Integrated risk analyses as part of national climate risk assessments: lessons learnt from the climate risk assessment of Germany

• Date: 24 January 2025
• Pages: 68-88
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCCSM-10-2023-0128
• Published date: 24 January 2025
• Subject Matter: Public policy & environmental management,Environmental issues,Climate change
• Author: Walter Kahlenborn,Maike Voss,Luise Porst,Marc Zebisch,Kathrin Renner,Inke Schauser

Integrated risk analyses as part of

national climate risk assessments:

lessons learnt from the climate risk

assessment of Germany

Walter Kahlenborn

Adelphi Research Gemeinnutzige GmbH, Berlin, Germany

Maike Voss

GIZ, Eschborn, Germany

Luise Porst

Leibniz Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research (ZALF),

Muncheberg, Germany

Marc Zebisch and Kathrin Renner

Center for Climate Change and Transformation, Eurac Research,

Bozen-Bolzano, Italy, and

Inke Schauser

KomPass, Umweltbundesamt, Dessau, Germany

Abstract

Purpose –Climate risk assessments (CRAs) become more and more necessary to prepare and prioritise

adaptationaction. On a policy level, the results of CRAs offer the foundation for national adaptation strategies.

However, existing CRAsoftentimes do not exploit their full potential by means of an integrated assessment,

i.e. to illustrate the complexity of cascading risks, provide cross-sectoral results, integrate adaptive capacity

and demonstrate spatial patterns. This paper seeks to f‌ill this gap by dissecting integrated assessment

approachesof national CRAs.

© Walter Kahlenborn, Maike Voss, Luise Porst, Marc Zebisch, Kathrin Renner and Inke Schauser.

Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published under the Creative Commons

Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative

works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to

the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at http://

creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode

Erratum: It has come to the attention of the publisher that the article, Kahlenborn, W., Voss, M., Porst, L.,

Zebisch, M., Renner, K. and Schauser, I. (2025), “Integrated risk analyses as part of national climate risk

assessments: lessons learnt from the climate risk assessment of Germany”,International Journal of Climate

Change Strategies and Management, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 68-88. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCCSM-10-2023-0128

incorrectly listed the aff‌iliation of Maike Voss as GIZ, Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso, this has now been

corrected to GIZ, Eschborn, Germany. The publisher sincerely apologises for this error and for any

inconvenience caused.

This article has been made possible through f‌inancing by the German Federal Environment Agency of

Germany.

IJCCSM

17,1

68

Received27 October 2023

Revised24 June 2024

Accepted10 S eptember 2024

InternationalJournal of Climate

ChangeStrategies and

Management

Vol.17 No. 1, 2025

pp. 68-88

EmeraldPublishing Limited

1756-8692

DOI 10.1108/IJCCSM-10-2023-0128

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/1756-8692.htm

Design/methodology/approach –The paper focuses on the integrated analyses of the results of CRAs.

Based on a review of selected national, multi-sectoral CRAs, the authors explore the application of such

analyses. Additionally, drawing on the latest climate impact and risk assessment for Germany, the authors

highlightlatest approaches and their implications.

Findings –The authors show that even though progress in establishing integrated assessmentmethods has

been made, no common framework exists so far and only few national CRAs include extensive integrated

analyses. Nevertheless, the German example demonstrates that integrated analyses can provide a

comprehensive overview over risk dynamics,(spatial) patterns and needs for action thus providing practical

advice for decision-makingon a national adaptation policy level.

Originality/value –While it is common knowledge that CRAs in general provide better results, if the

models appliedare integrated (i.e. combining climate, geo-physical,economic, etc. factors), little attention has

been given to the integratedanalyses of their results. This paper provides valuable newinsight on this aspect

which will becomefar more important in the future.

Keywords Adaptive capacity, Climate risk assessment, Integrated analysis, Cross-sector risks,

German CRA 2021

Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction

The European Environment Agency (EEA) reportedthat since 2018, 14 European countries

have released new climate risk assessments (CRAs). These countries include Austria,

Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Hungary, Ireland, Romania, Slovenia, Spain, Italy,

Switzerland, Germany and the Czech Republic (EEA, 2022). Despite the considerable

activity in this f‌ield, the existing CRAs have been criticized extensively in the literature

(Adger et al., 2018;Arribas et al.,2022;Bednar-Friedl et al., 2022;EEA, 2022;Ford et al.,

2018;Harrison et al., 2016). One major criticism is that CRAs often fail to adequately

consider non-climatic factors, such as socio-economic developments, and how they interact

with climatic factors. Additionally, they often overlook transboundary and international

climate risks, e.g. those associated with supply chains. Another limitation of CRAs is that

they do not considerthe dynamic interactions that occur across differentspatial scales (e.g. at

the national and local levels). Social equity in the context of climate-change impact and the

amplif‌ication of risks due to societal preferences are often neglected. Furthermore, the links

between CRAs and national risk assessments in the context of disaster risk management

(Sendai frameworkfor disaster risk reduction) have not been fullyaddressed.

To address these criticisms, CRAs use integrated models that combine climatic and

non-climatic factors, particularly socioeconomic factors, and to some extent, incorporate dynamic

interactions. Depending on their complexity, they evaluate the climate impacts on physical,

ecological, economic, social, cultural and institutional systems and consider the interactions

between these systems. However, even these improved and integrated climate risk models do not

necessarily meet the needs/goals of policymakers. From the perspective of policymakers, CRAs

should not only help identify the potential impacts of climate change on specif‌ic systems, sectors

or regions and provide a better understanding of the uncertainties and risks associated with climate

change, but also serve as a basis for developing adaptation strategies that can reduce the

vulnerability to these impacts (Weav er et al., 2017). Notably, CRA results should enable

policymakers to prioritize actions and allocate funding effectively. To obtain the information

necessary to address these questions, it is important to conduct intersectoral comparisons, identity

the regional hotspots, understand the cascading impacts and consider the adaptive capacity.

Even with a comprehensive and integrated CRA model that considers a wide range of

factors, the absence of an integrated analysis of model results limits the provision of necessary

information; several scholars have acknowledged this issue. Harrison et al. (2016) and Ford

International

Journal of Climate

Change Strategies

and Management

69