Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This report presents the results of Loop 2 (Loops are development cycles used in the project) of the PIISA project’s green roofs pilot, focused on assessing the applicability of green roofs and green roof insurance products in the Nordic region. While Loop 1 centered on the Netherlands, it included not only the analysis of the green roof strategy of the Dutch insurer Interpolis but also broader research activities: a cost-benefit analysis of green roofs, an evaluation of the effectiveness of various upscaling incentives (such as subsidies and premium discounts), and household surveys to assess public acceptance of green roofs and their behavioural drivers. Loop 2 builds on these insights to explore how similar approaches could be adapted for Nordic cities. The aim is to assess whether green roofs can be an effective climate adaptation measure in Nordic contexts, and whether insurers could play a role in (and benefit from) increasing green roof uptake. The pilot therefore aims to inform business models for nature-based climate adaptation solutions that align private incentives with public benefits. This report begins with a concise overview of the methods (Section 2) for the survey and literature review used in Loop 2. It then presents the key findings from the interviews (Section 3), followed by a discussion that places these insights in context with existing literature (Section 4). The report concludes with a synthesis of implications and recommendations for scaling up green roofs and green roof insurances in the Nordic region (Conclusion).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Farina et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: