Climatic Change

, Volume 138, Issue 3–4, pp 397–410 | Cite as

Assessing climate change vulnerability in urban America: stakeholder-driven approaches

  • Sabrina McCormickEmail author


Localized vulnerability assessments are critical to effective climate adaptation. However, the differences between how local decision-makers and experts see vulnerability have not yet been fully explored, especially in the United States. Seeing possible distinctions between these approaches is critical since it is necessary to ensure a comprehensive, accountable approach. This research explores the distinct approach of local stakeholders to conceptualizing climate vulnerability in six American cities. Sixty-five interviews of cross-sectoral local stakeholders were conducted in: Boston (MA), Los Angeles (CA), Portland (OR), Raleigh (NC), and Tampa (FL). Findings demonstrate that conceptualizations of vulnerability are affected by intellectual frameworks that tend to orient around infrastructure and human health; that retrospective and prospective thinking are inter-related and affect one another; and that institutionalized forms and biases are critical. These factors shape the way that vulnerability is conceived differently than traditional expert frameworks.


Vulnerability Assessment Local Stakeholder Climate Risk Expert Assessment Climate Change Vulnerability 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Aryal S, Cockfield G, Maraseni TN (2014) Vulnerability of Himalayan transhumant communities to climate change. Clim Chang 125(2):193–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Atkinson R, Flint J (2001) Accessing hidden and hard-to-reach populations: Snowball research strategies. Social Research Update 33(1):1–4Google Scholar
  3. Bales RC, Liverman DM, Morehouse BJ (2004) Integrated assessment as a step toward reducing climate vulnerability in the southwestern United States. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 85(11):1727–1734CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Balica S, Wright NG, van der Meulen F (2012) A flood vulnerability index for coastal cities and its use in assessing climate change impacts. Nat Hazards 64(1):73–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bambrick HJ, Capon AG, Barnett GB, Beaty RM, Burton AJ (2011) Climate change and health in the urban environment: adaptation opportunities in Australian cities. Asia Pac J Public Health 23(2 suppl):67S–79SCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bazeley P, Richards L (2000) The NVivo qualitative project book. Sage, LondonGoogle Scholar
  7. Bierbaum R, Smith JB, Lee A, Blair M, Carter L, Chapin FS III, Fleming P, Ruffo S, Stults M, McNeeley S (2013) A comprehensive review of climate adaptation in the United States: more than before, but less than needed. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Chang 18(3):361–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brody SD, Zahran S, Vedlitz A, Grover H (2008) Examining the relationship between physical vulnerability and public perceptions of global climate change in the United States. Environ Behav 40(1):72–95Google Scholar
  9. Bulkeley H, Tuts R (2013) Understanding urban vulnerability, adaptation and resilience in the context of climate change. Local Environ 18(6):646–662CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bureau USC (2010) 2010 Census Urban Area FactsGoogle Scholar
  11. Carlson K, McCormick S (2015) American adaptation: social factors affecting new developments to address climate change. Glob Environ Chang 35:360–367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cohen B (2006) Urbanization in developing countries: Current trends, future projections, and key challenges for sustainability. Technol Soc 28(1):63–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cutter SL, Emrich CT, Webb JJ, Morath D (2009) Social vulnerability to climate variability hazards: a review of the literature. Final Report to Oxfam America. Department of Geography, Columbia, SCGoogle Scholar
  14. Dodman D, Kibona E, Kiluma L (2011) Tomorrow is too late: Responding to social and climate vulnerability in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. Unpublished case study prepared for the Global Report on Human SettlementsGoogle Scholar
  15. Dolan AH, Walker I (2006) Understanding vulnerability of coastal communities to climate change related risks. J Coast Res:1316–1323Google Scholar
  16. Dow K, O’Connor RE, Yarnal B, Carbone GJ, Jocoy CL (2007) Why worry? Community water system managers’ perceptions of climate vulnerability. Glob Environ Chang 17(2):228–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ford J, Smit B (2004a) A framework for assessing the vulnerability of communities in the Canadian Arctic torisks associated with climate change. Human Dimensions of the Arctic System 57(4):389–400Google Scholar
  18. Ford JD, Smit B (2004b). A framework for assessing the vulnerability of communities in the Canadian Arctic to risks associated with climate change. Arctic 389–400Google Scholar
  19. Fraser ED, Dougill AJ, Hubacek K, Quinn CH, Sendzimir J, Termansen M (2011) Assessing vulnerability to climate change in dryland livelihood systems: conceptual challenges and interdisciplinary solutions. Ecol Soc 16(3):3Google Scholar
  20. Fussel H (2007) Vulnerability: a generally applicable conceptual framework for climate change research. Glob Environ Chang 17:155–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Glaas E, Jonsson A (2014) Facilitating joint knowledge production in participatory climate change vulnerability assessments. International Journal of Urban Sustainable Development 6(2):174–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hahn MB, Riederer AM, Foster SO (2009) The livelihood vulnerability index: a pragmatic approach to assessing risks from climate variability and change—A case study in Mozambique. Glob Environ Chang 19(1):74–88Google Scholar
  23. Ionescu C, Klein RJ, Hinkel J, Kumar KK, Klein R (2009) Towards a formal framework of vulnerability to climate change. Environ Model Assess 14(1):1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jonsson AC, Hjerpe M, Andersson-Sköld Y, Glaas E, André K, Simonsson L (2012) Cities’ capacity to manage climate vulnerability: experiences from participatory vulnerability assessments in the lower Göta Älv catchment, Sweden. Local Environ 17(6–7):735–750CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kjellstrom T, McMichael AJ (2013) Climate change threats to population health and well-being: the imperative of protective solutions that will last. Glob Health Action 6Google Scholar
  26. Lankao PR, Qin H (2011) Conceptualizing urban vulnerability to global climate and environmental change. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 3(3):142–149Google Scholar
  27. Leichenko R, McDermott M, Bezborodko E, Brady M, Namendorf E (2014) Economic vulnerability to climate change in coastal New Jersey: A stakeholder-based assessment. Journal of Extreme Events 1(01):1450003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mannheim K (1936) Ideology and Utopia, trans. Louis Wirth and Edward Shils (San Diego: Harvest-Harcourt Brace, 1985) 263Google Scholar
  29. McCarthy JJ (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 University PressGoogle Scholar
  30. McCormick S (2012) After the cap: risk assessment, citizen science and disaster recovery. Ecol Soc 17(4): 31Google Scholar
  31. Metzger KB, Ito K, Matte RD (2010) Summer heat and mortality in New York City: how hot is too hot? Environ Health Perspect 118(1): 80–86.Google Scholar
  32. Moser SC, Ekstrom JA (2010) A framework to diagnose barriers to climate change adaptation. Proc Natl Acad Sci 107(51):22026–22031Google Scholar
  33. Moss RH, Edmonds JA, Hibbard KA, Manning MR, Rose SK, Van Vuuren DP, Carter TR, Emori S, Kainuma M, Kram T (2010) The next generation of scenarios for climate change research and assessment. Nature 463(7282):747–756Google Scholar
  34. Mustelin J, Klein R, Assaid B, Sitari T, Khamis M, Mzee A, Haji T (2010) Understanding current and future vulnerability in coastal settings: community perceptions and preferences for adaptation in Zanzibar, Tanzania. Popul Environ 31(5):371–398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. NSF (2005) Workshop on Interdisciplinary Standards for Systematic Qualitative Research. Ballston, VA, National Science FoundationGoogle Scholar
  36. O’Brien K, Eriksen S, Nygaard LP, Schjolden A (2007) Why different interpretations of vulnerability matter in climate change discourses. Clim Pol 7(1):73–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Preston BL, Yuen EJ, Westaway RM (2011) Putting vulnerability to climate change on the map: a review of approaches, benefits, and risks. Sustain Sci 6(2):177–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Rosenzweig C, Solecki W (2014) Hurricane Sandy and adaptation pathways in New York: lessons from a first-responder city. Glob Environ Chang 28:395–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rosenzweig C, Solecki W, Hammer SA, Mehrotra S (2010) Cities lead the way in climate-change action. Nature 467(7318):909–911CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sullivan C, Meigh J (2005) Targeting attention on local vulnerabilities using an integrated index approach: the example of the climate vulnerability index. Water Sci Technol 51(5):69–78Google Scholar
  41. Team NCVS (2009) Vulnerability Through the Eyes of the Vulnerable: Climate Change Induced Uncertainties and Nepal’s Development Predicaments, Institute for Social and Environmental Transition--Nepal (ISET-N)Google Scholar
  42. Thomas F, Sabel CE, Morton K, Hiscock R, Depledge MH (2014) Extended impacts of climate change on health and wellbeing. Environ Sci Pol 44:271–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Van Aalst MK, Cannon T, Burton I (2008) Community level adaptation to climate change: the potential role of participatory community risk assessment. Glob Environ Chang 18(1):165–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Van Der Sluijs JP (2012) Uncertainty and dissent in climate risk assessment: a post-normal perspective. Nat Cult 7(2):174–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Milken Institute School of Public HealthGeorge Washington UniversityWashingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations