Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of contributors
- Part I
- Part II
- Part III
- 5 Establishing vulnerability observatory networks to coordinate the collection and analysis of comparable data
- 6 Comparative assessment of human–environment landscape change
- 7 Landsat mapping of local landscape change: the satellite-era context
- Part IV
- Part V
- Part VI
- Index
- References
5 - Establishing vulnerability observatory networks to coordinate the collection and analysis of comparable data
from Part III
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 06 January 2010
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of contributors
- Part I
- Part II
- Part III
- 5 Establishing vulnerability observatory networks to coordinate the collection and analysis of comparable data
- 6 Comparative assessment of human–environment landscape change
- 7 Landsat mapping of local landscape change: the satellite-era context
- Part IV
- Part V
- Part VI
- Index
- References
Summary
Introduction
Vulnerability has emerged in recent years as one of the central organizing concepts for research on global environmental change (e.g., Downing 2000; O'Brien and Leichenko 2000; Turner et al. 2003; Schröter et al. 2005; Parry et al., 2007). This concept is appealing because it is inclusive. From this perspective, humans and the natural environment are not independent systems, homogeneous and unable to adapt to threats, be they anticipated, realized, or perceived but not realized. Instead, human and natural systems are viewed as intimately coupled, and differentially exposed, sensitive, and adaptable to threats. This logic, followed to its natural conclusion, means that adopting a “vulnerability” perspective demands a thorough investigation of biophysical, cognitive, and social dimensions of human–environment interactions. Strictly speaking, to conduct a vulnerability assessment means that no element of the human–environment system may be simplified away or considered a mere boundary condition.
This conceptual inclusiveness complicates the analytical task (compared to the simpler impacts-only approach), which partially explains why there are few, if any, studies that deeply engage this vast set of intellectual dimensions. This inclusiveness also raises important methodological questions. Consider two vulnerability assessments that examine local-scale vulnerabilities associated with hydroclimatic variability. Mustafa (1998) examines flood-related vulnerabilities in five Pakistani farming communities; Hill and Polsky (2005) assess drought-related vulnerabilities in ten non-farming Massachusetts (USA) towns. Can the vulnerability indicators produced by these assessments be easily compared such that potential common findings on how exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity contribute to local vulnerabilities may be identified?
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Sustainable Communities on a Sustainable PlanetThe Human-Environment Regional Observatory Project, pp. 83 - 106Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2009
References
, 2000. Institutional adaptation to environmental risk under transition in Vietnam. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 90(4): 738–758.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and , 1999. Social vulnerability to climate change and the architecture of entitlements. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change 4(3/4): 253–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and , 1997. Evaluating qualitative research in social geography: establishing ‘rigour’ in interview anaysis. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 22: 505–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and (eds.), 2002. Navigating Social–Ecological Systems: Building Resilience for Complexity and Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
, , and , 1994. Climate change and social vulnerability: toward a sociology and geography of food insecurity. Global Environmental Change 4(1): 37–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and , 2005. The determinants of vulnerability and adaptive capacity at the national level and the implications for adaptation. Global Environmental Change 15(2): 151–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , and , 1994. IPCC Technical Guidelines for Assessing Climate Change Impacts and Adaptations, 59. London: Department of Geography, University College London; and Tsukuba, Japan: Center for Global Environmental Research, National Institute for Environmental Studies.Google Scholar
, 2000. Grounded theory: objectivist and constructivist methods. In Handbook of Qualitative Research, eds. and , pp. 509–536. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
, , , , , , , , , and , 1998. Assessing the vulnerability of coastal communities to extreme storm: the case of Revere, MA, USA. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change 3: 59–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and , 2003. Sustainability science: the emerging research program. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 100(14): 8059–8061.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, 1996. Vulnerability to environmental hazards. Progress in Human Geography 20(4): 529–539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, 2001. A research agenda for vulnerability science and environmental hazards. International Human Dimensions Program Update 01(2): 8–9.Google Scholar
, 2003. The vulnerability of science and the science of vulnerability. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 93(1): 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and , 2000. Revealing the vulnerability of people and places: a case study of Georgetown County, South Carolina. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 90(4): 713–737.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , , and , 2007. Why worry? Community water system managers' perceptions of climate vulnerability. Global Environmental Change 17: 228–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, 1991. Vulnerability to hunger in Africa: a climate change perspective. Global Environmental Change 1: 365–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, 2000. Human dimensions research: toward a vulnerability science?International Human Dimensions Program Update 00(3): 16–17.Google Scholar
, , , , , , , and , 2001. Vulnerability Indices: Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation, Policy Series No. 3. Nairobi: United Nations Environment Programme. Accessed at www.unep.org/library/Default.asp?catid=6.
and , 2004. Crossing the complex divide: linking scales for understanding coupled human–environment systems. In Scale and Geographic Inquiry, eds. and , pp. 55–64. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
, , , and , 2002. Processes of adaptation to climate variability: a case study from the US Southwest. Climate Research 21(3): 299–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and , 2002. Proximate causes and underlying driving forces of tropical deforestation. BioScience 52: 143–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, 1992. Basics of Grounded Theory Analysis: Emergence vs. Forcing. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.Google Scholar
, and , 1967. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago, IL: Aldine.Google Scholar
, and , 1994. Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In Handbook of Qualitative Research, eds. and , pp. 163–188. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
, 2001. Managing surprising ecosystems in southern Florida. Ecological Economics 37: 371–378.4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and , 2005. Suburbanization and adaptation to the effects of suburban drought in rainy central Massachusetts. Geographical Bulletin 47(2): 85–100.Google Scholar
, 1973. Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 4: 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, 1986. The resilience of terrestrial ecosystems: local surprise and global change. In Sustainable Development of the Biosphere, eds. and , pp. 292–317. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
, , , and , 1999. Relative regional vulnerability of water resources to climate change. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 35(6): 1399–1409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , and , 2006. Scholarly networks on resilience, vulnerability and adaptation within the human dimensions of global environmental change. Global Environmental Change 16: 240–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, 2001. Vulnerability and global environmental change. International Human Dimensions Program Update 01(2): 2–3.Google Scholar
, 1985. The interaction of climate and society. In Climate Impact Assessment: Studies of the Interaction of Climate and Society, eds. , , and , pp. 3–36. Chichester: John Wiley.Google Scholar
, , and (eds.), 1985. Climate Impact Assessment: Studies of the Interaction of Climate and Society. Chichester: John Wiley.
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , and , 2001. Sustainability science. Science 292: 641–642.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, and , 2000. Theory and practice in assessing vulnerability to climate change and facilitating adaptation. Climatic Change 47: 325–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and , 1999. Adaptation to climate change and variability: methodological issues. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change 4(3/4): 189–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and , 1999. Coastal adaptation to climate change: can the IPCC Technical Guidelines be applied?Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change 4(3/4): 239–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, 1990. Drought impacts in Mexico: climate, agriculture, technology, and land tenure in Sonora and Puebla. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 80(1): 49–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and , 2001. Vulnerability to Climate Change: A Quantitative Approach. Richland, WA: Pacific Northwest National Laboratory.Google Scholar
, 1998. Structural causes of vulnerability to flood hazard in Pakistan. Economic Geography 74: 289–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, 1999. Our Common Journey: A Transition Toward Sustainability. Board on Sustainable Development. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
, and , 2000. Double exposure: assessing the impacts of climate change within the context of economic globalization. Global Environmental Change 10: 221–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , , , , , , , , and , 2004. Mapping vulnerability to multiple stressors: climate change and globalization in India. Global Environmental Change 14: 303–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , , , , , , , and , 1999. Weather and climate extremes, climate change, and planning: views of community water system managers in Pennsylvania's Susquehanna River Basin. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 35(6): 1411–1419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , , and , 2005. Feeling at-risk matters: water managers and the decision to use forecasts. Risk Analysis 25: 1265–1275.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, , , , , , and (eds.), 2005. Land-Use and Land-Cover Change: Science/Research Plan, IGBP Report No. 53/IHDP Report No. 19. Stockholm: IGBP Secretariat.
, , and , 1994. Verification, validation, and confirmation of numerical models in the Earth sciences. Science 263(5147): 641–646.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, 2001. Viewpoint: Climate change – where should our research priorities be?Global Environmental Change 11: 257–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , , and (eds.), 2007. Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
, 2004. Putting space and time in Ricardian climate change impact studies: the case of agriculture in the U.S. Great Plains. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 94(3): 549–564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and , 2005. Reducing vulnerability to the effects of global change: drought management in a multi-scale, multi-stressor world. In Drought and Water Crises: Science, Technology, and Management Issues, ed. , pp. 215–245. Amsterdam: Marcel Dekker.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and , 2007. Building comparable global change vulnerability assessments: the Vulnerability Scoping Diagram. Global Environmental Change 17: 472–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Project for Public Spaces (PPS), 2005. Accessed at www.pps.org/.
, 1987. The Comparative Method: Moving beyond Qualitative and Quantitative Strategies. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
, 2005. Tropical Forests: Regional Paths of Destruction and Regeneration in the Late 20th Century. New York: Columbia University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, 2008. Capturing regional effects through meta-analyses of case studies: an example from the global change literature. Global Environmental Change 18: 18–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and , 2000. Adaptation: sensitivity to natural variability, agent assumptions and dynamic climate changes. Climatic Change 45: 203–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and , 2005. Assessing vulnerabilities to the effects of global change: an eight step approach. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change 10(4): 573–595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , and , 1999. The science of adaptation: a framework for assessment. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change 4(3/4): 199–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and , 1997. Human adaptation to climatic variability and change. Global Environmental Change 7(2): 129–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and , 2005. The Human–Environment Regional Observatory (HERO) Project: undergraduate research findings from four study sites. Geographical Bulletin 47(2): 65–72.Google Scholar
, and , 1998. Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
, , , , , , , , , , , , and , 2003. A framework for vulnerability analysis in sustainability science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 100: 8074–8079.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, , and (eds.), 2004. Integrated Land-Change Science and Tropical Deforestation in the Southern Yucatán: Final Frontiers. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
, , , , , , , , , and , 2002. Resilience management in social–ecological systems: a working hypothesis for a participatory approach. Conservation Ecology 6(1):14 (online). Accessed at www.consecol.org/vol6/iss1/art14/main.html.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, 1986. Meta-Analysis: Quantitative Methods for Research Synthesis. London: Sage Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and , 2002. Vulnerability of coastal communities to sea-level rise: a case study of Cape May County, New Jersey. Climate Research 22: 255–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , , and , 2005. Why don't Community Water System managers use weather and climate forecasts? Preprints of the 15th Conference on Applied Climatology, Savannah, GA, June 2005. Accessed at www.ametsoc.org/.
, , , , and , 2006. The potential use of climate forecasts by Community Water System managers. Land Use and Water Resources Research. Accessed at www.luwrr.com.
, , , , , , , , , , , , and , 2006. A portfolio approach to analyzing complex human–environment interactions. Ecology and Society 11(2): 31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 1
- Cited by