Speakers
Description
The contribution examines how climate risk and vulnerability assessments (CRVA) can be systematically embedded into real estate development to advance both urban climate resilience and compliance with emerging European regulatory frameworks. Using Milan as a demonstrative context, the study highlights CRVA’s value in meeting the requirements of the EU Taxonomy (European Commission, 2020) and aligning with the recommendations of the European Green Deal, thereby enabling developers to pursue adaptation measures with clear environmental, social, and financial benefits.
A two-step methodological framework underpins this approach: City Profiling and Mapping Urban Climate Risk and Vulnerability. In the first step, City Profiling collates detailed climatological and morphoclimatic data—ranging from temperature trends and precipitation patterns to urban heat island (UHI) effects and impervious surfaces (Baker et al., 2012). By establishing a baseline of local climate conditions, real estate developers can identify how site-specific or neighborhood-level vulnerabilities may affect project design, construction costs, and long-term asset performance. This data-driven perspective not only helps prioritize adaptation strategies but also supports compliance with the EU Taxonomy’s technical screening criteria, designed to steer investments toward sustainable outcomes.
The second step, Mapping Urban Climate Risk and Vulnerability, refines broader climate projections through downscaling techniques (Adger, 2003; Adamson et al., 2018). This process yields high-resolution maps detailing localized hazards, such as intensified heatwaves or flood-prone zones, enabling developers to evaluate potential risks to specific building sites and surrounding communities (Pietrapertosa et al., 2019). Integrating these localized insights into early-stage planning is critical for meeting the European Commission’s growing emphasis on adaptation within investment portfolios, as well as for ensuring alignment with the European Green Deal’s ambitious targets to reduce carbon emissions and enhance climate resilience.
Focusing on Milan illustrates both the urgency and the potential of this framework. The city’s dense urban morphology, ongoing regeneration initiatives, and heightened exposure to climate stressors (e.g., heat stress and periodic flooding) make it a compelling laboratory for innovation. By applying CRVA at multiple scales, developers gain a robust evidence base to inform architectural design choices, infrastructure improvements, and long-term maintenance plans. This not only mitigates risks associated with climate-related damages but also supports sustainable finance objectives—an increasingly important consideration for investors seeking environmentally responsible projects under programs like Next Generation EU (2021) and Horizon Europe (2021).
Moreover, by complying with EU Taxonomy guidelines, real estate stakeholders can demonstrate a proactive commitment to environmental, social, and governance (ESG) principles, thereby enhancing market reputation and unlocking potential financial incentives. The synergy between robust climate data and strategic development decisions also supports citywide adaptation efforts, amplifying the impact of private investments on Milan’s overall climate resilience. Importantly, CRVA can serve as a unifying platform for collaboration among municipal authorities, developers, and local communities, fostering inclusive governance mechanisms as advocated by the European Green Deal’s participatory tenets (Few et al., 2007).
In conclusion, integrating climate risk and vulnerability assessments into real estate development offers a unique opportunity to achieve compliance with EU regulations, fulfill the new recommendations of the European Green Deal, and drive widespread adaptation actions. By uniting scientific rigor, stakeholder engagement, and strategic policy alignment, CRVA emerges as a powerful tool for future-proofing urban environments and guiding responsible investment decisions. Milan’s experience exemplifies the broader relevance of this approach, reinforcing how the real estate sector can serve as a pivotal catalyst for climate resilience, environmental stewardship, and long-term urban sustainability.
References
Adamson et al. (2018). Re-thinking the present: The role of a historical focus in climate change adaptation research. Global Environmental Change, 48, pp.195–205.
Adger, W.N. (2003). Social capital, collective action, and adaptation to climate change. Economic Geography, 79(4), pp.387–404.
Baker et al. (2012). Local government response to the impacts of climate change: An evaluation of local climate adaptation plans. Landscape and Urban Planning, 107(2), pp.127–136.
European Commission. (2020). Taxonomy Regulation. Official Journal of the European Union, L 198, 13. [Online] Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32020R0851&from=EN
Few et al. (2007). Public participation and climate change adaptation: Avoiding the illusion of inclusion. Climate Policy, 7(1), pp.46–59.
Horizon Europe. (2021). The EU Framework Programme for Research and Innovation. [Online] Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/info/horizon-europe-next-research-and-innovation-framework-programme_en
Leyerer et al. (2019). Decision support for sustainable and resilience-oriented urban parcel delivery. EURO Journal on Decision Processes, 7(3–4), pp.267–300.
Next Generation EU. (2021). Recovery and Resilience Facility. [Online] Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/info/publications/next-generation-eu-recovery-and-resilience-facility_en
Pietrapertosa et al. (2019). Urban climate change mitigation and adaptation planning: Are Italian cities ready? Cities, 91, pp.93–105.
| Keywords | Climate Risk Assessment; EU Taxonomy; Sustainable Real Estate; Adaptation Strategies |
|---|---|
| Best Congress Paper Award | No |
