Tallinn: Setting the Scene, Challenges and Vision

The workshop brought together a diverse group of key actors, including representatives from the city administration (covering strategic planning, environment, and health), national ministries (environment, spatial planning, and social affairs), research institutions and universities, hospitals and the broader health sector, environmental NGOs, as well as urban planners and landscape architects.

Important Perspectives:
Participants emphasized that involving the health sector is essential for addressing climate-related risks. Spatial planning institutions were identified as critical for implementation, while there was also a strong call to include social services and vulnerable groups in the planning process.

Challenges Identified:
Key challenges include limited public awareness of heat risks, the need for better coordination between institutions, and a lack of clarity on roles and responsibilities, which can hinder effective action.

Next Steps:
To move forward, the following actions were prioritized:

• Establishing a cross-sector working group that includes planning, health, climate, and social sectors,
• Incorporating institutions that work directly with at-risk groups, such as the elderly and children, and
• Strengthening coordination between city departments to ensure a unified and efficient response.

Tallinn already possesses a solid knowledge base on urban heat challenges, including:

• Heat island analyses covering the years 2014–2021,
• Satellite-based mapping combined with ground measurements,
• An urban climate sensor network tracking temperature, humidity, and precipitation, and
• Modeled heat maps and micro-climate simulations.

Health Impact Studies have revealed that heat waves significantly increase mortality, with the strongest effects observed among the elderly (75+).

Key Insights:

• Satellite data alone is insufficient and must be complemented with ground-level data for accuracy.
• Heat risk is closely tied to social vulnerability, meaning some populations are disproportionately affected.
• Green areas play a crucial role in locally reducing temperatures, offering a natural mitigation strategy.

Key Knowledge Gaps:
Despite existing research, important gaps remain, such as:

• A deeper understanding of vulnerable groups and their specific needs,
• Localized health impacts of heat exposure,
• The effectiveness of adaptation measures, and
• The relationships between urban design and temperature regulation.

Next Steps:
To address these gaps and strengthen resilience, the following actions are planned:

• Combine satellite, sensor, and health data for a comprehensive analysis,
• Map vulnerable populations and their exposure to heat risks, and
• Identify high-risk neighborhoods to prioritize interventions.

During the discussions, a range of practical measures was proposed to combat urban heat, including:

• Urban greening initiatives such as planting trees, expanding parks, and creating green corridors,
• Increasing shade in streets and public spaces,
• Improving building insulation to reduce indoor heat,
• Installing cooling systems in buildings,
• Using white or reflective roofs to deflect heat,
• Ensuring drinking water availability in public spaces,
• Establishing cooling centers for vulnerable populations, and
• Providing behavioral guidance for citizens during heat waves.

Important Insights:
Key takeaways highlighted that:

• Trees can significantly lower local temperatures, making them a powerful tool for heat mitigation.
• Access to green spaces is uneven, creating what is known as "green inequality"—where some communities benefit more than others.
• Some measures are low-cost and quick to implement, offering immediate relief.
• Adaptation strategies must be integrated into urban planning early to maximize their effectiveness and sustainability.

Next Steps:
To move forward, the following actions were identified:

• Map existing adaptation measures to assess current efforts,
• Identify low-cost, quick-win solutions that can be implemented promptly,
• Develop a tailored package of measures for a pilot area, and
• Integrate heat mitigation strategies into urban planning rules to ensure long-term resilience.

Tallinn’s efforts are focusing on the pilot area of Väike-Õismäe, where a combination of sensor networks and advanced modeling will be used to:

• Map urban heat islands with precision,
• Simulate the effectiveness of mitigation measures,
• Predict future climate scenarios up to the year 2100, and
• Integrate heat data into the city’s GIS systems to enhance spatial planning.

The goal is to leverage modeling to support evidence-based spatial planning decisions, ensuring that interventions are both targeted and effective.

Future Technical Developments:
Plans include advancing tools for:

• Real-time risk visualization to monitor heat threats dynamically,
• Localized weather forecasts tailored to urban needs, and
• Scenario modeling to assess the impacts of proposed urban design changes before implementation.

Next Steps:

• Use Väike-Õismäe as a testing ground for piloting interventions,
• Connect climate data directly to urban planning tools to streamline decision-making, and
• Model the impacts of proposed interventions beforehand to optimize outcomes and minimize risks.

Governance Insights:
While crisis protocols for heat waves are already in place, there is a need to raise awareness of their existence and application. National warning systems could be made clearer and more visible to ensure broader public reach. Additionally, city planning processes must better integrate climate adaptation into their frameworks, and the public health perspective should play a stronger role in shaping policies and responses.

Communication Needs:
To enhance preparedness, there is a demand for:

• More concrete behavioral recommendations during heat events,
• Better-targeted information for at-risk groups, such as the elderly and children, and
• Awareness campaigns to educate the public about heat risks and protective actions.

Immediate Next Steps and wider perspective:

• Expand the heat monitoring network to improve data collection,
• Update heat island maps to reflect current conditions,
• Assess health risks and mortality patterns to identify vulnerable areas and populations, and
• Develop tailored adaptation measures for the pilot area.
• Translate research findings into actionable planning and health policies,
• Improve communication strategies to effectively reach vulnerable groups, and
• Strengthen collaboration between the climate, health, and planning sectors to ensure a coordinated and holistic approach.

The KNOWING project plays a pivotal role in Tallinn by:

• Enhancing local-scale heat modeling to provide finer-grained insights into urban heat dynamics,
• Supporting decision-making with robust spatial and environmental data, and
• Linking proposed interventions to measurable climate benefits, ensuring accountability and effectiveness.

Focus Areas:
The project concentrates on developing more detailed heat island models, particularly for specific districts, by integrating:

• Climate projections,
• Urban planning data, and
• Health risk considerations.

Strategic Importance:
KNOWING is designed to provide evidence for selecting priority intervention areas and to support planning decisions with location-specific data, making interventions both targeted and impactful.

Next Steps:

• Select pilot district(s) for in-depth modeling,
• Integrate modeling results with real-world measurements to validate accuracy, and
• Link intervention scenarios to measurable outcomes, such as heat reduction and health impact improvements, to demonstrate tangible benefits.

The central climate challenge in Tallinn revolves around urban heat island effects and the escalating risks of extreme heat, particularly in densely populated areas. The focus has shifted from high-level strategy to specific, actionable interventions that can be implemented on the ground.

Key Pressure Areas:

• Overheating in dense urban zones,
• Heightened health risks during heat waves, especially for vulnerable populations,
• Gaps in green infrastructure, which exacerbate heat exposure, and
• Buildings that are ill-prepared for future climate conditions, lacking adaptive design.

Policy Context:
While Tallinn’s Sustainable Energy and Climate Action Plan (SECAP 2030) provides a strategic framework, a major challenge remains: the lack of clear mechanisms to track and ensure effective implementation of these plans.

Data-Related Gap:
Current heat island maps rely primarily on satellite-based surface temperature data, but there is a critical lack of information on human-level temperatures (measured at 2 meters), which are more relevant for assessing real-world heat exposure and health impacts.

Next Steps (transferable beyond the pilot area):

• Transition from broad strategic plans to concrete, localized interventions,
• Identify the most affected urban zones and vulnerable groups to prioritize action,
• Clarify how climate risks impact daily life, moving beyond technical indicators to address real-world consequences, and
• Define priority implementation gaps in existing climate plans to ensure they are actionable and effective.

The workshop in Tallinn brought together a diverse group of participants, including representatives from city departments, national ministries, NGOs, and strategic planning units.

Key Insights:
There is a strong institutional awareness of climate risks across organizations. However, responsibilities for implementation are distributed across multiple departments, creating a need for clearer coordination structures. Additionally, public preparedness and awareness were highlighted as critical components for effective climate action.

Challenges Identified:

• A lack of in-house expertise for assessing climate resilience in projects,
• Uncertainty about the requirements for funding-related climate assessments, and
• The need to better integrate heat considerations into urban planning processes.

Next Steps:

• Clarify roles and responsibilities for implementing climate measures to avoid gaps or overlaps,
• Strengthen coordination between planning, health, and environmental sectors to ensure a unified approach,
• Enhance the internal knowledge base on resilience assessment methods to build capacity, and
• Improve communication with citizens about heat-related risks and protective actions to foster community resilience.

The discussions highlighted critical knowledge gaps that need to be addressed to effectively tackle urban heat challenges in Tallinn:

• There is a pressing need for more detailed, location-specific heat data, particularly at the human exposure level (e.g., air temperature at 2 meters), rather than relying solely on surface temperature measurements from satellites.
• Current tools are insufficient for assessing the climate resilience of projects and their impacts on vulnerable population groups, such as the elderly and low-income communities.
• The monitoring of Tallinn’s Sustainable Energy and Climate Action Plan (SECAP) faces significant gaps, including the absence of structured implementation tracking and limited impact assessment, which hinder accountability and progress evaluation.

An important shift is required: moving from general heat mapping to fine-scale modeling combined with field measurements to generate actionable insights.

Next Steps:

• Develop higher-resolution local heat models to capture microclimate variations,
• Integrate field measurements with satellite data to improve accuracy and relevance,
• Build indicators to systematically measure the progress of SECAP implementation, and
• Enhance assessment tools to evaluate the climate resilience of planning projects, ensuring they meet both current and future needs.

The discussions in Tallinn have identified top-priority intervention areas to address urban heat and climate resilience, with a focus on practical, visible solutions:

Urban Greening (Highest Priority):

• Increase the share of trees in streets and parking areas to provide shade and cooling,
• Close gaps in green infrastructure to create a connected network of green spaces,
• Implement nature-based cooling solutions, such as green roofs and permeable surfaces, and
• Improve rainwater management in new developments to enhance water retention and reduce heat.

Buildings & Infrastructure:

• Develop climate-resilient renovation guidelines to ensure buildings can withstand future climate conditions,
• Promote innovative and autonomous building solutions, such as smart materials and energy-efficient designs, and
• Strengthen passive cooling and insulation strategies to reduce reliance on energy-intensive cooling systems.

Health Preparedness:

• Provide operational heat warnings and behavioral guidance to help citizens and institutions respond effectively during heat waves,
• Improve climate preparedness in care institutions, ensuring they are equipped to protect vulnerable populations, and
• Monitor indoor climate conditions in facilities housing at-risk groups, such as hospitals and elderly care homes.

Key Insight:
There is a strong preference for visible, practical interventions that deliver tangible benefits, rather than abstract or theoretical strategies.

Next Steps:

• Prioritize street-level greening measures to create immediate cooling effects,
• Develop building design and renovation guidelines that incorporate climate resilience,
• Test pilot projects for climate-resilient buildings to demonstrate feasibility and effectiveness, and
• Implement operational heat information systems to provide real-time guidance and warnings.

Key Governance Insights:
While climate planning structures are already in place in Tallinn, there is a recognized need to strengthen implementation to ensure these plans translate into action. Stakeholders expressed a clear demand for:

• Practical guidance to support on-the-ground efforts,
• Operational tools to facilitate decision-making, and
• Better monitoring systems to track progress and outcomes effectively.

Priority Implementation Actions:
The following actions were identified as critical for immediate focus:

• Strengthening information provision during heat events to ensure timely and effective public response,
• Supporting adaptation measures in welfare and care institutions to protect vulnerable populations, and
• Developing practical planning guidance for climate-resilient buildings to integrate adaptation into urban development.

Risks Discussed:
Several challenges were highlighted, including:

• Higher maintenance costs, particularly for urban greening initiatives,
• Technical feasibility concerns related to implementing new solutions,
• Investment barriers that may hinder the adoption of climate-resilient building solutions, and
• The risk of ineffective communication if strategies are not well-designed or targeted.

Co-Benefits Identified:
Successful implementation of these measures is expected to yield multiple benefits, such as:

• Improved public health and well-being through reduced heat exposure,
• Lower cooling costs due to energy-efficient designs and natural cooling,
• Increased urban attractiveness, making the city more livable and appealing, and
• A stronger sense of security and preparedness among residents and institutions.

Next Steps:

• Develop a clear implementation roadmap for SECAP measures to guide action and accountability,
• Strengthen communication strategies to enhance heat preparedness and public engagement,
• Create support schemes to facilitate building adaptation, particularly for vulnerable and low-income groups, and
• Build a robust monitoring system to track the progress of adaptation efforts and ensure continuous improvement.

Tallinn’s overarching vision is already embedded in its city strategy and Sustainable Energy and Climate Action Plan (SECAP), which aims for the city to become climate-neutral by 2050. This vision emphasizes adapting to climate change through nature-based solutions and the development of climate-resilient buildings and infrastructure.

Main Thematic Focus:
The strategy prioritizes:

• Mitigating urban heat island effects, and
• Promoting climate-resilient urban development.

Long-Term Ambition:
Tallinn aspires to:

• Equip the built environment to withstand extreme weather events, and
• Integrate nature into the urban system to reduce heat stress and enhance livability.

Contextual Observation:
While heat impacts in Tallinn are currently perceived as less severe than in southern European regions, this perception may influence the sense of urgency and prioritization of adaptation efforts.

Next Steps (Transferable):

• Translate the existing strategic visions into concrete climate adaptation pathways to bridge the gap between planning and action,
• Connect heat mitigation efforts with the broader climate neutrality goals, ensuring a cohesive and integrated approach, and
• Frame adaptation not as a reactive measure, but as proactive urban transformation, positioning Tallinn as a leader in sustainable, resilient city development.

The workshop in Tallinn brought together a diverse group of participants, including representatives from city departments (such as strategy, transport, property, health, and welfare), national ministries (social affairs, regional development, and agriculture), hospitals and health sector representatives, as well as NGOs and research actors.

Workshop Structure:
The discussions were organized to reflect two key perspectives:

• The health sector, focusing on public health risks and preparedness, and
• Urban, technical, and planning actors, addressing infrastructure, design, and policy solutions.

Key Governance Insight:
A critical takeaway was the necessity for cross-sector alignment to effectively tackle urban heat. This requires integrating both the public health perspective (e.g., protecting vulnerable populations) and the urban planning perspective (e.g., designing resilient infrastructure and green spaces).

Context Factor:
Participation was slightly lower than expected, attributed to recent political changes in the city government, which may have disrupted continuity and engagement.

Next Steps:

• Strengthen long-term stakeholder continuity to ensure ongoing collaboration, even amid political transitions,
• Align the health and urban planning agendas under a unified climate vision, fostering a cohesive approach, and
• Build stable working group structures across departments to maintain momentum and ensure effective implementation.

During the workshop, participants were presented with key inputs, including:

• An overview of ongoing KNOWING activities and planned heat island modeling efforts, and
• Results from a national attitude survey on climate change, providing insights into public perceptions and priorities.

A pre-workshop survey was conducted among stakeholders to assess:

• The existing climate visions within their organizations,
• The degree of integration of heat-related measures into their strategies, and
• The relevance of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to their work.

Key Thematic Orientation Areas:
Based on the clustering of SDGs, the workshop identified several priority themes:

• Health and well-being,
• Sustainable cities and communities,
• Biodiversity,
• Water management,
• Energy, and
• Resource use.

Strategic Insight:
The survey revealed that many organizations already have partial climate visions, but the integration of heat-related measures into their strategies varies significantly, indicating a need for greater alignment and coordination.

Next Steps:

• Align institutional strategies with the city-level climate vision to create a unified approach,
• Use the SDGs as a structuring framework to guide long-term transformation and ensure comprehensive progress, and
• Strengthen the integration of heat resilience into organizational planning, making it a core component of future strategies.

The core activity of the workshop centered on the co-creation of a shared framework, where participants collaboratively developed:

• Visions for a climate-resilient Tallinn,
• Clear objectives to guide action,
• Constraints and obstacles that may hinder progress,
  all of which were structured and clustered into thematic areas and aligned with a timeline extending to 2050.

Key Strategic Directions:
From these discussions, four major strategic directions emerged:

• Strengthening nature-based solutions to effectively reduce urban heat,
• Improving the climate resilience of buildings and infrastructure,
• Enhancing health protection during extreme heat events, and
• Integrating climate considerations into urban systems and services.

Key Mindset Shift:
Participants expressed a fundamental shift in perspective, moving away from "passive adaptation" toward actively redesigning and improving the existing urban environment to proactively address climate challenges.

Next Steps:

• Translate broad visions into operational, actionable objectives,
• Link heat mitigation efforts with health and urban quality goals to maximize co-benefits, and
• Develop long-term implementation pathways to ensure progress toward the 2050 climate goals.

Summary:

The Vision Workshop played a pivotal role in providing structured inputs to guide the development of advanced modeling tools for Tallinn’s climate adaptation efforts.

Data and Modeling Context:
Tallinn already utilizes transport and planning models (such as VISUM) to inform decision-making. The KNOWING project builds on this foundation by introducing:

• Heat island modeling to map and analyze urban heat patterns,
• A comprehensive measures database to evaluate potential interventions, and
• Scenario-based planning support to explore future climate and urban development pathways.

Workshop Outputs:
The outputs from the workshop are being used to:

• Identify and define key vision elements, objectives, constraints, and obstacles, and
• Structure these components along a timeline extending to 2050, laying the groundwork for scenario building and long-term planning.

Next Steps:

• Translate workshop inputs into modeling parameters to ensure the models reflect real-world priorities and challenges,
• Use scenarios to test the feasibility of long-term heat mitigation goals, and
• Link modeling outputs with policy planning to bridge the gap between scientific insights and actionable strategies.

Summary:

Stakeholders identified several key constraints that could impact Tallinn’s climate adaptation and heat mitigation efforts:

• Economic and financial limitations, which may restrict funding for ambitious projects,
• Regulatory uncertainty, creating hesitation in planning and investment,
• Political factors, including shifting priorities and leadership changes,
• Limited human resource capacity, which can slow down implementation, and
• Market readiness, as sustainable solutions may not yet be widely available or affordable.

Structural Governance Uncertainty:
A significant challenge is the ongoing development of Estonia’s National Climate Act, which means future responsibilities for climate action are not yet fully defined. This uncertainty affects how roles and accountability will be distributed among institutions.

Implementation Risks:
Additional risks include:

• Limited competition and affordability in sustainable procurement, which could drive up costs,
• Unclear mandates for municipalities, leading to confusion over who is responsible for what, and
• Institutional fragmentation, where disjointed efforts may undermine coordination and effectiveness.

Next Steps:

• Use the workshop outcomes as input for the modeling phase to ensure real-world constraints are reflected in scenarios, and
• Reconvene stakeholders once modeling results are available to discuss findings and next actions.

To-Dos:

• Clarify institutional responsibilities once the national regulation is finalized, ensuring clear roles and accountability,
• Strengthen capacity for climate implementation within the city administration to overcome resource limitations,
• Prepare policy-relevant outputs from the modeling phase to inform decision-making, and
• Maintain engagement within the working group to ensure long-term continuity and collaboration.