Freight transport systems (FTS) are critical for the well-functioning of freight flows within countries and across borders. Climate extremes can disrupt freight flows, resulting in economic losses due to costly rerouting, spikes in freight rates or freight disruptions. However, climate extremes, and climate change more generally, are often not adequately included in long-term transport planning, nor are freight logistics generally set up to cope with such disruptions. In this chapter, we provide an overview of the main challenges of FTS and logistics within the context of climate change. Moreover, we summarize approaches and provide actionable guidance on how to improve the resilience of freight movements on three interconnected levels. First, we discuss ways how climate change can be included within the asset life cycle of transport infrastructure. Second, we set out approaches to perform climate criticality analysis of a national or international freight transport network. Third, we discuss logistics and governance considerations that can help boost climate resilience of freight movements on a systemic level. This chapter provides actionable recommendations to mainstream climate resilience in freight transport planning and operations.

@en

Infrastructure systems are particularly vulnerable to climate hazards, such as flooding, wildfires, cyclones and temperature fluctuations. Responding to these threats in a proportionate and targeted way requires quantitative analysis of climate risks, which underpins infrastructure resilience and adaptation strategies. The aim of this paper is to review the recent developments in quantitative climate risk analysis for key infrastructure sectors, including water and wastewater, telecommunications, health and education, transport (seaports, airports, road, rail and inland waterways), and energy (generation, transmission and distribution). We identify several overarching research gaps, which include the (i) limited consideration of multi-hazard and multi-infrastructure interactions within a single modelling framework, (ii) scarcity of studies focusing on certain combinations of climate hazards and infrastructure types, (iii) difficulties in scaling-up climate risk analysis across geographies, (iv) increasing challenge of validating models, (v) untapped potential of further knowledge spillovers across sectors, (vi) need to embed equity considerations into modelling frameworks, and (vii) quantifying a wider set of impact metrics. We argue that a cross-sectoral systems approach enables knowledge sharing and a better integration of infrastructure interdependencies between multiple sectors.@en

Disruptions to ports from climate extremes can have systemic impacts on global shipping, trade and supply chains. By combining estimated climatic-related port downtime at 1,320 ports with a global model of transport flows, we pinpoint systemic risks to global maritime transport, trade and supply-chain networks. We estimate a total of US$81 billion of global trade and at least US$122 billion of economic activity being at-risk on average annually.@en

The floods in the Netherlands in the summer of 2021 led to severe economic damage and losses in the affected area. A first estimate in September 2021 showed that more than 2,500 houses, more than 5,000 inhabitants and around 600 businesses were affected. Using the Dutch standard Flood Damage and Loss Model (SSM2017), and based on figures from international literature, the total damage in the Netherlands is estimated in the order of € 350 – 600 million. Physical damage to houses and businesses, business interruption, damage to infrastructure and crop losses were the most substantial. The differences in damage to individual structures (residential and commercial) were large. The estimated damage in the affected area clearly exceeds the damage of the Meuse River floods in 1993 and 1995 which occurred in the same region (converted to 2021 prices: around € 200 million and € 125 million, respectively, excluding damage due to business interruption). It is important to note that the largest damages and losses in 2021 occurred in the smaller regional rivers, mainly in the Geul floodplain, while in 1993 and 1995 most damage and losses were recorded in the Meuse floodplain.@en

Flood risk is expected to increase in coastal cities, particularly in Asian megacities such as Shanghai. This paper presents an integrated modeling framework to simulate changes in the flood risk in Shanghai and provide a cost-benefit analysis of multiple adaptation strategies used to reduce risk. The results show that the potential flood risk will increase dramatically as a result of sea level rise, land subsidence, and socioeconomic development. By 2100, the expected annual damage could reach 0.8% (uncertainty range: 0.4%–1.4%) of local GDP under an optimistic emission scenario (RCP4.5), compared to the current value of 0.03%. All of the adaptation strategies can effectively reduce the flood risk under the current conditions and those in 2050. In contrast to the ‘hard’ flood protection strategies (i.e., storm-surge barriers and floodwalls), the ‘soft’ strategies (i.e., building codes and nature-based measures) cannot substantially reduce the flood risk in 2100. However, the soft strategies can play a critical role in reducing the residual risk resulting from the hard strategies. A ‘hybrid’ strategy combining a storm-surge barrier, wet-proofing, and coastal wetland development outperforms both hard and soft strategies in terms of low residual risk and high benefit/cost ratio. Additionally, the hybrid strategy can also enable a larger reduction in casualties. These findings imply that managing flood risk is more than the use of single adaptation measures. The methodology developed in this paper can enlighten Shanghai and other coastal cities on an economically and socially feasible adaptation strategy in an uncertain future.

@en