A systematic review of dynamics in climate risk and vulnerability assessments
By Alexandra Jurgilevich, Aleksi Räsänen, F. Groundstroem, S. Juhola. 2017
211 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Understanding climate risk is crucial for effective adaptation action, and a number of assessment methodologies have emerged. We argue that the dynamics of the individual components in climate risk and vulnerability assessments has received little attention. In order to highlight this, we systematically reviewed 42 sub-national climate risk and vulnerability assessments. We analysed the assessments using an analytical framework with which we evaluated (1) the conceptual approaches to vulnerability and exposure used, (2) if current or future risks were assessed, and (3) if and how changes over time (i.e. dynamics) were considered. Of the reviewed assessments, over half addressed future risks or vulnerability; and of these future-oriented studies, less than 1/3 considered both vulnerability and exposure dynamics. While the number of studies that include dynamics is growing, and while all studies included socio-economic aspects, often only biophysical dynamics was taken into account. We discuss the challenges of assessing socio-economic and spatial dynamics, particularly the poor availability of data and methods. We suggest that future-oriented studies assessing risk dynamics would benefit from larger stakeholder involvement, discussion of the assessment purpose, the use of multiple methods, inclusion of uncertainty/sensitivity analyses and pathway approaches.
Subfields: Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, Sociology and Political Science
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e84b958c332484c7c24944376ea2ecceac015f53
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Sociology and Political Science
Citations in the corpus
- Climate vulnerability mapping: A systematic review and future prospects (2019, background): “Mapping will also need to acknowledge the dynamic connections between indicators, as well as linkages across scales (Jurgilevich et al., 2017).”
- A review of the global climate change impacts, adaptation, and sustainable mitigation measures (2022, background): “It is not plausible to interpret the exact consequences of climate change (CC) on a sectoral basis (Izaguirre et al. 2021; Jurgilevich et al. 2017), which is evident by the emerging level of recognition plus the inclusion of climatic uncertainties at both local and national level of policymaking (Ay”