Spatial heterogeneity in vulnerability

a) b)

c) d)

Figure 4.8: Representation of a) exposure, b) sensitivity, c) adaptive capacity, and d) vulnerability of the 85 regions analyzed for the 2030-2050 time horizon. The higher the score (and redder the region), the higher the exposure, the sensitivity, and the vulnerability and the lower the adaptive capacity. The lower and more nega-tive the score, the greener the region. Hatched areas indicate regions with lack of data. Maps refer to the ag-gregation levels F and E presented in Figure 4.4.

a)

b)

c) d)

e) f)

g)

Figure 4.9: Representation of vulnerability at the 2030-2050 horizon due to a) changes in climate suitability for tourism activities, b) snowpack reduction, c) glaciers melting, d) permafrost melting - rockfall, e) natural haz-ards, f) water scarcity – drought, g) scenic beauty changes. The redder the region, the more vulnerable; the greener the region, the more it will presumably benefit from the impact. Hatched areas indicate regions with lack of data, white areas, regions with nul vulnerability. Maps refer to the aggregation level D presented in Figure 4.4.

Alpine region and in particular the territory located at high-elevations in Valais, Ticino, and Uri ap-peared to be most exposed. Brig - Belalp, Zermatt Matterhorn, Lake Maggiore and Valleys, and Aletsch came out as the four most exposed regions. This is mainly due to the combination of future glacier surface loss, increased water scarcity and drought, changes in scenic beauty, and potential permafrost melting. Also regions at mid-elevation like The Pre-Alps - Les Paccots, and the Lake Gene-va Region - Jura appeared to be particularly affected. This is primarily due to snowpack reduction.

Other regions, such as the Region of Lake Murten, the Lakes Region, Zürichsee, the Geneva, and the Zug regions appeared to be less affected by these changes due mainly to their relatively good climate suitability for tourism activities (with the presence of lakes and their relative attractiveness during heat days) and the inexistence of typically mountainous impacts (glaciers and permafrost melting for example).

With regards to sensitivity, the Valais regions (Crans-Montana, Sierre - Anniviers, Sion Region - Les 4 vallées and Evolène, les Portes du Soleil - Chablais), the countryside of the Lake Geneva, the Mittelland II, and the Jura Bernois appeared to be among the most sensitive, as seen in Figure 4.8.b.

Reasons are mainly due to a combination of various aspects of the local environment, institutions and tourism structure. Less sensitive regions are Wengen-Mürren-Lauterbrunnental, Zurich, and the Zürcher Weinland.

In relation to adaptive capacity, the region between Zurich and Schaffhausen but without enclosing Zurich (Zürcher Weinland, Züri-Unterland, Zurich Mittelland, SchaffauserLand, Thurgau - Bodensee), the Rheintal, the canton of Nidwalden, the countryside behind the Lake Geneva region (Lake Geneva Region - Countryside and Region of Lake Murten), and lower and central Valais (Sierre - Anniviers) get the lowest scores (Figure 4.8.c). Reasons are primarily due to the fact that in these regions adapta-tion in relaadapta-tion to tourism has not been undertaken in the past (which is not surprising, considering that they are mostly not affected by climate change and/or dependent on tourism). Higher adaptive capacity was on the other hand attributed to Zermatt Matterhorn, Saas-Fee/Saastal, and Interlaken, where much has already been done in the past in this direction.

Looking at the vulnerability for the different impacts, it appears that the greatest beneficiaries for the 2030-2050 time horizon due to changes in climate suitability for tourism activities should be the Region of Lake Murten, the Zürichsee, Nidwalden, the Lakes Region, and the Rheintal (Figure 4.9.a).

In relation to snowpack reduction, Lake Geneva Region - Jura appears to be the most vulnerable re-gion. It is followed by The Pre-Alps - Les Paccots, The Pre-Alps - Gruyères - Moléson, and the Jura Bernois. Four regions stand to benefit from changes in snowpack: the Central Graubünden - Arosa, Verbier St-Bernard, Sierre - Anniviers, and Sion Region - Les 4 vallées et Evolène (Figure 4.9.b). This last region appears, however, to be the most vulnerable to glaciers melting, followed by Haslital, Verbier St-Bernard, Goms, the Ferienregion Lötschberg, and Aletsch (Figure 4.9.c). Sierre - Anniviers is the most vulnerable to permafrost melting, followed by Sion Region - Les 4 vallées et Evolène, Verbier St-Bernard, and Goms (Figure 4.9.d). When considering natural hazards, the most vulnerable regions are Brig - Belalp and the Rheintal (Figure 4.9.e). In relation to the increased water scarcity and drought, it is mainly the northern part of Ticino (Lake Maggiore and Valleys, Bellinzona and Northern Ticino), Brig - Belalp, and Aletsch that appear to be most affected on the 2030-2050 time horizon. Others regions, mainly in the North, get more runoff at this time horizon (Figure 4.9.f). Final-ly, in relation to changes in scenic beauty, Sierre - Anniviers stands out once again as one of the most vulnerable, followed again by Sion Region - Les 4 vallées et Evolène, Goms, and Verbier St-Bernard (Figure 4.9.g).

In relation to the combination of the vulnerability for these seven impacts (Figure 4.8.d), it appeared that the most vulnerable regions are located in the Valais Canton: Sierre - Anniviers, Brig - Belalp, and Sion Region - Les 4 vallées et Evolène are the three tourism regions that obtained the highest vulner-ability scores. They are followed by Lake Maggiore and Valleys, Bellinzona and Northern Ticino, and Aletsch. On the other hand, Saas-Fee/Saastal, Zermatt Matterhorn, and Engadin St. Moritz (which were among the most exposed) rank only after those regions. Their vulnerability is reduced by their low sensitivity and/or high adaptive capacity.

The regions with the strongest negative vulnerability, i.e which could benefit the most from climate change until 2030-2050, are mainly the lake regions (Region of Lake Murten, The Lakes Region, Zürichsee, Geneva Region) and Central Graubünden - Arosa. This last one is less affected than other regions; its vulnerability mainly relates to permafrost melting and changes in scenic beauty. It should be noted that for some regions we could not carry out calculations due to the lack of information.

These are the Brugg Region, Grächen-St. Niklaus, Lauchernalp - Lötschental, the Pre-Alps - Schwarzsee, and Winterthur and its region for which information on landscape beauty and public participation actions could not be collected during the survey. General scores can be found in the wiki (Annex A.18).