“Europe is warming faster than the rest of the world, even up to twice as fast.” This is often said in the media and in international reports. The statement is not made up; it is supported by organizations such as the Copernicus climate program and reports from the UN climate panel. But the reality is more complex. “The claim is true, but it is also a simplification”, experts say.
According to recent studies, including the report Europe’s Environment 2025 by the European Environment Agency and data from Copernicus, the average warming in Europe is about 2 to 2.5 degrees Celsius since the pre-industrial period (1850–1900). This is about twice the global average, which is around 1.2 degrees.
“If you only look at the numbers, the statement is correct”, says climate scientist Niels Souverijns (VITO). “But it is important to understand what is being compared.” The comparison uses a global average that includes both land and oceans. And that is where things become tricky.
Land warms faster than sea
“The Earth is a ‘blue planet’”, says climate researcher Joppe Massant (Ghent University). “Water warms much more slowly than land. This means continents will always warm faster than the global average.” Europe is mostly land and is also close to the North Pole, a region that warms very quickly. This makes the effect stronger.
“If you compare cities, like Brussels, with cities in America or Asia, you see they warm at about the same speed”, Souverijns explains. “So, the difference is not really about Europe itself, but about how the average is calculated.”
“The claim is statistically correct, but without context it can give a misleading picture.”
Niels Souverijns, climate scientist at VITO
Role of the North Pole
A large part of the explanation comes from the North Pole. It is warming up to four times faster than the global average, a process known as Arctic amplification.
This happens because of a feedback effect: ice and snow reflect sunlight, but when they melt, darker water or land appears and absorbs heat. This makes warming even faster.
“In statistics, Europe is often grouped together with places like Greenland and the Arctic”, says Souverijns. “This makes it seem like all of Europe is warming extremely fast. In reality, this is mainly true for the northern regions.” If Greenland were counted as part of North America, then North America would be the fastest-warming continent.
Massant agrees: “Europe is located close to the North Pole. That is why its average temperature increase is higher than in other regions.”
Role of air pollution
Another factor is the decrease in air pollution. Fine particles in the air can reflect sunlight and have a cooling effect. Europe has reduced this pollution a lot in recent decades.
“That is good for health”, says Souverijns. “But it also means less sunlight is blocked. So, Europe is now warming a bit faster than before.”
Big differences within Europe
The average number also hides large regional differences. In Belgium, temperatures have risen by a little more than 2 degrees, while parts of Scandinavia are close to 3 degrees. In places like Svalbard, about 500 km north of Norway, the increase can reach 4 to 5 degrees.
Coastal areas are slightly cooled by the ocean, while inland regions warm more strongly.
Communication versus nuance
So why is the statement used so often? According to Massant, communication plays a role.
“It helps showing how serious the situation is”, he says. “A global increase of 1.5 degrees may sound small, but on land, where people live, the effects are much bigger.” Souverijns calls the claim “misleading, but not wrong.” “It is statistically correct, but without context it can give the wrong idea.”
This nuance is also important when looking at the effects of climate change. For example, sea levels do not rise at the same speed everywhere. In parts of Scandinavia, it even seems slower because the land is still rising after the last ice age, a process called isostatic uplift.
Conclusion
So, the idea that Europe is “warming twice as fast” as the rest of the world is not false. The numbers are based on research from groups like Copernicus and the IPCC. But to fully understand it, you need to look deeper. Geography, physics, and even air pollution all play a role. As Souverijns says: “The statement is true, but the full story is more complex.”
RESEARCH | ARTICLE © Junior Antonissen, Yanne Bonte and Fenneke Ruys, AP University of Applied Sciences Antwerp, Belgium.
Leave your comments, thoughts and suggestions in the box below. Take note: your response is moderated.
