Unequal Vulnerability to Flood Hazards: “Ground Truthing” a Social Vulnerability Index of Five Municipalities in Metro Vancouver, Canada

Oulahen, Greg; Mortsch, Linda; Tang, Kathy; Harford, Deborah

doi:10.1080/00045608.2015.1012634

Cited by 103 publications

(76 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This finding becomes even more relevant when considering that several respondents work for the local Civil Defences and the National Centre for Monitoring and Early Warning of Natural Disasters (CEMADEN) -thus having great influence over deci-sions related to flood risk management in the region. These results reinforce the findings of other participatory modelling exercises (Falconi and Palmer, 2017;Kissinger et al, 2017;Maskrey et al, 2016;Oulahen et al, 2015;Voinov and Bousquet, 2010) that state that end users find it more accurate and useful when the model is created based on their perspectives.…”

Section: Reflections On the Participatory Processsupporting

confidence: 79%

“…The majority of respondents (95 %) were satisfied or very satisfied with the selected criteria, except for one participant. However, as highlighted by Oulahen et al (2015), the construction of any in- dex is likely to exclude variables considered relevant by some stakeholders.…”

Section: Reflections On the Participatory Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Indeed, assessing the criteria weights is seen as a sensitive and controversial step in the development of indices. According to Oulahen et al (2015), an unweighted index is still subjective rather than objective, as it treats all criteria as being equally important. Usually, weights are directly assigned by modellers using implicit judgements.…”

Section: Assigning Criteria Weights Using Ahp and Anpmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, participation and cooperation are key aspects for bridging the gap between modellers and end users and eventually between science and policy (Barthel et al, 2015;Voinov and Bousquet, 2010). If practitioners are involved in creating an index that they find useful, it is more likely they will incorporate it into policy decisions (Oulahen et al, 2015). Furthermore, better insights can be gained since knowledge beyond the boundaries of an organization is considered.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Participatory flood vulnerability assessment: a multi-criteria approach

Brito

Evers

Almoradie

2018

Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci.

132

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. This paper presents a participatory multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) approach for flood vulnerability assessment while considering the relationships between vulnerability criteria. The applicability of the proposed framework is demonstrated in the municipalities of Lajeado and Estrela, Brazil. The model was co-constructed by 101 experts from governmental organizations, universities, research institutes, NGOs, and private companies. Participatory methods such as the Delphi survey, focus groups, and workshops were applied. A participatory problem structuration, in which the modellers work closely with end users, was used to establish the structure of the vulnerability index. The preferences of each participant regarding the criteria importance were spatially modelled through the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) and analytical network process (ANP) multi-criteria methods. Experts were also involved at the end of the modelling exercise for validation. The final product is a set of individual and group flood vulnerability maps. Both AHP and ANP proved to be effective for flood vulnerability assessment; however, ANP is preferred as it considers the dependences among criteria. The participatory approach enabled experts to learn from each other and acknowledge different perspectives towards social learning. The findings highlight that to enhance the credibility and deployment of model results, multiple viewpoints should be integrated without forcing consensus.

show abstract

Section: Reflections On the Participatory Processsupporting

confidence: 79%

Section: Reflections On the Participatory Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Assigning Criteria Weights Using Ahp and Anpmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Participatory flood vulnerability assessment: a multi-criteria approach

Brito

Evers

Almoradie

2018

Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci.

132

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Effort has been made to validate indices either externally with real observable outcomes [29][30][31], or qualitatively with practitioners [32], or internally with sensitivity and uncertainty analysis [28]. Nonetheless, studies that focus on the validation of resilience indices, either qualitatively or quantitatively, are still uncommon.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing Community Resilience to Coastal Hazards in the Lower Mississippi River Basin

Cai

Lam

Zou

et al. 2016

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents an assessment of community resilience to coastal hazards in the Lower Mississippi River Basin (LMRB) region in southeastern Louisiana. The assessment was conducted at the census block group scale. The specific purpose of this study was to provide a quantitative method to assess and validate the community resilience to coastal hazards, and to identify the relationships between a set of socio-environmental indicators and community resilience. The Resilience Inference Measurement (RIM) model was applied to assess the resilience of the block groups. The resilience index derived was empirically validated through two statistical procedures: K-means cluster analysis of exposure, damage, and recovery variables to derive the resilience groups, and discriminant analysis to identify the key indicators of resilience. The discriminant analysis yielded a classification accuracy of 73.1%. The results show that block groups with higher resilience were concentrated generally in the northern part of the study area, including those located north of Lake Pontchartrain and in East Baton Rouge, West Baton Rouge, and Lafayette parishes. The lower-resilience communities were located mostly along the coastline and lower elevation area including block groups in southern Plaquemines Parish and Terrebonne Parish. Regression analysis between the resilience scores and the indicators extracted from the discriminant analysis suggests that community resilience was significantly linked to multicomponent capacities. The findings could help develop adaptation strategies to reduce vulnerability, increase resilience, and improve long-term sustainability for the coastal region.

show abstract

Understanding Communities and Their Risks

2020

Disaster Education, Communication and Engagement

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Unequal Vulnerability to Flood Hazards: “Ground Truthing” a Social Vulnerability Index of Five Municipalities in Metro Vancouver, Canada

Cited by 103 publications

References 33 publications

Participatory flood vulnerability assessment: a multi-criteria approach

Participatory flood vulnerability assessment: a multi-criteria approach

Assessing Community Resilience to Coastal Hazards in the Lower Mississippi River Basin

Understanding Communities and Their Risks

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About