Search

This paper provides an example for regional scale analysis of climate vulnerability incorporating environmental as well as socio-economic indicators. Researches have focused on different aspects of climate vulnerability so far, but usually there is little connection between the physical and social dimensions. Our study provides a more complex analysis, which builds on the application of international indices which have been used on the local and regional levels very rarely. In our research we combined physical and human geographical approaches and research techniques. The physical geographical assessment is based on indicators referring to ground water levels and vegetation production, while the human geographical side of the analysis focuses on economic and social sensitivity, adaptation and exposure indices, combined in the so-called socio-economic climate vulnerability index. In the analysis we tried to figure out the most sensitive areas in the Hungarian Southern Great Plain region. The main findings of the study are „hot spots" which coincide on both analyses, therefore, the most sensitive areas under current climate change conditions could be delimited. This study also demonstrates that the resolution of global climate change vulnerability indices is not suitable for regional scale analysis because of the significant territorial differences. Therefore, local or regional scale assessments are needed for the preparation of strategies for the elaboration of mitigation and adaptation policies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Most previously developed coastal vulnerability/sensitivity indices acknowledge that the addition of socioeconomic variables would assist in defining vulnerable areas. This study investigated the incorporation of socioeconomic variables into a GIS based coastal vulnerability index for wave-induced erosion in Northern Ireland. In this application, a socio-economic sub-index was developed to contribute potentially one third of the overall index score; the other components consisted of coastal forcing and coastal characteristic sub-indices. All variables were ranked on an arbitrary 1-5 scale with 5 being most vulnerable. The variables were merged within sub-indices and then the sub-indices were combined to produce the overall index. Several problems were encountered in assessing socio-economic vulnerability indicators. These relate to the inherent difficulties involved in ranking socio-economic data on an interval scale. Temporal aspects also caused difficulties as socio-economic variables vary over time as coastal populations and policies change. There were also problems in relation to the size of the unit used to display the data and how this affected the vulnerability of certain areas. Larger, more fundamental, problems in relation to human perceptions of vulnerability were also investigated. The final results of the combined index were tested against field and desk-top studies and although they correlated well with expected outcomes, the results did suggest an under representation of the socio-economic index. Suggestions are put forward to alleviate this problem in any future developments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]