Understanding livelihood vulnerability to climate change: Applying the livelihood vulnerability index in Trinidad and Tobago
TL;DR: In this article, a comparative study of two wetland communities in Trinidad and Tobago, a country that is expected to bear some of the most severe impacts of climate change, was conducted.
About: This article is published in Geoforum.The article was published on 2013-06-01. It has received 269 citations till now. The article focuses on the topics: Vulnerability index & Livelihood.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: Substantial variety in construction practices of composite indicators of risk, vulnerability and resilience were found and a number of potential limitations of the present state of practice and how these might impact on decision makers are discussed.
Abstract: INTRODUCTION: In the past decade significant attention has been given to the development of tools that attempt to measure the vulnerability, risk or resilience of communities to disasters. Particular attention has been given to the development of composite indices to quantify these concepts mirroring their deployment in other fields such as sustainable development. Whilst some authors have published reviews of disaster vulnerability, risk and resilience composite indicator methodologies, these have been of a limited nature. This paper seeks to dramatically expand these efforts by analysing 106 composite indicator methodologies to understand the breadth and depth of practice. METHODS: An extensive search of the academic and grey literature was undertaken for composite indicator and scorecard methodologies that addressed multiple/all hazards; included social and economic aspects of risk, vulnerability or resilience; were sub-national in scope; explained the method and variables used; focussed on the present-day; and, had been tested or implemented. Information on the index construction, geographic areas of application, variables used and other relevant data was collected and analysed. RESULTS: Substantial variety in construction practices of composite indicators of risk, vulnerability and resilience were found. Five key approaches were identified in the literature, with the use of hierarchical or deductive indices being the most common. Typically variables were chosen by experts, came from existing statistical datasets and were combined by simple addition with equal weights. A minimum of 2 variables and a maximum of 235 were used, although approximately two thirds of methodologies used less than 40 variables. The 106 methodologies used 2298 unique variables, the most frequently used being common statistical variables such as population density and unemployment rate. Classification of variables found that on average 34% of the variables used in each methodology related to the social environment, 25% to the disaster environment, 20% to the economic environment, 13% to the built environment, 6% to the natural environment and 3% were other indices. However variables specifically measuring action to mitigate or prepare for disasters only comprised 12%, on average, of the total number of variables in each index. Only 19% of methodologies employed any sensitivity or uncertainty analysis and in only a single case was this comprehensive. DISCUSSION: A number of potential limitations of the present state of practice and how these might impact on decision makers are discussed. In particular the limited deployment of sensitivity and uncertainty analysis and the low use of direct measures of disaster risk, vulnerability and resilience could significantly limit the quality and reliability of existing methodologies. Recommendations for improvements to indicator development and use are made, as well as suggested future research directions to enhance the theoretical and empirical knowledge base for composite indicator development. Language: en
167 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors aim to test two vulnerability assessment indices, livelihood vulnerability index and IPCC vulnerability index, around the Gandaki River Basin of central Nepal, where a total of 543 households practicing mixed agro-livestock were surveyed from three districts, namely, Dhading, Syangja and Kapilvastu representing three major ecological zones: mountain, mid hill and Terai (lowland).
Abstract: Climate change vulnerability depends upon various factors and differs between places, sectors and communities. People in developing countries whose subsistence livelihood depends mainly upon agriculture and livestock production are identified as particularly vulnerable. Nepal, where the majority of people are in a mixed agro-livestock system, is identified as the world’s fourth most vulnerable country to climate change. However, there is limited knowledge on how vulnerable mixed agro-livestock smallholders are and how their vulnerability differs across different ecological regions in Nepal. This study aims to test two vulnerability assessment indices, livelihood vulnerability index and IPCC vulnerability index, around the Gandaki River Basin of central Nepal. A total of 543 households practicing mixed agro-livestock were surveyed from three districts, namely Dhading, Syangja and Kapilvastu representing three major ecological zones: mountain, mid-hill and Terai (lowland). Data on socio-demographics, livelihood determinants, social networks, health, food and water security, natural disasters and climate variability were collected and combined into the indices. Both indices differed for mixed agro-livestock smallholders across the three districts, with Dhading scoring as the most vulnerable and Syangja the least. Substantial variation across the districts was observed in components, sub-components and three dimensions (exposure, sensitivity and adaptive capacity) of vulnerability. The findings help in designing site-specific intervention strategies to reduce vulnerability of mixed agro-livestock smallholders to climate change.
134 citations
Cites background from "Understanding livelihood vulnerabil..."
...Many authors (Aryal et al. 2014; Etwire et al. 2013; Shah et al. 2013) have used a similar approach in various contexts because this assessment tool is accessible to a diverse set of users in resource-poor settings....
[...]
...by many scholars in different contexts (Aryal et al. 2014; Etwire et al. 2013; Pandey and Jha 2012; Shah et al. 2013)....
[...]
...Within this broader framework, Hahn et al. (2009) developed an indicator-based vulnerability assessment that has been used by many scholars in different contexts (Aryal et al. 2014; Etwire et al. 2013; Pandey and Jha 2012; Shah et al. 2013)....
[...]
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors applied livelihood vulnerability index (LVI) and livelihood effect index (LEI) to assess vulnerability from climate variability and change of three agricultural and natural resources dep...
Abstract: This study applied livelihood vulnerability index (LVI) and livelihood effect index (LEI) to assess vulnerability from climate variability and change of three agricultural and natural resources dep...
107 citations
Cites background or methods from "Understanding livelihood vulnerabil..."
...This article has explored the analytical utility of using the livelihood and vulnerability index (LVI) developed by Hahn et al. (2009) and Shah et al. (2013) to understand local vulnerability to climate and environmental change....
[...]
...Question (54) is modified by (Shah et al. 2013) (54) Percentage of HHs that with housing affected by climate related disaster Percent Survey HUMAN AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT 1163...
[...]
...This study applied themethodology developed byHahn et al. (2009) and Shah et al. (2013) to calculate level of vulnerability to climate variability....
[...]
...Infrastructural factors affecting vulnerability to climate-induced health shocks were not only roads (Shah et al. 2013)....
[...]
...Within this broader framework, Hahn et al. (2009) developed an indicator-based vulnerability assessment that has been used bymany scholars in different contexts (Can et al. 2013; Shah et al. 2013; Madhuri et al. 2014; Panthi et al. 2016; Tjoe 2016)....
[...]
TL;DR: In this article, the authors developed a holistic approach to assess the livelihood vulnerability of 380 resource-poor, rural riparian households from char and river-bank communities in Bangladesh, based on the notion that vulnerability to climate change does not exist in isolation from wider community's socioeconomic and bio-physical attributes.
104 citations
TL;DR: In this article, a survey of 274 farm families of Fars province, selected through a multistage stratified random sampling technique, indicated that drought is the main threat to livelihood security meantime the interaction between drought intensity and its duration leads to more vulnerability.
Abstract: Agriculture as the main source of livelihood for rural residents of the developing countries is inherently sensitive to climate variability and change. Among different climatic events, drought is frequently identified as a major threat to agricultural systems and livelihood security of farm families, in many arid and semi-arid regions of the developing world. The negative impacts of drought are further intensified by the threat of climate change. In order to mitigate the negative impacts of drought on livelihood, increasing adaptive capacity of farm families is imperative. If rural livelihoods are no longer secure, farm families are finally forced to abandon agriculture. Therefore, the objective of this study was to investigate the livelihood vulnerability of farm families to drought. It was also intended to determine the drivers of livelihood vulnerability in the context of drought. A survey of 274 farm families of Fars province, selected through a multistage stratified random sampling technique, indicated that drought is the main threat to livelihood security meantime the interaction between drought intensity and its duration leads to more vulnerability. Additionally, results revealed that different adaptation strategies were used by the low, medium and high livelihood vulnerable families in order to adjust drought impacts. Tree analysis also illustrated that livelihood vulnerability is a product of the complex set of financial, physical, social and natural capitals. Some recommendations are offered to reduce the livelihood vulnerability of farm families to drought.
100 citations
References
More filters
Book•
01 Jul 2001
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors set the stage for impact, adaptation, and vulnerability assessment of climate change in the context of sustainable development and equity, and developed and applied scenarios in Climate Change Impact, Adaptation, and Vulnerability Assessment.
Abstract: Summary for policymakers Technical summary Part I. Setting the Stage for Impact, Adaptation, and Vulnerability Assessment: 1. Overview 2. Methods and tools 3. Development and application of scenarios in Climate Change Impact, Adaptation, and Vulnerability Assessment Part II. Sectors and Systems: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability: 4. Hydrology and water resources 5. Natural and managed ecosystems 6. Coastal zones and marine ecosystems 7. Energy, industry, and settlements 8. Financial services 9. Human health Part III. Regional Analyses: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability: 10. Africa 11. Asia 12. Australasia 13. Europe 14. Latin America 15. North America 16. Polar regions (Arctic and Antarctic) 17. Small island states Part IV. Global Issues and Synthesis: 18. Adaptation to climate change in the context of sustainable development and equity 19. Synthesis and integration of impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability Index.
12,541 citations
Book•
01 Jan 2007
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors present a cross-chapter case study on climate change and sustainability in natural and managed systems and assess key vulnerabilities and the risk from climate change, and assess adaptation practices, options, constraints and capacity.
Abstract: Foreword Preface Introduction Summary for policymakers Technical summary 1. Assessment of observed changes and responses in natural and managed systems 2. New assessment methodologies and the characterisation of future conditions 3. Fresh water resources and their management 4. Ecosystems, their properties, goods and services 5. Food, fibre and forest products 6. Coastal systems and low-lying areas 7. Industry, settlement and society 8. Human health 9. Africa 10. Asia 11. Australia and New Zealand 12. Europe 13. Latin America 14. North America 15. Polar regions (Arctic and Antarctic) 16. Small islands 17. Assessment of adaptation practices, options, constraints and capacity 18. Inter-relationships between adaptation and mitigation 19. Assessing key vulnerabilities and the risk from climate change 20. Perspectives on climate change and sustainability - 811 Cross-chapter case studies Appendix I. Glossary Appendix II. Contributors to the IPCC WGII Fourth Assessment Report Appendix III. Reviewers of the IPCC WGII Fourth Assessment Report Appendix IV. Acronyms and abbreviations Appendix V. Index and database of regional content Index CD-ROM.
8,465 citations
01 Jan 2007
TL;DR: Drafting Authors: Neil Adger, Pramod Aggarwal, Shardul Agrawala, Joseph Alcamo, Abdelkader Allali, Oleg Anisimov, Nigel Arnell, Michel Boko, Osvaldo Canziani, Timothy Carter, Gino Casassa, Ulisses Confalonieri, Rex Victor Cruz, Edmundo de Alba Alcaraz, William Easterling, Christopher Field, Andreas Fischlin, Blair Fitzharris.
Abstract: Drafting Authors: Neil Adger, Pramod Aggarwal, Shardul Agrawala, Joseph Alcamo, Abdelkader Allali, Oleg Anisimov, Nigel Arnell, Michel Boko, Osvaldo Canziani, Timothy Carter, Gino Casassa, Ulisses Confalonieri, Rex Victor Cruz, Edmundo de Alba Alcaraz, William Easterling, Christopher Field, Andreas Fischlin, Blair Fitzharris, Carlos Gay García, Clair Hanson, Hideo Harasawa, Kevin Hennessy, Saleemul Huq, Roger Jones, Lucka Kajfež Bogataj, David Karoly, Richard Klein, Zbigniew Kundzewicz, Murari Lal, Rodel Lasco, Geoff Love, Xianfu Lu, Graciela Magrín, Luis José Mata, Roger McLean, Bettina Menne, Guy Midgley, Nobuo Mimura, Monirul Qader Mirza, José Moreno, Linda Mortsch, Isabelle Niang-Diop, Robert Nicholls, Béla Nováky, Leonard Nurse, Anthony Nyong, Michael Oppenheimer, Jean Palutikof, Martin Parry, Anand Patwardhan, Patricia Romero Lankao, Cynthia Rosenzweig, Stephen Schneider, Serguei Semenov, Joel Smith, John Stone, Jean-Pascal van Ypersele, David Vaughan, Coleen Vogel, Thomas Wilbanks, Poh Poh Wong, Shaohong Wu, Gary Yohe
7,720 citations
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
"Understanding livelihood vulnerabil..." refers background in this paper
...Landmark studies of disasters, risk and climate change highlight three broad characterizations about the dynamic and integrated nature of social and environmental vulnerability (Watts and Bohle, 1993; Blaikie et al., 1994; Kelly and Adger, 2000)....
[...]