Introduction

Climate change is currently the most pressing threat facing humanity, and its effects are expected to worsen in the coming decades. As temperatures continue to rise, weather patterns are shifting and disrupting the delicate balance of ecosystems. These changes pose significant risks to all forms of life on Earth, including humans (IPCC 2021). Given the gravity of this crisis, the terms "climate crisis" or "climate emergency" are increasingly being used to describe the threat and consequences of climate change.

Climate change impacts various sectors, including agriculture, forestry, fisheries, water resources, human health, biodiversity and coastal zones. This leads to crop failures, water shortages, increased pest and disease outbreaks (Kitsara et al. 2021; van der Schriek et al. 2020; Kyriakopoulos et al. 2023), heightened forest fires and pest outbreaks (Xofis et al. 2020), altered fish stocks and survival (Papadopoulou and Vlachou, 2022), increased water scarcity, floods, and droughts (Hamed et al. 2018), health issues (Fan et al. 2023), species distribution changes (Gorman et al. 2022), and coastal erosion and flooding (Asprogerakas et al. 2020).

Climate change significantly affects economic growth and productivity through direct weather pattern changes and indirect impacts on human health, leading to decreased labor productivity and production efficiency (Roson and Mensbrugghe 2012).

Adaptation to climate change involves adjusting systems to climate events, including building sea walls and developing drought-resistant crops and early warning systems, aiming to increase resilience. Simultaneously, mitigation addresses climate change by reducing greenhouse gas emissions, promoting renewable energy, enhancing energy efficiency, and employing carbon sequestration to slow global warming (IPCC 2014 and 2021).

Understanding public perceptions of climate change and the associated risks is crucial for the success of any initiatives aimed at mitigating and adapting to it. It is imperative to comprehend the severity of the situation, acknowledge the impacts of climate change, and take steps to adapt to it (Whitmarsh and Capstick 2018; Masri et al. 2023).

It is noteworthy that the perceptions of climate change and of the global efforts against it vary significantly from country to country. These differences in perception are illustrated in the European Investment Bank’s latest climate survey (EIB 2022), with over 30 thousand participants from Europe, the United States and China. Participants from all three ranked climate change in the top three biggest challenges faced, with Chinese citizens significantly more concerned about environmental issues. In fact, 81% of Europeans considered climate change the biggest challenge in this century, and 77% felt that climate change impacts their everyday life. At the same time, Europeans, and to a lesser degree Americans, stated that they are more worried about the climate than their governments, while the Chinese felt that the opposite is true. 51% of Europeans felt that national governments are not doing enough to solve the climate crisis, and more than two-thirds of them believed that stricter government measures are needed.

Effective climate adaptation necessitates an understanding of the level and extent of awareness of the public and different groups on the issue, the incentives for action, and the ability to act at various scales, from global to local levels. Many studies have examined the opinions and perceptions of key stakeholders with an interest in or responsibility for adaptation, with the goal of assessing their influence and engagement in climate change adaptation (CCA) (Fadeyi and Maresova 2020; Simonsson et al. 2011; André et al. 2012; Russel et al. 2020; Bohensky et al. 2016; Sebos et al. 2016; Conde et al. 2005; Piwowarczyk et al. 2012; Dincă et al. 2014; Dilling and Berggren 2015; Torres-Bagur et al. 2019; Osaka and Bellamy 2020; Živojinović and Wolfslehner, 2015; Samaddar et al. 2019). In the context of CCA, stakeholders mainly refer to bodies and organizations that play a vital role in the design and implementation of actions and measures aimed at adapting to climate change in priority sectors and vulnerable areas (Nydrioti et al. 2022). Involving stakeholders in the decision-making process is a crucial step as it allows for potential future risks to be identified and addressed. Through stakeholder engagement, key groups are given the opportunity to provide input and contribute to the improvement of a measure or action, ultimately reducing the potential for future risks.

Fadeyi and Maresova (2020) studied the priorities of key actors regarding climate change in three developing countries in West Africa and found that continuous work by governments and local authorities is needed to effectively incorporate their opinions into climate action. Simonsson et al. (2011) and André et al. (2012) evaluated the perceptions of stakeholders in the two largest cities in Sweden on climate risks and obstacles to adaptation and concluded that the main challenge for effective adaptation is response capacity, particularly in terms of coordination, conflicting interests, and a lack of prioritization of adaptation measures. Russel et al. (2020) found that increasing the awareness of stakeholders in administrative sectors on the impacts of climate change could improve coordination of climate action. Osaka and Bellamy (2020) studied how people, including scientists, journalists, stakeholders, and citizens, perceived and used the results of attributing extreme events to climate change. They discovered that many stakeholders were still unsure about the ability to attribute extreme events to climate change and its usefulness for making policy. However, the results showed that the attribution mostly reinforced pre-existing views held by citizens, suggesting that people were engaging in motivated reasoning. According to Samaddar et al.'s (2019) survey, stakeholders deemed the participatory process as crucial for effective community participation in climate change adaptation. They found that setting clear and realistic goals with long-term development perspectives is key for successful community-based projects. However, internal conflicts and politics within the local community can hinder progress towards agreed objectives.

The importance of focusing on key stakeholders in government and non-governmental sectors is often emphasized (Bohensky et al. 2016; Sebos et al. 2016; Conde et al. 2005). Engaging with stakeholders is a crucial step in the decision-making process as it allows key groups to express their opinions and contribute to the improvement of the effectiveness of measures and actions, thereby reducing potential future risks. Piwowarczyk et al. (2012) evaluated the awareness of institutional stakeholders in eight countries bordering the Baltic Sea on the impacts of climate change on coastal areas and found that there is a gap between decision-making and scientific consensus, potentially due to a lack of interaction between scientists and actors. Dincă et al. (2014) examined the perspectives of stakeholders on the effects of climate change on tourist activities in destinations heavily dependent on climate resources and variability and found that enhancing the adaptation capacity of stakeholders requires effective cooperation and communication among authorities, experts, and stakeholders. The study conducted by Torres-Bagur et al. (2019) found that raising awareness and understanding of the impacts of climate change among owners and managers of tourist accommodation establishments is essential. It is also important to demonstrate the need for actions to mitigate and adapt to climate change, with a particular emphasis on water conservation measures, in order to ensure sustainable resource use. Dilling and Berggren (2015) highlighted the need for consultation between stakeholders and providers of climate information to improve the usefulness of the information and meet the needs of stakeholders. Živojinović and Wolfslehner (2015) found that urban forestry in Belgrade faces obstacles in adapting to climate change, including a lack of relevant legislation, weak coordination, a lack of stakeholder involvement, and a lack of capacity to address these barriers. They also noted a lack of technical and scientific data and capacity to use it locally as a barrier to adaptation.

Scope and contribution of the study

The scope of this study is to assess the levels of awareness, perceived values, recommendations and expectations of key stakeholders in Greece regarding climate change, its impacts and adaptation actions. The key stakeholders in this context include executives and staff from both public administration and private sectors at the national, regional and local levels. The survey conducted aimed at the investigation of the awareness and environmental concerns of SHs regarding climate change impacts and adaptation actions in Greece. As far as we are aware, this is the first research work where the SHs participated in a survey covering such a wide spectrum of public administration bodies of local, municipal and national interest as well as private entities. The survey was conducted via a web-based questionnaire to investigate the knowledge and requirements of key actors concerning climate change impacts and adaptation actions. It also aimed to understand how climate risks and adaptation requirements are integrated into the day-to-day activities of these key groups. The questionnaire was designed to determine key factors, challenges, and socio-economic and environmental issues that stakeholders perceive as relevant to climate change impacts and adaptation. It was short in length but included critical data that enable the recording of baseline views and perceptions.

The contribution of this study is significant, as it provides valuable insights into the levels of awareness, perceived values, recommendations and expectations of key stakeholders in Greece regarding climate change, its impacts and adaptation actions. This information can be used to inform the development of effective climate change adaptation strategies in Greece. By assessing the knowledge and requirements of key actors concerning climate change impacts and adaptation actions, the study can help identify gaps in understanding and areas where additional education and information may be needed. Additionally, by understanding how climate risks and adaptation requirements are integrated into the day-to-day activities of key groups, the study can help inform the development of policies and programs that effectively support the integration of climate change considerations into decision-making processes.

The study also fills a gap in the research by providing the first comprehensive examination of key stakeholders' views on climate change in Greece. By including a wide range of public administration bodies at the local, municipal and national levels as well as private entities, the study provides a holistic view of the situation and can serve as a benchmark for future research in the field.

Furthermore, by using a web-based questionnaire, the study can also be used as a model for future research in other regions or countries, as it is an efficient way to gather data from a large number of participants. The results of this study can help inform policy-making and decision-making processes as well as contribute to the development of effective adaptation strategies to address the impacts of climate change in Greece.

Materials and methods

The target audience of the survey was the key SHs of Greece, i.e., the executives and staff of public administration and private actors at national, regional and local levels. In order to achieve the greatest possible geographical coverage, but also to allow as many SHs as possible to participate in the survey, it was decided to conduct it through questionnaires uploaded on a platform developed for this purpose. The target audience was based on consultation lists of the 13 regions of Greece, including:

  1. 1.

    Departments and agencies of the municipalities of each region of Greece

  2. 2.

    Departments and agencies of the 13 regions of Greece

  3. 3.

    Departments and agencies of the seven decentralized administrations of Greece

  4. 4.

    Forest services

  5. 5.

    Archeological services

  6. 6.

    Fire services

  7. 7.

    Non-governmental organizations (NGOs)

  8. 8.

    Citizens' initiatives and associations

  9. 9.

    Infrastructure and transport authorities (ports, airports, rail and road transport)

  10. 10.

    Associations and chambers (technical, commercial, sectoral, local and regional, etc.)

  11. 11.

    Agricultural cooperatives

  12. 12.

    Water supply and sewerage companies

  13. 13.

    Power companies

  14. 14.

    Natural gas corporations

  15. 15.

    Universities

  16. 16.

    Research centers and institutes.

In the relevant literature, the significance of SHs has been indicated and ranked under three classification groups of high, medium, and low priority (Reed and Curzon, 2015; Walker et al. 2008). At the national level, ministerial directorates are assessed as being of high priority, followed by academic and research centers, which are of medium priority. At the regional level, high index values have been calculated for the Special Directorate of the Environment and Spatial Planning. The General Directorate of Civil Protection and the Directorate of European Programs have been assessed as being of medium and low priority, respectively (Nydrioti et al. 2022).

For the purposes of the survey, there were two noteworthy stakeholder categories: SHs who are active at the national level and play an important role in the implementation of the National Adaptation Strategy (NAS), and SHs who are active at the regional level and play an important role in the implementation of the Regional Adaptation Action Plans (RAAPs) (Raum 2018). Specific bodies from each category were included here based on their competence as well as their participation in the design and implementation of policies and measures for CCA (Nydrioti et al. 2022):

  • National-level bodies are categorized into ministerial directorates, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), academic and research centers, protected areas management bodies, public utilities and associations—chambers.

  • The regional bodies are mainly the general directorates and the directorates of each region as well as other entities. At the regional level, the identification of SHs focused on the general directorates and the specific directorates of each region, whose responsibilities are related to CCA. The administrative structure of the 13 Greek regions is similar, so the SHs were identified mainly in the General Directorates of Development and specifically in the Directorates of Environment and Spatial Planning and the Directorates of Civil Protection.

The stakeholder analysis was based on evaluation criteria and the assessment of their priority in CCA. The selected evaluation criteria are power, proximity and urgency. Criteria and weighting factors can be selected in alignment with the project characteristics, as CCA results can greatly impact on the general public, and key decisions are needed for adaptation implementation actions at both the legislative and administrative levels (Nydrioti et al. 2022; Walker et al. 2008).

Following the identification of suitable candidates for participation in the survey, a total of 1000 questionnaires were delivered to SHs, and a subtotal of 326 fully answered and usable questionnaires were collected, which is a statistically satisfactory response rate considering the effective and full coverage of responses from all stakeholders and Greek municipalities–geographical regions involved in the survey.

The questionnaire contained an introduction and two sets of questions, most of which were closed-ended. The full questionnaire can be found in the Supplementary Information (file: Questionnaire.pdf).

The introduction, in addition to a brief text on CC, contained concise information about the purpose of the questionnaire. It clarified to the reader that the survey was anonymous and confidential; however, some questions were included on the respondent’s characteristics, with the aim being to facilitate the analysis of replies, the categorization of respondents by employment body and position, and the correlation of the respondents’ fields of activity with the vulnerability sectors of the National Strategy for Climate Change.

The first set of questions comprised eight questions that aimed to capture the respondents’ views and knowledge on CC and its effects. At first, the respondents were asked to classify the importance of environmental problems addressed both nationally and globally. This way, the analysis of the responses highlights the importance of climate change compared to other environmental problems, as well as the different points of view among stakeholders in relation to CC at the national and global levels.

Respondents were also asked questions about the causes of CC, whether they perceived that CC is a real phenomenon, and whether its causes are natural or anthropogenic. In addition, they were asked their opinion on whether scientists exaggerate the negative effects of CC. These questions screen the extent of stakeholder agreement with the conclusions of the majority of scientists and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which asserts that climate change is caused by human activity and is a threat to humanity.

The next two questions requested that the respondents rank the significance of CC impacts both in Greece and in the region where they are based. In addition, they were asked to indicate the CC impacts that will affect the respondents’ field of activity.

Finally, the last three questions of this set were related to the respondents’ views on how informed they consider themselves to be on CC, and recorded the respondents’ sources of information. They were also asked when they think that the effects of CC will become visible in an attempt to determine their awareness of the issue.

The second set of questions comprised 15 questions related to the respondents’ information and views on planning and implementing actions to adapt to CC. The questionnaire aimed to capture the respondents’ views on whether planning is necessary in order to deal with CC, and which organization they believe should be responsible for planning adaptation actions, and at which level (global, national, regional, local, individual, etc.).

The respondents were also asked their opinion on the adequacy of CC adaptation measures adopted in Greece. Furthermore, an attempt was made to ascertain the degree of awareness concerning the Greek National Adaptation Strategy (NAS) and Regional Adaptation Plans (RAAPs) of the 13 regions of Greece.

The questions that followed aimed to depict whether, and the extent to which, the organizations of the respondents are related to environmental policies and actions, particularly actions that address CC. The questions aimed to record what types of CC policies and actions are being implemented and whether these are related to adaptation to CC or the mitigation of greenhouse gases. The section also included a question about the funds allocated for climate action by the respondents’ organizations.

The next two questions were related to the knowledge and the training received by the respondents concerning actions and measures to adapt to CC, while the remaining questions addressed the constraints and problems faced by the respondents’ organizations during the integration of adaptation to CC into their planning and operation.

Results

The characterization of the respondents regarding the type of their organization, their position in their organization, and their field of activity is summarized in Figs. 1, 2, and 3. The sampling population and the response rate revealed the inclusion of both environmentally aware and not particularly aware respondents.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Respondents’ employment by type of organization

Full size image
Fig. 2
figure 2

Position of respondents in their organization

Full size image
Fig. 3
figure 3

Field of activity of respondents

Full size image

The largest share of responses (36%) came from executives and staff of the 13 regional authorities of Greece. Α significant number of responses came from executives and staff of public sector entities other than local government and education and research institutes (21%), from NGOs (11%), from municipal authorities (10%), and from education and research institutes (7%).

The largest percentage of responses came from executives that are either directors or heads of departments in their organization (32%). Regarding the fields of activity, most replies came from respondents whose work is related to biodiversity and natural ecosystems (12%), education and raising awareness (9%), water resources (9%), and agriculture and livestock production (9%).

Concerning the respondents’ views and background knowledge on CC and its effects, climate change was rated as the most important environmental challenge at the global scale (Fig. 4). It is worth noting that a number of environmental challenges related to CC scored higher than 80%, such as freshwater depletion, forest fires, air pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, and ecosystem destruction/species extinction. On the other hand, the most important challenge in Greece was considered to be waste management (Fig. 4). Climate change was rated with a significance of 79% as the second most significant environmental challenge in Greece.

Fig. 4
figure 4

Respondents’ ranking of the significance of environmental challenges at the global scale and for Greece

Full size image

By comparing the received ratings of “important” and “very important” to the respondents’ organizations, it was clear that waste management was the environmental issue that scored the highest among respondents from local government (municipalities and regions) and the public sector.

None of the respondents viewed CC as non-existent (Fig. 5). The majority of respondents answered that CC is a real phenomenon (85%), which is human induced (33%) or comes from a combination of natural causes and human action (62%). In addition, the majority of respondents (87.5%) answered that the scientific community is not overreacting to CC (Fig. 6).

Fig. 5
figure 5

Respondents’ perception of climate change

Full size image
Fig. 6
figure 6

Responses to the question “are scientists overreacting to climate change?”

Full size image

The evaluation of the impacts of CC in Greece is presented in Fig. 3. The majority of respondents (98%) rated the increase in the frequency and the severity of extreme weather events (e.g., heavy rainfalls, heatwaves) as a “very” or “moderately” important impact of CC. In addition, the following impacts were evaluated as significant (rated as “very” or “moderately” important in more than 80% of the questionnaire responses):

  • Increase of forest fires

  • Temperature rise

  • Increase in the duration of drought periods

  • Increase in frequency and intensity of floods

  • Changes in seasonal and local climate

  • Losses of ecosystems and wetlands

  • Increasing immigration flows from developing countries.

The significance of potential climate change impacts on the respondents’ activities is shown in Fig. 7, while the relevant significance of potential CC impacts in Greece is depicted in Fig. 8.

Fig. 7
figure 7

Evaluation of CC impacts on the respondents’ fields of activity

Full size image
Fig. 8
figure 8

Evaluation of CC impacts in Greece

Full size image

Concerning the time horizon of CC effects, the majority of respondents replied that the impacts are already visible (64%), while 17% of the respondents said that they will be visible in 10 years, and 10% that they will be visible in 20 years (Fig. 9).

Fig. 9
figure 9

Perception of the time frame for the appearance of CC impacts

Full size image

The majority of respondents (82%) considered themselves well informed (Fig. 10) on the effects of climate change. The main sources of information about CC issues were reported to be the Internet, conferences/seminars and scientific publications (Fig. 10).

Fig. 10
figure 10

Level of awareness of respondents on the impacts of CC and main sources of information

Full size image

With respect to taking action to address CC, the majority of respondents (98%) replied that planning and coordinated adaptation actions are necessary to address the negative impacts (environmental, social, economic) of CC. They also indicated the importance of prevention to avoid further human intervention that exacerbates the effects of climate change (mitigation options), as well as forest management.

The respondents consider that the responsibility for the coordination of adaptation to new climate conditions should be shared among international organizations (European Union, United Nations), the Greek central government, the local governments (municipal–regional), and each organization or company, but they also consider it a personal responsibility of each citizen (Fig. 11).

Fig. 11
figure 11

Entities responsible for the coordination of adaptation actions

Full size image

It should be highlighted that nearly 50% of the respondents consider that the adaptation measures in Greece are not at all sufficient, while 95% of respondents consider that the measures are not fully sufficient.

The National Adaptation Strategy of Greece (NAS) is a key document on the country’s adaptation policy and sets out the general objectives, guiding principles and implementation means for an effective adaptation strategy under the framework of the UNFCCC, the European Regulations and international experience. A significant percentage of respondents (46%) are “somewhat” familiar with the NAS, while 23% are not at all familiar with it (Fig. 12).

Fig. 12
figure 12

Awareness of the National Adaptation Strategy and Regional Adaptation Action Plans in the respondent’s region

Full size image

Similarly, a significant share (47%) of the respondents indicated that they do not know that their region is preparing or has prepared a Regional Adaptation Action Plan (RAAP) (Fig. 12). Further analysis of the results showed that 46% of the respondents from municipalities and 45% from the public sector (other than local government) replied that they do not know that a RAAP is prepared by their region. The same answer was given by a smaller but also significant percentage from the regional government (36%).

The next question explored whether policies to protect the environment are implemented by the respondents’ organizations (Fig. 13). As far as municipalities and regions are concerned, 69% and 73%, respectively, of the respondents’ organizations implement policies for environmental protection. 30% of the respondents from municipalities replied that they do not implement such policies, focusing on the issue of insufficient resources. 24% of the respondents from the regions replied that their organization has not yet taken any measures to protect the environment. Nevertheless, the majority of the respondents consider that their organization should implement measures targeting CC adaptation, while 75% of the stakeholders consider that those measures should be implemented immediately (Fig. 13).

Fig. 13
figure 13

Respondents’ views on whether their organization/company should implement adaptation actions and implement specific policies

Full size image

The next question reflected whether the respondents working in public and private sectors implement measures to adapt to CC. The replies are presented in Fig. 14; 34% of the respondents indicated that their organization does not implement specific policies to adapt to CC, while 22% did not know whether it does. Furthermore, 36% of the respondents answered that they implement adaptation policies and 18% replied that they implement both adaptation and mitigation actions. Specifically, the respondents replied that their actions related to CC concern:

  • The planning and/or implementing of adaptation actions (27%)

  • Information, awareness and education actions regarding CC (27%)

  • The planning and/or implementing of mitigation actions (15%)

  • Risk assessment related to CC (18%);

  • CC research (12%).

Fig. 14
figure 14

Implementation of CC adaptation actions and the allocation of funds to climate actions by the respondents’ organization/company

Full size image

Further analysis of the replies from regions, municipalities and other public sector organizations is presented in Fig. 15. A significant share of the respondents from regions (43%) do not know whether CC adaptation policies are applied by their organization, while 36% of the respondents answered that their organization implements specific CC adaptation policies, including 15% that implement both adaptation and mitigation policies. Regarding the municipalities, 46% of the respondents answered that their organization implements specific CC adaptation policies, including a large proportion (38%) that implement both adaptation and mitigation policies. 43% of those from other public sector organizations indicated that no specific policies are applied.

Fig. 15
figure 15

Implementation of climate policies at the level of the regions, municipalities and other public authorities

Full size image

Concerning the allocation of funds to climate actions or not, the replies are presented in Fig. 14. Several respondents reported that their organizations allocate funds for both adaptation and mitigation actions (to reduce greenhouse gas emissions). Under the option “other,” some respondents clarified that the decentralized administration (the third level of government in Greece) does not manage financial instruments. Some responses also indicated that funding for climate actions can be obtained only through calls for funding by the operational programs of the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF).

The respondents performed a self-assessment of their knowledge and capacity to plan and implement adaptation actions. According to the replies presented in Fig. 16, a significant share of the respondents (over 50%) either had limited knowledge (45%) or no knowledge at all (7%). On the other hand, 37% of the respondents had sufficient knowledge and 9% had extensive knowledge. The limited level of knowledge about adaptation actions can be correlated with the low percentage of respondents that had received training on planning and implementing CC adaptation actions (Fig. 16).

Fig. 16
figure 16

Respondents who have received professional training related to climate change adaptation and self-assessment of their knowledge and capacity to plan and implement adaptation actions

Full size image

The main constraints on the elaboration of adaptation plans are presented in Fig. 17. The most important obstacle is the lack of financial resources (24%), followed by staff shortages (19%), a lack of qualified staff (18%), a lack of relevant instructions and tools (17%), a lack of training (13%) and knowledge gaps (8%). Under the option “other,” the respondents added the following obstacles: a lack of political will, a lack of awareness that problems are already being faced, as well as CC not yet being considered an issue of the highest priority.

Fig. 17
figure 17

Main constraints on the elaboration of CC adaptation plans by the respondents’ organization/company

Full size image

The next question reflects the extent to which stakeholders take climate risk into account and assesses its impacts on their decisions and future planning (Fig. 18). A significant share of the respondents (13%) did not know whether their organization implements measures to adapt to CC. 44% of respondents included climate risk to only a small extent (31%) or “not at all” (13%) in their decision-making processes. On the other hand, 38% took climate risk quite seriously, while only 5% considered that they “completely” include climate risk in their decisions.

Fig. 18
figure 18

Extent to which climate risk is included in the decisions/planning of the respondents’ organization

Full size image

Further analysis of the answers concerning regions, municipalities and the public sector is presented in Fig. 19. A significant percentage of the respondents from the regions (27%) did not know whether climate risk and its impacts are considered in the decisions and planning of their organizations, while only 25% answered that climate risk is completely or sufficiently considered. With respect to the municipalities, 46% of the respondents answered that their organization includes climate risk in decisions and planning. About half of the respondents from the rest of the public sector replied that their organizations take climate risk into account.

Fig. 19
figure 19

Extent to which climate risk and its impacts are included in the decision-making processes of regions, municipalities and the rest of the public sector

Full size image

The last question of the questionnaire explored the obstacles and constraints that prevent an adequate response to CC impacts (Fig. 20). The most important obstacle identified is the lack of human and financial resources.

Fig. 20
figure 20

Obstacles and constraints that prevent an adequate response to CC impacts

Full size image

Summary

This paper presents a targeted survey which aimed to determine the level of awareness, perceived values, recommendations, knowledge requirements and expectations of key stakeholders in Greece (public administration and private actors at the national, regional and local levels) about CC, its impacts and adaptation actions. The web-based survey also explored how climate risks and adaptation requirements are integrated into the day-to-day activities of the key stakeholders.

The following key issues of the analysis are related to the views of the respondents from public and private organizations about the importance of environmental problems and of climate change in particular. Emphasis was placed on the views and knowledge of respondents about the impacts of CC, as well as on the level of awareness and information sources.

The key stakeholders from public and private sectors consider that climate change is the most important problem at the global scale. It is very noteworthy, however, that the Greek stakeholders rank waste management as the top challenge for the country; this indicates that efforts to move towards a more circular economy should be intensified, particularly at the regional and local levels.

In a more generalized consideration, SHs could play a crucial role in the implementation and ongoing development of CC adaptation actions and policies. Over the last decade, an effort has been underway in Greece to establish an adaptation strategy at the national and regional levels and to enhance CCA. To this end, suitable national and regional SHs need to be identified and analyzed based on their influence on CCA in Greece, as this will enable the development of a customized engagement strategy and increase the impact of CCA actions (Nydrioti et al. 2022). Besides, following the mapping and analysis of SHs, it is necessary for researchers to define the challenges that need to be managed during the planning and implementation of CCA actions. The identification of stakeholder needs in terms of knowledge, funding and training in CCA comprises the first and key step in developing suitable training actions. These needs will still require more precise determination, which can be achieved through questionnaires and semi-structured interviews—methodological tools that can be used to achieve the following (Nydrioti et al. 2022):

  • Map how each organization integrates or addresses the risks of CC and CCA

  • Assess the readiness and administrative capacity of the body to implement policies and measures for CC and CCA

  • Identify the needs for training and the development of new skills in order for the organization to meet the specification and adaption criteria of CCA needs and preconditions.

In addition, the following environmental problems closely related to CC are considered very important at the global scale:

  • Depletion of water supplies

  • Forest fires

  • Air pollution

  • Greenhouse gas emissions

  • Loss of biodiversity.

CC is considered the second most important environmental problem for Greece after waste management, tied with forest fires. Other important environmental problems at the national level were ranked in order of importance as follows: water pollution, coastal and marine pollution, depletion of water supplies, air pollution and loss of biodiversity.

According to the findings of our study, the vast majority of stakeholders perceived CC as a real phenomenon that is either induced by human activity or comes from a combination of natural causes and human activities. No respondents denied the existence of CC. The majority of the stakeholder representatives (nine out of ten) considered that the scientific community is not overreacting to CC. The respondents agreed with the view of the overwhelming majority of scientists worldwide and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that CC is anthropogenic and a threat to humans. The majority of the stakeholder representatives (98%) considered that the increases in the frequency and intensity of extreme weather events (e.g., heavy rainfall, heatwaves) are the most important impact of CC. In addition, they considered the following impacts to be significant:

  • Forest fires

  • Rise in temperature

  • Increase in the duration of drought periods

  • Increase in the frequency and intensity of floods

  • Changes in the seasonal and local climate

  • Losses of ecosystems and wetlands

  • Increasing immigration flows from developing countries.

It is noteworthy that the majority of the representatives of stakeholders were aware of, and alarmed by, the devastating effects of CC as a reality. However, two out of every ten respondents claimed that these devastating consequences will become visible in 10 years, while another two out of ten believed that the appearance of these devastating consequences could be up to 20 years away in the future. Interestingly, there were also a very small portion of respondents who believed that CC consequences will become visible in more than 30 years.

The majority of the representatives of public and private bodies further considered that they were adequately informed about the effects of CC. No respondents considered themselves uninformed on CC. The main source of information on CC issues was the Internet (three out of ten respondents), while there were respondents who reported other sources of information, such as conferences, seminars and scientific publications.

The following key issues that were explored and were relevant to the actions implemented or planned by the stakeholders to address and adapt to CC included the necessity of CC adaptation action, the responsibilities of the public and private bodies, the adequacy of the implemented measures, the obstacles and constraints regarding the design and implementation of policies and measures, and the level of awareness of the representatives of the public and private bodies about the National Adaptation Strategy of Greece (NAS) and the 13 Regional Adaptation Action Plans (RAAPs). Significant findings on the level of the respondents’ knowledge and professional training received on CC adaptation are summarized below.

The vast majority of stakeholders viewed planning and coordinated adaptation as a necessity in order to mitigate the costs of the effects of CC. Stakeholders considered that the responsibility for adaptation actions lies with the international organizations (European Union, United Nations), the central government of Greece, the local governments, along with each organization or company, but they also felt that the personal responsibility of each citizen should not be underestimated. The stakeholders argued that the CC adaptation measures in Greece were either “somewhat” or “not at all” sufficient, while half of them alleged that the measures were not sufficient at all.

The majority of the stakeholders were either “a little” or “not at all” informed about the National Adaptation Strategy of Greece (NAS), which is the main document on the policymaking process for CCA in Greece. However, a significant share of the stakeholders (approximately one in two) did not know whether their region prepares or has prepared a Regional Adaptation Action Plan (RAAP), the main planning document for strengthening the resilience of the region to the effects of CC.

Furthermore, the majority of the representatives in local government (regions and municipalities) considered that the protection of the environment is a priority for their organization or, at least, that their organization had taken measures to protect the environment. 30% of the representatives in municipalities answered that they did not implement any environmental policies due to insufficient resources, whereas the stakeholders considered that their organization should implement measures to adapt to CC. 75% of the respondents estimated that these measures should be implemented immediately. A significant share of the respondents (more than one in two) characterized themselves as having either limited or no knowledge and capacity with respect to designing, planning and implementing CC adaptation actions, while eight out of ten representatives of public and private bodies had not received any professional training related to adapting to CC.

According to stakeholders, the main obstacle in their organization that prevented the elaboration of adaptation plans and an adequate response to CC impacts was the lack of human and financial resources, especially in public bodies. The stakeholders also highlighted the need for specialized staff, the lack of relevant instructions, tools and training, the knowledge gaps and lack of data, and the differences in CC policy time frames compared to the time frame of current policies.

Disappointingly, about half of the stakeholders from public and private bodies stated that their organizations included climate risk to only a small extent or “not at all” in their decision-making processes. Another small portion of respondents (13%) were not aware of whether their organization adopted measures to adapt to CC, indicating that a significant share of these public and private sector stakeholder bodies did not integrate climate risk into their decisions and future planning.

Discussion

Climate change is a multifaceted and complex issue with far-reaching environmental, economic and social implications. Raising the general public’s awareness and understanding of its causes and effects can be challenging. In this context, it is crucial to comprehend the perceptions and knowledge gaps of stakeholders involved in functions that are affected by or address climate change to implement effective climate adaptation policies and build climate resilience.

Despite the availability of relevant information on the issue, our survey results show that only one in five stakeholders received training on climate change and adaptation in their workplace. This highlights the need for targeted and effective communication strategies to increase understanding and the capacity for informed decision-making among key actors. These should address the broader public through various platforms as well as key actors through tailored materials.

Exploiting opportunities for two-way communication between scientists and stakeholders is essential. This approach can help make scientific information more relevant and useful to stakeholders and key actors by enabling immediate and direct interaction. Obtaining feedback from stakeholders can also assist policymakers in designing more effective measures and mechanisms and incorporating local knowledge into regional adaptation plans and actions (Singletary et al. 2022).

Despite increased funding for climate change research, a gap persists between scientific findings and their practical application. Traditional top-down research methods have contributed to this divide, prompting the adoption of transdisciplinary collaborative approaches that engage stakeholders in the research process. By involving decision-makers and stakeholders, this approach aims to co-produce knowledge that supports actionable change. Collaboration between scientists and decision-makers is crucial to address the complex resource management issues posed by climate change (Raaphorst et al. 2020; Gramberger et al. 2015; Fischer et al. 2021).

Engaging stakeholders in research production makes the process more transparent and legitimate while fostering ownership of the outcomes. The resulting co-produced knowledge is more likely to be integrated into decision-making frameworks. However, maximizing the effectiveness of these collaborations remains a challenge, with best practices and assessment metrics still evolving. It is important to identify factors that contribute to successful engagement, such as understanding who to engage and when, and to determine the optimal engagement modality. Despite the potential for engagement fatigue, collaborative research is vital for managing complex socio-environmental issues (Singletary et al. 2022; Dilling and Berggren 2015).

Planning and implementing targeted awareness campaigns for actors responsible for implementing adaptation measures is imperative to ensure they have the necessary knowledge and understanding to carry out their tasks effectively. Fostering an enhanced awareness and understanding of climate change among key actors can improve the chances of successful climate adaptation and resilience-building efforts (Otto-Banaszak et al. 2011).

Future work in this field should emphasize several key areas to promote effective and meaningful interactions between key stakeholders and policymakers, ensuring that climate change adaptation policies are relevant, effective and successful. Involving key stakeholders in the policy-making process from the outset and providing accurate information about the issue is essential. Organizing workshops, focus groups and other interactive sessions can facilitate open dialogue and promote a collaborative approach to addressing climate change challenges.

Engaging key stakeholders in the policy-making process helps build trust and commitment to policy implementation. Involving stakeholders in monitoring, evaluating and reviewing implemented policies ensures their perspectives are continuously considered. Encouraging collaboration between various sectors, such as public administration, private entities and non-governmental organizations, is crucial for a comprehensive and inclusive approach to policy development (Luís et al. 2018).

Implementing capacity-building programs and knowledge-sharing platforms can empower key stakeholders and enhance their ability to contribute to effective policy-making processes. This approach supports stakeholder engagement and fosters a better understanding of the complex issues related to climate change adaptation (Gannon et al. 2021).

Developing adaptive policy frameworks that can be adjusted based on new information, stakeholder feedback and evolving climate change impacts is another important aspect of future work in this field. This approach allows for continuous improvement and increased policy effectiveness (Gregorio et al. 2019).

In conclusion, future work in this field should focus on fostering meaningful interactions between key stakeholders and policymakers, ensuring stakeholders are both well informed and actively involved in policy formulation. This collaborative approach will lead to the development of more relevant, effective and successful climate change adaptation policies.

Limitations of the study

The use of a web-based survey alone to evaluate the awareness and perceptions of key actors regarding climate change presents limitations in our analysis. Self-reported data might be influenced by factors like social desirability bias, potentially resulting in an overestimate for the actual awareness. Furthermore, the survey's multiple-choice and closed-ended questions may not have captured detailed or nuanced responses, limiting our understanding of climate change's complexity.

To mitigate this limitation, we recommend incorporating open-ended questions into future surveys, enabling more in-depth answers. These questions can offer a richer understanding of key actors' attitudes and perceptions and facilitate a nuanced analysis. Moreover, we propose supplementing the survey with personal interviews or focus groups. These methods can yield deeper insights into key actors' attitudes, perceptions and behaviors by asking probing questions and allowing them to share their experiences and perspectives, thus addressing the current study's limitations and gaps.

Conclusions

Climate change is a complex issue with wide-ranging implications, making it challenging to raise awareness and understanding among the general public. Recognizing the perceptions and knowledge gaps of stakeholders involved in climate-change-affected functions is crucial for implementing effective adaptation policies and building resilience. Our study provides valuable insights into key stakeholders' awareness, values, recommendations, and expectations in Greece, informing the development of strategies and policies to address climate change impacts. The research fills a gap by offering the first comprehensive examination of stakeholders' views in Greece and can serve as a benchmark for future studies.

The survey results reveal that only one in five stakeholders received training on climate change and adaptation in their workplace, highlighting the need for targeted communication strategies. Fostering opportunities for two-way communication between scientists and stakeholders is essential, as it makes scientific information more relevant and useful while gathering feedback to assist policymakers in designing more effective measures. Implementing targeted awareness campaigns for actors responsible for adaptation measures is vital to ensuring they have the necessary knowledge and understanding to carry out their tasks effectively. Addressing communication gaps and understanding stakeholders' perceptions is crucial for the success of climate change adaptation policies, fostering a more comprehensive understanding of climate change implications, and enhancing the effectiveness of adaptation measures.