The European Court of Auditors has recently published a report on the EU’s climate adaptation efforts, with a focus on the unique challenges faced by mountain regions. The report concludes that, despite major policy and budgetary commitments over the past decade, significant gaps and inconsistencies in implementation at the local level are hampering adaptation and, in some cases, even leading to maladaptation.

Progress at European level but gaps on the ground

The report reviews the EU’s climate adaptation framework, including the 2021 EU Strategy on Adaptation to Climate Change and the EU Climate Law, as well as implementation efforts across four Member States: Austria, Estonia, France, and Poland. The Court notes that since adopting the first European adaptation strategy in 2013, the EU has established a solid policy foundation and dedicated substantial funding for adaptation, with an estimated €8 billion allocated for 2014-2020 and €26 billion for 2021-2027.

However, the Court’s analysis of adaptation plans in these Member States revealed critical implementation gaps. In particular, some national plans do not fully account for long-term climate projections to 2100. For instance, Austria’s plan for instance uses data from 2014 to estimate its adaptation needs in its 2024 National Adaptation Plan, and in Poland, it remains unclear if future temperature increases by 2100 are considered. In other cases, according to the report, the measures implemented even lead to maladaptation.

The report also highlights a general lack of awareness about existing EU tools and limited coordination across governance levels, resulting in redundant or inconsistent efforts.

Adaptation measures in the mountains under scrutiny

The auditors closely examined adaptation efforts in vulnerable sectors, including water scarcity, flooding, coastal erosion, mountain ecosystems, and forest management. In mountain areas, the auditors noted that while national strategies generally align with the EU’s adaptation goals, implementation often falls short. Promising developments include a growing recognition of the need to diversify year-round tourism and positive national initiatives, such as France’s new Climate Law, which requires each mountain region to create its own tailored adaptation strategy.

However, when looking at the implementation, they found several gaps or conflicting objectives, especially when it comes to ski resorts 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, around 70 % of ski slopes are equipped with snowmaking systems according to the Court – a case that was further analysed in our 2024 report “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 thus the conflicting needs between adaptation and territorial development or competitiveness. When it comes to the ski industry for instance, EU funding for energy-efficient snow cannons has been channelled under the operational programmes promoting competitiveness.

Funding adaptation: where does the EU money go?

The report dedicates significant attention to how EU funding is allocated for climate adaptation, particularly through the Cohesion Policy. A large share of all EU climate adaptation funding comes from this policy, with additional contributions from the Common Agricultural Policy, the LIFE Programme for environment and climate action, Horizon 2020 and now Horizon Europe, with the latter two of which are funding our FIRE-RES and MountResilience projects.

The importance of Cohesion Policy in funding regional adaptation is a crucial point to draw from this report since the regional policy’s dual role presents both challenges and opportunities. On one hand, its goal of supporting regional economic development sometimes conflicts with climate adaptation needs, leading to projects that inadvertently encourage maladaptation. On the other hand, this policy could help foster place-based adaptation strategies suited to specific mountain challenges.

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.

Euromontana also supports this proposal – our position on the 2021 European adaptation strategy stressed the need to climate-proof in particular the CAP and Cohesion Policy to ensure better coordination of policies and funding. Euromontana is currently at work with its members on climate-proofing the Cohesion Policy, especially when it comes to water use and investments for tourism.

Still on financing, participants in the 13^th European Mountain Convention proposed the creation of a “Mountain Just Transition Fund” as a tool to facilitate the transition of territories where winter tourism represents an important share of the local GDP. Supporting the transition of the local economy and associated jobs while fostering adaptation, such a mechanism would help to overcome the conflicts between adaptation to climate change and economic development. The European Committee of the Regions is also supporting an extended transition fund. This proposal will be developed further in the Puigcerdà Declaration, which will be unveiled on 11^th December.

We therefore welcome this report by the Court of Auditors, which highlights the unique vulnerabilities of mountain regions to climate change and calls for stronger political and financial measures to support adaptation. However, as emphasised in the IPCC’s 6th report, agriculture and tourism are only part of the picture. Additional efforts are needed from other economic sectors and private stakeholders to ensure that mountain regions can adapt effectively to the changing climate.