Abstract: Infrastructure systems form the backbone of every society, providing essential services that include energy, water, waste management, transport and telecommunications. Infrastructure can also create harmful social and environmental impacts, increase vulnerability to natural disasters and leave an unsustainable burden of debt. Investment in infrastructure is at an all-time high globally, thus an ever-increasing number of decisions are being made now that will lock-in patterns of development for future generations. Although for the most part these investments are motivated by the desire to increase economic productivity and employment, we find that infrastructure either directly or indirectly influences the attainment of all of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), including 72% of the targets. We categorize the positive and negative effects of infrastructure and the interdependencies between infrastructure sectors. To ensure that the right infrastructure is built, policymakers need to establish long-term visions for sustainable national infrastructure systems, informed by the SDGs, and develop adaptable plans that can demonstrably deliver their vision. Investing in infrastructure systems will lock-in patterns of development for future generations. This study finds that infrastructure either directly or indirectly influences the attainment of all of the Sustainable Development Goals, including 72% of the targets.

Abstract: Assessing species' vulnerability to climate change is a prerequisite for developing effective strategies to conserve them. The last three decades have seen exponential growth in the number of studies evaluating how, how much, why, when, and where species will be impacted by climate change. We provide an overview of the rapidly developing field of climate change vulnerability assessment (CCVA) and describe key concepts, terms, steps and considerations. We stress the importance of identifying the full range of pressures, impacts and their associated mechanisms that species face and using this as a basis for selecting the appropriate assessment approaches for quantifying vulnerability. We outline four CCVA assessment approaches, namely trait-based, correlative, mechanistic and combined approaches and discuss their use. Since any assessment can deliver unreliable or even misleading results when incorrect data and parameters are applied, we discuss finding, selecting, and applying input data and provide examples of open-access resources. Because rare, small-range, and declining-range species are often of particular conservation concern while also posing significant challenges for CCVA, we describe alternative ways to assess them. We also describe how CCVAs can be used to inform IUCN Red List assessments of extinction risk. Finally, we suggest future directions in this field and propose areas where research efforts may be particularly valuable.

Abstract: Reducing the social, environmental, and economic impacts of droughts and identifying pathways towards drought resilient societies remains a global priority. A common understanding of the drivers of drought risk and ways in which drought impacts materialize is crucial for improved assessments and for the identification and (spatial) planning of targeted drought risk reduction and adaptation options. Over the past two decades, we have witnessed an increase in drought risk assessments across spatial and temporal scales drawing on a multitude of conceptual foundations and methodological approaches. Recognizing the diversity of approaches in science and practice as well as the associated opportunities and challenges, we present the outcomes of a systematic literature review of the state of the art of people-centered drought vulnerability and risk conceptualization and assessments, and identify persisting gaps. Our analysis shows that, of the reviewed assessments, (i) more than 60% do not explicitly specify the type of drought hazard that is addressed, (ii) 42% do not provide a clear definition of drought risk, (iii) 62% apply static, index-based approaches, (iv) 57% of the indicator-based assessments do not specify their weighting methods, (v) only 11% conduct any form of validation, (vi) only ten percent develop future scenarios of drought risk, and (vii) only about 40% of the assessments establish a direct link to drought risk reduction or adaptation strategies, i.e. consider solutions. We discuss the challenges associated with these findings for both assessment and identification of drought risk reduction measures and identify research needs to inform future research and policy agendas in order to advance the understanding of drought risk and support pathways towards more drought resilient societies.

Abstract: A majority of workers in the world are informally employed and contribute to economic and social development through market and non-market activities that are not protected, regulated, well-recognised or valued. This study provides an in-depth diagnosis of informality and the vulnerability prevailing in the informal economy. It explores new ideas to improve the lives of workers in the informal economy based on the ILO indicators of informality and the new OECD Key Indicators of Informality based on Individuals and their Household (KIIbIH). The report contributes in four ways to the global debate on the transition from the informal to the formal economy: (1) by examining the multiple faces of informality in a large sample of countries representing diverse conditions, locations and stages of development; (2) by presenting new empirical evidence on the links between informality and the development process; (3) by assessing risks and vulnerabilities in the informal economy, such as poverty and occupational risks, which can be mitigated with social protection and appropriate risk management instruments; and (4) by showing that the transition to formality is a complex issue that touches on a wide range of policy domains.

Abstract: BACKGROUND: The health burden associated with temperature is expected to increase due to a warming climate. Populations living in cities are likely to be particularly at risk, but the role of urban ...

Abstract: Disasters and emergencies have been increasing all over the world. Todays, with technological advancement, acquiring knowledge and its application in the realm of action is regarded as the only effective way for prevent disasters or reducing its effects. The present study aimed to review the importance of education and the effect of different methods of education on disaster risk reduction and preparedness in vulnerable people. To this aim, some articles indexed in Database of PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar, Scopus, Science Direct, and ProQuest were searched. The search was limited to reviewed articles in English published between 1990 and 2017. In addition, the selected articles were reviewed for relevant citations. The conducted studies were reviewed by two researchers independently. The primary search generated 128 relevant references. After eliminating the duplicates and articles which were not related to the review of the abstract, 41 references were identified for inclusion. After reviewing more, 31 references, which failed to meet inclusion index, were excluded from the study. Disaster education aims to provide knowledge among individuals and groups to take actions to reduce their vulnerability to disasters. During the last decades, the issue that trained people can be prepared for disasters and responding well has been extensively investigated. Based on the results, disaster education is a functional, operational, and cost-effective tool for risk management. Based on some evidence, it is important for vulnerable people to learn about disasters. There are different methods to educate vulnerable people, but no method is better than others. Trained people can better protect themselves and others. In this regard, planning and designing comprehensive educational programs are necessary for people to face disasters.

Abstract: Background: Understanding which populations are vulnerable and which factors affect vulnerability to temperature-mortality associations is important to reduce the health burden from current day weather extremes and climate change. Objectives: We reviewed population-based studies on the impact of temperature on mortality and assessed the vulnerability to temperature-mortality associations systematically. Methods: We identified 207 studies published between 1980 and 2017 and summarized findings on effect modification based on individual- and community-level characteristics. Results: In our assessment of vulnerability to temperature-mortality associations, we found strong evidence of effect modification for several individual-level factors such as age and sex. We also found limited or suggestive evidence for other individual-level factors such as education, place of death, occupation, race, marital status, and chronic conditions. Evidence on effect modification by community-level characteristics for temperature-mortality associations is limited. We found weak evidence of effect modification for population density, heating system, healthcare facilities, proximity to water, housing quality, and air pollution level. We found limited or suggestive evidence for community-level socio-economic status, latitude, urban/rural, air conditioning, climatic condition, green space, and previous winter mortality. Conclusions: Our findings provide scientific evidence on which populations could be targeted for establishing appropriate strategies to reduce the health burden from extreme temperatures, and for policies on climate change.

Abstract: For decades sections of the academic community have been emphasizing that disasters are not natural. Nevertheless, politicians, the media, various international organizations—and, more surprisingly, many established researchers working in disaster studies—are still widely using the expression “natural disaster.” We systematically analyzed the usage of the expression “natural disaster” by disaster studies researchers in 589 articles in six key academic journals representative of disaster studies research, and found that authors are using the expression in three principal ways: (1) delineating natural and human-induced hazards; (2) using the expression to leverage popularity; and (3) critiquing the expression “natural disaster.” We also identified vulnerability themes that illustrate the context of “natural disaster” usage. The implications of continuing to use this expression, while explicitly researching human vulnerability, are wide-ranging, and we explore what this means for us and our peers. This study particularly aims to stimulate debate within the disaster studies research community and related fields as to whether the term “natural disaster” is really fit for purpose moving forward.

Abstract: Death tolls and economic losses from natural hazards continue to rise in many parts of the world. With the aim to reduce future impacts from natural disasters it is crucial to understand the variability in space and time of the vulnerability of people and economic assets. In this paper we quantified the temporal dynamics of socio-economic vulnerability, expressed as fatalities over exposed population and losses over exposed GDP, to climate-related hazards between 1980 and 2016. Using a global, spatially explicit framework that integrates population and economic dynamics with one of the most complete natural disaster loss databases we quantified mortality and loss rates across income levels and analyzed their relationship with wealth. Results show a clear decreasing trend in both human and economic vulnerability, with global average mortality and economic loss rates that have dropped by 6.5 and nearly 5 times, respectively, from 1980-1989 to 2007-2016. We further show a clear negative relation between vulnerability and wealth, which is strongest at the lowest income levels. This has led to a convergence in vulnerability between higher and lower income countries. Yet, there is still a considerable climate hazard vulnerability gap between poorer and richer countries.

Abstract: Social vulnerability influences the ability to prepare for, respond to, and recover from disasters. The identification of vulnerable populations and factors that contribute to their vulnerability are crucial for effective disaster risk reduction. Nepal exhibits multihazard risk and has experienced socioeconomic and political upheaval in recent decades, further increasing susceptibility to hazards. However, we still know little regarding social vulnerability in Nepal. Here, we investigate social vulnerability in Nepal by adapting Social Vulnerability Index (SoVI) methods to the Nepali context. Variables such as caste, and populations who cannot speak/understand Nepali were added to reflect the essence of the Nepali context. Using principal component analysis, 39 variables were reduced to seven factors that explained 63.02% of variance in the data. Factor scores were summarized to calculate final SoVI scores. The highest levels of social vulnerability are concentrated in the central and western Mountain, western Hill, and central and eastern Tarai regions of Nepal, while the least vulnerable areas are in the central and eastern Hill regions. These findings, supplemented with smaller-scale analyses, have the potential to assist village officers, policymakers, and emergency managers in the development of more effective and geographically targeted disaster management programs.

Abstract: Mountains are the water towers of the world, supplying a substantial part of both natural and anthropogenic water demands 1 , 2 . They are highly sensitive and prone to climate change 3 , 4 , yet their importance and vulnerability have not been quantified at the global scale. Here we present a global water tower index (WTI), which ranks all water towers in terms of their water-supplying role and the downstream dependence of ecosystems and society. For each water tower, we assess its vulnerability related to water stress, governance, hydropolitical tension and future climatic and socio-economic changes. We conclude that the most important (highest WTI) water towers are also among the most vulnerable, and that climatic and socio-economic changes will affect them profoundly. This could negatively impact 1.9 billion people living in (0.3 billion) or directly downstream of (1.6 billion) mountainous areas. Immediate action is required to safeguard the future of the world’s most important and vulnerable water towers. The worldwide distribution and water supply of water towers (snowy or glacierized mountain ranges) is indexed, showing that the most important water towers are also the most vulnerable to socio-economic and climate-change stresses, with huge potential negative impacts on populations downstream.

Abstract: This paper discusses the concepts of vulnerability and susceptibility and their relevance for understanding and tackling health inequalities. Tackling socioeconomic inequalities in health is based on an understanding of how an individual's social position influences disease risk. Conceptually, there are two possible mechanisms (not mutually exclusive): there is either some cause(s) of disease that are unevenly distributed across socioeconomic groups (differential exposure) or the effect of some cause(s) of disease differs across groups (differential effect). Since differential vulnerability and susceptibility are often used to denote the latter, we discuss these concepts and their current use and suggest an epidemiologically relevant distinction. The effect of social position can thus be mediated by causes that are unevenly distributed across social groups and/or interact with social position. Recent improvements in the methodology to estimate mediation and interaction have made it possible to calculate measures of relevance for setting targets and priorities in policy for health equity which include both mechanisms, i.e. equalize exposure or equalize effects. We finally discuss the importance of differential susceptibility and vulnerability for the choice of preventive strategies, including approaches that target high-risk individuals, whole populations and vulnerable groups.

Abstract: The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Working Group II Report (2014) presents vulnerability as a pre-existing characteristic property of a system. Accordingly, indicators for 'sensitivity' and 'adaptive capacity', which are internal properties of a system, are employed to assess it. Comparatively, the IPCC 2007 report includes 'exposure', an external factor, as the third component of vulnerability. We have compared the construct of vulnerability presented in IPCC 2007 and 2014 reports. It is argued that the results of vulnerability assessment obtained by adopting IPCC 2014 framework are practically more useful for reducing current vulnerability in preparedness to deal with an uncertain future. In the process, we have articulated the novel concepts of 'selecting hazard-relevant vulnerability indicators' and 'assessing hazard-specific vulnerability'. Use of these concepts improves the contextualization of an assessment and thereby the acceptability of assessment results by the stakeholders.

Abstract: In recent years, building disaster resilient communities has become a primary objective of crisis management institutions across the globe, as a resilient community is likely to suffer fewer losses and recover more quickly when faced with an adverse event. However, in order to strengthen a community's resilience, one needs to first establish a baseline, an initial measure that can be used to compare communities and to track changes over time. This article presents such a baseline, a community resilience index, for Norway. Following the approach outlined by the Baseline Resilience Indicators for Communities (BRIC), the article constructs a hierarchical index, using 47 indicators divided into six subdomains, to describe the resilience capacities of the Norwegian municipalities. The results show considerable variations in the relative levels of resilience. Most markedly, there seems to be a north-south divide; i.e., many of the northern municipalities having lower levels of overall resilience and many of the southern municipalities having higher levels of overall resilience. These initial observations are further analysed by deconstructing the overall index into its components to identify driving forces behind the overall resilience score. To validate the results, the resilience scores are compared to previously established vulnerability metrics. The resilience and vulnerability metrics are then used to identify potential low-risk (high resilience, low vulnerability) and high-risk (low resilience, high vulnerability) areas across Norway.

Abstract: As climate change continues to exert increasing pressure upon the livelihoods and agricultural sector of many developing and developed nations, a need exists to understand and prioritise at the sub national scale which areas and communities are most vulnerable. The purpose of this study is to develop a robust, rigorous and replicable methodology that is flexible to data limitations and spatially prioritizes the vulnerability of agriculture and rural livelihoods to climate change. We have applied the methodology in Vietnam, Uganda and Nicaragua, three contrasting developing countries that are particularly threatened by climate change. We conceptualize vulnerability to climate change following the widely adopted combination of sensitivity, exposure and adaptive capacity. We used Ecocrop and Maxent ecological models under a high emission climate scenario to assess the sensitivity of the main food security and cash crops to climate change. Using a participatory approach, we identified exposure to natural hazards and the main indicators of adaptive capacity, which were modelled and analysed using geographic information systems. We finally combined the components of vulnerability using equal-weighting to produce a crop specific vulnerability index and a final accumulative score. We have mapped the hotspots of climate change vulnerability and identified the underlying driving indicators. For example, in Vietnam we found the Mekong delta to be one of the vulnerable regions due to a decline in the climatic suitability of rice and maize, combined with high exposure to flooding, sea level rise and drought. However, the region is marked by a relatively high adaptive capacity due to developed infrastructure and comparatively high levels of education. The approach and information derived from the study informs public climate change policies and actions, as vulnerability assessments are the bases of any National Adaptation Plans (NAP), National Determined Contributions (NDC) and for accessing climate finance.

Abstract: Rapid urbanization and climate change together increase the vulnerability of poor urban communities to natural hazards, undermining urban resilience. It is therefore critical to identify and deepen...

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...

Abstract: The lack of empirical data regarding earthquake damage or losses has propelled the development of dozens of analytical methodologies for the derivation of fragility and vulnerability functions. Eac...

Abstract: BACKGROUND Responding effectively to climate change requires urgent action to halt net greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and to adapt to changes that cannot be prevented. The Paris Agreement of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change has committed governments to the following: keeping global temperature rise below 2°C, pursuing efforts to limit it to 1.5°C, and adapting to reduce the vulnerability of people and ecosystems to the damaging consequences of a changing climate. When protected, restored, or managed appropriately, natural and seminatural ecosystems make critical contributions to climate change mitigation and to helping people adapt to climate change. Ecosystems themselves are vulnerable to climate change, but by restoring natural ecosystem processes, resilience can be built, and a wide range of adaptation strategies can ameliorate the impacts. Both synergies and conflicts between different objectives can arise, and it is essential to have clarity about what constitutes success across the range of adaptation and mitigation outcomes and to track progress. The success of ecosystem-based mitigation can be measured in terms of falling net emissions and stabilization of atmospheric CO2 concentration. Although this is conceptually straightforward, it can be difficult to measure ecosystem fluxes accurately. Adaptation is more complicated because it encompasses a wide range of objectives, with respect to people and biodiversity, including both reducing vulnerability and managing unavoidable change. ADVANCES Many studies have investigated how nature-based solutions can contribute to climate change mitigation and adaptation. The evidence is now clear that protecting and restoring ecosystems is essential to holding global temperature rise to between 1.5° and 2°C. The value of different interventions for reducing GHG emissions and promoting carbon sequestration can be quantified with varying degrees of confidence. The evidence for the effectiveness, opportunities, and limitations of ecosystem-based adaptation in enabling people to cope with climate change is also growing, and these approaches are starting to be implemented. Adaptation to reduce the vulnerability of biodiversity and ecosystems themselves to climate change has been discussed over many years but proposed measures remain largely untested. This is starting to change, with recent studies gathering empirical evidence of the factors that influence the vulnerability of ecosystems and biodiversity. Nevertheless, evaluation and reporting of adaptation is currently focused on planning and implementation of actions rather than on assessment of whether these programs have successfully reduced vulnerability. OUTLOOK A picture is emerging of what successful adaptation and mitigation in terrestrial ecosystems looks like when it is built around protecting and restoring natural ecosystem processes. To realize the potential of ecosystems to ameliorate climate change requires integrated actions that are consistent with wider biodiversity and sustainable development goals. High-carbon ecosystems, particularly forests and peatlands, are essential, but other ecosystems, such as savannas, are also important elements of wider nature-based solutions and should be protected and restored. Pursuing mitigation objectives alone risks perverse outcomes that increase rather than reduce vulnerability. Further work is required to test the effectiveness of specific ecosystem-based mitigation and adaptation measures and what works best to support biodiversity in a changing climate. More-robust monitoring and evaluation are needed to drive progress. Measuring adaptation for biodiversity is particularly challenging, and monitoring and management will need to develop together as we learn from experience.