Climate Resilience for the Built Environment: are we prepared and what challenges ahead?

Resilience to natural hazards has become an imperative for our society: indeed, building resilience in this context is not just a necessity, it’s our duty, it must be our common objective, our shared vision towards a sustainable and liveable future. Not only in the past few years, but more and more nowadays, daily situations and events occur to remind us of this pressing need, representing a call for action to act now, timely, efficiently, effectively.

In fact, on a purely economic side, the costs associated to the recovery from disruptions caused by natural hazards are huge, are increasing, are not sustainable not only by the public side, the communities and the citizens by even from the private sector, including the banking and insurance market. Numbers, and costs, are likely to increase if projected in the future, exacerbated by climate change impacts. Thus, the adoption of a resilient approach is mandatory to minimize the damages and consequences, including the economic ones, to our infrastructures, cities, communities and society.

But what is this about?

Resilience sits in an intricate interplay among individuals, communities, institutions and infrastructures. Moreover, it is well known that Resilience depends on many factors such as technological (e.g. tools), human (e.g. capability of intervention and exploitation of information from citizens and users) and user’s acceptance (e.g. understanding the added value provided by innovations for the improvement of capabilities, in both ordinary and extraordinary conditions). Indeed, Resilience heavily depends on the degree to which individuals, communities and organizations can organize themselves to learn from past events (e.g. hazards, shocks, stresses) and act accordingly to minimize the risks and impacts of future ones.

In this context, our common goal should be to support the society (citizens, communities, institutions, etc.) in preventing, promptly detecting, timely responding to and cost effectively recovering from disruptions, such as those caused by natural hazards by increasing the resilience of the systems they use and/or operate, across their life cycle. This would be possible if we start streamlining the resilience “concept” for what it is, we stop attributing to it “capacities” or “dimensions” it should not have but we consider it for what benefit and value creation it can provide.
For instance, if we think about the built environment and an urban ecosystem, one can certainly considers three main levels of Resilience:

  • Level 1 – Resilience of infrastructure assets: This is the simplest to be achieved, but also the foundation of the whole resilience approach. Assets, such as roads, power lines, water lines, etc., must withstand stressor and shocks, induced by natural hazards within a sort of a design and built principle of resilience as a core capacity they can exploit. Here, the benefit of more resilient infrastructure assets is a reduction in the life-cycle cost of assets.
  • Resilience of infrastructure services: Infrastructure systems are interconnected networks, and the resilience of individual assets might be a poor proxy for the resilience of services provided at the network level. This is why a systemic approach to resilience services is preferable. At this level, the benefit of more resilient infrastructure is the provision of more reliable services.
  • Resilience of infrastructure users: In the end what matters is the resilience of users. Infrastructure disruptions can be catastrophic or not, depending on whether users—including people and supply chains—can cope with them. At this level, the benefit of more resilient infrastructure is a reduction in the total impact of natural hazards on people and economies.

How Research and Innovation comes into play?

There are many examples of research and innovation developments that support building resilience in the built environment, and many initiatives are undergoing. Among the others, the MULTICLIMACT project, being an innovative action, whose aim is to support cities and municipal authorities in understanding first, raising awareness and building capacity afterwards, and finally measuring the resilience of the system/s they do manage/operate. In doing so MULTICLIMACT ambition is proactively and efficiently tackles, some of the risks that might have a stronger impact on the years to come (e.g. in 10 years), such as, according to the Word Economic Forum Risk Report¹, “Extreme weather events”.

Pragmatically, how MULTICLIMACT is working to ensure the built environment is prepared and resilient to natural hazards?

MULTICLIMACT proposes a paradigm shift from classical steady-state, time and space independent risk-based approach to a time-and space depended Resilience² -based approach that integrates the Resilience Capabilities (Plan/Prepare, Detect, Absorb, Recover, Adapt) into the Disaster Management Cycle (Prevention, Preparedness, Response, Recovery), considering both actual system (e.g. a building, a district, a city, etc.) state (AS-IS condition) and future system state³ ⁴ ⁵ ⁶, during the life cycle (Plan/Evaluate, Design, Construct, Operate & Maintain)⁷ of the system in scope. In doing this MULTICLIMACT ambition is to pave the way to a de-facto standard in Resilience-based approaches that consider:

  1. The Context/ecosystem in which the system (e.g. a building, a district, a city, etc.) in scope insist on;
  2. The Hazard/s and their combination;
  3.  System Vulnerabilities;
  4. System Levels of exposure;
  5. System and systemic Risks;
  6. System Levels of criticality;
  7. Impacts at system and whole context/ecosystem level.

This would mean moving from the classical risk management approach to a resilience management approach considering both “pre-hazards” and “post-hazard” phases in a recursive and iterative cycle of “system states” where the “hazard” (i.e. the event) is seen as the triggering point.

The proposed approach is made operation by means of the MULTICLIMACT Climate REsilience Maturity Assessment (CREMA) tool that support decision-makers in the evaluation, through a rating system, of the maturity of the various assets they manage or operate (including buildings, infrastructures and urban areas) in terms of “AS IS” (current resilience situation) and “TO BE” (future resilience situations). The goal is to quantify how, in a rating scale, any mitigation or adaptation measure can enhance the resilience of the system in scope thus providing evidence-based results that might support the implementation of resilience strategies and investments.

You can download the full article here.


Reference list:

  • ¹ https://www.weforum.org/publications/global-risks-report-2025/

  • ² Defined as “The ability of the system to withstand a disruptive event by reducing the initial negative impacts (absorptive capability), by adapting itself to them (adaptive capability) and by recovering from them (restorative capability)” according to FIKSEL, 2003

  • ³ Fuggini, C., Solari, C., De Stefano, R. et al. Assessing resilience at different scales: from single assets to complex systems. Environ Syst Decis 43, 693–707 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-023-09935-w

  • ⁴ C. Fuggini, M. Kontogeorgos, S. Osmani, F. Bolletta, Resilience of Infrastructures and Systems to multiple hazardous events: application cases and future perspectives, in Critical Infrastructure – Modern Approach and New Developments” edited by Dr. Antonio Di Pietro, IntechOpen, November 2022, DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.108548

  • ⁵ C. Fuggini, F. Bolletta (2020) ‘Identification of indicators, metrics and level of service for the resilience of transport critical infrastructure’, Int. J. Sustainable Materials and Structural Systems, Vol. 4, Nos. 2/3/4, pp.330–346, https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSMSS.2020.109081

  • ⁶ F. V. De Maio, R. Valsecchi, S. Osmani, C. Solari & P. Basso, Multi-risk analysis methodology for evaluating climate change impacts at different scales, Life-Cycle of Structures and Infrastructure Systems – Biondini & Frangopol (Eds) 2023, https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003323020 ISBN 978-1-003-32302-0, Open Access: www.taylorfrancis.com, CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license

  • ⁷ https://www.oecd.org/gov/infrastructure-governance/performance/

Climate resilience through social innovation: the relevance of stakeholder engagement

The events associated with climate change are increasing year by year. If we can watch newscasts on TV or read digital newspapers, we can realize the dramatic consequences of climate change. If we have a look at the primary sector, these events have important impacts on agriculture, fisheries or forestry in the form of floods, fires or droughts. For instance, about 90 per cent of those disasters are weather-water-related, and they affect society, environment and regional economies; they cause injuries, displacements or deaths, but also influence the regional economy and the natural environment, e.g., the recent floods in Valencia or India.

These scenarios associated with climate change raise new challenges for societies (IPCC, 2022), and they require new perspectives to deal with new circumstances, in many cases, never seen before. Thus, climate change adaptation policies should go hand in hand with sustainable development practices in the productive industries associated with land and water seeking to create climate-resilient territories. It demands a multiple-viewpoint approach through the involvement of stakeholders to achieve an integral focus on the problem, and to develop smart socio-economic models able to adapt to new circumstances while maintaining the natural environment (Beretic et al., 2024). The interdisciplinarity of novel solutions is a must to adapt societies to new climate circumstances (Wamsler et al., 2021).

However, this approach is easy to plan, but difficult to apply as it needs adopting a top-down and bottom-up collaborative approach (Dzebo et al., 2019), where both policymakers and users can share their views and problems and find common spaces for co-creation processes through case studies or small-scale pilots. It is an exercise of social innovation, that should create solutions to face new realities, through an evidence-based policy generation toward environmental adaptation (Müller et al., 2021). Here is where the Mission: Adaptation to Climate Change tries to make its contribution, supporting at least 150 European regions and communities to become climate resilient by 2030.

It is an ambitious challenge, but basic for people, profit and planet. In this context is where the Farclimate project intends to contribute; through an exercise of social innovation, following participatory approaches, applying Living Lab methodologies, to deploy nature-based solutions. This project is mainly based on developing climate-resilient regions in terms of agriculture, forestry and fisheries, which are basic from the environmental perspective, but also from the social and economic ones.

In this regard, attending to the huge challenges explained before is a preliminary step to adapting regions and production systems to new climatic realities. This should necessarily start through a value-based approach where the different stakeholders participating should feel comfortable and perceive their involvement as rewarding.

For this objective, it is recommended to follow the philosophical principles of social exchanges to deal with stakeholders, that is, to understand:

  • The ontology, or who is who in the region, either humans or organizations, e.g., from Society, Science, Innovation, Industry, and Market
  • The axiology, identifying and clarifying the interests (coincident or contrary) in the region, e.g., ecological, productive, leisure, cultural, societal, among others
  • The epistemology, or the understanding of the capabilities every stakeholder has or the expertise and knowledge they possess, e.g., environmental conditions, ecological characteristics, physical parameters, socio-economic perspectives…
  • The deixology, through the identification of risks and opportunities associated with the different worldviews the stakeholders have, e.g., fishermen and farmers, transformation industry, citizen, civil servants…
  • The praxeology, or the definition of actions to be taken in the medium and long-term from each participant, e.g., good and bad practices in the area or beyond

You can download the full article here.


Reference list:

  • Beretić, N., Bauer, A., Funaro, M., Spano, D., & Marras, S. (2024). A participatory framework to evaluate coherence between climate change adaptation and sustainable development policies. Environmental Policy and Governance, 34(3), 275–290. https://doi.org/10.1002/eet.2076
  • Dzebo, A., Janetschek, H., Brandi, C., & Iacobuta, G. (2019). Connections between the Paris agreement and the 2030 agenda the case for policy coherence. Working Paper. Stockholm Environment Institute https://cdn.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/connections-between-theparis-agreement-and-the-2030-agenda.pdf
  • IPCC (2022) Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [H.-O. Pörtner, D.C. Roberts, M. Tignor, E.S. Poloczanska, K. Mintenbeck, A. Alegría, M. Craig, S. Langsdorf, S. Löschke, V. Möller, A. Okem, B. Rama (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA, 3056 pp., https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009325844.
  • Müller, R., Ruess, A. K., Eisenberger, I., Buocz, T. D., Damjanovic, D., Hofer, A., & Sedef, A. (2021). Co-Creating European Futures innovation, democracy and Co-creation in Europe 2030. In Deliverable D8.2: Roadmap of the project SCALINGS. Scaling up Co-creation: Avenues and limit for integrating Society in Science and innovation. Technical University of Munich.
  • Wamsler, C., Osberg, G., Osika, W., Herndersson, H., & Mundaca, L. (2021). Linking internal and external transformation for sustainability and climate action: Towards a new research and policy agenda. Global Environmental Change, 71, 102373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2021.102373

Fifth Open Training Session on Energy and Adaptation Planning

Open Training Session 5 featured image

On December 10, 2024, REGILIENCE organized its fifth online Open Training Session, titled “Time to adapt: embedding resilience in local and regional plans.“  in collaboration with PLAN4CET project. This session was the first one of the second cycle of REGILIENCE Open Training Sessions (OTS) which will focus on providing more concrete know-how and inspiration on specific sectors to provide practical knowledge and tools for public authorities to develop integrated approaches to build climate-resilient societies.The aim of this specific session was to better understand the connections between local planning for the can energy transition and for climate adaptation. As energy is a key sector in both mitigation and adaptation, we used it as starting point to reflect on synergies and integration of both, adaptation and clean energy planning. The event was a platform to share insights, exchange best practices, and explore ways to strengthen adaptation efforts at regional and national levels. 

The event included several expert presentations, each tackling different aspects of climate adaptation and energy planning. These presentations highlighted not only technical insights but also practical approaches that can be tailored to various regional contexts.  

Key Insights from the Session: 

  • Understanding Climate Risks: 
    Ine Vandecasteele from the European Environment Agency provided an overview of resources available at European level addressing both, energy and climate adaptation challenges. In particular, she highlighted the adaptation priorities stated in the European Climate Risk Assessments (EUCRA). 
  • Spatial Planning as a Tool for Resilience: 
    Tomislav Novosel (REGEA) highlighted the role of spatial planning in implementing adaptation strategies. He discussed how integrating resilience into territorial planning can help address vulnerabilities and create more robust regional responses. 
  • Climate Proofing  of infrastructure and services: 
    Miljenko Sedlar (REGEA) delved into the concept of climate proofing, offering practical methods to ensure that infrastructure and services are prepared for future climate challenges. He stressed the importance of proactive planning to minimize long-term risks. 
  • Balancing Mitigation and Adaptation: 
    Eleonora Leonardi (EURAC, Impetus Project) explored the delicate balance between mitigation and adaptation, using historic buildings as a case study. Her insights demonstrated how addressing both aspects is essential for sustainable development. 
  • Monitoring and Evaluating Progress: 
    Christian Kind (Adelphi) introduced the concept of maladaptation and the REGILIENCE self-assessment check list. He also emphasized the need for robust systems to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of adaptation measures. He underlined the key aspects to consider and shared inspiring best practices and useful resources.  

The session underscored the value of fostering dialogue and collaboration among stakeholders. By sharing knowledge and experiences, participants gained a deeper understanding of how to navigate the complex landscape of climate adaptation. 

If you missed the session, recordings and presentation slides are available. You can also explore previous sessions and contribute your ideas for future topics by visiting the REGILIENCE page. This series remains a cornerstone of REGILIENCE’s mission to empower regional actors in building a more resilient future. 

And download the following presentations:

On this page, you can see the Open Training Sessions (OTS) available for all interested parties, that will take place between March 2023 and 2025. The sessions are organised in a series of ten online events divided into two cycles.

How communities are taking charge of climate adaptation in Catalonia

Spain is on the front lines of climate change. The country is experiencing an uptick in floods, heatwaves, wildfires and droughts, underlining the urgency of resilient, community-focused solutions. The deadly floods in Valencia in October 2024 offered a sobering glimpse into what climate impacts can mean for people’s lives and homes. In response to such climate challenges and as part of the RESIST Project, Catalonia is pioneering multi-hazard early warning systems and progressing with plans that aim to keep communities safe and prepared.

 

Adaptation measures need to consider both local and global drivers of resilience to compounded risks and the cascading effects of climate change. Relevant climate information is a prerequisite for anticipating climate change, reducing uncertainty and assessing risks to biodiversity, people and infrastructure at regional and local scales, as well as for planning adaptation measures, piloting territorial transitions and evaluating the effectiveness of these measures.
However, climate information alone does not provide a full understanding of how climate risks are experienced locally, and what solutions and strategies need to be developed to manage these risks.

A New Model for Early Warnings in Catalonia

In Catalonia, the RESIST Project has turned its focus on the municipalities of Terrassa and Blanes — both chosen for their vulnerability to extreme weather and their contrasting urban and semi-urban landscapes. Here, teams are implementing an impact-based early warning system designed to tailor alerts to specific threats such as flood risks or wildfire dangers. Recognising Catalonia’s unique vulnerability to climate events, these multi-hazard systems are part of a larger push to equip communities with the knowledge and time they need to act effectively.

Focusing on the People Most at Risk

What sets RESIST’s approach apart is its commitment to inclusive resilience. Building protective systems for all, especially those in society’s most vulnerable groups, lies at the heart of this initiative. This means creating risk communication strategies for older people, who may live alone, and for young migrant communities, who often reside in informal housing where extreme weather poses significant risks.
To ensure this, RESIST has introduced site-specific alert systems that recognise the particular needs of each area. Each warning is finely tuned to the location’s vulnerabilities, a system that aims to save time, reduce exposure and allow timely evacuations.

Laying the Foundations with Technology and Awareness

Progress in Catalonia’s early warning infrastructure is already visible. Terrassa and Blanes are equipped with the ARGOS system , which collects and shares real-time hazard data with city officials and emergency responders. Alongside this, RESIST has rolled out risk awareness surveys and community-focused initiatives to help residents understand and prepare for climate threats.
For those living in flood-prone areas, the measures go further. Civil Protection teams in Terrassa, for instance, have started building a comprehensive hazard impact database and are installing flood-detection sensors to better monitor risk in real time. These actions are part of a broader effort to prepare first responders, equipping them with the tools and training to act effectively during emergencies.

Creating a Blueprint for the Future

RESIST’s goals don’t end in Catalonia. The project envisions a future where adaptable early warning systems reach more communities throughout Europe. The lessons learned here—through rigorous testing, monitoring, and community collaboration—are intended to help shape adaptable models that other vulnerable municipalities can adopt, both in Catalonia and beyond.
As Catalonia adapts to an increasingly volatile climate, the region’s efforts to build resilience serve as a testament to what community-centred planning can accomplish. Here, the focus isn’t just on technology and alerts; it’s on people and their safety, forging a model for climate preparedness that other regions may one day follow.

You can download the opinion article here.

Is there a place for nature(-based solutions) in the hi-tech digital world?

Our era is characterized by the integration of digital technology into every aspect of our lives.

From communication and entertainment to engineering and healthcare, the influence of digital tools is omnipresent. We’re seeing advancements in Artificial Intelligence, the Internet of Things, and Quantum Computing that are reshaping industries. Digital transformation is no longer just a trend. It is becoming part of our day-to-day activities. And it’s pretty exciting, isn’t it?

On the other end of the technology spectrum, there are nature-based solutions (NbS). Although not so loud, NbS are generating traction and becoming more and more recognized in their own right.

First things first – what are nature-based solutions? While several definitions exist, I will provide how the EU Commission defines them:

Solutions that are inspired and supported by nature, which are cost-effective, simultaneously provide environmental, social and economic benefits and help build resilience. Such solutions bring more, and more diverse, nature and natural features and processes into cities, landscapes and seascapes, through locally adapted, resource-efficient and systemic interventions.

On the ground, this high-level definition translates into green roofs and pocket parks in urban zones, interventions such as agroforestry and constructed wetlands in rural zones, or riparian buffer restoration and mangrove restoration in natural zones… Those are just a couple of examples; the list is not exhaustive.

Seeing how NbS are able to transform neighborhoods or landscapes through multiple benefits they provide, it is difficult not to get excited about what nature can do! I count myself as one of the NbS enthusiasts too. But some of my friends do not exactly agree with me. They say that technology is the real catalyst for progress. There is no doubt that we live in a high-tech digital world. Do we really have to choose one direction, though? Is this really an either/or situation?

I am borrowing the central statement of this piece from Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, whom I had an opportunity to hear during the New European Bauhaus festival this April.

Mr. Schellnhuber presented the evolution of technological development, characterizing them on a continuous scale from no-tech, through mid-tech to high-tech (Figure 1).

However, following such development the future we are heading for is not the future we want. As Mr. Schellnhuber put it, “If we want to reach climate resilience, no-tech needs to meet high-tech. Ingenuity needs to meet Evolution. The newest knowledge must be linked with no-tech and this is nature!” (Figure 2).

I believe that for successful implementation of NbS projects, such “no-tech meets high-tech” principle is crucial and that the rollout of NbS without cutting-edge digital tools is a highway to maladaptation.

As an example, say that a city is considering implementing a small park in combination with bioswales. This could reduce the heat-island effect and also reduce the risk of flash floods. But where should this small park be placed to actually provide those benefits? Satellite imagery can provide extensive up-to-date data on surface temperatures, land use, and vegetation health to identify the hotspots, and the newest hydrologic modeling can be used to simulate stormwater flows in the case of extreme rain events, thus determining the most impactful location for NbS implementation.

No-tech / high-tech synergy is exactly what we are trying to achieve through project CARDIMED. CARDIMED aims to enhance Climate Resilience in the Mediterranean by mainstreaming Nature-based Solutions in systemic transformation. The project, a part of the EU mission on Adaptation to Climate Change, will demonstrate 34 different types of NbS through 90 interventions across 10 regions and 20 locations. Leveraging advanced digital technologies is one of the core pillars of the project. Aiming at NbS designers and operators, CARDIMED is developing a harmonized NbS interventions management digital platform for accurate assessments and informed and targeted interventions.

Using advanced digital technologies is one of the core pillars of the project. Aiming at NbS designers and operators, CARDIMED is developing a Harmonised NbS interventions management digital platform for accurate assessments and informed and targeted interventions.

Going even a step further, we are leveraging latest tools to enhance communication with stakeholders! To highlight a few: we are developing an augmented reality smartphone app for immersive community engagement. Using their phones, citizens will be able to visualize how Nature-based Solutions would look in their environment. Similarly, we will use Digital storytelling to bring to life the benefits and services of nature by creating compelling narratives that resonate with diverse audiences.

In conclusion, Nature-based Solutions can greatly benefit from the latest digital advancement. The two are not opposing forces but rather complementary partners in creating sustainable and innovative solutions for the future.

You can download the opinion article here.

From strategy to action: REGILIENCE’s Management Board Meeting and Capacity Building in Poreč, Croatia

From October 22 to 24, 2024, REGILIENCE convened its fifth Management Board Meeting in Poreč, Croatia, at one of the project’s focus regions with the generous hosting support from REGEA. This event was set together with Poreč one-day workshop which brought together project partners to not only review strategic milestones but also participate in a practical capacity-building workshop tailored for the local and regional authorities. This dual focus provided both a reflection on the project’s progress and an in-depth opportunity to strengthen regional climate resilience efforts.

REGILIENCE partners in Poreč, Croatia, for the Management board Meeting

 

What is left in a year for REGILIENCE project?

As the project approaches its final year (concluding in October 2025), the REGILIENCE partners have developed a strategy to continue supporting the 7 focus regions and beyond, making full use of existing resources and upcoming project activities. Many local and regional authorities (LRAs) still lack general knowledge on resilience and adaptation, possibly due to limited awareness of available EU platforms and resources. The REGILIENCE partners agreed that the project’s final year should focus on bringing selected and relevant resources of EU platforms and initiatives to LRAs, supporting them in creating or enhancing their climate resilience pathways. This will cover information on extreme climate events, curated tools specifically designed to support LRAs, and details on EU support available to regions and communities. Such information will be disseminated through REGILIENCE channels, materials, and capacitybuilding activities, including workshops like the one organised in Poreč.

 

Empowering Istria to become climate resilient

The main goal of the workshop “Climate change and adaptation in Istria: From planning to local action” was to empower Istrian Cities, Municipalities, and Istrian County institutions to develop their climate resilience pathway. It combined presentations of experts from REGILIENCE and the region with lively discussions on how Istria can prepare for present and projected climate hazards. The event introduced the concepts of resilience and climate adaptation, showcased relevant examples and tools, and covered the European legislative framework and how the region can access EU support.

The workshop provided an opportunity for Istrian cities and stakeholders to discuss challenges and opportunities for planning and implementing climate adaptation measures. It set the scene to the climate risks and impacts in the Istrian region, while bringing innovative and tested tools that can be utilised to their advantage. The REGILIENCE team facilitated discussions encouraging the participants to spot climate risks in their own cities and technical opportunities that can support them in planning for climate adaptation actions. In return, the discussions contribute to our understanding on the climate hazards affecting the local population as well as the support and information needed to develop climate resilience pathways. This has given us a unique insight, one which we could not obtain through desktop research alone.

The participatory approach allowed the participants to connect to each other, exchange knowledge, and explore possibilities for climate resilience, gaining a new perspective on challenges and solutions which might not have been obvious before. Additionally, the three sets of discussions sparked their interests in assessing the opportunities and needs for better and more integrated planning, better access to direct funding and the implementation of new financing mechanisms, as well as methods for the engagement of the local community in climate adaptation.

The major success of this workshop was the increased awareness of regional and local authorities and initiatives about the importance of developing adaptation strategies for Istria and the ways to achieve this. It has reinforced the importance of the strategy developed by REGILIENCE partners during the Management Board meeting and provided useful insights for the work planned for the final year.  

The Triple-A Toolkit for Climate Services

Cities have access to an increasing number of tools, services, and frameworks to help them strengthen their climate resilience efforts. However, with such a wide range of options, finding the right tool for specific needs can be challenging. The Triple-A Toolkit offers valuable assistance in this process.

Cities vary in size, geography, socio-economic context, and their experience and capacities in terms of climate action. Some cities are leading the way while others may not have dedicated staff for climate action planning and implementation, often ending up integrating climate efforts into existing departments. Given this diversity across cities, the EU Horizon REACHOUT project has developed a flexible and modular “Triple-A” approach which effectively links and organizes urban adaptation and resilience activities based on three simple but key steps: Analysis, Ambition, and Action (Triple-A¹). These steps are flexible (do not have a pre-defined order) and can be adapted to the local context and needs to address specific challenges and achieve particular goals. Whatever the combination of the steps results in a learning process, leading to various outcomes and insights and thus advancing in urban adaptation and resilience.

¹ This approach was first used in the Dutch Delta Program.

Additionally, the Triple-A Toolkit, developed as part of the REACHOUT project, offers a set of tools, climate services and consultancy services for urban adaptation and resilience planning. The tools and services are grouped using the Triple-A approach and complexity level to facilitate municipalities, urban planners and climate adaptation practitioners finding the most appropriate resource based on its own resources, skills and maturity level.

One of the Triple-A framework’s standout features is its emphasis on Ambition, encouraging cities to imagine different futures and make plans to achieve them. It shifts the focus from predominantly managing risks to creating climate-resilient communities. Cities can set ambition at different levels —strategic (like setting visions or goals), technical (such as deciding on safety levels or choosing which risks to prioritize), or evaluative (monitoring trade-offs and benefits).

Unlike fixed step-by-step guidelines, the Triple-A framework offers flexible views on the activities that cities need for urban adaptation, supported by climate services and tools.

These activities include understanding climate change impacts, setting goals, implementing actions, and learning from them.

It is also compatible with other frameworks (UAST, RAST) to support formal adaptation plans, although this is not its primary focus.

The Triple-A Framework Explained

The Triple-A framework for adaptation
  • Analysis phase/step involves assessing the current and future climate risks by a better understanding of hazards, exposure, vulnerabilities and different types of impacts. It also includes identifying at-risk areas (hotspots), understanding root causes, and co-creating this information with citizens and stakeholders in climate action and create a sense of urgency. Monitoring and evaluation are key to analyse and assess the feasibility and effectiveness of actions and learn and adjust the course as necessary to achieve the desired goals.
  • Ambition phase/step focuses on setting priorities and agendas, while taking into consideration the key vulnerabilities, and developing ambitious adaptation strategies through envisioning positive futures of the “future we want”. Ambition setting involves defining visions, goals, and targets, and establishing values and criteria for prioritizing measures. This step is essential for transformative change and practical adaptation and/or resilience pathways. It includes setting and adjusting concrete goals, such as increasing green spaces or reducing unpaved areas. Ambition setting is a vital step towards transformative change, and it is also a necessary step towards monitoring (without clear goals it is impossible to monitor adaptation).
  • Action entails undertaking the necessary measures to achieve the desired objectives and goals. This involves creating and implementing adaptation actions and measures to reduce climate risk and foster resilient societies, considering specific contexts and limitations. Action includes deciding on short, medium, and long-term actions, integrating with other policy domains, and facilitating or stimulating others to implement parts of the ambition.

Crosscutting to the Triple-A activities are enabling conditions and capacity strengthening. In the REACHOUT project this refers to the factors and circumstances that facilitate the successful implementation of adaptation strategies. The success of these activities depends on enabling conditions and capacity strengthening. This means ensuring that cities have the right tools, resources, and support in place to make these strategies work.

Triple-A in Action: Logroño, Spain

At the start of the REACHOUT project, the city of Logroño, Spain, was just beginning to plan and implement climate adaptation efforts. Using the Triple-A Toolkit, the city has made great progress. Here’s how:

During the first iteration, an initial group of stakeholders was selected, and a preliminary definition of challenges and risk was agreed upon. Extreme heatwaves and pluvial flooding were selected as key priorities to be further analysed.

Heatwaves were assessed using the Thermal Assessment Tool² (TAT) (by Tecnalia).

The tool provides a user-friendly visualization of past, present and future heatwaves. TAT also enables the development of land surface temperature maps (heatmaps) to characterize heat phenomena at city level and spatially highlight areas of elevated land surface temperature during heat episodes in summer. These maps allow Logroño to better understand how land and urban morphology affect surface temperature and to identify hotspot areas for implementing heat reduction measures. The outcomes of the TAT tool help the city to communicate about heat risks to the public, leading to increased awareness and potential support for implementing heat reduction measures.

The heat assessment was followed by mapping social vulnerability throughout Logroño with the SVI-Tool² (by Univ. College Cork). The Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) maps from the SVI-Tool allow to spatially identify the most vulnerable areas, enabling more tailored interventions to enhance just resilient strategies.

In the second iteration, additional stakeholders were involved both at the municipality level as well as outside (city-hub) to discuss flood-related challenges and the goals for adaptation.

Past and future pluvial flood maps were generated using the Pluvial Flood Tool² (by CMCC) to assess current and future flood risks in Logroño. The Pluvial Flood Tool provides a comprehensive assessment of pluvial flood risk for both the baseline situation and various nature-based adaptation strategies in Logroño, evaluating economic damages and population exposure. This tool helped Logroño to identify suitable locations for flood relief measures, such as raingardens, water ponds, and a green corridor.

In the third iteration, the outcomes of the aforementioned Triple-A Tools were combined to identify suitable measures for adaptation while considering Logroño’s broader development objectives through co-developing Climate Resilient Development Pathways (CRDP) (by Deltares). The novel CRDP approach supports Logroño in planning actions across multiple time frames, outlining various pathways into the future by explicitly addressing the interactions between climate change adaptation, climate change mitigation, and sustainable development over time and under conditions of uncertainty. By accounting for these distinct but intertwined priorities, Logroño can flag potential trade-offs between needs and take advantage of synergistic actions. This assessment provides insights into how different measures complement each other or which ones would be most effective to achieve the desired objectives of Logroño.

Along these iterations (or learning loops) Logroño’s adaptation capacity has strengthened. The municipality as well as other city stakeholders have been involved in several training sessions, co-design activities and in the co-development of the city climate story. The latter has been a transversal tool to spread the message and the sense of urgency about climate action in Logroño.

Additionally, the municipality of Logroño developed the “Strategic Plans for Heatwaves” as part of their new urban strategy, ‘Logroño Circular’. The strategic plans directly incorporated the heat and social vulnerability maps developed with the tools from the Triple-A Toolkit to spatially plan and implement proposed measures for coping with urban heat.

In summary

The Triple-A framework and Toolkit offer flexible and adaptable support for cities to navigate the complex world of urban adaptation. By focusing on Analysis, Ambition, and Action, the framework fosters continuous learning, empowering cities to effectively tackle climate challenges. Whether just starting or refining their strategies, cities can use the Triple-A Tools and customize them to local conditions, involve diverse stakeholders, and build ambitious, climate-resilient futures. Through ongoing learning cycles, cities not only become more resilient but also contribute to a deeper understanding of how urban areas can adapt to climate change, laying the foundation for sustainable and resilient development. The Triple-A Toolkit contains tools and services from the project partners primarily, but in the future will be opened to other tool providers as well.

You can download the opinion article here.

Towards local adaptation by unlocking the potential climate value of municipal data

The impacts of climate change vary considerably from one region to another according to different physical, environmental, social, cultural and economic characteristics, resulting in different sensitivities to climate change. Therefore, adaptation measures need to be implemented at the local level to be effective in reducing risks and vulnerabilities.

Adaptation measures need to consider both local and global drivers of resilience to compounded risks and potential cascading effects of climate change. Relevant climate information is a prerequisite for anticipating climate change, reducing uncertainty and assessing risks to biodiversity, people and infrastructure at regional and local scales, as well as for planning adaptation measures, piloting territorial transitions and evaluating the effectiveness of these measures.
However, climate information alone is not sufficient to provide a full understanding of how climate risks are experienced locally and what solutions and strategies need to be developed to manage these risks.

Local governments manage large amounts of non-climate data, such as socio-economic, demographic, land use and earth observation data. Combined with climate data, these datasets are crucial for a comprehensive characterisation of climate risks and vulnerabilities at the local level. In VALORADA, we propose that existing demographic, territorial, economic, social and earth observation data have ‘potential climate value’. For example, demographic and geospatial data collected by local governments and hospitals – covering aspects such as age distribution, health status, place of residence and income levels – can be instrumental in understanding populations in urban areas affected by extreme heat or flooding. This helps to create detailed, context-specific socio-climatic profiles to inform decision-making processes. Nevertheless, in order to unlock the potential climate value of these datasets and ensure that they provide decision-useful information to local and regional policy makers, it is essential to clarify how data climate value is understood, defined and translated into actionable inputs for public sector decision making. It also requires overcoming barriers such as:

1. lack of collaboration between different stakeholders across different sectors;
2. siloed data management practices;
3. insufficient awareness of how data can contextualise climate risks;
4. poor data governance practices;
5. limited administrative capacity.

At VALORADA, we are working to unlock the climate value of socio-economic, demographic, land use and earth observation data. Our approach integrates two main strategies. First, we systematically analyse local socio-climatic risks and identify both the data available, and the data needed to characterise these risks. To support local governments, we are co-developing prototype data processing and manipulation tools that facilitate integrated analyses of climatic and non-climatic data.

The challenge is to promote such analysis using data already available to local governments. To address this, we are exploring different data sources and repositories within our demonstration regions, each containing different data types, formats, and spatial and temporal resolutions.

Second, to fully realise the climate value of socio-economic, demographic, land use and earth observation datasets, value parameters need to be defined. As the value of data is not intrinsic to the dataset, but depends on how users interpret and apply it, measuring its value in supporting adaptation planning and policy can be challenging. To address this, we are developing a Valorisation and Valuation Framework to provide a conceptual structure for assessing the climate value of municipal data. This framework aims to highlight the value of data, improve valorisation efforts (transforming data into actionable knowledge), and increase the uptake of data that is essential for reducing climate risks.

Finally, at VALORADA, we have allocated a full year to thoroughly test the usefulness and usability of our tools and methods. We will conduct various activities with our demonstration regions to assess both the barriers and opportunities for adopting our methodologies, thereby evaluating the legacy of our project. By testing our approach across five demonstration sites in Europe, we aim to derive generalizable recommendations that local governments can apply to enhance data governance to better support climate adaptation efforts.

You can download the opinion article here.

Jornadas de difusión, sensibilización y aprendizaje

La Subdirección General de Vivienda y Arquitectura de la Consejería de Fomento e Infraestructuras de Murcia tiene el placer de organizar jornadas de difusión, sensibilización y aprendizaje sobre la adaptación al cambio climático con el soporte del proyecto europeo REGILIENCE.  

Estas jornadas de formación se desarrollaran en tres días y están dirigidas a los profesionales de los 45 municipios de la Región de Murcia. En ellas abordaremos las soluciones sobre revegetación, las distintas alternativas al drenaje tradicional y los tipos de  soluciones basadas en la naturaleza que se pueden aplicar en los espacios urbanos.

Los objetivos serán adquirir conocimiento sobre las alternativas a los modelos tradicionales para dar solución a la creación de espacios urbanos, revegetados, con SUDS Y SBNS y  poder establecer contacto y conocer que se está haciendo en cada municipio, intercambiando información y estableciendo intereses comunes.

Se expondrán buenas prácticas llevadas a cabo en nuestra región que refuercen los contenidos teóricos de los cursos a través de paneles explicativos y con las presentaciones en las acciones estructurales que permitirán reconocer estas nuevas maneras de actuar y así transmitir a los asistentes la importancia decisiva de empezar inmediatamente a aplicarlas.

Es fundamental abordar la creación de los espacios públicos urbanos desde un punto de vista global en la ciudad, para que los planes urbanos de las zonas urbanizadas y a urbanizar tengan estrategias que permitan gestionar in situ las escorrentías generadas, reduciendo el impacto del proceso de urbanización en el ciclo integral del agua. Para ello la colaboración entre instituciones y entidades municipales es clave.

Solo a través de una mayor concienciación y comprensión de los beneficios de los espacios verdes urbanos como posibilidad para tener comunidades mejores y más sanas podremos  elevar la sostenibilidad urbana y mejorar tanto el entorno humano como el ambiental, mejorando así la relación entre las personas y su entorno urbano.

Registrar aquí

PROGRAMA

Días:

30/10/2024, 6/11/2024 y 13/11/2024 de las 8:30 hasta las 14:30.

Lugar:

Consejería de Obras Públicas. Antesala salón de actos. Pl. de Santoña, 6, 30006 Murcia, Spain

AGENDA

Día: 30/10/2024. Introducción y revegetación de espacios urbanos

Revegetar consiste en establecer la vegetación artificialmente con las plantas adecuadas en un terreno adecuado, utilizando las técnicas más adecuadas en cada caso.

08:30 Acreditaciones

09:00 Bienvenida

Directora General de Vivienda y Arquitectura. (María DoloresGil García)

09:15 Objetivos de los «Proyectos de Regiliencia». Presentación y objetivos del taller

Servicio de Arquitectura

09:25 Dinámica: Presentaciones grupos de 4 (rotativos)

10:00 Sostenibilidad urbana, revegetación de espacios urbanos… (TBD)

      ( PONENTE REGILIENCE)

11:00 Pausa del desayuno. Espacio para intercambio de contactos y colaboración

11:30 Pasar a la acción y aplicación práctica, Casos de éxito. Ayuntamiento de Cieza.

– Mantenimiento y  pliegos

( MIGUEL ÁNGEL PIÑERA SALMERÓN, Cieza)

13:30 Catálogo de  árboles CARM. APP

    ( Servicio de arquitectura)

14:30 Próximos pasos y cierre. Fin del taller.

Gracias

 

Día: 06/11/2024. Soluciones basadas en la naturaleza en espacios urbanos. SBN

Las soluciones basadas en la naturaleza son actuaciones que utilizan la naturaleza y los procesos naturales para ofrecer infraestructura, servicios y soluciones inclusivos para enfrentar el creciente desafío de la resiliencia urbana.

 08:30 Acreditaciones

09:00 Bienvenida

09:10 Introducción a las soluciones constructivas de las SBN. Principales tipos de SBN.

           Aplicación y ejemplos. Eficiencia en los Jardines verticales y cubiertas verdes.

     (UPCT Fernando Miguel García Martín y Jesús Ochoa)

11:30 Pausa del desayuno. Espacio para intercambio de contactos y colaboración

12:00 Pasar a la acción y aplicación práctica, Casos de éxito. Ayuntamiento de Lorquí

 ( Luis Bernardeau Esteller)

13:30 Aplicación práctica de SBN. Participación en grupos, Conclusiones de lo aprendido.

     (UPCT Fernando Miguel García Martín)

14:30 Próximos pasos y cierre. Fin del taller.

Gracias

 Día: 13/11/2024. Sistemas de drenaje sostenibles. SUD

Los SUD son elementos constructivos para gestionar el agua de lluvia, prevenir su contaminación o reducir la generación de escorrentía. Entre ellos se encuentran: Suelos permeables, elementos de tratamiento de aguas de escorrentía y cubiertas vegetadas

08:30 Acreditaciones

09:00 Bienvenida

09:10 Introducción a las soluciones constructivas de SUD. Principales tipos de SUDS

           (Green Blue Management. Sara Perales)

11:30 Pausa del desayuno. Espacio para intercambio de contactos y colaboración

12:00 Pasar a la acción y aplicación práctica, casos de éxito. Ayuntamiento de Torrepacheco

    (CETENMA)

13:30 Aplicación práctica de SUD. Participación en grupos, Conclusiones de lo aprendido.

    (CETENMA)

14:30 Próximos pasos y cierre. Fin del taller.

Gracias

CON EL APOYO DE REGILIENCE

REGILIENCE es un proyecto europeo cuyo objetivo es compartir las soluciones de adaptación intersectoriales más prometedoras y ayudar a las ciudades y regiones de toda Europa a ser más resistentes al cambio climático.

El proyecto desarrolla, recopila, comparte y promueve herramientas y conocimientos científicos para ayudar a las regiones europeas a identificar y abordar sus riesgos relacionados con el clima. Trabajemos en estrecha colaboración con proyectos afines, como ARSINOE, IMPETUS y TransformAr, para mejorar la capacidad de 7 regiones prioritarias para hacer frente a los impactos inevitables del cambio climático.

Los objetivos y la visión del proyecto REGILIENCE coinciden con los de la misión “Adaptación al cambio climático” de Green Deal y Horizonte Europa. El proyecto llega en un momento en que las regiones vulnerables son las que más apoyo necesitan para mitigar los efectos del cambio climático y adaptarse al futuro.

Registrar aquí

Why is EU water policy essential, but insufficient, to achieve climate resilience?

Making Europe climate resilient is a bold and important ambition. Whether or when we become climate resilient is directly related to the success of the implementation of the EU water policy. Climate change adaptation is largely water management, i.e. coping with, and being prepared for too much, too little and too dirty water.

EU water policy in a nutshell 

EU water legislation is more than 30 years old. The first set of water directives aimed to improve water quality. Waste water was then barely treated, many rivers were like an open sewer and drinking water from the tap was not safe to consume. The Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive and the Nitrates Directive have been in place since 1991. The Drinking Water Directive was first adopted in 1980. A turning point came in 2000 with the Water Framework Directive (WFD). Until the WFD, the water legislation was dispersed and often focused on one aspect (e.g. wastewater, drinking water). 
Under the WFD, an integrated river basin scale approach is required, with the main aim of reaching the so-called ‘good status of water bodies’. More than 100,000 water bodies have been delineated in Europe. Rivers, lakes, estuaries, coastal waters and groundwater are broken down and assigned as water bodies. In analogy with the human body, a good status means a healthy water body. Healthy in EU policy terms means clean and safe water, natural environment, good aquatic life.

The WFD allows authorities to focus the efforts on the actions that improve water status the most at the least cost. If that is agriculture, target agriculture. If the same result can be achieved at a lower cost, by targeting industrial emissions, household waste-water or nature restoration, prioritise that. All actions to improve water body status are bundled in so-called River Basin Management Plans (RBMP’s). 

Another batch of EU water policy came into force around 2006-2008. The Groundwater Directive further detailed the requirements of the WFD on groundwater. The Floods Directive (FD) asks for flood risk management. The Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) aims for healthy seas and oceans, whereas the Environmental Quality Standards Directive (EQS) is concerned with controlling hazardous substances, termed ‘priority substances’. These new directives also brought a new planning and reporting requirement: Flood Risk Management Plans (FRMPs) and MSFD’s Programme of Measures. Groundwater measures are to be integrated into the RBMPs. For water scarcity and drought, there is no legislation on its own.

It has been implicitly assumed that water scarcity and drought are covered by the WFD and the Groundwater Directive, and thus be included in the RBMP’s. Several Member States have developed Drought Risk Management Plans (DRMP), either as standalone reports or integrated into the RBMPs. Any measure taken under the WFD, FD and MSFD is to consider the impact of climate change and thus implicitly ensure climate adaptation. Recent revisions on EU water legislation have targeted water quality supporting the European Green Deal’s ambition for zero pollution for air, water and soil. The idea of an EU Water Resilience Initiative, as the overarching initiative to manage climate adaptation, flood, water scarcity and drought, has been raised before the 2024 European elections. A lot more water legislation exists, and nuances can be made. Yet, the above is a crash course on EU water policy.

Is the EU Water policy a success? 

A simple answer is not straightforward. The set of legislation, also called the ‘acquis’, is wide-ranging. My answer is thus focused on the success of the Water Framework Directive (WFD) and the Floods Directive (FD), the water Directives that most directly relate to climate change adaptation. The WFD is furthermore generally seen as the One Directive, that governs all EU water policy. In addition, a Fitness check was done in 2020 for the WFD and FD, which provides the answer to this question in hundreds of pages, based on a broad stakeholder consultation and review process. The below answer is a combination of my own opinion and the findings from the Fitness Check.

Without a doubt, it can be stated that the WFD has been transformational, in particular in terms of the governance setup. The requirement to work on a common and integrated goal, i.e. good water status, resulted in better cooperation between Member States by jointly gathering the needed knowledge, harmonising aquatic monitoring and assessment frameworks, working at river basin scale, and across borders on River Basin Management Plans (RBMPs). Stakeholder consultation, a legal requirement in both Directives, has become a common practice in developing water related plans.

The ‘Fitness check’ showed that the WFD has led to a higher level of protection for water bodies than could have been expected without them. Yet, the WFD’s implementation has been significantly delayed and less than half of the EU’s water bodies are in good status, even though the deadline for achieving good status for all water bodies was 2015. The fact that the WFD’s objectives have not been reached fully is, according to the Fitness check, not due to a deficiency in the legislation, but largely related to insufficient funding, slow implementation and actions from other sectors that undermine the success of WFD.

Slow implementation is partly related to the lack of financial resources. The measures proposed by Member States, and included in the RBMPs, are often determined by what can be delivered with the budgets and policies already in place, rather than adding new measures, and new budgets. A reduced belief that the WFD goals are possible in the local context, and administrative complexities to get water projects implemented also contribute to a slow implementation. The need for land and required permits to implement measures e.g. water retention measures or ‘room for the river’ projects, are typically named as important reasons, sometimes even excuses, for not progressing much in achieving good status.

The EU Common Agriculture Policy (CAP) e.g. has not much been influenced by the needs for good water management. Little progress, and depending on the region, even degradation, is seen in water retention on agricultural land, despite the need for good water management in agriculture.
The existence of the European agri-environment schemes, under the CAP, has not substantially resulted in better land and water management. The new eco-schemes are expected to reward European farmers for taking climate action.

The WFD, currently in its 2nd implementation cycle, has resulted in an EU-wide development of flood risk assessments, public online flood risk maps and agreed Flood Risk Management Plans. It is yet too early to draw conclusions on whether flood risk has been reduced as a consequence of the implementation of the FD. The first implementation cycle only started in 2016, eight years after the Floods Directive came into force. Drought risk management has not received much attention at the EU over the last 10 years. After the 2012 Blueprint, a decade of dormancy followed. Initiative on drought risk management was left to the individual Member States. The 2023 stock-taking on drought policies, planning and management showed that two-third (19 out of 27) of the EU Member States did take action on their own, and regulated drought risk management by legislation. The 2023 European drought risk atlas also revamped the need to assess the impact of drought risk.

Is progress on EU water policy sufficient for climate change adaptation?

EU water policy is without question essential for achieving climate change adaptation. Yet, the aim to become climate resilient by 2030 is undermined by the slow progress on the WFD and FD. The difficult, but needed, governance setup on the WFD and FD also risks delays in becoming climate resilient. Measures for climate change adaptation are, similar to water management related measures, location-specific. This means that the implementation of water related climate adaptation measures needs local leadership and local cooperation of actors. Yet, the limited resources at the local level (human and financial resources), and the need to fit, and cooperate, with the national and EU level actors, make it sometimes an insolvable puzzle.

Efforts in climate change adaptation also seem to be focused largely on water quantity aspects, i.e. too much and too little water. The challenge of ‘too dirty’ water seems to be largely disconnected from the climate change adaptation challenge. Yet, the flow of untreated waste-water into water bodies, as a consequence of combined sewer overflows, is increasing.

Toxic sewer overflows kill aquatic life and degrade the river bed, while algal blooms endanger swim water quality, especially shortly after summer storms.

How can climate change adaptation be facilitated? 

Becoming climate resilient not only requires responding to the already occurring consequences of climate change, but also to pro-actively prepare the economy, ecosystem and society for the climate extremes that are ahead. Becoming climate resilient to a substantial extent depends on the effective implementation of the EU policy that is already in place. The consequences of climate change are so wide-ranging that anyone needs to contribute to make change happen. Challenges to effectively implement EU policies, in support of climate change adaptation, requires the cooperation between sectors, by aligning the goals and sharing a common vision. In case trade-offs cannot be avoided, mitigation actions have to be included in the design phase. Another recommendation is to streamline, and where possible simplify, the administrative procedures that are required to implement climate adaptation measures.

It is often an administrative nightmare, both for the applicant and the competent authority, to agree on the needed procedures and permits to implement nature-based solutions.

Land availability is mostly named as an important bottleneck to progress with flood and drought risk measures. Yet, solutions exist. If ‘room for the river projects’ can be implemented in densely populated countries such as Belgium and the Netherlands, it can be implemented anywhere. Getting the work done, nevertheless requires cooperation, and new, transformational ways of implementation. Good practices exist in Europe.

 

You can download the opinion article here.