Riksrevisjonen OAG

'Most of the maps prepared by the [Norwegian Water Resources and Energy Directorate] NVE were only produced for the current climate. Therefore, they do not, for example, show how much larger a flood zone will become or how frequently flooding will occur with a future climate' (p.16). Flood maps produced after 2012 do take climate change into account; for the rest, 'the municipalities themselves have to calculate the potential extent of flooding caused by climate change' (p.16). Some areas fall outside both central government and municipal mapping, and the directorate's own risk assessment for 2021 found 'there is a high probability that the mapping is inadequate, and that a lack of knowledge in the community regarding hazard areas constitutes a major risk' - which 'can result in municipalities approving development in areas that are at risk of floods and landslides' (p.16).

The need is concentrated in what is already built: '75 per cent of the buildings in areas with natural hazards were built before general requirements for protection against natural hazards were strengthened in 1985', and '93 per cent of all buildings vulnerable to landslides, floods or storm surges were constructed before the requirements were inserted in the technical regulations in 2010' (p.17). Bringing them up to the current technical standard was estimated in 2021 at NOK 85 billion. Municipalities are responsible for adapting to future climate change, the safety of citizens, and for taking precautions against natural hazards, but they 'are struggling with initiating protective measures for existing built-up areas' (p.17). More than half of municipal grant applications are refused, and the compensation and insurance schemes 'provide weak incentives for prevention and protection rather than repair and replacement' (p.18).

Parts of the infrastructure have been mapped, but 'much of the mapping was based on the present climate, not a future climate', so 'the mapping showing the consequences that climate change will have is therefore inadequate for large parts of the rail and road network' (p.19). Ports and breakwaters 'are also not mapped for natural hazards, despite the fact that storm surges will occur significantly more often' (p.20). Measures are being taken and reported, yet 'the transport entities do not distinguish between measures that adapt the infrastructure to the current climate, and measures implemented that take into consideration a future climate' (p.20), and they 'have little knowledge about what it will cost to adapt the infrastructure to future climate change' (p.21).

The climate change act requires the government to account each year, in the budget proposal, for how Norway is preparing for and adapting to climate change. The audit found that 'the annual reports regarding adaptation to climate change only contain information about what a few key entities are doing', and that 'much of the reporting concerns what climate change will mean at a general level', so that 'the reporting to the Storting therefore does not provide a basis for assessing the efforts or effect of the measures that are being implemented' (p.22). It turns out that 'there is no mention of known challenges in the climate change adaption effort' (p.23), although 'the responsible ministries have long been aware that the municipalities have challenges in implementing the necessary measures for protecting existing built-up areas and infrastructure against natural disasters' (p.23).