CERTIFICATE OF ENDORSEMENT

This is to certify that the Commencement Report of the Directed Research Project
– “DRP000493 :- Assessment of DCRs for Climate Adaptation” submitted by
Kathan Patel (UG180274) is accepted and approved for further research
work on subject.

Prof. Tushar Bose

Date: 03/02/2023
 CT 3596
Directed Research Project

Assessment of DCRs for Climate Adaptation:- Commencement

Report
The DRP aims to evaluate international and
national cases of the development control
regulations that help mitigate or adapt to
climate change. Submitted by:
Kathan Patel
(UG180274)
Guide: Prof. Tushar Bose
 CT 3596 – DIRECTED RESEARCH PROJECT

Contents
1) Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 2
a) Climate change affecting Cities ...................................................................................... 2
b) Urbanization in World and India .................................................................................... 3
2) Literature Review .................................................................................................................. 5
3) Research Objectives / Questions ........................................................................................... 8
4) Research Methodology .......................................................................................................... 8
5) References ........................................................................................................................... 10

Kathan Patel_UG180274 1|Page

 CT 3596 – DIRECTED RESEARCH PROJECT

1) Introduction
a) Climate change affecting Cities
Climate is the typical weather of a region, and any change seen in the usual weather
pattern is known as Climate change. Human activities have significantly contributed to
climate change since the 1800s (May, 2017).
According to the Environmental Planning Agency (EPA), the principal sources of CO2
emissions are primarily electricity (38%), followed by transportation (31%). Industrial
operations account for 14% CO2 emissions, followed by commercial and residential
activities at 10% and non-fossil fuel combustion at 6%. Eighty percent of the world's
population lives in urban areas. Urban activities require enormous quantities of energy
to improve the quality of life, and as a result, urban areas emit around 78% of CO2 gas
into the atmosphere (Raparthi, 2021). The emitted CO2 remains in the surroundings
and raises the earth's temperature by preventing or reflecting the sun's heat or radiation
toward the earth's surface (May, 2017).
From the above paragraph, we can derive that cities are major CO2 emitters and
significant contributors to climate change. However, cities also suffer repercussions,
such as ecosystem loss, heat-related disease, increasing mortality rates, and substantial
economic losses. As a result, climate change would be responsible for impacting every
area of human life. Scientific research has recently revealed that coastal cities would be
affected by increasing sea levels and that almost 160 million people live in twenty
coastal cities. As a result, the effects of climate change are dire, and it is critical to
address climate change (Raparthi, 2021).

Figure 1 Change in global surface temperature (annual average) as observed and simulated using human
& natural and only natural factors (both 1850–2020). (IPCC, 2021)

Kathan Patel_UG180274 2|Page

 CT 3596 – DIRECTED RESEARCH PROJECT

b) Urbanization in World and India

Urbanization is a complex financial process that transforms the artificial environment,
transforming once-rural towns into urban settlements while also shifting the
geographical distribution of a population from rural to urban areas. The expansion of
urban settlements in terms of number, land area, and population size is a fundamental
result of urbanization (United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs,
Population Division, 2019).
In today's world, more people live in urban areas than in rural areas. In 2018, urban
regions housed 55% of the world's population. A total of 4.2 billion people lived in
urban areas. Since 1950, the world's population has seen rapid urbanization. More than
two-thirds (70%) of the world's population lived in rural areas in 1950. For the first
time in history, the global urban population surpassed the global rural population in
2007. Since then, the number of city inhabitants has continued to rise faster than the
rural population (figure 2). By 2050, two-thirds (68 percent) world's population will be
urban. (United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population
Division, 2019).

2007

Figure 2 Urban-rural populations of the world, 1950 -2050 (World Urbanization Prospects 2018)

India is a fast-growing country with a rapidly expanding population and economy. India
accounts for 18% of the worldwide population, trailing China, which accounts for
19.4% of the global population. India gradually shifted from a rural to an urban society
in the previous century. In 1901 10.86% of the India's population was classified under
urban areas; by 2011, the percent figure jumped to 31.16%; the figure will further
extend to 43% while approaching 2030. Hence, in 1901, the rural population was
89.14%, but it plummeted to 68.84%. In contrast, the urban population has nearly
tripled from 10.86% in 1901 to 31.16% in 2011. As a result, India's urban population

Kathan Patel_UG180274 3|Page

 CT 3596 – DIRECTED RESEARCH PROJECT

will grow dramatically, from 288 million in 2011 to around 475 million in 2031 and
820 million by 2051. (Census of India 2011).

Figure 3 Percentage of population in Urban and rural areas in India, 1950 -2050 (World Urbanization
Prospects 2018)

The data from the 2011 Census of India indicates that approximately 65 million people
were living in urban slums, representing 17% of the country's urban population. These
numbers have likely risen since then as India's urban population continues to grow.
Most of these slums are in large cities like Mumbai, Delhi, and Kolkata, with
Maharashtra having the highest number of slum households, followed by Tamil Nadu
and West Bengal. Basic amenities such as clean water, proper sanitation, and adequate
housing are lacking in most of these slums. According to the census, only 36% of slum
households had access to drinking water within the premises, and less than 25% had
access to toilets. Education and employment opportunities are also limited for slum
dwellers, with most having low literacy and education levels, with only 20% have
completed secondary education or higher. These statistics highlight the extent of the

Kathan Patel_UG180274 4|Page

 CT 3596 – DIRECTED RESEARCH PROJECT

problem of urban slums in India and the need for comprehensive and effective policies
to address these communities' issues.
The population residing in urban slums has been most at risk from natural hazards
(Hewitt, 1983; Watts, 1983). Poorer households are more likely to reside in high-risk
areas within urban settlements, making them more “vulnerable” to hazards such as
flooding, disease, and other chronic stressors.

2) Literature Review
The above-used term “Vulnerable/Vulnerability” meaning has evolved as experts in
various fields and with varying perspectives have contributed to the meaning. As with
other similar concepts, it can be challenging to agree on a single definition of
Vulnerability, particularly about climate change. Below, I have discussed the different
definitions of Vulnerability in the context of climate change in tabular form.
Table 1 Evolving definitions of Vulnerability in context

Definitions
Source Context
Vulnerability is defined as
Hazard and
Mitchell (1989) "... potential of loss"
disaster risk
"... the likelihood that an individual or group will
Hazard and
Cutter (1993) be exposed to and adversely affected by a
disaster risk
hazard"
"... the characteristic of person or group and their
Blaikie et al. situation that influences their capacity to Hazard and
(1994) anticipate, cope with, resist and recover from the disaster risk
impact of a natural hazard"
"... the exposure of individuals or collective
groups to livelihood stress as a result of the
Adger (1999) Climate Change
impacts of climate change and related climatic
extremes"
Both
"... the degree to which a system, subsystem, or
hazard/disaster risk
Turner et al. system component is likely to experience harm
and global
(2003) due to exposure to a hazard, either a perturbation
environmental
or stress stressor"
change
"... the state of susceptibility to harm from
Both
exposure to stresses associated with
Adger (2006) hazard/disaster risk
environmental and social change and from the
and climate change
absence of capacity to adapt"
"... degree to which a system is susceptible to, or
Intergovernmental
unable to cope with, adverse effects of climate Climate Change
Panel on Climate
change, including climate variability and

Kathan Patel_UG180274 5|Page

 CT 3596 – DIRECTED RESEARCH PROJECT

Definitions
Source Context
Vulnerability is defined as
Change IPCC extremes. Vulnerability is a function of the
(2007) character, magnitude, and rate of climate change
and variation to which a system is exposed, its
sensitivity, and its adaptive capacity"
United Nations
Office for "... the characteristics and circumstances of a
Hazard and
Disaster Risk community, system or asset that make it
disaster risk
Reduction susceptible to the damaging effects of a hazard"
UNDRR (2009)
"... the propensity and predisposition to be
Intergovernmental
adversely affected. Vulnerability encompasses a
Panel on Climate
variety of concepts and elements including Climate Change
Change IPCC
sensitivity or susceptibility to harm and lack of
(2014)
capacity to cope and adapt"
Even though the definition of Vulnerability is perceived differently, some fundamental
components are iterated into them. These components are:
Adaptive Capacity/Adaptability: The competence of a system to change with
environmental change to moderate expected harms, take advantage of chances, or adapt
to the outcomes. Furthermore, it changes in terms of importance from country to
country, community to community, social groups, and people, and over time, but also
according to its nature. Also, it relies upon access to the resources that could help
respond to threats and exposures (i.e., functioning community networks, access to low-
rate loans, access services such as health care and sanitation, irrigation systems, and
water storage) (Khajuria & Ravindranath, 2012).
Exposure: The nature and extent to which a system (people; livelihoods; species or
ecosystems; environmental functions, services, and resources; infrastructure; or
economic, social, or cultural assets) is subjected to environmental or socio-political
stress. The attributes for defining the level of exposure are its magnitude, frequency,
duration, and region of the stress/hazard.
Sensitivity: The extent to which climate variability or change affects a system or
species, either negatively or positively. The influence can be direct (for example, a
change in crop yield in response to a change in temperature mean, range, or variability)
or indirect (e.g., damages caused by an increase in the frequency of coastal flooding
due to sea level rise). Furthermore, it changes in terms of importance from country to
country, community to community, social groups, and people, and over time, but also
according to its nature.
All the above definitions indicate that Vulnerability heavily depends on context or
specificity, so assessments to evaluate Vulnerability should be conducted at the local
level to understand the situation better. Also, the assessment can outline the policies to
be introduced or amended accordingly at the local, national, and global levels.

Kathan Patel_UG180274 6|Page

 CT 3596 – DIRECTED RESEARCH PROJECT

Vulnerability has been proven to be a powerful analytical tool for understanding states
of susceptibility to harm, powerlessness, and marginalization in both physical and
social systems. It can also guide the normative analysis of efforts to improve well-being
through risk reduction.
Evaluating Vulnerability can assist in mitigating negative impacts by implementing
adaptation or mitigation strategies. However, the use of models and frameworks for
evaluating Vulnerability is hindered by the broad and complex nature of the term
(Twigg & Mihir, 1998), which encompasses various dimensions; the first dimension is
the physical dimension, which refers to how susceptible a structure, infrastructure, or
service is to being damaged by a specific hazard. The second dimension is the economic
dimension, which refers to the economic stability of a region endangered by a loss of
production, a decrease in income, or the consumption of goods due to a hazard. The
third dimension is the social dimension, which relates to how individuals and
communities cope with, resist, and recover from the impacts of hazards. The fourth
dimension is the environmental dimension, which refers to how different ecosystems
cope with and recover from the impacts of hazards and tolerate stressors over time and
space. The fifth dimension is the political dimension, which refers to the political
actions or characteristics determining how well a society can cope with and recover
from hazards and associated impacts.
Additionally, these factors that contribute to vulnerability are deeply rooted in complex
and diverse societal factors, which vary over time and region.
In recent years, various theories have put forward different conceptual frameworks with
the goal of creating techniques for assessing vulnerability. These conceptual
frameworks are summarised in the table below.
Table 2 Conceptual frameworks summarization

Name of Assessment Conceptualization Vulnerability Spatial

Framework Approach of Vulnerability Dimensions Scale
Spatial
Hazard of place Integrated Combination of Social, Local/place
model biophysical and Geographical
social Vulnerability
Sustainable Socioeconomic Shocks, trends, and Human, Local/place
livelihood seasonality which Social,
framework can be influenced Financial,
by transforming Physical,
structures Natural
Holistic approach Integrated Function of Social, Local to
exposure, Economic, national
susceptibility, and Physical
ability to cope
Vulnerability in the Integrated Function of Coupled Local to
context of socio- exposure, human and global
ecological sensitivity, and environment
perspective resilience

Kathan Patel_UG180274 7|Page

 CT 3596 – DIRECTED RESEARCH PROJECT

Name of Assessment Conceptualization Vulnerability Spatial

Framework Approach of Vulnerability Dimensions Scale
Spatial
The pressure release Socioeconomic Explained by three Physical Local to
(PAR) model progressive level: environment, global
root causes Local
dynamic pressure Economic,
and unsafe Social relation,
conditions Public action
and
institutions
BBC framework Integrated Function of Social, Local/place
exposure, Economic,
susceptibility, and Environmental
coping capacity
Second generation Integrated Function of Not Specified Local to
vulnerability exposure, global
assessment sensitivity, and
framework coping capacity
Methods for Integrated Function of Physical, Local to
the Improvement of exposure, Ecological, global
Vulnerability susceptibility, and Social
Assessment in resilience Economic,
Europe (MOVE) Cultural
framework Institutional
Intergovernmental Socioeconomic Consist of Environment, Local to
Panel on susceptibility and Social, global
Climate capacity to cope Economic
Change
vulnerability
and risk
framework

3) Research Objectives / Questions

There are three main objectives of the research. They are mentioned below:
1. Assessing areas in Ahmedabad which are vulnerable to flood.
a. Gathering Indicators from interviews and literature reviews
b. Plotting the weighted indicators on the map of Ahmedabad to
identify the vulnerable areas.
2. Commenting on the development control regulations to mitigate or adapt to the
effects of vulnerability.

4) Research Methodology

Kathan Patel_UG180274 8|Page

 CT 3596 – DIRECTED RESEARCH PROJECT

The process of creating and choosing indicators for Vulnerability is complicated.

Ideally, it involves nine steps, these steps are as follows:
• selecting and defining a goal,
• identifying the target group and purpose for the indicators,
• creating a conceptual framework,
• establishing criteria for potential indicators,
• identifying a set of potential indicators, evaluating, and selecting each
indicator,
• validating the outcome against actual data,
• preparing a report, and
• assessing the indicator's performance.
This process may also involve re-evaluating the results through an iterative process
(Maclaren, 1996).

Define Goals

Assess indicator
Scoping
performance

Indicator
Analyse indicator
framework
results
selection

Final set of Define selection

indicators criteria

identify potential
indicators

Figure 4 Methodology followed for the DRP

Kathan Patel_UG180274 9|Page

 CT 3596 – DIRECTED RESEARCH PROJECT

5) References
• United Nations. (n.d.). What Is Climate Change?
https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/what-is-climate-change
• What Is Climate Change? (n.d.). NASA.
https://www.nasa.gov/audience/forstudents/k-4/stories/nasa-knows/what-is-
climate-change-k4.html
• Raparthi, K. (2021). Assessing the Relationship Between Urban Planning Policies,
Gender, and Climate Change Mitigation: Regression Model Evaluation of Indian
Cities. Journal of Urban Planning and Development, 147(2).
https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)up.1943-5444.0000677
• IPCC, 2021: Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change 2021: The Physical
Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of
the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, A.
Pirani, S.L. Connors, C. Péan, S. Berger, N. Caud, Y. Chen, L. Goldfarb, M.I.
Gomis, M. Huang, K. Leitzell, E. Lonnoy, J.B.R. Matthews, T.K. Maycock, T.
Waterfield, O. Yelekçi, R. Yu, and B. Zhou (eds.)]
• United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division.
(2019). World Urbanization Prospects 2018: Highlights. World Urbanization
Prospects 2018: Highlights. https://doi.org/10.18356/6255ead2-en
• Adger, W. N. (2006). Vulnerability. Global Environmental Change, 16(3), 268–
281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.02.006
• Khajuria, A., & Ravindranath, N. H. (2012). Climate Change Vulnerability
Assessment: Approaches DPSIR Framework and Vulnerability Index. Journal of
Earth Science & Climatic Change, 03(01). https://doi.org/10.4172/2157-
7617.1000109
• L., R., Schroter, D., & Glade, T. (2013). Conceptual Frameworks of Vulnerability
Assessments for Natural Disasters Reduction. Approaches to Disaster Management
- Examining the Implications of Hazards, Emergencies and Disasters, 3–32.
https://doi.org/10.5772/55538
• McCarthy, J.J., Canziani, O.F., Leary, N.A., Dokken, D.J., White, K.S. (Eds.),
2001. Climate Change 2001: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge.
• Smith, K. K. S. (2013, January 16). Environmental Hazards | Assessing Risk and
Reducing Disaster | Keith S. Taylor & Francis.
https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/mono/10.4324/9780203805305/environment
al-hazards-keith-smith-keith-smith
• Twigg, J. and Mihir, R. (1998). Understanding vulnerability: South Asian perspectives.
840 Duryog Nivaran, Colombo, Sri Lanka.
• Hewitt, K., 1997. Regions of Risk: A Geographical Introduction to Disasters.
Longman, Harlow.
• Bohle, H-G. Vulnerability and Criticality: Perspectives from Social Geography.
IHDP Update 2/2001, Newsletter of the International Human Dimensions
Programme on Global Environmental Change. (2001). , 2001, 1-7.

Kathan Patel_UG180274 10 | P a g e
 CT 3596 – DIRECTED RESEARCH PROJECT

• Davidson, R. An Urban Earthquake Disaster Risk Index. The John A. Blume

Earthquake Engineering Center, Department of Civil Engineering, Stanford
University, (1997).
• Turner, B. L, Kasperson, R. E, Matson, P. A, Mccarthy, J. J, Corell, L, &
Christensen, R. W. L, et al. A framework for vulnerability analysis in sustainability
science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of
America, (2003).
• Maclaren, V. W. Urban Sustainability Reporting. Journal of the American Planning
Association (1996). , 62(2), 184-202.
• Consortium MOVE. Methods for the Improvement of Vulnerability Assessment in
Europe, Guidelines for development of different methods, Deliverable D6, MOVE
Project. (2010).
• Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change IPCC. Summary for Policy Makers. In
Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability; Field, C.B., Barros,
V.R., Dokken, D.J., Mach, K.J., Mastrandrea, M.D., Bilir, T.E., Chatterjee, M., Ebi,
K.L., Estrada, Y.O., Genova, R.C., et al., Eds.; Cambridge University Press: New
York, NY, USA, 2014; pp. 1-34. ISBN 978-1-107-64165-5.
• Birkmann, J., Cardona, O.D.; Carreño, M.L.; Barbat, A.H.; Pelling, M.;
Schneiderbauer, S.; Kienberger, S.; Keiler, M.; Alexander, D.; Zeil, P.; et al.
Framing vulnerability, risk and societal responses: The MOVE framework. Nat.
Hazards 2013, 67, 193-211.
• Cutter, S.L. Vulnerability to environmental hazards. Prog. Hum: Geogr. 1996, 20,
529-539.
• Department for International Development DFID Sustainable Livelihoods
Guidance Sheet. 1999. Available online:
https://worldfish.org/GCI/gei_assets_moz/Livelihood
• Cardona, O.D.; Barbat, A.H. El Riesgo Sismico y su Prevención; Cuaderno Tecnico
5: Madrid, Spain, 2000, 27. Turner, B.L.; Kasperson, R.E.; Matson, PA.; McCarthy,
JJ., Corell, R.W.; Christensen, L.; Eckley, N.; Kasperson, JX, Luers, A; Martello,
M.L.; et al. A framework for vulnerability analysis in sustainability science. Proc.
Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 2003, 100, 8074-8079.
• Wisner, B., Blaikie, P., Cannon, T.; Davis, L. At Risk: Natural Hazards, People's
Vulnerability and Disasters, 2nd ed.; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2004, ISBN
978-1-134-52861-5.
• Bohle, H.-G. Vulnerability, and criticality: Perspectives from social geography. Int.
Hum. Dimens. Programme Glob. Environ. Chang, 2001, 2, 3-5.
• Birkmann, J. Measuring vulnerability to promote disaster resilient societies:
Conceptual framework and definitions. In Measuring Vulnerability to Natural
Hazards: Towards Disaster Resilient Societies, Birkmann, J., Ed. United Nations
University Press: Tokyo, Japan, 2006, pp. 9-54. ISBN 978-81-7993-122-6.
• Füssel, H.-M., Klein, R.J.T. Climate Change Vulnerability Assessments. An
Evolution of Conceptual Thinking Clim. Chang, 2006, 75, 301-329.

Kathan Patel_UG180274 11 | P a g e