Prepared for what lies ahead in tourism
Stay up-to-date with current, independent statistics and information on tourism in the Alpine region.
External shocks such as floods or pandemics may lead to short-term adjustments, but contrary to theoretical expectations, they do not bring about a profound systemic change towards climate-resilient development paths.
In practice, the promotion of climate resilience fails primarily due to different sector perspectives, a lack of horizontal coordination and insufficient linking of adaptation and climate protection measures.
Climate-relevant reactions by affected individuals usually result from their own initiative and personal needs and are rarely triggered by existing political control or funding instruments.
A successful transformation requires more binding, cross-sector strategies, greater regional differentiation and better coordination between the various decision-making levels.
Summary of this study
Current and future climate change impacts require climate resilient development that integrates adaptation and mitigation approaches. Climatic and non-climatic shocks, which are rare and external events, could promote transformative change and effectively improve climate resilience. Following the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) concept of Climate Resilient Development Pathways (CRDPs), the study uses document analysis and semi-structured interviews with 41 stakeholders and 46 affected individuals to examine three case studies in Austria: the relocation of residential buildings after a flood, agricultural water management during a multi-year drought and tourism investments during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The case studies track policy strategies and individual responses across three phases: Policy development before the shock, policy application during the shock, and policy impacts after the shock. The study found that while existing policies can address or mitigate problems in the short term, they do not promote entry into climate-resilient development pathways. Although several strategies were adapted to support those affected, they were not fundamentally transformed by the shocks.
Policies often fail to promote climate resilience due to disconnected decision-making levels, different sectoral perspectives and a lack of horizontal policy coordination. When individuals implement measures that are effective for both adaptation and mitigation, they do so on their own initiative and not because of specific policy instruments. Shocks therefore do not prove to be clear milestones on the way to climate-resilient development pathways. Future climate-resilient strategies should therefore include binding regulations, regional differentiation and flexibility for individual needs.
Key findings of this study
- External shocks such as floods or droughts do not act as automatic catalysts for far-reaching systemic change. Although they trigger short-term adaptation reactions, they do not lead to long-term climate-resilient development paths without accompanying structural changes.
- The division of policy areas and a lack of coordination between the decision-making levels are massive obstacles to progress. Administrative bodies often act in isolation in their respective sectors, which means that the necessary synergies between climate change mitigation and adaptation remain largely unused.
- Climate-relevant actions by affected individuals usually stem from their own motivation and not from targeted political incentives. Many measures are implemented independently of specific instruments, while existing subsidies often only serve as windfall profits for projects that are planned anyway.
- A successful transformation requires more binding framework conditions and greater consideration of regional and individual needs. Future strategies must be coordinated across sectors and offer more flexible, tailor-made solutions in order to sustainably strengthen resilience to future crises.