Search for a command to run...
This deliverable reports the Phase 2 for the CARE_X project in the City of Xanthi, Greece. Phase 2 moves beyond a baseline application of CLIMAAX workflows by producing a regionalized, decision-relevant multi-risk assessment, grounded in local conditions and supported by stakeholder-informed interpretation. Phase 2 focused on four priority hazards: windstorms, heatwaves, fluvial flooding, and wildfires. The main action in this phase was the targeted improvement of one or more of the risk components (hazard, exposure, vulnerability) through the inclusion of local and higher-resolution datasets and locally appropriate analytical choices. This approach was implemented at an advanced and expert level within the CLIMAAX toolbox logic and was complemented by explicit reporting of assumptions and residual uncertainties to preserve transparency and reproducibility. The risk evaluation step drew on hazard-specific outputs that are directly relevant to municipal decision-making. Windstorm evaluation followed an event-based approach for workflow adaptations by implementing exposure data, wind measurements and observations from the wind-induced damage in a local scale to perform a regionalized risk analysis; heatwave evaluation used projections of heat hazard and health-relevant indicators, including relative risk of cardiovascular mortality above a locally derived threshold and its evolution under SSP pathways; flood evaluation used downscaled inundation-depth mapping, associated damage estimation using updated economic exposure proxies, and displacement-relevant indicators; wildfire evaluation used scenario-based Fire Weather Index exceedance probabilities derived through response-surface modelling, together with population exposure metrics and tests of refined fuel representation based on satellite products. Key Risk Assessment findings indicate that heatwaves represent the most critical and urgent risk for Xanthi. Heatwave severity is assessed as substantial under current conditions and critical under future conditions, with urgency requiring immediate action due to projected intensification and preventable impacts on vulnerable groups and critical services. Fluvial flooding and wildfires are assessed as high-priority risks. Flooding is substantial at present and can become critical for extreme events in future periods; urgency is assessed as more action needed given the potential for major disruption, damages, and cascading impacts. Wildfires are substantial at present and critical in the future; urgency is assessed as more action needed and potentially immediate in priority zones with elevated exposure and vulnerability. Windstorms are rated moderate for both current and future aware scenarios under the Phase 2 workflow configuration and therefore represent a lower-priority risk than heatwaves, flooding, and wildfires. Nevertheless, documented local wind impacts justify continued monitoring and targeted preparedness, with priority given to improved hazard spatialization and post-event validation at municipal scale. Resilience capacity is assessed as medium across all hazards, reflecting the presence of institutional mechanisms for preparedness and response, but also recognizing structural constraints that limit sustained implementation of prevention and adaptation measures. Capacity building undertaken during Phase 2 strengthened human and organizational readiness by improving technical literacy and shared understanding of workflow outputs, thereby supporting more effective uptake into municipal planning. Phase 2 also advanced the stakeholder interface required for risk uptake. Risk evaluation was informed through institutional coordination, knowledge transfer activities, and sector-specific consultation, and a broader participation pathway is planned through the Xanthi Resilience Festival (8–10 May 2026) as a mechanism to support public awareness, dialogue, and feedback integration. The main limitations of Phase 2 arise from uneven data availability across hazards and workflow-dependent scenario constraints. In particular, the assessment did not implement a harmonized, fully coupled modelling of municipal-scale future socio-economic development across hazards; instead, a climate-signal approach was applied where consistent socio-economic inputs were unavailable. In addition, certain regionalization steps (for example, flood map downscaling) improve municipal interpretability but do not replace specialized engineering studies required for design-level interventions, and windstorm analysis remains constrained by limited monitoring density and field validation. Phase 2 provides a strengthened evidence base for municipal climate risk management. The assessment indicates that heatwaves require immediate and sustained attention, while fluvial flooding and wildfires require intensified action and prioritized prevention and preparedness, and windstorm risk warrants monitoring and targeted preparedness given local event evidence and current validation constraints. The planned final phase will translate these priorities into implementable adaptation and risk management measures, integrate outputs into municipal planning instruments (including updates of risk management plans and preparedness procedures), and address the most consequential evidence gaps through targeted improvements in data, monitoring, and stakeholder validation.