European Court of Auditors highlights gaps in climate adaptation in the mountains
The European Court of Auditors recently released a critical report on the European Union’s (EU) climate adaptation efforts, including those in mountain areas. The report looked at the EU’s climate adaptation policy framework, including the 2021 EU strategy on adaptation to climate change and the EU Climate Law, as well as at implementation efforts in four Member States. It concludes that major policy and budgetary efforts have been made over the last ten years, but that gaps and inconsistencies in implementation on the ground are slowing down adaptation and even leading to maladaptation.
Progress at European level but gaps on the ground
In its report, the Court notes that since the adoption of the first European strategy for adaptation to climate change in 2013, the EU has put in place a solid policy framework and significant budgetary efforts. It’s estimated at least €8 billion in 2014-2020 and €26 billion in 2021-2027 were allocated to climate adaptation in the EU. Efforts were notably deployed under Horizon Europe, MountResilience’s funding programme. For 2021-2027, the Commission launched a specific Mission on adaptation to climate change with €874 million budget to accelerate adaptation by offering concrete solutions, sharing knowledge and enabling regions to become climate-resilient by 2030.
However, based on the in-depth analysis of climate adaptation plans and measures in four Member-States (Austria, Estonia, France, and Poland) the auditors highlighted critical gaps in implementation. The adaptation plans sometimes do not consider the climate scenarios for 2100; Austria’s plan for instance uses data from 2014 to estimate its adaptation needs in its 2024 National Adaptation Plan, while in the case of Poland it is not clear at all if the projected temperatures for 2100 are considered. In other cases, according to the report, the measures implemented even lead to maladaptation, for example, in terms of irrigation, or the use of artificial snow.
Furthermore, the Court notes a lack of knowledge of existing tools and a lack of coordination between levels of governance, which leads to an unnecessary multiplication of efforts. For example, of the municipalities that responded to the Court’s survey, 77% were not aware of the Climate-ADAPT platform. Similar national tools are sometimes also duplicating the resource pools – like the French and Polish national climate adaptation platforms (Centre de ressources pour l’adaptation au changement climatique and KLIMADA, respectively) which do not refer to their EU equivalent, Climate-ADAPT.
Adaptation measures in the mountains under scrutiny
In their analysis, the auditors examined measures in sectors and areas identified as highly vulnerable to climate change impacts, including flooding, water scarcity, coastal erosion, mountainous areas, and forest management.
When it comes to the mountains, they found that the national strategies in the selected Member States overall aligned with the EU strategy. However, when looking at the implementation, they found several gaps or conflicting objectives, especially when it comes to ski resort management.
Recalling that a global warming of four degrees above pre-industrial levels would lead to a very high risk of insufficient snow in almost all ski resorts, the Court questions the frequent use of technical measures such as artificial snowmaking by the tourism industry. In Austria, for example, around 70% of ski slopes are equipped with snowmaking systems – a case that was further analysed in the 2024 Euromontana study “Climate change in mountain areas: meeting the challenge of adapting water management and tourism”.
According to the Court, rather than being pathways towards climate adaptation, such solutions are leading to maladaptation. Yet, some EU projects received European funding for more energy-efficient snow cannons. According to the Auditors, one crucial issue for climate adaptation in the mountains, but also elsewhere, is the conflicting needs between adaptation and competitiveness. When it comes to the ski industry for instance, EU funding for energy-efficient snow cannons has been channelled under the operational programs promoting competitiveness.
Despite progress, competing interests thus continue to slow the implementation of adaptation measures on the ground. The report, however, highlights some promising developments, such as a growing recognition of the need to diversify tourism year-round. Positive steps are also emerging in national policies, like the new French Climate Law, which mandates that each mountain range develop its own tailored adaptation strategy.
Recommendations for enhanced adaptation
The EU auditors proposed several recommendations to strengthen European adaptation policies and funding for climate change:
- Improving the reporting on climate adaptation, the current reporting from Member States being too weak and vague.
- Making better use of the EU tools, such as the CLIMATE-ADAPT platform, by making them available in all EU languages and raising awareness of their existence.
- Providing better guidance on actions relevant to climate adaptation and provide member states with examples of projects leading to maladaptation.
- Future-proofing EU funding for climate adaptation, including in EU policies such as the Common Agriculture Policy but also in EU programmes for example assessing the need for eligibility conditions for future EU funded projects that take account of future climate conditions.
The MountResilience tackles the challenges pointed in the report
In the Austrian demonstrator in Tirol, project partners are applying a place-based approach to help mountain resorts adapt to the growing impacts of climate change. The initiative began with extensive interviews with regional experts and a survey of cable car companies, focusing on four mountain resorts, each with distinct climate challenges. These case studies provide a foundation for targeted strategies for transformative adaptation, including nature-based solutions such as reforestation and sustainable trail design, alongside innovative tourism offerings. The first phase emphasizes understanding local contexts and “tourism-making,” which refers to designing and managing tourism experiences, destinations, and activities. This approach seeks to avoid maladaptation while promoting sustainable and socially inclusive solutions.
In the next phases, stakeholders will co-create a mission and specific measures through workshops to develop solutions tailored to the unique needs of each region. These efforts will be supported by a monitoring system and cost-benefit analyses to ensure their long-term success. By embedding adaptation into social practices and fostering collaboration, the project aims to address immediate climate challenges and redefine how mountain resorts plan for a changing future.
