Suchergebnisse

This report was written for the RE-InVEST project ‑ Rebuilding an Inclusive, Value-Based Europe of Solidarity and Trust through Social Investments ‑ part of a European H2020 project designed to evaluate the European Commission's 2013 social investment strategy and offer new insights to inform public policymaking in response to the social damage done by the crisis. The RE-InVEST project started its work by assessing the social damage caused by the crisis in the pro­ject's 13 European partner countries and regions through the lens of human rights and capabilities. All the country analyses were conducted locally by 19 European institutional partners from civil society (NGOs, trade unions, etc.) and a range of academic and research institutions. They focused in particular on clearly identifying the vulnerable groups hardest hit by the crisis. This report presents information on the indicators that can be used to observe, assess and monitor people's levels of vulnerability, especially the categories that have borne the brunt of the social damage caused by the 2008 financial crisis and the following decade's austerity policies. The crisis started in the United States in 2007-2008, triggered by households and financial institutions in debt overload (housing and oil prices). It spread to Europe through the banking sector a few weeks later, forcing national governments to intervene directly and add to their own debt. Austerity policies were subsequently put in place to reduce this public debt, with budget cuts made in public spending. The harsh socio-economic impacts of these measures and corresponding rise in unemployment in the manufacturing sector hit people hard. Standards of living plummeted in the face of rising unemployment and the need to find new work, for employment is a cornerstone of self-respect and social recognition. The loss of that recognition increases people's sense of vulnerability (Nicaise, 2017b). A specialised methodology was developed to address this issue taking a bottom-up approach. Called ...

Abstract. The assessment of the physical vulnerability of elements at risk as part of the risk analysis is an essential aspect for the development of strategies and structural measures for risk reduction. Understanding, analysing and, if possible, quantifying physical vulnerability is a prerequisite for designing strategies and adopting tools for its reduction. The most common methods for assessing physical vulnerability are vulnerability matrices, vulnerability curves and vulnerability indicators; however, in most of the cases, these methods are used in a conflicting way rather than in combination. The article focuses on two of these methods: vulnerability curves and vulnerability indicators. Vulnerability curves express physical vulnerability as a function of the intensity of the process and the degree of loss, considering, in individual cases only, some structural characteristics of the affected buildings. However, a considerable amount of studies argue that vulnerability assessment should focus on the identification of these variables that influence the vulnerability of an element at risk (vulnerability indicators). In this study, an indicator-based methodology (IBM) for mountain hazards including debris flow (Kappes et al., 2012) is applied to a case study for debris flows in South Tyrol, where in the past a vulnerability curve has been developed. The relatively "new" indicator-based method is being scrutinised and recommendations for its improvement are outlined. The comparison of the two methodological approaches and their results is challenging since both methodological approaches deal with vulnerability in a different way. However, it is still possible to highlight their weaknesses and strengths, show clearly that both methodologies are necessary for the assessment of physical vulnerability and provide a preliminary "holistic methodological framework" for physical vulnerability assessment showing how the two approaches may be used in combination in the future.

Estimation of ecological drought vulnerability indicators is the important step for drought mitigation management. This article identified and estimated ecological drought vulnerability indicators among communal farmers in the Eastern Cape province of South Africa, using an ecological vulnerability index based on a household survey of 121 communal farmers. The results identified overgrazing, soil erosion, land degradation, surface and groundwater supply, and land use management as the main ecological vulnerability variables. The results showed that climate is not necessarily linked to ecological vulnerability. High rainfall districts in this study showed higher ecological vulnerability to drought because of poor planning and management of water supply, poor grazing practices and land management that leads to serious land degradation. The identification and analysis of ecological vulnerability indicators to drought would aid in reconsidering priorities for the government to implement appropriate policy measures in response to drought and suggest strategies to reduce drought vulnerability. Such policies and strategies will strengthen climate change adaptation and ensure ecological and climate sustainability that comply with the Millennium Development Goals set out by the United Nations in 2000 and the subsequent 2030 development agenda for the Sustainable Development Goals. ; https://doi.org/10.4102/jamba.v11i1.591

Estimation of ecological drought vulnerability indicators is the important step for drought mitigation management. This article identified and estimated ecological drought vulnerability indicators among communal farmers in the Eastern Cape province of South Africa, using an ecological vulnerability index based on a household survey of 121 communal farmers. The results identified overgrazing, soil erosion, land degradation, surface and groundwater supply, and land use management as the main ecological vulnerability variables. The results showed that climate is not necessarily linked to ecological vulnerability. High rainfall districts in this study showed higher ecological vulnerability to drought because of poor planning and management of water supply, poor grazing practices and land management that leads to serious land degradation. The identification and analysis of ecological vulnerability indicators to drought would aid in reconsidering priorities for the government to implement appropriate policy measures in response to drought and suggest strategies to reduce drought vulnerability. Such policies and strategies will strengthen climate change adaptation and ensure ecological and climate sustainability that comply with the Millennium Development Goals set out by the United Nations in 2000 and the subsequent 2030 development agenda for the Sustainable Development Goals. ; https://doi.org/10.4102/jamba.v11i1.591

Estimation of ecological drought vulnerability indicators is the important step for drought mitigation management. This article identified and estimated ecological drought vulnerability indicators among communal farmers in the Eastern Cape province of South Africa, using an ecological vulnerability index based on a household survey of 121 communal farmers. The results identified overgrazing, soil erosion, land degradation, surface and groundwater supply, and land use management as the main ecological vulnerability variables. The results showed that climate is not necessarily linked to ecological vulnerability. High rainfall districts in this study showed higher ecological vulnerability to drought because of poor planning and management of water supply, poor grazing practices and land management that leads to serious land degradation. The identification and analysis of ecological vulnerability indicators to drought would aid in reconsidering priorities for the government to implement appropriate policy measures in response to drought and suggest strategies to reduce drought vulnerability. Such policies and strategies will strengthen climate change adaptation and ensure ecological and climate sustainability that comply with the Millennium Development Goals set out by the United Nations in 2000 and the subsequent 2030 development agenda for the Sustainable Development Goals.

There is a growing need to develop health‐related indicators for climate change to assist in policy, planning, and evaluation of preventive measures. To date, no environmental health indicators of climate change have been developed specifically for Australia. We conducted a review of the Australian literature relevant to climate change health impacts to find out which exposure–response relationships could be readily used as indicators. The bulk of the literature relates to direct health‐related outcomes of extreme heat, and indirect outcomes associated with air pollution and infectious disease agents. Based on this information, evidence‐based indicators were chosen using the modified Driving force‐Pressure‐State‐Exposure‐Effect‐Action framework. Three groups of health outcome indicators are proposed: direct heat related, air pollution related, and climate‐sensitive infectious diseases. Indicators of human vulnerability to these outcomes are also included. The potential usefulness of and barriers to their use are discussed in the context of relevance for policy makers.

In the last 5 years in France, we have observed that each new flood event exposes the weaknesses of the existing prevention system as well as the local weakness. Such events raise questions about the relevance and the effectiveness of the means of prevention. But these events also reveal resistance of the exposed territories, which shows that effective and adequate local strategies exist. There are various methods to evaluate the weakness, or vulnerability of an area, but since the last ten years the qualitative approach of vulnerability in flood risks became more important. Nevertheless, local authorities are often unable to evaluate the vulnerabilities of their territory. Local decision makers request tools for a better assessment of flooding vulnerability. Thus, many approaches of the weakness and the resistance of frequently flooded territories were developed on various scales. These approaches are often partial and contextual. There is a clear need for a support of the evaluation of vulnerability. However, there are obvious synergies between these different approaches, with regard to data retrieval and the establishment of adequate information systems taking into account the vulnerability of a specific territory. The paper develops a methodology aimed to organize into a software tool the choice of vulnerability indicators and the integration of the point of view of various stakeholders (economists, town planners, experts, political leaders, etc). This challenge is based on three simple statements: break down of the problems of vulnerability into homogeneous subsets and manage them; articulation of these subsets in a graphical interface allowing the presentation of interactions between the indicators of vulnerability and compare the opposed visions of vulnerability. The interface of the tool integrates various vulnerability indicators, which are organised in several categories, in order to allow a flexible and efficient vulnerability analysis.

Abstract. In the last 5 years in France, we have observed that each new flood event exposes the weaknesses of the existing prevention system as well as the local weakness. Such events raise questions about the relevance and the effectiveness of the means of prevention. But these events also reveal resistance of the exposed territories, which shows that effective and adequate local strategies exist. There are various methods to evaluate the weakness, or vulnerability of an area, but since the last ten years the qualitative approach of vulnerability in flood risks became more important. Nevertheless, local authorities are often unable to evaluate the vulnerabilities of their territory. Local decision makers request tools for a better assessment of flooding vulnerability. Thus, many approaches of the weakness and the resistance of frequently flooded territories were developed on various scales. These approaches are often partial and contextual. There is a clear need for a support of the evaluation of vulnerability. However, there are obvious synergies between these different approaches, with regard to data retrieval and the establishment of adequate information systems taking into account the vulnerability of a specific territory. The paper develops a methodology aimed to organize into a software tool the choice of vulnerability indicators and the integration of the point of view of various stakeholders (economists, town planners, experts, political leaders, etc). This challenge is based on three simple statements: break down of the problems of vulnerability into homogeneous subsets and manage them; articulation of these subsets in a graphical interface allowing the presentation of interactions between the indicators of vulnerability and compare the opposed visions of vulnerability. The interface of the tool integrates various vulnerability indicators, which are organised in several categories, in order to allow a flexible and efficient vulnerability analysis.

International audience ; In the last 5 years in France, we have observed that each new flood event exposes the weaknesses of the existing prevention system as well as the local weakness. Such events raise questions about the relevance and the effectiveness of the means of prevention. But these events also reveal resistance of the exposed territories, which shows that effective and adequate local strategies exist. There are various methods to evaluate the weakness, or vulnerability of an area, but since the last ten years the qualitative approach of vulnerability in flood risks became more important. Nevertheless, local authorities are often unable to evaluate the vulnerabilities of their territory. Local decision makers request tools for a better assessment of flooding vulnerability. Thus, many approaches of the weakness and the resistance of frequently flooded territories were developed on various scales. These approaches are often partial and contextual. There is a clear need for a support of the evaluation of vulnerability. However, there are obvious synergies between these different approaches, with regard to data retrieval and the establishment of adequate information systems taking into account the vulnerability of a specific territory. The paper develops a methodology aimed to organize into a software tool the choice of vulnerability indicators and the integration of the point of view of various stakeholders (economists, town planners, experts, political leaders, etc). This challenge is based on three simple statements: break down of the problems of vulnerability into homogeneous subsets and manage them; articulation of these subsets in a graphical interface allowing the presentation of interactions between the indicators of vulnerability and compare the opposed visions of vulnerability. The interface of the tool integrates various vulnerability indicators, which are organised in several categories, in order to allow a flexible and efficient vulnerability analysis.