Quantifying households' vulnerability, regional environmental indicators, and climate change mitigation by using a combination of vulnerability frameworks

Abstract

Many susceptible regions face significant climatic threats. This study proposes an extended framework by linking the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Vulnerability Framework and Sustainable Livelihood Framework to assess the impacts of ecological indicators, household vulnerability, and climate change mitigation. A major ecological region of northwestern Pakistan with diverse geographical and climatic conditions was selected. In total, 24 adjacent rural communes were randomly selected, and 300 farm households were face-to-face interviewed based on a pretested questionnaire. The study findings reveal that the Charsadda District is more vulnerable to climate change, having the highest exposure level compared to the Mardan District and the district of Nowshera. Our findings also show that there are small differences in adaptive capacity, sensitivity, and adaptation measures, and sensitivity sources are relatively distinctive among these three districts, which directly and indirectly influence the perception of farmers. Based on the sensitivity analysis, the sensitivity of the Mardan District is the highest in terms of crop and livestock diseases, while the highest sensitivity in terms of water is assumed in the Charsadda District. In terms of adaptive capacity, the advantages and disadvantages varied greatly between the three targeted study districts; specifically, Nowshera had equitable adaptive capacity, Mardan leaned entirely on capital sources, and Charsadda depended solely on advantages in education level. Diverse efforts to address the risks of climate change should be proposed aptly by considering the climatic, socioeconomic, and geographical characteristics of each district.

Digital Transformation and Corporate Environmental Green Innovation Nexus: An Approach towards Green Innovation Improvement

“…Therefore, this paper examines whether the effect of DTCB on green innovation is heterogeneous between enterprises with different degrees of digital transformation. This paper uses the method of [52][53][54][55] to construct the indicators reflecting the degree of enterprise digital transformation. The specific steps are as follows.…”

Assessing Vulnerability to Natural Hazards: An Intra-district Analysis of Chamba, Himachal Pradesh

“…This approach enhances the understanding of how ecosystem services can mitigate or exacerbate vulnerability in deltaic regions, facilitating more effective adaptation and risk reduction strategies. Shah Fahad et al [4]. investigated present a comprehensive study that quantifies household vulnerability while considering regional environmental indicators and climate change mitigation efforts [4].…”

“…Shah Fahad et al [4]. investigated present a comprehensive study that quantifies household vulnerability while considering regional environmental indicators and climate change mitigation efforts [4]. The research employs a combination of vulnerability frameworks to analyze the intricate relationship between household vulnerability, environmental conditions, and climate change mitigation practices.…”

“…They underscore the importance of adopting multidimensional frameworks that consider the complexities of social, ecological, and environmental systems when evaluating vulnerability and devising strategies for resilience and adaptation. Twinkle Thakur et al [5] proposed investigates the vulnerability of various sectors in Lug Valley, located in the Kullu District of Himachal Pradesh, to the impacts of climate change [4]. The study examines how climate change affects different aspects of this region, including water resources, agriculture, and livelihoods [6,7].…”

A study assessing the impact of income relative deprivation and cooperative membership on rural residents' health: A pathway towards improving the health status of rural residents

“…A substantial number of studies provide evidence of negative impacts on individuals' health attributed to relative deprivation [ 1 , [3] , [4] , [5] , [6] , [7] , [8] , [9] , [10] , [11] , [12] , [13] ]. These negative effects are manifested in the increase in psychological pressure [ 1 , 14 ], the frequency of smoking and drinking [ 4 ], the increased probability of chronic diseases [ 15 , 16 ], and a decrease in the probability of individuals' access to public goods and active participation in social activities, which lead people to not obtain enough social and emotional support, thus increasing the risk of disease and death [ 17 ].…”