Skourtos adaptation in greece ccisc

301 views

Published on

Expert Workshop on Adaptation Financing and Implementation, Putting Priorities into Practice in OECD Countries, Paris, 18-19 June, 2014

Published in: Environment
0 Comments
2 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
301
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
2
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Skourtos adaptation in greece ccisc

  1. 1. Prioritising adaptation in Greece Research and first outcomes from the Climate Change Impacts Study Committee – Bank of Greece Michalis Skourtos Agricultural University of Athens and CCISC – Bank of Greece OECD Expert Workshop on Adaptation Financing and Implementation 18-19 June 2014 Paris, France
  2. 2. K. Drakatos, Chairman C. Zerefos, Coordinator Climate Unit C. Zerefos C. Repapis A. Asimakopoulos X. Gianakopoulos G. Tselioudis P. Xatzinikolaou και συνεργάτες Environment Unit E. Baltatzis A. Nastis A. Karamanos D. Papanikolaou S. Papoutsoglou M. Seferlis G. Stournaras Economy G. Donatos A. Papandreou H. Coccosis A. Xepapadeas E. Sartzetakis A. Kontogianni Μ. Σκούρτος και συνεργάτες Energy P. Kapros G. Gianopoulos Society J. Yfantopoulos P. Thomopoulos J. Sampethai Scientific Secretary D. Antonakaki V. Roussou Overall Coordination Representatives of the Bank of Greece
  3. 3. The profile of CCISC 2009: Founded by the Director of BoG as an independent think-tank 2011: Completion of the first Study on the environmental, economic and social impacts of climate change in Greece (http://www.bankofgreece.gr/Pages/en/klima/default.aspx) 2012: Initiation of research on: A National Strategy of Climate Change Adaptation 2013: First sectoral study on Adaptation in the Greek Tourist Sector
  4. 4. Basic assumptions of CCISC report Climatic parameters:  Temperature (ºC)  Precipitation (mm)  Relative Humidity (%)  Downward SW Surface Radiation (W/m2)  Wind Speed (m/sec)  Cloud Fractional Cover (%) Study for 3 different SRES Emission Scenarios: B2, A1B and A2 Time Periods: 1961-1990, 2021-2050, 2071-2100 1) Future Projections under SRES A1B are based on 12 RCMs (Regional Climate Models) simulations (EU ENSEMBLES Project) (RCMs spatial resolution: 25 km x 25 km) 2) Future Projections under SRES B2 and SRES A2 are based on 8 and 13 respectively RCMs simulations (EU PRUDENCE Project) (Data available only for periods 1961-1990 and 2071-2100) Greek territory divided in 13 climatic zones Discount rates 1% and 3% Cost estimated in €2008 and as % of GDP
  5. 5. Mean Air Temperature • 2021-2050, SRES A1B : Over Greece Mean annual air Temperature increase by 1.4 oC. • 2071-2100: Over Greece Mean annual air Temperature increase by 2.8 oC (SRES B2) up to 3.9 oC (SRES A2) • Temperature increase is more significant during summer and autumn than during winter and spring. • Temperature increase is more prominent over land. • SRES A1B: Mean Air Temperature Change between 2071-2100 and 1961-1990 Mean Air Temperature Change between 2071-2100 and 1961-1990 0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5 3 3,5 4 4,5 5 W est-Central M acedonia Eastern M acedonia/Thrace W est G reece Central-Eastern G reece Attica W est Peloponnese Eastern Peloponnese Ionian North Aegean East Aegean Cyclades Dodekannese Crete Greece TemperatureChange( o C) SRES B2 SRES A1B SRES A2 SRES A1B: Mean Air Temperature Change between 2021-2050 and 1961-1990
  6. 6. SRES A1B: Mean Annual Precipitation Percentage Change Between 2021-2050 and 1961-1990 SRES A1B: Mean Annual Precipitation Percentage Change Between 2071-2100 and 1961-1990 Precipitation • 2021-2050, SRES A1B: Over Greece Mean annual Precipitation is predicted to decrease by 6.5%. • 2071-2100: Over Greece Mean annual Precipitation is predicted to decrease by 5% (SRES B2) and by 18% (SRES A1B, SRES A2) -30 -25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 W est-Central M acedonia Eastern M acedonia/Thrace W est G reece Central-Eastern G reece Attica W est Peloponnese Eastern Peloponnese Ionian North Aegean East Aegean Cyclades Dodekannese Crete Greece PrecipitationPercentageChange(%) SRES B2 SRES A1B SRES A2 Mean Annual Precipitation Percentage Change Between 2071-2100 and 1961-1990
  7. 7. Conclusions I • 2021-2050, SRES A1B : Mean annual air Temperature increase by 1.4 oC. • 2071-2100: Mean annual air Temperature increase for 2.8 oC (SRES B2) up to 3.9 oC (SRES A2) • 2021-2050, SRES A1B: Mean annual Precipitation is predicted to decrease by 6.5%. • 2071-2100: Mean annual Precipitation is predicted to decrease by 5% under SRES B2 and by 18% under SRES A1B and SRES A2 • 2021-2050, SRES A1B: Mean annual Relative Humidity is predicted to decrease by 2%. • 2071-2100: Mean annual Relative Humidity is predicted to decrease for 2.5% up to 4% under SRES B2 and for 6% up to 10% under SRES A2
  8. 8. Overview of damage estimates Sector Scenarios Impacts Focus on Metho d applied Damage estimates Remarks (NPV bil) (%GDP) Water Α1Β, Α2, Β2 Loss of water reserves Drinking services (housing, industrial and tourist uses) Market prices 3,3 – 7,3 (i=0) 1,9 – 3,9 (i=1) 0,8 – 1,3 (i=3) 1,4% – 3,16% (i=0) 0,83% - 1,69% (i=1) 0,34% - 0,58% (i=3) Short discussion on adaptation with indicative cost estimates SLR SLR of 0,5 και 1 m. Long term loss of coastal land and short term damages from storm surges Five land uses: Urban, agricultural, tourist, forests and wetlands Market prices / Value transfer 0,3 – 0,6 (i=0) 0,1 – 0,3 (i=1) 0,02 – 0,04 (i=3) ......................... CBA of adaptation in 4 coastal areas. B/C ratio: 978 - 2 (i=1%) και 224 - 0,6 (i=3%) Fisheries /aquacultu re Rise of sea surface temperature by 3,3 ºC in 2100 Loss of fish stocks / loss of biodiversity Loss of fishermen income / social cost from the loss of biodiversity Market prices / value transfer 0,01 (i=0) 0,006 – 0,005 (i=1) 0,001 – 0,0008 (i=3) ..................
  9. 9. Overview (cont) Agricultu re Α1Β, Α2, Β2 Loss of yield per hectare for wheat, cotton, corn, olives and vineyards with or without desertification Loss of income Market prices AIB: benefits 3,28% (without desertificatio n) / damages 16,91% (with desertificatio n) A2: benefits 2,92% (without desertificatio n) / damages 17,81% (with desertificatio n) Β2: benefit 13,37% (without desertificatio n) / damages 10,05% (with desertificatio n) Discussion on adaptation with indicative cost estimates Forest ecosyste ms Α2, Β2 Reallocation of forests, fires, biomass, water retention Loss of income form timber / loss of non- timber services Market prices 4,2 – 9,4 (i=1%) 1,3 – 3 (i=3%) Discussion on adaptation with indicative cost estimates
  10. 10. Overview (cont) Biodiversity Α1Β, Α2, Β2 Ecosystem services TEV Value transfer 352 – 4,4 (i=1) 130,8 – 1,7 (i=3) …………………. Discussion on adaptation with indicative cost estimates Tourism Α2, Β2 Arrivals, overnights and expenditure Very low expected impacts / marginally negative for the total of Greek teritory Discussion on adaptation with indicative cost estimates Urban environment Α1Β, Α2, Β2 Higher indoor temperatures Quality of life Additional cost of cooling 20-21 (i=0) Discussion on adaptation with indicative cost estimates Transport Α1Β, Α2, Β2 Vulnerability of transport infrastructure Loss of transport services Replaceme nt cost of networks and cost of delays 0,11 – 0,6 annually Discussion on adaptation with indicative cost estimates Health Α1Β, Α2, Β2 Rising mortality rates Statistical value of life Value ttransfer 0,135 – 0,085 annually Discussion on adaptation with indicative cost estimates
  11. 11. Overview (cont) Mining and extractive industry Α1Β Destruction of infrastructure s, loss of water reserves, rising particulate matter Restoratio n of infrastruct ure Market prices / value transfer 1,5 % – 1,4 % Discussion on adaptation with indicative cost estimates
  12. 12. A macroeconomic estimate of adaptation cost  Comparison of costs of inaction, mitigation and adaptation  Focus on: water, forests, transport, tourism, urban environment and coastal zone  Assumed effectiveness of (hard) adaptation measures 30%-70%  Implementation of investments in 2020-2050 and 2050-2070  Cost of adaptation: 1,5% for 2025-2050 and 0,9% for 2051-2070 (in GDP 2008)
  13. 13. The benefits of coastal adaptation: A case study • Groins in Lampi beach, Kos island • Beach nourishment in Kardamaina beach, Kos island • Revetments and geotextiles in Afantou beach, Rhodes island. • Bulkheads in Tigaki beach, Kos Island -10,000 € 0 € 10,000 € 20,000 € 30,000 € 40,000 € 50,000 € ΑΣΘ 0,5 m ΑΣΘ 0,5 m ΑΣΘ 1 m ΑΣΘ 1 m ΑΣΘ 0,5 m ΑΣΘ 0,5 m ΑΣΘ 1 m ΑΣΘ 1 m ΑΣΘ 0,5 m ΑΣΘ 0,5 m ΑΣΘ 1 m ΑΣΘ 1 m ΑΣΘ 0,5 m ΑΣΘ 0,5 m ΑΣΘ 1 m ΑΣΘ 1 m ΜΠ1 ΜΠ2 ΜΠ3 ΜΠ4 χιλ.€ Κόστος κατασκευής Αποφευχθείσα ζημία Κοινωνικό όφελος Cost and benefit of coastal adaptation measures (discount rate 3%). Kontogianni A, C. Tourkolias, D. Damigos, M. Skourtos (2014). Assessing sea level rise costs and adaptation benefits under uncertainty in Greece. Environmental science & policy 3: 61–78
  14. 14. Lessons learned  The severe expected financial cost of inaction was confirmed  The potential for both mitigation and adaptation is high • But, in times of financial austerity…..  No stand-alone mitigation or adaptation policies are in demand.  Mainstreaming climate policies and showcasing ancillary benefits seems a powerful financial strategy  Capacity building in the state agencies / local municipalities is imperative in order to promote a ‘green civil servant’ mentality in administration
  15. 15. …policy uses How has then CCISC report been used to inform policy development? •Several prioritization approaches have been applied (i.e. CEA, CBA, ROV) •Experts disagree on the best approach; depending on specific policy issues and data availability •State administration not wiling to use CBA •CEA has gained some prominence after WFD and MSFD •Deliberation with and networking of stakeholders is crucial! CCISC’s research has also motivated interest for climate adaptation issues in the Union of Greek Industrialists and is currently backing-up campaigns by environmental NGOs
  16. 16. …and a look ahead How best could subsequent studies support the implementation of adaptation at the national level? By creating a solid knowledgebase for adaptation By showcasing pros and cons of alterative prioritisation approaches By organizing and fostering deliberation By designing robust socio-economic scenarios for the Greek economy By networking with international partners, especially in the Mediterranean basin NOTA BENE The rapid recovery of the Greek economy is a basic parameter in all implemented policies. This entails that prioritizing adaptation at the national level is currently possible only as a strategy of ancillary benefits from large scale growth/employment investments. Mainstreaming par excellence!
  17. 17. Thank you for your attention!

×