Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Incorporating stakeholders’ knowledge into assessing vulnerability to climatic hazards: application to the river basin management in Taiwan

  • Published:
Climatic Change Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

There is a growing research interest on the transdisciplinary measurement of vulnerability to climatic hazards from the perspective of integrated river basin management. However, the incorporation of stakeholders’ participation, local knowledge and locally spatial characteristics into the process of such vulnerability assessment is one of the challenges faced by decision-makers, especially in developing countries. This article proposes a novel methodology for assessing and communicating vulnerability to policymaking at the river basin level through a case study of Tachia River basin in Taiwan. The authors used a multicriteria decision analysis to develop an integrated vulnerability index applied to a participatory geographic information system (GIS) to map vulnerability to climatic hazards. Using a GIS-based spatial statistics technique and multivariate analysis, we test the degree to which vulnerabilities are spatially autocorrelated throughout the river basin, explain why clustering of vulnerable areas occurs in specific locations, and why some regions are particularly vulnerable. Results demonstrate that vulnerable areas are spatially correlated across the river basin. Moreover, exposure, biophysical sensitivity, land uses and adaptive capacity are key factors contributing to the formation of localized ‘hot spots’ of similarly and particularly vulnerable areas. Finally, we discuss how the findings provide direction for more effective approaches to river basin planning and management.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The focus group consisted of six experts and officers from the fields of disaster management, city planning, civil engineering, climatology, and water management. The focus group meetings helped identify the framework of vulnerability indicators, the relationship between indicators and vulnerability, as well as the connections in the network of these indicators (Fig. 1).

  2. This implies that either lower or higher income areas are more sensitive to impacts of hazards. The middle income areas are thus relatively less sensitivity to hazards than other areas.

  3. This assumption is particularly capable to reflect the natural circumstances of Tachia River basin, because large parts of the basin are composed of environmental sensitive areas.

  4. The AHP with its independence assumptions within and between clusters and elements is a special case of the ANP.

  5. These nine experts were organized separately from the abovementioned focus group. But the background was similar, which was also composed of experts and officers from the fields of city planning, engineering, climatology, as well as disaster and water management.

  6. Some villages in downstream regions were clustered highly vulnerable areas majorly due to their relatively more proximity to rivers and more social dependence, as well as lower risk perceptions and access to resources compared to other villages.

References

  • Adger WN (2006) Vulnerability. Glob Environ Chang 16(3):268–281

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anselin L (1995) Local indicator of spatial association. Geogr Anal 27(2):93–115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balica SF, Douben N, Wright NG (2009) Flood vulnerability indices at varying spatial scales. Water Sci Technol 60(10):2571–2580

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berman R, Quinn C, Paavola J (2012) The role of institutions in the transformation of coping capacity to sustainable adaptive capacity. Environ Dev 2:86–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bernard L, Ostländer N (2008) Assessing climate change vulnerability in the arctic using geographic information services in spatial data infrastructures. Clim Change 87(1–2):263–281

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brooks N, Adger WN, Kelly PM (2005) The determinants of vulnerability and adaptive capacity at the national level and the implication for adaptation. Glob Environ Change 15(2):151–163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brouwer R, Akter S, Brander L, Haque E (2007) Socioeconomic vulnerability and adaptation to environmental risk: a case study of climate change and flooding in Bangladesh. Risk Anal 27(2):313–326

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ceccato L, Giannini V, Giupponi C (2011) Participatory assessment of adaptation strategies to flood risk in the Upper Brahmaputra and Danube river basins. Environ Sci Policy 14(8):1163–1174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cutter S, Boruff BJ, Shirley WL (2003) Social vulnerability to environmental hazards. Soc Sci Quart 84(2):242–261

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cutter S, Barnes L, Berry M, Burton C, Evans E, Tate E, Webb J (2008) A place-based model for understanding community resilience. Glob Environ Change 18(4):598–606

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eakin H, Bojórquez-Tapia LA (2008) Insights into the composition of household vulnerability from multicriteria decision analysis. Glob Environ Change 18(1):112–127

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eakin H, Luers AL (2006) Assessing the vulnerability of social-environmental systems. Annu Rev Env Resour 31:365–394

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Engle NL (2011) Adaptive capacity and its assessment. Glob Environ Change 21(2):647–656

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Engle NL, Lemos MC (2010) Unpacking governance: building adaptive capacity to climate change of river basins in Brazil. Glob Environ Chang 20(1):4–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • FRRFD (Foresight Reducing Risks of Future Disasters: Priorities for Decision Makers) (2012) Final project report. The Government Office for Science, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs S, Kuhlicke C, Meyer V (2011) Editorial for the special issue: vulnerability to natural hazards-the challenge of integration. Nat Hazards 58(2):609–619

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Füssel HM (2007) Vulnerability: a generally applicable conceptual framework for climate change. Glob Environ Change 17(2):155–167

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Füssel HM, Klein RT (2006) Climate change vulnerability assessments: an evolution of conceptual thinking. Clim Change 75(3):301–329

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gallopín GC (2006) Linkage between vulnerability, resilience, and adaptive capacity. Glob Environ Change 16(3):293–303

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gencer C, Gürpinar D (2007) Analytic network process in supplier selection: a case study in an electronic firm. Appl Math Model 31(11):2475–2486

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Getis A, Ord JK (1992) The analysis of spatial association by use of distance statistics. Geogr Anal 24(3):189–206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • GWP (Global Water Partnership) (2000) Integrated water resource management. Technical Advisory Committee Background Paper, No 4, Stockholm, Sweden

  • Hooijer A, Klijn F, Pedroli B, Van Os A (2004) Towards sustainable flood risk management in the Rhine and Meuse River Basins: synopsis on the finding of IRMA-SPONGE. River Res Appl 20(3):343–357

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hung HC (2009) The attitude towards flood insurance purchase when respondents’ preferences are uncertain: a fuzzy approach. J Risk Res 12(2):239–258

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hung HC, Wang TW (2011) Determinants and mapping of collective perceptions of technological risk: the case of the Second Nuclear Power Plant in Taiwan. Risk Anal 31(4):668–683

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hung HC, Ho MC, Chen YJ, Chien CY, Chen SY (2013) Integrating long-term seismic risk changes into improving emergency response and land-use planning: a case study for the Hsinchu City, Taiwan. Nat Hazards. doi:10.1007/s11069-013-0714-y

    Google Scholar 

  • Ionescu C, Klein RJT, Hinkel J, Kavi Kumar KS, Klein R (2005) Towards a formal framework of vulnerability to climate change. NeWater Working Paper 2

  • IPCC (2007) Climate change 2007: impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Cambridge University Press

  • IPCC (2012) Managing the risks of extreme events and disasters to advance climate change adaptation: a special report of Working Groups I and II. Cambridge University Press

  • ISDR (2011) Global assessment report on disaster risk reduction. Switzerland, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein RJ, Nicholls RJ, Thomalla F (2003) Resilience to natural hazards: how useful is this concept? Environ Hazards 5(1–2):3–45

    Google Scholar 

  • Krishnamurthy PK, Fisher JB, Johnson C (2011) Mainstreaming local perceptions of hurricane risk into policymaking: a case study of community GIS in Mexico. Glob Environ Change 21(1):143–153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leach WD, Pelkey NM, Sabatier P (2002) Stakeholder partnership as collaborative policymaking: evaluation criteria applied to watershed management in California and Washington. J Policy Anal Manag 21(4):645–670

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luers AL, Lobell DB, Sklar LS, Addams CL, Matson PA (2003) A method for quantifying vulnerability, applied to the agricultural system of the Yaqui Valley, Mexico. Glob Environ Change 13(4):255–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCall MK, Minang PA (2005) Assessing participatory GIS for community-based natural resource management: claiming community forests in Cameroon. Geogr J 171(4):340–356

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mehaffey M, Wainger L, Wade T, Yankee D, Smith E, Bott V, Yarbourgh R (2008) Assessing vulnerability from alternative development patterns. Landsc Urban Plan 87(1):84–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Metzger MJ, Leemans R, Schröter D (2005) A multidisciplinary multi-scale framework for assessing vulnerabilities to global change. Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinf 7(4):253–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of the Interior, Taiwan (2011) Statistical yearbook of interior. Taipei, Taiwan

  • O’Brien K, Sygna L, Haugen JE (2004a) Vulnerable or resilient? A multi-scale assessment of climate impacts and vulnerability in Norway. Clim Change 64(1–2):193–225

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Brien K, Eriksen S, Schjolden A, Nygaard L (2004b) What’s in a word? Conflicting interpretations of vulnerability in climate change research. CICERO Working Paper

  • Saaty TL (2004) Fundamentals of the analytic network process-multiple networks with benefits, costs, opportunities and risks. J Syst Sci Syst Eng 13(3):348–379

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scheuer S, Haase D, Meyer V (2011) Exploring multicriteria flood vulnerability by integrating economic, social and ecological dimensions of flood risk and coping capacity: from a starting point view towards an end point view of vulnerability. Nat Hazards 58(2):731–751

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharma U, Patwardhan A, Parthasarathy D (2009) Assessing adaptive capacity to tropical cyclones in the East coast of India: a pilot study of public response to cyclone warning information. Clim Change 94(1–2):189–209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smit B, Wandel J (2006) Adaptation, adaptive capacity and vulnerability. Glob Environ Change 16(3):282–292

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tran P, Shaw R, Chantry G, Norton J (2009) GIS and local knowledge in disaster management: a case study of flood risk mapping in Vietnam. Disasters 33(1):152–169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner BL II, Kasperson RE, Matson PA, McCarthy IJ, Corell RW, Christensen L, Eckley N, Kasperson JX, Luers A, Martello ML, Polsky C, Pulsipher A, Schiller A (2003) A framework for vulnerability analysis in sustainability science. P Natl Acad Sci USA 100(14):8074–8079

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wisner B, Blaikie P, Cannon T, Davis I (2004) At risk: natural hazards, people’s vulnerability and disasters. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The research was supported by the National Science Council, Taiwan under Grants: NSC97-2621-M-305-003 and NSC98-2621-M-305-002. None of the conclusions expressed here necessarily reflect views other than those of the authors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hung-Chih Hung.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hung, HC., Chen, LY. Incorporating stakeholders’ knowledge into assessing vulnerability to climatic hazards: application to the river basin management in Taiwan. Climatic Change 120, 491–507 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-013-0819-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-013-0819-z

Keywords

Navigation