2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2009.11.009
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Ecological vulnerability in risk assessment — A review and perspectives

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
192
0
3

Year Published

2010
2010
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 341 publications
(195 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
0
192
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…Consequently, the ontology on vulnerable systems shown in Fig. 3 explicitly refers to four classes of vulnerable systems: (1) ''natural systems'' for vulnerability studies referring to a set of subclasses that include physical systems (Calvalieri et al 2012), biological systems (De Lange et al 2010), and/or biophysical systems (O'Brien et al 2004); (2) ''social systems'' for vulnerability studies referring to the subclasses of population in general (Adger 1999;Carreño et al 2007), social groups, for example, communities (Cutter et al 2003;Bollin and Hidajat 2006), functional systems, such as the economy (Patt et al 2010), the public financial sector (Mechler et al 2006) or the health sector (Hahn et al 2009;Few and Tran 2010); and (3) ''technical systems,'' such as vulnerability studies referring to critical infrastructure (Hellström 2007;Kröger and Zio 2011). In addition, the ontology also accounts for a separate class of hybrid concepts referring to interactions between and within systems, such as in societal and ecological (biophysical) subsystems (Turner et al 2003;Gallopín 2006) or societal and technical subsystems (Khazai et al 2013).…”
Section: Vulnerable Systems-vulnerability Of What?mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Consequently, the ontology on vulnerable systems shown in Fig. 3 explicitly refers to four classes of vulnerable systems: (1) ''natural systems'' for vulnerability studies referring to a set of subclasses that include physical systems (Calvalieri et al 2012), biological systems (De Lange et al 2010), and/or biophysical systems (O'Brien et al 2004); (2) ''social systems'' for vulnerability studies referring to the subclasses of population in general (Adger 1999;Carreño et al 2007), social groups, for example, communities (Cutter et al 2003;Bollin and Hidajat 2006), functional systems, such as the economy (Patt et al 2010), the public financial sector (Mechler et al 2006) or the health sector (Hahn et al 2009;Few and Tran 2010); and (3) ''technical systems,'' such as vulnerability studies referring to critical infrastructure (Hellström 2007;Kröger and Zio 2011). In addition, the ontology also accounts for a separate class of hybrid concepts referring to interactions between and within systems, such as in societal and ecological (biophysical) subsystems (Turner et al 2003;Gallopín 2006) or societal and technical subsystems (Khazai et al 2013).…”
Section: Vulnerable Systems-vulnerability Of What?mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…De Lange [33] concludes that both concepts represent different approaches to the same problem: one regarding resilience as a retrospective approach ("did the system return to its original state? "); other viewing vulnerability in a prospective way ("is a system likely to be impacted by a particular stressor?…”
Section: Vulnerabilitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, in spite of this relevance, few examples of vulnerability assessment have been presented in the literature. A state of the art overview is described by De Lange et al (2010). Ecological vulnerability must be assessed at different hierarchical levels (population, community, ecosystem, landscape).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Ecological vulnerability must be assessed at different hierarchical levels (population, community, ecosystem, landscape). Some definitions are given by De Lange et al (2010). The problem is not easy; particularly if one considers that the responses of different populations are generally different as a function of different stressors.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%