Climatic Change

, Volume 139, Issue 3–4, pp 351–365 | Cite as

Examining urban inequality and vulnerability to enhance resilience: insights from Mumbai, India

  • Patricia Romero-LankaoEmail author
  • Daniel M. Gnatz
  • Joshua B. Sperling


Understanding how households, ranging from poor to wealthy differ in levels of vulnerability to hazards, such as floods and heat waves and knowledge of the mechanisms creating this difference is fundamental to enhancing resilience, fairly, across urban populations. A complex problem exists, however, in determining the relative influences of various attributes of wealth and vulnerability. In this paper we apply a livelihoods framework to characterize urban households by the resources or assets that comprise their livelihoods. We then combine a fuzzy logic approach with an analytic hierarchy process (ANH), to examine the relative influence of wealth (poverty), exposure, sensitivity and capacity on vulnerability to climate hazards in Mumbai, India. While research on urban resilience has grown considerably in recent years, this paper belongs to the few studies that have examined the relative influence of wealth and capacity on differences in vulnerability within and across household classes in cities. We find that under current climate change conditions, differences in wealth and capacity largely account for the high household vulnerability levels in Mumbai. While this pattern might change in a future (warmer) world, without a profound transformation, it is hard to imagine that the change would be for the better.


Analytic Hierarchy Process Social Inequality Informal Settlement Climate Risk Urban Household 
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.



This research was supported by funding from the NSF PIRE Award #1243535. Survey support from Dr. Gufran Beig’s team and students at the Indian Institute of Tropical Meteorology was invaluable. The authors would also like to acknowledge the reviewers for their useful suggestions and comments.

Supplementary material

10584_2016_1813_MOESM1_ESM.docx (92 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 91 kb)


  1. Aceves-Quesada JF, Díaz-Salgado J, López-Blanco J (2007) Vulnerability assessment in a volcanic risk evaluation in central Mexico through a multi-criteria-GIS approach. Nat Hazards 40(2):339–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Adger WN (1999) Exploring income inequality in rural, coastal Viet Nam. The Journal of Development Studies 35(5):96–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Adger WN (2006) Vulnerability. Glob Environ Chang 16(3):268–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baud I, Sridharan N, Pfeffer K (2008) Mapping urban poverty for local governance in an Indian mega-city: the case of Delhi. Urban Stud 45(7):1385–1412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baud I, Kuffer M, Pfeffer K, Sliuzas R, Karuppannan S (2010) Understanding heterogeneity in metropolitan India: the added value of remote sensing data for analyzing sub-standard residential areas. Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinf 12(5):359–374. doi: 10.1016/j.jag.2010.04.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bhagat RB, Guha M, Chattopadhyay A (2006) Mumbai after 26/7 deluge: issues and concerns in urban planning. Popul Environ 27(4):337–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Blaikie P, Terry C, Ian D, Ben W (2004) At risk: Natural hazards, people’s vulnerability and disasters. Routledge, NY, USAGoogle Scholar
  8. Bojórquez-Tapia LA, Juárez L, Cruz-Bello G (2002) Integrating fuzzy logic, optimization, and GIS for ecological impact assessments. Environ Manag 30(3):418–433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chatterjee M (2010) Slum dwellers response to flooding events in the megacities of India. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Chang 15(4):337–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Collins TW, Bolin B (2009) Situating hazard vulnerability: people’s negotiations with wildfire environments in the US Southwest. Environ Manag 44(3):441–455CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cowell F (1998) Measuring inequality. LSE perspectives in economic analysis. Oxford University Press, UKGoogle Scholar
  12. Cutter SL, Mitchell JT, Scott MS (2000) Revealing the vulnerability of people and places: a case study of Georgetown county, South Carolina. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 90(4):713–737CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cutter SL, Boruff BJ, Lynn Shirley W (2003) Social vulnerability to environmental hazards. Soc Sci Q 84(2):242–261. doi: 10.1111/1540-6237.8402002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cutter SL, Lindsey B, Melissa B, Christopher B, Elijah E, Eric T, Jennifer W (2008) A place-cased model for understanding community resilience to natural disasters. Glob Environ Chang 18(4):598–606Google Scholar
  15. Dankelman I (2010) Gender and Climate Change: An Introduction. RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
  16. De Maio FG (2007) Income inequality measures. J Epidemiol Community Health 61(10):849–852CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Eakin H, Bojorquez-Tapia LA (2008) Insights into the composition of household vulnerability from multicriteria decision analysis. Glob Environ Chang 18(1):112–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Field CB, van Aalst M, Adger N, Arent D, Barnett J, Richard B, Bilir E, Birkmann J, Carmin JA, Chadee D, Challinor A, Chatterjee M, Cramer W, Debra D, Estrada Y, Gattuso JP, Hijioka Y, Hoegh-Guldberg O, Huang HQ, Insarov G, Jones R, Sari K, Romero-Lankao P, Larsen, JN, Losada I, et al. (2014) Technical summary. In: Field CB, Barros, VR, Dokken, DJ, Mach, KJ, Mastrandrea MD, Bilir TE, Chatterjee M, Ebi KL, Estrada YO, Genova RC, Girma B, Kissel ES, Levy AN, MacCracken S, Mastrandrea PR, and White LL (eds) 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 changeGoogle Scholar
  19. Filmer D, Pritchett LH (2001) Estimating wealth effects without expenditure data—or tears: an application to educational enrollments in states of India. Demography 38(1):115–132Google Scholar
  20. Garschagen M, Romero-Lankao P (2013) Exploring the relationships between urbanization trends and climate change vulnerability. Clim Chang . doi: 10.1007/s10584-013-0812-6August, 1–16Google Scholar
  21. Giordani P, Giorgi GM (2010) A fuzzy logic approach to poverty analysis based on the gini and bonferroni inequality indices. Statistical Methods & Applications 19(4):587–607. doi: 10.1007/s10260-010-0146-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Guest G (2000) Using guttman scaling to rank wealth: integrating quantitative and qualitative data. Field Methods 12(4):346–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gupta K (2007) Urban flood resilience planning and management and lessons for the future: a case study of Mumbai, India. Urban Water J 4(3):183–194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gupta K, Arnold F, Lhungdim H (2009) Health and Living Conditions in Eight Indian Cities. Ministry of Health and Family Welfare Government of India, Mumbai Google Scholar
  25. Harlan SL, Brazel AJ, Jenerette GD, Jones NS, Larsen L, Prashad L, Stefanov WL (2007) In the shade of affluence: the inequitable distribution of the urban heat island. Research in Social Problems and Public Policy 15:173–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hijioka, Y, Lin E, Pereira JJ, Corlett RT, Cui X, Insarov G, Surjan A, Field C, Barros V, Mach K (2014) Chapter 24: Asia Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability, IPCC Working Group II Contribution to AR5., Cambridge, U. Press, Cambridge UK and New York, USAGoogle Scholar
  27. Jepson W (2014) Measuring ‘no-win’waterscapes: experience-based scales and classification approaches to assess household water security in colonias on the US–Mexico border. Geoforum 51:107–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Makri A, Stilianakis NI (2008) Vulnerability to air pollution health effects. Int J Hyg Environ Health 211(3–4):326–336. doi: 10.1016/j.ijheh.2007.06.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Manuel-Navarrete D, Pelling M, Redclift M (2011) Critical adaptation to hurricanes in the Mexican caribbean: development visions, governance structures, and coping strategies. Glob Environ Chang 21(1):249–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. McFarlane C (2012) From sanitation inequality to malevolent urbanism: The normalisation of suffering in Mumbai. Geoforum 43(6):1287–90Google Scholar
  31. McKenzie DJ (2005) Measuring inequality with asset indicators. J Popul Econ 18(2):229–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Moser CON (1998) The asset vulnerability framework: reassessing urban poverty reduction strategies. World Dev 26(1):1–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Moser C (ed) (2008) Assets and Livelihoods: A Framework for Asset-Based Social Policy. Assets, Livelihoods and Social Policy. World Bank, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  34. Moser C, Felton A (2007) The Construction of an Asset Index Measuring Asset Accumulation in Ecuador. Chronic Poverty Research Centre Working Paper, no. 87. Global Economy and Development The Brookings Institution, Washington DC, 20036, USAGoogle Scholar
  35. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (2010) Mumbai human development report 2009. Oxford, New York London Google Scholar
  36. Municipal Corportation of Greater Mumbai (2014) Development for greater Mumbai 2014–2034 preparatory studies. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai, MumbaiGoogle Scholar
  37. Norris FH, Stevens SP, Pfefferbaum B, Wyche KF, Pfefferbaum RL (2008) Community resilience as a metaphor, theory, set of capacities, and strategy for disaster readiness. Am J Community Psychol 41(1–2):127–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. O’Neill MS (2005) Disparities by race in heat-related mortality in four US cities: the role of air conditioning prevalence. Journal of Urban Health: Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine 82(2):191–197. doi: 10.1093/jurban/jti043. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Qin H, Romero-Lankao P, Hardoy J, Rosas-Huerta A (2015) Household responses to climate-related hazards in four Latin American cities: A conceptual framework and exploratory analysis. Urban Climate 14(1):94–110Google Scholar
  40. Ranger N, Hallegatte S, Bhattacharya S, Bachu M, Priya S, Dhore K, Rafique F, Mathur P, Naville N, Henriet F (2011) An assessment of the potential impact of climate change on flood risk in Mumbai. Clim Chang 104(1):139–67Google Scholar
  41. Rashed T, Weeks J (2003) Assessing vulnerability to earthquake hazards through spatial multicriteria analysis of urban areas. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 17(6):547–576CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Revi A (2008) Climate change risk: an adaptation and mitigation agenda for Indian cities. Environ Urban 20(1):207–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Ribot J (2010) Vulnerability does not fall from the sky: toward multiscale, pro-poor climate policy. Soc Dimens Clim Chang: Equity and Vulnerability in a Warming World 47–74Google Scholar
  44. Romero-Lankao P, Qin H (2011) Conceptualizing urban vulnerability to global climate and environmental change. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 3(3):142–149. doi: 10.1016/j.cosust.2010.12.016 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Romero-Lankao P, Qin H, Dickinson K (2012) Vulnerability to temperature-related hazards: a meta-analysis and meta-knowledge approach. Glob Environ Chang 22(3):670–683CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Romero-Lankao P, Hughes S, Qin H, Hardoy J, Rosas-Huerta A, Borquez R, Lampis A (2014) Scale, urban risk and adaptation capacity in neighborhoods of Latin American cities. Habitat International 42(0):224–235. doi: 10.1016/j.habitatint.2013.12.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Roy A (2009) Why India cannot plan its cities: informality, insurgence and the idiom of urbanization. Planning Theory 8(1):76–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Saaty TL (2008) Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Services Sciences 1(1):83–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Tah JHM, Carr V (2000) A proposal for construction project risk assessment using fuzzy logic. Construction Management & Economics 18(4):491–500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Vincent K (2007) Uncertainty in adaptive capacity and the importance of scale. Glob Environ Chang 17(1):12–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Vyas S, Kumaranayake L (2006) Constructing socio-economic status indices: how to use principal components analysis. Health Policy and Planning 21(6):459–468CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Wilkinson RG, Pickett KE (2006) Income inequality and population health: A review and explanation of the evidence. Soc Sci Med 62 (7): 768–84Google Scholar
  53. Zérah MH (2008) Splintering urbanism in Mumbai: contrasting trends in a multilayered society. Geoforum 39s (6): 1922–1932.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Center for Atmospheric ResearchBoulderUSA
  2. 2.Institute for Sustainable Urban TransitionsBoulderUSA

Personalised recommendations