The Institution of Civil Engineers (ICE) has urged the UK government to commission an independent review of the costs and benefits of adapting infrastructure to climate change.
In its report Making resilience count: The economic value of climate readiness, the ICE said the financial consequences of failing to prepare for climate impacts were becoming increasingly clear. It cited more than €3bn (£2.6bn) in damage from European wildfires this summer and estimated UK heatwaves had caused at least £1bn in lost productivity. Heat-related deaths are also expected to reach a record level, it said.
Review modelled on Stern and Dasgupta
The ICE said the proposed assessment should have a “similar catalysing impact” to the Stern Review on the economics of climate change and the Dasgupta Review on biodiversity.
It said the Stern Review helped shape UK carbon budgets, contributing to a 54% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions between 1990 and 2025.
The proposed adaptation review would be commissioned centrally by government while retaining an independent element. The ICE also wants a senior minister to be accountable for implementing its findings.
Whole-system approach
The review would examine transport, water and power networks together rather than assess risks in isolation. It would consider short-term impacts between 2030 and 2040, medium-term effects up to 2050 and longer-term risks through to 2100.
According to the ICE, this approach would help identify immediate threats and account for interdependencies and potential failures between infrastructure sectors. It said these factors were routinely undervalued in investment and regulatory decisions.
The organisation also wants the review to map data ownership and accessibility, and identify what is needed to make existing datasets useful for resilience planning. While “a lot of data” is available, the ICE said it is fragmented across organisations and there are still gaps in understanding climate impacts.
It suggested using existing tools and methodologies developed by organisations including the Climate Change Committee, alongside interviews with sector experts, stakeholder submissions and a literature review. The work underpinning the report was supported by Frontier Economics.
Regulatory role
The ICE said the assessment should examine whether regulators have sufficient powers, tools and incentives to embed adaptation in infrastructure decisions, and whether current regulatory arrangements adequately encourage resilience.
Sam Gould, ICE director of policy and external affairs, said: “This summer’s heatwaves were some of the clearest evidence yet that we need to make adaptation just as much of a priority as reducing emissions. There’s an enormous opportunity to adapt our infrastructure systems, but it’s been neglected.”
He added: “Critical systems with huge economic implications that people rely on, like water, power and transport networks, aren’t as resilient as they should be. Understanding the positive impact that investing in adaptation could have will help decision makers prioritise resilience across the political system.”
Gould said an independent review could “jump-start real change” in the UK’s approach to adaptation and called on ministers to commission one “as soon as possible”.