Search

Cities across Mediterranean Europe face common climatic threats. They are highly vulnerable and very likely to suffer losses and damages due to heat waves, droughts, wildfires, landslides, and extreme coastal events. To this date, however, there is no systematic understanding of how cities in Mediterranean Europe are preparing to adapt to these impacts. To address this question, we analyse local adaptation plans in 73 cities located in 51 regions across 9 European countries along the Mediterranean Sea (France, Italy, Spain, Greece, Portugal, Croatia, Slovenia, Cyprus and Malta). We also investigate upper levels of planning to understand the influence of policy environments. Across the sample, 67 % of regions have adopted a plan, but only 30 % of the cities. The most common climate-related hazards these cities prepare for are extreme temperatures and rainfall, followed by drought and water scarcity, as well as floods and landslides. Without legal obligations, neither regional nor national adaptation policy frameworks seem to influence the development of urban plans. In some cases, cities are ahead of national policy. This paper sheds light on the progress of local adaptation planning in Mediterranean Europe and paves the way for further research in this climate-threatened geographical area.

The Paris Agreement aims to limit global mean temperature rise this century to well below 2 °C above pre-industrial levels. This target has wide-ranging implications for Europe and its cities, which are the source of substantial greenhouse gas emissions. This paper reports the state of local planning for climate change by collecting and analysing information about local climate mitigation and adaptation plans across 885 urban areas of the EU-28. A typology and framework for analysis was developed that classifies local climate plans in terms of their alignment with spatial (local, national and international) and other climate related policies. Out of eight types of local climate plans identified in total we document three types of stand-alone local climate plans classified as type A1 (autonomously produced plans), A2 (plans produced to comply with national regulations) or A3 (plans developed for international climate networks). There is wide variation among countries in the prevalence of local climate plans, with generally more plans developed by central and northern European cities. Approximately 66% of EU cities have a type A1, A2, or A3 mitigation plan, 26% an adaptation plan, and 17% a joint adaptation and mitigation plan, while about 33% lack any form of stand-alone local climate plan (i.e. what we classify as A1, A2, A3 plans). Mitigation plans are more numerous than adaptation plans, but planning for mitigation does not always precede planning for adaptation. Our analysis reveals that city size, national legislation, and international networks can influence the development of local climate plans. We found that size does matter as about 80% of the cities with above 500,000 inhabitants have a comprehensive and stand-alone mitigation and/or an adaptation plan (A1). Cities in four countries with national climate legislation (A2), i.e. Denmark, France, Slovakia and the United Kingdom, are nearly twice as likely to produce local mitigation plans, and five times more

The EU remains widely dependent on external gas supplies, with imports representing 70% of its consumption in 2013. Member States have different import profiles with divergent levels of dependency on Russian imports. Several European Member States rely heavily on Russian supplies, which shows that the EU gas supply security needs to be examined both from an internal and international perspective. Since the 2009 crisis between Russia and Ukraine, the EU has adopted several legislative tools to strengthen EU gas security of supply. The third legislative package, the security of supply Regulation (EU) 994/2010 and the Energy Infrastructure package identifying Projects of Common Interest have significantly improved the ability of the EU to face import disruptions. However, several countries remain particularly vulnerable to the occurrence of disruption. When considering national production, storage, and the diversity of suppliers, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, Latvia, and Lithuania seem to be at risk. Romania, Poland, and Hungary also import the bulk of their gas from Russia, but have either domestic production or significant storage capacity., QC 20180130