Frequent and intense occurrences of extreme events pose significant risks to key sectors

The gap

Evidence profile

Sourced from the stated research gap and stated challenges and recommendations of the source papers, classified as general, drawn from work published between 2024 and 2026, spanning 3 journals. Those papers have been cited 92 times in total.

Supporting evidence — 3 representative gaps

• Assessing power system vulnerability to climate-related stressors and shocks: The case of Indonesia (2026) · Energy Sustainable Development/Energy for sustainable development · doi

  Existing studies often assess climate-related impacts in isolation, focusing on individual components or specific hazards. The lack of system-level implications and integrated assessments of climate-related vulnerabilities. The need for a spatially explicit approach to capture broader system-level interactions.

  generalstated research gap
  Keywords: existing studies often assess climate-related impacts isolation focusing
• Identification of climate change hotspots in the Mediterranean (2024) · Scientific Reports · cited 92× · doi

  Frequent and intense occurrences of extreme events pose significant risks to key sectors. The region's specific vulnerabilities to climate change need to be addressed. A more localized definition of hotspots is necessary to enhance targeted interventions and adaptive measures.

  generalstated challengesevidence 5/5
  Keywords: frequent intense occurrences extreme events pose significant risks
• World’s population susceptible to water risks is concentrated in two of the 58 IPCC reference regions (2026) · npj natural hazards. · doi

  Our analysis suggests that the geographical reference regions being used by the IPCC would benefit from further spatial disaggregation in highly populated parts of the planet, especially South and East Asia. Current geographical boundaries being used are suitable for climate hazard identi- fication as is done by IPCC Working Group I but are too coarse spatially when climate change impacts are viewed from a population-at-risk per- spective as is done in Working Group II. Although our focus here has been on water-related climate risks, we suspect a similar disconnect may exist for other types of climate hazards assessed by the IPCC. With loss and damage becoming a growing preoccupation of the UNFCCC process, we suspect policymakers will increasingly turn to the IPCC and particularly researchers whose work contributes to Working Group II assessments to generate projections of where future loss and damage potential is greatest. Here again, we suggest that reconsideration of the number of geographical reference regions in heavily populated regions and their boundaries is warranted. Having a larger number of geographical reference units with higher spatial resolution for heavily populated parts of the world would also support more detailed risk assessments in future Working Group II regional chapters, with parti- cular relevance to Asia.

  generalrecommendationsevidence 5/5
  Keywords: geographical ipcc climate working group reference regions populated used spatial parts asia boundaries done risk

Questions about this gap