Sessions of special interest for Science-for-Policy 

The European Green Deal, launched by the European Commission under President von der Leyen in 2019 to reduce emissions by at least 50% by 2030, will transform Europe’s economy, energy, transport, and industrial sectors. Moreover, building on this trajectory, the new 2040 climate target aims for a 90% reduction compared to 1990 levels. Achieving this ambitious goal requires substantial investment in innovation, clean technology, and green infrastructure, while ensuring a just transition for the communities most affected by several of these structural changes.

Scientists, with their disciplinary expertise and emerging technologies, play a critical role in driving green innovation. Thus, their active participation in entrepreneurial ventures and the innovation process is also essential for the successful implementation of the Green Deal.

This Union Symposia will explore programmes, challenges, and opportunities for scientists to engage in the innovation process, and how a just transition can be ensured for communities most affected by structural changes in the economy and energy systems. We will particularly focus on where innovation and especially R&D, focusing on the best practices that have successfully supported green innovation. It will also examine political, economic, and social barriers of greenovation, and discuss strategies to ensure a just transiton for affected communities.

The planetary boundaries framework defines a safe operating space for humanity, measuring with indicators and thresholds how pressures on the environment have destabilized the Earth system with profound consequences for environmental health, economic development and social equity. The freshwater boundary, initially defined as consumption of no more than 4000 cubic kilometres of freshwater per year, has now been considered transgressed. Yet this global figure conceals essential details: how are pressures spread across regions and sectors, and how do surface and groundwater each contribute? If these combined pressures are indeed disrupting the Earth’s water cycle, what actions can we take to bring it back onto a sustainable path?

This Union-wide Symposium brings together diverse perspectives on how water, land use and ecological systems, respond across levels to climate change and changing human activities, from the global dimension to national policies and local river basin management. The discussion will highlight both research advances and operational strategies that the geoscience community can mobilize to confront these challenges, empower stakeholders, and identify pathways to more sustainable management within the planet’s freshwater boundaries.

The climate challenge is no longer only about understanding the Earth system, it is also about understanding ourselves as humans. As a global society, response to climate change information and climate action policies is shaped not only by scientific evidence, but also by moral values, cultural identities, religious beliefs, fears, and psychological dynamics. Attitudes that may appear irrational often reflect deeper questions of meaning, trust, and social belonging. How can scientists and governments communicate climate science in ways that resonate with diverse societies without resorting to manipulative tactics? How can decision-makers design ethical and inclusive policies that inspire meaningful action at individual, community, and societal levels?

This Union Symposium will bring together experts from multiple disciplines to explore these questions through both scientific research and practical experience. Speakers will examine the moral, psychological, cultural, and social dimensions that shape public engagement with climate change. Perspectives from religious traditions, as well as indigenous and marginalized communities, will broaden the dialogue and offer insights into how climate communication and policy can become more inclusive, trustworthy, and impactful.

Climate change is reshaping the landscape of risk and hazards across Europe. Natural hazards (such as wildfires, flooding, droughts, heatwaves, etc) are increasingly occurring together or in quick succession, with one event exacerbating the impacts of, and reducing the resilience of communities and environments to another. In some cases, certain hazards can even trigger the next event at a pace or frequency that outstrips our ability to respond and react to the first. These “multi-hazards” may also compound with other geopolitical or social crises, making them overwhelming for emergency services and governments. The mitigations and protections in place across nation states from civil protection architecture, to monitoring, analysis and warning systems, must evolve to inform adaptation strategies and protect communities.

In this new era of climate hazards and risks, the EU has launched the Preparedness Union Strategy, which aims to prepare Europe by bolstering foresight and anticipation capabilities, promoting population preparedness, and among these building a first EU-wide climate adaptation plan.

This Union Symposia will explore how Europe can ensure the use of the best possible scientific evidence into the development of integrated, multi-level strategies for coping with multi-hazard and climate enhanced risks. It will consider the challenges faced when incorporating scientific evidence into both developing and committed policies and evaluate the importance of community engagement and acceptance in the process. This session will illustrate how for natural hazards, siloed research prevents preparedness and reduces resilience.

The session will rely on an interactive format where scientists and decision-makers jointly workshop the impacts of and solutions for integrating disciplines, regions, approaches, and techniques to effectively promote resilient and effective adaptation frameworks. Members of the EGU Climate Hazard and Risk Task Force will share their perspectives from responding to a call for evidence related to the development of the European Climate Adaptation Plan by the European Commission.

As our world approaches 1.5°C of global warming, as worldwide emissions continue to grow, and the impacts of climate change escalate, there is a general sentiment that we are running out of time. Increasingly, geoengineering concepts are being pushed into the media and policy spheres, using this sentiment of urgency to frame these concepts as “buying us time” for mitigation. There are many concepts, with the most advanced concepts including solar radiation management (marine cloud brightening, stratospheric aerosol injection mostly), sea ice thickening/brightening, sea curtains, tarping mountain glaciers, ocean fertilisation or alkalinity enhancement, as well as ocean biomass dumping, and many more. Some might target the root cause of our rising temperatures by absorbing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, but with detrimental effects on the ecosystems impacted. Other concepts would just attenuate the symptoms of our planet, the rising global temperature.

Are geoengineering concepts a distraction from our urgent need for adaptation and mitigation? In a world where research funding, political focus on the green transition, and geopolitical order are dwindling, are we reducing our chances of reaching the highest possible mitigation ambition to stay well below 2°C and pursue efforts to stay below 1.5°C by even discussing these options? Several of the targeted ecosystems (e.g. our deep ocean, cloud-aerosol interactions, etc.) are not yet well understood at a fundamental level. Is it appropriate to advocate for their manipulation without first conducting adequate fundamental research?

In this Great Debate, we aim to have a constructive and open dialogue on the value of delving into geoengineering concepts in the context of mitigation targets and policy dialogues.

Across the globe, the pathways from scientific evidence to political action are anything but uniform. While some researchers are encouraged to engage directly in shaping national agendas, others operate in systems where science-policy boundaries are strictly delineated.

Rather than asking what should be the role of scientists—a debate often limited by normative frameworks—this Science for Policy Great Debate asks: What could be the role of scientists in various governance and institutional contexts? The aim is to spark a forward-looking conversation on how scientists could engage across policy systems—acknowledging structural, cultural, and political diversity—and what mechanisms are needed to support that engagement sustainably. This Great Debate will also look ahead: What emerging structures and support systems are necessary to equip scientists with the tools, networks, mandates, incentives, and trust to work across science-policy boundaries? How can international collaboration respect national context while fostering shared ambition?

This session brings together researchers, policymakers, and science advisors from different countries and sectors to explore how scientists navigate their responsibilities and opportunities at the science-policy interface. How do political cultures, institutional structures, and public expectations influence the mandates scientists take on—from knowledge brokers and community advocates to embedded advisors and Horizon Europe Mission leads?

As we approach the IPCC’s AR7 era, the landscape of climate prediction is more diverse—and contentious—than ever. Should we trust high-resolution, process-based models rooted in physical laws, or embrace the promise of machine learning, which some claim will soon surpass traditional approaches? With Earth observations and hybrid frameworks adding further complexity, a critical question emerges: can data-driven models anticipate a future climate that will be fundamentally different from anything in the observational record? This debate is urgent, as society demands actionable guidance on climate risks and tipping points.
At the same time, global leadership in climate science is shifting. With recent political developments in the US, the European Union faces both a challenge and an opportunity to shape the scientific and policy agenda. What should Europe’s role be in steering the next generation of climate modeling and ensuring robust, transparent advice for decision-makers? This session brings together leading voices from science, policy, and technology to debate the future of climate prediction, the limits of machine learning, and the responsibilities of the EU in a rapidly changing world.

Global challenges, such as climate change and natural hazards, are becoming increasingly complex and interdependent, and solutions have to be global in scope and based on a firm scientific understanding of the challenges we face. At the same time, Science and technology are playing an increasingly important role in a complex geopolitical landscape. In this difficult setting, scientific collaboration can not only be used to help address global challenges but also to foster international relations and build bridges across geopolitical divisions. Science diplomacy is a broad term used both to describe the various roles that science and researchers play in bridging geopolitical gaps and finding solutions to international issues, and also the study of how science intertwines with diplomacy in pursuing these goals.

During this Short Course, science diplomacy experts will introduce key science diplomacy concepts and outline the skills that are required to effectively engage in science diplomacy. They will also provide practical insights on how researchers can actively participate in science diplomacy, explore real-life examples of science diplomacy, and highlight resources where participants can learn more about science diplomacy moving forward.

This Short Course is of interest to researchers from all disciplines and career levels.

Science is increasingly under pressure from political polarisation, misinformation, and declining public trust. These dynamics not only destabilise scientific communication but also challenge the ability of researchers to engage effectively with society and policymakers. To navigate this landscape, scientists and science communicators are developing new “toolkits” – practical methods, frameworks, and strategies – that support resilience, credibility, and impact.

This short course will introduce participants to a set of emerging toolkits designed over the coming year, focusing on how researchers can strengthen the role of science in public discourse and policy. The session will explore key questions: How can scientists better anticipate and counter misinformation? Which communication strategies foster trust across diverse audiences? What can we learn from cross-disciplinary and international experiences in addressing science denial and disinformation campaigns?

Through interactive discussion and real-world examples, participants will gain insight into practical approaches to safeguard the integrity of science while making it more accessible and actionable. The course will also highlight opportunities for early-career scientists to contribute to shaping new narratives and engagement strategies, ensuring that science remains a cornerstone for evidence-based decision-making.

By the end of the session, attendees will walk away with concrete ideas and resources to strengthen their own science communication practices and to contribute to building a more resilient scientific community.

Join us for a lunchtime session bringing together representatives from four key Austrian public institutions — the Austrian Parliament, the Federal Computing Centre, the Federal Ministry of Innovation, Mobility and Infrastructure, and the City of Vienna.

Each speaker will offer a brief insight into how their organisation engages with and applies scientific knowledge in their day-to-day work, and what kinds of research collaborations or expertise they are looking for. This is a great opportunity for researchers to learn about non-academic career pathways and partnership opportunities, and to make direct contact with practitioners at the intersection of science and public policy.

Speakers:

Dr. Christoph Clar, Policy Officer, Research and Support in Parliamentary Matters, Parliament Austria

Gerhard Embacher-Köhle, Senior Management Consultant, Austrian Federal Computing Centre (BRZ)

Dr. Katharina Meissner-Schöller, Head of the Department for Science, Research and Business City Vienna

Florian Schwendinger, Policy Officer, Federal Ministry of Innovation, Mobility and Infrastructure (BMIMI)

Are you keen to see your research results integrated into decision-making but don’t know where to start? Science for policy can be very rewarding, but some basic considerations for engaging in science-policy can help you get your foot in the door or up your level of impact. A basic introduction that provides some tips for engagement will be followed up with short impulse talks from a panel of experts, highlighting different opportunities for policy engagement and the skills that got them there. It will also include teasers for different existing toolkits (e.g., Sci-4-Pol Competence Framework) and training opportunities (e.g., Science-Policy Pairing Scheme, or IEEP-EGU mentorship scheme) to boost your science for policy engagement skills. The session will end with an open Q&A with the panel.

Once you have completed your PhD a new challenge reveals itself: finding a position where you can apply your advanced skillset. This task is not always easy, and frequently a general overview of the available positions is missing.
The academic pathway is often considered as the natural next step for scientists, however, in some divisions, up to 70% of PhD graduates will go into work outside of academia. There are many different careers beyond academia which require or benefit from a research background, but often early career scientists struggle to make the transition due to reduced support and networking.

In this panel discussion, scientists with a range of backgrounds give their advice on building a career. The panel will start by discussing common career questions, such as how to transition between academia and industry, and what are the pros and cons of a career inside and outside of academia. The session will then conclude with panellists answering questions from the audience. This short course is targeted at early career scientists, but is open to anyone considering the next step in their career.

Geoscientists play a key role in providing essential information in decision-making processes that consider environmental, social, and economic consequences of geoscience work. Therefore, their responsibilities extend beyond scientific analysis alone. Global challenges, such as climate change, resource management, and disaster risk reduction, push geoscientists to expand their role beyond research and to engage ethically in public efforts.
Geoethics provides a framework for reflecting on the ethical, social, and cultural implications of geoscience in research, practice, and education, guiding responsible action for society and the environment. It also encourages the scientific community to move beyond purely technical solutions by embracing just, inclusive, and transformative approaches to socio-environmental issues.
Furthermore, science is inseparable from social and geopolitical contexts. These conditions shape what research is funded, whose knowledge is valued, with whom we collaborate, and who has access to conferences. As Earth and planetary scientists, we must consider the human and environmental consequences of our work. This is especially true in Earth observation, where many satellites have both scientific and military applications, and where scientific tools have at times enabled ecocide and resource exploitation under neocolonial systems.
This session will offer insights and reflections across a wide range of topics, from theoretical considerations to case studies, foster awareness and discussion of sensitive issues at the geoscience–society interface and explore how geoethics can guide responsible behavior and policies in the geosciences.

Climate change is one of the defining societal challenges of the 21st century, and its impacts increasingly affect communities worldwide. Despite growing evidence, political and societal responses remain inadequate for mitigation, adaptation, and loss and damage, resulting in persistent vulnerabilities, more frequent and intense extreme weather events, and accumulating impacts on societies and ecosystems. This shortfall in climate action has prompted citizens and organizations to pursue legal action—seeking remedies for climate-related damages and putting pressure on decision-makers to commit to and implement meaningful emission reductions. Among many important recent developments, the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has highlighted the crucial role of climate science in litigation and policymaking, specifying that climate action must be grounded in the best available scientific evidence. This interdisciplinary session invites contributions that advance the integration of insights from the geosciences into legal practice. We welcome new scientific methods to support legal arguments, as well as inter- and transdisciplinary approaches on the integration of scientific insights in climate litigation, and on the effective communication of scientific findings to legal practitioners and the broader society. Submissions may also address questions of climate change and impact attribution, responsibility, human and environmental rights, burden sharing of efforts, translation between science and law, and science communication, that link beyond disciplinary boundaries. Please note that all first authors of an abstract to any Programme Group (PG) within the General Assembly are allowed to also submit a second regular abstract to an Education and Outreach Session (EOS)-led session like this one.

Science communication includes the efforts of natural, physical and social scientists, communications professionals, and teams that communicate the process and values of science and scientific findings to non-specialist audiences outside of formal educational settings. The goals of science communication can include enhanced dialogue, understanding, awareness, enthusiasm, influencing sustainable behaviour change, improving decision making, and/or community building. Channels to facilitate science communication can include in-person interaction through teaching and outreach programs, and online through social media, mass media, podcasts, video, or other methods. This session invites presentations by individuals and teams on science communication practice, research, and reflection, addressing questions like:

What kind of communication efforts are you engaging in and how are you doing it?
What are the biggest challenges or successes you’ve had in engaging the public with your work?
How are other disciplines (such as social sciences) informing understanding of audiences, strategies, or effects?
How do you spark joy and foster emotional connection through activities?
How do you allow for co-creation of ideas within a community?
How are you assessing and measuring the positive impacts on society of your endeavours?
What are lessons learned from long-term communication efforts?

This session invites you to share your work and join a community of practice to inform and advance the effective communication of earth and space science.

Policy development and decision-making require robust science-based evidence to address societal challenges. Scientific data and analysis are also crucial for drafting or updating regulation to ensure the most relevant, and state-of-the-art methodologies are used to support effective laws and procedures. Although some mechanisms are being created to provide knowledge-based advice to policymakers, the pathways for scientists to engage and support the process of decision-making and regulation development are often unclear. Therefore, there is a need among the scientific community to share experiences and best practices to enrich decision-making at local, regional-national and European/international levels.
This session will demonstrate examples of successful, as well as lessons learnt from ineffective, engagement of geoscientists in policy design, regulation design, decision-makings and other actions in a political context, to deliver on societal benefits beyond academia. Challenges, main barriers encountered and strategies to overcome them will be examined.
The session will also showcase the role of stakeholders working with political institutions and how engagement with the scientific community can trigger fruitful deliberations between science, policy and society.
The session also aims at showcasing the outcome of evidence-based regulations addressing societal challenges, such as climate change effects or sustainable use of natural resources.
This session is aimed at researchers, policymakers and those working at the interface, from all career stages and disciplines. It will provide a space for questions and discussion, along with ample networking opportunities, including during the proposed associated Splinter Meeting during EGU 2026 week.

All science has uncertainty. Global challenges such as disaster risk, environmental degradation, and climate change illustrate that an effective dialogue between science and society requires clear communication of uncertainty. Responsible science communication conveys the challenges of managing uncertainty that is inherent in data, models and predictions, facilitating the society to understand the contexts where uncertainty emerges and enabling active participation in discussions. Uncertainty communication can play a major role across the risk management cycle, especially during decision-making, and should be tailored to the audience and the timing of delivery. Therefore, research on quantification and communication of uncertainties deepens our understanding of how to make scientific evidence more actionable in critical moments.

This session invites presentations by individuals and teams on communicating scientific uncertainty to non-expert audiences, addressing topics such as:

(1) Innovative and practical tools (e.g. from social or statistical research) for communicating uncertainty
(2) Pitfalls, challenges and solutions to communicating uncertainty with non-experts
(3) Communicating uncertainty in risk and crisis situations (e.g., natural hazards, climate change, public health crises)

Examples of research fitting into the categories above include a) new, creative ways to visualize different aspects of uncertainty, b) new frameworks to communicate the level of confidence associated with research, c) testing the effectiveness of existing tools and frameworks, such as the categories of “confidence” used in expert reports (e.g., IPCC), or d) research addressing the challenges of communicating high-uncertainty high-impact events.

This session encourages you to share your work and join a community of practice to inform and advance the effective communication of uncertainty in earth and space science.

Scenarios and storylines provide complementary frameworks to explore, quantify, and communicate climate risks under deep uncertainty, and to support decision-making across science, policy and practice. Storylines, defined as “physically self-consistent unfoldings of past events, or of plausible future events or pathways,” can be used to systematically describe climate-driven trends or extreme events, and the associated risk while accounting for uncertainty. Socioeconomic scenarios explore long-term alternative development pathways, exposure and vulnerability dynamics, and societal responses. Together, they provide a powerful framework to investigate short to long-term climate risk estimates and projections, including compound and cascading risks, stress-test systems, intervention options in uncertain futures. They allow us to explore multiple plausible futures, supporting decision-making in high-uncertainty conditions and helping prioritize and optimize interventions to reduce negative impacts.

This session brings together researchers and practitioners working across climate science, impacts and risk assessment, and social sciences to advance the development and application of climate risk storylines and scenarios. We welcome contributions that span the full chain from physical climate modelling and event attribution to the co-production of narratives with stakeholders, and the use of scenarios in real-world decision contexts.

We invite abstracts that address, among others:

a) Physical and impact-based climate storylines, including past events, attribution studies, and plausible future extremes
b) Development and use of socioeconomic scenarios, including qualitative narratives and their quantification
c) Methods for integrating quantitative and qualitative knowledge, and linking climate and non-climate risk drivers
d) Conceptual models and frameworks for combining hazards, exposure, vulnerability and response
e) Applications of storylines and scenarios for stress testing, impact and risk assessment, early warning systems, adaptation planning and policy support
f) Participatory and co-production approaches that enhance relevance, robustness and uptake for decision-making

By bridging physical modelling, socioeconomic pathways and stakeholder-driven approaches, this session aims to strengthen the role of storylines and scenarios as actionable tools for managing climate risks in a rapidly changing world.

The session deals with scientific concepts and empirical studies in the natural and social sciences that address the societal pressures on the Earth system and/or the effects of Earth system changes on societies in the context of the Anthropocene. It involves descriptive and explanatory approaches for a better understanding of key interlinkages, feedbacks and natural and social tipping points as well as normative or ethical views of habitability such as planetary boundaries and social justice. Hereby, it focuses on the complexity, dynamics and uncertainties of the underlying Earth system processes and social, economic and political dynamics across spatial and temporal scales as well as preventive interventions for systemic sustainability transformations. The aim is to explore the potential of deeper integration of the different research strands with their ontological and epistemological knowledge for the advancement of Anthropocene research. The topics range from the analysis of stratigraphic archives of anthropogenic pressures and climate change impacts on human health and food security to secondary effects such as poverty, inequality and migration. Reflection of transformative capacities encompasses governance arrangements and policies with a particular emphasis on the communicative science-policy/society interface. Selected guiding questions are: What additional knowledge and methods are needed to more appropriately describe key interlinkages between Earth system and societies shaping the Anthropocene? What natural and social sciences evidence is needed as reference to further negotiate and agree on the future habitability of the planet for human societies and wild species? What science communication and education can facilitate the transfer of knowledge and strengthen societal capacities for sustainability transformations without destroying the hope for a liveable future? Approaches from all related disciplines and studies from around the world will be considered.

During the last decades research in geosciences has become increasingly interdisciplinary. This is due to the fact that fundamental questions in science like “Which role did geological processes play in the origin of life on Earth?”, “How did the geosphere, biosphere and atmosphere interplay during the emergence and evolution of terrestrial life” and “Which geological and geophysical conditions ae necessary for the appearance of life on other celestial bodies” will not be answered by one discipline alone but require a concerted and coordinated approach involving many researchers with seemingly unrelated scientific backgrounds. Thus, boundaries between disciplines disappear and new cross-disciplinary fields like geochemistry, geobiology and astrobiology emerge. To be successful in such interdisciplinary fields the European research community needs to

• foster interdisciplinary research projects
• train the next generation of scientists in multidisciplinary research
• convince decision makers about the necessary of interdisciplinary research and training
• alert the general public to highlights of interdisciplinary research

Research in interdisciplinary fields opens a multitude of perspectives for researchers. Also, many of them meet lively interest of the general public. However, there are also challenges to be met: Firstly, researchers have to learn the language of fields seemingly unrelated to their own. Secondly, traditional curricular at universities might not always be open to or include interdisciplinary fields. Thirdly, there is always the chance of pseudoscience gaining ground.
In the proposed session following items could be discussed:

• Training in interdisciplinary fields like astrobiology: Experiences, chances, challenges and pitfalls
• Which channels and methods are apt to engage the general public (e.g. How can science fiction be used to interest people in research)
• How can we use interdisciplinary research areas to motivate young people to embark on a career in science?
• How to create efficient and sustainable European structures to coordinate and promote research in interdisciplinary fields

The experience of new structures like the European Astrobiology Institute in those areas could be of great value for other emerging interdisciplinary subjects. To our minds, such a session would be timely in a changing European science landscape.

Understanding where people live, how populations and visitors are distributed across space, and how these patterns shift over time is central to planning in an era of climate change, natural hazards, and mounting pressures on natural environments. This session focuses on data-driven approaches that connect advances in gridded population and socio-demographic datasets with the management of nature-based tourism and outdoor recreation across rural communities, destinations, and protected landscapes. Emphasis is placed on methodological progress in building, validating, and integrating spatial population and human-activity data—along with assessing spatial accuracy, uncertainty, and data fusion methods for future projections under alternative scenarios. The session also focuses on real-world applications that translate these data products into actionable planning and governance, including climate change adaptation, disaster risk management, sustainable land-use planning, and destination resilience. Key thematic areas include geoscience methods for tourism and recreation; the role of biodiversity, geodiversity, and ecosystem services; natural hazards and risk communication; strategic decision-making and stakeholder trust in data; participatory and citizen approaches; and the use of local knowledge to support sustainable development and mitigation. Overall, the session highlights how robust spatial evidence can support transparent, impactful decisions for communities and environments under uncertainty.

Forests and surrounding landscapes are interconnected, and any human activities are integral elements of the socio-ecological system. Forest landscape management usually involves multi-stakeholder interventions to negotiate and implement management actions for local livelihoods, health and well-being. In this context integrated Decision Support Systems (DSS) are needed that help to address ecosystem services at the landscape scale by linking forest, agricultural and landscape interactions. The main aim of this inter- and transdisciplinary session is to identify solutions that use new and innovative methodological approaches in decision support, focusing on holistic planning to enhance sustainable ecosystem management and address ecosystem services, risks, and uncertainties. Computerized decision support systems (DSS) are know to support planning and decision making in semi- and unstructured decision problems. In that context database systems are often linked with analytical models and expert knowledge to take informed and data-driven decisions and allow managers visualizations by various graphical and tabular means. The first generation of DSSs was typically designed to address relatively narrow, well-defined problems for only one ecosystem service (e.g. timber production or increasing the resistance against storms). There has been a trend towards the development of more integrated DSS that simultaneously cover a broader range of ES such as habitat for biodiversity conservation and water provision, but there are still few examples for landscape management. This session invites contributions that bring together the scientific advances in this direction by presenting frameworks off integrated DSS and advandced combinations of methods, models and data to support decison making.

Water underpins every aspect of life, from healthy ecosystems to economic prosperity and human well-being. People, ecosystems, and all living species depend on it for survival. As climate change intensifies droughts, floods, and water quality degradation, ensuring water resilience has become an urgent priority. The recently adopted EU Water Resilience Strategy (2025) responds to this challenge setting out an ambitious agenda to ensure Europe’s water systems can withstand growing climate-induced pressures, water reuse and preserving ecosystems while supporting human well-being and enabling water-smart economy. It calls for integrated water governance, and systemic and innovative solutions to reduce vulnerabilities, and build adaptive capacity across all sectors. Nature-Based Solutions (NbS) offer transformative means to achieve these objectives. By restoring ecosystems, enhancing natural water retention, and reinforcing the connectivity between terrestrial and aquatic systems, NbS help maintaining hydrological balance while delivering multi-faceted ecosystems services and biodiversity gains. Mainstreaming NbS requires bridging the gap between strategy design and implementation, through replicating and scaling up successful models, aligning policies and financing instruments while fostering participatory governance to ensure solutions are ecologically effective and socially acceptable. This session invites participants to explore how mainstreaming NbS can translate the EU Strategy into action by closing the implementation gap and advancing integrated water management frameworks that align governance, financing, and innovation under a shared ambition: achieving water resilience. Contributions are welcome from real-world NbS case studies, methodological approaches and tools for co-design and stakeholder engagement in water management planning and implementation. In particular, we seek insights into how NbS are valued and implemented as alternative and/or complementary investments to grey infrastructure, and which methods are agile, whilst robust, to undertake such comparative evaluations. Submissions demonstrating innovation and practical applications, monitoring and evaluation strategies, and measurable outcomes showcasing NbS co-benefits would be highly valued, ensuring that the discussion bridges scientific evidence with real-world impact to enhance water availability and quality, reduce disaster risk, while strengthening socio-ecological resilience.

A number of countries develop and disseminate ‘National Climate Scenario’ products to inform a range of applications, including climate risk assessments and impacts assessments and the development of adaptation plans.
Different nations have taken a range of approaches to the provision of their National Scenarios to provide decision-relevant information. Common challenges encountered by the providers of National Scenarios include how to capture, quantify and communicate uncertainties, the provision of information at high enough resolution to inform relevant applications, how to update and revise National Projections to capture new and emerging science, and understanding the user landscape to provide information of both the type and format that is relevant and accessible to a wide range of ‘next users’ and ‘end users’ with different levels of technical capacity and different specific requirements.
The session will take an inter-disciplinary view of the landscape of the provision and use of National Projections, and we particularly encourage submissions that consider:
• Latest plans and opportunities for developing new or updated National Projections products and services;
• Challenges in the provision of National climate information – including technical hurdles, information gaps and the challenges in providing information in ways that is relevant and accessible;
• New developments in the science or scenario products drawing from novel types of information that could form part of a National Climate information package – e.g. drawing from event Attribution, exploiting decadal forecasts to provide near-term projection information, provision of ‘High Impact, Low Likelihood’ scenarios, exploitation of convection-permitting downscaling and global high resolution models, the use of storylines approaches;
• Understanding user needs and the co-development of climate information and services;
• The future outlook and opportunities for national climate services, including developments such as CMIP7 and CORDEX, potential to use of AI emulation in projections products, and the implications of wider climate science and or policy developments.

Achieving carbon neutrality, and ultimately net carbon removal, is a central pillar of climate mitigation, but it increasingly entails complex scientific, technological, and societal challenges. Pathways consistent with limiting global warming to 1.5°C or 2°C are expected to rely heavily on the deployment of negative emission strategies, including afforestation and reforestation, bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS), enhanced rock weathering, and direct air carbon capture and storage. While these approaches offer substantial mitigation potential, they are constrained by biogeophysical limits, technological feasibility, governance challenges, and uneven social impacts across regions and communities. At the same time, the transition toward carbon neutrality is reshaping industrial structures, land use, and everyday life, with significant implications for the distribution of costs and benefits. These transformations can intensify social conflicts, disproportionately affect vulnerable groups, and shape public perceptions and acceptance of climate policies and technologies. Understanding the interactions between technological deployment, societal responses, and governance is therefore essential for assessing the feasibility and inclusiveness of carbon neutrality pathways. This session examines carbon neutrality pathways from inter- and trans-disciplinary perspectives, focusing on the potentials and limits of negative emission technologies and their societal implications, including issues of social conflict, governance, and inclusion.

Early Warning Systems (EWS) represent a critical cornerstone of disaster risk reduction as they provide an essential foundation for protecting lives and livelihoods through the timely provision of actionable information. However, the efficacy of EWS is dependent not only on scientific robustness but also on seamless integration across disciplines, from disaster risk knowledge and hazard detection to communication strategies and community response. Subsequently, these systems require innovative advancements across the warning chain to meet the ambitious targets outlined in the Early Warnings for All (EW4ALL) initiative action plan and the Sendai Framework towards multi-hazard, all-vulnerability, and impact-based EWS. This session aims to foster a dialogue on the implementation and methodological innovations surrounding EWS, particularly between researchers working toward more effective, inclusive, and actionable EWS.

This interdisciplinary session invites contributions from a wide range of disciplines and sectors involved with the full spectrum of EWS development and implementation, including but not limited to natural hazards science, atmospheric and hydrologic research, social sciences, and disaster management practice. We encourage submissions addressing the following key themes and sharing of lessons from successes and failures:
● Early warning and anticipatory action: Frameworks and multi-stakeholder implementation in translating early warnings/EWS into effective disaster response and preparedness mechanisms;
● Impact-based approaches: methodologies and approaches for design and implementation of impact-based EWS;
● Technological innovations: advances in AI, machine learning, Earth observation, IoT and other cutting-edge technologies in components of EWS;
● Risk communication and community engagement: strategies that integrate behavioral and psychological insights, building trust, and ensure effective warning communication and dissemination, particularly at the community level;
● Data integration and system interoperability: approaches to integrate diverse data sources that address challenges in cross-agency data sharing and platform integration.

Climate services are instrumental in translating local knowledge and scientific insights into practical applications, empowering communities at multiple scales to efficiently tackle climate change challenges.

The paradigm of Essential Variables (EVs) - ECVs, EOVs, EBVs - provides a data-driven foundation for global environmental monitoring (GCOS, GEO, UN SDGs). Yet, their full potential is hampered by interoperability gaps, fragmented governance, and siloed infrastructures, limiting integrated use and translation into local action.

Conversely, local demand for actionable information is growing. Earth Observation data, often as Analysis-Ready Data (ARD), must be transformed into locally relevant, co-created Action-Ready Information (ARI) for climate solutions. This requires integrating global EVs with local data and knowledge.

This session bridges these fronts. We explore all aspects of climate service development from the co-creation of climate services that emphasize inclusive and novel methodologies and the integration of multiple knowledge systems, through to the development of usable, equitable and impactful solutions for multiple stakeholder groups a focus on the use of technical, infrastructural, and socio-technical advancements to evolve EVs into a truly interoperable, global common language and ensure their effective translation for local decision-making. We welcome contributions on:

- Interoperability Foundations: Semantic frameworks (iADOPT, SOSA/SSN), FAIR principles, and lessons from research infrastructures (ENVRI, CRDCs) aligning EVs across domains and global programmes.
- From ARD to ARI: Case studies on transforming EV-based products into local insights via co-creation, integrating satellite data with in-situ, citizen science, and indigenous knowledge.
- Cross-Scale Infrastructure: Architectures and platforms (e.g., digital twins) enabling seamless data flow from global systems to local applications.
- Policy and Capacity: How interoperable EVs strengthen global policy (IPCC, SDGs) and how local insights inform action, including funding, capacity building, and governance models.

We invite scientists, data engineers, social scientists, and policymakers to connect the "essential" with the "actionable", forging a coherent path from global observation to local solution.

Nature-based solutions (NBS) are increasingly recognized as transformative strategies for addressing the twin challenges of climate change and environmental degradation while promoting sustainable development. By harnessing the capacity of ecosystems, NBS such as wetlands, restored streams, floodplains, and green infrastructure can mitigate floods and droughts, improve water quality, enhance biodiversity, and support human well-being. Their implementation aligns with the European Green Deal, the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and global climate adaptation commitments. Despite their growing prominence, many questions remain about how to design, implement, assess, and scale up NBS in diverse hydrological and socio-economic contexts. Evidence is still emerging on their long-term performance compared to conventional engineering approaches, the trade-offs and synergies among ecosystem services, and the enabling conditions for mainstreaming NBS in water and land management policies.
This session explicitly aims to foster interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary exchange by bringing together hydrologists, geomorphologists, ecologists, soil scientists, hazard researchers, and social scientists, alongside practitioners and policymakers. The goal is to advance both the scientific basis and the practical governance of NBS for resilience planning, land and water management, and climate adaptation across landscapes.
We welcome contributions that:
- Provide evidence of NBS performance in water storage, flood and drought resilience, sediment and nutrient retention, and ecosystem service delivery.
- Develop or apply innovative tools and frameworks for placement and site selection, designing, and monitoring NBS (e.g., modelling, remote sensing, decision-support systems, participatory approaches).
- Explore co-benefits and trade-offs, particularly in relation to hydrological performance, ecological, and socio-economic effects.
- Present case studies and comparative analyses from different climatic and geographical contexts or applied to specific anthropic elements such as long linear infrastructures.
- Identify governance, policy, and financial mechanisms that enable successful NBS implementation and upscaling.
By bridging science, practice, and policy, this session highlights NBS as key instruments for advancing water and land management, strengthening resilience, and creating sustainable futures.

Social-science and humanities (SSH) research is crucial for informing ambitious, effective, just or societally acceptable climate action. This session highlights how SSH insights on social metabolism, labor transitions, perceptions and societal readiness, institutional dynamics, justice, needs/capabilities, and power relations can enrich and reshape diverse modeling approaches. We aim to provide a platform for interdisciplinary work that broadens the scope of what models and scenarios can represent, clarifies their limits, and fosters connections across methods.

We welcome contributions that:

Integrate SSH concepts and methods into integrated assessment models (IAMs), energy–economy–environment models, or other analytical frameworks

Use empirical and participatory approaches to inform model assumptions, structures, and constraints

Engage with normative dimensions such as fairness, feasibility, and societal acceptance

Connect justice issues to marginalized or disadvantaged communities, especially in the Global South

Address the role of governance, institutions, finance, and critically evaluate material and human needs in shaping transition pathways

Investigate social impacts of modeled scenarios (e.g., income, labor, or demand modeling)

Just-transitions and equity analyses linked to real supply-chain data & green industrial policy

We particularly encourage work that incorporates procedural, recognitional, transitional and other forms of justice, identifies how data gaps map onto justice gaps, and provides bi-directional feedback between social science and modeling communities. By convening these perspectives, the session seeks to advance interdisciplinary approaches that make climate and energy scenarios more relevant, inclusive, and impactful.

Climate change poses a significant threat to sustainability. It disproportionately affects different social groups, intensifying interconnected risks across socio-ecological systems and challenging conventional approaches to disaster risk reduction and adaptation. These challenges are particularly pronounced in climate-sensitive ecosystems, such as arid and semi-arid regions, where land degradation, water scarcity, biodiversity loss, and socio-economic vulnerability intersect.

Nature-based and community-led strategies offer effective, context-specific solutions that reduce climate risks, restore ecosystems, enhance biodiversity and ecosystem services, and support local livelihoods, enabling sustainable and equitable adaptation even in highly constrained environments such as drylands.

This session invites contributions that explore how nature-based and community-led approaches support disaster risk reduction, ecosystem restoration, and climate change adaptation across diverse ecological and socio-economic contexts, with a particular focus on research that:
- Assesses the effectiveness of these strategies in reducing risk and enhancing climate resilience
- Examines socio-ecological trade-offs and synergies by integrating ecological and social science perspectives within systems-based approaches
- Evaluates long-term resilience and restoration outcomes across varied ecological and socio-economic contexts, including arid and semi-arid landscapes
- Engages with Indigenous and local knowledge systems, emphasizing culturally grounded and community-driven solutions
- Investigates governance challenges, structural barriers, and enabling conditions, and explores inclusive frameworks that support equity, participation, and sustainability
- Investigates synergies and trade-offs between nature-based approaches and conventional measures
- Examines the effectiveness, resilience, and scalability of specific nature-based solution typologies (e.g., water harvesting, vegetation restoration, agroforestry)
- Examines innovative monitoring and assessment tools (e.g., citizen science, remote sensing, hydrological modelling, eDNA, AI) to evaluate, optimize, and scale nature-based and community-led strategies

This session is supported by the RISK-KAN Working Group on “Nature-Based and Community-Led Climate Risk Strategies.” Contributions from diverse regions are welcome, with a particular emphasis on early-career researchers and practitioners from underrepresented areas.

The connection between atmospheric science and public policy is more important now than ever. Poor air quality and climate hazards create compounding risks that impact public health and equity, demanding effective, science-informed policy solutions. This session calls for research that explores how mitigation and adaptation strategies for air pollution and climate change may influence atmospheric composition and dynamics in the present and future.

Abstracts should investigate the efficacy of climate mitigation and air pollution controls by linking them to impacts on air quality, climate, public health, or environmental justice. Of particular interest is research examining both intended outcomes and potential unintended consequences of emission reduction strategies—including unexpected changes in atmospheric chemical composition such as ozone increases or unforeseen climate impacts. Submissions that consider interactions between air quality, climate, health, and environmental justice, connecting the environmental and social sciences, are especially valued.

Submissions may employ a wide range of techniques including remote sensing, statistical and Earth-system modeling, ground-based observations, machine learning, and policy analysis. Contributions examining historical, current, and projected future changes in anthropogenic emissions and their atmospheric responses are encouraged, particularly those investigating how effectively policies can address poor air quality, climate change, health impacts, and environmental injustices. Novel research that identifies areas of policy need through advances in atmospheric science is also sought, ultimately supporting more holistic and effective strategies that balance pollution reduction with comprehensive understanding of atmospheric system responses.

NOTE: The session AS3.25 - Atmospheric composition responses to historical, current, and future changes in anthropogenic emissions has merged with this one.

The urgency, complexity, and economic implications of greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reductions demand strategic investments in science-based information for planning, implementing, and tracking emission reduction policies and actions. An increasing number of applications succeed by combining activity-based emissions data with atmospheric GHG measurements and analyses – this hybrid approach can yield additional insights and practical information to support mitigation efforts at different scales. Inspired by this potential, the Integrated Global Greenhouse Gas Information System (IG3IS) of the World Meteorological Organization works to identify and document good practice guidelines for informing decisions, while promoting scientific advances and facilitating two-way linkages between practitioners and stakeholders in the policy realm, tailoring research actions to meet policy needs.
Since EGU18, this session continues to showcase how scientific data and analyses can be transformed into actionable information services and successful climate solutions for a wide range of user-communities. Actionable information results from data with the required spatial and temporal granularity and compositional details able to explicitly target, attribute and track GHG emissions and reductions where climate action is achievable.
This session seeks contributions from researchers, inventory compilers, government decision and policy makers, non-government and private sector service providers that show the use and impact of science-based methods for detecting, quantifying, tracking GHG emissions and the resulting climate mitigation. We especially welcome presentations of work guided by IG3IS good practice research guidelines at urban and national scale and for specific economic sectors. The scope of the session spans measurements of all GHGs and from all tiers of observation.

Europe is warming faster than any other continent, with climate-related hazards such as heatwaves, droughts, floods, and wildfires becoming more frequent and intense. These events not only pose direct threats to human systems but also trigger cascading effects across ecosystems, biodiversity, and biogeochemical cycles. This panel discussion explores the complex interplay between climate change and compounding natural hazards—such as wildfires, landslides, and extreme weather—and their cascading impacts on ecological systems, biogeochemical processes, and carbon dynamics. It will examine how these interactions affect ecosystem services, resilience and adaptation, drawing on insights from ecological modelling, Earth observation, and multi-risk analysis.

To effectively address these complex and cascading risks, the session also draws on expertise in governance and science-policy communication, recognising that scientific insights must be translated into actionable strategies, informed decision-making, and inclusive policies that enhance societal and ecological resilience.

This session brings together experts in ecological modelling, Earth Observation, multi-risk assessment, governance, and science-policy communication, including members of the EGU Climate Hazards Task Force. Panellists will respond to questions from the chairs and the audience, addressing how scientific research can better inform policy, what tools are needed to anticipate complex hazard-ecosystem interactions, and how to foster resilience in the face of uncertainty. The session aims to bridge disciplinary boundaries and spark dialogue between scientists, policymakers, and civil society, encouraging a shift from reactive to proactive risk and ecosystem management.

Climate services challenge the traditional interface between users and providers of climate information as it requires the establishment of a dialogue between subjects, who often have limited knowledge of each-other’s activities and practices. Increasing the understanding and usability of climate information for societal use has become a major challenge where economic growth, and social development crucially depends on adaptation to climate variability and change.

To this regard, climate services do not only create user-relevant climate information, but also stimulate the need to quantify vulnerabilities and come up with appropriate adaptation solutions that can be applied in practice. This session invites contributions from all fields in which climate information is used in decision-making processes, including agriculture, renewable energy, banking, water management, tourism and any other societal sector dependent on climate information.

The operational generation, management and delivery of climate services poses a number of new challenges to the traditional way of accessing and distributing climate data. With a private sector growing and playing an increasingly important role as a service provider, it is important to understand the roles and responsibilities of publicly funded climate data, information and services, as well as the standardisation process for climate services.

This session aims to gather best practices and lessons learnt, for how climate services can successfully facilitate adaptation to climate variability and change by providing climate information that is tailored to the real user need.
Contributions are encouraged from public and private climate services providers, as well as from international efforts (GFCS, CSP, …); European Initiatives (HEU, ERA4CS, C3S, ClimatEurope, ECRA, JPI-Climate…) as well as national, regional and local experiences.

Developing effective, efficient, and equitable climate adaptation strategies requires a deep understanding of how physical hazards translate into localized, human-centered impacts. While identifying areas of concentrated physical risk is a critical first step, achieving resilience demands more granular assessments of inequalities, socio-economic vulnerability and adaptive capacity. This session aims to bridge the gap between hazard-focused risk identification, detailed social and economic vulnerability and impact analyses, actionable, adaptation strategies at different levels of governance
We place particular emphasis on the multifaceted human impacts of climate change - beyond traditional damage-cost metrics - encompassing health, livelihoods, well-being, and other critical dimensions of human life. The session will showcase insights from European climate risk assessments which develop science-based, impact-driven decision-support tools to enhance local and regional adaptive capacity. These projects integrate physical and social sciences, promote Nature-Based Solutions, support multi-level climate governance, and employ participatory approaches to co-produce adaptation pathways aligned with the EU Mission on Adaptation to Climate Change by 2030, but longer time horizons are also envisaged.
We invite contributions that:
-present innovative, interdisciplinary methods for assessing climate risk that integrate physical hazard data with socio-economic vulnerability and adaptive capacity analysis.
- explore equity-focused socio-economic evaluations, including capability-based approaches to understand how climate change affects what individuals and communities can do and be.
- investigate the role of Nature-Based Solutions in building resilience.
- examine cross-sectoral and cascading impacts of extreme events on human systems.
- showcase community-based and participatory methods (e.g., stakeholder consultations, Living Labs) for co-developing transformative adaptation strategies.
- demonstrate decision-support tools that translate complex risk assessments into actionable local adaptation and mitigation plans.
By bringing together diverse perspectives, empirical evidence, and methodological innovations, this session will advance the science–policy interface for climate adaptation, contributing to climate-resilient development pathways for metropolitan and regional contexts across Europe and beyond.

Geodetic research produces important contributions that are essential for understanding the dynamics of the Earth. However, the path from research results to policy impact is often challenging. Essential Geodetic Variables (EGVs) were developed to help promote geodetic products and their importance for global society, offering a structured way to identify, share, and communicate key components of geodesy. Furthermore, a classification as EGV should also be an incentive for operational monitoring and the provision of base funding. But how do we make sure that EGVs are not just useful within the scientific community, but also accessible and relevant to policymakers and other stakeholders?
This session will provide an overview of the latest developments in defining the EGVs and draw lessons from other scientific disciplines on how they communicated their essential variables to scientists and stakeholders. We will have an open discussion and hear from experts at the interface of science and policy to explore strategies for making geodetic products and data easier to understand. By the end of the session, we aim to outline specific ways the community can use the EGVs to streamline communication and enhance the visibility of geodetic research.

Water scarcity and management under uncertain future conditions represent significant global challenges that necessitate adaptive, robust, and inclusive adaptation strategies. Climate change is causing increased frequency and severity of extreme weather events such as floods and droughts, making it difficult to predict and manage water resources since historical data is no longer a reliable guide for future conditions. Growing urban populations demand more water and can outpace water infrastructure development, leading to shortages and inequities in water distribution, often exacerbated by political, economic, and social factors that influence water governance. The pace of technological change in water treatment, distribution, and conservation can improve water systems, but it introduces uncertainty regarding their long-term viability and integration into existing systems.

Decision Making Under Deep Uncertainty (DMDU) represents a promising approach to help decision-makers confront such a wide range of unpredictable and variable future conditions. Unlike traditional frameworks that depend on accurate predictions and precise probabilities, DMDU accepts that the future is inherently unpredictable, especially in complex systems like human water systems, and emphasizes adaptive planning that evolves with new information on water supply, demand, and ecosystem health. This session aims to gather scientists to discuss and exchange knowledge of existing and emerging approaches for supporting the design and implementation of adaptive and robust water management strategies under deep uncertainty. We welcome contributions focused on recent methodological advances, including uncertainty and sensitivity analysis, scenario generation techniques, robust optimization, and experiences related to real-world applications.

Water sustains societies, economies, and ecosystem services locally and globally. Yet, competition over freshwater is intensifying worldwide, driven by rising demand and shifting availability under climate change and variability. Addressing these challenges requires integrative water management and policy approaches that balance trade-offs across social, economic, and environmental water uses. Equally, adaptive and flexible solutions are needed to allow policies to adapt to changing and uncertain climatic and socio-economic conditions, thereby strengthening the sustainability and resilience of water systems. This session provides a forum for showcasing novel and emerging research at the intersection of agricultural production, energy security, water supply, economic development, and environmental conservation. In particular, we encourage contributions that: (i) advance understanding of critical interconnections, feedbacks, and risks within water system components, (ii) introduce novel methods or tools for evaluating and monitoring trade-offs and performance in water allocation, management, and policy across sectors, (iii) evaluate technological, policy, and/or governance innovations to address the water-food-energy-environment nexus across scales (local, regional, and/or global), and (iv) advance methods to evaluate risks to water systems and identify solutions to enhance system and user resilience. We welcome real-world examples on the successful application of these methods to facilitate integrated planning and management of the water-food-energy-environment (WEFE) nexus.

This session will showcase innovative approaches to multi-(hazard) risk assessment and management, focusing on advancing the understanding of risk components (hazard, exposure, vulnerability, and capacity) in multi-hazard settings, as well as applications of multi-hazard thinking in disaster risk reduction (DRR) and climate change adaptation. Effective DRR and the translation of research results into practice requires considering multiple hazards and their interactions as highlighted in international frameworks and reports, including the Sendai Framework, the IPCC’s AR6, and the EUCRA. Multi-(hazard) risk assessment examines how interactions among hazards shape exposure and vulnerability through hazard impacts, particularly in the context of climate change and slow-onset hazards (e.g., pandemics). Yet, conventional frameworks still often overlook interrelated hazards and risks, leading to unintended consequences. The session will highlight a spectrum of approaches to multi-(hazard) risk, from analysing hazard interactions and dynamics of vulnerability to characterising multi-hazard exposure. It will also discuss good practices and persistent challenges in managing multi-(hazard) risk across scales. By addressing the full risk management chain—analysis, evaluation, and implementation—this session will identify research gaps, synergies, and opportunities for collaboration across disciplines.
We welcome abstracts presenting original research, case studies, and critical reflections across the DRR cycle. Suggested topics include:
- Multi-(hazard) risk methodologies addressing exposure, vulnerability, and impacts.
- Tools and frameworks for multi-(hazard) risk assessment, management, and inclusive risk-informed decision-making.
- Cross-sectoral approaches that integrate physical, social, economic, environmental, and institutional dimensions.
- Treatment of uncertainty in multi-(hazard) risk and compounded impact assessment.
- Implementation of DRR measures from a multi-hazard perspective, with attention to synergies and trade-offs between hazard-specific measures.
- Multi-hazard early warning systems.
- Cascading impacts, including health impacts that follow from natural hazards, difficulties that arise when natural hazards and diseases coincide, and challenges and lessons for adaptation management facing natural hazards and diseases.

High-impact wildfire events in 2025 across the United States, France, Spain, Cyprus, South Korea, Japan, Syria, and Canada resulted in extensive burned areas, mass evacuations, substantial carbon emissions, severe smoke impacts, and loss of life. These events further underline the urgency of strengthening wildfire prevention and risk reduction efforts, from local and structural scales to broader landscape levels. Effective wildfire prevention requires a robust understanding of exposure, vulnerability, and risk in the Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI).
This session aims to showcase studies, projects, and initiatives addressing wildfire risk and vulnerability assessment, damage analysis, prevention measures, and local adaptation strategies in the WUI. We particularly welcome contributions focusing on participatory approaches, community-based risk reduction, resilience of communities and the built environment, as well as public awareness and education, household and community preparedness, stakeholder engagement, recovery processes, and lessons learned within disaster risk reduction frameworks. We also encourage submissions that critically examine prevailing wildfire management approaches and explore wildfire risk in relation to large-scale land-use change and associated agricultural, nature conservation, and climate mitigation policies. Inter- and transdisciplinary research addressing the social and political dimensions of wildfire risk, and translating scientific knowledge into policy- and action-relevant insights, is especially encouraged.
By sharing experiences, methods, and lessons learned across diverse geographical and socio-environmental contexts, this session aims to foster dialogue on wildfire risk management and support the development of practical, transferable solutions for reducing wildfire impacts in the WUI worldwide.

The imperative for disaster risk reduction is increasingly clear, especially due to the increase in frequency and intensity of hazards due to climate change. The so-called “implementation gap”, however, reveals a lack of effective measures and on the scale needed. It also demonstrates that a large proportion of human populations are still ill-advised, assisted, or lack inclusion in the decision-making processes pertaining to their adaptation and risk mitigation. The problem thus is that risk mitigation and management need to be more frequent, more intense, and adequately distributed across the different population groups.
Conversely, recent research demonstrates that most of the effective and transformative adaptation and risk mitigation happens at the local level, often through grassroots citizen-led movements. Such movements frequently stem from a deep connection with place and are motivated by the need to sustain livelihoods, preserve settlement conditions, or protect the environment. Community-led initiatives share important affinities with participatory and stakeholder-based approaches in disaster risk reduction and could contribute to addressing implementation gaps through more robust engagement with scientific assessments and evidence-based frameworks.
In this context, and following successful editions at previous EGU meetings, this session seeks to fill in the gap on accounting, analysing, and empowering citizen and stakeholder-centred risk management and disaster risk reduction approaches. We invite scholars from a wide range of disciplines to contribute their work on:
- Transdisciplinary approaches and integrative methods in disaster risk management, vulnerability, risk analysis, and disaster risk reduction that combine knowledge from both academic and non-academic stakeholders.
- Innovative methods and data sources that leverage citizen and stakeholder knowledge into risk frameworks, including mixed methods research with high transferability potential into other applications (e.g., integration with remote sensing and climate models).
- The interaction between societal dynamics and natural hazards, including the influence of urban development on the occurrence and impact of single and multiple natural hazards.
- Case studies and lessons learned that demonstrate the active involvement of citizens and other stakeholders in the design or implementation of risk assessment frameworks, risk mitigation strategies, and governance actions.

Covener: L. Giani e M. Bostenaru Dan.
This trans-disciplinary session goes beyond the disciplinary boundaries of Earth and environmental sciences to address socially relevant issues associated to geological and climate-related hazards, by integrating disciplinary paradigms and participatory research approaches. Geological and climate related hazards have always been part of Earth’s dynamics, but climate change, together with increasing land use and consumption, is intensifying their frequency, impact and societal consequences, escalating into disaster risk situations.
Effective external communication of risk is essential for the approval and implementation of prevention policies, mitigation plans and resilience pathways for institutions, communities and territories, and for strengthening trust between society and institutions. Understanding how these risks have been communicated and managed in the past can provide insights for planning future resilience actions. In this context, attention is given to how institutions incorporate risk into policies and programmes, how scientific knowledge is transferred into decision-making, and what challenges arise in communicating complex and evolving risk scenarios before, during and after catastrophic events.
The session welcomes contributions that explore the intersection of natural hazard research and social sciences, including studies on risk perception, behavioural change in preparedness and response, awareness, and the mental health impacts associated with hazardous events. Disaster risk reduction strategies should be informed not only by hazard modelling, but also by the social dynamics that shape real-world readiness and response among residents, tourists, experts and other stakeholders, as well as the protection of cultural and natural heritage.
A special focus will be devoted to case studies illustrating how institutions and scientists have addressed social crises induced by one or more geological or climate-related phenomena, how communication has activated—or failed to activate—the chain of civil responsibility, and how nature-based solutions can contribute to reducing the negative effects of climate change while supporting well-being and mental health. An emphasis will be placed on the concept of the mental map of heritage habitats, investigated through psychogeographical approaches, as a key element to be preserved and considered in retrofit, emergency management and post-disaster rebuilding processes.

Special Programme Group Session led by Panos Panagos, Calogero Schillaci, Arwyn Jones, Nils Broothaerts, Diana Vieira, Carmen Sanchez Garcia

Soil System Sciences face urgent challenges: accelerated depletion of soil resources, land degradation, climate extremes, and rising food security demands requiring coordinated scientific and policy responses.

The European Soil Observatory (EUSO) was established to provide a robust evidence base for soil policy and management at European scale. Its Stakeholder Forum fosters partnerships with academia, research communities, and organisations such as the Soil System Sciences (SSS) Division. This Special Session will examine scientific priorities in the SSS community and explore how collaboration with the EUSO can address research gaps and inform policy.

Key policy initiatives include:
• The proposed Soil Monitoring and Resilience Law (European Commission, July 2023) for monitoring soil health, sustainable management, and restoration of contaminated sites.
• Mission Soil, which will create 100 Living Labs to achieve healthy soils by 2050.
• The Carbon Removals and Carbon Farming (CRCF) Regulation, a voluntary EU framework for certifying carbon removals, soil emission reduction, and biodiversity co-benefits.

The session will feature a panel discussion with experts from the Joint Research Centre, relevant Directorate-Generals, EU agencies (EEA, EFSA), FAO, ESA, and COPERNICUS. Panelists will address challenges in soil monitoring, data harmonisation, and technology development, and showcase how EUSO’s centralised platform supports soil data flows, policy development, and restoration efforts.

Emphasis will be placed on transdisciplinary research, collaboration among scientists, policymakers, and stakeholders, and adoption of emerging tools such as digital soil mapping, soil sensing, and precision agriculture to enhance soil conservation and climate resilience.

Expected outcomes include a stronger EUSO–SSS partnership, improved cross-institutional collaboration, and broader awareness of EUSO’s role in supporting soil policy and management. Structured discussion will encourage knowledge exchange and highlight strategies for effective soil data integration and conservation initiatives across Europe and the Mediterranean.

This session welcomes all stakeholders engaged in soil monitoring and policy and aims to advance cooperation between the research and policy communities to safeguard soils for future generations.

The year 2024 was the warmest on record, with climate-related disasters displacing 46 million people worldwide and natural catastrophes causing $417 billion in economic losses. In South America, the convergence of climate change–driven temperature anomalies, deforestation, and El Niño triggered severe droughts, resulting in unprecedented agricultural losses, escalating water-use conflicts, and rising political instability across commodity-dependent economies. In the Brazilian Amazon, 2024 marked the worst drought in 120 years, directly affecting hundreds of thousands of riverside and Indigenous communities.
Within this challenging climate landscape, the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP30) convened in Belém in 2025 amid high expectations. Framed by Brazil’s president as the “COP of Truth,” the summit aimed to confront climate denial with scientific evidence and expose the gap between political rhetoric and concrete action. Central to this effort was the “Baku-to-Belém Mission to 1.5,” urging countries to clarify and strengthen emissions-reduction and adaptation targets. Yet attempts to raise ambition stalled, revealing deep divisions over a fossil-fuel phase-out roadmap. These tensions crystallized into a “coalition of the willing”, comprising more than 80 countries committed to strengthening emissions-reduction ambitions, in opposition to resistance from major petrostates. Compounding political resistance, meeting the financial needs of countries’ conditional commitments (those dependent on external funding) remains a major hurdle, as developing countries require $1.3 trillion per year by 2035 beyond self-funded targets — a number that is still far from secured.
This raises a central question: caught between countries’ (un)willingness and (un)conditional commitments, what future should we be preparing for? This Townhall brings together South American scientists present in Belém to reflect on progress and challenges ahead. As the world’s most unequal region, South America’s climate transition is inseparable from social policy, making progress especially complex. While rooted in the South American experience, the discussion resonates across global contexts.
We will examine the financial, scientific, and ethical dimensions of climate (un)agreements at COP30, focusing on:

(a) the credibility of climate finance commitments by developed economies;
(b) the role of early career researchers in addressing imbalances in technology access and knowledge transfer; and
(c) the extent to which Indigenous and ethnic minority voices were meaningfully included.
Ultimately, this discussion confronts the unresolved tensions exposed at the “COP of Truth” and explores the road ahead for global climate governance.

Climate change is the biggest global challenge of the 21st century, affecting almost every sector in the world. However, climate change impacts are profoundly unequal, disproportionately affecting the world's marginalised people, particularly those from lower economic communities and those in vulnerable and disadvantaged situations. They include women, children, older persons, indigenous peoples, people of colour, minorities, migrants, rural workers, persons with disabilities, and the poor.

This Townhall Meeting will explore or come up with how policies can be implemented for marginalized people, especially those in low-income countries, and at the same time how such policies may prevent negative human rights impacts. Panelists from EDI, EGU policy, scientific and policy communities, with contributions from the audience, will explore a number of crucial issues related to climate policy-action for vulnerable and marginalised people. The target audience can be ECRs, scientists, policymakers, social activists, media persons etc.

Policy-action questions will include:
• How can we mobilize resources for sustainable, human-rights-based development for these people? How do we ensure EDI in climate action?
• How can we convince the UN to establish a special office and dedicated research budget for climate-impacted marginalised people?
• What are the effective dedicated policies and actions to reduce GHGs that also reduce the suffering of vulnerable people?
• How can GHG-emitting countries contribute to marginalized people, proportionally to their per-capita, GHG emissions?
• How may policies established by the UNFCCC and the UNDESA better take into account the challenges faced by marginalized people and communities?
• What global and local governance approaches are necessary to alleviate the suffering of climate refugees?
• How can the transfer of geoscientific knowledge empower marginalised communities to become more resilient to climate change?

In the current geopolitical landscape, the anachronistic view of science as a "neutral space" detached from political and ethical implications, is further exposing its profound limitation. This debate is not new: over seventy years ago, the Russell-Einstein Manifesto reminded the scientific community that technological and theoretical advancements cannot be separated from their consequences on human beings, urging us to 'remember our humanity and forget the rest'. Despite this and a growing body of evidence and epistemologic debates during the last decades, science is still seen as a value-free vacuum within our institutions and for many scholars. However, geoscientists are often drawn to intersect their activities with territories and people affected by conflicts and systemic violations of international law, or with regions scarred by extractive violence and resource exploitation.

This Townhall meeting aims to create a safe and productive space to discuss the transition from a passive "scientific diplomacy" to an active "ethical accountability" within research institutions and international scientific societies.

The goal is to identify collective commitment elements with the help of EGU community, urging researchers to recognize their role, responsibility, and power in the construction of a society that respects human rights and international law. Participants are invited to contribute to the development of a declaration addressing the non-neutrality of science,
the refusal to collaborate with institutions involved in war operations, respect for international law and the construction of solidarity programs for scientific/academic communities in conflict zones.

Drawing inspiration from recent mobilizations across various prestigious scientific journals (such as The Lancet and Nature), academia and research institutions, and aligned with the European Charter for Researchers, we propose a shift in focus from "research integrity" (avoiding fraud) to "research responsibility" (avoiding complicity, fostering our humanity).

We will use collaborative methods (E.g. Brainwriting, Dot Voting, etc, with a strict time control to assure a result)
to maximize opportunities for everyone to share their view on the issues under discussion: scientific practice should be impartial but not neutral, institutional silence in the face of documented atrocities can be interpreted as a form of
connivance.

Making use of the “body or virtual positioning technique”, attendees will address critical
and controversial points raised by the global scientific community, including:

● Beyond Neutrality: Discussing the non-neutrality of science and why the "apolitical" stance is no longer viable when research infrastructure and academic communities are being systematically destroyed (the so-called "scholasticide").
● Ethical Procurement and Due Diligence: Tackling how to implement protocols to prevent institutional complicity with entities involved in conflicts condemned by international bodies and development/exploitation of dual-use technologies.
● The Dilemma of Cooperation and the “conscientious objection”: Addressing how to respond to calls, also coming from dissident scholars within affected regions, for a critical review of cooperation agreements with institutions implicated in violations of humanitarian law.
● Environmental Legacy of War: Using our expertise to monitor and denounce the long-term consequences of conflict, ranging from the contamination of air, soil and water resources to the massive production of toxic debris.