Revealing the Vulnerability of People and Places: A Case Study of Georgetown County, South Carolina
01 Dec 2000-Annals of The Association of American Geographers (Taylor & Francis Group)-Vol. 90, Iss: 4, pp 713-737
TL;DR: In this article, a reorientation of emergency management systems away from simple post-event response is discussed, and a noticeable change in the focus of disaster management systems is observed.
Abstract: Losses from environmental hazards have escalated in the past decade, prompting a reorientation of emergency management systems away from simple postevent response. There is a noticeable change in p...
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: The Social Vulnerability Index (SoVI) as discussed by the authors is an index of social vulnerability to environmental hazards based on county-level socioeconomic and demographic data collected from the United States in 1990.
Abstract: Objective. 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.
Methods. Using a factor analytic approach, 42 variables were reduced to 11 independent factors that accounted for about 76 percent of the variance. These factors were placed in an additive model to compute a summary score—the Social Vulnerability Index.
Results. There are some distinct spatial patterns in the SoVI, with the most vulnerable counties clustered in metropolitan counties in the east, south Texas, and the Mississippi Delta region.
Conclusion. Those factors that contribute to the overall score often are different for each county, underscoring the interactive nature of social vulnerability—some components increase vulnerability; others moderate the effects.
4,230 citations
TL;DR: A vulnerability framework for the assessment of coupled human–environment systems is presented and it is shown that vulnerability is registered not by exposure to hazards alone but also resides in the sensitivity and resilience of the system experiencing such hazards.
Abstract: Global environmental change and sustainability science increasingly recognize the need to address the consequences of changes taking place in the structure and function of the biosphere. These changes raise questions such as: Who and what are vulnerable to the multiple environmental changes underway, and where? Research demonstrates that vulnerability is registered not by exposure to hazards (perturbations and stresses) alone but also resides in the sensitivity and resilience of the system experiencing such hazards. This recognition requires revisions and enlargements in the basic design of vulnerability assessments, including the capacity to treat coupled human–environment systems and those linkages within and without the systems that affect their vulnerability. A vulnerability framework for the assessment of coupled human–environment systems is presented.
3,733 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the disaster resilience of place (DROP) model is proposed to improve comparative assessments of disaster resilience at the local or community level, and a candidate set of variables for implementing the model are also presented as a first step towards its implementation.
Abstract: There is considerable research interest on the meaning and measurement of resilience from a variety of research perspectives including those from the hazards/disasters and global change communities. The identification of standards and metrics for measuring disaster resilience is one of the challenges faced by local, state, and federal agencies, especially in the United States. This paper provides a new framework, the disaster resilience of place (DROP) model, designed to improve comparative assessments of disaster resilience at the local or community level. A candidate set of variables for implementing the model are also presented as a first step towards its implementation.
3,119 citations
Cites background from "Revealing the Vulnerability of Peop..."
...’s (2003) vulnerability/sustainability framework; and (3) Cutter’s hazards-of-place model of vulnerability (Cutter, 1996; Cutter et al., 2000)....
[...]
...…conceptual models for hazard vulnerability include: (1) Blaikie and Wisner et al.’s pressure and release model (Wisner et al., 2004); (2) Turner et al.’s (2003) vulnerability/sustainability framework; and (3) Cutter’s hazards-of-place model of vulnerability (Cutter, 1996; Cutter et al., 2000)....
[...]
...…as an equity or human rights issue (Sarewitz et al., 2003) and (4) the use of vulnerability assessments to identify hazard zones, thereby forming the basis for pre-impact and hazard mitigation planning (Brooks et al., 2005; Clark et al., 2000; Cutter et al., 2000; O’Brien et al., 2004)....
[...]
..., 2003) and (4) the use of vulnerability assessments to identify hazard zones, thereby forming the basis for pre-impact and hazard mitigation planning (Brooks et al., 2005; Clark et al., 2000; Cutter et al., 2000; O’Brien et al., 2004)....
[...]
TL;DR: The authors argue that societies have inherent capacities to adapt to climate change, but these capacities are bound up in their ability to act collectively, and they argue that this capacity is limited by the nature of the agents of change, states, markets and civil society.
Abstract: The effects of observed and future changes in climate are spatially and socially differentiated. The impacts of future changes will be felt particularly by resource-dependent communities through a multitude of primary and secondary effects cascading through natural and social systems. Given that the world is increasingly faced with risks of climate change that are at the boundaries of human experience3, there is an urgent need to learn from past and present adaptation strategies to understand both the processes by which adaptation takes place and the limitations of the various agents of change – states, markets, and civil society – in these processes. Societies have inherent capacities to adapt to climate change. In this article, I argue that these capacities are bound up in their ability to act collectively.
2,346 citations
Cites background from "Revealing the Vulnerability of Peop..."
...The vulnerability of marginalized groups and their exclusion from decision making has been documented throughout the world, from Japan to the United States and the Caribbean, for instance (Uitto 1998; Cutter, Mitchell, and Scott 2000; Pelling 1999, 2002)....
[...]
TL;DR: The six articles of the special feature are introduced and situated within these components of study of land change: observation and monitoring; understanding the coupled system—causes, impacts, and consequences; modeling; and synthesis issues.
Abstract: Land change science has emerged as a fundamental component of global environmental change and sustainability research. This interdisciplinary field seeks to understand the dynamics of land cover and land use as a coupled human-environment system to address theory, concepts, models, and applications relevant to environmental and societal problems, including the intersection of the two. The major components and advances in land change are addressed: observation and monitoring; understanding the coupled system-causes, impacts, and consequences; modeling; and synthesis issues. The six articles of the special feature are introduced and situated within these components of study.
1,645 citations
References
More filters
TL;DR: The authors argue that the social, political and economic environment is as much a cause of disasters as the natural environment and that the concept of vulnerability is central to an understanding of disasters and their prevention or mitigation, exploring the extent and ways in which people gain access to resources.
Abstract: Many disasters are a complex mix of natural hazards and human action. At Risk argues that the social, political and economic environment is as much a cause of disasters as the natural environment. Published within the International Decade of Natural Hazard Reduction, this book suggests ways in which both the social and natural sciences can be analytically combined through a 'disaster pressure and release' model. Arguing that the concept of vulnerability is central to an understanding of disasters and their prevention or mitigation, the authors explore the extent and ways in which people gain access to resources. Individual chapters apply analytical concepts to famines and drought, biological hazards, floods, coastal storms, and earthquakes, volcanos and landslides - the hazards that become disasters'. Finally, the book draws practical and policy conclusions to promote a safer environment and reduce vulnerability.
6,432 citations
Book•
01 Jan 1994
TL;DR: In this paper, the challenge of disasters and their approach are discussed, and a framework and theory for disaster mitigation is presented. But the authors do not address the problem of access to resources and coping in adversarial situations.
Abstract: Part 1: Framework and Theory 1. The Challenge of Disasters and Our Approach 2. Disaster Pressure and Release Model 3. Access to Resources and Coping in Adversity Part 2: Vulnerability and Hazard Types 4. Famine and Natural Hazards 5. Biological Hazards 6. Floods 7. Severe Coastal Storms 8. Earthquakes, Volcanoes and Landslides Part 3: Action for Disaster Reduction 9. Vulnerability, Relief and Reconstruction 10. Towards a Safer Environment
5,190 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors propose a conceptual framework that links the technical assessment of risk with psychological, sociological, and cultural perspectives of risk perception and risk-related behavior to amplify or attenuate public responses to the risk or risk event.
Abstract: One of the most perplexing problems in risk analysis is why some relatively minor risks or risk events, as assessed by technical experts, often elicit strong public concerns and result in substantial impacts upon society and economy. This article sets forth a conceptual framework that seeks to link systematically the technical assessment of risk with psychological, sociological, and cultural perspectives of risk perception and risk-related behavior. The main thesis is that hazards interact with psychological, social, institutional, and cultural processes in ways that may amplify or attenuate public responses to the risk or risk event. A structural description of the social amplification of risk is now possible. Amplification occurs at two stages: in the transfer of information about the risk, and in the response mechanisms of society. Signals about risk are processed by individual and social amplification stations, including the scientist who communicates the risk assessment, the news media, cultural groups, interpersonal networks, and others. Key steps of amplifications can be identified at each stage. The amplified risk leads to behavioral responses, which, in turn, result in secondary impacts. Models are presented that portray the elements and linkages in the proposed conceptual framework.
3,016 citations
"Revealing the Vulnerability of Peop..." refers background in this paper
...In their pioneering work, Kasperson et al. (1988) suggest that risks (the term hazards easily could be substituted) interact with cultural, social, and institutional processes in such a way as to either temper public response or heighten it....
[...]
...In their pioneering work, Kasperson et al. (1988) suggest that risks (the term hazards easily could be substituted) interact with cultural, social, and institutional processes in such a way as to either temper public response or heighten it. This social amplification of risk model helps us to interpret public perceptions and, ultimately, policy responses to risk and hazards in contemporary society....
[...]
Book•
01 Jan 1982
2,181 citations
"Revealing the Vulnerability of Peop..." refers background in this paper
...…humanenvironment relations (Torry 1979), and the more contemporary view that natural hazards are socially and culturally constructed (O’Keefe et al. 1976; Douglas and Wildavsky 1982; Susman et al. 1983; Johnson and Covello 1989; Krimsky and Golding 1992; Blaikie et al. 1994; Palm and Carroll 1998)....
[...]
...The poor are more susceptible to certain hazards due to lack of resources, poor-quality housing, and the inability to recover quickly (Burton et al. 1993; Dasgupta 1995 )....
[...]
Book•
01 Jan 1987
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors provide a method of analyzing the problems of management and degradation, focusing particularly on the decision making environment of the land users and managers themselves, its great variety through space and time, and the inability of single theories to provide satisfactory explanations.
Abstract: Acknowledges that the reasons why land management can fail are extremely varied, and must include a thorough understanding of the changing natural resource base itself, the human response to this, and broader changes in society, of which land managers are a part. Four chapters provide a method of analyzing the problems of management and degradation. They focus particularly on the decision making environment of the land users and managers themselves, its great variety through space and time, and on the inability of single theories to provide satisfactory explanations. Case studies cover Nepal, North America, Indonesia, the Pacific, China, India and historical erosion in Europe, and in modern capitalist, socialist, and developing countries.
2,047 citations