section 2: vulnerability approaches
DESCRIPTION
EGS 3021F: Vulnerability to Environmental Change Gina Ziervogel ( [email protected] ) December 2011. Section 2: Vulnerability approaches. This work by Gina Ziervogel is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Section 2:Vulnerability approaches
EGS 3021F: Vulnerability to Environmental Change Gina Ziervogel ([email protected])December 2011
This work by Gina Ziervogel is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
•Risk/Hazard•Political economy/ecology•Ecological resilience
Eakin and Luers (2006)
Conceptual lineages of vulnerability research:
Risk/hazardApproach to vulnerability research
Risk/hazard approach
Focal Questions: What are the hazards? What are the impacts? Where and when?
Key attributes: Exposure (physical threat, external to
system) Sensitivity
Exposure unit: Places, sectors, activities Landscapes, regions
Decision scale of audience Regional Global
(Eakin and Luers, 2006)
By Gina Ziervogel
……Risk/hazard approach
Definition of vulnerability
The degree to which an exposure unit is susceptible to harm due to exposure to a perturbation or stress, and the ability (or lack thereof) of the exposure unit to cope, recover, or fundamentally adapt (become a new system or become extinct).
(Kasperson et al, 2001)
……Risk/hazard approach
Evolved from natural hazards literature Hazards characterisation, risk threshold,
human behaviour
Geographers such as ▪ Gilbert White – human factors involved in disasters
Natural Hazards: Local, National, Global (1974)▪ Burton I, White G, Kates R. 1978. Environment as Hazard.
New York: Oxford Univ.▪ Cutter SL. 1996. Vulnerability to environmental hazards.
Prog. Hum. Geogr. 20:529–39
History ……Risk/hazard approach
Used in IPCC (2001) Sensitivity to risk + possible economic & social
losses Quantifications used as proxy for vulnerability
Late 1990s Increased attention to social drivers and institutional
conditions▪ Kelly PM, Adger WN. 2000. Theory and practice in
assessing vulnerability to climate change and facilitating adaptation. Clim. Change 47:325–52
▪ Burton I, Huq S, Lim B, Pilifosova O,Schipper EL. 2002. From impacts assessment to adaptation priorities: the shaping of adaptation policy. Clim. Policy 2:145– 159
……Risk/hazard approach
Source: Emergency Events Database EM-DATCentre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters CRED(http://www.emdat.be/)
Definition of disaster:>10 killed>100 affected
Great natural catastrophes and economic losses
( Munich Re 2000, in Kasperson et al, 2005: 154 )
Flooding
54 000 people displaced
Damage to bridges/roads affecting 344 000
145 deathshttp://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=38212
4 Jan 2009
14 April 2009
Critique
‘Natural’ hazards should be seen as ‘social’ hazards
Need to acknowledge how political and economic forces make people more vulnerable
(Wisner et al, 2004)
(Kaplan et al, 2009)
(Kaplan et al, 2009)
Political economy/ecologyApproach to vulnerability research
Political ecology approaches to vulnerability emerged in response to risk-hazard assessment of climate impacts and disasters▪ Hewitt K, ed. 1983. Interpretations of Calamity. Boston,
MA: Allen & Unwin
Characteristics: Analyses of social and economic processes Interacting scales of causation Social differences
Political economy/ecology approach
(Eakin and Luers, 2006)
Focal Questions: How are people and places affected differently? What explains differential capacities to cope and
adapt? What are the causes and consequences of
differential susceptibility?
Key attributes: Capacity Sensitivity Exposure
Political economy/ecology
Exposure unit Individuals, households, social groups Communities, livelihoods
Decision scale of audience Local Regional Global
Political economy/ecology
“Vulnerability comes at the confluence of underdevelopment, social and economic marginality and the inability to garner sufficient resources to maintain the natural resource bases and cope with the climatological and ecological instabilities of semi-arid zones”
(Ribot et al, 1996)
Political economy/ecology
Sociopolitical Cultural Economic factors
Underpinned by Amartya Sen’s concept of entitlements and capabilities• Sen (1981).Poverty and Famines: an Essay on
Entitlement and Deprivation.
Links to Bohle et al.’s (1994) ‘space’ of vulnerability
Differential:- Exposure to hazards- Impact- Capacities
Political economy/ecology
Vulnerability space
(Bohle et al, 1994)
Case study
Mexico:Differential outcomes in crop yields during droughtcan’t be explained by rainfall
Land tenureHistorical biases in access to resources
Colonial political economy, imposed by Spanish, allowed landholders to manipulate price of staples poor suffered
Poor lack credit, fertilizer etc.New techniques for agricultural intensification replace
traditional hazard prevention strategies
(Liverman, 1994)
Political economy/ecology
Case study
( http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.3200/ENVT.51.2.26-36)
Hurricane impact and response
Hazards associated with hurricanes: High winds Tornadoes Heavy rainfall Rain-induced flooding
Response:
Evacuation Sheltering
Social and racial stratification in America has impacted on response
(Cutter and Smith, 2009)
Increasing costs of natural disasters world wide
(http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/RisingCost/)
Historical response 1926 – Mississippi river
White power barons demanded that levee downstream be destroyed to alleviate flooding potential
Dynamited banks and destroyed homes and businesses of poor African Americans to save wealthy city
2005 – Hurricane Katrina Preparation and response – differential treatment
following class and racial divides Lessons learnt?
(Cutter and Smith, 2009)
2008: Hurricane Gustav, southern Louisiana Evacuated 1.9 million people
53 deaths 2 evacuations: 1 for those with car and 1 for those without▪ Those with cars returned 3 days after event
Those without cars Designed to be race and class neutral Mainly poor and minority groups Transported on state buses ▪ not told where they were going or how long it would take
Insufficient facilities (sleeping, ablution) Sex offenders told to ‘fend for themselves’ Returned more than 5 days later
(Cutter and Smith, 2009)
2008: Hurricane Ike, Galveston Texas
Major Hurricanes not frequent along this coast
125 lives lost mainly white middle income residents 1 million evacuated, 100 000 didn’t although category 2 hurricane, category
4 storm surge with strong winds
(Cutter and Smith, 2009)
(Cutter and Smith, 2009: 33)
Ecological resilienceApproach to vulnerability research
Ecological resilience Focal questions
Why and how do systems change? What is the capacity to respond to
change? What are the underlying processes that
control the ability to cope or adapt?
By Gina Ziervogel
Exposure unit Coupled human-environment systems Ecosystems
Decision scale Landscapes Ecoregions Multiple scales
Ecological resilience
Resilience is “the capacity of a system to undergo disturbance and maintain its functions and controls” (Carpenter et al, 2001: 766)
Key attributes Amount of change the system can undergo Threshold identification Degree of self-organisation Degree to build capacity to learn and adapt Factors than enable disturbance to be absorbed
(Carpenter et al, 2001)
Ecological resilience
Resilience for whom or what?
Cannot assume social and ecological resilience move in the same direction Food production increases and ecological
diversity decreases (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment,
http://www.maweb.org/en/Scenarios.aspx )
History
Contrasts to earlier views of system existing near equilibrium
Engineering resilience – return to predisturbed state after disturbance
Systems exhibit non- and multi-equilibrium dynamics
Ecological resilience
Historical cont.. Human activity one of many driving forces Timmerman (1981) ▪ Vulnerability, resilience and the collapse of society▪ Linked resilience theory to social sciences▪ Vulnerability of society to hazard result of rigidity
Adaptive co-management of human-managed resource systems▪ Enable dynamic learning▪ Enhance flows of knowledge across scales
Additional case study materialIntegrating resilience, political ecology and risk/hazard
Cross-cutting case study: Social-ecological resilience to coastal disasters Resilient SES have diverse mechanisms for
living with and learning from change and uncertainty
Instead of attempting to control changes the concept of resilience aims at “sustaining and enhancing the capacity of SESs to adapt to uncertainty and surprise.”(Adger et al, 2005)
Hazards become disasters when resilience is eroded because of : Environmental change Human action
Components of resilience easily eroded if importance not recognized e.g. overfishing and pollution
can’t absorb disturbance regime shifts coral replaced by seaweed
(Adger et al, 2005)
Field in Banda Aceh, Indonesia (Adger et al, 2005)
Tsunami impact and response Ecological resilience
Close to epicentre: Mangroves, dunes etc made no difference to impact
Sri Lanka: smaller waves dissipated by mangroves
Strong local governance Less impact in west Sumatra and Thai island Inherited knowledge of tsunamis, early warning
Where ecosystems were undermined, harder to recover Loss of traditional income sources (Adger et al,
2005)
Resilience response
Regenerating physical and ecological structures doesn’t solve problem Strengthen long-term employment Manage natural resilience of reefs▪ water quality coral reefs
Need to address multiple scales
Reducing perverse incentives that Destroy natural capital Exacerbate vulnerability
(Adger et al, 2005)
Review of vulnerability approaches
Review
Vulnerability definitions and concepts
Vulnerability frameworks Conceptual approaches
Review of vulnerability approachesChoose from Risk/Hazard; Political economy; Ecological resilience
Vulnerability approach
1 Why and how do systems change?
2 Key attributes: exposure and sensitivity
3 Exposure unit: individuals
4 What are the causes and consequences of differential susceptibility?
5 Gilbert White
6 Threshold identification
7 Sen’s concept of entitlement
Review of vulnerability approaches
Vulnerability approach
1 Why and how do systems change? Resilience
2 Key attributes: exposure and sensitivity Risk/hazard
3 Exposure unit: individuals Political ecology
4 What are the causes and consequences of differential susceptibility?
Political ecology
5 Gilbert White Risk/hazard
6 Threshold identification Resilience
7 Sen’s concept of entitlement Political ecology
ReferencesAdger, N.W., Hughes, T.P., Folke, C., Carpenter, S. R. and Rockstöm, J. 2005. Social-Ecological
Resilience to Coastal Disasters. Science, 309 (5737): 1036-1039Bohle, H. G., Downing, T. E. and Watts, M. J. 1994.Climate change and social vulnerability:
Toward a sociology and geography of food insecurity. Global Environmental Change, 4(1): 37-48
Carpenter SR, Walker BH, Anderies JM, Abel N. 2001. From metaphor to measurement: Resilience of what to what? Ecosystems 4:765–81
Chopra, K., Leemans, R., Kumar, P., and Simons, H. 2005. Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Policy responses, Volume 3. Findings of the Responses of Working Group of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Washington, Covelo, London: Island Press. (accessed at http://www.maweb.org/en/Scenarios.aspx)
Cutter, S. and Smith, M. 2009. Fleeing from the hurricane’s wrath: Evacuation and the two Americas. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development, 51 (2): 26-36
Eakin, H. and Luers, A. L. 2006. Assessing the Vulnerability of Social-Environmental Systems. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 31: 365-394
Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change (IPCC), 2001. McCarthy, J.J., Canziani, O.F., Leary, N.A., Dokken, D.J. and White, K.S (eds). Contribution of Working Group II to the Third Assessment Report, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, USA: Cambridge University Press. (accessed at http://www.grida.no/publications/other/ipcc_tar/ )
Kaplan, M., Renaud, F. G. and Luchters, G. 2009. Vulnerability assessment and protective effects of coastal vegetation during the 2004 Tsunami in Sri Lanka. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 9: 1479-1494
Kasperson, R. E., Kasperson, J. X., and Dow, K. 2001. Vulnerability, equity, and global environmental change, in J. X. Kasperson and R. E. Kasperson (eds.), Global Environmental Risk, London: Earthscan.
Liverman, D.M. 1994. Vulnerability to Global Environmental Change. Chapter 26, p. 326-342 in S. Cutter, (ed), Environmental Risks and Hazards. Prentice Hall: Saddle River, NJ. (Reprint of 1990 report published by Clark University)
Munich Re 2000: Topics 2000: Natural Catastrophes—the Current Position. Munich, Germany. (Available online at www.munichre.com) in Kasperson, R.E., E. Archer, D. Caceres, K. Dow, T. Downing, T. Elmqvist, C. Folke, G. Han, K. Iyengar, C. Vogel, K. Wilson and G. Ziervogel, 2005. Vulnerable Peoples and Places.
Ribot JC, Najam A, and Watson G. 1996. Climate variation, vulnerability and sustainable development in the semiarid tropics. In Ribot, J.C., Magalhaes, A.R. and Panagides, S.S. (eds), Climate Variability, Climate Change and Social Vulnerability in the Semi-arid Tropics, pp. 13–51. Cambridge, UK:University Cambridge Press
Scoones, I. 1998. Sustainable rural livelihoods: a framework for analysis. IDS working paper, 72. Brighton: IDS.
Timmerman P. 1981. Vulnerability, resilience and the collapse of society. Rep. 1, Inst. Environ. Stud., Toronto, Canada
Wisner, B., Blaikie, P., Cannon, T., Davis, I., 2004. At Risk: Natural Hazards, People’s Vulnerability, and Disasters. New York: Routledge
All web links were checked in November 2011
References continued