Assessing Climate Change Vulnerability o

ASSESSING CLIMATE CHANGE VULNERABILITY OF
BANGLADESH USING GIS
Master of Science in Environmental Science
Md. Golam Azam

Student No.: MS171006
Session: 2017-2018
Environmental Science Discipline

School of Life Science
Khulna University
Khulna-9208
Bangladesh
June, 2019
1
ASSESSING CLIMATE CHANGE VULNERABILITY OF
BANGLADESH USING GIS
A Thesis Submitted to Environmental Science Discipline, Khulna University, Khulna,

Bangladesh in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of
Science in Environmental Science
Course No.: ES 5302

Course Title: Thesis Research
Md. Golam Azam

Student No.: MS171006
Session: 2017-2018

School of Life Science
Khulna University
June, 2019
I
DECLARATION
I do hereby declare that the entire work submitted as an MS thesis entitled “Assessing
Climate Change Vulnerability of Bangladesh using GIS” towards the partial fulfillment
for the degree of Master of Science in Environmental Science at Khulna University, is
the result of my own investigation and this thesis or any part of it has not been submitted
elsewhere for the award of any degree or diploma.
----------------------------------
Md. Golam Azam
Student No.: MS 171006
Session: 2017-2018
II
CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the research work presented in this thesis entitled “Assessing
Climate Change Vulnerability of Bangladesh using GIS” was carried out by the Masters
final year examine Md. Golam Azam, bearing Student No. MS 171006, Session 2017-
1018, under my supervision.
It is approved as to the style and contents.
-----------------------------------
Dr. Md. Mujibor Rahman
Professor
Khulna University
Khulna-9208
III
APPROVAL
The thesis entitled “Assessing Climate Change Vulnerability of Bangladesh using GIS”
by Md. Golam Azam, Student No. MS 171006, Session 2017-2018, submitted in partial
fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Master of Science in Environmental
Science has been approved for necessary steps.
-----------------------------------
Dr. Salma Begum
Professor and Head
Khulna University
Khulna-9208
IV
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First and foremost, I proclaim my submission to Allah, the ever-living sustainer of

everything that exists. Only He is the knower of revealed and concealed, the approver of
all knowledge divulged.
I would like to express my heartiest gratitude and sincerity to my research supervisor Dr.
Md. Mujibor Rahman, Professor, Environmental Science Discipline, Khulna
University, for his guidance during the study period. His encouragement, constructive
comments and suggestions have inspired me and made me motivated to accomplish the
present study with esthetic and integrity.
I would like to extend my heartfelt appreciation to Ahmed Saad Hussain, a brother from
Khulna University, who has enriched my reasoning in conceptualization of the
methodology through sharing a few thought provoking ideas. I do express my
indebtedness to Md. Al-Amin and Ahsan Imam, two of my friends-forever, since they
have assuaged my arduous tasks directly and indirectly on several occasions.
This dissertation benefited enormously from comments and remarks of Md.

Anisuzzaman Shakil, which made it possible to maintain grammatical consistency.
Therefore, I express my heartfelt appreciation for him. I am also grateful to my friend
Md. Mainuddin Patwary, Mosharof Hossain, Sk. Rezwan-Ul-Islam and brother
Tridip Biswas for their noteworthy contribution in correcting mistakes in this
manuscript.
Inspiration and reinforcement were received from quite a few numbers of individuals and
organizations. With adoration and tributes, I would like to extend my sincere gratitude
and acknowledgement to all of those who aided to this study and whose names are not
mentioned.
Md. Golam Azam

June, 2019
V
DEDICATION
DEDICATED TO
ALL DECENT MEN AND WOMEN
WHO WILL READ IT WITHOUT PROPER ATTENTION
REGARD IT WITH INTENSE AFFECTION
LOVE IT WITHOUT REASON
INCLUDING
YOU
VI
TABLE OF CONTENTS
HEADING Page No
DECLARATION ............................................................................................................ II
CERTIFICATE .............................................................................................................. III
APPROVAL ...................................................................................................................IV
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT .............................................................................................. V
DEDICATION ...............................................................................................................VI
TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................. VII
LIST OF FIGURES ......................................................................................................... X
LIST OF TABLES .........................................................................................................XI
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ..................................................................................... XIII
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................ XIV
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION .................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background ............................................................................................................ 1
1.2 Problem Statement ................................................................................................. 7
1.3 Justification ............................................................................................................ 8
1.4 Objective of the Study ............................................................................................ 9
1.5 Organization of the Thesis ..................................................................................... 9
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ....................................................................... 10
2.1 Vulnerability to Climate Change .......................................................................... 10
2.2 Components of Climate Change Vulnerability .................................................... 11
2.3 Assessment of Vulnerability ................................................................................ 11

VII
2.4 Vulnerability Mapping ......................................................................................... 12
2.5 Principal Component Analysis (PCA) ................................................................. 12
2.6 Research Gap ........................................................................................................ 13
CHAPTER 3: MATERIALS AND METHODS ............................................................ 14
3.1 Study Area ............................................................................................................ 14
3.2 Conceptual Framework for Climate Change Vulnerability ................................. 16
3.2.1 UNFCCC’s vulnerability framework ............................................................ 16
3.2.2 IPCC’s vulnerability composition framework .............................................. 19
3.2 Indicator Selection and Data Collection ............................................................... 19
3.3 Data Processing: Digitization, Database Creation and Raster Conversion .......... 26
3.4 Normalization of the Indicators ............................................................................ 26
3.5 Principal Component Analysis (PCA) ................................................................. 27
3.6 Aggregation (Weighted Average) of Indicators Based on PCs............................ 28
3.7 Accumulation of Indicators to Assess Overall Vulnerability............................... 28
3.8 Classification of Raster ........................................................................................ 29
3.9 Illustration of The Whole Research Work in Flow Diagram ............................... 29
CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ............................................................. 33
4.1 Retention of Vulnerability Profile and Unbiased Weights of Indicators ............. 33
4.1.1 Principal Component Analysis (PCA) .......................................................... 33
4.1.2 Vulnerability profiles and weights of indicators ........................................... 35
4.2 Profile Based Spatial Vulnerability ...................................................................... 38
VIII
4.2.1 Vulnerability due to meteorological shift ...................................................... 38
4.2.2 Vulnerability due to extreme climatic events ................................................ 38
4.2.3 Water related vulnerability ............................................................................ 41
4.2.4 Socioeconomic vulnerability ......................................................................... 42
4.2.5 Infrastructural and information vulnerability ................................................ 44
4.2.6 Hazard shock vulnerability............................................................................ 46
4.3 Countrywide Overall Vulnerability ...................................................................... 46
4.3.1 Exposure ........................................................................................................ 46
4.3.2 Sensitivity ...................................................................................................... 48
4.3.3 Adaptive capacity .......................................................................................... 49
4.3.4 Vulnerability.................................................................................................. 51
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION ....................................................................................... 53
REFERENCE ................................................................................................................. 55
APPENDICES ................................................................................................................ 70
Appendix 1: Stand-alone Script for PCA in Python Window .................................... 70
Appendix 2: Data (Socioeconomic) Table Extracted from BBS ............................... 72
Appendix 3: Maps (Biophysical Indicators) Used in the Present Study .................... 78
Appendix 4: Overview of study findings .................................................................. 90
IX
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1: Where the most extreme weather event occurs ............................................ 3
Figure 1.2: Most vulnerable countries of the world regarding climate change ............... 5
Figure 1.3: Spatial variability of temperature (°C per year) from 1971 to 2010 ............. 6
Figure 1.4: Spatial variability of rainfall (% per year) from 1971 to 2010 ..................... 6
Figure 1.5: Some reasons of Bangladesh to be vulnerable to climate change ................ 7
Figure 3.1: Location of the study area, Bangladesh, in the context of the World ......... 15
Figure 3.2: UNFCCC framework for vulnerability assessment. ................................... 18
Figure 3.3: Vulnerability concept according to the IPCC AR4..................................... 19
Figure 3.4: Comprehensive work flow diagram for the entire research. ....................... 30
Figure 3.5: Work flow diagram for profile (PCs) based vulnerability analysis ............ 31
Figure 3.6: Work flow diagram form overall vulnerability assessment ........................ 32
Figure 4.1: Scree plot for the percent of the Eigenvalue of the dataset ........................ 34
Figure 4.2: Principal components with higher Eigenvalues. ........................................ 34
Figure 4.3: Meteorological shift vulnerability (PC1). ................................................... 39
Figure 4.4: Extreme climate vulnerability (PC2). ......................................................... 40
Figure 4.5: Water related vulnerability (PC3) ............................................................... 41
Figure 4.6: Socioeconomic vulnerability (PC4) ............................................................ 43
Figure 4.7: Infrastructural and information vulnerability (PC5). .................................. 44
Figure 4.8: Hazard shock vulnerability (PC6) ............................................................... 45
Figure 4.9: Countrywide overall exposure to climate change. ...................................... 47
Figure 4.10: Sensitivity to climate change of Bangladesh. ........................................... 49
Figure 4.11: Adaptive capacity to climate change of Bangladesh. ............................... 50
Figure 4.12: Overall vulnerability to climate change of Bangladesh. ........................... 51
X
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1.1: The Long-Term Climate Risk Index (CRI) .................................................... 4

Table 3.1: Selected indicators from different sectors of vulnerability. ......................... 20
Table 3.2: Rationale of selecting indicators of vulnerability......................................... 22
Table 4.1: Selected PC layers with Eigenvectors ......................................................... 36
Table 4.2: Retained vulnerability profile and unbiased weights of indicators. ............. 37
Table 4.3: Classification of 64 districts according to different PCs .............................. 42
Table 4.4: Classification of 64 districts according to vulnerability components .......... 52
XI
LIST OF MAPS
Map 1: Drought prone areas. ......................................................................................... 78
Map 2: General hazard class map. ................................................................................. 79
Map 3: Tidal flood prone areas of Bangladesh. ............................................................. 80
Map 4: Sea level rise (SLR) risk map. ........................................................................... 81
Map 5: Cyclone prone areas of Bangladesh. ................................................................. 82
Map 6: Salinity map of Bangladesh. ............................................................................. 83
Map 7: Flush flood prone areas. .................................................................................... 84
Map 8: River flood prone areas. .................................................................................... 85
Map 9: Erosion prone areas. .......................................................................................... 86
Map 10: Maximum temperature variability coefficient................................................. 87
Map 11: Minimum temperature variability coefficient. ................................................ 88
Map 12: Precipitation variability coefficient. ................................................................ 89
XII
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
AR4 Fourth Assessment Report of IPCC
BARC Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council
BBS Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics
BCAS Bangladesh Center for Advanced Studies
BMD Bangladesh Meteorological Department
BWDB Bangladesh Water Development Board
CDMP Comprehensive Disaster Management Program
CEGIS Center for Environmental and Geographic Information Services
CRI Global Climate Risk Index
DoE Department of Environment
GIS Geographic Information System
HH Household
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
IWFM Institute of Water and Flood Management
MoEF Ministry of Environment and Forest
NH Natural Hazard
PC Principal Component
PCA Principal Component Analysis
SRDI Soil Resource Development Institute
UNFCCC United Nation’s Framework Convention on Climate Change
UNICEF United Nations International Children's Emergency Fund
USGS United States Geological Survey
WMO World Meteorological Organization
XIII
ABSTRACT
Climate change has been the most argumentative issue of the world over the last few
decades where developing countries like Bangladesh are maintained as most vulnerable
to the forthcoming impacts. The geography and natural hazard proneness of Bangladesh
make the country extremely risky. Furthermore, the socioeconomic condition has already
exacerbated the susceptibility to extreme climate events. Therefore, detailed study of
countrywide climate change vulnerability is imperative to facilitate proper measures
towards adaptation. Nonetheless, to meet the exigency of demonstrating spatial climate
change vulnerability, this study aims to identify the profiles of sectoral vulnerability; to
retain unbiased weights of indicators; and to visualize the spatial vulnerabilities in GIS
environment.
In this study, 42 indicators, 30 socioeconomic and 12 biophysical, have been integrated

in the IPCC framework. All the indicators have been incorporated to the GIS database
and converted to raster input layers followed by normalization of the raster layers.
Multivariate analysis of all 42 indicators to retain Principal Components (PCs), in order
to get unbiased weights and sectoral vulnerability profile, has been performed in Python
module of ArcMap 10.5. Through Catell’s scree test and Kaiser’s criterion, 6 PCs having
a higher Eigenvalue and accumulative of Eigenvalues (about 75%) have been identified.
The overall vulnerability of the country from exposure, sensitivity and adaptive capacity
has also been indexed in this study.
The PC1, defined as the meteorological shift vulnerability, shows the southeastern and
western climatic sub-region consisting of 17 districts as highly vulnerable. The PC2, the
extreme climate vulnerability, shows the coastal region with its 9 districts as highly
vulnerable. Water related vulnerability (PC3) is high in riverine areas as well as in other
wetlands and comprises 8 districts. Socioeconomic vulnerability (PC4) is high in south
and hilly regions containing 35 districts. Most regions of the country are found moderate
to less vulnerable to infrastructure and information vulnerability (PC5). However, hazard
shock vulnerability (PC6) is high in southwest coastal region, central region and
northeastern region, where households and crops are usually affected due to a variety of
natural disasters, consisting of 7 districts.
Coastal region, part of hilly region, riverine areas and the haor basin are found highly
vulnerable since these regions are more exposed as well as highly sensitive to climate
XIV
change effects. Though adaptive capacity is found quite well all over the country, the
level of vulnerability of coastal region is controlled by exposure and sensitivity. The haor
basin is moderate to highly exposed and sensitive to climate change, yet the lower level
of adaptive capacity makes this region highly vulnerable. Riverine areas are found highly
vulnerable probably due to flood and riverbank erosion, especially the Brahmaputra river
basin found to be more vulnerable than other riverine areas. Upper parts of the Chittagong
hilly region, outer Brahmaputra floodplain and most of the Ganges flood plain are
moderate to low vulnerable; lower level of exposure and sensitivity of these regions make
them moderate to low vulnerable having moderate adaptive capacity.
The present study however is a new edition in climate vulnerability assessment since it
encompasses multivariate spatial analysis to demonstrate countrywide climate change
vulnerability. Results from this study can also be an essential tool in taking proper
measures related to the adaptation and mitigation of climate change impacts from root
level to policymaking platforms.
XV
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background to the Study
The greatest threat, claimed by thousands of scientists that our Earth faces today is
climate change. In a warming planet, climate change affects various aspects, which
includes the weather system, hydrology, ecology and environment (Rahman & Lateh,
2017). Climate change refers to a change in the state of the climate that can be identified
(e.g., using statistical tests) by changes in the mean or the variability of its properties,
which persists for an extended period, typically decades or longer (IPCC, 2007). The
classical period for averaging these variables is 30 years, as defined by the World
Meteorological Organization (WMO). It was observed that, in general, developing
countries are more vulnerable to the effects of climate change than developed ones,
mainly because of the low capacity to adapt to the impacts of climate change in the
developing world.
According to the fifth Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report,

significant trends in temperature and precipitation were observed around the world but
with different magnitudes (IPCC, 2014). Globally, surface temperatures are rising, but
warming is not uniform all over the globe (Jones, 2001; Jones & Moberg, 2003; IPCC,
2007; Kerr, 2009; Nick, et al., 2009; Lorentzen, 2014). In the fifth assessment of IPCC,
it was stated that the average temperature of the Earth has risen approximately 0.85 °C
from 1880 to 2012 and temperature of the world would increase between 0.3 and 4.8 °C
by the end of the twenty-first century (IPCC, 2013). Furthermore, coupled with global
warming, there is strong evidence that changes in rainfall patterns have already taken
place on both global (Hulme, et al., 1998) and regional scales (Yu & Neil, 1993;
Rodrı′guez-Puebla, et al., 1998; IPCC, 2007).
Variations to regional and local climate depend on respective features; therefore, climate
change at regional and local scales often does not match those on a global scale. In this
regard, the assessment of climate variability and change on a smaller scale (country level)
is a key issue and this will help to improve our understanding of long-term climate
variability and change as well as the associated mechanisms of forcing of change at
country level or local scales.
1
Most of the least developed countries, where livelihoods are mostly natural resource
dependent, are readily at risk to the negative impacts of forthcoming events from climate
change (Heltberg & Bonch-Osmolovskiy, 2011). The society and its interaction with the
climate affect the climate change impact along with the biophysical characteristics of a
certain area. According to the Second Assessment Report, Socioeconomic systems are
more vulnerable in developing countries as the economic and institutional circumstances
are not strong enough (IPCC, 1996). The report also describes that vulnerability is highest
where sensitivity is high and adaptive capacity is low. Further, in the Fourth Assessment
Report, the IPCC defines the vulnerability as the degree to which a system is susceptible
to, or unable to cope with, adverse effects of climate change, including climate variability
and extremes. The focus of the researches has been to mitigation and adaptation to
climate change after the Fourth Assessment Report of IPCC, which brings in researches
that have centered on analysis of human welfare in order to specify the vulnerability of
an area (Ibarraran, et al., 2008).
Typically, coastal countries are recognized as vulnerable to climate change and extremes
due to the impacts on water quantity and quality from various activities such as
continuing high density of socioeconomic and development activities, rising of sea level,
saltwater intrusion (Iyalomhe, et al., 2015). Another reason of coastal region being more
vulnerable is the rising of temperature and changing of both cyclone and precipitation
patterns (Moser & Davidson, 2015). From Global Climate Model results it is found that
agricultural sector is highly impacted by climate extreme events (Glibert, et al., 2014;
Iyalomhe, et al., 2015); including sea level rise, storm surge (Neuman, et al., 2015) and
coastal erosion (Barbier, 2015). Though Bangladesh is considered as a coastal country,
specifically the southern part in Bangladesh is found to be severely affected by extreme
climate under the higher emission scenarios (Ruane, et al., 2013). The assessment of
vulnerability due to coastal inundation, which is very essential in the context of climate
change, in present and the future scenarios from sea level rise would be useful for
assessing adaptation options (McInnes, et al., 2013). Vulnerability assessment should be
done integrating natural processes, socioeconomic conditions, and the mechanisms of
responses of the integrated ecological and economic system (Chang & Huang, 2015).
Bangladesh is among the most vulnerable countries in the world in the context of climate
change and climate variability. Extreme climatic events have become distinctive in
Bangladesh (Ahmed, et al., 2013) (DoE, 2012) with an area of 147,570 km2 (BBS, 2012)
2
and a fast-growing population currently stands at over 160 million (Dewan, et al., 2012)
(DoE, 2012) and anticipated to be added by another 20 million by 2025 (Shaw, 2015).
The population density of the country is very high which is 1015 per sq. km. with an
annual growth rate of 1.37 percent (Shaw, 2015). By 2025, population density could be
over 1200 per km2 (Shaw, 2015). Coastal districts adjacent to Bay of Bengal are highly
vulnerable to extreme climate condition, including changes of uneven disasters such as
cyclone-induced storm surge, coastal floods, riverbank erosion, and increasing trend of
sea level rise, saline water intrusion and many more natural calamities (Dasgupta, et al.,
2014).
1.2 Statement of the Problem
Figure 1.1: Where the most extreme weather event occurs. Most affected countries in
different extreme events occurred from 1998 to 2016 are ranked by the Germanwatch
& Munich Re in its Global Climate Risk Index (CRI) 2018. Source: (DW, 2018)
3
Table 1.1: The Long-Term Climate Risk Index (CRI): the 10 countries most affected from 1997 to 2016 (annual averages)1. Source:
(Germanwatch, 2017)
CRI Deaths per Number of
Total losses in Losses per unit
1997–2016 Country CRI score Death toll 100 000 total events
million US$ GDP in %
(1996–2015) inhabitants (1997–2016)
1 (1) Honduras 12.17 301.65 4.28 561.11 1.968 62
2 (3) Haiti 13.50 280.40 2.96 418.77 2.730 72
3 (2) Myanmar 14.00 7 097.75 14.55 1 277.86 0.694 43
4 (4) Nicaragua 19.33 162.45 2.96 234.60 1.127 44

5 (5) Philippines 20.17 859.55 0.98 2 893.41 0.611 289
6 (6) Bangladesh 26.50 641.55 0.44 2 311.07 0.678 187
7 (7) Pakistan 30.50 523.10 0.33 3 816.82 0.605 141

8 (8) Vietnam 31.83 312.60 0.37 2 029.80 0.549 216
9 (10) Thailand 33.83 139.60 0.21 7 696.59 0.967 137
10 (11) Dominican Republic 34.00 210.90 2.32 243.53 0.262 49
1
Honduras, Haiti and Myanmar were identified as the most affected countries in this 20-year period (IPCC, 2013). They are followed by Nicaragua,
the Philippines, and Bangladesh. Table 1 shows the ten most affected countries concerning the last two decades with their average weighted ranking
(CRI score) and the specific results relating to the four indicators analyzed. For the examination of the CRI, the indicators which were analyzed
are, a) Number of deaths, b) Number of deaths per 100 000 inhabitants, c) Sum of losses in US$ in purchasing power parity (PPP) as well as d)
Losses per unit of Gross Domestic Product (GDP).
4
Figure 1.2: Most vulnerable countries of the world regarding climate change according to the Notre Dame Global Adaptation Index.2 Source:
(The Washington Post, 2015)
2
The areas in red, including Bangladesh, are very vulnerable to climate change and ill-prepared to deal with its impact. Areas in blue are countries
that are vulnerable but are relatively well equipped. Countries in yellow are less vulnerable but also less prepared. The countries in green, which
include most of the world’s developed countries, are both less vulnerable and better equipped to deal with the challenge of climate change.
5
Figure 1.3: Spatial variability of temperature (°C per year) from 1971 to 2010: (a)
mean, (b) mean minimum and (c) mean maximum.3 Source: (Rahman & Lateh, 2017)
Figure 1.4: Spatial variability of rainfall (% per year) from 1971 to 2010: (a) annual,
(b) pre-monsoon and (c) post-monsoon.4 Source: (Rahman & Lateh, 2017)
3
A higher variability (>0.027 to 0.051 °C per year) is observed mainly in the
northwestern, northern and northeastern parts for mean minimum temperature. For mean
maximum temperature, higher variability (between 0.017 and 0.026 °C per year) is found
at the northeastern, eastern and southeastern parts of the country. In the case of mean
temperature, maximum variability (0.11 to 0.25 °C per year) is found in the northeastern,
southern and southeastern parts.
4
The annual rainfall variability is the highest (between 22.25 and 32.80 % per year) in
the northwestern, northern and eastern parts. The maximum pre-monsoon (between 46
to 60 % per year) and post-monsoon (between 83 to 100 % per year) rainfall variability
are highest in the southern coastal and southeastern hill districts of Bangladesh. The pre-
monsoon rainfall variability is also remarkable in the northwestern and southwestern
parts.
6
Figure 1.5: Some reasons of Bangladesh to be vulnerable to climate change, outlined in
the figure. Source: (UNFCC, 2008)
Bangladesh, indexed as the sixth most vulnerable nation to climate change
(Germanwatch, 2017), becoming more susceptible to the forth coming extreme events
despite her ongoing socioeconomic progress. Though the country is moving towards a
more resilient one to adapt climate change, the meeting of expected level of measures
requires studies that are more comprehensive. Since the climate and weather of the
country varies with the differences in geography, any study regarding climate change
vulnerability would not be fruitful without spatial consideration in profiling vulnerability
indicators (Abson, et al., 2012; Davies & Midgeley, 2010).
Though several studies have already been done regarding climate change vulnerability
in different parts of Bangladesh like (Ahsan & Warner, 2014; Ahmed, et al., 2013;
7
Dasgupta, et al., 2010) to name a few, but not considering the whole country. The spatial
consideration of vulnerability indexing GIS is not introduced yet, except for a particular
locale and particular sector like (Uddin, et al., 2018) and (Roy & Blaschke, 2015).
Therefore, this study adopted the assessment of countrywide vulnerability considering
indicators based on spatial variations in GIS environment.
1.3 Justification of the Present Study
Since Bangladesh lies in the most extreme weather occurring region (Germanwatch,
2017), it is inevitable to assess the level of vulnerability of the country for adopting
proper measures to mitigate the resulting effects. Beside global assessment of
vulnerability, it is also unavoidable to measure local level vulnerability of the whole
country (Davies & Midgeley, 2010; Ericksen, et al., 2011). On the other hand, diverse
geographical features as well as heterogeneous climatic conditions characterize
Bangladesh (Rashid, 1991).
As a low lying country on a mega delta, Bangladesh is particularly exposed to global sea
level rise that is caused by thermal expansion (warmer oceans expand) and by melting of
glaciers, polar icecaps, and ice-sheets increasing the overall volume of the oceans.
Bangladesh has always been a disaster prone country, and in addition to long-term
changes to average climatic conditions, climate change is also causing more
unpredictable and more extreme weather, leading to more frequent and/or more severe
disasters (UNICEF, 2016).
Therefore, a countrywide vulnerability assessment using geospatial analysis is worth

consideration. In addition to that, a sectoral vulnerability index helps in decision making
to identify proper measures of adaptation. Since the extreme events that occur in
Bangladesh are not uniformly distributed all over the country, the profile based climate
vulnerability hotspots need to be identified. However, the present study considers those
unmet exigencies and provides potential implications for future decision-making and
policymaking.
8
1.4 Objectives of the Study
The general objective of this study is to assess spatial climate change vulnerability of
Bangladesh using Geographic Information System (GIS).
Further, the present study is structured by the following specific objectives:
i) To retain sectoral vulnerability profile and unbiased weights for vulnerability

indicators through multivariate spatial analysis;
ii) To demonstrate sector specific spatial climate change vulnerability of
Bangladesh; and
iii) To assess overall spatial climate change vulnerability of Bangladesh.
1.5 Outline of the Thesis
This thesis consists of five chapters that describe the background, literature review,
materials used, methods followed, and findings of the study and finally the conclusion
reached.
In Chapter one, background of the present study is elaborated and discreetly rationalized
with problem statement and justification of the study. The general objective and specific
objectives of the study are also stated in the present chapter.
In chapter two, literature on climate change, climate vulnerability, vulnerability mapping,

Principal Component Analysis (PCA), etc. are vigorously reviewed. Literature review
also creates the structural foundation of the following chapter through scientific and
logical reasoning.
Chapter three describes all the materials used and methods followed in fulfilling the
objectives of the thesis along with study area profile and detailed illustration of research
flow diagram.
Chapter four deals with the results from spatial multivariate analysis, mapping, etc. and
their scientific discussion to see whether the objectives are met.
Finally, chapter five contains the precise conclusion of the findings along with some
future implications of the study.
9
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
A few studies have been carried out in different places, using vulnerability index (Cinner,
et al., 2013; Bjarnadottir, et al., 2011), to assess the climate change vulnerability. Some
studies also have been carried out before in Bangladesh and other countries regarding the
assessment of the socioeconomic vulnerability index (Ahsan & Warner, 2014;
Hagenlocher, et al., 2013; Chen, et al., 2013; Ge, et al., 2013; Eakin & Luers, 2006;
Yoon, 2012), mainly through household survey. A study found the southern and south
eastern unions relatively more vulnerable (Ahsan & Warner, 2014). Climate change
vulnerability evolved from drinking water quality and management have been assessed
in rural areas of the coastal Bangladesh (Delpla, et al., 2014; Sarkar & Vogt, 2015). The
water vulnerability in relation to global climate change provides the community an
inclusive overview of the lack of water availability to identify the specific areas, groups
and sectors where attention is needed (Plummer, et al., 2013) since adequate safe
drinking water supply is essential for economic, social and sanitary reasons (Pagano, et
al., 2014). On the other hand, infrastructure vulnerability involves the consideration of a
range of physical, operational, geographical and socioeconomic characteristics (Grubesic
& Matisziw, 2013; Tang, et al., 2013). This vulnerability includes economic value of
infrastructure, and residential and commercial building values (Thatcher, 2013).
2.1 Vulnerability to Climate Change
Vulnerability is the factor for risk level assessment as well as building resilience
(Salinger, et al., 2005). It is also the degree to which a system either susceptible or
incapable to cope with the adverse effects of climate change, including climate variability
and extremes (IPCC, 2014; IPCC, 2001). Vulnerability can be defined as the ability or
inability of individuals or social groupings to respond to, in the sense of cope with,
recover from, or adapt to, any external stress placed on their livelihoods and well-being
(Kelly & Adger, 2000). On the other hand, Barker, et al. (2007) defines vulnerability as
a function of the character, magnitude, and rate of climate variation to which a system is
exposed, its sensitivity, and its adaptive capacity. Understanding of vulnerability have
been described both theoretically and practically through conceptual models, framework
and assessment techniques (Cutter, et al., 2008). Adger (2006) conceptualizes the
vulnerability as a function of exposure, sensitivity and adaptive capacity as per the
definition of IPCC.
10
2.2 Components of Climate Change Vulnerability
The degree of climate stress upon a particular unit of analysis can be termed as exposure
(Comer, et al., 2012). Further, exposure can be defined as the experiences of disturbances
in the internal and external system (Abson, et al., 2012). The reaction of a system to
climate hazards is called sensitivity (Preston & Stafford-Smith, 2009). Sensitivity is
variable as it depends on location, sectors and population. According to Gallopin (2003),
sensitivity is the degree to which a system is changed or affected by an internal or
external disturbance or set of disturbances. Both socioeconomic and ecological
conditions outline the responsiveness of a system to climatic influences as well as
determine the degree to which a group will be affected by environmental stress (SEI,
2004). According to IPCC (2001), the magnitude a system is affected either positively or
negatively by climate stress is sensitivity. On the other hand, sensitivity is the degree to
which a system is experienced with positive and negative by directly or indirectly of all
elements of climate changes (IPCC, 2001). Adaptive capacity is the ability to overcome
exposure and sensitivity to climatic influences (Preston & Stafford-Smith, 2009).
Capacity is usually determined by resource availability as well as by the institutional and
governance networks that exist to deploy those resources, whereas socio-political
barriers may inhibit successful adaptation to Climate change impacts (Deressa, et al.,
2009). Adaptive capacity is a significant factor in characterizing vulnerability. According
to Brooks (2003), the ability to modify social characteristics or behavior to better cope
with existing or anticipated external stresses, and also changes in external conditions is
adaptive capacity. IPCC (2001) describes adaptive capacity of a system, region, or
community as its potential or ability to adapt with the effects or impacts of climate change
(including climate variability and extremes). The ability of a system to cope with extreme
climate variability and to moderate the potential damages is termed as adaptive capacity
(IPCC, 2001; Burton, et al., 2002; Adger, 2006; Brooks, 2003; Gallopín, 2006; Yohe &
Tol, 2002; Gerlitz, et al., 2015). Nonetheless, adaptive capacity is context-specific and
varies from country to country, community to community, among social groups and
individuals, and over time (IPCC, 2001).
2.3 Assessment of Climate Change Vulnerability
Though vulnerability assessment is not a new concept, still it emerges in the climate
science and climate policy application (Füssel & Klein, 2006) which is the primary step
in lessening the impact of the future extreme climate on socio-ecological system (Adger,
11
2006) (Howden, et al., 2007). Assessing vulnerability to climate change is important for
characterizing the risks posed by climate change and makes the base for recognizing
measures in order to adapt to the adverse impacts of climate change. This assessment of
vulnerability will facilitate stakeholders and decision-makers to mark the most
vulnerable areas, the most vulnerable social groups and the most vulnerable sectors.
However, the vulnerability assessment of a system can be performed through the

determination of these three components:
i) the presence of people, livelihoods, species or ecosystems, environmental

functions, services, resources, infrastructure, or economic, social or cultural
assets in places and settings that could be adversely affected (exposure);
ii) the degree to which the system is affected (sensitivity); and
iii) the ability of the system to adjust to potential damage (adaptive capacity) (IPCC,
2014)
2.4 Mapping of Climate Change Vulnerability
There are different tools and techniques available for assessing vulnerability in a
particular system. Mapping in Geographic Information System is one such tool for
vulnerability assessment as GIS is a powerful visualization tool to identify the most
susceptible areas from present to future changes in the environment (Uddin, et al., 2018).
The vulnerability mapping by hotspot identification (Davies & Midgeley, 2010;
Ericksen, et al., 2011) makes it easy for decision making of government, donor agencies
of Southeast Asian countries that are the most vulnerable to climate change (Yusuf &
Francisco, 2009).
2.5 Principal Component Analysis (PCA) in Vulnerability Assessment
In multivariate statistics, Principal Components Analysis (PCA) is a backbone of modern

data analysis tool that is widely used (Blasius & Greenacre, 2014; Bro & Smilde, 2014;
Hair, et al., 2006; Hou, et al., 2015; Guillard-Gonçalves, et al., 2015; Singh & Vedwan,
2015) in making decisions based on spatial maps (Okey, et al., 2015; Schiavinato &
Payne, 2015). PCA approach provides several potential advantages. When the original
variables are correlated, the higher orders Principal Components (PCs) clearly captures
more of the grouped variability than any individual original variable. PCA technique is
applied for spatially explicit group of socioeconomic vulnerability (Miller, 2014),
12
poverty (Howe, et al., 2013) and health vulnerability (Fisher, et al., 2015; Zhu, et al.,
2014).
The quality of PCA can be evaluated by cross-validation using either bootstrapping or

jackknife method (Abdi & Williams, 2010). However, the application of PCA implies to
maximize the variance of a simple linear combination in a direction orthogonal to the
first principal component (PC) and so on. For example, principal component analysis
could be used to calculate unbiased weight and batter data interpretation that minimizes
the total sum of the squared perpendicular distance from the points to the line (Rencher,
2002). There have been different scientific methods for determining the number of
principal components to retain. In PCA algorithm, the number of principal components
(PCs) have been determined based on a rule of thumb proposed by Kaiser (1960).
According to that rule, a component will be retained if its Eigenvalue is greater than
unity. PCA is performed to calculate the components unbiased weight based on their
factor scores and the proportion of variance of each component as described by Zhu et
al. (2014) and Jolliffe (2002). In PCA analysis, prior to the PCs retention, several test
statistics has been performed to assess the suitability of representative data. These tests
include Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy and range from 0 to
1 with > 0.50 considered as suitable for PCA. Scree plot is another method of PCs
retention, explores the graphical interpolation method in decreasing order of Eigenvalue
with a line to determine the point at which the significant breakpoint exists (Catell, 1966)
(Ledesma & Valero-Mora, 2007). Varimax rotation methods are also applied which
maximizes high item loadings and minimizes low item loadings thus providing more
clear interpretation in a simplified way (Williams, et al., 2010).
2.6 Gaps in Research
Alongside continuous climate research all over the globe, a plethora of regional and local
level studies has also been accomplished in different parts of the world. Both scientific
and social dimensions of climate risk, vulnerability and adaptation have been discussed
in various studies from abroad as well as from Bangladesh. Nevertheless, in Bangladesh,
most of the studies have been performed in local level. However, a countrywide
vulnerability assessment in Bangladesh is still a lacking. Moreover, considering
methodological dimension, multivariate spatial analysis is also very much atypical in
Bangladesh.
13
CHAPTER 3: MATERIALS AND METHODS
3.1 Study Area
The spatial extent of Bangladesh is between 20° 34′ N to 26° 38′ N latitude and 88° 01′
E to 92° 41 ′ E longitude (Figure 3.1) with an area of 144,000 km2. Bangladesh has a
sub-tropical humid climate characterized by wide seasonal variations in rainfall,
moderately warm temperature and high humidity. Three distinct seasons can be
recognized in Bangladesh,
(i) The dry winter/post-monsoon season from November to February,

(ii) The pre-monsoon hot summer season from March to May, and
(iii) The rainy monsoon season from June to October (Rashid, 1991).
The historical average temperature of the country is 25.75 °C, with a range of 18.85 to
28.75 °C (monthly average). The average minimum and maximum temperatures are
21.18 and 30.33 °C, and varies from 12.5 to 25.7 °C (monthly average) and 25.2 to 33.2
°C (monthly average), respectively. January is the coldest and April and May are the
hottest months in Bangladesh. The historical average rainfall of the country is 2428 mm
per year (BMD, 2013) and the rainfall is very much seasonal in Bangladesh, which varies
from 1400 to 4400 mm. The highest rainfall occurs in June, July, and August. More than
75% of the total rainfall in Bangladesh occurs during the monsoon season, caused by
winds blowing from the Southern Hemisphere from mid-May to September, which
accumulates moisture and deposits copious amounts of precipitation over the South
Asian continent. In respect to the global warming and climate change, Bangladesh is one
of the most vulnerable countries in the world due to its least capacity to address the
devastating impacts (IPCC, 2007). Recently, Bangladesh is experiencing higher
temperatures, more variability in rainfall, more extreme weather events and sea level rise.
Bangladesh is highly vulnerable, because it is low-lying, located on the Bay of Bengal in
the delta of the Ganges, Brahmaputra and Meghna and also densely populated. Since
agriculture is the mainstay of the economy of Bangladesh, its agriculture and water
sectors are very sensitive to impacts of the climate change.
14
Figure 3.1: Location of the study area, Bangladesh, in the context of the World along
with climatic sub-regions and elevation of the country. Recreated from the climatic
sub-region map of Rashid (1991) & USGS’s elevation data.
15
3.2 Conceptual Framework for Climate Change Vulnerability
3.2.1 IPCC’s vulnerability composition framework
Vulnerability is a concept used to express the complex interaction of climate change

effects and the susceptibility of a system to its impacts. There exist manifold definitions
and methods of operationalizing this concept. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (IPCC) sought to elaborate and advance an approach for understanding
vulnerability in its Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) as:
“....... the degree to which a system is susceptible to, and unable to cope with, adverse
effects of climate change, including climate variability and extremes. Vulnerability is a
function of the character, magnitude, and rate of climate change and variation to which
a system is exposed, its sensitivity, and its adaptive capacity” (IPCC, 2007).
Within this perspective, vulnerability is understood to be the function of a system’s

climate change exposure, sensitivity and adaptive capacity to cope with climate change
effects (2).
There are basically three conceptual approaches for assessment of vulnerability,
a) Socioeconomic approach: focusing on socioeconomic and political variations

within the society, but not environmental factors;
b) Biophysical approach: focusing on physical damage done by environmental
factors on the social and biological systems; and
c) Integrated assessment approach: combines both socioeconomic and biophysical
approaches (Deressa, et al., 2008).
This study adopts the integrated assessment approach and uses the indicator method to
assess the vulnerability of Bangladesh.
With increase in exposure, i.e., increase in the change in temperature and rainfall and
also increase in the occurrence of natural hazards the people will be more vulnerable to
climate change, especially farmers as their livelihood depends on it. Sensitivity increases
the effect of exposure on the people and will have more negative impact on them.
Sensitivity will include the factors like casualties and damage caused by the natural
hazards as well as human and environmental factors that makes them more susceptible
16
to the natural hazards and climate variability. The combined effect of exposure and
sensitivity will increase the vulnerability while adaptive capacity will decrease it.
Figure 3.2: Vulnerability concept according to the IPCC AR4. Source: (GIZ, 2014)
3.2.1 UNFCCC’s vulnerability framework

The United Nation Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC, 2008)
mentions two types of vulnerability assessment framework: impacts (top-down) and
adaptation (bottom-up) (Figure 3.3).
Impacts frameworks are also referred to as ‘first generation’. They were mainly designed
to understand the potential long-term impacts of climate change. The main elements of
impacts framework are the baseline socioeconomic and environmental scenarios, climate
change scenarios. Biophysical impacts (sensitivity) are assessed based on them, thus
vulnerability can be estimated. After that climate adaptations policy can be examined
(UNFCCC, 2008).
17
Figure 3.3: UNFCCC framework for vulnerability assessment. The adaptation
framework selected for the present study, works from the bottom of the figure to the
top. Source: (UNFCCC, 2008)
On the other hand, the adaptation frameworks also referred as ‘second generation’, which
have developed in recent years, focus on involving stakeholders and addressing
adaptation. The framework contains technical papers, engaging stakeholders, assessing
vulnerability, assessing current and future climate risks, assessing changing
socioeconomic conditions based on indicators, then assessing adaptive capacity. Finally
formulating a climate adaptation strategy, and continuing the adaptation process. As
different frameworks have different strengths, adaptation framework emphasized on
18
stakeholders’ involvement more than others did and therefore it played significant role
to select this framework.
3.2 Indicator Selection and Data Collection
Many studies have been conducted using social, economic or biophysical indicators to
assess vulnerability (Liu, et al., 2008; Metzger & Schröter, 2006; Stelzenmüller, et al.,
2010). However, for the present study, 30 socioeconomic indicators have been
considered for this study, which has been obtained from the Bangladesh Bureau of
Statistics (BBS, 2012; BBS, 2013; BBS, 2016). All socioeconomic data were
incorporated in GIS database in order to generate maps. A brief description of the
selected indicators is given in Table 3.1. The rationale of selecting all these
socioeconomic indicators is presented in Table 3.2.
The 12 biophysical system indicators for the present base scenario have also been
classified based on the collected information from different sources and literature. A brief
description of the biophysical indicators is provided in Table 3.1. The coefficient of
temperature and precipitation variability have been extracted from the work of Institute
of Water and Flood Management (IWFM, 2014) and mapped according to the climatic
sub-regions produced by Rashid (1991). A five-class drought class map of the whole
country has been recreated from Comprehensive Disaster Management Program (CDMP,
2006). The cyclone risk map used in this study, a four-class relative risk map, has been
adopted from Center for Environment and Geographic Information Services (CEGIS,
2006). The Sea Level Rise (SLR) risk map have been produced from the elevation map
collected from United States Geological Survey (USGS). Different types of flood risk
maps have been reproduced from the maps of Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council
(BARC, 2001) and Bangladesh Water Development Board (BWDB, 2010). Erosion
prone areas with relative risks (BWDB, 2010) and salinity intrusion map of 1 to 5 ppt
salinity line (SRDI, 2010) also have been recreated in this study. Finally, a general hazard
class map covering all over the country, with a 1 to 5 relative hazard proneness, has been
adopted from Bangladesh Center for Advanced Studies (BCAS, 2008). However, the
rationale of selecting these biophysical indicators is provided in Table 3.2.
19
Table 3.1: Selected indicators from different sectors of vulnerability.
Sectors of Vulnerability
No. Indicators Description of Units Sources
Vulnerability Components
1 Literacy rate Percent of people
Social
2 Dependency ratio Percent of people
3 Irrigation Percent of agricultural land covered
District statistics
4 School No. of Govt. primary school per 1000 people
(BBS, 2013)
5 Shelter No. of Cyclone and/or flood shelter per 1000 people
6 Roads Km of road per 1000 people
Infrastructural
7 Health institutes No per 1000 people
Adaptive
8 Electricity Percent of HHs with connection
Capacity
9 Tube well Percent of HHs with tube well
10 Drinking water source Percent of HHs with drinking water source within 200 m
11 Away population Per 1000 people National report
12 Household Total number of households (BBS, 2012) Economic
13 Poverty Percent of people below poverty line
14 Radio Per 1000 people
Information
15 Television Per 1000 people
16 Agriculture dependency Percent of HHs depending on farming
District statistics Ecological
17 Fuelwood dependency Percent of HHs using wood for cooking
(BBS, 2013)
18 Disability Percent of people Sensitivity
19 Female HH head Percent of HHs National report Human
20 Population density People per square km (BBS, 2012)
(Table continued)
20
Sectors of Vulnerability
No. Indicators Description of Units Sources
Vulnerability Components
21 Injury in NH No of people injured in 2009-2014
22 Crop damage Acre of cropland damaged in 2009-2014
23 Household damage No of HHs destroyed in 2009-2014
24 Tornado affected HHs No of HHs affected in 2009-2014
Bangladesh
25 Drought affected HHs No of HHs affected in 2009-2014 disaster-related Shocks to
Sensitivity
26 Storm affected HHs No of HHs affected in 2009-2014 statistics (BBS, Natural Hazard
2016)
27 Salinity affected HHs No of HHs affected in 2009-2014
28 Cyclone affected HHs No of HHs affected in 2009-2014
29 Flood affected HHs No of HHs affected in 2009-2014
30 Erosion affected HHs No of HHs affected in 2009-2014
31 Maximum Temperature Coefficient of change in 1960-2009
Climatic
32 Minimum Temperature Coefficient of change in 1960-2009 (IWFM, 2014)
Variables
33 Precipitation Coefficient of change in 1960-2009
34 Drought Relative risk map (CDMP, 2006)
35 Hazard Class Relative risk map generalized hazards (BCAS, 2008)
36 Tidal Flood Relative risk map (BARC, 2000)
Exposure
37 Sea Level Rise Coastal elevation (m) USGS
38 Cyclone Relative risk map (CEGIS, 2006) Extreme Events
39 Salinity Intrusion Relative risk of ppt of saline intrusion (SRDI, 2010)
40 Flush Flood Relative risk map (BARC, 2000)
41 River Flood Risk map based on inundation height (BWDB, 2010)
42 Erosion Relative risk map (BWDB, 2010)
21
Table 3.2: Rationale of selecting indicators of vulnerability.
Relation to
No. Indicators Rationale of Selecting the Indicator Cited from
Vulnerability
Literacy rate increases adaptive capacity by allowing access to (Acosta-Michilik & Espaldon, 2008;
1 Literacy rate -
information, which reduces vulnerability. Deressa, et al., 2009)
Dependency Higher number of dependent people of a region lessens the social (Strand, et al., 2010; Schwarz, et al.,
2 +
ratio capacity to adapt in extreme climatic events. 2011)
Irrigation enables farmers yielding crops during dry spells or droughts, (Alcamo, et al., 2007; Deressa, et
3 Irrigation -
which ensures food security. al., 2009)
No of Govt. primary school increases resilience during natural disasters
4 School -
providing infrastructural support. (Acosta-Michilik & Espaldon, 2008;
Cyclone cause less damages to the shelters than the regular households Toni & Holanda, 2004; Kelkar, et
5 Shelter causing affected people more adaptive. Flood camp does similar in - al., 2008; Ford, 2009; Schwarz, et
floods. al., 2011; Yoo, et al., 2011; Roy &
Increased road length is correlational to the adaptive capacity during Blaschke, 2015)
6 Roads -
emergencies.
Health Important for rural health and hygiene practice contributing ultimate (Knutsson & Ostwald, 2006; Roy &
7 -
institutes vulnerability reduction. Blaschke, 2015)
Electricity connection is fundamental to daily life as a tool of
(Acosta-Michilik & Espaldon, 2008;
8 Electricity affordability to the quality of life and ensures socioeconomic -
Toni & Holanda, 2004)
development.
Households with tube well are less susceptible drinking water stress
9 Tube well -
during and after disaster situation. (Acosta-Michilik & Espaldon, 2008;
Drinking Households with access to improved source of drinking water are less Kelkar, et al., 2008)
10 -
water source susceptible of climate change associated diseases.
(Table Continued)
22
Relation to
Vulnerability
Away The number of away population has a positive relationship in increasing (Toni & Holanda, 2004; Armah, et
11 -
population the adaptive capacity through economic capacity building. al., 2010; Lal, et al., 2011)
No of household increases the adaptive capacity of a certain community (Acosta-Michilik & Espaldon, 2008;
12 Household -
thus decreases the overall vulnerability. Toni & Holanda, 2004)
People below poverty line encounters great risk due to lack in nutrition, (Ford, 2009; Armah, et al., 2010;
13 Poverty +
health facilities and being exposed to environment during hazards. Roy & Blaschke, 2015)
Forecasts of weather extremes and natural hazards are disseminated
14 Radio -
very easily and effectively through radio broadcast. (Acosta-Michilik & Espaldon, 2008;
Television plays important role in spreading forecast and hazard Toni & Holanda, 2004)
15 Television -
information. Television also serves as the medium of awareness raising.
Agriculture Agriculture dependent community becomes highly susceptible when (Marin, 2010; Krishnamurthy, et al.,
16 +
dependency hazards cause destruction in croplands. 2011; Rawlani & Sovacool, 2011)
Fuelwood Dependency on fuelwood for cooking purpose makes a community (Fisher, et al., 2010; Seidl, et al.,
17 +
dependency more vulnerable to climate change. 2011; Uddin, et al., 2018)
Elderly and disabled people face great risk of vulnerability because of
(Ben Mohammad, 2011; Wang,
18 Disability obstruction in mobility and are most sensitive groups during natural +
2010)
hazards.
Woman can be more sensitive during natural disaster and become
Female HH vulnerable due to cultural structure and inferior social position. (Schwarz, et al., 2011; Manuel-
19 -
head Therefore, higher number of female household can reduce gender Navarrete, et al., 2011)
disparity thus reduce vulnerability.
Population Rapid growth of population lack in quality housing and living standard
20 + (Uddin, et al., 2018)
density resulting an increase in vulnerability.
(Table Continued)
23
Relation to
Vulnerability
Previous record of human injury due to natural disasters can be a good
21 Injury in NH + (Roy & Blaschke, 2015)
indicator of climate change susceptibility.
Bangladesh is an agriculture dependent country. Crop damage in
22 Crop damage previous natural hazards shows the agriculture and food security + (Mimura, 1999)
vulnerability.
Household Household damage in past events show the overall physical
23 + (Acosta-Michilik & Espaldon, 2008)
damage vulnerability of a community.
Tornado Damages infrastructure and rural houses, even loss of life is also evident
24 + (Roudier, et al., 2011)
affected HHs from past events of tornado.
Drought Increase in drought increases vulnerability by mainly affecting (Eriksen & Silva, 2009; Marin,
25 +
affected HHs agricultural production. 2010)
Storm Storm increases the physical vulnerability of the community. The more
26 + (Uddin, et al., 2018)
affected HHs the number of affected HHs the more the vulnerability of a community.
Salinity increases the vulnerability of coastal community by degrading
Salinity drinking water quality as well as reducing agriculture and fishery (Mimura, 1999; Rawlani &
27 +
affected HHs Sovacool, 2011)
production.
Cyclone Cyclone directly increases the vulnerability level of coastal community (Alcamo, et al., 2007;
28 +
affected HHs causing destruction to households, croplands and taking lives. Krishnamurthy, et al., 2011)
Flood is the most frequent and most devastating natural hazard in
Flood Bangladesh. Damages road, infrastructure, flood embankments, and (Armah, et al., 2010; Uddin, et al.,
29 +
affected HHs 2018)
rural houses.
Erosion Increase in shoreline erosion and riverbank erosion increase
30 + (Rawlani & Sovacool, 2011)
affected HHs vulnerability through dislocation of human settlement.
(Table Continued)
24
Relation to
Vulnerability
Maximum
31 Increase in temperature variability is considered increasing the exposure (Bury, et al., 2011; Rawlani &
Temperature
+ Sovacool, 2011; Roudier, et al.,
Minimum to climate change effects thus increasing vulnerability.
32 2011)
Temperature
Increase in the variability of change in precipitation increase (Deressa, et al., 2009; Marin, 2010;
33 Precipitation +
vulnerability. Ben Mohammad, 2011)
Increase in drought increases vulnerability by mainly affecting (Eriksen & Silva, 2009; Marin,
34 Drought +
agricultural production. 2010)
Overall classification of the whole country according to different natural
35 Hazard Class + (Lal, et al., 2011)
hazard intensity.
Storm surge inundation or tidal flood increases the physical
36 Tidal Flood + (Armah, et al., 2010)
vulnerability of the coastal community.
Sea Level Coastal vulnerability increases with sea level rise. Regions with lower
37 + (Yoo, et al., 2011; Mimura, 1999)
Rise elevation possess the higher SLR risk.
Cyclone susceptibility is considered as a vital indicator which increases (Alcamo, et al., 2007;
38 Cyclone +
vulnerability of coastal community. Krishnamurthy, et al., 2011)
Salinity increases the vulnerability of coastal community by degrading
Salinity drinking water quality as well as reducing agricultural and fisheries (Mimura, 1999; Rawlani &
39 +
Intrusion Sovacool, 2011)
production.
Flush floods are common in hilly regions, damages road, infrastructure,
40 Flush Flood +
and rural houses. (Armah, et al., 2010; Uddin, et al.,
River floods are devastating in riverine countries like Bangladesh. 2018)
41 River Flood +
Damages road, infrastructure, flood embankments, and rural houses.
Increase in shoreline erosion and river bank erosion increase
42 Erosion + (Rawlani & Sovacool, 2011)
vulnerability.
25
3.3 Data Processing: Digitization, Database Creation and Raster Conversion
Since spatial assessment of vulnerability is adopted in the present study, the base map of
Bangladesh is firstly digitized along with its all district centers. The socioeconomic data,
collected from different BBS publications, are transformed into desired units of
measurement and then incorporated in GIS database. As the dataset is presented based
on districts, the GIS database is also created basing district centers.
On the other hand, all the biophysical data were collected from different published maps
which were not corresponding to the district map of Bangladesh. Therefore, a new GIS
database was created for biophysical indicators followed by the incorporation of
quantified scale derived from those reference maps.
For the suitability of spatial analysis, all vector maps from created databases, both from
socioeconomic and biophysical, were converted to raster datasets using ArcMap’s
conversion toolbox. However, for GIS analysis, ArcGIS 10.5 desktop version is used in
all over the present study.
3.4 Normalization of the Indicators
Normalization is important for multivariate statistical analysis as some variables have

large range of variance and some of them have a small range of variance. Normalization
technique that implies the transforming dataset to a specific range (0–1) is thus essential.
Normalization technique has been applied to create a stronger relationship amongst the
dataset and imply to normalize residuals using the methods of transformation
(Quackenbush, 2002). To avoid the influence of one variable to other variables, the
dataset has been normalized. A similar approach has been followed in developing human
development index and life expectancy index (Coulibaly, et al., 2015; Piya, et al., 2012;
UNDP, 2007). Data normalization has been done using the following equation (Eq. 3.1).
𝑋𝑑 −𝑋𝑚𝑖𝑛
𝑋𝑑 = ......................................... Eq. 3.1
𝑋𝑚𝑎𝑥 −𝑋𝑚𝑖𝑛
Where,
Xd is an observed value in an array of observed values for a given variable;
Xmax is the highest value in the same array;
Xmin is the lowest value in the same array.
26
For the normalization of raster datasets in ArcMap 10.5, raster calculator was used which
is a widely used tool under Map Algebra of the Arc toolbox. For each raster dataset, the
following expression was used (Eq. 3.2);
(“x” - “x”.minimum)/(“x”.maximum – “x”.minimum) ........................ Eq. 3.2

Where,
x = Raster name.
All of the created normalized raster data are then stored in a new database for further
analysis.
3.5 Principal Component Analysis (PCA)
The principal component analysis is used by many scientific disciplines. PCA is a

statistical procedure that applies an orthogonal transformation in order to convert a set of
observations, which might be possibly correlated variables into linearly uncorrelated
variables called principal components. This transformation is conducted in such a way
that the first principal component has the largest possible variance, and each of the next
principal components has the highest variance possible following the constraint that it is
orthogonal to the preceding components. Finally, the resulting vectors produced by PCA
are an uncorrelated orthogonal basis set.
Mathematically, the PCA depends on the Eigenvector based multivariate analysis (Abdi
& Williams, 2010). The principal component analysis can be done by Eigenvalue
decomposition of a data covariance (or correlation) matrix or singular value
decomposition of a data matrix. The results of a PCA are usually presented in terms of
component scores, which is often known as factor scores (the transformed values of
variable related to a particular data point), and loadings (the weight used to multiply each
standardized original variable in order to get the component score) (Wold, et al., 1987).
Principal component analysis (PCA) of normalized raster datasets were performed using
the Arcpy, which returns a multi raster band (each band for each PC), and a text (“. asc”
or “.txt”) file containing PCA result. ArcPy is a Python site package that provides a useful
and productive way to perform geographic data analysis, data conversion, data
management, and map automation with Python. This package provides a rich and native
Python experience offering code completion and reference documentation for each
function, module, and class.
27
An exemplary script for PC analysis using Arcpy is given bellow,
>>> import arcpy

>>> from arcpy import env
>>> from arcpy.sa import *
>>> env.workspace = "C:/sapyexamples/data"
>>> outPrincipalComp = PrincipalComponents(["redlands"],4,
"pcdata.txt")
>>> outPrincipalComp.save("C:/sapyexamples/output/outpc01")
3.6 Aggregation (Weighted Average) of Indicators Based on PCs
In order to measure indicator-based vulnerability (profiles retrieved from PCA), the

normalized raster of a same profile or PC are aggregated after multiplication with their
respective unbiased weights (retrieved from PCA). Before aggregating, the indicators of
negative relations with vulnerability (according to Table 3.2) were inversed (1-noramal
value) using the following equation (Eq. 3.3) in raster calculator,
(1-“Xnormal”) ..................................................................... Eq. 3.3

Where,
Xnormal = normalized raster name
Indicators of the same profile were then aggregated using the following expression (Eq.
3.4) in the raster calculator,
(“X1” *W1 + “X2” *W2 + ...... + “Xn” *Wn) / (W1 + W2 + ...... + Wn) ........ Eq. 3.4
Where,
X = raster name
W = weight of raster X from PCA
3.7 Accumulation of Indicators to Assess Overall Vulnerability
The study uses the integrated assessment approach using indicator, which is one of the
most common methods, to analyze vulnerability. According to IPCC Fourth Assessment
Report vulnerability may be formulated as:
Vulnerability = Exposure + Sensitivity – Adaptive Capacity .............. Eq. 3.5

A higher adaptive capacity is associated with the lower vulnerability while a higher
exposure and sensitivity is associated with higher vulnerability.
However, before indexing the overall vulnerability of the country, indicators from
exposure, sensitivity and adaptive capacity according to Table 3.1, have been
28
accumulated after weighting. Unlike previous section, there is no need of inversing any
indicators. Exposure, Sensitivity and Adaptive capacity have been determined by
following the Eq. 3.4.
3.8 Classification of Raster
The cluster analysis encompasses a number of algorithms and methods to identify

structures within the data as a homogeneous group of cases. Cluster analysis has been
applied to a wide range of research problems (Anderberg, 2014; Duran & Odell, 2013;
Tan, et al., 2013). In this study, Jenks natural break is performed for the classification of
spatial vulnerability. The Jenks Natural Breaks Classification (or Optimization) system
is a data classification method designed to optimize the arrangement of a set of values
into "natural" classes. A Natural class is the most optimal class range found "naturally"
in a dataset. A class range is composed of items with similar characteristics that form a
"natural" group within a dataset (Dent, 1999). This classification method seeks to
minimize the average deviation from the class mean while maximizing the deviation
from the means of the other groups. The method reduces the variance within classes and
maximizes the variance between classes (Jenks, 1967). It is also known as the goodness
of variance fit (GVF), which equals the subtraction of SDCM (sum of squared deviations
for class means) from SDAM (sum of squared deviations for array mean) (ESRI, 2016;
Slocum, 1999).
3.9 Illustration of The Whole Research Work in Flow Diagram
To better understand the whole research, a flow chart can be very useful demonstration.
The processes involved in the present study are comprehensively illustrated in Figure
3.4. From the identification of research problem to the final output of the study is
precisely demonstrated in this figure. Nonetheless, this study has two different parts of
spatial vulnerability assessment, one is profile based vulnerability assessment and the
other is the overall vulnerability assessment. Figure 3.5 and Figure 3.6 shows the specific
procedures adopted in assessing the profile based and overall vulnerability respectively.
29
Figure 3.4: Flow diagram showing comprehensive theoretical framework for the entire
study.
30
Figure 3.5: Work flow diagram for profile (PCs) based vulnerability analysis in Python
and ArcGIS.
31
Figure 3.6: Work flow diagram form overall vulnerability assessment in Python and
ArcGIS
32
CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Assessment of vulnerability, according to the IPCC framework, requires two multivariate

statistical approaches before the aggregation of indicators. They are,
i) Normalization of indicators to reduce the heterogeneity of variance among

indicators; and
ii) Principal Component Analysis (PCA) to retain unbiased weights and to identify
sectoral vulnerability profiles.
All of the 42 indicators in raster form have been analyzed in Arcpy to retain multiband
raster layers of each principal components (PCs). A text file has also been produced from
which the PCA results have been visualized in charts.
On the other hand, the overall vulnerability assessment requires the accumulation of
indicators based on the sectors occupied by the basic three components of vulnerability
depicted in the AR4 of IPCC. Climatic variables and all extreme event’s risk maps have
been accumulated through weighted average to produce exposure map of the country.
Indicators of ecological, human and natural hazard shocks are weighted and accumulated
to sensitivity. All social, infrastructural, economic and information indicators have been
accumulated to produce adaptive capacity map.
4.1 Retention of Vulnerability Profile and Unbiased Weights of Indicators
4.1.1 Principal Component Analysis (PCA)

Principal component analysis has been conducted to reduce variable quantities into a
smaller number of variables-called principal components (PCs) as well as to provide the
useful information of original dataset as mentioned by Thompson (2004) and (Williams,
et al., 2012). A pairwise correlation matrix has been used in the PCA process visualizing
the relations between respective variables to reduce the initial matrix to a subset of non-
highly correlated metrics as described by Abson et al. (2012). The Cattell scree test
(Catell, 1966), in Figure 4.1, and Kaiser’s criterion with greater Eigenvalue (Kaiser,
1960), in Figure 4.2, have been performed to extract the number of principal components
(PCs). In this study 6 principal components have been retained which are tabulated in
Table 4.1. Figure 4.1 and Figure 4.2 demonstrating the cumulative percentage of variance
is 75 percent for 6 principal component (PCs) having greater Eigenvalues. Finally, three
components have been assembled to get the overall vulnerability map.
33
Figure 4.1: Scree plot for the percent of the Eigenvalue of the dataset. The 7th
component shows a different nature in the line which, according to Catell (1966),
indicates that the first six PCs (orange dots) are responsible for most of the variability.
Figure 4.2: Principal components with higher Eigenvalues, responsible for almost
75% of total variability. First six components are considered for weight and profile
retention according to Kaiser’s criterion (Kaiser 1960).
34
4.1.2 Vulnerability profiles and weights of indicators
In this study, 6 Principal Components (PCs) have been selected following Catell’s scree
test and Kaiser’s criterion which are tabulated in the following table (Table 4.1).
Considering highest Eigenvectors from each PC, the 6 vulnerability profiles have been
retained (Table 4.2). Unbiased weights have been found for each individual indicator
after carrying out PCA shown in Table 4.2 in which 6 vulnerability profile as Principal
Component 1 (PC1) to 6 (PC6) are tabulated. In table 4.1, the heaviest Eigenvectors have
been marked as bold shaded. Table 5 shows different types of vulnerabilities where 42
indicators have been arranged according to the highest value of PCA loadings.
The 6 groups are titled with heavily loaded indicators and termed them into vulnerability
profiles: PC1 as Meteorological Shift Vulnerability, PC2 as Extreme Climate
Vulnerability, PC3 as Water Related Vulnerability, PC4 as Socioeconomic Vulnerability,
PC5 as Infrastructural & Information Vulnerability, and PC6 as Hazard Shock
Vulnerability. The PC1 (Meteorological Shift Vulnerability) has been highly loaded by
6 indicators: Tornado affected households, Drought affected households, Drought risk
map, Maximum temperature coefficient, Minimum temperature coefficient, and
Precipitation coefficient. The PC2 (Extreme Climate Vulnerability) has been loaded for
8 indicators which are Hazard class map, Storm affected households, Salinity affected
households, Cyclone affected households, Tidal flood risk map, Sea level rise risk map,
Cyclone prone map and Salinity intrusion map. The PC3 (Water Related Vulnerability)
has been loaded for 7 indicators: Number of Tube well, Flood affected households,
drinking water availability, Erosion affected households, Erosion prone map, Flush flood
prone map and River flood map. The PC4 (Socioeconomic Vulnerability) has been
loaded for 9 indicators which are Disability, Population density, Fuelwood dependency,
Away population, Dependency ratio, Household numbers, Poverty, Literacy rate and
Female household heads. The PC5 (Infrastructural and Information Vulnerability) has
been loaded for 9 indicators which are Number of schools, Number of flood and cyclone
shelters, Length of road networks, Irrigation coverage, Number of Radios, Number of
Televisions, Number of Health service institute, Dependency on agriculture and
Electricity. The PC6 (Hazard Shock Vulnerability) has been loaded for 3 indicators:
Number of injured in natural hazard, Crop damage in natural hazard and Household
damage in natural hazard. These 6 PC groups of vulnerabilities have been used to assess
profile based spatial vulnerability all over the country.
35
Table 4.1: Selected PC layers with Eigenvectors. Shaded cells indicate highest
Eigenvectors which are the weights for the input layers.
Layer PC PC PC PC PC PC
Input Raster
No Layer 1 Layer 2 Layer 3 Layer 4 Layer 5 Layer 6
1 Storm affected HHs 0.110 0.155 0.028 -0.135 0.079 0.049
2 Tornado affected HHs 0.107 -0.055 0.096 0.020 0.042 0.057
3 Disability -0.005 0.040 -0.052 0.191 -0.056 0.121
4 Salinity affected HHs 0.051 0.980 0.006 -0.153 -0.046 0.032
5 Injury in NH 0.124 0.039 0.016 0.064 0.101 0.258
6 School -0.104 0.082 -0.060 -0.129 0.248 -0.002
7 Shelter 0.072 0.167 -0.150 0.085 0.207 -0.030
8 Tube well 0.098 -0.098 0.208 0.069 0.135 0.196
9 Crop damage in NH 0.132 -0.017 0.032 -0.080 0.100 0.336
10 Cyclone affected HHs 0.107 0.152 0.042 -0.095 0.001 0.089
11 Roads -0.101 0.123 -0.145 -0.139 0.146 0.037
12 Household damage in NH 0.071 0.121 0.085 -0.064 0.120 0.137
13 Irrigation 0.064 -0.157 -0.066 0.034 0.076 0.061
14 Flood affected HHs 0.057 -0.065 0.259 0.151 0.122 -0.011
15 Population density -0.002 -0.024 -0.141 0.043 -0.022 -0.017
16 Fuelwood dependency -0.113 -0.152 0.083 0.246 -0.018 -0.329
17 Away population -0.005 -0.102 -0.134 0.062 -0.111 0.009
18 Dependency 0.042 0.050 0.143 0.184 0.170 -0.367
19 Household 0.035 -0.029 -0.183 0.071 0.037 0.005
20 Poverty 0.069 -0.037 -0.162 0.185 0.135 -0.034
21 Radio -0.066 0.051 -0.054 -0.218 0.251 -0.085
22 Television -0.018 -0.051 -0.256 0.009 0.182 -0.004
23 Drinking water source 0.087 -0.280 0.229 -0.167 0.046 0.172
24 Health institute -0.023 -0.088 -0.143 -0.023 0.148 -0.014
25 Erosion affected HHs 0.114 0.032 0.388 0.063 -0.087 0.101
26 Literacy rate -0.203 0.081 -0.263 0.110 -0.167 0.061
27 Agriculture dependency -0.063 -0.037 0.020 0.011 0.352 0.123
28 Electricity -0.117 -0.070 -0.400 0.024 0.089 -0.033
29 Drought affected HHs 0.155 -0.067 0.103 0.072 0.104 0.008
30 Female HH head 0.090 0.012 -0.233 0.161 0.076 -0.259
31 Tidal Flood 0.157 0.456 0.136 0.152 -0.405 0.090
32 Sea Level Rise 0.263 0.342 -0.156 -0.182 0.054 -0.088
33 Drought 0.538 -0.073 -0.006 -0.098 -0.020 -0.076
34 Erosion 0.077 0.014 0.745 0.063 0.061 0.059
35 Flush Flood 0.176 -0.009 0.244 0.101 -0.202 -0.047
36 Hazard Class 0.196 0.279 0.013 0.151 0.179 0.079
37 Maximum Temperature 0.400 -0.233 -0.046 0.353 -0.052 0.107
38 Minimum Temperature 0.373 -0.210 0.129 -0.114 0.040 -0.161
39 Precipitation 0.388 -0.269 0.017 0.371 -0.004 0.199
40 River Flood 0.164 -0.100 0.369 0.303 -0.356 -0.005
41 Cyclone 0.115 0.362 -0.075 -0.074 0.108 -0.005
42 Salinity Intrusion -0.161 0.228 -0.047 -0.172 0.019 -0.136
36
Table 4.2: Retained vulnerability profile and unbiased weights of indicators.
Principal Retained
Indicators Vulnerability profile
Components weights
Tornado affected HHs 0.107
Drought affected HHs 0.155
Drought Meteorological Shift 0.538
PC 1
Maximum temperature Vulnerability 0.400
Minimum temperature 0.373
Precipitation 0.384
Hazard Class 0.279
Storm affected HHs 0.155
Salinity affected HHs 0.098
Cyclone affected HHs Extreme Climate 0.152
PC 2
Tidal Flood Vulnerability 0.456
Sea Level Rise 0.384
Cyclone 0.362
Salinity Intrusion 0.228
Tube well 0.208
Flood affected HHs 0.259
Drinking water source 0.229
Water Related
PC 3 Erosion affected HHs 0.388
Vulnerability
Erosion 0.745
Flush Flood 0.244
River Flood 0.369
Disability 0.191
Population density 0.043
Fuelwood dependency 0.246
Away population 0.062
Socioeconomic
PC 4 Dependency 0.184
Vulnerability
Household 0.071
Poverty 0.185
Literacy 0.110
Female HH head 0.161
School 0.243
Shelter 0.207
Roads 0.146
Irrigation 0.076
Infrastructural &
PC 5 Radio 0.251
Information Vulnerability
Television 0.182
Health institute 0.148
Agriculture dependency 0.352
Electricity 0.089
Injury in NH 0.258
Hazard Shock
PC 6 Crop damage in NH 0.336
Vulnerability
Household damage in NH 0.137
37
4.2 Profile Based Spatial Vulnerability
Following the principals from UNFCCC and IPCC frameworks for vulnerability
assessment, countrywide sector specific profile based vulnerability analysis has been
performed in this study following the methodology flow chart demonstrated in Figure
3.5.
4.2.1 Vulnerability due to meteorological shift

Important indicators like temperature and precipitation coefficient are component of this
vulnerability profile, which are vital to the phenomenon of climate change. Variability
in temperature and precipitation coefficient bring various types of meteorological
hazards like meteorological drought and tornado. Moreover, variability in temperature
directly causes various human health issues due to heat stress. The PC1 contains
indicators that are spatially variable keeping correspondence to the climatic sub regions
of Bangladesh such as temperature and rainfall. Drought risk map, drought affected
household and tornado affected households are also limited to certain regions making
PC1 completely matching the climatic sub regions of Bangladesh (Figure 4.3). It is
clearly visualized that all of the coastal regions, Chittagong hill tracts, northern part of
the north region and western region of the country is highly vulnerable to weather shift
or meteorological shift (Figure 4.3). On the other hand, mid-south region is mainly low
vulnerable to weather shift and meteorological variability, while, the north-eastern and
north-western regions are moderately vulnerable (Figure 4.3). Number of districts highly
vulnerable due to meteorological shift is 17, moderately vulnerable 21 and 26 districts
are low in vulnerability (Table 4.3).
4.2.2 Vulnerability due to extreme climatic events

The extreme climate vulnerability or PC2 is composed mainly of coastal events like
cyclone, tidal surge, sea level rise, salinity intrusion, etc. Coastal regions are readily very
much vulnerable to climate change due to the sensitivity of coastal ecosystem and it’s
depending community. However, from Figure 4.4, it’s obvious that the coastal regions
of the country are highly vulnerable due to climatic extreme events. Regions with lower
elevation are moderately vulnerable, whereas, only high lands are found to be less
vulnerable to extreme climatic events (Figure 4.4). The higher lands of Barind tract and
Madhupur tract, Sylhet and Chittagong hill tracts and a part of Himalayan piedmont
38
plains found to be less vulnerable (Figure 4.4). However, due to extreme climatic events
9 districts of the coastal Bangladesh are found highly vulnerable (Table 4.3).
Figure 4.3: Meteorological shift vulnerability (PC1). PC1 is the aggregation of tornado
and draught affected households for the year of 2009 to 2014; drought prone map; and
temperature and rainfall variability from 1960 to 2009.
39
Figure 4.4: Extreme climate vulnerability (PC2). This map consists of storm, salinity
and cyclone affected households from 2009 to 2014; hazard class map, tidal flood map,
cyclone risk map, salinity intrusion map and SLR risk map.
40
4.2.3 Water related vulnerability
Figure 4.5: Water related vulnerability (PC3). An aggregation of drinking water

source, tube well for the year of 2011; flood and erosion affected household from 2009
to 2014; and erosion, river flood and flush flood risk maps.
Water related vulnerability (PC5) is aggregated from all sort of water related stressors
and capacitators. The PC5 includes both river and flush flood, river erosion, drinking
41
water availability and tube well as its components. Therefore, it can be asserted that the
PC5 covers the water related vulnerability. However, from Figure 4.5 it is clear that flood
prone areas are mainly responsible for the water related vulnerability. Most of the country
is under moderate vulnerability while the Chittagong hill tracts are found to be in the less
vulnerable zone (Figure 4.5). Flood affected 8 districts from central Bangladesh have
been found to be highly vulnerable to water related vulnerability while 40 are moderate
and 16 districts with higher elevation are less vulnerable (Table 4.3).
Table 4.3: Classification of 64 districts according to different PCs

Principal Components Vulnerability Jenk's natural No of
(Vulnerability profile) level break Districts
Low 0.04-0.18 26
PC1 Moderate 0.18-0.38 21
Meteorological Shift
High 0.38-0.78 17
Low 0.83-0.33 28
PC2 Moderate 0.33-0.58 27
Extreme Climate
High 0.58-0.92 9
Low 0.02-0.29 16
PC3 Medium 0.29-0.47 40
Water Related
High 0.47-0.79 8
Low 0.17-0.51 31
PC4 Medium 0.51-0.62 19
Socio-economic
High 0.62-0.77 14
PC5 Low 0.43-0.56 15
Infrastructure & Medium 0.56-0.64 14
Information High 0.64-0.78 35
Low 0.0-0.15 41
PC6 Medium 0.15-0.33 16
Hazard Shock
High 0.33-0.65 7
4.2.4 Socioeconomic vulnerability

The socioeconomic vulnerability has been defined as greater economic distress in dealing
with economic resource and losses, arising out of economic openness. In this study PC4
is termed as socioeconomic vulnerability consisting of social indicators like, disability,
dependency, literacy, female household head etc. Economic indicators include poverty,
away population etc. According to the Figure 4.6, Dhaka, Chittagong and Rajshahi
regions are found to be less vulnerable. On the other hand, most portion of the country is
moderate to highly vulnerable to socioeconomic challenges. However, 14 districts hilly,
coastal and haor regions are found to be extremely vulnerable to socioeconomic
42
conditions (Table 4.3). Table 4.3 and Figure 4.6 also depict that the urbanized areas are
less vulnerable to climate change due to their better socioeconomic conditions.
Figure 4.6: Socio-Economic vulnerability (PC4). This profile is a result of aggregation

of 9 socioeconomic indicators from 2011.
43
4.2.5 Infrastructural and information vulnerability
Infrastructures plays a vital role in enhancing adaptive capacity for facing climate change
impacts. In this study, the infrastructural vulnerability along with information
vulnerability forms the PC5.
Figure 4.7: Infrastructural and information vulnerability (PC5). An aggregation of 9

indicators covering information and infrastructural indicators from the year of 2011.
44
Figure 4.8: Hazard shock vulnerability (PC6). An aggregation of injury, crop damage
and household destruction from 2009 to 2014.
However, mid to northern regions of the country are moderate to highly vulnerable
to infrastructural vulnerability (Figure 4.7). Regions with higher number of govt.
primary school, flood camp and cyclone shelter are mainly responsible for the
mitigation of infrastructural vulnerability. On the other hand, information vulnerability
depends mainly on the number of radio and television, which are very much available in
45
southern regions, which makes the less vulnerable. However, 35 districts are found
highly vulnerable for lack of infrastructure and information, while 14 and 15 districts are
found to be medium and low vulnerable respectively due to infrastructure and
information insufficiency (Table 4.3).
4.2.6 Hazard shock vulnerability

Bangladesh has been visited by frequent natural disasters which caused community to
react negatively. Previous losses and damages, both to life and properties, due to natural
disasters is a measure of sensitivity. In this study crop damage, household damage and
injury to human health are aggregated to measure the hazard shock vulnerability (PC6).
Hazard shock vulnerability is high in south west coastal region, central region and north
eastern region where households and crops are usually affected due to a variety of natural
disasters (Figure 4.8). The possible reason of south west region to be highly vulnerable
to hazard shock could be cyclone, salinity and sea level rise. On the other hand, the
central part possesses the higher vulnerability possibly due to flood, erosion and drought.
However, 41 districts are found to be less vulnerable hazard shock while 16 are
moderately vulnerable (Table 4.3).
4.3 Countrywide Overall Vulnerability
After the accomplishment of a countrywide profile based vulnerability assessment this

study also performed the overall vulnerability indexing of the country. According to the
IPCC’s fourth assessment report (AR4), vulnerability has three components, exposure,
sensitivity and adaptive capacity (). Here, all the three components have been indexed
though raster analysis following the Eq. 3.4 then Eq. 3.5. In the whole process of
vulnerability assessment, the procedures demonstrated in Figure 3.6 have been followed.
4.3.1 Exposure
Exposure is simply the climate variability or shift in climatic characters along with
occurrences in climate induced natural hazards. In Bangladesh, both of these sections of
indicators are evident. The temperature and precipitation variability, mapped before
according to their variability coefficient, is one of the major sectors of Exposure. On the
other hand, biophysical maps namely cyclone risk map, salinity map, drought prone map,
flood prone map, river and coastal erosion map, etc. are accumulated to get the overall
climate change exposure of the whole country.
46
Figure 4.9: Countrywide overall exposure to climate change.
The coastal region of Bangladesh is highly exposed to climate change since most of the
extreme climatic events occur in this region including tropical cyclones, storm surges,
sea level rise, salinity intrusion, etc. (Figure 4.9). Moreover, the variability in climatic
indicators, especially maximum temperature, is also proved to be high in variability
which also makes the coastal region of Bangladesh more exposed to climate change than
47
any other region. Beside coastal region, riverine areas all over the country are found
highly exposed to climate change probably due to river erosion and flooding.
Most of the floodplain areas and depressed haor areas are found moderately exposed to
climate change (Figure 4.9). Since the lower elevation of the country always carry a
significant level of flood proneness, it is possible that the exposure level is controlled by
the elevation. However, rest of the country especially the hilly areas, Barind tract,
Madhupur tract and palin areas are less exposed to climate change impacts and effects
(Figure 4.9).
4.3.2 Sensitivity
Sensitivity is the level of susceptibility of a region to climatic extreme events or
variability induced effects. Some socioeconomic indicators namely population density,
disability percentage, literacy of female population, etc. are considered to be controlling
factors of climate change sensitivity. Other than these socioeconomic indicators, there
are indicators familiar as hazard shock indicators, can be mingling of both biophysical
and socioeconomic characters. Household damage, crop damage, injury in previous
natural hazards are mainly three hazard shock indicators which are widely familiar.
Moreover, in the present study, number of households affected in previous natural
hazards namely tropical cyclone, storm surge, flood, river bank erosion, coastal erosion,
tornado, drought, salinity intrusion, etc. are also been considered as sensitivity inducing
indicators.
Most of the coastal region, part of the haor region, and the floodplain of the Brahmaputra
are found highly sensitive to climate change (Figure 4.10). Now, for the coastal region it
is possible that there are more records of previous damages to structures and loss of
wealth and lives which make this region more sensitive to climate change. Floods and
flush floods from the past have made the haor region highly sensitive. The Brahmaputra
floodplain is characteristic of river flood, erosion and meteorological drought. More over
tornado visits this region very frequently. Therefore, this region experienced much more
damages and destructions from those above mentioned hazards which make this region
highly sensitive to climate change.
Mainly the hilly region and different small part of the country are moderately sensitive
while northern and central part of the country are found less sensitive to climate change
impacts (Figure 4.10).
48
Figure 4.10: Sensitivity to climate change of Bangladesh.
4.3.3 Adaptive capacity

Adaptive capacity to climate change depends on infrastructural, information, human,
economic and ecological features of a country. Infrastructure includes roads, buildings
for shelters, health institutes, irrigation facility, drinking water facility, etc. Information
technology including radio and television access also contribute to enhance the adaptive
49
Figure 4.11: Adaptive capacity to climate change of Bangladesh.
capacity. Economic and human indicators include away population, household number,
poverty, female household head, etc. Nonetheless, the adaptive capacity is depicted to be
the image of a country’s development scenario. As Bangladesh is rapidly developing the
adaptive capacity of the country is also increasing. However, this study found most of
the country is very much adaptive only haor region and hilly region of Bandarbans are
less adaptive (Figure 4.11).
50
4.3.4 Vulnerability
Vulnerability is the function of exposure, sensitivity and adaptive capacity where
adaptive capacity is subtracted from the aggregation of exposure and sensitivity.
Figure 4.12: Overall vulnerability to climate change of Bangladesh.
All of the coastal region, most of the hilly region, riverine areas and the haor basin are
found highly vulnerable to climate change in this study (Figure 4.12). The coastal region
is characteristic of different extreme climatic events which make this region more
51
exposed (Figure 4.9) as well as highly sensitive (Figure 4.10) to climate change effects.
Though adaptive capacity is found quite good all over the country, the level of
vulnerability of coastal region is controlled by exposure and sensitivity.
The haor basin is moderate to highly exposed and sensitive to climate change (Figure 4.9
and Figure 4.10). However the lower level of adaptive capacity makes this region highly
vulnerable to climate change (Figure 4.12). Riverine areas are generally found highly
vulnerable probably due to flood and river bank erosion. Nevertheless, the Brahmaputra
river basin particularly have more highly vulnerable areas than other riverine areas
(Figure 4.12).
Upper parts of the Chittagong hilly region, outer Brahmaputra floodplain and most of the
Ganges flood plain are moderate to low vulnerable (Figure 4.12). Figure 4.9 and Figure
4.10 are depicting that lower level of exposure and sensitivity of these regions make them
moderate to low vulnerable, as adaptive capacity of this regions are moderate too (Figure
4.11).
Table 4.4: Classification of 64 districts according to vulnerability components
Jenk's natural No of
Index Level
break Districts
Low 0.04-0.23 22
Exposure Moderate 0.23-0.40 24
High 0.40-0.74 18
Low 0.06-0.22 26
Sensitivity Moderate 0.22-0.31 20
High 0.31-0.47 18
Low 0.34-0.39 16
Adaptive
Moderate 0.39-0.44 20
capacity
High 0.44-0.54 28
Low 0.0-0.02 26
Vulnerability Moderate 0.02-0.25 26
High 0.25-0.66 12
Concisely, a huge portion of the country is highly vulnerable to climate change due to its
geography as well as socioeconomic features, as the whole country is frequently visited
by various hazards and extreme events. Regions where vulnerability level is low are
mainly due to the socioeconomic development of the country.
52
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION
The present study findings eloquently express the climate change vulnerability for
different sectors. Meeting all the objectives, the study findings specifically have focused
on retention of unbiased weights for the indicators, identification of vulnerability profile
and finally aggregation of sector specific indicators to demonstrate a countrywide spatial
climate vulnerability.
Assessment of vulnerability to climate change has been introduced in a new and an

interesting way through considering countrywide spatial variation. All relevant raster
indicators have been incorporated in the IPCC framework to assess spatial vulnerability
to climate change for 6 different Principal Components (PCs), responsible for more than
72% of accumulative variability of the total dataset. Multivariate analysis in GIS
environment gave a variety of outcomes for each vulnerability profile. The PC1, which
is defined as the meteorological shift vulnerability, shows the south-eastern and western
climatic sub-region consisting of 17 district are highly vulnerable. The PC2, the extreme
climate vulnerability, shows the coastal region with its 9 districts are highly vulnerable.
Water related vulnerability (PC3) is high in riverine areas as well as in other wetlands
and comprises 8 districts. Socioeconomic vulnerability (PC4) is high in south and hilly
regions containing 35 districts. Most regions of the country are found moderate to less
vulnerable to infrastructure and information vulnerability (PC5). However, hazard shock
vulnerability (PC6) is high in south west coastal region, central region and north eastern
region, where households and crops are usually affected due to a variety of natural
disasters, consisting of 7 districts.
Coastal region, part of hilly region, riverine areas and the haor basin are found highly
vulnerable since these regions are more exposed as well as highly sensitive to climate
change effects. Though adaptive capacity is found quite good all over the country, the
level of vulnerability of coastal region is controlled by exposure and sensitivity. The haor
basin is moderate to highly exposed and sensitive to climate change, yet the lower level
of adaptive capacity makes this region highly vulnerable. Riverine areas are found highly
vulnerable probably due to flood and river bank erosion, especially the Brahmaputra river
basin found to be more vulnerable than other riverine areas. Upper parts of the Chittagong
hilly region, outer Brahmaputra floodplain and most of the Ganges flood plain are
53
moderate to low vulnerable; lower level of exposure and sensitivity of these regions make
them moderate to low vulnerable having moderate adaptive capacity.
Since there are different sectors of vulnerability which are dictating in different parts of
the country, forthcoming climate change impact mitigation and adaptation measures are
being proposed to be sector specific. The present study has been completed with a
comprehensive framework and a vigorous methodology, which presented the
countrywide vulnerability of climate change based on sectoral vulnerability profiles
(PCs), which would be proved a new source of ideas. Moreover, this study has also
identified the overall climate change vulnerability of the country. Exposure, sensitivity,
adaptive capacity and vulnerability hotspots have been identified based on a normalized
relative scale. However, the present study findings, which are mainly maps, have scopes
of being references for further studies. This study can also be an essential tool in
measures related to the adaptation and mitigation of climate change impacts from root
level to policymaking level.
This study has considered socioeconomic data back from 2011 from the Bangladesh
Population and Housing Census since countrywide socioeconomic data is only available
from BBS. Though the data is eight years old, it is accepted for the present study, which
is the main limitation of the study, because present data for the whole country is beyond
reach.
54
REFERENCE
Abdi, H. & Williams, L., 2010. Principal component analysis. Wiley Interdisciplinary
Reviews: Computational Statistics, 2(4), pp. 433-459.
Abson, D., Dougill, A. & Stringer, L., 2012. Using Principal Component Analysis for
information-rich socio-ecological vulnerability mapping in Southern Africa. Applied
Geography, pp. 1-10.
Acosta-Michilik, L. & Espaldon, V., 2008. Assessing vulnerability of selected farming

communities in the Philippines based on a behavioral model of agents’ adaptation to
global environmental change. Global Environmental Change , 18(4), pp. 554-563.
Adger, W., 2006. Vulnerability. Global Environmental Change, 16(3), pp. 268-281.
Ahmed, N., Occhipinti-Ambrogi, A. & Muir, J., 2013. The impact of climate change on
prawn postlarvae fishing in coastal Bangladesh: Socioeconomic and ecological
perspectives. Marine Policy, Volume 39, pp. 224-233.
Ahsan, M. & Warner, J., 2014. The socioeconomic vulnerability index: A pragmatic
approach for assessing climate change led risks–a case study in the south-western coastal
Bangladesh. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, Volume 8, pp. 32-39.
Alcamo, J. et al., 2007. A new assessment of climate change impacts on food production
shortfalls and water availability in Russia. Global Environmental Change, 17(3-4), pp.
429-444.
Anderberg, M., 2014. Cluster analysis for applications: Probability and mathematical
statistics: A series of monographs and textbooks. Utah: Academic press.
Armah, F. et al., 2010. Impact of Floods on Livelihoods and Vulnerability of Natural

Resource Dependent Communities in Northern Ghana. Water, 2(2), pp. 120-139.
Barbier, E., 2015. Cliamte change impacts on rural poverty in low-elevation coastal
zones. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, Volume 165, pp. A1-A13.
55
BARC, 2001. Flood risk map of Bangladesh. Dhaka: GIS division. Bangladesh
Agricultural Research Council.
Barker, T. et al., 2007. Technical Summary. In: Climate Change 2007: Mitigation.
Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New
York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press.
BBS, 2012. Bangladesh Population and Housing Census 2011: National Report,
Volume-4, Dhaka: Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics. Government of the People's Republic
of Bangladesh.
BBS, 2013. District Statistics 2011., Dhaka: Bangladesh Bureau of statistics.

Government of the People Republic of Bangladesh.
BBS, 2016. Bangladesh Disaster Related Statistics 2015: Climate Chanfe and Natural
Disaster Perspective, Dhaka: Bangladesh Bureau of statistics. Government of the People
Republic of Bangladesh.
BCAS, 2008. Climate Change: Responses BECAS. Dhaka: Center for Advanced Studies.
Ben Mohammad, A., 2011. Climate change risks in Sahelian Africa.. Regional
Environmental Change, 11(1), pp. 109-117.
Bjarnadottir, S., Li, Y. & Stewart, M., 2011. Social vulnerability index for coastal
communities at risk to hurricane hazard and a changing climate. Natural Hazards, 59(2),
pp. 1055-1075.
Blasius, J. & Greenacre, M., 2014. Visualization and verbalization of data. 1st ed. New
York: CRC Press.
BMD, 2013. Bangladesh Meteorological Department. Dhaka: s.n.
Brooks, N., 2003. Vulnerability, risk and adaptation: A conceptual framework, Norwich:
Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research. Working Paper 38.
56
Bro, R. & Smilde, A., 2014. Principal component analysis. Analytical Methods, 6(9), pp.
2812-2831.
Burton, I. et al., 2002. From impacts assessment to adaptation priorities: The shaping of
adaptation policy. Climate Policy, 2(2-3), pp. 145-159.
Bury, J. et al., 2011. Glacier recession and human vulnerability in the Yanamarey
watershed of the Cordillera Blanca, Peru. Climatic Change, 105(1-2), pp. 179-206.
BWDB, 2010. Annual Flood Report 2010. Dhaka: Bangladesh Water Development
Board.
Catell, R., 1966. The screen test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral
Research, 1(2), pp. 245-276.
CDMP, 2006. Component 4B of Comprehensive Disaster Management Programme.

Dhaka: Comprehensive Disaster Management Programme (CDMP).
CEGIS, 2006. Draft Final Report of Impact of Sea Level Rise on Land use Suitability
and Adaptation Options in Southwest region of Bangladesh, Dhaka: Center for
Environmental and Geographic Information Services (CEGIS).
Chang, L. & Huang, S., 2015. Assessing urban flooding vulnerability with an emergy
approach. Landscape and Urban Planning, Volume 143, pp. 11-24.
Chen, W., Cutter, S., Emrich, C. & Shi, P., 2013. Measuring social vulnerability to
natural hazards in the Yangtze River Delta region, China. International Journal of
Disaster Risk Science, 4(4), pp. 169-181.
Cinner, J. et al., 2013. Evaluating social and ecological vulnerability of coral reef
fisheries to climate change. PLOS One, 8(9).
Comer, P. et al., 2012. Climate Change Vulnerabilitty and Adaptaion Strategies for
Natural Communities: Piloting methods in t he Mojave and Sonoran desert, Arlington,
VA: Report to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. NatureServe.
57
Coulibaly, Y. et al., 2015. Mapping vulnerability to climate change in Malawi: Spatial
and social differentiation in the Shire river basin. American Journal of Climate Change,
4(3), p. 282.
Cutter, S. et al., 2008. A place-based model for understanding community resilience to

natural disasters. Global Environmental Change, 18(4), pp. 598-606.
Dasgupta, S. et al., 2010. Vulnerability of Bangladesh to cyclones in a changing climate,

potential damages and adaptation cost.. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper
5280.
Dasgupta, S. et al., 2014. Cyclones in a changing climate: The case of Bangladesh.

Climate & Development, 6(2), pp. 96-110.
Davies, R. & Midgeley, S., 2010. Risk and vulnerability mapping in southern Africa: A
hotspot analysis. Information for adaptation series.
Delpla, I. et al., 2014. A decision support system for drinking water production
integrating health risks assessment. International Journal of Environmental Research
and Public Health, 11(7), pp. 7354-7375.
Dent, B., 1999. Cartography: Thematic Map Design. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Deressa, T., Hassan, R. & Ringler, C., 2008. Measuring Ethiopian farmer's vulnerability
to climate chan ge across regional states, Washington D.C.: IFPRI.
Deressa, T., Hassan, R. & Ringler, C., 2009. Assessing household vulnerability to climate
change. The case of farmers in the nile basin of ethiopia, Washington DC: International
Food Policy Research Institute.: IFPRI Discussion Paper 00935.
Dewan, A., Yamguchi, Y. & Rahman, M., 2012. Dynamics of land use/cover changes
and the analysis of landscape fragmentation in Dhaka Metropolitan, Bangladesh.
Geojournal, 77(3), pp. 315-330.
DoE, 2012. Environmetnal outlook, Vol. 52, Dhaka: Department of Environment.

Government of the People's Republic of Bangladesh.
58
Duran, B. & Odell, P., 2013. Cluster analysis: A survey. Springer Science & Business
Media, Volume 100.
DW, 2018. Climate Risk Index: 2017 broke records for extreme weather. Environment:
Extreme Weather. Duetche Welle. [Online]
Available at: https://www.dw.com/en/climate-risk-index-2017-broke-records-for-
extreme-weather/a-46565140
[Accessed 7 March 2019].
Eakin, H. & Luers, A., 2006. Assessing the vulnerability of social-environmental

systems. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 31(1), p. 265.
Ericksen, P. et al., 2011. Mapping hotspots of climate change and food insecurity in the
global tropics. Climate Change Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS): Report 5.
Eriksen, S. & Silva, J., 2009. The vulnerability context of a savanna area in Mozambique:
household drought coping strategies and responses to economic change. Environmental
Science and Policy, 12(1), pp. 33-52.
ESRI, 2016. Technical Support: What is the Jenks optimization method?. [Online]
Available at: https://support.esri.com/en/technical-article/000006743
Fisher, B. et al., 2015. Health, wealth, and education: The socioeconomic backdrop for
marine conservation in the developing world. Marine Ecology Progress Series, Volume
530, pp. 233-242.
Fisher, M., Chaudhury, M. & McCusker, B., 2010. Do Forests Help Rural Households
Adapt to Climate Variability? Evidence from Southern Malawi. World Development ,
38(9), pp. 1241-1250.
Ford, J., 2009. Vulnerability of Inuit food systems to food insecurity as a consequence
of climate change: a case study from Igloolik, Nunavut. Regional Environmental
Change, 9(2), pp. 83-100.
59
Füssel, H. & Klein, R., 2006. Climate change vulnerability assessments: An evolution of
conceptual thinking. Climatic Change, 75(3), pp. 301-329.
Gallopin, G., 2003. A systemic synthesis of the relations between vulnerability, hazard,
exposure and impact, aimed at policy identification. Mexico, ECLAC, pp. 2-5.
Gallopín, G., 2006. Linkages between vulnerability, resilience, and adaptive capacity.
Global Environmental Change, 16(3), pp. 293-303.
Gerlitz, J. et al., 2015. An approach to measure vulnerability and adaptation to climate

change in the Hindu Kush Himalayas. In: Handbook of climate change adaptation. Berlin
Heidelberg: Springer, p. 151–176.
Germanwatch, 2017. GLOBAL CLIMATE RISK INDEX 2018: Who Suffers Most From
Extreme Weather Events?, Munich: Germanwatch e.V..
Ge, Y. et al., 2013. Assessment of social vulnerability to natural hazards in the Yangtze
River Delta, China. Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment, 27(8), pp.
1899-1908.
GIZ, 2014. The vulnerability sourcebook: Concept and guidelines standardised

vulnerability assessments. [Online]
Available at:
https://gc21.giz.de/ibt/var/app/wp342deP/1443/wpcontent/uploads/filebase/va/vulnerab
ility-guides-manualsreports/Vulnerability_Sourcebook_-
_Guidelines_for_Assessments_-_GIZ_2014.pdf
Glibert, P. M. et al., 2014. Vulnerability of coastal ecosystems to changes in harmful

algal bloom distribution in response to climate change: Projections based on model
analysis. Global Change Biology, 20(12), pp. 3845-3858.
Grubesic, T. & Matisziw, T., 2013. A typological framework for categorizing

infrastructure vulnerability. Geojournal, 78(2), pp. 287-301.
60
Guillard-Gonçalves, C., Cutter, S., Emrich, C. & Zêzere, J., 2015. Application of social
vulnerability index (SoVI) and delineation of natural risk zones in greater Lisbon.
Portugal. Journal of Risk Research, 18(5), pp. 651-674.
Hagenlocher, M., Delmelle, E., Casas, I. & Kienberger, S., 2013. Assessing
socioeconomic vulnerability to dengue fever in Cali, Colombia: Statistical vs expert-
based modeling. International Journal of Health Geographics, 12(1), pp. 1-10.
Hair, J. et al., 2006. Multivariate data analysis. New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Heltberg, R. & Bonch-Osmolovskiy, M., 2011. Mapping Vulnerability to Climate

Change. Washington, DC: The World Bank.
Hou, K., Li, X. & Zhang, J., 2015. GIS analysis of changes in ecological vulnerability
using a SPCA model in the loess plateau of Northern Shaanxi, China. International
Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 12(4), pp. 4292-4305.
Howden, S. et al., 2007. Adapting agriculture to climate change. Proceedings of the

National Academy of Sciences, 104(50).
Howe, C. et al., 2013. Elucidating the pathways between climate change, ecosystem
services and poverty alleviation. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 5(1),
p. 102–107.
Hulme, M., Osborn, T. & Johns, T., 1998. Precipitation sensitivity to global warming:
comparison of observations with HADCM2 simulations. Geophysical Research Letters,
Volume 25, p. 3379–3382.
Ibarraran, M., Malone, E. & Brenkert, A., 2008. Climate Chang e Vulnerability and
Resilience: Current Status and Trends for Mexico. Richland, Washington: Pacific
Northwest National Laboratory.
IPCC, 1996. Climate Change 1995. Impacts, Adaptation and Mitigation of Climate
Change: Scientific Technical Analyses, New York, USA; Melbourne, Australia:
Cambridge University Press.
61
IPCC, 2001. Climate change 2001: Impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. Contribution
of working group II to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
IPCC, 2007. Technical Summary of Climate Change2007: the physical scince basis.
Contributions of Working Group I to the fourth assessment report of the
Intergovernemtal Panale on Climate Change, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
IPCC, 2013. Climate Change 2013 the Physical Science Basis: Working Group I
Contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
IPCC, 2014. Summary for policymakers. In: Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation,
and Vulnerability. Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of Working Group
II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change,
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge; United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA:
Cambridge University Press.
IWFM, 2014. Impact of Climate Change on Rainfall Intensity in Bangladesh, Dhaka:

Institute of Water and Flood Management (IWFM). Bangladesh University of
Engineering and Technology (BUET).
Iyalomhe, F. et al., 2015. Regional Risk Assessment for climate change impacts on
coastal aquifers. The Science of the Total Environment, Volume 537, pp. 100-114.
Jenks, G., 1967. The Data Model Concept in Statistical Mapping. International Yearbook
of Cartography , Volume 7, pp. 186-190.
Jolliffe, I., 2002. Principal component analysis. New York: Wiley & Sons.
Jones, P., 2001. Instrumental temperature change in the context of the last 1000 years.
In: Brunet M, Lo’pez D (eds) Detecting and modelling regional climate change. New
York, Springer.
62
Jones, P. & Moberg, A., 2003. A hemisphere and large-scale surface air temperature
variations: an extensive revision and an update to 2001. Journal of Climate, Volume 16,
pp. 206-223.
Kaiser, H., 1960. The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educational
and psychological measurement, 20(1), p. 141.
Kang, H., Xuxiang, L. & Jing, Z., 2015. GIS analysis of changes in ecological
vulnerability using a SPCA model in the loess plateau of Northern Shaanxi, China.
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 12(4), pp. 4292-
4305.
Kelkar, U., Narula, K., Sharma, V. & Chandna, U., 2008. Vulnerability and adaptation
to climate variability and water stress in Uttarakhand State, India. Global Environmental
Change , 18(4), pp. 564-574.
Kelly, P. & Adger, W., 2000. Theory and practice in assessing vulnerability to climate
change and facilitating adaptation. Climate Change, Volume 47, pp. 325-352.
Kerr, R., 2009. Galloping Glaciers of Greenland Have Reined Themselves In. Science,
323(5913), p. 458.
Kline, P., 2014. An easy guide to factor analysis. New Delhi: Routledge.
Knutsson, P. & Ostwald, M., 2006. A Process-Oriented Sustainable Livelihoods

Approach. A Tool for Increased Understanding of Vulnerability, Adaptation and
Resilience. In: Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change. s.l., Springer.
Krishnamurthy, K., Fisher, J. & Jhonson, C., 2011. Mainstreaming local perceptions of
hurricane risk into policymaking: A case study of community GIS in Mexico. Global
Enviromental Changes, 21(1), pp. 143-153.
Lal, P., Alavalapati, J. & Mercer, E., 2011. Socio-economic impacts of climate change
on rural United States. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 16(7),
pp. 819-844.
63
Ledesma, R. & Valero-Mora, P., 2007. Determining the number of factors to retain in
EFA: An easy-to-use computer program for carrying out parallel analysis. Practical
Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 12(2), pp. 1-11.
Liu, J. et al., 2008. A spatially explicit assessment of current and future hotspots of
hunger in Sub-Saharan Africa in the context of global change. Global and Planetary
Change, 64(3), pp. 222-235.
Lorentzen, T., 2014. Statistical analysis of temperature data sampled at Station-M in the
Norwegian Sea. Journal of Marine System, Volume 130, pp. 31-45.
Manuel-Navarrete, D., Pelling, M. & Redclift, M., 2011. Critical adaptation to hurricanes
in the Mexican Caribbean: Development visions, governance structures, and coping
strategies. Global Environmental Change , 21(1), pp. 249-258.
Marin, A., 2010. Riders under storms: Contributions of nomadic herders’ observations
to analyzing climate change in Mongolia. Global Environmental Change, Volume 20,
pp. 162-176.
McInnes, K., Macadam, I., Hubbert, G. & O'Grady, J., 2013. An assessment of current
and future vulnerability to coastal inundation due to sea‐level extremes in Victoria,
southeast Australia. International Journal of Climatology, 33(1), pp. 33-47.
Metzger, M. & Schröter, D., 2006. Towards a spatially explicit and quantitative
vulnerability assessment of environmental change in Europe. Regional Environmental
Change, 6(4 ), p. 201–216.
Miller, S., 2014. Indicators of social vulnerability in fishing communities along the west
coast region of the US.. New York: s.n.
Mimura, N., 1999. Vulnerability of island countries in the South Pacific to sea level rise
and climate change. Climate Research, 12(1-2), pp. 137-143.
Moser, S. & Davidson, M., 2015. ). The third national climate assessment's coastal
chapter: The making of an integrated assessment. Climate Change, pp. 1-15.
64
Neuman, J. et al., 2015. Risk of coastal storm surge and the sea level rise in the red river
delta, Vietnam. Sustainability, 7(6), pp. 6553-6572.
Nick, F., Vieli, A., Howat, I. & Joughin, I., 2009. Large scale changes in Greenland outlet
glacier dynamics triggered at the terminus. National Geoscience, Volume 2, pp. 110-114.
Okey, T., Alidina, H. & Agbayani, S., 2015. Mapping ecological vulnerability to recent
climate change in Canada's Pacific marine ecosystems. Ocean & Coastal Management,
Volume 106, pp. 35-48.
Pagano, A. et al., 2014. A Bayesian vulnerability assessment tool for drinking water
mains under extreme events. Natural Hazards, 74(3), pp. 2193-2227.
Piya, L., Maharjan, K. & Joshi, N., 2012. Vulnerability of rural households to climate
change and extremes: Analysis of Chepang households in the Mid-Hills of Nepal.
Selected paper prepared for presentation at the international association of agricultural
economics (IAAE) triennial conference. Brazil: Foz do Iguacu , s.n.
Plummer, R., de Grosbois, D., Armitage, D. & de Loë, R., 2013. An integrative
assessment of water vulnerability in First Nation communities in Southern Ontario,
Canada. Global Environmental Change, 23(4), pp. 749-763.
Preston, B. & Stafford-Smith, M., 2009. CAF Working Paper 2: Framing vulnerability
and adaptive capacity assessment: Discussion paper, s.l.: CSIRO Climate Adaptation.
Quackenbush, J., 2002. Microarray data normalization and transformation. Nature

Genetics, Volume 32, pp. 496-501.
Rahman, M. & Lateh, H., 2017. Climate change in Bangladesh: a spatio-temporal

analysis and simulation of recent temperature and rainfall data using GIS and time series
analysis model. Theoritical and Applied Climatology, 128(27).
Rashid, H., 1991. Geography of Bangladesh. 2nd ed. Dhaka: University Press Ltd.
Rawlani, A. & Sovacool, B., 2011. Building responsiveness to climate change through
community based adaptation in Bangladesh. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for
Global Change, 16(8), pp. 845-863.
65
Rencher, A., 2002. Principal component analysis. Methods of multivariate analysis. 2nd
ed. New York: Wiley & Sons.
Rodrı′guez-Puebla, C., Encinas, A., Nieto, S. & Garmendia, J., 1998. Spatial and
temporal patterns of annual precipitation variability over the Iberian Peninsula.
International Journal of Climatology, Volume 18, pp. 299-316.
Roudier, P., Sultan, B., Quirion, P. & Berg, A., 2011. The impact of future climate change
on West African crop yields: What does the recent literature say?. Global Environmental
Change, 21(3), pp. 1073-1083.
Roy, D. & Blaschke, T., 2015. Spatial vulnerability assessment of floods in the coastal
regions of Bangladesh. Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk, 6(1), pp. 21-44.
Ruane, A. et al., 2013. Multi-factor impact analysis of agricultural production in

Bangladesh with climate change. Global Environmental Change, 23(1), p. 338–350.
Salinger, M., Sivakumar, M. & Motha, R., 2005. Reducing vulnerability of agriculture
and forestry to climate variability and change: Workshop summary and
recommendations.. Climatic Change, 70(1-2), pp. 341-362.
Sarkar, R. & Vogt, J., 2015. Drinking water vulnerability in rural coastal areas of
Bangladesh during and after natural extreme events. International Journal of Disaster
Risk Reduction, Volume 14, pp. 411-423.
Schiavinato, L. & Payne, H., 2015. Mapping coastal risks and social vulnerability:
Current tools and legal risks. North Carolina : Springer.
Schwarz, A. et al., 2011. Vulnerability and resilience of remote rural communities to

shocks and global changes: Empirical analysis from Solomon Islands. Global
Environmental Change, 21(3), pp. 1128-1140.
SEI, 2004. Choosing methods in assessments of vulnerable food systems, Stockholm:

Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI) Briefing Note.
Seidl, R., Rammer, W. & Lexer, M., 2011. Climate change vulnerability of sustainable
forest management in the Eastern Alps. Climatic Change, 106(2), pp. 225-254.
66
Shaw, J., 2015. Vulnerability to climate change adaptation in rural Bangladesh. Climate
Policy, 15(3), pp. 410-412.
Singh, S. & Vedwan, N., 2015. Mapping composite vulnerability to groundwater arsenic
contamination: An analytical framework and a case study in India. Natural Hazards,
75(2), pp. 1883-1908.
Slocum, T., 1999. Thematic Cartography and Visualization. New York: Prentice-Hall.
SRDI, 2010. Salinity risk map of Bangladesh. Dhaka: Soil Resource Development
Institute (SRDI).
Stelzenmüller, V., Ellis, J. & Rogers, S., 2010. Towards a spatially explicit risk
assessment for marine management: Assessing the vulnerability of fish to aggregate
extraction. Biological Conservation, 143(1), pp. 230-238.
Strand, L., Tong, S., Aird, R. & McRae, D., 2010. Vulnerability of eco-environmental
health to climate change: the views of government stakeholders and other specialists in
Queensland, Australia. BMC Public Health, Volume 10, pp. 441-450.
Tang, H. et al., 2013. Vulnerability of population and transportation infrastructure at the

east bank of Delaware Bay due to coastal flooding in sea-level rise conditions. Natural
Hazards, 69(1), pp. 141-163.
Tan, P., Steinbach, M. & Kumar, V., 2013. Data mining cluster analysis: Basic concepts
and algorithms.. In: Introduction to Data Mining. New York: Pearson.
Thatcher, C. A. B. J. C. &. P. E. A., 2013. Economic vulnerability to sealevel rise along

the northern US Gulf coast. Journal of Coastal Research, 63(sp 1), pp. 234-243.
The Washington Post, 2015. The countries most vulnerable to climate change, in 3 maps.
Climate and Environmetn. The Washinton Post. [Online]
Available at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-
environment/wp/2015/02/03/the-countries-most-vulnerable-to-climate-change-in-3-
maps/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.3fb7e3aa57b2
67
Thompson, B., 2004. Exploratory comfirmatory factor analysis: Understanding
concepts and applications. New York: American Psychological Association (APA).
Toni, F. & Holanda, E., 2004. The effects of land tenure on vulnerability to droughts in
North eastern Brazil. Global Environmental Change, 18(4), pp. 575-582.
Uddin, M. et al., 2018. Mapping of climate vulnerability of the coastal region of

Bangladesh using principal component analysis. Applied Geography, 120(2019), pp. 47-
57.
UNDP, 2007. Human development report 2007/2008: Fighting climate change: Human
solidarity in a divided world, London: Oxford University Press.
UNFCCC, 2008. Compendium on methods and tools to evaluate impacts of, and
vulnerability and adaptation to climate change. UNFCCC Secretariat. [Online]
Available at:
http://unfccc.int/files/adaptation/nairobi_workprogramme/compendium_on_methods_t
ools/application/pdf
UNICEF, 2016. Learning to Live in a Changing Climate: The Impact of Climate Change
on Children in Bangladesh, Dhaka: United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF)
Bangladesh.
Wang, J., 2010. Food Security, Food Prices and Climate Change in China: a Dynamic
Panel Data Analysis. Agriculture and Agricultural Science Procedia , Volume 1, pp. 321-
324.
Williams, B., Brown, T. & Onsman, A., 2012. Exploratory factor analysis: A five-step
guide for novices. Australian Journal of Paramedicine, 8(3), p. 1.
Williams, B., Onsman, A. & Brown, T., 2010. Exploratory factor analysis: A five-step
guide for novices. Australasian Journal of Paramedicine, 8(3).
Wold, S., Esbensen, K. & Geladi, P., 1987. Principal component analysis. Chemometrics
and Intelligent Laboratory Systems, 2(1-3), pp. 37-52.
68
Yeater, K., Duke, S. & Riedell, W., 2015. Multivariate analysis: Greater insights into
complex systems. Agronomy Journal, 107(2), pp. 799-810.
Yohe, G. & Tol, R., 2002. Indicators for social and economic coping capacity-moving
toward a working definition of adaptive capacity. Global Environmental Change, 12(1),
pp. 25-40.
Yoo, G., Hwang, J. & Choi, C., 2011. Development and application of a methodology
for vulnerability assessment of climate change in coastal cities. Ocean and Coastal
Management , 54(7), pp. 524-534.
Yoon, D., 2012. Assessment of social vulnerability to natural disasters: A comparative

study. Natural Hazards, 63(2), pp. 823-843.
Yu, B. & Neil, D., 1993. Long-term variations in regional rainfall in the south-west of
Western Australia and the difference between average and high intensity rainfalls.
International Journal Cliamtology, Volume 13, pp. 77-88.
Yusuf, A. & Francisco, H., 2009. Climate change vulnerability mapping for Southeast
Asia, Singapore: Economy and Environment Program for Southeast Asia (EEPSEA).
Zhu, Q. et al., 2014. The spatial distribution of health vulnerability to heat waves in
Guangdong Province, China. Global Health Action, Volume 7.
69
APPENDICES
Appendix 1: Stand-alone Script for PCA in Python Window
The following script performed Principal Component Analysis (PCA) on an input

multiband raster and generated a multiband raster output in the present study.
# Name: PrincipalComponents.py
# Description: Performs principal components analysis on
a set of raster bands.
# Requirements: Spatial Analyst Extension
# Import system modules

import arcpy
from arcpy import env
from arcpy.sa import *
# Set environment settings

env.workspace = "D:/PC/Normalized.gdb"
# Set local variables

inRasterBand1="Normalized.gdb/ShockStormT"
inRasterBand2="Normalized.gdb/ShockTornado"
inRasterBand3="Normalized.gdb/SocialDisability"
inRasterBand4="Normalized.gdb/ShockSalinity"
inRasterBand5="Normalized.gdb/ShockInjury"
inRasterBand6="Normalized.gdb/InfrusSchool"
inRasterBand7="Normalized.gdb/InfrusShelter"
inRasterBand8="Normalized.gdb/InfrusTubewell"
inRasterBand9="Normalized.gdb/ShockCrop"
inRasterBand10="Normalized.gdb/ShockCyclone"
inRasterBand11="Normalized.gdb/InfrusRoads"
inRasterBand12="Normalized.gdb/ShockHouseH"
inRasterBand13="Normalized.gdb/InfrusIrrigation"
inRasterBand14="Normalized.gdb/ShockFlood"
inRasterBand15="Normalized.gdb/SocialPopulation"
inRasterBand16="Normalized.gdb/EcologicalFuelwood"
inRasterBand17="Normalized.gdb/EconomicAwayPop"
inRasterBand18="Normalized.gdb/EconomicDependency"
inRasterBand19="Normalized.gdb/EconomicHousehold"
inRasterBand20="Normalized.gdb/EconomicPoverty"
inRasterBand21="Normalized.gdb/InformRadio"
70
inRasterBand22="Normalized.gdb/InformTelevision"
inRasterBand23="Normalized.gdb/InfrusDrinkingW"
inRasterBand24="Normalized.gdb/InfrusHealthI"
inRasterBand25="Normalized.gdb/ShockErosion"
inRasterBand26="Normalized.gdb/SocialLiteracy"
inRasterBand27="Normalized.gdb/EcologicalAgriculture"
inRasterBand28="Normalized.gdb/InfrusElectricity"
inRasterBand29="Normalized.gdb/ShockDrought"
inRasterBand30="Normalized.gdb/SocialFemaleHHH"
inRasterBand31="Normalized.gdb/TidalFlood"
inRasterBand32="Normalized.gdb/SeaLevelRise"
inRasterBand33="Normalized.gdb/Drought"
inRasterBand34="Normalized.gdb/Erosion"
inRasterBand35="Normalized.gdb/FlushFlood"
inRasterBand36="Normalized.gdb/HazardClass"
inRasterBand37="Normalized.gdb/MaxTemperature"
inRasterBand38="Normalized.gdb/MinTemperature"
inRasterBand39="Normalized.gdb/Precipitation"
inRasterBand40="Normalized.gdb/RiverFlood"
inRasterBand41="Normalized.gdb/Cyclone"
inRasterBand42="Normalized.gdb/SalinityIntrusion"
numberComponents = 42
outDataFile = "D:/PC/output/pc1.txt"
# Check out the ArcGIS Spatial Analyst extension license

arcpy.checkOutExtension("Spatial")
# Execute PrincipalComponents
outPrincipalComp = PrincipalComponents([inRasterBand1,
inRasterBand42], 42, outDataFile)
# Save the output

outPrincipalComp.save("D:/PC/output/outpc01")
71
Appendix 2: Data (Socioeconomic) Table Extracted from BBS
Socioeconomic data table: Part 1
Primary employment:
Population Density
Disable Population
Female Household
Poverty headcount
Tornado Affected
Drought Affected
Cyclone Affected
Agriculture (%)
Fuel Wood Use
Storm Affected
Flood Affected
people/sq.km
Crop damage
Erosion
Salinity
percent
Head
HH
HH
HH
HH
HH
HH
HH
District
Barisal 90 13239 22220 3939 77711 12000 0 878.5676 1.3 11.3 54.8 72.5 51.32 6076
Jhalokati 4122 6517 66370 578 583 8434 0 812.4691 1.9 13.9 40.5 83.5 47.50 6722
Pirojpur 35 11 56840 46 35520 4729 104 764.5931 2 9.6 44.1 88.8 51.16 1451
Bhola 218 8347 149299 1218 54808 2378 0 854.8047 1.5 6.1 33.2 78.9 67.40 484
Barguna 409 698 130854 1046 36699 932 6839 564.8753 2.1 8.5 19 67.5 64.17 171
Patuakhali 6649 14087 215118 621 52468 7111 0 546.8935 1.6 6.2 25.8 68 61.60 258
Bandarban 302 3002 0 2 0 106 0 72.07235 1.4 6.8 40.1 97 71.27 149
Chittagong 1644 24906 22729 436 13502 18776 7579 1454.354 1.3 18.5 11.5 56 17.55 3225
Cox's Bazar 0 17834 3263 953 6713 1290 3004 900.6564 1.5 14.3 32.7 76.5 49.07 356
Brahmanbaria 229 2395 0 3070 0 13 0 1242.906 1.2 21.6 30 22.5 53.01 3
Chandpur 8809 34218 22989 735 10011 2080 46 1319.479 1.9 21.2 51 47.7 51.36 0
Comilla 7924 3297 0 1829 0 177 0 1449.408 1.3 22.2 37.9 32.2 46.69 6
Khagrachari 7124 53 0 36 0 406 0 189.0426 1.6 8.9 25.5 94.2 66.88 15
Feni 6021 46635 12551 11 1420 1351 4988 1379.934 1.3 27.1 25.9 42.8 30.51 165
Lakshmipur 21 4631 9450 536 2936 4972 0 1240.132 1.3 20.4 31.2 70.4 54.37 3856
Noakhali 13208 804 62326 157 23590 994 7200 970.1482 1.4 21.5 9.6 49.5 45.75 96
72
Rangamati 387 106 0 0 0 0 0 88.76153 1.8 6 20.3 91.6 66.13 0
Dhaka 2747 3350 0 470 0 2108 0 6663.458 0.8 11.6 15.7 11.9 4.20 422
Gazipur 8272 6340 0 1226 0 88 0 1694.211 0.9 9.3 19.4 35.9 16.04 11
Manikganj 6169 20339 0 6 0 1233 0 850.4739 1.5 13.8 18.5 6 60.32 479
Munshiganj 2299 2403 0 243 0 1592 0 1299.55 1.5 20.6 28.7 50.3 41.10 253
Narayanganj 1832 2779 0 10 0 116 0 3186.756 0.9 12.1 26.1 27.9 9.58 32
Narshingdi 1876 844 0 9 0 453 0 1598.734 1.2 15.8 23.7 29.2 35.68 125
Rajbari 3989 6483 0 1152 0 4810 0 5943.112 1.6 7.5 41.9 11 61.21 3702
Faridpur 3864 12760 0 2699 0 4550 0 778.9284 1.6 10.9 36.3 8.1 58.48 2087
Gopalganj 23228 11575 0 0 0 948 0 642.0368 1.4 9.8 42.7 34.7 65.39 577
Madaripur 51470 35260 0 0 0 453 0 882.7783 1.3 9.9 34.9 39.7 59.35 281
Rajbari 3989 6483 0 1152 0 4810 0 903.8054 1.6 7.5 41.9 11 61.21 3702
Shariatpur 28770 45084 0 924 0 10247 0 751.5247 1.3 15.2 52.6 23.4 61.32 12647
Jamalpur 22920 108717 0 2669 0 11597 0 911.943 1.3 12 51.1 23.5 69.51 6131
Sherpur 1489 11566 0 6 0 3238 0 842.344 1.6 10.3 48.4 44.6 69.56 3262
Kishoreganj 5842 15546 0 215 0 1303 0 961.1953 1.6 13.3 30.3 27.2 60.29 0
Mymensingh 2696 51502 0 17671 0 2739 0 987.6841 1.4 10.7 50.5 54.5 58.58 942
Netrakona 16993 73701 0 7768 0 627 0 641.0496 1.5 11 35.3 41 74.92 134
Tangail 866 75217 0 1059 0 13759 0 869.2241 1.4 12.6 29.7 22 55.67 11322
Jessore 14611 2315 0 9 0 114 0 924.6996 1.3 9.9 39 52.4 54.35 785
Jhenaidah 1733 294 0 7764 0 424 0 754.5675 1.6 7.1 24.7 18.9 66.63 110
Magura 758 1345 0 6 0 2316 0 742.038 1.2 9.6 45.4 16.3 65.98 1027
Narail 1425 6158 0 0 0 4477 0 633.6912 1.6 13.4 20 25.3 65.71 1446
Bagerhat 21332 2577 35843 6955 46301 560 91476 412.1698 1.7 10.2 42.8 80.1 56.32 7651
Khulna 4485 155 102640 1443 842 1551 31532 565.9214 1.7 8.2 38.8 67.5 39.91 7762
Pirojpur 35 11 56840 46 35520 4729 104 1838.171 2 9.6 44.1 88.8 51.16 1451
Satkhira 2554 30724 16916 953 14160 13096 25753 506.7797 1.7 7.2 46.3 49.9 66.66 30
73
Chuadanga 4258 401 0 136 0 29 0 818.8391 1.7 6 27.7 21 66.03 1
Kushtia 3852 7398 0 260 0 5191 0 939.6589 1.4 8.2 3.6 20.7 57.19 3896
Meherpur 7205 33 0 21 0 5 0 739.3112 1.7 9.2 15.2 12 71.75 0
Bogra 24827 78332 0 67 0 2025 575 966.4458 1.5 8.9 16.6 14.5 60.15 1426
Joypurhat 3608 1957 0 0 0 0 0 780.6207 1.5 8.6 26.7 8.4 69.45 0
Dinajpur 20878 6264 0 5768 0 267 0 702.0071 1.5 7.9 37.9 14.5 63.80 41
Panchagarh 1908 2256 0 5047 0 185 0 573.5372 1.6 6.3 26.7 14.4 65.26 9
Thakurgaon 1760 5026 0 20460 0 124 0 619.294 1.6 6.7 27 9.1 69.79 71
Pabna 6334 10454 0 4284 0 2825 0 872.4152 1.3 8.5 31.5 11.9 57.00 2705
Sirajganj 3629 122416 0 34371 0 11457 0 1062.845 1.6 7.4 38.7 11.4 51.36 10666
Naogaon 58859 43860 0 158 0 1564 0 619.0174 1.6 9.6 16.9 5.5 73.66 1068
Natore 53031 25457 0 6561 0 374 0 739.6835 1.6 7.4 35.1 13 70.57 136
Nawabganj 3867 12254 0 674 0 2457 0 788.1465 1.5 12.1 25.3 13.1 64.49 2735
Rajshahi 1647 2728 0 0 0 97 0 897.967 1.6 9.1 31.4 11.5 63.02 114
Gaibandha 21832 68237 0 1899 0 7446 0 896.1615 2 13.2 48 17.1 70.64 3859
Kurigram 33610 84281 0 12124 0 16117 0 742.4582 1.5 10.9 63.7 42.5 72.18 6899
Lalmonirhat 8435 13912 0 841 0 2024 0 832.9573 1.7 8.7 34.5 44.9 72.90 894
Nilphamari 17029 5108 0 0 0 1369 0 884.081 1.5 7.3 34.8 31.4 68.85 685
Rangpur 11750 18834 0 13969 0 6014 0 999.9301 1.5 9.9 46.2 36 63.05 1924
Habiganj 1302 4357 0 9 0 228 0 681.8074 1.5 13.3 25.3 33.3 64.48 10
Maulvibazar 6357 17727 0 49 0 1591 0 588.4098 1.5 16 25.7 82.4 49.77 92
Sunamganj 45316 199597 0 4605 0 3337 0 552.3525 1.6 9.8 26 20.3 72.98 2598
Sylhet 14678 65038 0 649 0 2828 0 815.1651 1.5 15 24.1 64.8 38.09 400
74
Socioeconomic data table: Part 2
Irrigated Area percent of

Health Service Capacity
No of Schools per 1000
Drinking Water Within
Radio per 1000 people

Electricity Connection
Road Network km per
Flood Camp/ Cyclone
Households with tube

200m of dwellings %
Away Population per

Dependency percent
Television per 1000

Household damage
well water percent
No of Household
per 1000 people
No of Injured
Literacy Rate
1000 people
1000 people
percent HH
agriculture
Shelter
people
people
District
Barisal 1412.55 190 61.36 41.69 0.65 0.72 3.88 287 49 35.7 76.4 93.90 513760 20.45 28.43 194.42
Jhalokati 1098.77 381 67.70 41.13 0.83 0.44 4.53 15 48.8 8.3 84.7 93.61 157480 19.55 74.18 344.43
Pirojpur 1281.72 306 65.41 40.36 0.86 0.49 3.70 177 41.8 12.1 69.9 74.63 256100 19.82 60.80 321.78
Bhola 3857.43 1238 41.79 45.32 0.53 0.36 1.90 355 27.3 58 75.1 96.16 372760 2.09 32.50 163.36
Barguna 2573.11 1215 57.23 40.00 0.81 0.45 5.32 157 17.1 7.5 72.3 86.47 215860 186.02 105.93 278.03
Patuakhali 5647.95 960 52.93 41.89 0.77 0.51 4.45 518 23.2 3 67.8 96.84 346580 8.74 35.34 232.32
Bandarban 80.83 80 32.82 42.48 0.87 0.83 4.05 0 16.2 30 68.5 40.70 80100 26.45 41.35 189.07
Chittagong 673.28 1730 60.86 37.88 0.31 1.11 1.35 715 81.9 30 91.7 71.18 1531600 32.16 28.11 569.94
Cox's Bazar 991.94 326 38.25 46.46 0.29 0.42 1.81 470 35.8 64.1 91.8 88.29 416060 12.89 14.02 204.71
Brahmanbaria 320.17 1461 44.02 47.33 0.37 0.36 1.11 16 75.3 10.4 96.8 93.64 538920 11.72 21.86 415.45
Chandpur 575.22 635 56.06 43.08 0.48 0.44 2.19 100 50.2 86 84.8 88.31 506620 17.44 58.79 297.96
Comilla 453.68 62 53.22 43.93 0.37 0.67 1.90 13 76.7 54.4 94.1 89.26 1053440 9.97 19.86 446.24
Khagrachari 103.5 19 43.73 42.63 0.71 0.43 5.54 0 23.4 39.4 73.6 67.32 133780 14.59 63.22 372.91
Feni 612.06 332 61.17 40.77 0.37 0.42 2.42 86 78.9 39.2 91.4 90.14 277620 24.20 18.15 410.42
Lakshmipur 535.35 444 49.53 44.52 0.42 0.26 3.48 127 49.9 46 85.8 87.94 365360 8.79 18.28 285.21
Noakhali 2038.08 760 53.59 45.41 0.39 0.42 2.68 281 50.5 28.5 82.8 88.63 593920 8.71 18.21 324.71
Rangamati 18.38 7 46.64 39.22 1.04 0.64 4.47 1 26.4 16 70 38.63 128500 18.28 68.43 372.36
75
Dhaka 60.2 14 72.99 29.60 0.09 2.27 0.56 12 97.6 100 98 31.14 2785220 146.25 72.39 704.40
Gazipur 78.64 1 63.78 31.48 0.22 0.40 1.50 28 87.4 65 98 60.22 826460 189.77 98.80 566.74
Manikganj 58.34 366 45.99 38.01 0.43 0.65 1.95 32 49.6 77 98.1 94.07 324820 11.20 46.25 415.65
Munshiganj 95.21 8 54.11 38.33 0.41 0.38 1.50 15 93.2 54 92.4 93.32 313580 33.16 19.41 577.67
Narayanganj 24.82 0 58.65 34.86 0.18 0.45 0.79 13 95.9 73 96.9 78.80 675720 86.60 23.59 631.11
Narshingdi 102.68 11 48.67 41.99 0.35 0.37 2.89 1 70.5 70 98.8 94.36 477860 26.15 28.28 429.25
Rajbari 155.53 153 46.52 39.48 0.44 0.37 4.27 4 49.6 70 94.2 96.62 238160 18.94 37.60 384.21
Faridpur 140.81 0 46.96 41.14 0.44 0.85 2.07 40 46.1 60 96.5 94.33 420320 18.33 29.36 341.45
Gopalganj 152.74 300 57.07 42.72 0.70 0.63 2.27 43 40.6 76 86.6 90.42 249920 20.17 30.61 251.21
Madaripur 277.45 143 45.06 42.44 0.57 0.33 2.71 50 57.7 62 92.9 95.95 252180 21.22 40.11 342.56
Rajbari 155.53 153 46.52 39.48 0.44 0.37 4.27 4 49.6 70 94.2 96.62 238160 18.94 37.60 384.21
Shariatpur 928.45 263 44.46 44.63 0.64 0.32 2.65 19 36.7 50 86.2 95.18 247960 14.56 69.07 249.10
Jamalpur 463.79 224 33.23 41.61 0.46 0.33 1.82 37 37 61 97.9 96.18 563380 7.66 17.37 350.19
Sherpur 28.42 0 32.77 42.74 0.52 0.27 1.84 4 46.4 52 96 94.20 341420 7.83 8.97 392.43
Kishoreganj 408.34 206 38.59 45.72 0.44 0.56 2.03 97 46.6 69 91.5 94.04 627260 9.66 27.90 338.78
Mymensingh 1392.39 960 40.67 43.89 0.40 0.58 2.04 19 42.3 62 86.8 91.28 1155380 15.46 39.43 385.35
Netrakona 704.04 508 35.57 45.57 0.55 0.26 2.21 56 25.9 60 88.4 90.21 479260 8.32 17.62 217.04
Tangail 1502.3 1919 43.25 38.43 0.43 0.38 1.96 18 52.7 71 97.3 94.20 870000 9.70 43.11 450.61
Jessore 596.45 321 54.67 35.98 0.45 0.75 2.71 2 65.8 64 98.5 97.04 656360 28.43 19.31 56.30
Jhenaidah 234.99 78 45.41 36.60 0.50 0.99 2.34 0 64 67 96 95.22 422360 24.32 29.68 56.38
Magura 36.64 0 47.85 39.71 0.54 0.96 2.80 0 47.4 82 96.1 96.29 205960 18.61 48.65 35.39
Narail 118.01 157 57.19 40.71 0.66 0.68 3.02 3 49.2 51 89.4 96.50 162640 17.60 25.83 378.51
Bagerhat 1947.48 733 58.34 38.62 0.77 0.57 3.35 210 37.3 27 71.9 59.36 354300 16.14 47.24 254.43
Khulna 2283.7 540 59.67 35.23 0.51 0.95 2.75 126 58.5 36.7 78.8 83.75 547280 25.31 43.05 497.79
Pirojpur 1281.72 306 65.41 40.36 0.86 0.49 2.76 177 41.8 12.1 69.9 74.63 256100 19.82 60.80 321.78
Satkhira 2195.96 3251 49.48 35.94 0.53 0.57 3.09 68 40.4 57 83.9 79.06 469820 4.88 92.60 475.20
Chuadanga 27.37 85 43.93 35.57 0.37 0.46 1.92 0 58.1 84 99.1 94.48 277440 12.45 15.61 392.17
76
Kushtia 175.95 128 42.46 36.33 0.41 0.60 2.13 0 66.6 85 96.9 95.89 477300 10.74 18.92 556.13
Meherpur 27.74 3 42.03 34.27 0.47 0.46 3.27 2 68.7 100 99.2 93.61 166320 8.71 17.21 566.26
Bogra 435.33 1238 46.18 35.88 0.46 0.84 2.06 5 57.9 60 98.5 93.45 867100 20.58 19.94 506.80
Joypurhat 14.71 16 53.68 33.81 0.42 0.60 1.38 0 55.3 53 97.6 94.85 242580 23.00 40.82 445.74
Dinajpur 241.13 51 49.78 37.14 0.59 0.58 2.40 0 40.7 55 98.9 96.33 715760 14.43 21.20 425.44
Panchagarh 62.09 203 46.84 39.57 0.65 0.42 3.28 0 28.8 36 99 94.50 228620 12.01 32.01 297.48
Thakurgaon 369.41 72 44.50 39.12 0.67 0.36 2.17 0 39 30 99.1 97.61 320820 10.16 24.45 44.55
Pabna 161.89 154 43.69 38.63 0.44 0.70 2.21 1 62.3 55 95.3 93.70 590780 13.33 51.87 497.71
Sirajganj 1732.97 1777 38.88 40.67 0.54 0.50 1.42 66 43.4 75 96.8 95.43 714940 8.49 41.01 387.93
Naogaon 444.09 1576 45.77 34.44 0.53 0.46 2.15 10 36.7 50 91.1 89.73 655780 8.94 108.01 335.80
Natore 700.36 149 46.14 35.80 0.42 0.34 2.47 5 58.5 80 96 93.66 423880 18.09 30.61 525.05
Nawabganj 211.02 320 40.83 39.39 0.43 0.32 2.19 1 49.7 52 94.2 88.18 358000 17.23 68.03 474.71
Rajshahi 65.67 0 50.08 34.10 0.40 0.78 2.64 17 71.1 77 93.7 88.43 633680 16.67 41.26 611.95
Gaibandha 511.97 1215 38.31 39.92 0.58 0.25 1.61 12 35 60 98 94.86 612300 11.44 27.80 382.11
Kurigram 406.58 1067 38.01 41.11 0.56 0.36 1.67 34 17.7 52 98.2 96.71 508100 5.61 25.11 342.77
Lalmonirhat 309.43 210 41.97 40.92 0.59 0.37 2.53 31 19.1 51 99 96.76 290480 8.67 35.27 201.86
Nilphamari 531.01 87 39.70 40.87 0.55 0.32 1.92 1 36.4 50 98.8 96.30 421540 11.40 20.78 533.00
Rangpur 225.23 144 44.71 38.31 0.48 0.95 2.73 6 42.7 48 99.2 95.67 720220 9.52 30.96 521.16
Habiganj 132.33 62 39.22 44.83 0.49 0.28 1.68 12 46.6 56 94.2 87.44 393400 31.16 18.95 242.35
Maulvibazar 441.66 48 49.08 41.79 0.59 0.36 2.11 20 56 32 82 74.82 361200 11.11 18.23 337.35
Sunamganj 2418.11 2610 33.49 47.11 0.58 0.25 1.54 23 26.7 70 85.1 88.12 440400 10.08 5.15 153.82
Sylhet 695.75 1389 50.38 43.38 0.39 1.29 2.06 113 62.8 48 90 64.54 596060 22.17 24.30 311.85
77
Appendix 3: Maps (Biophysical Indicators) Used in the Present Study
Map 1: Drought prone areas.
78
Map 2: General hazard class map.
79
Map 3: Tidal flood prone areas of Bangladesh.
80
Map 4: Sea level rise (SLR) risk map.
81
Map 5: Cyclone prone areas of Bangladesh.
82
Map 6: Salinity map of Bangladesh.
83
Map 7: Flush flood prone areas.
84
Map 8: River flood prone areas.
85
Map 9: Erosion prone areas.
86
Map 10: Maximum temperature variability coefficient.
87
Map 11: Minimum temperature variability coefficient.
88
Map 12: Precipitation variability coefficient.
89
Appendix 4: Overview of study findings
Figure I: Classification of 64 districts according to different PCs
Figure II: Classification of 64 districts according to vulnerability components
90

Assessing Climate Change Vulnerability o

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Assessing Climate Change Vulnerability o

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ASSESSING CLIMATE CHANGE VULNERABILITY OF

BANGLADESH USING GIS

Master of Science in Environmental Science

Md. Golam Azam

Environmental Science Discipline

A Thesis Submitted to Environmental Science Discipline, Khulna University, Khulna,

Course No.: ES 5302

Md. Golam Azam

Environmental Science Discipline

It is approved as to the style and contents.

First and foremost, I proclaim my submission to Allah, the ever-living sustainer of

This dissertation benefited enormously from comments and remarks of Md.

Md. Golam Azam

ALL DECENT MEN AND WOMEN

WHO WILL READ IT WITHOUT PROPER ATTENTION

REGARD IT WITH INTENSE AFFECTION

LOVE IT WITHOUT REASON

CERTIFICATE .............................................................................................................. III

TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................. VII

LIST OF FIGURES ......................................................................................................... X

LIST OF TABLES .........................................................................................................XI

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ..................................................................................... XIII

ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................ XIV

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION .................................................................................... 1

1.1 Background ............................................................................................................ 1

1.2 Problem Statement ................................................................................................. 7

1.3 Justification ............................................................................................................ 8

1.4 Objective of the Study ............................................................................................ 9

1.5 Organization of the Thesis ..................................................................................... 9

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ....................................................................... 10

2.1 Vulnerability to Climate Change .......................................................................... 10

2.2 Components of Climate Change Vulnerability .................................................... 11

2.3 Assessment of Vulnerability ................................................................................ 11

2.5 Principal Component Analysis (PCA) ................................................................. 12

2.6 Research Gap ........................................................................................................ 13

CHAPTER 3: MATERIALS AND METHODS ............................................................ 14

3.1 Study Area ............................................................................................................ 14

3.2 Conceptual Framework for Climate Change Vulnerability ................................. 16

3.2.1 UNFCCC’s vulnerability framework ............................................................ 16

3.2.2 IPCC’s vulnerability composition framework .............................................. 19

3.2 Indicator Selection and Data Collection ............................................................... 19

3.4 Normalization of the Indicators ............................................................................ 26

3.5 Principal Component Analysis (PCA) ................................................................. 27

3.6 Aggregation (Weighted Average) of Indicators Based on PCs............................ 28

3.7 Accumulation of Indicators to Assess Overall Vulnerability............................... 28

3.8 Classification of Raster ........................................................................................ 29

3.9 Illustration of The Whole Research Work in Flow Diagram ............................... 29

CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ............................................................. 33

4.1 Retention of Vulnerability Profile and Unbiased Weights of Indicators ............. 33

4.1.1 Principal Component Analysis (PCA) .......................................................... 33

4.1.2 Vulnerability profiles and weights of indicators ........................................... 35

4.2 Profile Based Spatial Vulnerability ...................................................................... 38

4.2.2 Vulnerability due to extreme climatic events ................................................ 38

4.2.3 Water related vulnerability ............................................................................ 41

4.2.4 Socioeconomic vulnerability ......................................................................... 42

4.2.5 Infrastructural and information vulnerability ................................................ 44

4.2.6 Hazard shock vulnerability............................................................................ 46

4.3 Countrywide Overall Vulnerability ...................................................................... 46

4.3.1 Exposure ........................................................................................................ 46

4.3.2 Sensitivity ...................................................................................................... 48

4.3.3 Adaptive capacity .......................................................................................... 49

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION ....................................................................................... 53

Appendix 1: Stand-alone Script for PCA in Python Window .................................... 70

Appendix 2: Data (Socioeconomic) Table Extracted from BBS ............................... 72