent effects  

Change land use. 

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  significant  agronomic  costs)  but  it  will  contribute  to 
downstream sectors/population by playing a water absorption 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. 

Many changes in agricultural 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 drought or pests or other 
pressures;  changes  in  cropping  patterns  e.g.  avoiding  monoculture,  going  for  longer  rotations,  taking 
sensitive crops out of the rotation; changes in tillage practices; changing to systems which may be more 
resilient  e.g.  mixed  farming,  organic  farming.  In  addition  these  measures  potentially  contribute  to 
biodiversity conservation and enhancing ecosystem reliance 

Reduce/avoid  soil  degradation  (loss  of  organic  matter,  erosion,  salinisation)  by  adapting  existing 
cultivation practices (e.g. ploughing in crop residues, using "green manuring"), the use of soil improvers 
and  organic  fertilisers  (e.g.  compost  and  manure),  optimizing  irrigation  techniques  and  changing  to 
more halophytic crops, raising the ground water table 

In  almost  all  cases,  these  changes  will  result  in  increased  costs/loss  of  profits:  in  many  cases,  the 
replacement system is closer to traditional farming 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  soil  quality.  Besides  their  contribution  to  conserving 
biodiversity, thus enhancing ecosystem resilience essential for adaptation could be rewarded 

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 climate 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  agriculture  to  purely  environmental  services  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 contracts with land owners. 

Change 
activities. 

location  of  economic 

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  changes  will  be  needed  in  many  farming  systems, 
farmers’ efforts could be enhanced and made more environmentally responsive, by the use of training 

EN 

80 

   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 Agriculture Policy and its resources (both direct payments and rural 
development) provides  a  framework  that can facilitate climate  adaptation and  adjustment of 
agricultural  practices  at  EU  level.  Further  consideration  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 adaptation could be further considered in the CAP. 

In  some  regions  of  Europe  the  potential  effects  of  climate  change  are  starting  to  be  very 
visible.  We  have  suffered  floods,  droughts,  heat  waves.  The  agricultural  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  effects  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/storms/fires) disturbances 

to forests health. 

–  Increased  frequency  of  extreme  weather  events  (storms,  floods  and  droughts)  leading  to 

high risk of fire erosion problems, 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  ecologic 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 stands 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 significant deforestation. However, this trend 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 m3 and is increasing, with harvesting still 
falling behind increment. Production 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  managed  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  have  suffered  severe  storms,  droughts  and  fires, 

EN 

81 

   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 their 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 CO2 fertilisation, warmer winter 
weather  and  longer  growing  seasons,  and  reduced  cold  related  damage),  but  might  be 
negatively  affected  by  others  (such  as  from  reduced  summer  rainfall  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 are 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 levels in the atmosphere, warmer winters 
and  longer  growing  seasons,  and  increased  nutrient  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  fires  and,  ultimately,  to  desertification  in  some 
areas.  Species  choice  and  the  biodiversity  associated  with  forests  will  also  be  affected.  A 
changing  climate  is  also  likely  to  mean  that  the  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 through 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  forests,  the  soils  contain 
significantly more carbon than tree biomass. In both cases, these carbon stocks are vulnerable 
to  the  direct  (and  indirect)  effects  of  climate  change  (lowering  of  water  table,  retreat  of 
permafrost and forest fires, desertification, respectively). Adaptation of management practices 
should be considered to help protect 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 the latter two are also 
heavily influenced by climate). Forests have evolved with the climate, gradually shifting their 
composition  and  structure  as  climate  has  changed  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 

82 

   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  extreme  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 implications for forests, 
but the increased variability (likely 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  likely,  and  extended  droughts  or  major  floods  are 
more  likely  to  be  caused  by  increased  variability.  Expected  increase  in  the  frequency  of 
drought periods in central and southern Europe is likely to influence and 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 Europe, 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  diseases  in  stressed  environments.  However,  it 
should  be  noted  that  the  impacts  of  climate  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  risk  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 CO2 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 climate change in the short and medium term (IPCC, 

83  

84 

85 
86 

and 

Rural 

Agriculture 

EFI, 2008. Impacts of Climate Change on European Forests and Options for Adaptation, Report to the 
DG 
from 
http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/analysis/external/euro_forests/index_en.htm  
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.ogs.trieste.it/doga/echo/ecem07/Main/27Nov/casalegno.pdf 
ICP Forests Technical Report, 2004, available at http://www.icp-forests.org/RepTech.htm 
Lange  et  al.,  BALANCE:  an  attempt  to  assess  climate  change  impacts  in  the  Barents  Sea  Region, 
Climatic Change, Volume 87, Numbers 1-2 / mars 2008 

Development, 

available 

EN 

83 

   EN 

 
                                                 
2007), however, in the case of the major tropical forest basins there is a risk of drastic rather 
than  gradual  change  in  the  longer-term.  Given  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  (source  of  renewable  energy)  and  indirect  (timber 
replacing GHG-intensive materials) through sustainable forest management, 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 mitigation 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  likely  to  lead  to  the  widespread  planting  of  fast-
growing non-native species. It will 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 ecosystem services provided by alternative land 
covers. This approach is achievable and, indeed, extensive Eucalyptus 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 outline the type of measures 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  within  Ministerial  Conference  on  the  Protection  of 
Forests in Europe (MCPFE)87 and standards for sustainable forest management: 

•  (Partially autonomous) Facilitate natural regeneration and forest growth in northern regions 
or  high  elevation  areas  (where  low  temperatures  had  been  a  limiting  factor  for  growth) 
causing a shifting of the tree limit towards areas hitherto covered by grasslands or tundra.   

•  (Partially  Autonomous)  Increase  diversity  in  forest  (at  genetic,  species,  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  level,  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  diversification  measure  in  semi-natural  forest  or  for  commercial 
reasons in production forests/plantations, it is important to consider possible future impacts 
on  on  biodiversity.  These  impacts  may  include  risks  of  invasiveness,  the  introduction  of 
pests  and  diseases,  inability  to  support  local  fauna  and  flora  and  incompatibility  with 

87  

www.mcpfe.org 

EN 

84 

   EN 

 
                                                 
existing natural/semi-natural ecosystems. Risks associated with such introductions should 
consider the impacts of climate change on such risks. 

•  (partially  Autonomous)  Enlarge  woodlands  and  utilise  topographical  and  edaphic 
heterogeneity  in  the  landscape.  The  resilience  of  individual  species  to  climate  change  is 
dependent  on  soil  type,  aspect  and  microclimate.  Heterogeneity  in  the  landscape  may 
allows  individual  species  to  be  retained  if  their  specific  requirements  are  considered. 
Larger  woodland  units  also  contain  a  larger  and  more  varied  genepool,  promoting 
evolutionary adaptation processes.  

•  (Partially  autonomous)  Adapt  management  systems.  Forest  management  has  developed 
over  time  to  accommodate  extreme  climatic  events  including  wildfires  and  storms. 
Decision  support  tools  are  available  but  may  need  updating  to  reflect  the  projections  of 
climate change. Fire and wind risk 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  and  water  availability; 
and promoting regeneration through stand management and controlling agents that prevent 
regeneration will enhance the adaptive capacity of semi-natural woodland ecosystems.  

•  (Intervention  required)  Landscape  approach  to  adaptation.  The  ecosystem  services 
provided by forests can contribute to adaptation at the landscape level through the creation 
of  habitat  networks  (aiding  species  migration  and  adaptation  of  biodiversity),  flood 
alleviation  and  large-scale  erosion  protection.  Such  services  provided  by  forests  can 
provide  a  more  holistic  approach  to  adaptation  that  contributes  to  wider  sustainable 
development  objectives  than  ‘grey  infrastructure’.  However,  such  an  approach  requires 
careful targeting and an appropriate planning framework to ensure that it is effective and 
maximises available resources. 

•  (Intervention  required)  Maintain  and  enhance  forest  monitoring.  The  development  of 
climate change adaptation strategies and action 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  existing  and  introduced  forests  pests,  pathogens 
and invasive species. 

•  (Intervention  required)  Communication,  education,  training  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  therefore  an  integral  part  of 
adaptation.  Communication  of  the  likelihood  and  far-reaching  impacts  of  forest  fires  in 
southern Europe – coupled to awareness raising 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 

85 

   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  uncertainty  about  the  nature  and  direction  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  alter  the  species  composition  of  forests  on  the 
landscape level unless measures are taken to alter 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 represent  the greatest challenge  to the sector, with 
appropriate  measures  largely  restricted  to  adjustments  to  existing  good  practice.  For  this 
reason, where opportunities for adaptation arise, early action is therefore crucial. 

Table 9- Potential planned adaptation options for forestry 

Type of action 

Description 

Share losses  

Mitigate the threat  

We  could  refer  to  reforestation  and  reconstruction  operations  after  large  storms,  many 
countries must have material on this. Put strategies in place to deal with large volumes of 
timber coming to market. 

As  the  forest  microclimate  is  able  to  substantially  compensate  for  macroclimatic  changes, 
there is an added need for continuous-cover management, especially in semi-natural forests 
where natural regeneration is feasible (possibly requiring control of herbivore populations) 
(and desirable). Reducing other pressures including air pollution, habitat fragmentation and 
invasive non-native species will 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 required by some commercial forestry operators. 

Prevention measures (changes species composition, genetic diversity, reduction of fuel loads 
to  counter  the  threat  of  forest  fires)  are  possible.  The  protective  functions  of  forests  are 
increasingly important in the context of climate change – for example flood alleviation and 
soil erosion control. 

Change land use. 

Diversified 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  partially  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  earlier  vegetation  through  past  climatic  changes 
(normally connected to geographical features like 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 extreme 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 therefore an integral part of adaptation. 

Regulation 

and 

public 

If measures consistent with climate change adaptation (for example, the requirement to address genetic 

88 

Magnani et al., The human footprint in the carbon cycle of temperate and boreal forests, Nature 447, 
849-851 

EN 

86 

   EN 

 
                                                 
procurement 

Capacity Building 

and  structural  diversity)  were  introduced  into  Forestry  Standards  operating  in  Member  States,  the 
requirement  for  certification,  particularly  through  public  procurement,  would  promote  the  uptake  of 
appropriate ‘no-regret’ actions. 

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  forest  management  and 
consolidation of ownership structures. The fact that wood and biomass are becoming more 
expensive and that increased productivity 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  associations  (FOA)  and  promoting  shared 
management could be among the most important measures. 

Forest  monitoring  at  EU  level.  In  order  to  monitor  the  damages  to  (and  the  migration  of) 
forests and issue clear policy messages, national forest inventories (NFI) must include new 
criteria (such as forest health, growth, diversity of tree species and ground vegetation, water 
and  element  budgets,  reforestation/afforestation  rates)  and  ensure  their  assessments  are 
consistent/compatible/comparable with their counterparts 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 facilitate such flows for adaptation (e.g. corridors 
or "stepping stones"). Research can also contribute 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  forestry  policy,  while  respecting  the 
principle  of  subsidiarity  to  allow  Member  States  to  implement  specific  actions  that  reflect 
local/regional environmental, social 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 climate 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  States  are  invited  to  work  on  assessing  the 
impacts  of  climate  change,  to  raise  awareness  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 possibilities, including support for restoration or re-
establishing forests damaged by natural disasters/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 aspects 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 require that adaptation measures are implemented 
to  ensure  both  the  productive  capacity  and  ecosystem  functions  of  European  forests  .are 
maintained. Unlike most other sectors, the planning 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 

87 

   EN 

 
                                                 
The  argument  that  this  uncertainty  should  delay  action  is  not  a  tenable  position  given  the 
urgency for action. It does, however, mean that no regret actions should be sought that focus 
on increasing resilience, reducing other pressures including atmospheric pollution and forest 
degradation and embedding knowledge of the likely impacts of climate change in sustainable 
forest management practice.   

In some regions of Europe the effects of climate change are starting to become evident and an 
increasing frequency of devastating forest fires have been recorded recently in both northern 
and  southern  Europe.  Some  less  visible  impacts  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 monitor 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 activities could be considered. 

10.3. 

Fisheries and Aquaculture 

10.3.1.  Impacts 

The  future  impacts  of  climate  change  are  expected  to  result  in  a  number  of  changes  in  the 
abiotic  (i.e.  sea  level,  sea  temperature,  acidity,  salinity,  stratification,  light,  and  possibly 
thermohaline circulation) and biotic (i.e. primary production, food webs, etc) 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  "harvesting"  activity  (rather  than  a  "cropping"  one  involving  seeding 
and  nurture),  and  human  activities  also  affect  the  reproductive  success  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 already being observed in European Seas90. As outlined in 
the section 2.2.1, sea surface temperatures in Europe are rising, and this increase has led to 
many marine organisms in the European Seas appearing 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 ultimately for the structure of marine food-webs 
at all trophic levels, including fisheries. In addition, many species of fish and plankton have 
shifted  their  distributions  northward,  and  sub-tropical  species  are  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 

88 

   EN 

 
                                                 
estimated  at  about  50  km/year  (high  confidence).  Such  changes  affect  the  composition  of 
local and regional marine ecosystems.  

These  observed  changes  in  distribution,  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 commercial value by region. Recent studies91 have shown 
that the northward movement of southerly species has caused species richness to increase in 
the  North  Sea.  However,  this  increase  may  have  negative  ecological  and  socio-economic 
effects; the three large species that have decreased 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 species 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  fisheries  potentially  include  food  chain  effects, 
diseases, and for marine ecosystems, increased ocean acidity, though the levels of catch (and 
sustainability)  of  commercial  fisheries  are  likely  to  remain  a  more  direct  factor  affecting 
fisheries.  The  changes  from  climate  are  therefore  likely  to  increase  the  vulnerability  of 
fisheries. 

It is too early to ascertain any actual impact of climate change 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 total fisheries production With time, such effects 
are  expected  to  be  more  directly  observable,  though  further  changes  in  distribution  and 
potentially  the  abundance  of  marine  species  are  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 invasive 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. 

• 

• 

91  

92 

In a few situations e.g. early retreat of sea ice in Arctic areas, there may be increases in 
fish catch92. 

There  are  other  factors  in  relation  to  regional  seas,  e.g.  temperature  is  projected  to 
increase  and  run-off  to  the  Mediterranean  Sea  to  decrease;  for  the  Baltic  sea,  both 

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/ 
Impacts  of  a  Warming  Arctic  –synthesis  report  of  the  Arctic  Climate  Impact  Assessment,  2004, 
available at http://www.acia.uaf.edu/ 

EN 

89 

   EN 

 
                                                 
increasing  run-off  and  decreasing  frequency  of  Atlantic  inflow  is  likely  to  decrease 
salinity  (EEA,  2008),  in  turn  affecting  sea  ice  cover  and  stratification  –  the  latter  may 
impact on commercially relevant regional cod fisheries.  

These  projected  changes  in  the  location  and  availability  of  fish  stocks  will  have  strong 
economic impacts, as well as localised employment 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  generally  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 resources upon the exploitation of which aquaculture is 
developed,  such  as  clean  water,  feed,  etc.  Likely  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  demands;  increased  susceptibility  to  pathogens; 
uncertain supply of freshwater; sea level raise; extreme whether 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  research  on  the  impacts  of  climate  change  on 
aquaculture  are  needed  in  relation  to  marine  and  freshwater  ecosystems  and  social  and 
economic consequences for the industry 

10.3.2.  External dimension 

One  illustration  of  external  action  in  fisheries  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 and the UN Convention on the law of the Sea. 
Ambitious agreements at global level are a key addition 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 external 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  reduce  the  fishing  pressure  and 
fisheries impacts on ecosystem. Climate change is an added stress on marine ecosystems 
and fish stocks on top of over-fishing,  pollution etc. Climate change therefore makes the 
need  to  reduce  fishing  pressure  even  more  urgent.  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 

90 

   EN 

 
–  Ensure  that  adequate  measures  will  be  taken  as  changes  appear  by  developing  a 
responsive and responsible decision framework . Climate change has highlighted that 
we  have  been  operating  within  a  false  mindset  of  nature  being  constant  -  climate 
change and considerations of ecosystem linkages require management to be adaptive 
in a changing environment. Proper monitoring and scientific  analysis  needs to be in 
place  which  enables  early  warnings  of  changes  and  also  of  regime  shifts.  However, 
warnings about regime shifts are very difficult to get because science does not have 
good methods to identify such shifts in the 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  next  cod  recovery  plan  does  specifically 
mention the changing environment as a reason to propose a new approach. We need 
to  develop  a  responsible  and  responsive  decision  process  which  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  distributions  of  access  will  be  raised  in 
international  fora  as  the  geographical  distribution  of  stocks  change.  We  need  to 
discuss and get decision rules 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  creates  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 distribution 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  approach,  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 recover 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 managers should increasingly take into consideration the impacts of climate 
change  and  ensure  the  lowering  of  the  impact  of  fishing  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 

91 

   EN 

 
Type of action 

Description 

Change 
activities. 

location  of  economic 

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 fishing activities are thoroughly organized at 
national, European and worldwide levels.  

Marine  ecosystems  (including  also  commercial  stock  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 that, 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, early 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  stocks  is  unknown.  Of  those  stocks  for  which  the  state  is  known 
68%  are  at  high  risk  of  depletion,  and  only  some  32%  of  stocks  are  known  to  be  fished 
sustainably. In 88% of stocks, overfishing is so serious that more fish would be caught if there 
was  less  fishing.  This  number  is  way  above  the  situation  outside  the  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  fleet  with  too  many  vessels  chasing  a  dwindling 
resource. This leads not only to poor economics 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  environmental  change  and  thus  that  fish  stocks  should  never  be 
exploited to a point where they are not resilient to environmental change93. 

10.4.  Energy 

10.4.1.  Impacts 

Climate change (and most of subsequent mitigation or adaptation options) is expected to have 
a direct effect on both the supply and demand side for energy 

93  

COM(2008)187 final 

EN 

92 

   EN 

 
                                                 
10.4.1.1. Energy supply 

The changing climate may have significant effects on most energy technologies, particularly 
affecting  hydro-electric  resource,  and  water  abstraction  availability  for  cooling  of  thermal 
plants: 

–  Decreased precipitation is expected to have a negative impact on the electricity generation 
sector where rivers provide cooling water. Power stations may have to be shut down when 
water  temperatures  exceed  certain  thresholds.  Electricity  production  has  already  been 
reduced  in  various  localised  locations  in  Europe  during  very  warm  summers.  This  will 
affect countries which use the largest percentages of abstracted water for cooling in energy 
production.  Rising  temperatures  and  lower  river  levels  may  combine  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 changes 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 Switzerland are also included 
in this calculation the share would be 13.1%. Increasing precipitation in countries north of 
the Alps and Portugal, as well as melting glaciers in the Alps 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 availability for hydro generation during extended periods 
of  low  precipitation.  In  Mediterranean/Black  Sea  countries,  hydropower  generation  is 
likely  to  suffer  from  reduced  annual  precipitation,  due  to  changing  climate  patterns.  The 
projected change in river runoff due to climate change is estimated to increase hydropower 
production  by  up  to  25  %  or  more  in  northern  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  affected  under  changed  climatic 
conditions with more frequent extreme flows and possibly natural hazards 

–  Higher  temperatures  and  atmospheric  CO2  concentrations  in  moderate  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  regions,  notably  in  Southern  Europe,  might  have 
detrimental  effects  on  crop  yields  and  therefore  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 velocities for Europe is still unknown, and higher 
frequencies of heavy storms may negatively affect total annual wind power generation.  

–  Extreme  weather  events,  including  storms,  damage  electricity  transmission  lines.  These 
may be vulnerable to incidences of increased storm frequency or magnitude from climate 

94  
95  

Eurostat's 'Yearly Energy Statistics 2006'  
IPCC Fourth Assessment Report WG II, Chapter 12, p.556. 

EN 

93 

   EN 

 
                                                 
change.  Climate  change  is  also  likely  to  result  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 cabling) 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 heating and cooling demand changes will be driven 
by  autonomous  adaptation  in  the  absence  of  planned  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  region  and  20-30%  by  2100  in  Finland  under  a  business  as  usual 
scenario  –  though  the  reductions  will  be  lower  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  increases  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. These 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, efficiency, income). There may also be an emerging 
issue of increased energy demand for water supply (pumping, desalination, etc). 

The  net  change  in  European  energy  demand  is  uncertain,  but  there  will  be  strong 
distributional  patterns,  with  significantly  reduced  space  heating  demand  in  northern  Europe 
compared to significantly increased space cooling 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 electricity, and there may be additional issues 
of peak electricity demand across Europe, especially in Southern Europe in the summer. This 
may result in serious problems for the grid dimensions.  

There  may  also  be  some  supply-demand  linkages.  Increasing  summer  peaks  for  cooling, 
combined  with  heat  extremes,  will  potentially  change  plant  margins,  requiring  extra  system 
capacity to meet peak summer extremes (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  relation  to  lower  vulnerabilities  to  other  supply 
disruptions). 

10.4.2.  External dimension 

There are linkages with other external generation networks (e.g. non EU European countries), 
and  external  electricity  production  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  such  as  international  gas  supply  pipelines  and 
impacts on fossil fuel extraction in areas that supply Europe. These external effects need to be 

EN 

94 

   EN 

 
further  explored.  The  potential  impact  of  permafrost  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 infrastructure 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 changes to ensure that sustainable buildings incorporate adaptation 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 energy generation where appropriate to local conditions. 

Change 
activities. 

location  of  economic 

The  location  of  energy  supply  will  move  to  less  vulnerable  locations  (areas  not  affected  by  sea  level 
rise, floods, decrease water availability, changes in water quality, extreme weather events, etc.) 

More decentralised or dispersed energy supply infrastructure may be used to reduce risk.  

Major investments in relocation and reinforcement of the Energy Grid and connections 

Capacity Building 

Review  vulnerability  of  current  and  planned  power  generation  and  distribution  systems  within  and 
outside of EU for all energy flows to, from and within EU, including potential future changes in plant 
production (including intermittency), peak supply, and plant margins, at cross sectoral level (including 
demand from new sectors such as water). 

New  market  players  may  see  opportunities  for  new  types  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 for extreme events and rapid reaction response plans 

The adaptation of energy supply system to CC impact 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 efficiency improvement and infrastructure protection through green structural 
approach. 

EN 

95 

   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 research to improve understanding of the inter-relations between 
projected climate change scenarios, impacts (including humidity) and electricity demand 

There is a need for building adaptive capacity in the energy sector and mainstreaming climate 
change throughout EU energy policy (including supply choices) 

The need for  trans-boundary  co-ordination and of greater inter-connections between  regions 
and countries to help electricity flows. There is a role for co-ordination of network regulators. 

There is a need to encourage innovation in terms of energy storage or building design to store 
energy, as well as smarter grids and systems to use energy more effectively.  

As  regards  the  security  of  supply  (increase  resilience  energy  system),  there  is  a  need  to 
increase 
infrastructure  and  ensuring  new  energy 
infrastructure is resilient to future climate impacts, including extreme events; 

the  resilience  of  existing  energy 

As  regards  the  trans-boundary  dimension  of  water  management  aspects,  there  is:  need  to 
consider water supply for energy in the perspective of changes in overall water availability / 
trade off with other uses (see water section) 

There  are  links  with  mitigation  and  it  is  necessary  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  adapt  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 autonomous 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 built environment including infrastructure is to extreme events 
(floods and storm events, sea level rise, coastal erosion rates, and to a lesser extent also heat-
waves  and  droughts).  These  pose  a  specific  threat  to  the  urban  environment,  and  may 
particularly  materialise  in  coastal  areas  and  river  basins.  It  is  likely  that  extreme  weather, 
including heavy precipitation will increase in frequency and intensity in Europe, though the 
most  severe  effects  are  expected  in  the  second  half  of  the  century.  Coastal  zones  in  Europe 
contain large populations. 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, 2006). Climate change is an additional 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 required to deal with market failures (infrastructure provision 

EN 

96 

   EN 

 
as public good, principal agent problem in buildings, etc.) and to face more extreme climate 
scenarios.  Whilst  some  new  building  may  have  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). Autonomous changes in buildings are not likely to 
be  able  to  cope  with,  nor  necessarily  take  into  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 securing functionality rather 
than on protecting individual infrastructures, in other words in extending critical infrastructure 
protection to critical infrastructure 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 additional costs, that very 
often, achieving the desired level of protection is simply not cost-effective in relation to the 
actual  threats.  "What  is  especially  important  here  is  to  create  "societal  resilience"  capacity 
relying  on  joint  efforts,  training,  continuity  planning  etc,  of  the  whole  society,  including 
communities and businesses"97. 

Climate  change  damages  to  Europe's  infrastructure  and  buildings  may  affect  the  proper 
functioning  of  the  European  internal  market  (e.g.  closure  of  ports,  airports,  road  and  rail 
infrastructure).  Infrastructure  networks  are  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  adaptation  considerations  should  be  integrated.  As 
infrastructure and building investments may have a 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. 

10.5.1.  Impacts 

The main potential vulnerability of the built environment and infrastructure is from extreme 
events, such as floods and storm events, and to a lesser extent 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  (very  high  confidence)  (IPCC,  2007).  Socio-
economic factors are instrumental in the vulnerability to climate impacts from these extremes, 
including changes to population growth, occupancy, land-use policy, economic 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  %  are  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  weather  and  climate  related  events 
(EEA,  2008).  Overall  losses  caused  by  weather  and  climate  related  events  have  increased 
during the period 1980-2007 from a decadal average of less than €7.2 billion (1980-1989) to 

96  

97  

Nordregio  Report  2007:5  Towards  a  Baltic  Sea  Region  Strategy  in  Critical  Infrastructure  Protection, 
Christer Pursiainen (ed.) with the assistance of Patrick Lindblom and Per Francke 
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 

97 

   EN 

 
                                                 
about  €13.7  billion  (1998-2007).  However,  while  overall  losses  resulting  from  weather  and 
climate related events have increased clearly during the last 27 years, better reporting, social 
change and economic development (land-use changes) 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 insured 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 flood events in large parts of 
Europe (medium confidence), even though that estimates of changes in flood frequency and 
magnitude  remain  highly  uncertain.  Within  the  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  effects  of  human-caused  climate  change  are  expected  in  the 
second half of the century. Some preliminary estimates99 indicate that annual flood losses in 
Europe  could  rise  to  €100  –  120  billion  (tenfold)  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  river  catchments  (Upper  Danube  and  Meuse)  in 
detail. For the Upper Danube the estimated total damage of a 100-year flood is projected to 
rise  by  around  19  %  from  current  levels  under  a  low  emission  scenario  (B2)  by  2100,  and 
40% (an increase of €18.5 billion) under a high emission 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  significant  socioeconomic 
activities  related  to  infrastructure  and  buildings.  Section  10.8  deals  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  intensity  of  extreme  weather 
events, such as storms and associated storm surges, and sea level rise.  

There are projections that the losses from extreme 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  double  by  the  2080s  with  climate  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  infrastructure),  and  the  recent  hot  summers  have  been 
linked  to  large  economic  damages  associated  with  building  and  infrastructure  from  ground 
subsidence (high confidence). Notwithstanding the 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 projected to increase the frequency and intensity of droughts in many 
regions  in  Europe  due  to  higher  temperatures,  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  sectoral  water  section.  Heat  extremes  may  be 
particularly  important  in  larger  urban  areas,  because  of  exacerbation  of  the  existing  ‘urban 

98 
99 

Münchener Rück, 2008 
Association  of  British  Insurers,  Financial  Risks  of  Climate  Change,  June  2005,  available  at 
http://www.abi.org.uk/Display/File/Child/552/Financial_Risks_of_Climate_Change.pdf 

EN 

98 

   EN 

 
                                                 
heat island effect’. There will be increased fire risks or wider fire risk areas, which are likely 
to be particularly important for the Mediterranean region in relation to significant increase of 
fire potential, an enlargement of the fire prone area and a lengthening of the fire season. 

Average temperature changes may also affect building and infrastructure. In some areas of the 
Alps, the gradual warming of permafrost and subsequent 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  Europe  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,  intense  or  unpredictable  extreme  climate  events  will 
increase insurance claims, which is likely to translate 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-insured households and businesses 
are likely to be those with lower adaptive capacity, further exacerbating the vulnerability of 
high-risk  companies  and  communities.  The  autonomous  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  frequency  of  violent  storms  and  flooding)  and  this 
may affect the growth and geographical distribution 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  pronounced.  Adaptation  costs  for  infrastructure, 
therefore,  could  have  two  interlinked  but  different  meanings:  1)  the  costs  of  infrastructural 
solutions  that  serve  as  adaptations  in  many  climate  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  estimates  for  adaptation  in  coastal  zones,  water 
resources,  energy,  and  (to  some  extent)  agriculture  are  in  fact,  infrastructure  costs.  This 
includes costs of protective structures in coastal zones, storage or irrigation infrastructure for 
agriculture and water supply, as well 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 

99 

   EN 

 
Type of action 

Description 

Public  infrastructure  e.g.  road,  shared  water  ways,  bridges  etc.  may  incur  losses  met  by  insurance  or 
public purse.  

Specific financial support for coastal regions 

Mitigate the threat  

Coasts:  increased  investments  in  coast  protection  promoting  a  combination  of  ‘hard’  (defences)  and 
‘soft’ (managed realignment or retreat) adaptation measures. This combination of coastal management 
will increase coastline inundation in specified locations. 

Prevent effects  

Review climate resilience (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,  property  and  defence  assets  in  terms  of  resistance  and 
resilience to climate impacts. 

More  requirements  for  urban  planning  (e.g.  prohibition  of  building  in  flooding  areas,  more  space  for 
ecosystems and water retention to reduce flash flooding, 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,  materials  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 ventilated buildings and urban green space management to reduce heat 
stress (urban heat island effect, water resources) 

Change land use. 

Soft adaptation measures such as “making space for water” through managed retreat option and altering 
land  use  at  the  coast.  This  can  bring  benefits  to  biodiversity,  i.e.  creation  of  new  saline  habitats  to 
replace existing inter-tidal habitats currently at risk due to sea-level rise. 

Review  land-use  planning  and  management  to  better  integrate  risks  and  constraints  on  buildings  and 
infrastructure related to climate change. 

Change 
activities. 

location  of  economic 

Relocation  of  critical  vulnerable  infrastructures  and  buildings  which  provide  essential  services  to 
communities.  

Capacity building 

Investment  appraisal  procedures  and  plan/infrastructure  assessment  should  be  updated  to  integrate 
potential Climate change impacts (e.g. longer planning horizon, including climate change impacts). 

Availability  and  training  of  the  workforce  in  the  sector  are  challenging  pre-requisites  for  adaptation; 
public policies (building codes, urban planning) have a key role in driving 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  undertaken  and  trans-boundary  issues  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 mainstreamed 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 

100 

   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 considering existing buildings is required and will take time to 
establish and implement. Without such policies and programmes, the vulnerability of 
such buildings will increase over time as the impacts of climate change increase. 

–  Early  planning  for  new  infrastructure  and  displacement  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 climate, in terms of the source of tourists and 
their preferred destination. At present, the predominant (summer) tourist 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  visitors  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  winter  sports  tourism  industry  in  Europe, 
contributing close to EUR 50 billion in annual turnover to the economy of Alpine countries100. 
Coastal and mountain tourism are the segments that 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  temperatures  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-modal distribution either 
side  of  the  summer  peak,  or  a  transfer  to  other  more  northerly  regions  of  Europe,  which 
become  more  attractive,  as  shown  in  modelling  work  within  the  PESETA  project101.  The 
potential shift in the major flows of tourism within the EU will be important in regions such 
as  some  Mediterranean  regions,  where  tourism  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  industry  in  Europe  and  its  financial  viability,  because  of  the 
availability of natural snow or suitable conditions for making 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 

101 

OECD, 2007 - Climate Change in the European Alps: Adapting Winter Tourism and Natural Hazards 
Management, available at http://www.oecd.org 
http://peseta.jrc.ec.europa.eu/docs/Tourism.html 

EN 

101 

   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 water 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).  This  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 coastal and river flood plains, those 
whose economies are closely linked with climate-sensitive resources (such as agricultural and 
forest  product  industries,  water  demands  and  tourism),  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 such  as food and  paper industries in  affected 
regions. There is a decline of industrial water abstraction in OECD countries in recent years, 
which is primarily the result of increased water use efficiency but may also reflect a shift of 
water-intensive  industries  (for  other  reasons,  like  other  industries  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 services, on the costs of raw 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 external dimension may be positive: the need for 
expertise and technologies to support adaptation measures throughout the world should create 
many  opportunities  for  EU  companies  to  develop  outside  Europe,  export  or  transfer 
technologies  and  know-how.  This  should  be  particularly  the  case  in  the  water  sector  (urban 
water  supply  including  development  of  desalination,  technologies  for  water  saving  and  re-
use), energy sector, construction (design and engineering activities) and insurance.  

Opportunities  and  threats  also  exist  from  international  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. Additional visitors may add to existing pressures 
(e.g. water availability) in some regions.  

EN 

102 

   EN 

 
10.6.3.  Adaptive Capacity 

The  most  relevant  autonomous  adaptation  response  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 dimension), 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 pose 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 example, in France almost half a billion Euros 
were spent between 1990 and 2004 on artificial snow-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  (increasing  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 water or snow scarcity 
will be in the short term to increase investment in water supply or snow-making equipments, 
together with relocation of activities in more favourable areas. Both categories of projects will 
have  substantial  environmental  impacts,  to  be  addressed  under  environmental  impact 
assessment. 

Against  that  background,  planned  adaptation  options  can  be  considered  to  ensure  the 
competitiveness of European industry and services, and mitigate potential environmental and 
social side-effects. 

Table 13- Potential planned adaptation options for Industry and Services 

Type of action 

Description 

Share losses  

Mitigate the threat  

Prevent effects  

For all activities located in vulnerable areas (coastal zones, flood plains, regions 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 properly assessed and covered by insurances 

in  the  short  term,  ski  resorts  are  likely  to  increase  investments  in  snow-making  equipments,  develop 
high-mountain extensions (cost estimates included in OECD paper); 

Improve  climate  risk  assessment  in  strategic  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  raw  materials,  water  and  energy  in  the  production 
processes" (this is a measure beneficial both for mitigation 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  objectives  "Further  improving  resource  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 
activities. 

location  of  economic 

in  the  longer  term,  abandon  a  number  or  ski  locations  (locations  in  the  Alps  are  likely  to  be  more 
affected than Scandinavia); for Mediterranean countries, 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,  redirection  of  beach  tourism  to  regions  bordering  the 
Atlantic, North and Baltic Seas  

EN 

103 

   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,  building  design,  materials  and  equipments,  water  management  and 
treatment, production processes saving water and energy. 

Promote the flexibility of tourists and institutions such as school holiday 

10.6.4.  Need for early action at EU level 

As adaptation for the tourism sector will largely 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  tourism.  This  includes  the  use  of  EU  funds  for 
tourism  related  infrastructure  or  development,  and  in  wider  policy  appraisal  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 differ significantly between regions and economic 
sectors.  Industries  have  the  responsibility  to  assess  and  manage  the  risk  related  to  climate 
change  for  their  activities,  and  to  integrate  this  risk  in  their  decision  making  and  financial 
management,  for  example  to  plan  for  new  investments  or  anticipate  on  the  relocation  or 
climate-proofing of industrial facilities. As the difficulty is higher 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 adaptation. In addition to this autonomous or planned adaptation, the 
scale of adaptation measures and possible impacts on the regional cohesion in the European 
Union justifies EU action to: 

–  facilitate the conversion of regions and economic activities impacted by climate change; 

–  promote solutions favourable to both adaptation to climate change and to competitiveness, 

with the development of innovative and less resource-intensive activities. 

Tourism development often implies very significant investments in infrastructure and services 
and requires a high degree of certainty, therefore early action is needed to incorporate as soon 
as  possible  climate  proofing  considerations  and  long  term  planning  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. Early planning and support measures are likely to 
be  more  cost-effective  than  late  or  reactive  measures.  Early  planning  by  public  authorities, 
including land-use planners and permitting authorities, would also facilitate 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 

104 

   EN 

 
Prevention  and  Control  Directive,  should  allow  orderly  and  cost-effective  adaptation 
measures by the concerned industries (such as the relocation of unsustainable 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  health,  either  directly  related  to  the  physiological 
effects of heat and cold, or indirectly, for example, through the increased transmission of food 
or  vector-borne  disease,  or  through  other  climate  change  effects  like  flooding.  These  health 
changes will have economic consequences, e.g. through medical costs, lost time at work, and 
less obvious costs that can be estimated by approaches including willingness to pay to avoid 
pain and suffering. An increase in some of these 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 heat related mortality and morbidity, from annual 
temperature  increases  and  heat  extremes103,  though  these  are  also  influenced  by  socio-
economic changes from population growth, age distribution (the aging European population) 
and other factors. In EU countries, mortality is estimated to increase by 1–4% for each one-
degree rise in temperature. The PESETA project 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  will  be  important  here  as  populations  will 
partly  acclimatise  to  future  temperatures.  With  autonomous  adaptation  factored  in,  the 
numbers above are estimated at around 5000 deaths per year in the 2030s and 20,000 deaths 
per  year  in  the  2080s  (A2,  low  confidence),  with  estimated  economic  costs  of  €10  to  20 
billion/year.  There  is  a  very  strong  distributional  pattern  in  the  impacts,  and  the  elderly  are 
most  at  risk  of  death  from  heat-stroke  and  cardiovascular,  renal,  respiratory  and  metabolic 
disorders105. Whilst total deaths are strongly related to population, the change in death rates 
are much greater in Southern and South-Eastern Europe, not least due to the greater warming 
signal in these regions. It is also highlighted that heat related health concerns themselves are 
likely to drive interactions with energy use and air conditioning for cooling. 

In addition, climate sensitive infectious diseases, such as food borne disease like Salmonella, 
have  the  potential  to  increase  under  a  changing  climate.  Some  emerging  work  (PESETA, 
based  on  Kovats,  2003)  shows  that  the  disease  burden  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  underestimate  the  numbers  by  a  factor  of  ten  or 

102  

103  

104 
105  

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. 
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.  
Heat waves have not been considered 
WHO  Regional  Office  for  Europe,  Heat-health  action  plans  -  Guidance  (2008)  available  at: 
http://www.euro.who.int/document/e91347.pdf 

EN 

105 

   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 mentioned 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  fishery  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 context (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,  seasons  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  climate  change  is  very  small,  especially  where 
there  is  adequate  health  services  and  management  of  mosquito  control  (EEA,  2008). 
Nonetheless, new challenges can emerge, as with the Chikungunya virus outbreak in Europe; 
and  the  presence  of  a  suitable  vector  might  allow  for  future  local  outbreaks.  There  are  also 
observed  changes  in  vector  distribution  -  the  limit  of  tick  distribution  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 north, 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 diseases is uncertain.  

While  flooding  is  the  most  frequent  weather  related  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  coastal  section),  and  estimates  –  in  the  absence  of 
adaptation – that these indirect health effects 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  waterborne  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 water bodies used for recreation.  

Finally, there are  a number of other emerging  health 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 quality in Europe, in terms of concentrations 
and  dispersion  of  air  pollutants.  Whilst  air  pollution  levels  have  reduced  dramatically  in 
recent decades in Europe, the health risks of air pollution are still significant, primarily from 

106  

EN 

FAO,  Climate  Change: 
http://www.fao.org/docrep/010/i0195e/i0195e00.htm 

Implications 

for  Food  Safety,  Rome, 

2008, 

available 

at 

106 

   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 will 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 pollutant in many parts of Europe. The EEA (2008) reports that 
climate variability and change has 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 
levels107. Nonetheless, there are some individual country studies which 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,  cutaneous  malignant  melanoma  and  sunburn  .  Higher 
ambient  temperatures  will  influence  clothing  choices  and  time  spent  outdoors,  potentially 
increasing UV exposure in some regions and decreasing 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 medications for allergic rhinitis, and wider economic 
costs  to  individuals.  Finally,  there  will  be  a  range  of  indirect  health  effects  from  climate 
change acting on other health determinants. 

The  health  effects  of  climate  change  will  be  unevenly  distributed  across  regions  of  Europe. 
Health  and  well  being  are  also  strongly  related  to  socio-economic  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 related mortality, there is a greater vulnerability for the elderly, 
and there maybe additional factors for this group in relation to socio-economic status. These 
inequality issues are even more pronounced in relation to external factors (effects outside the 
EU). 

10.7.2.  External dimension 

Climate-induced  changes  in  the  potential  distribution  of  malaria  and  other  vector  borne 
diseases  are  projected  mainly  in  poor  and  vulnerable  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 major factor here will be the external dimension, either from risk 
from Europeans travelling in endemic 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 

107 

   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 measures to mitigate the risk of food 
poisoning. 

Development  of  heat  health  action  plans  (heat-wave  early  warning  and  public  health  response),  the 
strengthening  of  emergency  medical  services,  improvement  of  climate-sensitive  disease  surveillance, 
and  actions  to  increase  accessibility  to  key  determinants  of  health,  such  as  clean  water,  energy  and 
sanitation. 

Prevent effects  

Much  adaptation  can  be  achieved  in  the  context  of  pursuing  wider  development  objectives—for 
example, improved health and education services. 

The maintaining / strengthening of public health infrastructure is often viewed as the “most important, 
cost-effective  and  urgently  needed”  adaptation  strategy.  This  includes  the  reinforcement  of  public 
health  policies  that  recognise  climate  risk,  public  health  training,  more  effective  surveillance  and 
emergency response systems, and sustainable prevention and control programs. Education of public and 
health professionals. 

As vulnerability to climate change can be exacerbated by other stresses, including lack of preparedness 
or high burden of disease, it is important to include risks from climate into public health policies, thus 
strengthening health services' preparedness and enhancing international cooperation 

Change land use. 

Greening urban areas, Green roofs 

Change 
activities. 

location  of  economic 

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  community’s  adaptive  capacity  are:  economic  wealth,  technology, 
information  and  skills,  infrastructure,  institutions,  and  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 estimating the cost of the current climate sensitive disease 
burden, or of health-specific adaptation strategies. 

Research  and  sharing  and  implementation  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 age (links the aging population 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,  the  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  measures  regarding  health  would  be  most  appropriate  at  national, 
regional  and  local  level,  it  has  to  be  taken  into  consideration  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 

108 

   EN 

 
Improvement  of  international  surveillance  systems  are  needed  to  facilitate  national  and 
regional preparedness to epidemic-prone disease and to reduce their vulnerability to them 

Economies of scale could be made with respect the exchange 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, updating relevant EU legislation 

–  Supporting  key  actions  with  a  view  to  ensure  that  the  specificities  of  particularly 

vulnerable groups are taken into account within the policy making process. 

In general, early adaptation actions with regard to health would be relevant when: 

–  action measures have already been shown to be effective under current climate conditions; 

–  severe impacts are possible (for example, 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 threaten 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  their  importance,  the  effects  on  coasts  are  also  reported  in  this 
separate section. 

Coastal  zones  in  Europe  contain  large  human  populations  and  significant  socioeconomic 
activities. They also support diverse ecosystems that provide important habitats and sources of 
food, as well as providing other ecosystem services. 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 areas in countries such as the Netherlands, England, Denmark, 
Germany  and  Italy  are  already  below  normal  high-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,  particularly  via  sea  level  rise  and  changes  in  the 
frequency and/or intensity of extreme weather events, 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 wetlands, and estuaries. Direct impacts from sea 

EN 

109 

   EN 

 
level  rise  include  inundation  and  displacement  of  wetlands,  lowlands,  coastal  erosion, 
increased storm flooding and damage, increased salinity in estuaries and coastal aquifers, and 
rising coastal water tables and impeded drainage. Potential indirect impacts include changes 
in  the  distribution  of  bottom  sediments,  changes  in  the  functions  of  coastal  ecosystems  and 
impacts on human activities. 

There are emerging estimates of the potential physical impacts (area lost, 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 model 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  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 valued at a cost of 12 to 18 billion/year. 
When hard adaptation measures are considered (dike building and beach nourishment) 
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.  The  optimal  protection  level  is 
determined by the equalisation of marginal costs and benefits. Two 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 comparing the nourishment costs (basically a 
function of cubic metre of sand) 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 OECD108 has also looked at current and future major coastal cities 
with sea level rise (0.5 metres global average) 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  tourism  potential  and  recreational 
value  (see  tourism  and  industry  section),  and  the  role  of  seas  and  oceans  are  essential  for 
ecosystem services including fisheries (see relevant section) and climate 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  cities  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 

110 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Finally,  there  are  specific  biodiversity-ecosystems  issues  for  Europe’s  coastline,  with 
projected climate change and sea level 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 migration of beaches and the loss of up to 20% of 
coastal wetlands. In addition, rising sea levels may cause saline intrusions on aquifers in the 
coastal areas. 

Traditionally,  most  shore-line  management  policies  tend  to  reduce  the  flexibility  of  the 
coastline, to minimize its natural dynamics because of the inconvenience it raises for human 
activities. Seawalls and dykes are measures that try to fix the coastline so that land use can be 
orderly planned, houses built and harbours maintained. But there are also clear disadvantages 
to  this  kind  of  management.  Maintenance  costs  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 coastal 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 realignment 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 refer preferably to coastal 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  develop  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  measures  such  as  risk 
assessment, mapping, risk reduction measures 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 dimensioned to last for 50 years taking into account 
the worst-case IPCC scenario. They 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  global  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 defences taking into account 200-year level rise. 

Guidelines in England and Wales have been have been issued111 recommending sea-level rise 
be taken into account in flood and coastal defence projects grant aided by the Department for 
Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra). 

109  
110  

111  

CONSCIENCE 6th FP Project, see http://www.conscience-eu.net 
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 
Flood and Coastal Defence Appraisal Guidance FCDPAG3 Economic Appraisal Supplementary Note to 
Operating Authorities – Climate Change Impacts October 2006 

EN 

111 

   EN 

 
                                                 
However, climate change adaptation is not always considered within the coastal management 
plans of national or sub-national governments. According to information presently held by the 
Commission,  climate  change  impacts,  adaptation  and  their  economic  perspectives  are  only 
considered in the design of the coastal infrastructure projects in a few Member States and the 
costs of the options differ widely. Relatively little is known about the costs and the benefits of 
the adaptation options and uncertainty levels are very high, partly because effective adaptation 
measures  are  highly  dependent  on  specific,  geographical  and  climate  risk  factors  as  well  as 
institutional, political and financial constraints.  

In  this  light,  many  recent  studies112  highlight  the  need  for  further  work  to  target  the 
assessment  of  risk  management  strategies,  most  notably  the  cost  and  effectiveness  of 
adaptation options.  

The promotion of coherent and integrated planning and management tools of the maritime and 
coastal areas can provide the appropriate 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  this  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)  initiative  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  Network  (EMODNET),  proposed  as  part  of  the 
maritime  policy,  will  focus  on  improving  access  to  researchers  and  service  providers  to 
existing data, identifying gaps and proposing what further monitoring is required.  

10.9.  External dimension 

In  addition  to  the  external  aspects  of  climate  change  impacts  in  Europe,  or  on  how  the  EU 
transfers  problems  outside  the  region,  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  changes  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 

112 

   EN 

 
                                                 
emerging, although many are difficult to discern due to adaptation and 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  likely  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 depending on the crop), and then decrease beyond 
that  in  some  regions.  At  lower  latitudes,  especially  seasonally  dry  and  tropical  regions, 
crop  productivity  is  projected  to  decrease  for  even  small  local  temperature  increases  (1-
2°C), which would increase the risk of hunger. Globally, the potential for food production 
is projected to increase with increases in local 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  local  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. Those densely-populated and low-lying areas where adaptive 
capacity is relatively low, and which already face other challenges such as tropical storms 
or local coastal subsidence, are especially at risk. he numbers affected 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 small islands are especially vulnerable. 

–  Health. Climate change-related exposures are likely to affect the health status of millions 
of  people,  particularly  those  with  low  adaptive  capacity.  For  these  groups,  this  includes 
potential effects from increases in malnutrition and consequent disorders, increased deaths, 
disease  and  injury  due  to  heatwaves,  floods,  storms,  fires  and  droughts,  the  increased 
burden of diarrhoeal disease, and the altered spatial distribution of some infectious disease 
vectors.  Studies  in  temperate  areas  project  some  benefits  (e.g.  fewer  deaths  from  cold 
exposure), but overall it is expected that these benefits will be outweighed by the negative 
health  effects  of  rising  temperatures  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 and transmission potential of malaria in Africa. 

It  is  also  clear  that  the  impacts  of  future  climate  change  will  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 

113 

   EN 

 
poorer  regions.  Climate  change  is  a  serious  challenge  to  poverty  reduction  in  developing 
countries and threatens to undo development gains. 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 likely 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  and  natural  disasters. 
Furthermore,  the  ability  to  adapt  for  these  countries  and  communities  is  likely  to  be  more 
limited because of technical, economic 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  alter  rainfall  patterns  and  reduce  available 
freshwater in certain regions (see above), and increasing water shortages have the potential 
to lead to conflict. Agricultural 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, particularly in less developed 
countries. These potential effects will be more intense in areas under strong demographic 
pressure, and have the potential to exacerbate existing conflicts over depleting resources, 
especially where access to those resources is politicised.  

–  Economic  Damage  (risks  to  coastal  cities  and  critical  infrastructure):  Coastal  zones  are 
home to about one fifth of the world population, a number set to rise in the years ahead. 
Mega-cities,  with  their  supporting  infrastructure,  such  as  port  facilities,  are  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  exposed  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-level rise and increased storminess), subsidence, 
population  growth  and  urbanisation,  with  the  asset  exposure  growing  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  flooding  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, including capacities for emergency relief operations.  

–  Loss of territory and border disputes: Receding coastlines and submergence could result in 
loss of territory, particularly  for countries such  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  inadequate  in  resolving territorial  and  border 
disputes.  A  further  dimension  of  competition  for  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  multiple  factors,  e.g.  poor  governance,  conflict,  are  in  play 

EN 

114 

   EN 

 
(fragility)  and  climate  change  may  be  an  additional  influence  on  the  political  stability  of 
countries and regions.  

–  Environmentally-induced  migration:  Those  parts  of  the  populations  that  already  suffer 
from  poor  health  conditions,  significant  unemployment  or  social  exclusion  are  rendered 
more vulnerable to the effects of climate change, 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  factors  in  this  phenomenon.  Some 
countries  that  are  extremely  vulnerable  to  climate  change  are  already  calling  for  its 
international  recognition.  Environmentally-induced  migration  may  increase  conflicts  in 
host, transit and destination areas, for internally displaced people and external  migration. 
Europe might also expect increased migratory pressure.  

–  Pressure  on  international  governance:  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.  Impacts  of  climate  mitigation  policies  (or  policy 
failures) could thus drive political tension nationally 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 emissions 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 particularly if the frequency 
of extreme events increases.  

Adaptation  presents  a  particular  challenge  for  policy  makers  around  the  world,  given  the 
environment of uncertainty with limited information regarding the actual timing and scale of 
the  consequences.  At  the  same  time,  consequences  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 external policy making. The EU acknowledges 
that  more  work  needs  to  be  done  urgently  to  forecast,  analyse,  and  communicate  the  actual 
consequences  and  associated  adaptation  costs  in  partner  countries.  Integrating  adaptation 
policies,  programmes  and  aid  programmes  internationally  requires  understanding  of  (non-
climate related) priorities of other countries and establishing new dialogues on adaptation. 

There is a lack of conclusive studies on climate change and migration patterns: it is currently 
difficult to put numbers on future flows of displaced people due to impacts of climate change, 
since non-climate drivers are also important (government policy, resilience to natural disaster 
etc.). There are no reliable estimates of the numbers affected, and this is a research priority. 
There  are  wider  issues  on  definitions  and  obligations  of  the  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 fundamental in securing the achievement of the UN 
Millennium Development Goals after 2015, especially in sub-Sahara Africa. The EU has the 

EN 

115 

   EN 

 
possibility  through  its  development  and  cooperation  funds  to  compensate  for  the  unequal 
distribution  of  climate  impacts,  to  support  developing  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 developing countries capacity building, research, 
information and data gathering, knowledge and technology 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 their 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  urgent  action  on  adaptation  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  Developed  Countries,  Small  Island 
Developing States and Africa.  

EN 

116 

   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.  For  the  purpose  of  this  Impact  Assessment, 
relevant reports containing information on adaptation at national level have been reviewed for 
the  Denmark,  Finland,  France,  Netherlands,  Spain,  Hungary,  Germany  and  United 
Kingdom113.  In  addition  to  these  publicly  available  reports,  some  more  Member  States  are 
currently preparing national strategies, which may become available in the coming months. In 
addition,  in  some  Member  States  adaptation  strategies  are  available  at  regional  level.  These 
have not been reviewed at this stage. 

Table 15: Overview of national adaptation strategies, plans or programmes in the EU 

Member 
State 

Impacts, 
adaptation assessments 

vulnerability 

& 

NAS 
under 
preparati
on 

NAS 
adopted 

link  (copy  from  either  EEA  or  table 
below) 

Austria 

StartClim reports (2003-2009) 

http://www.austroclim.at/index.php?id=40 

Anpassungsstudie 

http://www.umweltnet.at/article/archive/70
98 

Belgium 

Bulgaria 

Cyprus 

Czech Rep. 

Sustainable  Spatial  Development  
(SSD) 

2012 

 Second  National  Action  Plan  on 
Climate Change 2005-2008 

http://www2.moew.government.bg/recent_
doc/international/climate/NAPCC_Final_E
nglish.doc 

National  Programme  to  Abate  the 
Climate  Change  Impacts  in  the 
Republic
Czech 

2009 

http://www.env.cz/AIS/web-pub-
en.nsf/$pid/MZPOBFKFL7JL/$FILE/N%
C3%A1rodn%C3%AD_program_EN.pdf 

Denmark 

Ministry of Climate and Energy 

2008 

http://www.env.cz/AIS/web-
en.nsf/pages/Climate_Change 

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 

117 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
Member 
State 

Impacts, 
adaptation assessments 

vulnerability 

& 

NAS 
under 
preparati
on 

NAS 
adopted 

link  (copy  from  either  EEA  or  table 
below) 

=227544&Ian=EN 

http://www.mmm.fi/attachments/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;  

2008 

http://www.anpassung.net 

Klimazwei; KLIMZUG 

http://www.klimazwei.de 

Greece 

Ministry of Environment & Athens 
Academy 

Hungary 

VAHAVA 

Ireland 

ERTDI; CCRP 

National Climate Change Strategy 

Italy 

http://www.bmu.de/english/climate/downloads/d
oc/42841.php  

www.minenv.gr/welcome_en.html 

2008 

http://www.kvvm.hu/cimg/documents/nes0
80214.pdf 

http://www.environ.ie/en/PublicationsDocu
ments/FileDownLoad,1861,en.pdf 
http://www.epa.ie 

http://www.conferenzacambiamenticlimati
ci2007.it 

http://www.apat.gov.it/site/en-GB 

Latvia 

ASTRA 

2009 

http://www.vidm.gov.lv/eng 

Lithuania 

ASTRA 

Luxembourg 

Malta 

Netherlands 

Global 
(GEF) 

Environment 

Facility 

National  Programme  for  Spatial 
to  Climate  Change 
Adaptation 
(ARK),  CcSP,  Knowledge 
for 
Climate 

http://www.astra-project.org 

http://www.astra-project.org 

http://www.mepa.org.mt/environment/inde
x.htm?climate_change/mainpage.htm&1 

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.climatechangesspatialplanning.
nl 

Poland 

Portugal 

SIAM 

Romania 

National  Strategy  and  National 
Action  Plan  on  Climate  Change 

2009 

www.siam.fc.ul.pt/siam.html 

www.mmediu.ro 

EN 

118 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Member 
State 

Impacts, 
adaptation assessments 

vulnerability 

& 

NAS 
under 
preparati
on 

2005-2007 

NAS 
adopted 

link  (copy  from  either  EEA  or  table 
below) 

http://www.mmediu.ro/departament_mediu
_en/climate_change.htm 

Slovakia 

Slovenia 

Spain 

ECCE + Impacts on coastlines 

2006 

Sweden 

SWECLIM;  SWECIA; 
CLIMATOOLS 

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 

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
trasweciaclimateimpactsandadaptation.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/sb/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/Environment/climatechange/
uk/legislation/index.htm 

EN 

119 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Details for adopted National Adaptation Strategies 

Member 
State 

Denmark 

Title 

Strategy for Adaptation to Climate Changes in Denmark 

Year 

2008  

Level 
progress 

of 

Sectors 
addressed 

Instruments 
themes 
addressed 

Internet link 

The strategy, published by the Danish Government, proposes measures in 
several  sectors.  All  relevant  authorities  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 specifically 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  the  major  Danish  universities,  the 
University  of  Aarhus,  has  been  created.    Many  adaptation  measures  are 
already taking place in different sectors, at national and local level. 

Water  Management,  Agriculture,  Biodiversity/ecosystems,  Forestry, 
Fisheries,  Human  Health,  Coastal  Zones,  Energy,  Land  use, 
Insurance/finance,  Construction,  Nature  and  Nature  Management, 
Planning, Emergency and Rescue Services 

/ 

Coordinated  research,  Knowledge  and  information  sharing,  Financing 
adaptation, Planning tools, Coordinated action across MS/stakeholders 

for 

tilpasning 

'Strategi 
http://www.kemin.dk/da-
DK/KlimaogEnergipolitik/DanskKlimaogEnergipolitik/Klimatilpasningsst
rategien/Documents/klimatilpasningsstrategi_03032008.pdf 

klimaændringer 

i  Danmark': 

til 

EN 

120 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
Finland 

Title 

Finland's National Strategy for Adaptation to Climate Change 

Year 

2005 

Level 
progress 

of 

Sectors 
addressed 

The strategy describes climate change vulnerability and potential impacts 
in a range of different  sectors and suggests measures to improve adaptive 
capacity  in  these  sectors.  The  objective  of  the  National  Adaptation 
Strategy is to reduce the negative consequences 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. 
 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 

Internet link 

http://www.mmm.fi/attachments/5eWDKveQh/5h0aZ7Iid/Files/CurrentFil
e/Finlands_national_adaptation_srtrategy_julkaisu.pdf 

Hungary 

Title 

National Climate Strategy 2008-2025 

Year 

2008 

Level 
progress 

of 

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 Programmes 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  systems,  Knowledge  sharing,  Planning 
tools, Coordinated action across MS/stakeholders, Financing 

Internet link 

http://www.kvvm.hu/cimg/documents/nes080214.pdf 

EN 

121 

   EN 

 
 
France 

Title 

Year 

National adaptation strategy to climate change 

2007 

Level 
progress 

of 

is 

the 

result  of  an  extensive  consultation 

The  National  Adaptation  Strategy,  written  by  the  National  Observatory 
(ONERC) 
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  “Grenelle  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,  finance  adaptation  actions,  use  legal  and 
regulation  tools,  put  forward  determined  approaches  and  dialogue  with 
private stakeholders, take into account specifics of overseas territories and, 
finally, take part in international exchanges. 

Internet link 

http://www.ecologie.gouv.fr/adaptation-au-changement.html 

Netherlands 

Title 

National Programme on Climate Adaptation and Spatial Planning 

Year 

2008 

Level 
progress 

of 

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 currently 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, Coordinated action across MS/stakeholders 

Internet link 

http://www.vrom.nl/pagina.html?id=2706&sp=2&dn=7222 

EN 

122 

   EN 

 
 
Spain 

Title 

Year 

National Plan for adaptation to Climate Change 

2006 

Level 
progress 

of 

Sectors 
addressed 

Instruments 
themes 
addressed 

Internet link 

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, thereby defining the best climate change 
adaptation options. 

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 

/ 

Awareness  raising,  Mainstreaming  adaptation  in  policy,  Knowledge 
sharing, Planning tools, Coordinated action across MS/stakeholders 

‘Plan Nacional de Adaptación al Cambio Climático': 
http://www.mma.es/secciones/cambio_climatico/areas_tematicas/impactos
_cc/pdf/pna_v3.pdf 

Adapting to Climate Change in England - a Framework for Action 

2008 

 The development of a NAS by the government 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.  

United 
Kingdom 

Title 

Year 

Level 
progress 

of 

Sectors 
addressed 

 Flood  management,  water  resources,  coastal  erosion,  high  temperatures, 
biodiversity conservation 

/ 

Providing  evidence,  raising  awareness,  ensuring  and  measuring  progress, 
embedding adaptation 

Instruments 
themes 
addressed 

Internet link 

http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/climatechange/adapt/pdf/adapti
ng-to-climate-change.pdf 

EN 

123 

   EN 

 
 
 
Germany 

Title 

National Climate Change Adaptation Strategy 

Year 

2008 

Level 
progress 

of 

Sectors 
addressed 

/ 

Instruments 
themes 
addressed 

The strategy has been adopted in late 2008; a national action plan is to be 
delivered by 2011 setting out i.a. principles 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  
of the strategy and next steps. 

further development 

 health, construction, water management and flood protection, soil, 
biodiversity, agriculture, horticulture, fisheries, energy, finance, transport, 
industry, tourism and spatial planning 

new  governance  structures  as  catalyst  for  an  integrated  adaptation 
approach (i.a. an interministerial working group), an extended participation 
process which increases integration between 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 

Internet link 

http://www.bmu.de/files/pdfs/allgemein/application/pdf/das_gesamt.pdf 
http://www.bmu.de/files/pdfs/allgemein/application/pdf/das_zusammenfas
sung_en.pdf 
http://www.bmu.de/klimaschutz/downloads/doc/42783.php 

EN 

124 

   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,  comprehensive  and  regularly  updated  climate 
change  and  socio-economic  scenarios  (projection  data)  for  analysis  across  Europe.  This 
could build upon existing research and ensure continuity 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 requires improving the link 
between  atmospheric,  land  use  and  socio-economic  models,  at  global,  EU  and  regional 
scale;  developing  options  for  adaptation  strategies  and  measures    at  sectoral  and  cross-
sectoral  level  and  the  assessment  of  their  ecological,  social  and  economic  potential, 
benefits  and  costs and identify options for initial no regret measures as starting point for 
adaptation  avoiding  costly  mal-adaptation.  This  requires  ensuring  interdisciplinary 
cooperation to link the different research approaches to sustainable development.  

–  Action  1.2.  Build  a  structured  information  dataset  to  better  understand  the  territorial  and 
sectoral distribution of vulnerability to climate change impacts (vulnerability being defined 
as  a  function  of  1)  the  exposure  to  CC  impacts,  2)  the  sensitivity  and  3)  the  adaptive 
capacity of a system or a territory. The approach would be threefold: 

–  Vulnerability  assessment  of  the  energy  and  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 sustainability 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 transfer on impacts, adaptation measures in place 
and  best  practices,  contributing  to  the  Shared  Environmental  Information  System114 
(SEIS). Its purpose would be to promote understanding of climate change impacts across 
Europe  and  to  equip  stakeholders  to  adapt  and  it  could  include:  communication  and 
dissemination  of  scientific  research  on  impacts  to  enable  planned  proactive  adaptation 
action;  exchange  of  adaptation  best  practice  in  or  between  sectors  or  regions;  tools  and 
guidance for adaptation strategies. This initiative interlinks with GMES for obtaining better 
information on the state of the environment, to point out past and current trends on climate 
including the likelihood of extreme events and climate-related disasters." 

114  

COM(2008)46final 

EN 

125 

   EN 

 
                                                 
–  Action  1.4.  Provision  of  targeted  awareness-raising,  communication,  education  and 
training on climate change impacts and adaptation: This might include campaigns aimed at 
European citizens, recommendations to Member States to build capacity among all parties 
involved.  A  strategy  for  adaptation  must  include  a  strong  notion  of  the  importance  of 
human  capital.  'Human  capital'  comprises  aspects  ranging  from  awareness  for  the 
challenges linked with adaptation to climate change, 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 climate change. With the European Social Fund (ESF), the EU has 
an  instrument  that  provides  Member  States  and  regions  with  the  opportunity  to  invest  in 
human  capital.  The  current  programming  period  2007-2013  calls  for  ESF  co-funded 
interventions in this area. ERDF and Cohesion Fund also support capacity building through 
various means going from direct financial support. Awareness raising should be facilitated 
also  through  other  EU  Funds  (Structural,  Rural  development,  Development,  research), 
thereby ensuring that advice and training is provided to foster good autonomous adaptation 
by  public  authorities, 
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, and generally for sustainable economic growth 
across Europe. 

third  countries, 

–  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  number  of  additional  knowledge  gaps  should  be 
worked  upon:  (1)  -  Further  improvement  of  the  quality  and  coverage  of  the  analysis  of 
climate  change  impacts  for  major  sectors  at  scales  relevant  to  adaptation  measures  (2)  - 
Identification of the limits to resilience beyond which human systems and ecosystems are 
no longer capable to maintain the required functions and providing 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  and  by  the  pooling  of  national  public  funding  through  ERA-
NET+. In addition to the RTD Framework programme, the prioritisation of climate change 
adaptation research is necessary in other Community and European schemes which support 
research  related  activities  such  as  research  exchanges  and  networks  of  scientists,  such  as 
the  EUREKA  and  COST  programmes  supported  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  wide  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  address  climate  change  impacts  to  the  full  extent,  systematic 
Climate  Health  Checks  need  to  be  undertaken  periodically  on  how  climate  change 
impacts  are  integrated  in  all  Community  policy  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 

126 

   EN 

 
                                                 
serious  impacts  will  occur  (see  below)  ,  more  detailed  checks  are  needed  to  address  the 
ability of policies in place to address CC impacts and adaptation needs. This will entail an 
initial health check of those European policies (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  climate  change  (vulnerability 
mapping),  as  well  as  how  climate  change  might  affect  the  success  of  policies.  It  is  a 
necessary  precursor  to  mainstreaming  policies  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 beginning 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 made to the knowledge base and will take on 
board feed from reporting on response of the policies and progress made to adapt to CC on 
the basis of established indicators, whether possible.  

–  Action  2.2.  On  the  basis  of  the  baseline  identified  in  section  2,  soft  short-term  measures 
can already be identified to mainstreaming adaptation into sectoral policies, implementing 
the  principles  for  sustainable  adaptation  identified  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 measures to enhance water efficiency in 
agriculture,  households  and  buildings.  Explore  the  potential  for  policies  and 
measures to boost ecosystem storage capacity for water in Europe. 

–  Ensure  that  climate  change  is  taken  into  account  in  the  framework  of  the 
Integrated Maritime Policy, the Marine Strategy Framework Directive and in the 
reform of the Common Fisheries Policy. 

–  Integrate  climate  change  adaptation  aspects  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  Environmental  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  projects  and  irrigation  technology,  and  rather 
favour projects that make more water/energy 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 

127 

   EN 

 
–  Promote further health governance and co-ordination with specific focus on core 

EU competences: infectious diseases, UN conventions, Animal health 

–  Communication/Green  Paper  due  to  be  adopted  in  2010  outlining  a  long  term 
commitment and proposing 3 options to improve forest protection at EU level. 

–  Develop guidelines for climate proofing spatial planning  integrated with land and 
water  management  and  nature  conservation,  addressed  to  local  and  regional 
authorities  in  order  to  secure,  inter  alia,  the  connectivity  of  ecosystems,  the 
sustainable management of soils and in general the  use of "green infrastructures" 
(allow  for  natural  water  retention,  exploit  the  cooling  and  filtering  capacities, 
protecting  its  qualities  and  carbon  content,  avoid  erosion  and  leaching,  etc.)  an 
fully  exploit  a  proper  functioning,  provision,  and  recognition,  of  ecological 
services (agriculture, forestry, ecosystems). 

–  Mainstreaming  adaptation  in  the  EU  external  policies,  notably  development 
cooperation,  security  and  migration  actions  while  ensuring  that:  1)  bilateral  and 
regional  agreements  (e.g.  Country  and  Regional  Strategy  Papers)  include  a 
climate  change  vulnerability  assessment  and  2)  the  effects  of  climate  change  in 
migratory  flows  are  considered  in  the  broader  EU  reflection  on  security, 
development and migration policies. Mainstreaming adaptation in the EU's trade 
policy, notably in the liberalisation of trade in environmental 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  and  the  EU-ACP  Water  Facility),  energy, 
desertification,  biodiversity, 
forests,  coastal  erosion,  disaster  prevention, 
agriculture and health. 

–  Action  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. 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: recommending 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  matter,  improving  water  retention,  and 
protecting biodiversity. Ensuring a better management of land as a scarce resource 
suffering  multiple  and  competing  demands  and  could  include  concepts  of 
recycling  of  land,  increasing  multifunctional  land  use:  flexible  landscapes  that 
would  provide  the  necessary  space  and  elements  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 

128 

   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 setting 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  the  probability  of  risk  as  well  as  measures  to 
strengthen  the  preparedness  of  key  institutions.  Risk  reduction  measures  have  been 
implemented using financial security (insurance) 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 climate 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  strategy,  but  should  duly  take 
into  account  possible  impacts  of  social  and  territorial  exclusion.  Due  to  the  cross-boundary 
effects  of  climate  change,  there  may  be  benefits  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  that  certain  private  actors/sectors  (like  those 
providing  public  or  utility  services,  critical  infrastructures  or  sectors  very  vulnerable  to 
weather  conditions)  are  covered  under  a  standard  weather-related  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 results in the right outcome in 
terms of the availability and level of cover and the distribution of risks. […] First, as long as 
climate  impacts  are  uncertain,  insurance  companies,  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  cultural  factors  will  prevent  people  from  adapting 
fully in the short-term, especially 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 insurance 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  specific  risks  related  to  extreme 
weather  events  and  especially  support  insurance  uptake  by  key  sectors  more  vulnerable 
than  others  to  climatic  variations,  like  agriculture  and  forestry  (awareness,  market 
availability, or guidelines, co-financing 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  national  or  local  schemes.  Undoubtedly,  taking  up 
insurance is a private decision, however it may be necessary that certain private actors/sectors 

EN 

129 

   EN 

 
(such as those providing public services, critical infrastructures or sectors 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  located  in  flood  plains,  publicly  supported  insurance 
schemes may be required. The economic analysis and transfer efficiency effects of insurances, 
is a very complex subject; this has been largely 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 assessment in the remaining sectors. 

–  Action  3.1.  Within  the  context  of  using  risk  management  techniques  for  addressing  the 
sharing  of  climate  change  risks  and  facilitate  better  and  more  acute  adaptation,  the 
Commission  will  examine  further  the  potential  for  insurance  and  other  financial  security 
products to complement adaptation 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  sector  in  the  development  of 
insurance schemes tailored to the needs of specific groups and sectors adaptation efforts to 
CC. The further work planed on vulnerability indicators for areas and sectors could help to 
this regard. Furthermore, work on adaptation costs 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 financial 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  accompanying  specialised  MBIs  and  to  encourage, 
where appropriate, public-private partnerships. This can enable the sharing of investment, the 
spreading of the risk, reward and responsibilities 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  with  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 costs. 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 (“dynamic efficiency”). Furthermore, experience 
gained  with  MBIs,  suggest  that  they  can  support  employment  when  used  in  the  context  of 
environmental  tax  or  fiscal  reform.  Examples  of  MBIs  include  incentive  schemes  for 
protecting  ecosystem  services  or  for  projects  that  enhance  the  resilience  of  ecosystems  and 
economic sectors in the form of Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES). 

–  Action  3.2.  There  is  a  need  to  strengthen  the  role  of  innovative  funding  mechanisms  for 
adaptation.  In  the  context  of  the  White  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 identified with regard to financing: 

EN 

130 

   EN 

 
–  Action 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): 

–  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  enhancement  of  green  infrastructure,  such  as 
develop connectivity, with a view to facilitating species migration in response to 
climate  change,  involving  wider  land  use  planning,  including  trans-boundary 
collaboration, support crops change to more resilient ones. 

–  Option 4.2. Review the existing funding instruments 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  adaptation.  A  Commission  Communication 
could  substantially  help  in  this  direction,  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  that  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  infrastructure  to  climate  change.  This  can  be 
addressed in a follow up of the Strategic Energy Review and the SET Plan. Also 
the guidelines for Trans European Transport Networks should look to incorporate 
an assessment of the impacts of climate change.  

–  The revision of the current Funding Guidelines 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  should  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  adopting  guidance  on  investments  under 
Cohesion Policy 

–  Making the reduction of fishing capacity (either through decommission of ships or 
with  reduction  in  fishing  gear)  an  obligatory  measure  in  the  European  Fisheries 
Fund (EFF) with specific targets per country. 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 public funded investment can be examined 
as well as the possibility to condition the funding to an assessment of the climate impact on 

EN 

131 

   EN 

 
the  proposed  investment.  Regarding  EU  funding,  for  Agriculture,  the  current  RD 
regulation  for  2007-2013  do  not  give  support  to  new  irrigation  projects  or  areas  but  to 
improvements  in  current  irrigated  areas,  water  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  programmes  could  be  assessed,  for  instance 
tourism  investments  should  avoid  spending  under  the  SF  for  tourism  projects  that  are 
unsustainable  in  the  longer  term  (e.g.  ski  facilities  in  low  land  Alpine  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  adaptation  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  mechanisms  and  the  links  with  funding  of 
mitigation  activities  and  international  Adaptation  actions  in  a  post  2012  global  climate 
agreement.  This  action  requires  quite  a  lot  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 authorities (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-ordination of adaptation policies and the 
assessment of next steps. 

The elaboration of an EU Adaptation strategy requires collecting and sharing information for 
the MS and regions/local authorities as the 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  and  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  instruments,  e.g.  Eionet.  This  would  involve  either 
supporting  the  creation  of  national  bodies  dealing  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, plus 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  Member  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  would  play  a  role  in  developing  the  EU 
framework  in  order  to  facilitate  the  ongoing  development  of  the  EU  strategy  and  the 
preparation  of  national  adaptation  strategies  by  the  Member  States.  The  Steering  Group 

EN 

132 

   EN 

 
would also consider the appropriate level at which actions should be best implemented. In 
the initial phase the Steering Group would focus 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:  building  the  evidence  base  on 
the impacts of climate change, assessing the risks of climate change for the EU, the scope 
for increasing climate resilience, and costing the risks and opportunities. 

–  Action 5.3. Some regions or cities have already produced regional adaptation strategies. 
For  less  advanced  regions,  however,  there  could  be  the  need  to  provide  assistance  for 
capacity  building  and  best  practice  sharing.  This  would  will  ensure  an  increase  of 
institutional and social awareness, and achieve solidarity objectives while allowing a cost-
efficient use of public and EU resources. Based on a review of existing 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  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. 

It  is  also  proposed  to  fully  exploiting  the  Global  Climate  Change  Alliance  to  strengthen 
dialogue with developing countries and implement concrete pilot adaptation programs. 

EN 

133 

   EN