1. Climate change and territorial effects on regions and local economies in Europe Stefan Greiving (TU Dortmund) ESPON Climate

2. 2 Final policy questions: 1.How and to which degree will climate change impact on the competitiveness and cohesion of European regions and Europe as a whole? 2.In which way can policy contribute to mitigate climate change, and to adapt to and manage those results of climate change that cannot be avoided, while making sure that synergies of mitigation and adaptation policies are being exploited? Project started later and is one the way to the DFR (23 December) Two selected key research questions (partly) addressed by this presentation: 1. What is the degree of vulnerability of different types of European regions to climate change? 2. Are there potentially new types of (climate change) regions emerging? Objectives – research and policy questions

3. Conceptual framework Füssel & Klein 2006 Emissions Climate change Climate variability Exposure to climatic stimuli Sensitivity to climatic stimuli Impacts of climate change Vulnerability to climate change Adaptation Mitigation Adaptive capacity Non-climatic factors

4. Delphi-based survey: Concept Normative questions, as cultural believes and political preferences influence the weighting of factors like social or economic sensitivity on the aggregated level, ESPON Climate deals with (e. g. value of live against economic damages or willingness to adapt): Survey refers to – the various sensitivity dimensions e.g. how important is economy vs. environment? – Exposure vs. Sensitivity – Impact vs. adaptive capacity Delphi-based survey among ESPON Monitoring committee in order to capture perspectives across the ESPON space Three rounds of iterative web-survey to facilitate consensus formation process Results of the first round are available (25 participants).

5. Delphi-based survey: First round results (1) Sensitivity Physical sensitivity 19 % Environmental sensitivity 31 % Cultural sensitivity 11 % Social sensitivity 16 % Economic sensitivity 23 % Exposure Impact 56 %44 %

6. Delphi-based survey: First round results (2) Adaptive capacity Economic20 % Institutions18 % Technology24 % Infrastructure16 % Knowledge & awareness22 % Impact Vulnerability 50 %

7. Delphi-based survey: Second round

8. First new type of climate change regions Please note: this is a typology of similar climate change patterns and not a typology of the present climate

9. There are already territorially differentiated adaptation strategies: Building adaptation capacity: relates towards a measure that builds government or societal awareness about adaptation. Reduction of risk and sensitivity: Actions can be undertaken to reduce the risk of damage and disruption, and reduce sensitivity of people, property, natural resources, and ecology Increased coping capacity: during extreme or damaging events. Capitalization on changed climatic conditions: action might be undertaken to capitalize on such change. Source: Massey/ Bergsma: Assessing adaptation in 29 European Countries. Amsterdam 2008. Adaptation objectives per macro region

10. Considerable differences between countries within a macro region

11. DG Regios 2020 Report THE CLIMATE CHANGE CHALLENGE FOR EUROPEAN REGIONS Main Findings: Regions under highest pressure are generally located in the south and east of Europe, the whole of whole of Spain, Italy, Greece, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Malta and Hungary, as well as most of Romania and southern parts of France. This is due mostly to changes in precipitation and an increase in temperature which have an impact on vulnerable economic sectors, with river floods also contributing to the overall effect in Hungary and Romania. In some cases severe impacts will be felt in regions with low GDP per capita and therefore lower capacity for adaptation to climate change developed typology. However, the study bases on a limited set of exposure indicators; adaptive capacity is not considered by the vulnerability map. It is not clear yet whether the ESPON Climate vulnerability map will show a similar picture

12. Aggregated climate change exposure Aggregated changes in climate stimuli are more severe in Scandinavia, the Alpine region and parts of South-eastern Europe. Range of values between 1.14 and 3.25 – some regions are three times as much exposed as others. This does not necessarily mean that the vulnerability of Scandinavian regions is particular high. When sensitivity and adaptive capacity come in, the picture will considerably change. The Mediterranean area is considered to be particularly vulnerable due to its sensitivity.

13. Climate change exposure: Mountain areas Mountain regions seem more exposed to changes in climatic stimuli than other types of regions Particular sensitive due to economic profile (tourism) and land-use patterns (settlements often located in valleys prone to mountains hazards)

14. Climate change exposure: Urban areas Urban areas are considered to be similarly exposed as neighboring rural areas by climate models. However, due to the so called heat island effect, even todays means temperature in inner cities may differ up to 10 C° from their hinterland This effect cannot be considered by the pan-European analysis, but by case studies (i.e. North Rhine-Westphalia). In addition, urban areas are more sensitive due to the density of population and infrastructure. Urban areas may own more adaptive capacity (knowledge, awareness, technology, infrastructure, economic resources)

15. Climate change exposure: Areas with population increase Population data base on DEMIFER project It is expected that the sensitivity of growing regions will increase (more economic values, more population at risk in areas prone to extreme weather events) This is particular troublesome for growing urban areas This calls for more efforts in adapting to climate change (i. e. in South-west Franc and northern Italy.

16. Climate change exposure: Areas with population decline Some areas, mostly located in Eastern Europe which are characterised by a population decline are particularly exposed to climatic changes One might argue that a shrinking population lowers at least economic as well as social sensitivity However, severe conflicts may arise: less population and consequently less economic activities may also imply less resources for adaptation An ageing population becomes more sensitive (dependency ratio) and less able to cope with extreme events

17. While the need for co-ordination and integration across sectors, scales and levels is growing, the capacities to respond are frequently shrinking […]. While it is generally recognised that the role of spatial planning for climate mitigation and adaptation should be strengthened, the practice is not very well developed as yet. (PEER Report No. 2: Climate Policy Integration, Coherence and Governance, p. 60). Substantiated by comparative analysis of national adaptation strategies from the perspective of spatial planning on behalf of the German Federal Ministry for Transport, Building and Urban Development (in print). Some recommendations: – Climate proofing should be integrated in SEA – Concepts of resilience and no regret have to be operationalized for planning purposes – Dealing with uncertainty calls for flexible concepts which can be frequently adapted according to the results of a continuous monitoring of given vulnerability. First response to policy questions

18. Towards aggregated vulnerability to climate change Sensitivity analysis (separately for each sensitivity dimension) will be conducted based on identified cause-effect relations between climatic stimuli and sensitivity indicators. Impact maps (and related new typologies) will be compiled by considering the Delphi weighting Analysis of adaptive capacity dimensions (according to the Delphi weighting) Draft vulnerability analysis expected to be ready for next TPG meeting (September 2010, Budapest). Validation of pan-European results by case studies Focus on policy recommendations based on analysis (October – December 2010)