Climate Change: Impacts and

Adaptation

Vulnerability to Climate Change

Week 4, Session 7&8

Environment and Climate Change

Management Masters Program
1 11/10/23
 Content of the session

Introduction
Vulnerability to Climate change
Classification scheme for vulnerability
factors
Assessment of Vulnerability
Conceptual elements of climate change
vulnerability assessments

2
 Introduction
People all over the world are being confronted
with the reality of climate change.
For some, climate change is simply a matter of
changes in weather patterns: things are a bit
hotter, a bit colder, a bit more uncertain.
For others, it is already a matter of survival: too
little water or too much, not enough food to go
around, risks to safety and security.
The real injustice of climate change is that those
who have contributed least to its causes are
suffering most from its effects.
3
 Vulnerability to Climate Change
There is no single ‘correct’ or ‘best’
conceptualization of vulnerability that would
fit all assessment contexts.
Instead, the diversity of conceptualizations is
seen primarily as a consequence of the term
‘vulnerability’ ;
It is being used in different policy contexts,
referring to different systems exposed to
different hazards.

4
 Example:
“Which of two regions is more vulnerable to climate
change and variability: Florida or Tibet?’’

Florida

5
 Tibet, China

6
Different scholars may reasonably provide different
answers to this question.
Many of them will suggest that Tibet is more vulnerable
because it has less resources to cope with whatever
threats climate change might bring about, it has less
potential to diversify its income base, and it is already
stressed by political tensions.
Others might highlight Florida’s vulnerability,
emphasizing its low elevation that makes it highly
susceptible to sea-level rise, its current exposure to
hurricanes and the severe damages caused by them, and
its present climate being rather warm already.
Still others might argue that this question is not relevant
at all, given the huge differences in climate, topography,
and socioeconomic conditions between these two regions.
7
 Dimensions of Vulnerability to Climate
Change
 The following four dimensions are fundamental to
describe a vulnerable situation:
System: The system of analysis, such as a coupled
human-environment system, a population group, an
economic sector, a geographical region, or a natural
system.
Attribute of concern: The valued attribute(s) of the
vulnerable system that is/are threatened by its exposure to
a hazard.
Hazard: A potentially damaging influence on the system
of analysis.
Temporal reference: The point in time or time period of
8
interest.
 Therefore, the following nomenclature allows to
fully describe a vulnerable situation:
 vulnerability of a system’s attribute(s) of concern to
a hazard (in temporal reference), whereby the
temporal reference can alternatively be stated as the
first qualifier.
Examples for fully qualified descriptions of
vulnerability are ‘‘vulnerability of the tourism
sector in a specific mountain region to climate
change over the next 30 years’’, and ‘‘vulnerability
of a particular ecosystem’s net primary production
to wild-fires in 2050’’.
9
 Let us now review the Florida - Tibet example:
The question posed there specified the system
(the geographical regions Florida - Tibet,
respectively) and the hazard (climate change and
variability).
However, the question which of the two regions
is more vulnerable to this hazard could not be
clearly answered because neither the attribute(s)
of concern nor the temporal reference were
specified.

10
 For instance, a vulnerability assessment focusing
on human livelihoods as the attribute of concern
would probably consider Tibet as more vulnerable
because the livelihoods of nomads and subsistence
farmers may be threatened by extended droughts.
An assessment focusing on economic impacts
might consider Florida as more vulnerable, given
the substantial concentration of capital along its
coastline, which is threatened by hurricanes, storm
surges, and sea-level rise.

11
12
 Classification scheme for vulnerability factors
 A clear description of the vulnerable situation is an important
first step for avoiding misunderstandings around vulnerability.
 However, there are also different interpretations of the term
‘vulnerability’ itself. These different vulnerability concepts
can be distinguished by the vulnerability factors that they
consider.
United Nations (2004) distinguish four groups of
vulnerability factors that are relevant in the context of
disaster reduction:
 Physical factors, which describe the exposure of vulnerable
elements within a region;
 Economic factors, which describe the economic resources of
individuals, populations groups, and communities;
13
  Social factors, which describe non-economic factors
that determine the well-being of individuals,
population groups, and communities, such as the
level of education, security, access to basic human
rights, and good governance; and
 Environmental factors, which describe the state of
the environment within a region.
 All of these factors describe properties of the
vulnerable system or community rather than of the
external stressors.

14
 Assessment of Vulnerability
 IPCC defines vulnerability as ‘the extent to which
climate change may damage or harm a system.’ It
adds that vulnerability ‘depends not only on a
system’s sensitivity, but also on its ability to adapt a
new climatic conditions’.
 Hence, a highly vulnerable system is one that is
highly sensitive to modest changes in climate and one
for which the ability to adapt is severely constrained.
 Vulnerability depends on the level of economic
development and institutional capacities.
Vulnerability is highest where there is the greatest
15
sensitivity to climate change and the least
adaptability.
 Cont’d…
 Vulnerability and adaptation have implications for
assessment of vulnerability.
 In one case, vulnerability depends on the
adaptation that has taken place; in the other,
vulnerability is defined in terms of capacity to
adapt, and capacity to respond to stress is a starting
point for impact analysis.
 Assessing the impacts of and vulnerability to

climate change and subsequently working out

adaptation needs requires good quality information.

16
 Cont’d…
 This information include climate data, such as
temperature, rainfall and the frequency of extreme
events, and
 non-climatic data, such as the current situation on

the ground for different sectors including water

resources, agriculture and food security, human
health, terrestrial ecosystems and biodiversity, and
coastal zones.

 But in absence of information, countries are limited in

their ability to plan adaptation measures and adapt
effectively.
17
 Cont’d…
 Reliable, systematic climate data helps countries
determine their current climate viabilities, and
model future change.
 Countries use a number of assessment models,

tools and methodologies as well as various

scenarios including those provided by the IPCC,
it helps in assessment of the future impacts of
climate change.
 Climate change impacts, vulnerability and
adaptation assessments need to generate outputs
18
that are policy relevant.
 Different approaches, different methods

19
 Evolution of assessments in climate change
Plurality of research traditions underpinning climate
change literature;
 Conceptual shift in the 1990s towards an adaptation
agenda led to new approaches for assessing vulnerability
to climate change:
 ‘Bottom-up’ approaches (VA & AA):
 more attuned/familiar to local context and
conditions;
 more capable of identifying local options &
limitations than top-down approaches
 focus on vulnerability and adaptation to climate
change and development of adaptation policy;
20  From science to policy-driven analyses.
 Conceptual elements in climate change VA

21
 1. Subject of analysis/place-based
Coupled human-environment system (CHES)
as main subject of analysis in VA; the focus of
the VA,
Need to identify the attribute of concern in the
CHES to be addressed in the VA;
 Focus the assessment on a particular geographical
area; more attuned to bottom-up approaches;
 CHES basically linked to a ‘place’ - helps to
identify and establish existing conditions and
scales of interaction relevant to the system and
22
VA;
 2. Key components of vulnerability
Vulnerability to climate change as a function of three
components: V = f(E, S, AC);
 Exposure – nature and degree of a climatic stimulus to
which a system is exposed;
 Sensitivity – broadly understood as the degree to which a
system is affected by climatic stimulus;
 Adaptive capacity – the existing or potential capacity of
a system to adapt in response to that climatic stimulus and
take advantage of any opportunities that arise - to cope
with the consequences
 Majority of conceptual frameworks include some
combination of these components of vulnerability;
23
24
 3. Multiple and interacting perturbations
CHES constantly changing due to pressures and factors
influencing it (e.g. political and economic systems,
demographic changes); & as it changes so does its
vulnerability to climate change;
A perturbation can be understood as “some influence that
may adversely affect a valued attribute of a system” (Fussel,
2007).
Need to account for internal (e.g. unsuitable land
management practices in a farming community) and
external perturbations (e.g. policy on land management
practices);
Perturbation is interchangeably used with terms such as

25
stresses, hazards, stimulus and events.
 4. Scales of analysis
In the context of VA, scale is understood as the
“spatial, temporal, quantitative, or analytical
dimensions used by scientists to measure and study
objects and processes” and relates to terms such as,
levels (short, medium, long duration), extent (size of
the scale) and resolution (relates to precision);
CHES influenced by processes operating at disparate
or different scales of action;
 The notion of hierarchy where elements within the
system are somehow connected and analysis of
different scales helps to understand interactions
26
between elements.
  Need for scales to be harmonious with purpose of
analysis and policy-making level (Eakin and Luers,
2006);
 Critical issues regarding the choice of analytical
scales:
 Conceptual e.g. choice of analytical approaches
leading to different interpretations; issues of equity
and justice (Schneider et al., 2007);
 Operational e.g. Integration of information from
different scales and disciplines and the interaction
between scales (Wilbanks, 2002); data availability.

27
 5. Engaging stakeholders
Stakeholders perceived as agents holding information
and local knowledge relevant to the VA (Carter et al.,
2007);
Advantages of stakeholder engagement include a more
transparent and legitimate production of information,
salient policy and greater credibility regarding the
outcomes of the analysis (Eakin & Luers, 2006);
Policy-setting context for development of adaptation
policy;
Various types and levels of stakeholders involvement
and participation and engagement methods and tools;

28
 6. Dealing with uncertainty
 Two broad categories of uncertainty in climate change:
 Internal uncertainty e.g. natural internal variability of the
physical system; uncertainty surrounding the social
dimensions of the system namely its own capacity to adapt
(Mearns, 2010);
 External uncertainty e.g. future global greenhouse gases
emissions (Hallegatte, 2009); and uncertainty in
modelling the impacts of climate change (Dessai et al.,
2009);
 Conventional approach: bound uncertainty through more
sophisticated models and techniques to reduce uncertainty;
 Alternative approach: defend more flexible ways of
characterising uncertainty in a policy-setting context and
29 communicating uncertainty to policy-makers.
 7. Differential vulnerability
Differential concept - not equally distributed across
the system;
Dimensions associated with vulnerability: poverty,
class, gender, religion, age, etc...
Other factors influencing adaptive capacity such as
health, access to services, etc; also identified as
contributing to reduce vulnerability;
However ‘categories’ of vulnerability not mutually
exclusive as can be compounded and translated into
different levels of vulnerability.

30
 8. Causal structures
Emphasizes the role of socio-economic and political
processes and factors in causing people’s vulnerabilities;
Multiplicity of intersecting pressures and forces and their
causal linkages to the system that underpins the notion of
causal structures in climate change vulnerability.
 Although relations between underlying processes and
impacts on the system can be established
spontaneously/unexpectedly, proving those causal
linkages empirically can be challenging;
 Many of the VA frameworks do not address this
component and those that do tend to be perceived as
analytically and operationally complex.
31
 9. Historical and prospective analysis
Understanding current vulnerability provides ‘a
roadmap from known territory into uncertain future’;
Range of tools and methods e.g. Indicators, workshops,
interviews, mapping, vulnerability profiles, etc...
Future vulnerability normally pursued through the use
of projections and scenarios of the future;
Scenario-based approaches - extremely helpful when
considering uncertainty in future pathways in the
CHES as well as a powerful tool to communicate and
explore potential futures with stakeholders.

32
 Examples of VA frameworks

33
 Some remaining challenges
 Despite efforts in developing conceptual VA
frameworks and methodologies there is still a shortage
of empirical studies putting these into practice and
evaluating the frameworks;
 Remaining challenges regarding conceptual elements
include:
 The need to better understand how human and
environmental systems are coupled and the ways in
which they interact;
 The need to further explore the relationships and links
between the key components of vulnerability;
 The need to continue developing new ways of
34 integrating uncertainty in VA and policy-making.
35
 Group discussion

By selecting a coupled human environment system

(e.g. sectors, communities….) as main subject of
analysis, assess its vulnerability to climate change.

(Hint: Vulnerability = f (Exposure, Sensitivity, Adaptive

Capacity))

36
 Thank You!

37