GeoPolicy: Response to the new European climate resilience framework

The art of Fire in soil system by Victoria Arcenegui. Distributed via Imaggeo

Climate change is having a profound impact on the planet. According to several reports, 2023 was the warmest year on record, with the global average temperature over the 12-month period from February 2023 to January 2024 exceeding the 1.5 °C threshold above pre-industrial levels. Climate change acts as a risk multiplier, as its impacts transcend national borders and amplify existing threats and crises. Climate-related hazards can trigger cascading and systemic disruptions across interconnected systems, affecting entire societies and disproportionately impacting vulnerable social groups.

In response to the increasing intensity and complexity of climate-related hazards, the European Commission is developing a new Integrated Framework for European Climate Resilience and Risk Management. The framework builds upon the 2021 EU Adaptation Strategy, and seeks to build a comprehensive approach to hazard assessment which will include how mitigation, adaptation, preparedness and response can be integrated across different sectors, regions, governments and communities. The policy package is expected to be adopted in the second half of 2026, before which it was open to feedback via public consultation on the the Commission’s “Have your say” platform.

The EGU Climate Hazard and Risk Task Force welcomes the new frameworks ambition to reckon with the complex and far-reaching affects of climate change, and have responded to the publication with key recommendations focused across five themes. A summary of their response is provided below.

1. Climate resilience by design

Integrating resilience by design is essential to address intensifying, long-term climate impacts across sectors, and with particular consideration given to cascading and compound risk. The Task Force recommended embedding climate resilience proactively across all major sectors with a key emphasis given to risks which cross sectoral boundaries, harmonised digital infrastructure, social equity, the “no maladaptation” principle for EU spending, and cautioned against weakening biodiversity safeguards. Priority sectors identified by the Task Force include:

• The built environment and critical infrastructure. Long asset lifetimes make proactive action essential in urban landscapes.
• Health and social care systems. Such systems are already under pressure from heatwaves, flooding, and air pollution,
• Agriculture and water.  Both resources are highly sensitive to drought and soil degradation,
• Energy systems. Energy infrastructure is vulnerable to extremes that threaten security of supply,
• Coastal zones. Our coasts face compound pressures from sea-level rise and storm surge.

Ultimately, effective climate resilience must be embedded systematically across EU policies and investment frameworks, particularly in sectors where today’s choices lock in long-term exposure.

2. Legislative framework for climate resilience

Progress on climate adaptation across the EU is slow and unable to keep pace with accelerating climate change due to a fragmentated responsibilities, inconsistent policies, governance and co-ordination across Member States, exacerbated by limited budgets and weak compliance. The Task Force supports establishing a common legislation that incorporates:

• Common baselines and risk standards. A mandatory EU-wide baseline of common climate scenarios and minimum risk standards, connected to the latest climate science.
• Multi-hazard and cascading risk assessments. Assessments must move on from considering singular risks to requiring multi-hazard and cascading risk assessments as a standard element of planning and investment decisions.
• Clear institutional risk ownership. Each identified systemic risk should have a clearly designated institutional risk owner, with ownership mapped out in National Adaptation plans.
• Vulnerability, equity, and open data. Priorities open-access socio-economic data for exposure and vulnerability, ensuring that risk frameworks explicitly address the needs of vulnerable populations and high-risk regions, and increase the representation of cultural heritage through interdisciplinary and community-grounded strategies.

3. Decision-support tools for climate resilience

Access to clear, reliable, and practical information is a prerequisite for effective adaptation, yet most existing tools are too technical, use different methods and reference points, and are poorly integrated across borders and sectors. The Task Force called for interoperable, decision-relevant climate risk tools that serve public authorities, financial actors, and citizens – moving beyond purely scientific platforms towards systems directly embedded in governance and adaptation planning, including:

1. Prioritise interoperability. Prioritising the interoperability, comparability, and practical usability of existing climate information systems would strengthen knowledge sharing, validation processes, and capacity development across scale and borders.
2. Embed tools within governance. Current platforms need to move beyond scientific modelling and directly supporting adaptation planning and decision-making at all levels, such as through a single, accessible platform with harmonised data on climate-change impacts.
3. Communicate statistics with stories. Quantitative risk metrics can be better communicated when accompanied by qualitative approaches that deepen contextual understanding and ground decisions in real-world impacts.
4. Accessible, usable and sharable. Any tool must be accessible to diverse audiences, meet the needs of decision-makers, and strengthens communication whilst including sector-specific modules, risk timelines, and vulnerability indicators.

4. Protecting people and supporting regional and local action

Climate change disproportionately affects vulnerable groups; for the framework to be considered legitimate, adopted and effective climate action must engage local and regional authorities as well as their target communities. Yet, adaptation policies lose impact if they do not the uneven administrative capacities and diverse geographics which affect adaption planning. The Task Force recommends:

1. Common standards for systemic support. Minimum protection standards for planning and critical services – such healthcare, early warning systems – should be established and harmonized between Member States. Such standards should be by a vulnerability framework which prioritizes vulnerable social groups and regions.
2. A people-centered, place-based approach. Adaptation planning can be strengthened by adopting a co-operative approach meaningfully engages and builds trust with local stakeholders through community-level and bottom-up resilience-building while integrating local and traditional knowledge into decision-making.
3. Integrated training and education programmes. Evidence-based training on climate-related risks integrated through education, healthcare and professional sectors would enhance public awareness and preparedness, whilst improve climate adaptation and transition through investment in reskilling and upskilling.
4. Flexible funding for diverse adaptation. Long-term, accessible funding must also be flexible and coupled with technical assistance and capacity-development to address the diverse technical and administrative needs.

5. Finance and insurance

Climate change is already exacting socio-economic costs whilst the magnitude of finances required for building resilience exceeds government capacity. However, only a only a faction of the climate-related losses are insured whilst a €70 billion gap exists between the current and needed yearly investment for adaptation. The Task Force recommends:

1. Systemically assessing financing needs. A systemic comparison of the adaptation financing needs between Member States would establish a foundation for identifying investment gaps, climate risks, support public planning and mobilizing fair funding for vulnerable States.
2. Strengthening financial incentives. Use targeted fiscal and regulatory incentives through tax measures and innovative instruments – such as resilience bonds and blended finance – to transform adaptation from a cost into an investable opportunity, and better align private investment with long-term resilience objectives.
3. Closing the insurance protection gap. Access to affordable insurance can be achieved by aligning insurance incentives with climate adaptation investment and de-risking insurance markets, by strengthening public–private reinsurance schemes, developing an EU-level risk pooling, and prioritising Member States most affected by the insurance gap.
4. Long-term, integrated reporting. Corporate reporting should include small and medium-sized enterprises and be supported by policies that incentivize reducing impact and exposure, delivered through a coherent framework of incentives and disincentives linked climate and environmental activities.