Social vulnerability and local level assessments: A new approach for planning

Mendes, J M; Tavares, A O and Santos, P P (2020) Social vulnerability and local level assessments: A new approach for planning. International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, 11(1), pp. 15-43. ISSN 1759-5916

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to present a new index of social vulnerability (SV), based on local level data [statistical blocks (SBs)]. This same methodology was applied before at the municipal level, which is a level of analysis that under-evaluates local spots of high SV, by one side, and generalizes the coverage of support capacity equipment and infrastructure. The geographical level of detail of the input data allows to overcome those limitations and better inform infra-municipal risk practitioners and planners. Design/methodology/approach: The assessment of SV in this paper adopts an inductive approach. The research context of this conceptual and methodological proposal derived from the need to operationalize the concept of SV as a planning tool. This approach required to distinguish between the components of criticality and support capability, as their assessment provides knowledge with distinct applications in risk management. The statistical procedure is based on principal components analysis, using the SB as the unit of analysis. Findings: Support capability acts as a counter-weight of criticality. This understanding is well illustrated in the mapping of each component and the final score of SV. The methodological approach allowed to identify the drivers of criticality and support capability in each SB, aiding decision-makers and risk practitioners in finding the vulnerability forcers that require more attention (public or private social equipment, housing policies, emergency anticipatory measures, etc.). Originality/value: An original approach to SV assessments is the consideration of the components of criticality and support capability. The results allow for the definition of adapted and specific strategies of risk mitigation and civil protection measures to distinct types of risk groups and by different stakeholders and risk practitioners. By predicting the impact and the recovery capacity of communities, the results have applicability in several fields of risk governance as, for example, risk communication and involvement, social intervention (health, education and housing), emergency response, contingency planning, early warning and spatial planning.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: criticality; disaster resilience; risk management; scale; social vulnerability; support capability
Index terms: inductive approach, early warning, disaster resilience, strategy, emergency response, level of detail, proposal, housing, contingency planning, risk mitigation, practitioner, vulnerability, mapping, methodology, risk governance, recovery, spatial planning, housing policy, planner, risk management
Subjects: environmental hazards, urban design, financial risk, research methods, safety engineering, spatial and geospatial analysis, management, project planning, public policy, operations management, technical documentation, climate science, practitioner, profession, construction type, risk assessment
Topics: Construction Technology, Governance, Sustainability, Roles and Professions, Risk Management, Project Management, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Cost Management, Health and Safety, Design Practice
Descriptive scope: 3 PCT

N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here