Global vulnerability hotspots: differences and agreement between international indicator-based assessments

Daniel Feldmeyer (), Joern Birkmann, Joanna M. McMillan, Lindsay Stringer, Walter Leal Filho, Riyanti Djalante, Patricia F. Pinho and Emma Liwenga
Additional contact information
Daniel Feldmeyer: University of Stuttgart
Joern Birkmann: University of Stuttgart
Joanna M. McMillan: University of Stuttgart
Lindsay Stringer: Department of Environment and Geography, University of York
Walter Leal Filho: Department of Natural Sciences, Manchester Metropolitan University, Oxford Road
Riyanti Djalante: ASEAN Organisation
Patricia F. Pinho: Institute for Advanced Studies (IEA)
Emma Liwenga: Institute of Resource Assessment (IRA) - University of Dar Es Salaam

Climatic Change, 2021, vol. 169, issue 1, No 12, 22 pages

Abstract: Abstract Climate change impacts and their consequences are determined not only by the intensity and frequency of different climatic hazards but also by the vulnerability of the system, society or community exposed. While general agreement exists about the importance of assessing vulnerability to understand climate risks, there is still a tendency to neglect global and regional vulnerability patterns because they are hard to quantify, despite their value in informing adaptation, disaster risk and development policies. Several approaches to quantifying global vulnerability exist. These differ in terms of the indicators they use and how they classify countries or regions into vulnerability classes. The paper presents the structure of selected approaches and explores two indices in depth. The aim of this paper is to assess the level of agreement between selected international indicator-based assessments of vulnerability, at the level of climate regions. Results suggest that the two major global vulnerability assessments analysed largely agree on the location of the most and least vulnerable regions when these assessments are aggregated to a regional scale using the IPCC’s climate regions. The paper then discusses the robustness of the information derived and its usefulness for adaptation, disaster risk and development policies. Measuring progress towards reducing vulnerability to climate change and hazards is key for various agencies and actors in order to be able to develop informed policies and strategies for managing climate risks and to promote enabling conditions for achieving the SDGs and building resilience.

Keywords: Vulnerability; Hotspots; Indicators; Climate change; Global mapping (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10584-021-03203-z Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:climat:v:169:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1007_s10584-021-03203-z

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/10584

DOI: 10.1007/s10584-021-03203-z

Access Statistics for this article

Climatic Change is currently edited by M. Oppenheimer and G. Yohe

More articles in Climatic Change from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().