This paper estimates the direct and indirect socio-economic impacts of the 2000 flood that took place in the Po river basin (Italy) using a combination of Computable General Equilibrium (CGE) model and Spatial and Multi-Criteria Analysis. A risk map for the whole basin is generated as a function of hazard, exposure and vulnerability. The indirect economic losses are assessed using the CGE model, whereas the direct social and economic impacts are estimated with spatial analysis tools combined with Multi-Criteria Analysis. The social impact is expressed as a function of physical characteristics of the extreme event, social vulnerability and adaptive capacity. The results indicate that the highest risk areas are located in the mountainous and in the most populated portions of the basin, which are consistent with the high values of hazard and vulnerability. Considerably economic damages occurred to the critical infrastructure of all the sectors with the industry/commercial sector having the biggest impact. A negative variation in the country and industry Gross Domestic Product (GDP) was also reported. Our study is of great interest to those who are interested in estimating the economic impact of flood events. It can also assist decision makers in pinpointing factors that threaten the sustainability and stability of a risk-prone area and more specifically, to help them understand how to reduce social vulnerability to flood events.

The present research describes a climate change integrated impact assessment exercise, whose economic evaluation is based on a CGE approach and modeling effort. Input to the CGE model comes from a wide although still partial set of up-to-date bottom-up impact studies. Estimates indicate that a temperature increase of 1.92°C compared to pre-industrial levels in 2050 could lead to global GDP losses of approximately 0.5% compared to a hypothetical scenario where no climate change is assumed to occur. Northern Europe is expected to benefit from the evaluated temperature increase (+0.18%), while Southern and Eastern Europe are expected to suffer from the climate change scenario under analysis (-0.15% and -0.21% respectively). Most vulnerable countries are the less developed regions, such as South Asia, South-East Asia, North Africa and Sub-Saharan Africa. In these regions the most exposed sector is agriculture, and the impact on crop productivity is by far the most important source of damages. It is worth noting that the general equilibrium estimates tend to be lower, in absolute terms, than the bottom-up, partial equilibrium estimates. The difference is to be attributed to the effect of market-driven adaptation. This partly reduces the direct impacts of temperature increases, leading to lower damage estimates. Nonetheless these remain positive and substantive in some regions. Accordingly, market-driven adaptation cannot be the solution to the climate change problem.

The study analyses central contributions to the debate on the concept of a Green Economy in the run-up to the 2012 United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development. It does so by identifying the pillars on which the various understandings of a green economy are based as well as analysing policy concepts published and statements made. It concludes that currently there are three distinguishable discourses on the green economy and that the political challenge for the Rio+20 conference will lie in building bridges between these different understanding to build a consensus. A central role for the EESC is seen in supporting the EU’s role as a role model and helping to build the bridges and adapt the concept in other countries.

This report presents findings from an online survey and a number of expert interviews on the perspectives of European civil society on Sustainable Development and the Green Economy in the run-up to the 2012 UN Conference on Sustainable Development. The survey was sent out to civil society organisations in six selected European countries to gain a better understanding of their views on specific aspects of the Green Economy concept. In addition to this, the data analysis allows the authors to compare respondents’ answers across different groups of civil society as well as between countries. The survey questions range from the definitional aspects of what the Green Economy is and what its elements are to the conflict dimensions identified in the first part of the study as well as the risks and opportunities seen in the Green Economy. Finally, it includes the questions what role governments should take and what policy and financing instruments should be used more widely in the transition to the Green Economy.

Impact Assessment (IA) intends to collect evidence on the likely impacts of new policies and thereby minimize unwanted side-effects and maximize the benefits to society. Although it is a requirement in the EC and all OECD countries, the scope and methods vary considerably. Governments have invested considerably in research to support the evidence basis of policy making for sustainable development. However, the general picture shows a gap between the proliferation of IA tools from the scientific community and their actual use in the policy process. The FP7 network of excellence LIAISE (www.liaise- noe.eu) is designed to identify the causes for non-use of IA tools and bridge the gaps between researchers with a generally strong orientation towards their (disciplinary) peers and practitioners who tend to focus on their policy domain and policy problems. LIAISE aims at: 1) understanding of the policy process and the resulting needs for IA knowledge and IA tools; 2) description of IA tools and scientific IA expertise in a standardised way; 3) a shared IA toolbox targeted at the needs of both researchers and practitioners; 4) a shared IA research agenda integrating scientific knowledge gaps and the priorities for the development of new IA knowledge that arise from the future policy agenda; and 5) safeguarding the project results beyond the period of project funding, by developing an institutional setting and a business plan that facilitate the extension of the present consortium towards a broad centre of IA expertise with a structural permanence. A lively interaction between the different communities involved, is essential to realize these objectives. The Berlin Conference is an important opportunity to inform external research groups about the LIAISE approach to bridging the gap between science and policy. Their feedback and views on possible next steps in the further integration of the IA research community are highly valued, as well as their interest to become involved in this process.