All

What are you looking for?

All
Projects
Results
Organizations

Quick search

  • Projects supported by TA ČR
  • Excellent projects
  • Projects with the highest public support
  • Current projects

Smart search

  • That is how I find a specific +word
  • That is how I leave the -word out of the results
  • “That is how I can find the whole phrase”

Review of current approaches to spatially explicit urban vulnerability assessments: hazard complexity, data sources, and cartographic representations

The result's identifiers

  • Result code in IS VaVaI

    <a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F44555601%3A13440%2F20%3A43895699" target="_blank" >RIV/44555601:13440/20:43895699 - isvavai.cz</a>

  • Alternative codes found

    RIV/44555601:13520/20:43895699

  • Result on the web

    <a href="https://content.sciendo.com/view/journals/geosc/14/1/article-p47.xml" target="_blank" >https://content.sciendo.com/view/journals/geosc/14/1/article-p47.xml</a>

  • DOI - Digital Object Identifier

    <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/geosc-2020-0005" target="_blank" >10.2478/geosc-2020-0005</a>

Alternative languages

  • Result language

    angličtina

  • Original language name

    Review of current approaches to spatially explicit urban vulnerability assessments: hazard complexity, data sources, and cartographic representations

  • Original language description

    Socio-ecological hazards are processes that MINUS SIGN depending on the vulnerability of societal systems MINUS SIGN may have profound adverse impacts. For this reason, the current discourse in disaster risk reduction (DRR) has been experiencing a shift toward a vulnerability-led paradigm, raising new questions about how to address (i) the complexity of vulnerabilities to multiple hazards, (ii) their cultural, dynamic, and subjective character, and (iii) the effectiveness and legitimacy of vulnerability assessments as decision-support tools. In this paper, we present a review of 707 vulnerability studies (derived from the Clarivate WoS database; 1988MINUS SIGN 2018) with a particular focus on urban settings and spatially explicit assessments in order to evaluate current efforts to meet the aforementioned issues. The reviewed studies assessed vulnerabilities to 35 hazard types that were predominantly (n=603, 85%) analysed as single hazards (mostly seismic, flood, and groundwater contamination hazards, as well as climate change), whereas only 15% (n=104) of studies focused on multiple hazards (mostly atmospheric hazards). Within the spatially explicit vulnerability studies, almost 60% used data collected by the study itself (mostly seismic hazards), while statistical and combined data were both employed in 20% of cases (mostly floods, climate change, and social and political hazards). Statistical data were found to have only limited transferability, often being generalised to be applicable in small-scale studies, while reducing the role of cultural and contextual factors. Field research data provided high-resolution information, but their acquisition is time-consuming, and therefore fixed at a local scale and single temporal stage. Underlying hazard types and suitable data sources resulting in other differences found a preference towards the specific coverage and resolution of vulnerability maps that appeared in 44% of all reviewed studies. Altogether, the differences we found indicated a division of spatially explicit vulnerability research in two major directions: (i) geological and geomorphological studies focusing on physical vulnerability, using their own data surveys at a detailed scale and lacking links to other hazards, and (ii) other studies (mostly atmospheric hazards and socialpolitical hazards) focusing on social or combined vulnerabilities, using primarily statistical or combined data at a municipal, regional, and country scale with occasional efforts to integrate multiple hazards. Finally, although cartographic representations have become a frequent component of vulnerability studies, our review found only vague rationalisations for the presentation of maps, and a lack of guidelines for the interpretation of uncertainties and the use of maps as decision-support tools.

  • Czech name

  • Czech description

Classification

  • Type

    J<sub>SC</sub> - Article in a specialist periodical, which is included in the SCOPUS database

  • CEP classification

  • OECD FORD branch

    50704 - Environmental sciences (social aspects)

Result continuities

  • Project

    <a href="/en/project/EF17_048%2F0007435" target="_blank" >EF17_048/0007435: Smart City - Smart Region - Smart Community</a><br>

  • Continuities

    P - Projekt vyzkumu a vyvoje financovany z verejnych zdroju (s odkazem do CEP)

Others

  • Publication year

    2020

  • Confidentiality

    S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Data specific for result type

  • Name of the periodical

    GeoScape

  • ISSN

    1802-1115

  • e-ISSN

  • Volume of the periodical

    14

  • Issue of the periodical within the volume

    1

  • Country of publishing house

    CZ - CZECH REPUBLIC

  • Number of pages

    15

  • Pages from-to

    47-61

  • UT code for WoS article

    000546451300005

  • EID of the result in the Scopus database

    2-s2.0-85090268321