Votre recherche

Abstract A leading challenge in measuring social vulnerability to hazards is for output metrics to better reflect the context in which vulnerability occurs. Through a meta-analysis of 67 flood disaster case studies (1997–2013), this paper profiles the leading drivers of social vulnerability to floods. The results identify demographic characteristics, socioeconomic status, and health as the leading empirical drivers of social vulnerability to damaging flood events. However, risk perception and coping capacity also featured prominently in the case studies, yet these factors tend to be poorly reflected in many social vulnerability indicators. The influence of social vulnerability drivers varied considerably by disaster stage and national setting, highlighting the importance of context in understanding social vulnerability precursors, processes, and outcomes. To help tailor quantitative indicators of social vulnerability to flood contexts, the article concludes with recommendations concerning temporal context, measurability, and indicator interrelationships.

Abstract Fatalities caused by natural hazards are driven not only by population exposure, but also by their vulnerability to these events, determined by intersecting characteristics such as education, age and income. Empirical evidence of the drivers of social vulnerability, however, is limited due to a lack of relevant data, in particular on a global scale. Consequently, existing global‐scale risk assessments rarely account for social vulnerability. To address this gap, we estimate regression models that predict fatalities caused by past flooding events ( n  = 913) based on potential social vulnerability drivers. Analyzing 47 variables calculated from publicly available spatial data sets, we establish five statistically significant vulnerability variables: mean years of schooling; share of elderly; gender income gap; rural settlements; and walking time to nearest healthcare facility. We use the regression coefficients as weights to calculate the “ Glob al‐ E mpirical So cial V ulnerability I ndex (GlobE‐SoVI)” at a spatial resolution of ∼1 km. We find distinct spatial patterns of vulnerability within and across countries, with low GlobE‐SoVI scores (i.e., 1–2) in for example, Northern America, northern Europe, and Australia; and high scores (i.e., 9–10) in for example, northern Africa, the Middle East, and southern Asia. Globally, education has the highest relative contribution to vulnerability (roughly 58%), acting as a driver that reduces vulnerability; all other drivers increase vulnerability, with the gender income gap contributing ∼24% and the elderly another 11%. Due to its empirical foundation, the GlobE‐SoVI advances our understanding of social vulnerability drivers at global scale and can be used for global (flood) risk assessments. , Plain Language Summary Social vulnerability is rarely accounted for in global‐scale risk assessments. We develop an empirical social vulnerability map (“GlobE‐SoVI”) based on five key drivers of social vulnerability to flooding, that is, education, elderly, income inequality, rural settlements and travel time to healthcare, which we establish based on flood fatalities caused by past flooding events. Globally, we find education to have a high and reducing effect on social vulnerability, while all other drivers increase vulnerability. Integrating social vulnerability in global‐scale (flood) risk assessments can help inform global policy frameworks that aim to reduce risks posed by natural hazards and climate change as well as to foster more equitable development globally. , Key Points We develop a global map of social vulnerability at ∼1 km spatial resolution based on five key vulnerability drivers (“GlobE‐SoVI”) We establish vulnerability drivers empirically based on their contribution to predicting fatalities caused by past flooding events Accounting for social vulnerability in global‐scale (flood) risk assessments can inform global policy frameworks that aim to reduce risk

Tokyo is located in a lowland area that is vulnerable to flooding. Due to global climate change, the scalability and frequency of flooding is increasing. On the other hand, population aging and family structural changes, as well as the lack of adaptation measures, would accelerate flooding vulnerability. The key factors involved in social vulnerability must be studied to reduce the risk of flooding. In this study, we refer to the MOVE framework (a disaster vulnerability assessment framework) and analyze it from three perspectives: Exposure to social vulnerability, susceptibility, and resilience. We subsequently develop an index system to complete the evaluation using 11 indicators. The collected data will help reveal social vulnerability to floods in the Katsushika Ward, Tokyo, using the information entropy method and GIS. We found that the western region of the Katsushika Ward is at more risk than the eastern region during flooding. Additionally, the possibility of a serious crisis erupting is greater in the southwestern region than in the northwestern region. Consequently, we conclude that the spatial distribution of flooding varies in the region. The results of this study will help in understanding social vulnerability, in selecting and combining adaptation measures suited to the characteristics of the area, and in the effective and efficient implementation of these measures by the local government’s disaster department.

Although numerous studies have been conducted on the vulnerability of marginalized groups in the environmental justice (EJ) and hazards fields, analysts have tended to lump people together in broad racial/ethnic categories without regard for substantial within-group heterogeneity. This paper addresses that limitation by examining whether Hispanic immigrants are disproportionately exposed to risks from flood hazards relative to other racial/ethnic groups (including US-born Hispanics), adjusting for relevant covariates. Survey data were collected for 1283 adult householders in the Houston and Miami Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) and flood risk was estimated using their residential presence/absence within federally-designated 100-year flood zones. Generalized estimating equations (GEE) with binary logistic specifications that adjust for county-level clustering were used to analyze (separately) and compare the Houston (N = 546) and Miami (N = 560) MSAs in order to clarify determinants of household exposure to flood risk. GEE results in Houston indicate that Hispanic immigrants have the greatest likelihood, and non-Hispanic Whites the least likelihood, of residing in a 100-year flood zone. Miami GEE results contrastingly reveal that non-Hispanic Whites have a significantly greater likelihood of residing in a flood zone when compared to Hispanic immigrants. These divergent results suggest that human-flood hazard relationships have been structured differently between the two MSAs, possibly due to the contrasting role that water-based amenities have played in urbanization within the two study areas. Future EJ research and practice should differentiate between Hispanic subgroups based on nativity status and attend to contextual factors influencing environmental risk disparities.

Abstract High-resolution global flood risk maps are increasingly used to inform disaster risk planning and response, particularly in lower income countries with limited data or capacity. However, current approaches do not adequately account for spatial variation in social vulnerability, which is a key determinant of variation in outcomes for exposed populations. Here we integrate annual average exceedance probability estimates from a high-resolution fluvial flood model with gridded population and poverty data to create a global vulnerability-adjusted risk index for flooding (VARI Flood) at 90-meter resolution. The index provides estimates of relative risk within or between countries and changes how we understand the geography of risk by identifying ‘hotspots’ characterised by high population density and high levels of social vulnerability. This approach, which emphasises risks to human well-being, could be used as a complement to traditional population or asset-centred approaches.

Abstract This study integrates novel data on 100-year flood hazard extents, exposure of residential properties, and place-based social vulnerability to comprehensively assess and compare flood risk between Indigenous communities living on 985 reserve lands and other Canadian communities across 3701 census subdivisions. National-scale exposure of residential properties to fluvial, pluvial, and coastal flooding was estimated at the 100-year return period. A social vulnerability index (SVI) was developed and included 49 variables from the national census that represent demographic, social, economic, cultural, and infrastructure/community indicators of vulnerability. Geographic information system-based bivariate choropleth mapping of the composite SVI scores and of flood exposure of residential properties and population was completed to assess the spatial variation of flood risk. We found that about 81% of the 985 Indigenous land reserves had some flood exposure that impacted either population or residential properties. Our analysis indicates that residential property-level flood exposure is similar between non-Indigenous and Indigenous communities, but socioeconomic vulnerability is higher on reserve lands, which confirms that the overall risk of Indigenous communities is higher. Findings suggest the need for more local verification of flood risk in Indigenous communities to address uncertainty in national scale analysis.

This paper finds that social differentiation in flood impacts is relatively small soon after a flood, with some surprising results such as professionals and homeowners badly affected in the short‐term – but widens over time, with socially disadvantaged groups displaying less recovery. The paper concludes that vulnerability and resilience to flooding are sensitive to financial resources, institutional support (chiefly from a landlord), and capacity to deal with disruption (chiefly time availability, which is low among professionals and high among retired people). An implication of these findings is that existing indices of flood vulnerability that use multiple measures of social deprivation should be used with caution, as not all conventional aspects of social deprivation are necessarily associated with greater vulnerability to flood impacts. , This paper reports household questionnaire survey results on vulnerability and resilience to flooding from one of the largest and most representative samples ( n  = 593) of households up to 12 years after they were flooded, and is one of the first to provide detailed analysis of social differentiation in long‐term flood impacts. A novel finding is that social differentiation in flood impacts is relatively small soon after a flood, but widens over time, with socially disadvantaged groups displaying less recovery. The patterns of social differentiation in vulnerability and resilience to flooding differ markedly according to the type and timescale of the impact, with some normally socially advantaged groups (e.g., professionals and homeowners) being most vulnerable to short‐term impacts. Consistent with some existing studies, we found that older residents (age 70+) have greater resilience to flood impacts, although our sample may not capture the frailest individuals. As in previous research, low income is linked to lower resilience, particularly in the long term. We find that prior experience of flooding, despite enhancing preparedness, overall erodes rather than enhances resilience to flooding. Flood warnings are effective at reducing vulnerability to short‐term impacts. Underlying influences on resilience to natural disasters are complex and may only be revealed by multivariate analysis and not always be evident in simple observed patterns. The paper concludes that vulnerability and resilience to flooding are sensitive to financial resources, institutional support (chiefly from a landlord), and capacity to deal with disruption (chiefly time availability, which is low among professionals and high among retired people). An implication of these findings is that existing indices of flood vulnerability that use multiple measures of social deprivation should be used with caution, as not all conventional aspects of social deprivation are necessarily associated with greater vulnerability to flood impacts.

Flood risk assessments provide inputs for the evaluation of flood risk management (FRM) strategies. Traditionally, such risk assessments provide estimates of loss of life and economic damage. However, the effect of policy measures aimed at reducing risk also depends on the capacity of households to adapt and respond to floods, which in turn largely depends on their social vulnerability. This study shows how a joint assessment of hazard, exposure and social vulnerability provides valuable information for the evaluation of FRM strategies. The adopted methodology uses data on hazard and exposure combined with a social vulnerability index. The relevance of this state-of-the-art approach taken is exemplified in a case-study of Rotterdam, the Netherlands. The results show that not only a substantial share of the population can be defined as socially vulnerable, but also that the population is very heterogeneous, which is often ignored in traditional flood risk management studies. It is concluded that FRM measures, such as individual mitigation, evacuation or flood insurance coverage should not be applied homogenously across large areas, but instead should be tailored to local characteristics based on the socioeconomic characteristics of individual households and neighborhoods.

Abstract While flood risk management planning in the U nited S tates has focused on flood control structures designed to protect the economic value of property, it has consistently undervalued other social impacts associated with flooding. The US A rmy C orps of E ngineers ( USACE ) recently initiated research aimed at understanding how to incorporate social characteristics into the measures currently utilised in flood control project evaluation and consideration. This paper proposes a methodology for incorporating a known measure of social vulnerability, the S ocial V ulnerability I ndex ( SoVI ), into USACE civil works planning. Using the USACE S outh A tlantic D ivision as the study area, this paper evaluates eight different variations of the social vulnerability metric and their potential deployment in USACE projects. Each formulation is compared with the original‐computed SoVI as a means to test its spatial and statistical sensitivity, including an assessment of each variant's robustness, reducibility, scalability, and transferability. Results indicate that while it is possible to create simplified, yet robust, versions of SoVI for individual places, such ‘lite’ metrics tend to fall short in areas of scalability and transferability in relation to the original SoVI formulation.

County-level socioeconomic and demographic data were used to construct an index of social vulnerability to environmental hazards, called the Social Vulnerability Index (SoVI) for the United States based on 1990 data. Copyright (c) 2003 by the Southwestern Social Science Association.