The climate risks we face

The first ever European climate risk assessment carried out by the European Environment Agency (EEA) has concluded that Europe is unprepared for what lies in store.

The year 2023 was the warmest year ever. The global average temperature during 2023 has surpassed the threshold of 1.5 degrees Celsius set in the Paris agreement at the 2015 Climate Summit.

Europe is the fastest warming continent. The situation in Southern Europe is even worse. It will face considerably reduced rainfall and more severe droughts.

At this point, none of this is however news. It is already the present. The future may, however, be even worse than that.

In a 425-page report we are told that climate change is a multiplier of risks: existing risks will be aggravated. Climate risks are growing much faster than our preparedness. We are being extremely slow in developing and implementing climate change adaptation strategies.

36 major climate risks for Europe have been identified. They are grouped in five clusters, namely, ecosystems, food, health, infrastructure, and the economy/finance.  

The key findings of this first European climate risk assessment, which I quote verbatim from the EEA report, are:

“Ecosystems: climate change is one of the main drivers of biodiversity loss and ecosystem degradation in Europe. Among climate risks related to ecosystems, risks to coastal and marine ecosystems have the highest severity in the current period as well as the greatest urgency to act.

Food: Europe faces multiple challenges to food production and food security, including reducing its environmental impact. Crop production is already facing substantial climate risks in Europe as a whole, and critical risk levels in Southern Europe.

Health: climate change poses major risks to human health systems. Risks related to heat are already at critical levels in southern Europe.

Infrastructure: extreme weather events are posing increasing risks to the built environment and infrastructure in Europe, and the services they provide. Such events can disrupt essential services, including energy supply, water supply and transport networks.

Economy and finance: the European financial system faces critical risks from the impacts of climate change, both within Europe and abroad. Serious sector- and region-specific risks to Europe could catalyse a systemic financial shock.” (page 264: para 18.6 of the report)

This is a wakeup call of the highest order. The European continent is unprepared for the growing extremes of climate. Yet senior politicians at an EU level are more interested in sabotaging specific initiatives which seek to bridge the gap in climate change preparedness. The recent debate (and voting patterns) on the regulatory framework for the restoration of nature is a case in point.

The recent Dutch farmers’ revolt which has shaken the Netherlands’ body politic has its origin in the difficulties encountered in implementing the Nitrates Directive. It has however spread to other regions, motivated by the industrial agricultural lobby’s determination to sabotage the EU Green Deal.

In Germany the centre-right CDU-CSU have just launched their joint EU Parliament electoral manifesto with a pledge to reverse the controversial phase-out of the internal combustion engine. A definite commitment to water-down the EU Green Deal. The CDU-CSU leading candidate is the same person piloting the EU Green Deal, Ursula von der Leyen.

With these attitudes it is inevitable that our preparedness for the climate risks we face will get even worse. This is the future we face. It keeps getting worse until those that matter come to their senses.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday : 17 March 2024

Institutional fragmentation obstructs good governance

Some seek to deceive themselves and others when they proclaim their conviction that there is no conflict between the economy and the environment. The current state of affairs in all areas of environmental importance is precisely the result of this conflict.

This conflict is continuously manifested through various natural phenomena: nature’s retaliatory actions to the mismanagement of the earth’s resources. Currently climate change tops the list of nature’s defensive actions in the ongoing conflicts resulting from the impacts of the economy on the environment.

The impacts of climate change effect all of us, but most of all they effect the vulnerable among us. Whether it is floods or drought, extremes of temperatures or rising sea levels, at the end of the day it is the vulnerable and the poor who shoulder most of the burden which results when the earth cries. “Cry of the earth, cry of the poor”, we were told many years ago by Brazilian Franciscan liberation theologian Leonardo Boff. Environmental degradation and social injustice are intertwined.

Emissions to air, sea or land: all of them have an impact, generally a cumulative one, which contaminate in various ways the air we breathe, the sea and its resources and all sorts of natural resources all around us. These impacts generally take time to leave their mark and as a result of this time lag, generally, they are ignored until it is almost too late to act.

Parliament is currently debating the setting up of a Climate Change Authority. Concluding the debate at second reading stage, Environment Minister Miriam Dalli emphasized that climate action requires everyone’s contribution. Yes Minister, that is correct: however, it also requires consistency on the part of the executive. One cannot advocate addressing climate change at the same time as dishing out fossil fuel subsidies, as government has been doing for quite some time.

To address climate change we require a behavioral change. Having public transport available at no cost was a courageous step which seeks to address this behavioral change through encouraging a modal shift in our mobility requirements. On its own, however, this is definitely not enough.

In order to facilitate this modal shift to take place, it is essential that, simultaneously with free public transport one should discourage the use of private transport. Removing the fossil fuel subsidies the soonest would be a step in this direction.

Likewise, the heavy investment in road infrastructure aiming to facilitate traffic management also encourages more traffic on the road. It has been proven by studies carried out in a multitude of other countries that infrastructural interventions in the road network will, in the end, increase traffic congestion because they end up generating more traffic. This is actually happening around us too!

A stronger push towards a behavioral change would address both our deficits: our fiscal deficit as well as our environmental deficit.

The electrification of transport would definitely help in reducing climate change impacts. It will not however contribute to the modal shift in addressing our mobility requirements.

The fact that in most cases travelling distances in Malta are small should facilitate the effort. As emphasized by the National Transport Masterplan we ought to realise that fifty per cent of trips with private cars in the Maltese islands are for distances having a duration of less than 15 minutes. Further, these trips cover an average distance of 5.5 kilometers. This signifies that half of the trips with private cars cover mobility needs within areas which are within easy reach of either local public transport or else can be covered by walking or cycling. Addressing adequately just this statistic could reduce substantially cars from our roads without in any way impacting our mobility needs. In addition, substantial emissions contributing to climate change would also be reduced.

This is what we call a low-lying fruit in the management and implementation of environmental policy. It is an objective which is not so difficult to attain. Yet it is unfortunately ignored.

A positive step taken by the Robert Abela led administration is the apparent shelving of the proposed undersea tunnel between Malta and Gozo. Studies carried out have clearly shown that the economic viability of the tunnel was dependent on increasing by about three times the car movements between Malta and Gozo. As a result, additional environmental impacts would have been created!

I speak of an “apparent shelving” as the matter is not yet clear. Government has not made any statement on its intentions even though it is clear that it has had second thoughts on the whole matter, as it is no longer “a priority”.

The fragmentation of the institutions intended for environmental governance does not lead to good governance. It rather obstructs it. It would have been more appropriate if the functions assigned to the proposed Climate Change Authority had been assigned to the Environment and Resources Authority. The consolidation of environmental functions would be appropriate in view of the smallness of our territories. It would also be more effective.

published on The Malta Independent on Sunday: 25 February 2024

The 15-minute city

Every city can benefit from a reconsideration of its urban priorities. In this era of climate change various cities around the world have taken initiatives in order to contribute their share to the achievement of carbon neutrality. The 15-minute city is one such initiative which reimagines the urban fabric in order to prioritise people over cars, in the process reducing the carbon footprint: “ville du quart d’heure”, the “quarter hour city”. 

It is a vision which is mostly associated with Paris and is the brainchild of Carlos Moreno (in photo above) an architect advising the Mayor of Paris. It has however been also applied in various other cities around the world. The aim is to encourage self-sufficient communities, where all basic needs are just a walk, or a bike ride away from your home, as a result slowly addressing our addiction to the car which we would need less and less.

This is a practical application of urban proximity, as a result of which cities move away from the use of fossil fuels into a vehicle free era. It is the mobility modal shift we require in this day and age to effectively deal with the emissions linked to private transport.

It is not always easy to apply these ideas in established urban areas where land use patterns and infrastructure is already in place. However, it is a practical way of integrating policy derived from climate change objectives with land use planning.

In Malta distance is not an issue, as everywhere is already almost within easy reach. We do not need any special effort in this respect. Our National Transport Masterplan, in fact, advises us that 50 per cent of trips carried out by our cars are for short distances, having a duration of less than 15 minutes. Within this context, achieving 15-minute cities should not be that difficult if we put our heads together to address it.

In a post Covid era, working from home is increasing in frequency, although this is not possible for all types of work. This reduces our travel requirements.

We must also be able to address our basic needs for food and medicine in our locality. For this to materialise we need however to ensure that small and medium sized businesses in our localities are encouraged to stay open for business notwithstanding the stiff competition which they continuously face from big business.  There are ways in which they can be assisted to overcome the difficulties they face. This is not only in their interest but more in the interest of the community they serve.

The supermarkets mushrooming around the islands is a case in point. Each supermarket has a substantial catchment area. Most users of supermarkets travel by private car to do their shopping when it most suits them. In an age when most of us are more conscious of the fact that private car use is a significant contributor to Malta’s climate change impacts, we should factor this into land use planning considerations.

Some may argue that supermarkets, as a result of their economies of scale, provide goods at substantially reduced prices from that possible in small or medium sized retail outlets in our localities.  It has however to be viewed also in the context of expenses incurred not only in car use but also in the resulting reduction to the air quality and the associated health consequences. Expenses incurred, at the end of the day, are not only those measured in euro, they are also measured in terms of the social and environmental costs incurred.

We need to ensure that our localities are equipped to live up to present day challenges. Ensuring their self-sufficiency would definitely be an adequate objective which can be achieved through the development of 15-minute cities.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday : 4 February 2024

Climate change governance and political incompetence

It has been announced that an Authority on Climate Change will be set up by government. This  has apparently been approved by Cabinet, earlier this week. No further details have so far been released.

It is not at all clear whether this authority will be expected to take charge of the action required on a national level in order to mitigate the impacts of climate change, or else, whether it will take the lead in the initiatives required to adapt to climate change.

Currently available on the website of the Ministry responsible for Climate Change one can peruse a draft document dated September 2023 and entitled Draft Energy and Climate Plan 2021-2030. As far as I am aware this document is still a draft. A definite version has apparently not been published yet notwithstanding that it should have been in effect 3 years ago! This draft document lays down national objectives relative to energy policy within the context of the climate change debate.

There is no Climate Change Adaptation Strategy available on the Ministry’s website. Some years ago (May 2012) a National Climate Change Adaptation Strategy was adopted and published, but apparently this has not been updated. It could, most probably, have been discarded; however, no information is available on the matter. Perusing my copy of the said strategy, I recollect that it was a reasonable first effort and was supplemented by an extensive 164-page report drawn up by the then Climate Change Committee for Adaptation. These documents were drawn up after extensive public consultation.

While energy issues are foremost in any Climate Change Adaptation Strategy, we need to go in considerable detail on other equally important aspects, such as the impacts of climate change on agriculture, water resources, health, civil protection, land use planning, tourism, coastal settlements, protection of the coastal infrastructure as well as biodiversity and the marine environment.

The debate on water resources has been ongoing and various policy initiatives have addressed the matter over the years. I am not sure as to what has been done by the Agriculture Ministry or the Health Ministry, but at the end of the day it is those same Ministries which need to initiate, implement and monitor the required action in their areas of responsibility.

Similarly, the Tourism Ministry seems clueless on climate change impacts on the industry. I have yet to come across a serious assessment of climate change on tourism in the Maltese islands and in particular on the potential havoc which tourism infrastructure will have to face as a result of an inevitable sea level rise.

What about inbuilding climate change considerations in land use planning policy and design guidelines? The 15-minute city initiative in Paris and elsewhere specifically addresses climate change in an urban policy context. Yet the Planning Authority in Malta is not bothered at all.

On the other hand, we need to realise that there have been various valid proposals over the years which have been discarded by government. One specific example which comes to mind is the proposal in the National Transport Master Plan which has pointed out the need to embark on private vehicle restraint.

The fact that to date we have an out-of-date Climate Change Adaptation Strategy and no effective coordination at Ministerial level on climate change impacts across all areas, signifies a failure of the Climate Change Ministry to implement its basic political brief over the years.

This is where the proposed Climate Change Authority comes in. It will most probably be considered essential to fill the coordination gap created by incompetence at the political level over the years.

The Ministry responsible for Climate Change specifically exists to coordinate, across government, issues of climate change through the various Ministries. This coordination has, unfortunately, over the years been inexistent. Hence the proposed solution to setup an authority to fill in the gap.

Climate change governance, over the years, has been characterised by political incompetence. The creation of an authority will just serve to shift the blame.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday: 14 January 2024

Awtorità dwar il-Klima

Mela issa qalulna li ser iwaqqfu Awtorità dwar il-Klima. Fil-fatt il-Kabinett approva li din titwaqqaf.

Forsi tajjeb li nemfasizza li l-awtoritajiet ma jsolvux problemi.  

Jekk inħarsu lejn id-diversi awtoritajiet oħra li għandna fil-pajjiz hu ċar x’jagħmlu l-awtoritajiet f’Malta. Ġeneralment iservu ta’ paraventi għall-Gvern. (Mhux biss dak li għandna illum: iżda ta’ qablu ukoll!)

Għax x’jiswa’ li taħtar Awtorità, u timlija b’nies tal-partit jew viċin ħafna tiegħu, li biex jiċċaqalqu jistennew ftit lill-Ministru jitħarrek.

Flok ma nwaqqfu l-awtoritajiet aħjar li tinbidel l-attitudi u nibdew nerfgħu r-responsabbiltajiet ambjentali tagħna bis-serjetà.

The EU Emissions Trading Scheme and the Malta Freeport

The EU Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS) has been in place for the past 20 years, since 2003. It deals with the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions through the use of market-based instruments. Initially maritime emissions were excluded from its operation.

The debate at an EU level as to when greenhouse gas emissions from the maritime industry would no longer be excluded from this regulatory process has been ongoing for quite some time. Extending the applicability of the EU ETS to maritime transport was a crucial next step, no longer avoidable after the 2015 Paris Climate Summit.

At Paris there was unanimous agreement between the participating states that urgent action needed to be taken in order to contain the increase in global temperature to possibly no more than 1.5 degrees Celsius above the pre-industrial global temperature. Achieving that aim would be of considerable help in reducing climate change impacts, including the potential rise in sea level, a serious threat to islands and coastal areas.

As an island state with a substantially developed coast, Malta has an interest in arresting the projected sea level rise, the soonest possible. At least an interest in reducing it to the minimum possible. Depending on its extent, a sea level rise will be extremely damaging to Malta’s infrastructure.

Everybody is aware that as of the 1 January 2024 cargo and passenger ships having a gross tonnage of 5000 tonnes or over will be subject to the EU ETS scheme as a result of which they will pay for their carbon emissions. Initially such payments will cover 40 per cent of their emissions. This will rise to 70 per cent in 2025 and then to 100 per cent from 2026 onwards. This is an application of the polluter pays principle. A basic principle in international environmental law enshrined in the EU treaties and incorporated as well in the Maltese statute book.

The scheme will be operating within the European Union and consequently there will be shipping lines which will try to better organise themselves in order to avoid payment for their carbon emissions. This fact was highlighted some weeks ago by Alex Montebello, the CEO of the Freeport Terminal, who argued, in an article published in the local press, that the North African ports, to which the EU ETS does not apply, as they are not part of an EU member state, will be placed at a competitive advantage. Consequently, most probably, the Malta Freeport Terminal will lose substantially its transhipment role. The Malta Freeport’s loss, he argued, will be the gain of other ports along the southern Mediterranean shores, such as Damietta, Tangier Med or East Port Said.

Now this is an interesting argument which most probably was considered by the negotiators on behalf of the Maltese Government when they handled the matter in Brussels.

In fact, a substantial number of islands within the EU territory are exempted from the provisions of ETS if they satisfy the applicable criteria. Having a population which is less than 200,000 and no road or rail links with the European mainland are the criteria to be met. As a result, the port of Imġarr in Gozo is the only exempted Maltese port which is included in the relative EU implementation decision published in the Official Journal of the EU on the 19 December 2023.

No explanation has been forthcoming from Government, and I would not dare speculate as to the reason why the Maltese negotiators failed to ensure that the transhipment role of the Freeport Terminal at Marsaxlokk Bay was defended appropriately.  The locality of Birżebbuġa, possibly, stands to gain, inadvertently, as a result of this failure.

Obviously, Malta cannot possibly be exempted as this would defeat the whole purpose of the EU ETS which is that of reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Possibly, for a change, as a country we have started taking our responsibilities seriously. Maybe we can now start the long process of aligning our economy with our environmental responsibilities.

Well, it is never too late.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday: 7 January 2024

An alternative to supermarkets?

Supermarkets are self-service shops offering a wide variety of food and beverages as well as household goods. Having a substantial amount of floor space, they are usually close to residential areas and seek to attract custom through a broad selection of products, competitive pricing and convenient shopping hours.

When located in urban areas, they compete for space with the local community. The impacts of their operations within localities, is not what one would wish for close to one’s home. Both in the case of supplies delivered as well as a result of the customer traffic generated.

Identifying sites outside the development zone for supermarkets creates other problems. Foremost among them is that we cannot keep losing agricultural land and other ODZ land to development of any type.

As an issue of land use planning, it has not been addressed by the Planning Authority over the years.  It is a responsibility which the Planning Authority has abdicated and left to market forces to decide.  Surprisingly Local Councils have not spoken up about the matter, notwithstanding the substantial impacts which localities have to shoulder as a result.

Each supermarket has a substantial catchment area. Most users of supermarkets travel by private car to do their shopping when it most suits them. In an age when most of us are more conscious of the fact that private car use is a significant contributor to Malta’s climate change impacts, we should factor this into land use planning considerations.

The issue ties in with the 15-minute city idea which is being floated around as an objective in various countries, notably by Carlos Moreno, the architect advising the Mayor of Paris, but also elsewhere. If this objective is attained it would be a significant contributor to reducing car-use and the associated impacts.

The 15-minute city idea signifies that land use planning seeks to ensure that basic needs can be addressed within a 15-minute distance from our home. Among other matters this would signify that we would be in a position to find all our basic needs in retail outlets in our towns and villages. In such circumstances the car would be (almost) redundant. The objective of having self-sufficient localities is attainable over time through developing 15-minute cities.

Some may argue that supermarkets provide goods at substantially reduced prices from that possible in small or medium sized retail outlets in our localities. This may be correct and would generally result from their economies of scale. It has however to be viewed also in the context of expenses incurred not only in car use but also in the resulting reduction to the air quality and the associated health consequences. Expenses incurred, at the end of the day, are not only those measured in euro, they are also measured in terms of the social and environmental costs incurred.

Many more supermarkets are being planned. Can we afford the costs involved? At the end of the day, is it worth it?

The problem is much wider than that resulting from the uptake of land, be it urban or rural. It also involves substantial impact on existing retail outlets of a small or medium size within our localities. The number of supermarkets mushrooming across the islands is squeezing these small and medium size outlets out of the market. They cannot compete in terms of price and within a short time few of them will still be around unless they can group together. If they opt out of the market, our localities, will, as a result be much worse off.

This indicates a possible solution to the problem. The small and medium sized retail outlets in our localities should get together and organise themselves properly within a co-operative framework where they can pool resources. As a result, they would be able to offer products for sale at competitive prices. They can build up an economy of scale which could withstand the onslaught they are currently being subjected to. As a result, they can remain open for custom in our localities, contributing to their self-sufficiency.

We have not given sufficient weight to the cooperative model which, if properly applied in our localities, can provide a remedy to the impacts of supermarkets, possibly reducing their need.

Cooperatives based on the democratic participation of their members are a tool which can help us address the impacts of supermarkets on our localities. It is a realistic possibility which we discard at our peril.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday: 10 December 2023

Rainwater down the drain

(file photo by author dated 4 October 2018: overflowing sewer at Archbishop Gonzi Square Kalkara)

We have just experienced the driest October in living memory. This is not a new experience. In the past few years, the climate has changed substantially. We are experiencing longer periods of drought and then suddenly we are faced with a storm and floods which wreak havoc all along their path.

After heavy rainfall most of our streets are flooded. The question which seeks a reasonable answer is: why is it that when it rains, so much water is flowing in our streets?

It has been 143 years since our laws imposed the duty to have water cisterns in our buildings.

How come that our regulatory authorities keep ignoring this blatant waste of a natural resource, provided by nature free of charge?

These same authorities which continuously speak about sustainability have proven themselves incapable of managing a natural resource. As a result, a substantial part of it goes to waste into the sea, either directly or else as a result of being filtered through the urban wastewater treatment plants, also referred to as sewage purification plants. Then, after having disposed of the purified wastewater into the sea we recover the same water through desalination plants for our use. In the process we incur substantial costs which are mostly avoidable. This is anything but sustainable!

Unfortunately, a substantial amount of rainwater incident on our roofs, in many instances, ends up in our streets or else in the public sewers instead of being collected in mandatory rainwater cisterns. In a number of cases these rainwater cisterns are either too small or else inexistent!

It is no wonder that our streets are flooded whenever it rains!

In addition, the rainwater ends up overloading our urban wastewater treatment plants which use a considerable amount of energy to produce treated water (called new water) or else to be dumped into the sea. 

Two authorities are responsible for this mess.

The main culprit is the Planning Authority (and its predecessors) which in many cases failed to identify and halt development which did not have provision for rainwater harvesting.

An additional culprit is the Water Services Corporation (WSC). Over the years, the Water Services Corporation (WSC) has taken over responsibility for the management of the public sewers from the former Drainage Department. This responsibility includes authorising the owners of newly- constructed properties to connect the drains of these properties with the public sewer. Is the WSC verifying that it is only the drains that are connected and, in particular, that rainwater pipes are not connected to the public sewer too? The obvious answer is provided by our streets on a rainy day. Clearly, no one is bothering to check what is connected to the public sewer.

Last year, government had embarked on a consultation on stormwater management. In the consultation document entitled Green Stormwater Infrastructure Guidance Manual we were informed that only 36 per cent of dwellings have a water cistern. Compliance with rainwater harvesting regulations, we were then informed, varied from 80 per cent in the case of villas to 4 per cent in the case of apartment blocks. On a geographic basic, Gozo had a 25 per cent compliance!

Millions of euros of public funds, local and EU funds, have been utilised in useless projects. The incompetent authorities have employed many to manage the resource. We have many “managers” but no results. If you seek a proof take a look at our streets during a rainwater storm. You will have all the answers you require.

Our forefathers had no authorities to monitor rainwater harvesting. They had no managers to enforce compliance! They had common sense which led them to understand nature and to use natural resources respectfully.

If we are to solve the problems that we have created over the years we need to rediscover our forefathers’ skills. Making peace with nature and appreciating its free gifts would be a good start.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday: 26 November 2023

The dignity of human life is impacted by Climate Change

Everything is connected. The health of the planet is also reflected in our health.

Pope Francis, in his Apostolic Exhortation Laudate Deum, published last week, joined environmental activists in emphasising that the impact of climate change will increasingly prejudice the lives of many.  

He addresses the social impact of climate change and states that this is intimately related to the dignity of human life. He quotes with approval the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops which had repeatedly emphasised that the impacts of climate change are borne by the most vulnerable. Likewise, he emphasises one of the conclusions of the Amazonia Synod which had underlined that “attacks on nature have consequences on peoples’ lives.”

Poverty and environmental degradation are inter-related. One inevitably leads to the other. This is also the underlying theme of Laudato Sí, the Pope’s eco-encyclical published eight years ago wherein he had described our common home as a suffering planet, urgently in need of being handled with care.

Plainly said, social and environmental policy are interlinked. A theme resonating Latin American liberation theology. Specifically, Leonardo Boff’s seminal work Cry of the Earth, cry of the poor comes to mind.

Leonardo Boff emphasises that the tears of the earth are reflected in the daily tribulations of the vulnerable and the poor. They are the most impacted by the reactions of the earth to the mistreatment that it is continuously being subjected to. It is the vulnerable and the poor who are bearing the brunt of droughts and floods, extreme temperatures, hurricanes and the rising sea level.

We are on the eve of another climate summit. Session 28 of the Conference of the Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), commonly referred to as COP 28, is due to be held in Dubai shortly.

In preparation for COP 28, a synthesis report published last week by the UNFCCC has once more drawn attention that the targets agreed to at the Paris COP 21 in 2015, eight years ago, were still off track. We are still far off from ensuring that the temperature rise is restricted to within 1.5 degree Celsius above the pre-industrial temperature.

“The world in which we live is collapsing and may be nearing the breaking point”, Francis emphasised. Yet we go on and on in activities contributing considerably to climate change.

A case in point is Malta’s transport policy. It is a known fact that transport is a major contributory factor to carbon emissions in the Maltese islands. Yet the state continuously encourages the use of more cars through an intensive development of the road infrastructure. This is done notwithstanding the existence of alternatives, the use of which is made substantially easier by our small size as a country. The fact that everywhere is close by is completely ignored in Malta’s transport policy.

Electrification of vehicular traffic will result in some improvement. It is however not enough. We need a modal shift. A shift from the use of cars to alternative means of sustainable mobility. A substantial reduction of cars on the road is essential.

Our smallness facilitates mobility through sustainable transport options. Public transport is nowadays free but its use is not sufficiently encouraged. It needs to be more efficient and reliable. Only then will it be used more. This must however be linked to an immediate decrease of cars from our roads.

Land use planning can also contribute substantially in this respect. The 15-minute city concept which I have written about earlier this year (TMIS 29 January 2023: Open spaces and the 15-minute city) is a case in point. With appropriate urban planning, which we lack, we can have access to most of our needs within walking distance. That on its own could contribute substantially to achieving the behavioural change required in our roads.

Such a behavioural change on our part could do wonders. It would be a significant local change contributing to a global impact. Reducing the impacts of climate change will contribute to the upholding of human dignity, in particular through protecting those most vulnerable, not just locally.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday: 15 October 2023

Planning for climate change

The Joint Research Centre (JRC) of the European Commission has recently published a study entitled “Regional Impact of Climate Change on European tourism demand”. It aims to provide evidence-based scientific support to the EU policymaking process.

This JRC technical study examines the potential impact of climate change on tourism demand within the context of the debate shaping the 2030 EU Agenda for Tourism. The development of touristic destinations must essentially consider the impact of climate change.

This is a debate which is unfortunately absent locally. In Malta, both the tourism industry as well as the Malta Tourism Authority (MTA) are only interested in numbers, more than anything else.  This is evidenced by the Deloitte report on the industry’s capacity, published some months ago. It is pertinent to remember that the Deloitte report points out that a projected supply of touristic accommodation, close to 5 million tourists annually would be required to ensure the sector’s long-term profitability (at an average 80 per cent occupancy throughout the year).  Tourism planning at its worst possible. Pure madness!

Land use planning concessions, left right and centre, have been dished out to attain this massive over-development. The tourism industry with government’s complicity has planned for this massive over-capacity, in the process ignoring the reality on the ground.

The JRC study emphasises that “the last three decades of research have failed to prepare the (tourism) sector for the net-zero transition and the climate disruption that will transform tourism in the 2050-time horizon.”

The study finds a clear north-south pattern in tourism demand changes: “northern regions benefitting from climate change and southern regions facing significant reductions in tourism demand.”

Southern coastal regions are projected to lose a significant amount of summer tourists, around 10 per cent, in the warmer climate scenarios considered by the study. This compares to a projected significant increase of approximately 5 per cent in the Northern European coastal regions.

The projected shift in tourism is not only regional: it would also be seasonal.

Such studies are indicative. However, they should be taken note of and have a bearing on the essential planning which is required if we are to be as prepared as can be for the climate changes which are on our doorstep. Matters may possibly even turn out to be far worse than what is being projected! Hence the need for more focused studies on what lies in store.

Both the industry and the Tourism Ministry are oblivious to all this. They are still euphoric on the “post-Covid record number of tourists”, ignoring the changes on the horizon.

Climate change is impacting everything, not just tourism. It is already impacting water resources, the infrastructure, coastal protection, energy, biodiversity, agriculture as well as health.

Only recently we read in the media that at a recent informal meeting of EU Health Ministers held at the Canary Islands, Health Minister Chris Fearne raised the impact of climate change on health. He was reported as having emphasised the need to consider, in depth, the impacts which climate change is having on our health systems. Fearne is obviously planning ahead, not just on the impacts of the climate on health planning. His radar is most obviously focused on the composition of the EU Commission which this time next year will be in the process of being screened by the EU Parliament and its various committees.

Whatever the motivation on the importance of climate change, it is imperative that we plan ahead, definitely beyond the immediate future.

Unfortunately, the Ministry responsible for climate change hasn’t got an inkling of all this. It should be leading the way in discussing and planning how best to adapt to climate change and to mitigate its impacts. Instead, it is focused on the unofficial electoral campaign for the EU Parliament.

Adapting to climate change will require substantial behavioural change which successive governments have been reluctant to encourage through adequate policy initiatives. Climate change will not go away. We can only adapt to the change and seek to implement the required mitigation measures. Without behavioural change we are doomed.

It is about time that we act, before it is too late.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday: 3 September 2023