(Non-) robustness of vulnerability assessments to climate change: An application to New Zealand

Fernández, Mario Andrés; Bucaram, Santiago; Rentería, Willington

doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.07.054

Cited by 13 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These methodologies largely focus on (i) deductive approaches to identify easy to measure indicators (i.e. variables that reflect past or present conditions within a limited temporal range, and at a single spatial scale) and (ii) developing quantitative methods for aggregation and evaluation of these indicators (Aroca-Jimenez et al, 2017; Bjarnadottir et al, 2011; Fernandez et al, 2017; Mason et al, 2019; Spielman et al, 2020; Yoon, 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social vulnerability, social-ecological resilience and coastal governance

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Non-technical summary Our analysis shows that the framing of social vulnerability is shaped by a narrow definition of resilience, focusing on post-disaster return and recovery responses. This perspective does not account for the dynamism and non-stationarity of social-ecological systems (SES) which is becoming increasingly important in the face of accelerating environmental change. Incorporating social-ecological resilience into social vulnerability analysis can improve coastal governance by accounting for adaptation and transformation, as well as scale and cross-scale interactions. Technical summary Social vulnerability analysis has been unable to deliver outcomes that reflect the reality of vulnerability and its consequences in an era characterised by accelerating environmental change. In this work, we used critical discourse analysis and key informant interviews to understand different framings of social vulnerability in coastal governance and management, globally and in New Zealand. We found that the framing of system vulnerability could vary depending on the definition of resilience adopted, which has critical ramifications for coastal governance of linked systems of humans and nature. We found that the framing of social vulnerability in coastal governance is mainly influenced by engineering, community and disaster resilience, focusing on return and recovery governance responses to environmental change (e.g. hurricanes, wildfires). Instead, we suggest a novel perspective based on social-ecological resilience, which more accurately reflects the dynamics of linked systems of humans and nature (SES). This revised perspective, general vulnerability, accounts for the dynamics of Earth's systems across various spatial and temporal scales in the face of accelerating environmental change. Accounting for social-ecological resilience and its core aspects (i.e. panarchy, adaptation and transformation) is essential for informing coastal governance of SES (Do we adapt? or Do we transform the SES?). Social media summary Social-ecological resilience is essential for social vulnerability analysis in the face of accelerating environmental change.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social vulnerability, social-ecological resilience and coastal governance

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The question remains, how much uncertainty is introduced by a single indicator into the assessment of vulnerability and how much a single (or several) indicator affects the overall outcome. Just recently in parallel to our work, Fernandez et al [31] investigated the effect of particular indicators on the overall outcome of their index. They studied the substitutional power of indicators by various aggregation schemes.…”

mentioning

confidence: 72%

“…A single aggregate index representation of climate vulnerability dimensions like adaptive capacity may be appealing for policy makers but would be inaccurate and highly misleading [9]. Moreover, vulnerability assessments based on indicators are not robust to changes in the assumptions with respect to the substitution or compensation between the indicators [31]. Thus a continual process of refinement is essential so that the indicators and the index have the greatest possible validity and thus utility [13].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sensitivity analysis of a climate vulnerability index - a case study from Indian watershed development programmes

Sathyan

Funk

Aenis

et al. 2018

Clim Chang Responses

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: This paper presents a detailed analysis of a composite Climate Vulnerability Index (CVI) to examine and compare climate change vulnerability and its dimensions adaptive capacity, sensitivity and exposure. Thereby, we are mainly interested on climate change vulnerability at community-level watershed development programmes and how the different implementing agencies could help to address the problems associated with climate change in future planning and implementation. Method: The primary data used for this study was obtained from household surveys (n = 215) in three watershed communities of Kerala, India. We use bootstrap sampling and a leave-one-out sensitivity analysis to compare the climate vulnerability of the three examined watersheds in detail. By introducing the bootstrapping method and sensitivity analysis into the research field of climate vulnerability, the paper describes significant differences in CVI values and the influencing indicators to the overall vulnerability at the watershed community level. Results:The results show that there are significant differences in the exposure and sensitivity dimensions of vulnerability even if the overall CVI shows less variability and no significant differences among the three watersheds. The sensitivity analysis emphasizes that 'Livelihood Strategies' and 'Social Network' are the most influencing major components of vulnerability. This suggests that implementing agencies should focus on these two major components in order to improve the watershed development programmes. Conclusion:The bootstrapping approach is transferable to evaluate the degree of influence of indicators on a composite index like the CVI. Moreover, it allows us to evaluate the potential effectiveness of various other climate change programmes where the evaluation is commonly done by field surveys. This thereby helps to increase the credibility in the examination of the impacts of climate change at different scales in order to find key areas for better policy planning.

show abstract

“…However, we argue that understanding the meanings people attribute to their experiences can point toward the larger causes of those experiences. Critiques of solely quantitative assessments include the risk of oversimplification due to aggregation (Fernandez et al, 2017) and their inability to reveal the complex relations between actors and resources that shape vulnerability (Montaña & Mussetta, 2016;Retamal et al, 2011). Qualitative approaches, in contrast, have the power to identify deep structural causes of vulnerability that otherwise may not be noticed.…”

Section: Qualitative and Community-based Research On Vulnerability: Challenges And Benefitsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“Deep Vulnerability”: Identifying the Structural Dimensions of Climate Vulnerability through Qualitative Research in Argentina, Canada, and Colombia

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Extreme climate events are becoming more frequent and severe due to climate change. Vulnerability to extremes is the result of three components: exposure to hazards, sensitivity of the system, and capacity to adapt. A large-scale qualitative study of rural vulnerability to climate extremes in Argentina, Canada, and Colombia demonstrates the political-economic root causes of vulnerability in each context. Structural causes are difficult to identify using quantitative indices and deductive metrics alone, but qualitative approaches can help identify key drivers of vulnerability at a deeper level. Technology and diversification are insufficient to address such structural or “deep” vulnerability.

show abstract

(Non-) robustness of vulnerability assessments to climate change: An application to New Zealand

Cited by 13 publications

References 30 publications

Social vulnerability, social-ecological resilience and coastal governance

Social vulnerability, social-ecological resilience and coastal governance

Sensitivity analysis of a climate vulnerability index - a case study from Indian watershed development programmes

“Deep Vulnerability”: Identifying the Structural Dimensions of Climate Vulnerability through Qualitative Research in Argentina, Canada, and Colombia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About