Increasing flood, droughts, heatwaves and earthquakes are forcing a rethink of how we design and build urban environments.
That’s why the EU-funded MULTICLIMACT project is investigating how novel construction methods–from innovative materials to nature-based solutions–can help us mitigate and adapt to climate change. From historic Riga to the flood-prone Netherlands, they’re putting together practical tools to help diverse urban environments prepare for and adapt to climate risks. All while protecting cultural heritage and vulnerable communities.
To find out more about the future of climate-smart infrastructure and sustainable urban living, we caught up with MULTICLIMACT’s Celina Solari, Infrastructure Research & Innovation, Eng. Project Manager, RINA Consulting.
How is climate change forcing cities and builders to rethink construction methods, materials and urban planning?
Climate change is driving a paradigm shift from classical steady-state and risk-based approaches to a dynamic, resilience-based approach. This integrates the entire life cycle of assets (planning, design, construction, operation, maintenance) and their evolution over time and space.
Key factors are the increasing frequency and intensity of multi-hazard events (floods, heat waves, droughts, earthquakes, etc.), as well as urbanisation pressure and complex interdependencies within city ecosystems. This obliges cities and developers to adopt climate-proof materials, nature-based solutions and adaptive urban planning that increases resilience in all phases of crisis management (prevention, preparedness, response and recovery), ensuring that systems can dynamically plan, absorb, recover and adapt.
The Multiclimact project focuses on four locations across Europe. What are the main impacts of climate change that are being felt in those places?
Yes, we are working on four pilot sites: the Camerino area in Italy, including a student residence; Barcelona city centre in Spain; a dam and a polder area (Tedingerbroekpolder dike, Green River) in the Netherlands; and the Central Market and old town in Riga, Latvia. These four pilot sites face specific and significant climate hazards that impact both people and infrastructure.
- In the Netherlands, increased intense rainfall and drought periods put pressure on hydraulic defence systems, making smart monitoring of dams and movable barriers necessary to prevent devastating floods.
- In Riga, climate change manifests as scorching summers, heatwaves, heavy rainfall and urban flooding, exacerbated by the city’s dense and historic structure.
- Camerino is facing increased extreme weather events in an area already vulnerable to seismic damage, with the risk of cultural heritage degradation and resource management challenges. The main hazards include seismic events and heatwaves that increase the risk of floods and landslides. All this is complicated by the presence of historic sites and vulnerable public buildings such as student residences.
- Barcelona is affected by urban heat waves and, as we sadly witnessed last autumn, by heavy, sudden rainfall that threatens the balance between urban, rural and natural areas.
These challenges require locally adapted strategies that combine technological innovation and social engagement.
What learnings have emerged from these sites so far?
Valuable lessons are emerging on how to tackle climate challenges in diverse contexts. One of the clearest lessons is that resilience must be contextual, people-centred and data-driven. It’s also essential to integrate it early in the planning stages, not just as a retrofit.
- In the Netherlands, the use of fibre optic sensors for real-time monitoring of dikes has shown great potential for active flood risk prevention without invasive interventions.
- In Riga, the integration of passive solutions and heating/cooling systems compatible with historic buildings demonstrates how the energy transition can respect cultural heritage.
- In Camerino, the experimentation of resilient strategies in small urban centres has highlighted the importance of local planning with materials and techniques compatible with historical features. Additionally, involving students and local authorities in testing real-time monitoring systems has emphasised the importance of transparent and accessible data to build a risk-aware community.
- In Barcelona, nature-based and circular economy solutions, such as recycled pavements and urban drainage systems, have proven effective in combating heat islands and sudden floods in dense urban settings.
Overall, there’s a clear need to integrate digital tools, early warning systems and human-centred design to create adaptive, climate-resilient and more livable environments.
Another key takeaway is that there is no one-size-fits-all solution: strategies must reflect the environmental, social and infrastructural context of each site. Collaboration among stakeholders (urban planners, engineers, citizens and policymakers) is also crucial to ensure practical, accepted, and inclusive measures.
What are the greatest challenges involved in climate-proofing the built environment, and how are you addressing them?
Key challenges include a) the complexity of exposure to multiple risks (multi-hazard), b) managing systemic dependencies, c) integrating resilience across lifecycle phases and d) ensuring coordination between different stakeholders.
Another major challenge is to transform resilience planning from static risk assessments into a dynamic and iterative process that responds to evolving threats.
We’re addressing these issues by developing a multi-level toolkit combining:
- Innovative materials like self-sensitive engineered cementitious composites for seismic resilience, porous asphalt to reduce heat islands, multifunctional mortars to improve indoor air quality, and more.
- Resilient design methods for circularity, energy retrofit, heritage protection and human-centred health.
- Digital tools, including Climate Resilience Maturity Assessment (CREMA). This comprehensive platform assesses and tracks the resilience maturity of assets throughout their life cycle. CREMA quantifies AS-IS status and models TO-BE conditions, integrating multi-hazard scenarios, system vulnerabilities, systemic interdependencies and socio-economic impacts. This provides decision-makers with a clear visualisation of resilience gaps and priorities and helps guide evidence-based investments. This supports iterative and time-dependent monitoring, making resilience a living process rather than a static plan. This approach considers context, vulnerability, exposure, criticality and systemic risks, moving from traditional risk management to a dynamic resilience management framework.
How can climate adaptation and mitigation efforts in the built environment be made equitable, ensuring that vulnerable and marginalised communities aren’t left behind?
Equity is embedded through citizen involvement, capacity building and social innovation strategies. We promote participatory design, ensuring transparent decision-making and promoting open science practices.
By organising brokers, workshops and training and addressing vulnerabilities in heritage and housing, we work to avoid disproportionate displacement and burdens by offering adaptable, locally relevant and inclusive resilience pathways.
What can citizens do to support your aims?
Each of us can and must do our part, even in small ways, to fight climate change and avoid feeding it. We must become more conscious consumers, asking ourselves not only what we buy, but also who we are giving our money to (as consumers and investors), why we buy, and, above all, do we really need it?
Ask yourself: “Does my choice have environmental or ethical consequences?” The answer could mean avoiding fast fashion, unsustainable e-commerce giants and financial institutions that invest in fossil fuels. But most of all, it means consuming less. We live surrounded by excess. Stopping the culture of overconsumption is key to stopping climate change, because the two are deeply connected. Let’s live with less, and live better.
Get cutting-edge climate change insights direct from the experts.
Explore all our content
Disclaimer
Funded by the European Union. Views and opinions expressed are, however, those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or the granting authority. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority can be held responsible for them.
The information and documentation in this section are published with permission from their respective sources. While the MAIA Project strives to ensure the accuracy and completeness of the content, we make no guarantees or warranties of any kind, express or implied, about the validity, reliability, or accuracy of the information. The original sources are solely responsible for the content they provide. We disclaim any liability for any errors, omissions, or inaccuracies in the information and for any actions taken in reliance on the information contained on this website.
