The vulnerability sourcebook and climate impact chains – a standardised framework for a climate vulnerability and risk assessment

How can the UK road system be adapted to the impacts posed by climate change? By creating a climate adaptation framework

Climate adaptation has been a top priority in the UN climate negotiations due to the increasing frequency of extreme weather occurrences. Assessments of Climate Vulnerability and Risk are crucial for designing adaptation strategies and identifying vulnerable locations and individuals. However, there aren't many development projects or efforts in India that focus on Climate Vulnerability and Risk Assessment (VRA), and investment plans don't include climate resilience. The scopes and methodologies of risk identification and vulnerability assessments that are currently in use in India are evaluated in this article. It then offers recommendations for growing adaptation activities at the federal level, along with methodology based on global best practices.

With climate change increasingly affecting people, assets and the environment, Climate Risk Assessments (CRA) are seeing strong attention for understanding the scope and scale of climate risks in order to plan and implement adaptation and climate risk management responses. In the context of the EU Horizon 2020 project CLIMAAX we developed an inclusive and harmonized CRA framework adapted for NUTS-1 and NUTS-2 level. This framework aligns with state-of-the-art methodologies and is further complemented by a user-friendly toolbox tailored for risk quantification across European regions. Our approach integrates insights from UCPM documents, European National Adaptation Plans and Strategies, peer-reviewed literature as well as existing CRA frameworks and international standards to respond to needs, recent advancements and best practices in the CRA field. The framework was collaboratively developed with five European pilot regions to ensure feasibility and applicability while pursuing adaptive flexibility. The practical need of the CRA framework led to a five-step assessment cycle (with special emphasis on key risk assessment as a novelty), underpinned by a conceptual context addressing principles, technical choices (e.g. future scenarios) and participatory processes. The framework allows for toolbox extension (the risk analysis) as well as indicates entry points for Climate Risk Management and Adaptation options thereby creating a feedback loop within the CRA cycle. To address compound and multi-hazards aspects of risk, the framework is designed to tackle complexity by referring to a variety of options such as workflows for climate risk quantification or qualitative options together with participatory processes and stakeholder inclusion. The developed CRA framework brings together practical needs and scientific, standardized knowledge. However, further insights are needed to efficiently connect climate risk estimations with climate risk management and adaptation strategies to support communities and regions in their efforts towards building climate resilience.

Cities are at the forefront of the battle against climate change. We are the source of approximately 80% of global greenhouse gas emissions. And as the climate changes, densely populated urban areas—particularly coastal cities—–will disproportionately feel the impacts. Those of us in local government recognize the importance of national and international leadership on climate change. But we are not waiting for others to act first. Under PlaNYC, New York City's comprehensive sustainability plan, most of our efforts have focused on reducing our greenhouse gas emissions. Initiatives including the Greener, Greater Buildings Plan, which will increase energy efficiency of existing buildings, and retrofitting ferries to use cleaner fuel, will help us meet our goal of reducing the city's emissions by 30% by 2030. These actions alone, however, will not stop climate change. We already face climate risks today, including heat waves, blackouts, flooding, and coastal storms. With climate change these risks will only increase. To ensure that New York City is resilient to existing and future climate risks, we must take further action. Through a generous contribution from the Rockefeller Foundation, I convened the New York City Panel on Climate Change (NPCC), which gathered the leading climate change scientists, academics, and insurance, risk management and legal experts. These experts helped develop a framework and tools to assist the City create a risk-based response to climate change that is grounded in state-of-the-art science information. In February 2009, the NPCC released the most detailed climate risk information for any major city in the world; this volume of the Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences presents the NPCC's full findings. The NPCC climate change projections put numbers to what we already know: climate change is real and could have serious consequences for New York if we do not take action. I appreciate the hard work of the members of the New York City Panel on Climate Change. Through PlaNYC, the City will build on their work as we craft strategies to improve the city's resilience to climate. Building climate resilience can take many forms, including increasing our understanding of climate risks and vulnerabilities, hardening facilities and assets to prevent impacts, educating vulnerable populations about risks, and ensuring that we can quickly resume operations after weather events occur. In the coming months, the New York City Climate Change Adaptation Task Force, another PlaNYC initiative, will release a plan detailing how Task Force members will prepare the city's critical infrastructure for warmer temperatures, changing precipitation patterns, and rising sea levels. Planning for climate change today is less expensive than rebuilding an entire network after a catastrophe. We simply can't wait to plan for the effects of climate change. The NPCC and Rockefeller Foundation's contributions to the City's climate resilience efforts will help ensure that we create a greener, greater New York for future generations. In 2008, Mayor Bloomberg established the New York City Panel on Climate Change (NPCC), with the mandate to provide New York City with the most up-to-date and comprehensive scientific, technical, and socioeconomic information about climate change and its impacts on the city and environs. Climate Change Adaptation in New York City: Building a Risk Management Response is the first report of the NPCC. The report will help New York City develop, adopt, and implement policies to adapt the city's critical infrastructure to the changing climate. This NPCC report outlines a powerful and novel framework for deploying sophisticated tools of risk management to address the city's climate adaptation challenges, and details with rigor and insight the critical challenges that climate change poses to New York City's energy, transportation, water, and communications systems. The report also presents a coordinated set of climate projections prepared by the NPCC to be used by the many public agencies and private-sector organizations that manage critical infrastructure in the region as they develop adaptation strategies, and it describes how legal and regulatory tools can support adaptation policies. The challenges facing the insurance industry and the use of insurance to reduce climate risks are also described at length. A final section sets forth the indicators and monitoring activities needed to inform Flexible Adaptation Pathways as the City and region move forward. The NPCC report is the product of the committed scientists and experts in the New York City region who served as authors, led by Co-chairs Cynthia Rosenzweig and William Solecki. The dedicated Science and Policy Team at the Columbia Earth Institute and the CUNY Institute for Sustainable Cities organized the process that has resulted in the production of this landmark report. It is becoming recognized throughout the world that cities have a crucial role to play in responding to climate change. The NPCC 2010 Report puts climate change adaptation in New York City in the broader national and international contexts and helps establish New York City as a thought and policy leader in this urgent endeavor. Climate Change Adaptation in New York City will be widely read around the world, both for its specific insights and also as a roadmap for other cities in preparing plans for climate change adaptation. The work of the NPCC is a pioneering activity for which all New Yorkers, and all others around the world who will benefit, should be most grateful. The Rockefeller Foundation also merits our gratitude for the generous support it has provided to this endeavor. Climate change will have a profound impact on New York City and its residents as it alters environmental baselines on which the urban infrastructure was built. Despite this, both the City and its stakeholders have a wide range of tools and resources with which to respond to the problem. Key insights in the following report derive from the highly integrated connections between science and public policy as they relate to climate change. The New York City Panel on Climate Change, for example, comprises a number of scientists and other technical experts capable of considering the issues at hand with a view to understanding the potential impacts of climate change and options for adaptation. The City University of New York is well placed to contribute to the multifaceted complex questions of climate change and how the city will be affected. This requires a multidisciplinary approach that can draw from the deep resources of the colleges that make up our institution. In addition, the New York City Panel on Climate Change had ongoing, continuous, and fruitful communication with the Mayor's Office of Long Term Planning and Sustainability, and the New York City Climate Change Adaptation Task Force. The collaborations brought forward in this document embody the culmination of a first step in a science–policy linkage that will be required to effectively address climate change in New York City. In addition, these collaborations show how great universities in a great city can link together to make a positive difference in the lives of its citizens.

The importance of the renewable energy sector in mitigating climate change has received plenty of attention over the years, but climate risks to the renewable energy sector, and the need for adaptation within energy companies, have been largely overlooked. Subsequently, not much is known about the current state of climate risk assessments and adaptation measures within the renewable energy sector. This study addresses this gap by categorising different types of climate risks faced by renewable energy companies and the measures that are used to prepare and adapt to them. We summarise the existing literature on climate risks and adaptation within the renewable energy sector and carry out an interview‐based qualitative case study regarding energy companies' perception and assessment of climate risks in Finland. The results show that while companies are aware of climate risks, particularly concerning the green transition, climate risks are not comprehensively assessed, and adaptation measures mainly account for direct physical risks with little regard for more systemic and complex risks, such as cross‐border impacts or cascading risks.

Disaster risk reduction in rural Africa can contribute to reducing poverty and food insecurity if included in local development plans (LDPs). Five years after the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR), we do not know how much risk reduction is practiced in rural Africa. The aim of this assessment is to ascertain the state of mainstreaming DRR in development planning in the rural jurisdictions of tropical Africa. One hundred and ninety-four plans of 21 countries are considered. Ten characteristics of the plans are examined: Climate trends, hydro-climatic hazards, vulnerability and risk assessments, alignment with Sendai Framework, vision, strategies and objectives, DRR actions, internal consistency, DRR relevance and funding sources, local and technical knowledge integration, public participation. It is found that local climatic characterization is almost always absent and risk reduction is an objective of the plans in one case out of three. Prevention actions prevail over those of preparedness. There is poor participation in the plan preparation process and this limits the implementation of the actions. A modification of the national guidelines on the preparation of LDPs, the orientation of official development assistance towards supporting climate services and the training of local planners, together with the increase of financial resources in local jurisdictions are essential for improving DRR at local scale.

Learning from Tribal Innovations: Lessons in Climate Change Adaptation

The growing concern about the changing climate and the need to document its observed impacts have resulted into advances in climate change adaptation practices globally. Despite being among the world’s most vulnerable regions, urban mining communities have diverse resources and contribute significantly to the quality of urban climate. The location of urban communities near mining activities has not only attracted urban development in most cities but has also provided these communities with a good opportunity for sustainable ways of living. However, most research on mines seem to have focused on impacts of mining on the environment with little focus on communities’ climate change adaptation responses. This review paper attempts to address this inadequacy in research by exploring factors that increase urban communities’ resilience and the adaptation strategies they use. The study used an evidence-review strategy involving the collection of information from peer-reviewed articles, books, and reports. A total of 213 documents, which included 122 articles, 60 reports, 31 books and gray literature, were identified with the help of Google Scholar and Web of Science search engines. First, the review paper observes that although the concepts of resilience and adaptive capacity are extensively explored, their meanings still remain unclear due to their multiple interpretations. Second, there seems to be very little consensus on factors that lead to increased resilience and the parameters that should be used to measure progress in becoming more resilient due to multiple interpretations of the resilience concept. Third, very few studies seem to have been conducted to assess progress in becoming more resilient in most urban mining communities. Fourth, there also seems to be a challenge in designing vulnerability and resilience assessment frameworks that are procedurally robust, context-specific and appropriate for decision-making related to adaptation action. This study recommends a need to conduct more comprehensive studies which clearly explore factors that increase resilience and adaptive capacity and those that suggest clear policy options for urban mining communities to supplement the rather limited body of literature in this area.

Cultural landscapes represent the intersection of natural and cultural heritage, encompassing the physical environment as well as the cultural practices, traditions, and values associated with a specific place. These landscapes often have important socioeconomic and community dimensions, serving as centers of livelihoods, tourism, and community identity. Moreover, these landscapes have intrinsic value and contribute to the overall diversity and richness of our global heritage. They hold stories, knowledge, and traditions that connect us to our past and shape our collective identity. Climatic and anthropogenic hazards pose significant risks to these landscapes, including the degradation or loss of cultural heritage sites, changes in traditional land-use practices, and the erosion of cultural identities and knowledge systems. To understand and evaluate these potential impacts, helping to safeguard and preserve the cultural significance and integrity of these landscapes, it is necessary to identify the specific risks and vulnerabilities that cultural landscapes face, allowing for the development of targeted adaptation strategies, enabling proactive measures to mitigate the impacts and ensure the resilience and continuity of these landscapes for future generations. One widely adopted tool for risk assessments are Impact Chains [1], i.e., cause-effect models that describe the relationship between a hazard (e.g., a storm surge, a heatwave), exposed elements (e.g., residents, birdlife, agricultural practices) and their vulnerability (e.g., dike maintenance practices), and resulting impacts (e.g., coastal erosion). Impact Chains are composed of all these elements and additionally, intermediate impacts, i.e., cascading effects related to hazard and vulnerability elements. Impact Chains are typically developed through participative processes that involve local stakeholders. These stakeholders provide valuable input and feedback for the development of the Impact Chain. The validated Impact Chain provides a structured representation of the cause-effect relationships associated with the investigated risk. Until now, Impact Chains have mainly been used as a basis for indicator-based Climate Risk and Vulnerability Assessments from the national to the local level, but not for modelling anthropogenic hazards like over-tourism or the abandonment of agricultural practices. In addition, only few Impact Chains for cultural sites have been developed. In this contribution, we present Impact Chains that have been developed for five cultural landscapes as part of the Horizon Europe project RescueME (GA No. 101094978) and cover both climatic as well as anthropogenic hazards. These Impact Chains have been developed within case studies of the island of Neuwerk in the Waddensea of Hamburg (Germany), the Huerta and Albufera de Valencia (Spain), the Defensive System of the City of Zadar (Croatia), the region of Portovenere, Cinque Terre and the Islands (Italy), and the UNESCO Geopark in Crete (Greece). This contribution will describe the co-creation process for Impact Chain development, the involved stakeholder types, as well as the adaptations made to the standard Impact Chain representations [1].  

The role of the chief scientist (CS), a key administrative position in various Israeli ministries, is to fund policy‐oriented research and support evidence‐based decision‐making. Has the CS's role promoted or constrained incorporation of scientific advice regarding climate change adaptation into governmental policy? Have administrative traditions affected the adaptation planning process in Israel? Analysis of documents and 26 in‐depth interviews with key stakeholders sheds light on the ongoing climate change adaptation policy formulation process. Our study reveals that the CS of the Ministry of Environmental Protection functions as a bridge at different interfaces and can be characterized as a boundary worker between institutions. The inherent independence of this position facilitates the CS's ability to initiate, foster, and prioritize complex issues such as adaptation. Our findings further suggest that the perception that Israel has already adapted, or will easily adapt, has negatively affected the adaptation process. 科学建议和行政传统：首席科学家在气候变化适应工作中的作用 首席科学家是以色列各部门的一个关键行政职务, 其具体作用是为政策性研究提供资金, 并支持循证决策。对于有关气候变化适应的科学建议, 首席科学家的作用是促进还是限制了其被纳入到政府政策中？行政传统是否影响了以色列的气候适应规划进程？通过文件分析及与关键利益相关者的26次深入访谈, 笔者揭示了正在进行的适应气候变化政策的制定过程。研究表明, 环保部门的首席科学家在不同的层面上起着桥梁作用, 在不同机构的分界线上工作以彼此连接。该职位的内在独立性能促进首席科学家在发起问题、培养和优先考虑包括适应气候等复杂问题的能力。研究进一步表明, 以色列已经适应了或即将轻易适应某些观点, 而这已经对气候适应过程产生了负面影响。 Asesoria cientifica y tradiciones administrativas: el papel que juegan los cientificos principales en la adaptacion al cambio climatico El papel que juegan los cientificos principales, un puesto administrativo clave en varios ministerios israelies, esta especificamente designado para el financiamiento de investigacion orientada hacia la politica y el apoyo a decisiones basadas en evidencia. ?El papel que juegan los cientificos principales ha promovido o limitado la incorporacion de asesoria cientifica en lo que concierne a la adaptacion al cambio climatico dentro de las politicas del gobierno? ?Las tradiciones administrativas han afectado el proceso de planeacion para la adaptacion en Israel? El analisis de los documentos en 26 entrevistas exhaustivas con partes afectadas clave ilustra el proceso de formulacion de las politicas de adaptacion al cambio climatico actual. Nuestro estudio revela que el Cientifico Principal del Ministerio de Proteccion Ambiental funciona como un puente para diferentes interfaces y puede ser caracterizado como un trabajador limitrofe entre las instituciones. La independencia inherente de esta posicion facilita la habilidad del cientifico principal para iniciar, fomentar y darle prioridad a complejos problemas como la adaptacion. Nuestros hallazgos sugieren que la percepcion de Israel ya se ha adaptado, o se adaptara facilmente, y ha afectado negativamente el proceso de adaptacion.

Planning the adaptation of agriculture and forestry landscapes to climate change remains challenging due to the need for integrating substantial amounts of information. This information ranges from climate scenarios, geographical site information, socio-economic data and several possible adaptation measures. Thus, there is an urgent need to have a framework that is capable of organizing adaptation strategies and measures in the agriculture and forestry sectors in Mediterranean climatic regions. Additionally, this framework should provide a cause effect relation with climate vulnerability to adequately support the development of adaptation planning at municipal and local (farm) level. In this context, we propose to test and evaluate a framework for climate adaptation of the agriculture and forestry sectors, based on the local causal-effect relation between adaptation strategies and measures and the level of vulnerability reduction achieved for Mediterranean areas. The framework was developed based on the combination of the DPSIR (Driving forces, Pressures, State, Impacts, Responses) and Vulnerability frameworks and reviewed 162 practical adaptation measures, further organized into strategies, complemented by a set of efficacy indicators. The framework was tested with 70 stakeholders in six stakeholder workshops for the planning of two farms and one municipal climate adaptation study, that are now in actual implementation and monitoring. The framework is composed by a set of eight adaptation strategies in which adaptation measures are clustered and assessed using efficacy indicators. In the evaluation of the adaptation framework, 96% of stakeholders considered its content as good or very good and 89% considered the final outcomes as good or very good. Finally, the framework was also used to assess and compare the adaptation strategies and measures presented in the climate adaptation plans of the three case studies. On average, 52.2% of the adaptation measures selected by the three case studies are dedicated to Ecosystem Resilience, 30.9% to Adaptive Capacity, 9.1% to Microclimates, 7.4% to Protection, and 0.3% to Mitigation strategies. This framework was considered effective in supporting adaptation planning at farm and municipal levels and useful to assess and compare adaptation plans in the frame of vulnerability reduction. Future studies can further contribute to support adaptation planning in these sectors by using, developing and streamlining this framework to additional and different socio-ecological contexts.

This is a compilation of policies and practices that contribute to bridging a knowledge gap with regards to climate change impacts and adaptation for coastal transport infrastructure. It presents examples of legal and policy approaches, as well as of reports, studies and guidance to support climate risk, vulnerability and impact assessment, and the development of effective adaptation response measures for coastal transport infrastructure, with a view to informing and inspiring policy makers, national authorities, transport managers, infrastructure owners, and other stakeholders in their efforts.

Although responsible for adapting society to climate change, most municipalities in Norway lack systems for monitoring and evaluating their climate change adaptation (CCA) efforts, which may hamper improvements to and effective CCA. The article assesses adaptation progress in municipalities in Western Norway by developing and applying a first-step co-produced framework for monitoring CCA in land-use planning. The framework was developed throughout two workshops between us (the researchers) and planners, showing how acute and slow climate risks are responded to following the logic of municipal land-use policy: assessment, regulation, and implementation. The framework was tested on a collection of municipal land-use plans, policy documents, and risk and vulnerability assessments related to climate risks. Semi-structured interviews with the participating planners supported the document analysis. The results were evaluated in meetings between us and municipal stakeholders. The authors found that while all municipalities assessed climate risks, there were large differences in the extent to which municipalities implement regulations and especially physical measures to mitigate these risks. They conclude that collaboratively examining how CCA could be monitored ensures that the co-produced framework is meaningful for the end user and can serve as a starting point for more comprehensive CCA monitoring and evaluation.

Issue/ problemClimate change is a threat multiplier that leads to severe weather events, increasing mortality and morbidity, especially among vulnerable groups. In the European Region, exposure to heatwaves has escalated by almost 60% when comparing the period of 2000-2009 with that of 2010-2019. Also, differences in sensitivity, exposure and adaptive capacity result in unequal climate-related health impacts, reflecting socio-demographic disparities and marginalization.Description of the problemHow can climate adaptation strategies for European countries be improved to better protect vulnerable groups from climate-related health risks? We conducted content analysis to review the integration of adaptation policies for vulnerable groups from grey literature and articles through a search in Google Scholar and some reference lists. The search was conducted in March 2025.ResultsWe reviewed 38 national adaptation plans and articles and identified main health indicators as mortality, morbidity, and mental health stress while elderly people, children, pregnant women and people with low socioeconomic status were identified as most vulnerable. Measures include heat-health action plans, early warning systems, improved surveillance for climate-sensitive diseases, and urban planning. Others are cross-border cooperation, nature-based solutions and more climate risk assessments. Findings indicate that weak risk communication obstructs public awareness and responsiveness to climate-related threats. Lack of financial, technical and trained professionals at the local level restricts the implementation of necessary adaptation measures. Housing challenges, citizenship rights, educational and language barriers exacerbate vulnerability.LessonsFuture policy should explore inclusive cross-sectoral strategies and stronger risk communication to better integrate health equity into climate resilience planning and policy.Key messages• Vulnerable groups and migrants are underrepresented in the climate adaptation policies in Europe, leading to health inequalities amid increasing climate threats.• Stronger cross-sector strategies and inclusive planning are key to protecting vulnerable groups from climate-related health risks.

Climate adaptation is being embraced by many municipalities worldwide. An element of this is the planting and protection of urban trees. However, the fact that climate change will also have an impact on urban trees has been largely overlooked. We argue that climate vulnerability assessments are necessary for addressing climate adaptation in urban forests and contribute to successful climate adaptation in cities. We review and integrate the literature on climate vulnerability and urban forests to explore how the general notion of urban forest vulnerability to climate change can be developed into an operational framework for undertaking a vulnerability assessment. The framework characterizes climate exposure, impact, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity, as well as nonclimatic drivers and factors, in urban forests. The most important themes in this discussion include urban tree species selection and diversity, naturalization, resource access, social awareness and engagement, budget and economic valuation, liability issues, and governance structures. Climate change vulnerability assessments help us understand how and why urban forests are vulnerable to climate change, identify future areas for research, and determine what adaptation measures could be included in urban forest management. These assessments help bring climate change to the forefront of the decision-making process and contribute to successful urban adaptation to climate change.