Search

The study assesses the direct effects of climate change by 2060, including extreme events, on the productivity of regional crop farming and livestock in Greece, and the broader socio-economic effects on the agri-food and other sectors. Different approaches (i.e., agronomic models, statistical regression models, and equations linking thermal stress to livestock output) were combined to estimate the effects on productivity from changes in the average values of climatic parameters, and subsequently the direct economic effects from this long-term climate change. Recorded damages from extreme events together with climatic thresholds per event and crop were combined to estimate the direct economic effects of these extremes. The broader socio-economic effects were then estimated through input–output analysis. Under average levels of future extreme events, the total direct economic losses for Greek agriculture due to climate change will be significant, from EUR 437 million/year to EUR 1 billion/year. These losses approximately double when indirect effects on other sectors using agricultural products as inputs (e.g., food and beverage, hotels, and restaurants) are considered, and escalate further under a tenfold impact of extreme events. Losses in the GDP and employment are moderate at the national level, but significant in regions where the contribution of agriculture is high. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Appropriately designed and implemented climate mitigation actions have multiple co-benefits (yet some trade-offs cannot be excluded) that result in substantial social and economic value beyond their direct impact on reducing energy consumption and GHG emissions. Despite their wider acknowledgement by the research community, decision makers and the public have incomplete information on these multiple effects. This paper has a twofold objective: First, through analytical bottom-up approaches, it assesses, in quantitative terms, the macroeconomic effects and the public health benefits attributed to a variety of mitigation actions under consideration in the context of the Greek Energy and Climate Plan. Second, it investigates, through a social survey, how citizens perceive climate change and value these multiple impacts of mitigation actions, and to what extent they are willing to pay for them and support the adoption of policy measures aiming at the green transition of the Greek economy. We show that mitigation actions bring about significant health benefits, particularly in cities, and generate significant positive macroeconomic effects, particularly if mitigation actions focus on the decarbonization of the building sector and on the exploitation of local renewable sources. We also argue that most people do not realize that climate mitigation actions can have wider benefits for society, such as tackling energy poverty, improving public health, and creating new jobs. Unwillingness to pay tends to be the prominent attitude. People who are more reluctant to cover a part of the cost of environmental protection are less likely to perceive that climate change is one of the main challenges at global and national level and support the adoption of climate mitigation policies. In this context, the national strategy for climate change should focus on effectively informing and engaging the public in climate mitigation strategies, strengthening the public trust in government institutions, promoting mutually acceptable solutions with the local communities, and providing incentives for changing citizens' behavior towards climate-related actions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although climate change risks have been studied for a number of economic sectors, banking has received relatively little attention. The paper proposes a methodology and an associated decision-support tool for quantifying, in monetary terms, the risks for banks from the exposure of their loan recipients and/or applicants to climate change. The framework and tool are applied to a case study based on input from a Greek bank; results indicate that climate change risks for banks are considerable, and thus decision makers need to estimate their magnitude and possibly consider these within the credit management process, and in environmental planning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]