2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2021.102199
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Indicator-based approach for the assessment of intrinsic physical vulnerability of the built environment to hydro-meteorological hazards: Review of indicators and example of parameters selection for a sample area

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
3

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The indicators used were quantified with the help of the well-known AHP method to interpret the findings comprehensively. The major indicators were selected for estimation of the physical, socio-cultural, economic, environmental, and climate change vulnerabilities (Ge et al 2021;Azar 2007;Cutter et al 2003;Zhao et al 2018;Beccari 2016;Birkmann 2006;Agliata et al 2021;Gupta et al 2020;Terzi 2019;Feldmeyer et al 2020;Rafiq and Blaschke 2012;Holub (Fatemi et al 2017;Kulatunga 2010;Rufat et al 2015;Ashraf et al 2017); economic vulnerability with sub-indicators (Chen et al 2013); climate change with sub-indicators -flash floods, snow avalanches, landslides, temperature, and rainfall (Shah et al 2020;Agliata et al 2021;Edmonds et al 2020); and geophysical environment vulnerability with sub-indicators -slope, geomorphology, elevation, and spect (Zhao et al 2018). The field survey and interviews focused on understanding emerging vulnerabilities in the region which were analyzed and calculated with the help of the AHP method.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The indicators used were quantified with the help of the well-known AHP method to interpret the findings comprehensively. The major indicators were selected for estimation of the physical, socio-cultural, economic, environmental, and climate change vulnerabilities (Ge et al 2021;Azar 2007;Cutter et al 2003;Zhao et al 2018;Beccari 2016;Birkmann 2006;Agliata et al 2021;Gupta et al 2020;Terzi 2019;Feldmeyer et al 2020;Rafiq and Blaschke 2012;Holub (Fatemi et al 2017;Kulatunga 2010;Rufat et al 2015;Ashraf et al 2017); economic vulnerability with sub-indicators (Chen et al 2013); climate change with sub-indicators -flash floods, snow avalanches, landslides, temperature, and rainfall (Shah et al 2020;Agliata et al 2021;Edmonds et al 2020); and geophysical environment vulnerability with sub-indicators -slope, geomorphology, elevation, and spect (Zhao et al 2018). The field survey and interviews focused on understanding emerging vulnerabilities in the region which were analyzed and calculated with the help of the AHP method.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Agliata et al (2021),Pereira et al (2020),Leal et al (2021),Kappes et al (2012) P2 Number of storeys* Taller buildings may have deeper foundations, making them less prone to flood damage, but can also be more susceptible to differential settlements due to poor ground conditions and shallow footingsAgliata et al (2021), Pereira et al (2020), Kappes et al (2012), Miranda and Ferreira (2019), Stephenson and D'Ayala (2014), D'Ayala et al (2020) P3 External cladding material The absorption of the cladding material directly affects the building fabric, influencing its vulnerability to floods Leal et al (2021), Kappes et al (2012) P4 Structural system The material of the structural system has an indirect impact on the building's performance during flooding compared to P3 and P7 Leal et al (2021), Kappes et al (2012) P5 Soil and lithological context The soil and lithological context control soil saturation and erodibility during flooding and, in accordance, with the building foundation choices and the structural system. This indicator ranks less significant in flood vulnerability due to higher uncertainty compared to other indicators Empirical data P6 Building exposure Isolated buildings are more prone to collapse, while non-isolated buildings are less vulnerable.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%