23 June 2009 - A new report
from PEER, ‘Europe Adapts to Climate Change:
Comparing National Adaptation Strategies’,
critically analyzes the current status
of national adaptation strategies in EU
member states, and identifies a variety
of opportunities to strengthen their further
development and implementation, including
timely and targeted scientific research.
Earlier this year PEER,
a grouping of seven of the biggest European
environmental research institutes including
National Environmental Research Institute
(NERI), Aarhus University published the
report, ‘Climate Policy Integration, Coherence
and Governance’.
The new reports deals
with several aspects of implementing climate
policy in Europe. The first report analyses
the adaptation strategies of the EU member
states, identifying a number of common strengths
and weaknesses of the current strategies
in the countries studied. The second report
assesses the degree of climate policy integration
in six different European countries, at
national and local levels, as well as within
key policy sectors such as energy and transport.
It analyses measures and means to enhance
climate policy integration and improve policy
coherence.
Dr. Rob Swart, from
Alterra in the Netherlands, the lead author
of ‘Europe Adapts to Climate Change: Comparing
National Adaptation Strategies’ says:
“We note that communication and awareness
raising is going to be important to get
public support for adaptation measures,
and to help stakeholders to adapt. Since
adaptation is very different from mitigation,
communication should be designed specifically
for that purpose, including exchange of
experiences on adaptation practices. It
could well be that breaking down institutional
barriers will actually be more important
than the technical feasibility of adaptation
options.”
Both reports were launched
23. June in Brussels in the presence of
Peter Gammeltoft, Head of Unit 'Protection
of Water & Marine Environment' at the
European Commission. The preliminary conclusions
of the research were used in the European
Commission's White Paper on climate change,
published in April 2009.
Speakers at the Brussels
event included Prof. Pat Nuttall, PEER's
chair and director of the UK Centre for
Ecology & Hydrology, the lead authors
of the two reports, Rob Swart, from Alterra
in the Netherlands and Per Mickwitz, from
Finnish Environment Institute (SYKE ), Prof.
Ellen Margrethe Basse, head of the Climate
Secretariat, Aarhus University, Denmark
and Katherine Richardson, Vice Dean, University
of Copenhagen, Denmark.
Contact: Researcher,
PhD Svend Binnerup (NERI - Denmark), tlf.
+45 4630 1373, sbi@dmu.dk
Dr. Rob Swart (Alterra - The Netherlands),
tlf. +31 (0) 317 481 193, rob.swart@wur.nl
Europe Adapts to Climate
Change: Comparing National Adaptation Strategies.
PEER Report No 1. Helsinki: Partnership
for European Environmental Research. Swart,
R.J., Biesbroek, G. R., Binnerup, S., Carter,
T.R., Cowan, C., Henrichs, T., Loquen, S.,
Mela, H., Morecroft, M.D., Reese, M., &
Rey, D. 2009. 280 pp.
The reports
PEER partners
Alterra, Wageningen University and Research
Centre, The Netherlands
Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, UK
Cemagref - Centre for Agricultural and Environmental
Engineering Research, France
JRC - Joint Research Centre, Institute for
Environment and Sustainability, European
Commission
NERI, Aarhus University, Denmark
Finnish Environment Institute SYKE, Finland
Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research
– UFZ, Germany
+ More
Valuation of changes
in mortality risk: A welfare economic methodological
study
22 June 2009 - The report
discusses how a change in mortality risk
is best described as changes in age-conditional
survival probabilities rather than changes
in expected lifetimes or changes in the
number of deaths due to a given cause. Furthermore,
how changes in individuals’ lifetime utility
due to a change in mortality risk should
be calculated is discussed. Finally, attention
is given to how individuals’ willingness
to pay for a change in mortality risk should
be interpreted, as well as how these should
be aggregated to give an overall willingness
to pay.
When aiming to value
a change in mortality risk in connection
with welfare economic analysis the following
issues generally arise:
• How should a change
in mortality risk be described?
• If the valuation should
reflect changes in individuals’ lifetime
utility, how should this then be estimated?
• Should the valuation
estimates be based directly upon current
individuals’ willingness to pay for a change
in mortality risk or should the willingness
to pay estimates be interpreted in a lifetime
utility perspective, and if so, how? Or
should valuation exercise rather be based
on a more objective estimation of the change
in individuals’ expected consumption?
• How is individuals’
average willingness to pay estimated when
individuals’ willingness to pay are an expression
of different expected lifetimes and based
on different personal time preferences?
On the background of
a review of these issues, the author concludes
that there is no clear valuation method
for changes in mortality risk and thereby
identifies a range of further research needs.
Contact: Senior Researcher
Flemming Møller, tel. 4630 1221,
fm@dmu.dk
Møller, F. 2009:
Værdisætning af ændring
i dødsrisiko. Beskrivelse af ændring
i dødsrisiko, livstidsnyttefunktion,
fortolkningen af personers betalingsvillighed
og aggregeringen heraf. Danmarks Miljøundersøgelser,
Aarhus Universitet. 100 s. - Arbejdsrapport
fra DMU nr. 253. http://www.dmu.dk/Pub/AR253.pdf
(in Danish)
