in

Opportunity windows accelerate action and expand options for climate adaptation in Europe


Abstract

Climate adaptation must be intensified globally to keep up with increasing climate change impacts. To date, adaptation is mostly driven by climate risks that need to be reduced and little by opportunities. We identify opportunity windows -i.e. favourable conditions for new or upgraded measures- by constructing an evidence-based dataset from qualitative and quantitative sources, and discuss how they can help to progress adaptation. Here we find evidence of past, present and future adaptation opportunity windows throughout Europe. Present and past triggers for opportunity windows include the implementation of European Union Directives and post-disaster recovery funds, and societal support after floods, droughts and wildfires. Future opportunities relate to aging dams and storm surge barriers. Opportunities also emerge from innovations (e.g. through pilots) which could inform new forms of adaptation. Decision-makers can operationalise and seize adaptation opportunities through adaptive pathways planning, but would need to anticipate opening and closing windows.

Similar content being viewed by others

Risk perception of climate change and global crises: Influences of socio-economic drivers and political orientations

Meta-analytical evidence of a self–other discrepancy in climate change-related risk perceptions

Adaptation constraints in scenarios of socio-economic development

Data availability

All data and calculations are presented either in Supplementary Material 1, or the two Online datasets. The two online datasets are publicly available in Figshare and can be accessed through the following link: https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.31249858 Part of this research incorporates data from the GRanD database (http://globaldamwatch.org/) which is © Global Water System Project (2011).

References

  1. Calvin, K. et al. IPCC, 2023: Climate Change 2023: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Core Writing Team, Lee, H. & Romero, J. eds) (IPCC, 2023).

  2. IPCC. Europe. in Climate Change 2022–Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability, 1817–1928 (Cambridge University Press, 2023).

  3. United Nations Environment Programme. Adaptation Gap Report 2024: Come Hell and High Water-As Fires and Floods Hit the Poor Hardest, It Is Time for the World to Step up Adaptation Actions (UNEP, 2024).

  4. Birchall, S. J., Bonnett, N. & Kehler, S. The influence of governance structure on local resilience: enabling and constraining factors for climate change adaptation in practice. Urban Clim. 47, 101348 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Malekpour, S. & Newig, J. Putting adaptive planning into practice: a meta-analysis of current applications. Cities 106, 102866 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Kwadijk, J. C. J. et al. Using adaptation tipping points to prepare for climate change and sea level rise: a case study in the Netherlands. WIREs Clim. Change 1, 729–740 (2010).

    Google Scholar 

  7. IPCC. Glossary. in Climate Change 2022–Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability, 2897–2930 (Cambridge University Press, 2023).

  8. Dow, K. et al. Limits to adaptation. Nat. Clim. Change 3, 305–307 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Haasnoot, M., Kwakkel, J. H., Walker, W. E. & ter Maat, J. Dynamic adaptive policy pathways: a method for crafting robust decisions for a deeply uncertain world. Glob. Environ. Change 23, 485–498 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Haasnoot, M., Di Fant, V., Kwakkel, J. & Lawrence, J. Lessons from a decade of adaptive pathways studies for climate adaptation. Glob. Environ. Change 88, 102907 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Haasnoot, M. et al. Generic adaptation pathways for coastal archetypes under uncertain sea-level rise. Environ. Res. Commun. 1, 071006 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  12. Brown, K., Naylor, L. A. & Quinn, T. Making space for proactive adaptation of rapidly changing coasts: a windows of opportunity approach. Sustainability 9, 1408 (2017).

  13. Brullo, T., Barnett, J., Waters, E. & Boulter, S. The enablers of adaptation: a systematic review. NPJ Clim. Action 3, 1–8 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  14. IPCC. Adaptation opportunities, constraints, and limits. in Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects, 899–943 (Cambridge University Press, 2014).

  15. Göransson, G., Van Well, L., Bendz, D., Hedfors, J. & Danielsson, P. Opportunities for planned retreat and flexible land use in Sweden: local, regional and national governance perspectives. Clim. Risk Manag. 41, 100530 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  16. Lehner, B. et al. High-resolution mapping of the world’s reservoirs and dams for sustainable river-flow management. Front. Ecol. Environ. 9, 494–502 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  17. Magnan, A. K. et al. Status of global coastal adaptation. Nat. Clim. Change 13, 1213–1221 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  18. Reckien, D. et al. How are cities planning to respond to climate change? Assessment of local climate plans from 885 cities in the EU-28. J. Clean. Prod. 191, 207–219 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  19. McEvoy, S., Haasnoot, M. & Biesbroek, R. How are European countries planning for sea level rise? Ocean Coast. Manag. 203, 105512 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  20. Soroka, S. N. & Wlezien, C. Degrees of Democracy: Politics, Public Opinion, and Policy (Cambridge University Press, 2010).

  21. Wlezien, C. The public as thermostat: dynamics of preferences for spending. Am. J. Pol. Sci. 39, 981–1000 (1995).

  22. Winkelmann, R. et al. Social tipping processes towards climate action: a conceptual framework. Ecol. Econ. 192, 107242 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  23. Solecki, W., Orlove, B. & Bolgert, A. The role of catalysts in the climate adaptation process. WIREs Clim. Change 16, e931 (2025).

  24. van der Most, H., Tánczos, I., de Bruijn, K. & Wagenaar, D. New, risk-based standards for flood protection in the Netherlands. In Proc. 6th International Conference on Flood Risk Management (2014).

  25. Rosenzweig, C. & Solecki, W. Hurricane Sandy and adaptation pathways in New York: lessons from a first-responder city. Glob. Environ. Change 28, 395–408 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  26. Patterson, J. J. More than planning: diversity and drivers of institutional adaptation under climate change in 96 major cities. Glob. Environ. Change 68, 102279 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  27. Pauw, W. P., Kempa, L., Moslener, U., Grüning, C. & Çevik, C. A focus on market imperfections can help governments to mobilize private investments in adaptation. Clim. Dev. 14, 91–97 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  28. Ding, H., Zhou, D. Q., Liu, G. Q. & Zhou, P. Cost reduction or electricity penetration: government R&D-induced PV development and future policy schemes. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 124, 109752 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  29. Fritz, L., Baum, C. M., Brutschin, E., Low, S. & Sovacool, B. K. Climate beliefs, climate technologies and transformation pathways: contextualizing public perceptions in 22 countries. Glob. Environ. Change 87, 102880 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  30. Zhang, Y., Shen, Z. & Lin, Y. The construction of water-sensitive urban design in the context of Japan. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 691, 012015 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  31. Nakamara, H., Shiozaki, Y. & Kato, T. Super levees along the Arakawa river in Tokyo: evaluation from the viewpoint of spatial planning in a low-lying area. In Proc. International Conference on Flood Resilience: Experiences in Asia and Europe (ICFR2013) (2013).

  32. McKean, C. A. Tokyo Building Enormous “Super-Levees” to Hold Back Its River. Next City. https://nextcity.org/urbanist-news/tokyo-is-building-enormous-super-levees-to-hold-back-its-river (2013).

  33. Wieland, M. & Mueller, R. Dam safety, emergency action plans and water alarm systems-Martin Wieland and Rudolf Mueller discuss the integral safety concept for large dams. Int. Water Power Dam Constr. 61, 34 (2009).

    Google Scholar 

  34. Perera, D., Smakhtin, V., Williams, S., North, T. & Curry, A. Ageing Water Storage Infrastructure: An Emerging Global Risk https://seprem.es/articulos_f/Debate_Riesgo/Ageing-Water-Storage-Infrastructure-AnEmerging-Global-Risk_web-version.pdf (2021).

  35. Giupponi, C. et al. Boon and burden: economic performance and future perspectives of the Venice flood protection system. Reg. Environ. Change 24, 44 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  36. Haasnoot, M. et al. Adaptation to uncertain sea-level rise; how uncertainty in Antarctic mass-loss impacts the coastal adaptation strategy of the Netherlands. Environ. Res. Lett. 15, 034007 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  37. Hall, J. W., Harvey, H. & Manning, L. J. Adaptation thresholds and pathways for tidal flood risk management in London. Clim. Risk Manag. 24, 42–58 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  38. Penning-Rowsell, E. C., Haigh, N., Lavery, S. & McFadden, L. A threatened world city: the benefits of protecting London from the sea. Nat. Hazards 66, 1383–1404 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  39. Lionello, P. et al. Pathways for adaptation of Venice and its lagoon to sea-level rise. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7420349/v1 (2025).

  40. van Ginkel, K. C. H. et al. Climate change induced socio-economic tipping points: review and stakeholder consultation for policy relevant research. Environ. Res. Lett. 15, 023001 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  41. Birkmann, J. et al. Strengthening resilience in reconstruction after extreme events–insights from flood affected communities in Germany. Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct. 96, 103965 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  42. Umek, G. Transnational Water Security. Presented at the European Water Summit, Brussels, Belgium, (2024). Available at: https://web.archive.org/web/20240613020540/https://www.vlaamsewaterweg.be/sites/default/files/download/ppt_water_summit.pdf (Internet Archive).

  43. OECD. Taming Wildfires in the Context of Climate Change: The Case of Greece https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/2024/06/taming-wildfires-in-the-context-of-climate-change-the-case-of-greece_754f2c60/cfb797a7-en.pdf (2024).

  44. Dottori, F., Mentaschi, L., Bianchi, A., Alfieri, L. & Feyen, L. Cost-effective adaptation strategies to rising river flood risk in Europe. Nat. Clim. Change 13, 196–202 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  45. Thorarinsdottir, T. L., Guttorp, P., Drews, M., Kaspersen, P. S. & de Bruin, K. Sea level adaptation decisions under uncertainty. Water Resour. Res. 53, 8147–8163 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  46. Lincke, D. & Hinkel, J. Coastal migration due to 21st century sea-level rise. Earths Future 9, e2020EF001965 (2021).

  47. Lincke, D. & Hinkel, J. Economically robust protection against 21st century sea-level rise. Glob. Environ. Change 51, 67–73 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  48. Völz, V. et al. The economically optimal mix and timing of coastal adaptation in Europe to 2150. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-6314787/v1 (2025).

  49. ClientEarth. Key Deadlines under the Water Framework Directive https://www.clientearth.org/media/br0pedp4/clientearth-legal-paper_key-deadlines-under-the-wfd.pdf (2023).

  50. European Commission. Water Framework Directive https://environment.ec.europa.eu/topics/water/water-framework-directive_en.

  51. European Environmental Agency. Ecological status of surface waters in Europe https://www.eea.europa.eu/en/analysis/indicators/ecological-status-of-surface-waters?activeAccordion= (2021).

  52. Keskitalo, E. C. H., Westerhoff, L. & Juhola, S. Agenda-setting on the environment: the development of climate change adaptation as an issue in European states. Environ. Policy Gov. 22, 381–394 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  53. Garside, S. & Zhai, H. If not now, when? Climate disaster and the green vote following the 2021 Germany floods. Res. Polit. 9, 20531680221141523 (2022).

  54. Biella, R. et al. The 2022 drought needs to be a turning point for European drought risk management. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 25, 4475–4501 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

  55. European Parliament. Comparative Tool https://results.elections.europa.eu/en/tools/comparative-tool/.

  56. Brière, C., Janssen, S. K. H., Oost, A. P., Taal, M. & Tonnon, P. K. Usability of the climate-resilient nature-based sand motor pilot, the Netherlands. J. Coast. Conserv. 22, 491–502 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  57. Stive, M. et al. The sand engine: a solution for vulnerable deltas in the 21st century? In Proc. 7th International Conference Coastal Dynamics (2013).

  58. Lorenzoni, I., Day, S. A., Mahony, M., Tolhurst, T. J. & Bark, R. H. Innovation in coastal governance: management and expectations of the UK’s first sandscaping scheme. Reg. Environ. Change 24, 101 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  59. North Norfolk District Council. Bacton to Walcott Coastal Management https://www.north-norfolk.gov.uk/sandscaping.

  60. Penning-Rowsell, E. Floating architecture in the landscape: climate change adaptation ideas, opportunities and challenges. Landsc. Res. 45, 395–411 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  61. Zevenbergen, C., Rijke, J., van Herk, S. & Bloemen, P. Room for the river: a stepping stone in adaptive delta management. Int. J. Water Governance 3, 121–140 (2015).

  62. Morote, Á, Rico, A. & Moltó, E. Critical review of desalination in Spain: a resource for the future? Geogr. Res. 55, 412–423 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  63. Navarro, T. Water reuse and desalination in Spain–challenges and opportunities. J. Water Reuse Desalin. 8, 153–168 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  64. Weisscher, S. A. H., Baar, A. W., van Belzen, J., Bouma, T. J. & Kleinhans, M. G. Transitional polders along estuaries: Driving land-level rise and reducing flood propagation. Nat. Based Solut. 2, 100022 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  65. Islam, M. et al. Inducing mussel beds, based on an aquaculture long-line system, as nature-based solutions: effects on seabed dynamics and benthic communities. Nat. Based Solut. 6, 100142 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  66. Rijksoverheid. Doel Nationaal Groeifonds https://www.nationaalgroeifonds.nl/doel-nationaal-groeifonds.

  67. NL2120. Elevating Nature-based Solutions https://www.nl2120.nl/.

  68. ReGeNL. Naar een rendabele regeneratieve landbouw https://regenl.nl/.

  69. Botzen, W. J. W., Aerts, J. C. J. H. & van den Bergh, J. C. J. M. Dependence of flood risk perceptions on socioeconomic and objective risk factors. Water Resour. Res. 45, W10440 (2009).

  70. Mutlu, A., Roy, D. & Filatova, T. Capitalized value of evolving flood risks discount and nature-based solution premiums on property prices. Ecol. Econ. 205, 107682 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  71. Niu, D., Eichholtz, P. & Kok, N. Overstromingsinformatie verandert koopgedrag van woningeigenaren. ESB 109, 272–275 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  72. Bin, O. & Landry, C. E. Changes in implicit flood risk premiums: empirical evidence from the housing market. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 65, 361–376 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  73. Atreya, A. & Ferreira, S. Seeing is believing? Evidence from property prices in inundated areas. Risk Anal. 35, 828–848 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  74. Atreya, A., Ferreira, S. & Kriesel, W. Forgetting the flood? An analysis of the flood risk discount over time. Land Econ. 89, 577–596 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  75. Eisenack, K. et al. Explaining and overcoming barriers to climate change adaptation. Nat. Clim. Change 4, 867–872 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  76. Werners, S. E., Wise, R. M., Butler, J. R. A., Totin, E. & Vincent, K. Adaptation pathways: a review of approaches and a learning framework. Environ. Sci. Policy 116, 266–275 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  77. Lawrence, J. et al. Dynamic adaptive pathways planning for adaptation: lessons learned from a decade of practice in Aotearoa New Zealand. J. Integr. Environ. Sci. 22, 2451424 (2025).

  78. Bloemen, P., Reeder, T., Zevenbergen, C., Rijke, J. & Kingsborough, A. Lessons learned from applying adaptation pathways in flood risk management and challenges for the further development of this approach https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-017-9773-9 (2018).

  79. Di Fant, V. et al. Opportunity windows accelerate action and expand options for climate adaptation in Europe_Online datasets. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.31249858.v2 (2026).

  80. IPCC. Water. in Climate Change 2022–Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability, 551–712 (Cambridge University Press, 2023).

  81. IPCC. Climate Resilient Development Pathways. in Climate Change 2022–Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability, 2655–2808 (Cambridge University Press, 2023).

  82. Gersonius, B. et al. Developing the evidence base for mainstreaming adaptation of stormwater systems to climate change. Water Res 46, 6824–6835 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  83. van de Ven, F. H. M., Gersonius, B., de Graaf, R., Luijendijk, E. & Zevenbergen, C. Creating water robust urban environments in the Netherlands: linking spatial planning, design and asset management using a three-step approach. J. Flood Risk Manag 4, 273–280 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  84. Koukoui, N., Gersonius, B., Schot, P. P. & van Herk, S. Adaptation tipping points and opportunities for urban flood risk management. J. Water Clim. Change 6, 695–710 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  85. Fairbrother, M. Public opinion about climate policies: a review and call for more studies of what people want. PLOS Clim. 1, e0000030 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  86. Bliuc, A.-M. et al. Public division about climate change rooted in conflicting socio-political identities. Nat. Clim. Change 5, 226–229 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  87. Bremer, J. & Linnenluecke, M. K. Determinants of the perceived importance of organisational adaptation to climate change in the Australian energy industry. Aust. J. Manag. 42, 502–521 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  88. Mendizabal, M. et al. Triggers of change to achieve sustainable, resilient, and adaptive cities. City Environ. Interact. 12, 100071 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  89. Kopp, R. E., Shwom, R. L., Wagner, G. & Yuan, J. Tipping elements and climate–economic shocks: pathways toward integrated assessment. Earths Future 4, 346–372 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  90. Kingdon, J. A. Agendas, Alternatives and Public Policies. (Little, Brown and Company, 1984).

  91. Béland, D. & Howlett, M. The role and impact of the multiple-streams approach in comparative policy analysis. J. Comp. Policy Anal. Res. Pract. 18, 221–227 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

V.D.F., M.H. and K.D.B. have been supported in this research by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme as part of the Pathways2Resilience project (101093942). A.P. has contributed to this research as part of her studies at the University of Bonn and the United Nations University-Institute for Environment and Human Security. The authors wish to acknowledge I. van den Broek for codesigning the figures. Part of this research incorporates data from the GRanD database (http://globaldamwatch.org/), which is © Global Water System Project (2011).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

V.D.F., M.H., H.M. and B.v.d.H conceptualised the study. V.D.F., A.K.P. carried out the data collection and analysis. V.D.F., H.M., A.K.P., K.d.B., B.v.d.H. and M.H. all contributed to the interpretation of results and both writing and editing of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to
Valeria Di Fant.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information

Communications Earth and Environment thanks Johanna Nalau and the other anonymous reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work. Primary handling editor: Yann Benetreau. A peer review file is available.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Transparent Peer Review File

Supplementary Information

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Di Fant, V., Middelkoop, H., de Bruin, K. et al. Opportunity windows accelerate action and expand options for climate adaptation in Europe.
Commun Earth Environ (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-026-03332-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-026-03332-2


Source: Resources - nature.com

Timing of rainfall influences juvenile and yearling mass of a long-lived herbivore in a semiarid environment

Analysis of the evolution and spatial effects of green space pattern in China’s urbanization process: a case study of Guangzhou City

Back to Top