Geology, Ecology, and Landscapes

ISSN: (Print) 2474-9508 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tgel20

Assessing socio-economic vulnerability to

climate change-induced disasters: evidence from
Sundarban Biosphere Reserve, India

Mehebub Sahana, Sufia Rehman, Ashish Kumar Paul & Haroon Sajjad

To cite this article: Mehebub Sahana, Sufia Rehman, Ashish Kumar Paul & Haroon Sajjad
(2019): Assessing socio-economic vulnerability to climate change-induced disasters: evidence
from Sundarban Biosphere Reserve, India, Geology, Ecology, and Landscapes, DOI:
10.1080/24749508.2019.1700670

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/24749508.2019.1700670

© 2019 The Author(s). Published by Informa View supplementary material

UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis
Group on behalf of the International Water,
Air & Soil Conservation Society(INWASCON).

Published online: 10 Dec 2019. Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 722 View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tgel20
GEOLOGY, ECOLOGY, AND LANDSCAPES
https://doi.org/10.1080/24749508.2019.1700670 INWASCON

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Assessing socio-economic vulnerability to climate change-induced disasters:

evidence from Sundarban Biosphere Reserve, India
Mehebub Sahanaa, Sufia Rehmanb, Ashish Kumar Paulc and Haroon Sajjad b

a
Environmental Information System (ENVIS) Centre, Indira Gandhi Conservation Monitoring Centre-Geographic Information System
(IGCMC), WWF-India, New Delhi, India; bDepartment of Geography, Faculty of Natural Sciences, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi, India;
c
Department of Geography & Environment Management, Vidyasagar University, Midnapur, West Bengal, India

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

Indian Sundarban Biosphere Reserve (SBR), a fragile ecosystem, is susceptible to frequent Received 18 August 2019
cyclones, floods, and storm surge. The study impeccably analyzed the socio-economic vulner- Accepted 28 November 2019
ability in SBR using pragmatic approach. Average storm surge height, slope amount, flood KEYWORDS
inundation, drainage proximity, and drainage density were used for assessing exposure while Vulnerability; exposure;
sensitivity and adaptation were examined from the data derived through a comprehensive sensitivity; adaptation;
field survey of 570 households in SBR. The revelation of the study manifested very high pragmatic approach; SBR
vulnerability in Basanti, Gosaba, Kultali, Namkhana, and Patharpratima blocks and high vulner-
ability in Kakdwip, Sagar, and Hingalganj blocks of SBR. Constant exposure to cyclones and
storm surges, frivolous infrastructural setup, impoverish social structure, and lamentation of
losses are major barriers to overall socio-economic upliftment of communities. Consolidated
infrastructural setup, proper early warning system, disaster monitoring centres, better trans-
port connectivity within remote islands, better livelihood opportunities, education, and aware-
ness may help in improving the socio-economic conditions of the communities. Pragmatic
approach assisted in the cogent understanding of climate change impacts and indicated
adaptive and mitigation measures to improve coastal society in SBR. Thus, the approach has
proven to be effective for analyzing the impact of climate change-induced hazards on socio-
economic condition on the communities in coastal areas.

1. Introduction the extreme disaster events inclusively have risen

around 151% during the last 20 years (UNISDR,
IPCC (2007) has remarkably stated that “scientific evi-
2018). Developing nations are the most vulnerable to
dence for warming of the climate system is unequivocal.”
the destructions and damages caused by abrupt disas-
Rising concerns over climate change impacts have
ter events. Studies demonstrated that impoverish
led to the realization of intrinsic variability in climatic
groups are more vulnerable to disasters and suffer
regimes on the planet Earth. Researchers across the
most from their consequences (Twigg, 2004;
globe are concerned about understanding of climate
UNISDR, 2018; Wisner, Gaillard, & Kelman, 2012).
change and exploring its relative impacts on the eco-
Vulnerability can be assessed through analyzing the
system (Moss et al., 2010). The temperature has
relationship between physical and social systems using
increased up to 1°C, and the last five years recorded
a range of techniques. Selection of suitable site-specific
the highest temperature globally (UNDP: United
indicators is required to address multifaceted issues for
Nations Development Programme, 2019). If the tem-
vulnerability assessment (Hahn, Riederer, & Foster,
perature continues to rise at the current rate, it is
2009). Various scholars have utilized appropriate meth-
plausible that it may reach 1.5°C globally between
ods to assess vulnerability, e.g., gap method (Sullivan,
2030 and 2052. The mean global temperature is also
Meigh, & Fediw, 2002), human development index
anticipated to reach around 4°C by the end of the
(Bray, Jemal, Grey, Ferlay, & Forman, 2012), composite
century (IPCC, 2018). Climate-induced disasters
vulnerability index (Rygel, O’sullivan, & Yarnal, 2006),
have also become evident in many parts of the world.
sustainable livelihood security index (Sajjad & Nasreen,
Nearly 1.3 million deaths and 1.4 billion injuries were
2016), and fuzzy logic (Ahmed et al., 2018). Index-
reported due to geophysical and climatic disasters
based vulnerability analysis helps in explicit vulnerabil-
(storms, floods, tsunamis, heatwaves, drought, earth-
ity assessment by integrating various indicators mani-
quake, etc.) during 1998–2017. These vicious disasters
festing different vulnerability scenarios. Scholars have
have caused displacement and rendered homeless of
widely used these indices as effective policy tools
many people in disaster-affected nations. Losses from

CONTACT Haroon Sajjad [email protected] Department of Geography, Faculty of Natural Sciences, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi
110025, India
Supplemental data for this article can be accessed here.
© 2019 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group on behalf of the International Water, Air & Soil Conservation Society(INWASCON).
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits
unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
2 M. SAHANA ET AL.

(Kelkar, Balachandra, & Gurtoo, 2011; Malakar & complexity of varied problems. These indices are more
Mishra, 2017). Vulnerability assessment in a hazard- critical for climate change assessment (Sathyan, Funk,
affected region depends on its social and economic Aenis, Winker, & Breuer, 2018). Various antecedent
conditions (Malakar & Mishra, 2017). Such an assess- approaches were adopted to predict the future conse-
ment is very essential for determining the degree of quences of global climate change. One such approach
suffering of the relied population and economic struc- popularly known as pragmatism claimed wide acknowl-
ture due to disasters. It can be accomplished using both edgment in various disciplines. Pragmatistic thinking
the data sources, i.e.,, primary (Challinor, Simelton, was evolved in the United States during the late nine-
Fraser, Hemming, & Collins, 2010) and secondary teenth and the advent of the twentieth centuries. This
(Sahana & Sajjad, 2019). Vulnerability assessment and approach consisted of method and seeking truth behind
adaptation to climate change have inculcated cogitation the theory (Hammersley,2018). A practical approach to
among the scientific community (Tian & Lemos, 2018). climate mitigation and adaptation is essential for effica-
Successively, various case studies were carried out to cious hazard preparedness and indelible management.
examine the vulnerability to natural hazards (Bohle, Thus, the pragmatic approach calls for the practical
Downing, & Watts, 1994; Dumenu & Obeng, 2016; implementation of actions to identify the best practices
Fischer, Shah, Tubiello, & Van Velhuizen, 2005; for solving the problem (Miettinen, Samra-Fredericks,
Owusu & Nursey-Bray, 2019). Abid, Schilling, & Yanow, 2009).
Scheffran, and Zulfiqar (2016) examined the farm- Indian Sundarban Biosphere Reserve (SBR) sets an
level vulnerability to changing climate and extreme example of a dynamic ecosystem having the largest
weather events using vulnerability components and mangrove stretch among the important biodiversity
farmers’ affirmation. Climate change impacts on the reserves in the world. Impacts of cyclones, floods, and
socio-ecological system are complex and dynamic due storm surge are being evident since its existence
to inherent heterogeneity and uncertainty and require (Mukhopadhyay, 2009). Climate change has also con-
precise assessment. Pandey and Bardsley (2015) exam- tributed to increasing the frequency of extreme weather
ined socio-ecological vulnerability to climate change events (Raha, Das, Banerjee, & Mitra, 2012). The fre-
and unscrupulous resource distribution in the quent onset of climate change-induced disasters has
Himalayan region. Vulnerability assessment aims to always been detrimental to the local community.
distinguish the implications of changing climate and Thus, a social and economic vulnerability assessment
adaptation strategies in a given system. is imperative for understanding the smack of disasters
Scientific engineering and technical measures were and the formulation of efficient management strategies.
prominent for vulnerability assessment during the However, a scientific assertion on this problem is scant
1970s (Brooks, 2003), while social science-oriented (Slettebak, 2013). In this backcloth, this paper intends a
approaches were carried out for vulnerability assess- cogent examination of socio-economic vulnerability
ment during the 1980s. Vulnerability was partially ana- using pragmatic approach in the Reserve. The main
lyzed using the earlier approach which was later focus has been given to the increasing vulnerability of
replaced by a human-oriented approach involving the local community to evident disaster events and
environmental, social, economic, institutional, and eco- changing climate scenarios. Sea-level rise, cyclonic
nomic parameters (Blaikie, Cannon, Davis, & Wisner, depressions, floods, and rising temperature have signif-
2005; Ciurean, Schröter, & Glade, 2013). Vulnerability icantly contributed to induce vulnerability in the region
assessment varies with the people, place, and type of (Ghosh, Schmidt, Fickert, & Nüsser, 2015; Mahadevia
disaster implications (Dintwa, Letamo, & Ghimire & Vikas, 2012). Climate change has also threa-
Navaneetham, 2019). Vulnerability assessment in large tened the health of mangroves (Manna &
areas requires a more holistic and interdisciplinary Raychaudhuri, 2018). Thus, socio-economic vulnerabil-
approach (Ciurean et al., 2013). Most of the studies on ity assessment has important consideration in the
social vulnerability assessment have followed a semi- Indian SBR. We used a bootstrap methodology for
quantitative approach based on spatial, socio-economic, identifying and selecting site-specific indicators for con-
demographic, and field-derived indicators (Fekete, structing a vulnerability index. The vulnerability analy-
2019). The index-based disaster resilience assessment sis through this framework can be useful for assessing
is an integral part of the management and planning of relative regional vulnerability and identifying priority
natural hazards. Indices are helpful in ascertaining the regions for lessening the impact of climate change-
changes driven by hazards and priority areas of concern induced vulnerability.
which may be based on inductive, deductive, qualita-
tive, and quantitative approaches (Ogie & Pradhan,
2. Study area
2019). Composite indices are informative, analytical,
and collaborative. They facilitate effective decision- With immense heterogeneity in biodiversity, SBR is situ-
making, help in planning, and assist in raising the con- ated at the vertex of Bay of Bengal between 21°40ʹ to 22°
cerns for policy incentives by recognizing the 40ʹ north latitudes and 88°03ʹ to 89°07ʹ east longitudes
 GEOLOGY, ECOLOGY, AND LANDSCAPES 3

(Mitra, Banerjee, Sengupta, & Gangopadhyay, 2009). Of economic activities in SBR (Mahadevia Ghimire &
the total area of the Reserve (9630 km2), 4264 km2 is Vikas, 2012).
under mangrove forest, 2195 km2 is under wetlands
cover, and 5,366 km2 is under built up. SBR consists of
3. Database and methodology
19 blocks (administrative divisions of the district)
spreading over north and south Twenty-Four Parganas The composite socio-economic index was constructed
districts of West Bengal (Hazra, Ghosh, DasGupta, & as a function of exposure, sensitivity, and adaptation.
Sen, 2002). This magnificent deltaic ecosystem sustains Average storm surge height, slope amount, flood inun-
a large variety of mangrove species (Excoecaria dation, drainage proximity, and drainage density were
agallochaLinn., Porteresia coarctata Roxb., Phoenix palu- used for assessing exposure. Flood inundation layer
dosa Roxb., etc.) and beasts (Royal Bengal Tiger, various was prepared using a shuttle radar topographic mis-
reptiles, spotted dear, marine turtles, and Gangetic dol- sion digital elevation model (SRTM DEM-1 arc sec-
phins). Having 102 islands (48 inhabited and 54 being ond) through spatial modeling. Proximity to the
uninhabited), SBR enjoys a tropical wet climate with a drainage layer was prepared by digitizing the rivers
short dry spell between November and April. The from topographical sheet (1:50,000) and Google earth
Reserve experiences high relative humidity and tempera- and using buffer analysis in ArcGIS. Euclidean dis-
ture throughout the year with heavy rainfall during tance function in ArcGIS was used to prepare the
monsoon season. The minimum temperature ranges drainage density layer. The slope was calculated from
between 2° and 4°C, while the maximum reaches to 43° SRTM DEM data using spatial analysis tool in ArcGIS,
C in March. Mean annual precipitation ranges between while data of average storm surge height were
150 and 200 cm. Tropical cyclones, storm surges, and obtained from Indian Meteorological Department
floods are the common phenomena during monsoon (IMD) and converted into raster format using the
(Figure 1). Hooghly, Ganga, Muriganga, and Ichamati IDW function in ArcGIS. The data regarding indica-
are the significant rivers in the study area. SBR owes tors of sensitivity and adaptation were collected at the
recent geological origin (6000–7000 years before present) household level using multi-stage cluster sampling
as an outcome of long depositional work of River Ganga method. We first selected villages from the study
and Bay of Bengal (Banerjee, Senthilkumar, Purvaja, & area. Each block was divided into two strata (nearer
Ramesh, 2012; Gopal & Chauhan, 2006). This fragile to waterbody and one situated in the mainland). From
delta is a home of 4.37 million people and provides each of these strata, one village was selected randomly.
immense resources for their sustenance. Agriculture is From each block (the study area is divided into 19
the mainstay of the economy, while prawn cultivation, blocks), two villages were selected randomly. In this
fishing, and honey collection are the other important way, 38 villages were selected from the study area. In

Figure 1. (a) Location of West Bengal in India, (b) location of SBR in West Bengal state, and (c) location of community development
blocks in SBR.
4 M. SAHANA ET AL.

the second stage, the selection of households was made Component vulnerability score was then calculated by
on the basis of a stratified random sampling technique. averaging the weighted score of all sub-components
In this stage, the strata considered were occupation of for each domain category:
the community (cultivators, fishermen, daily wage Pn
k¼1 ðWISÞk
labourers, businessmen, and government servants). COV i ¼ Pn
From each occupation class, three households were k¼1 ðaverage weightÞk
selected. In this way, 15 households were selected where COVi is the component score of the vulnerabil-
from each village. Thus, a total 570 households were ity index of each block; WISk is the weighted index
selected for in-depth study. A questionnaire was score of each sub-component.
designed to collect the relevant information related Composite socio-economic vulnerability with its
to socio-economic vulnerability. The questionnaire three components of adaptation capacity, sensitivity,
contained questions on household profile, demo- and exposure following IPCC pragmatic approach was
graphic, social, economic, health, food and water, calculated:
and physical and infrastructural indicators. Sufficient P2
care was taken to make the questionnaire communic- j DOj
COVadaptation capacity ¼
able to the respondents. One of the authors belonged 2
to the study area and worked as a major source of help
P2
in asking questions. IPCC pragmatic approach was j DOj
used to construct a composite socio-economic vulner- COVsensitivity ¼
2
ability index (SeVI) using six major socio-economic
X
components and their sub-indicators (Figure 2, COVexposure ¼ DOm
Appendix 1). m¼1

The sub-components were standardized between 0 where j, l, and m denote the number of components
and 1. Each sub-component has an equal contribution under exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity
to the SeVI index, and a balanced weighted approach (Table 4), and “i” denotes the blocks. Finally, the
was used for calculating the SeVI (Hahn et al., 2009): block-level composite socio-economic vulnerability
(SeVI) was obtained:
Weighted index score ðWISÞk
DMadaptation capacity þ DMsensitivity þ DMexposure
¼ ðcomponent index scoreÞ  ðaverage index scoreÞ SeVI ¼
3

Figure 2. Methodological framework of the study.

 GEOLOGY, ECOLOGY, AND LANDSCAPES 5

3.1 Rationale for the selection of indicators livestock death, and percentage of households suffered
from home damage were chosen for assessing eco-
Vulnerability demands assessment and policy mea-
nomic conditions of surveyed households in SBR.
sure, and thus, scholars have used various indicators
Distance to health centre, percentage of households
to quantify the degree of vulnerability (Abuodha &
affected from vector-borne diseases, percentage of
Woodroffe, 2010; Hahn et al., 2009; Luers, Lobell,
households affected with waterborne diseases, percen-
Sklar, Addams, & Matson, 2003; Orencio, 2014; Sam,
tage of households with death caused due to natural
Kumar, Kächele, & Müller, 2017; Szlafsztein & Sterr,
hazards, and percentage of households attending
2007). In the present study, we have examined socio-
health awareness camp and frequent check-up in the
economic vulnerability in SBR using its major compo-
near hospital were chosen as sub-components for
nents and their site-specific sub-indicators. Major
assessing health vulnerability.
components, namely, demographic, social, economic,
Socio-economic vulnerability assessment incapaci-
food and water, and infrastructural components were
tates the analysis of the direction of socio-economic
used to examine the degree of sensitivity and adapta-
implications caused by climate change-induced disas-
tion. Exposure was analyzed using average storm surge
ters. Income, type of housing structures, health status,
height, slope amount, flood inundation, drainage
level of education, family structure, disabled popula-
proximity, and drainage density indicators. Slope
tion, and occupation have been identified as the essen-
amount is an important factor in highlighting the
tial components for vulnerability assessment (Demel,
coastal susceptibility to floods and storm surges. The
Udayanga, Gajanayake, Hapuarachchi, & Perera, 2019).
lower slope is more affected by seawater penetration
Percentage of the sampled households with own agri-
and inundation (Kumar, Mahendra, Nayak,
cultural production, percentage of households which
Radhakrishnan, & Sahu, 2010). The coastal areas of
have lost their agricultural land, percentage of house-
SBR are adversely affected by flood inundation and
holds fetching water from >1 km distance, percentage of
storm surge; thus, these indicators were chosen to
households using pond water as drinking water, per-
analyze the vulnerability of the coastal blocks. Higher
centage of households using boiled water for drinking,
stream density results in a higher probability of spread
and percentage of households having water facilities
and inundation (Golladay & Battle, 2002). Mean
within premises sub-components were chosen to assess
stream density, stream frequency, and morphology of
the food and water vulnerability. Percentage of house-
the basin determine the fluvial dynamics such as flood
holds without electricity facility, percentage of house-
occurrence, frequency, and size of the affected region
holds without toilet facility, percentage of households
(Bhattacharjee, 2016). The demographic vulnerability
with no accessibility to paved road, percentage of
was assessed by using six important sub-components,
households having cemented house, distance to school,
namely, dependency ratio in the sampled households
and percentage of households located along the river/
(HHs), percentage of illiterate household heads, per-
road side sub-components were used for assessing the
centage of female-headed households, percentage of
physical and infrastructural vulnerability.
household heads with higher education, percentage of
households with basic housing structure, and percen-
tage of old and child population. Age, gender, class,
4. Results
and economic status assume greater significance in
analyzing disaster risk reduction (Ayeb-Karlsson et Most of the coastal blocks of SBR have experienced
al., 2019). high and very high vulnerability. High degree of expo-
The social characteristics such as level of education, sure and sensitivity while low level of adaptation has
income, and disabled population are significant indi- substantially contributed to very high to high vulner-
cators for the risk mitigation process (Papathoma- ability of these blocks. Demographic, social, economic,
Köhle, Cristofari, Wenk, & Fuchs, 2019). Six sub- food and water, and infrastructure components con-
components, namely, percentage of illiterate house- tributed to varying degrees of vulnerability in these
holds, percentage of landless households, percentage blocks. Coastal blocks were found more exposed to
of scheduled castes/scheduled tribes (SC/ST) house- coastal disasters and sensitive to the damages driven
holds, percentage of households with family members by them. Low level of adaptation attributed to very
migrated outside, percentage of households with pri- high and high vulnerability in the coastal blocks of
mary source of income, and ratio of non-agricultural SBR. Most of the sampled households of coastal
income to total income were chosen for assessing islands were badly affected by asset loss and home
social vulnerability in SBR. Percentage of households damages. Soil erosion and coastal inundation are
depending on natural sources for income, percentage major causes of vector-borne and waterborne diseases
of unemployed households, percentage of households among the sampled households. The composite socio-
below poverty line, percentage of households with economic vulnerability revealed that low health status
asset and land losses, percentage of households with and less access to food and water, low economic
6 M. SAHANA ET AL.

condition, and low provision of infrastructure are economic, health, food and water, and physical and infra-
causes for high and very highsocio-economic vulner- structural factors increased the sensitivity of these blocks.
ability of the sampled households in SBR. The compo- The high dependency ratio, unemployment, high propor-
nents of the SeVI are presented in Figure 3. tion of child and women, unavailability of electricity,
sanitation facilities, high vector and waterborne diseases,
and unavailability of paved roads were identified signifi-
4.1 Relative performance of vulnerability
cant sub-indicators for raising the degree of sensitivity of
components
these blocks. Hingalganj, Sagar, and Kakdwip blocks
Very high exposure was found in Patharpratima, experienced high sensitivity due to low social, demo-
Namkhana, Kultali, and Gosaba blocks. All the factors graphic, and economic structure. Most of the households
of exposure were found inducing very high exposure in in these blocks were illiterate, largely affected by disaster
these blocks. Basanti, Kakdwip, Sagar, Sandeshkhali II, damages, and located along the rivers. Moderate sensitiv-
and Hasnabad blocks experienced high exposure. High ity prevailed in Sandeshkhali II, Hasnabad, and
drainage density, drainage proximity, and high storm Sandeshkhali II blocks. Demographic, health, and food
surge height were identified the main factors for and water components contributed moderate sensitivity
increasing the exposure in these blocks. Only two in these blocks (Figure 5 and Table 2). Minakhan,
blocks, namely, Sandeshkhali I and Minakhan blocks Mathurapur I, Mathurapur II, Jaynagar II, Haroa,
were found under moderate exposure. Low exposure Canning II, Jaynagar I, and Canning I blocks were experi-
was found in Mathurapur I, Mathurapur II, Haroa, enced low sensitivity. These blocks have a good socio-
Jaynagar I, Jaynagar II, Canning I, and Canning II economic status than the rest of the blocks in SBR.
blocks (Figure 4 and Table 1). These blocks being In the case of adaptation, Jaynagar II, Haroa,
located away from the coast are less affected by flood Canning II, Jaynagar I, Canning I, and Mathurapur
inundation and storm surge. II blocks registered very high adaptation. The high
Sensitivity analysis revealed that Patharpratima, adaptation was identified in Minakhan, Mathurapur
Namkhana, Kultali, Gosaba, and Basanti blocks were I, Kakdwip, and Sandeshkhali I blocks. These blocks
very highly sensitive in SBR. Demographic, social, have performed well in higher education, have a good

Figure 3. Components of socio-economic vulnerability index: (a) demographic, (b) economic, (c) health, (d) social, (e) food and
water, and (f) physical and infrastructure.
 GEOLOGY, ECOLOGY, AND LANDSCAPES 7

Figure 4. Degree of household exposure in SBR. Figure 5. Degree of household sensitivity in SBR.

health condition, have a high percentage of cemented Patharpratima, Namkhana, Kultali, Gosaba, and Basanti
houses, and have sources of water within their pre- blocks. These blocks registered a high degree of exposure
mises. Only two blocks, namely, Sagar and Basanti and sensitivity. The frequent onset of disasters, lack of
experienced moderate adaptation, while Hasnabad, early warning system, and unscrupulous health facilities
Sandeshkhali II, Namkhana, Gosaba, Patharpratima, are also responsible for increasing the vulnerability of
Hingalganj, and Kultali blocks were found under low these blocks. Thus, adaptation must be increased to lessen
adaptation (Table 3 and Figure 6). These blocks regis- the impact of vulnerability in these blocks. High vulner-
tered low level of higher education, lack of amenities ability prevailed in Sagar, Kakdwip, and Hingalganj
and facilities, and prevalence of muddy structures. blocks of SBR. High degree of exposure and sensitivity
Effective adaptation measures are required to increase while low adaptation contributed high vulnerability in
the level of adaptation in these blocks. these blocks. Minakhan, Sandeshkhali I, Sandeshkhali II,
and Hasnabad blocks were found under moderate vul-
nerability, while Jaynagar II, Haroa, Mathurapur I,
4.2 Composite socio-economic vulnerability (SeVI)
Mathurapur II, Canning II, Jaynagar I, and Canning I
The vulnerability scores are presented in Figure 7. blocks found under low vulnerability (Table 4 and
Analysis of composite socio-economic vulnerability Figure 8). These blocks are situated inland areas and
(SeVI) revealed a very high vulnerability in have a high degree of adaptation than the coastal blocks.

Table 1. Index values of exposure indicators in SBR.

Block Flood inundation Proximity to the drainage Drainage density Slope amount Average storm surge height Exposure
Canning I 0.21 0.23 0.26 0.21 0.24 0.23
Jaynagar I 0.27 0.26 0.27 0.24 0.31 0.27
Canning II 0.27 0.25 0.24 0.25 0.28 0.25
Mathurapur II 0.31 0.31 0.35 0.29 0.29 0.31
Mathurapur I 0.36 0.33 0.32 0.41 0.39 0.36
Haroa 0.32 0.31 0.33 0.29 0.35 0.32
Jaynagar II 0.31 0.29 0.32 0.29 0.34 0.31
Hasnabad 0.59 0.59 0.54 0.62 0.63 0.59
Sandeshkhali I 0.54 0.56 0.58 0.55 0.56 0.55
Sandeshkhali II 0.68 0.68 0.67 0.71 0.68 0.68
Minakhan 0.52 0.56 0.55 0.51 0.51 0.53
Hingalganj 0.81 0.79 0.75 0.76 0.78 0.78
Kakdwip 0.69 0.71 0.71 0.67 0.67 0.69
Sagar 0.7 0.69 0.67 0.66 0.68 0.68
Basanti 0.76 0.76 0.77 0.74 0.73 0.75
Gosaba 0.79 0.82 0.83 0.78 0.83 0.81
Kultali 0.87 0.89 0.88 0.87 0.81 0.86
Namkhana 0.85 0.91 0.95 0.98 0.96 0.93
Patharpratima 0.86 0.92 0.96 0.97 0.95 0.93
Source: Authors’ own calculations based on satellite data.
8 M. SAHANA ET AL.

Table 2. Index values of sensitivity indicators in SBR.

Block Demographic Social Economic Health Food & water Physical & Infrastructural Sensitivity Index
Canning I 0.21 0.25 0.18 0.19 0.22 0.20 0.21
Jaynagar I 0.20 0.21 0.23 0.24 0.24 0.21 0.22
Canning II 0.23 0.22 0.22 0.26 0.24 0.24 0.23
Mathurapur II 0.24 0.30 0.32 0.36 0.29 0.28 0.30
Mathurapur I 0.34 0.27 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.33 0.31
Haroa 0.28 0.25 0.30 0.34 0.32 0.24 0.29
Jaynagar II 0.29 0.32 0.27 0.28 0.32 0.27 0.29
Hasnabad 0.43 0.40 0.43 0.39 0.41 0.42 0.41
Sandeshkhali-I 0.42 0.43 0.38 0.40 0.37 0.38 0.40
Sandeshkhali-II 0.42 0.41 0.38 0.41 0.44 0.43 0.41
Minakhan 0.37 0.38 0.39 0.38 0.42 0.37 0.39
Hingalganj 0.75 0.69 0.71 0.75 0.72 0.72 0.72
Kakdwip 0.71 0.67 0.67 0.68 0.64 0.69 0.68
Sagar 0.73 0.71 0.69 0.71 0.71 0.72 0.71
Basanti 0.81 0.79 0.75 0.78 0.78 0.81 0.79
Gosaba 0.81 0.82 0.76 0.78 0.82 0.77 0.79
Kultali 0.83 0.79 0.80 0.84 0.84 0.79 0.82
Namkhana 0.88 0.85 0.87 0.88 0.84 0.86 0.86
Patharpratima 0.90 0.91 0.95 0.92 0.89 0.90 0.91
Source: Authors’ own calculations based on field survey (2018)

Table 3. Index values of adaptation indicators in SBR.

Block Demographic Social Economic Health Food and water Physical and infrastructural Adaptive capacity
Canning I 0.63 0.64 0.65 0.7 0.7 0.71 0.67
Jaynagar I 0.69 0.66 0.69 0.72 0.71 0.69 0.69
Canning II 0.72 0.75 0.79 0.65 0.68 0.69 0.71
Mathurapur II 0.62 0.65 0.68 0.69 0.66 0.62 0.65
Mathurapur I 0.63 0.61 0.62 0.63 0.62 0.61 0.62
Haroa 0.63 0.72 0.75 0.78 0.72 0.71 0.71
Jaynagar II 0.71 0.74 0.69 0.73 0.75 0.76 0.73
Hasnabad 0.38 0.4 0.39 0.4 0.42 0.41 0.4
Sandeshkhali I 0.54 0.52 0.48 0.52 0.55 0.58 0.53
Sandeshkhali II 0.39 0.38 0.39 0.49 0.36 0.34 0.39
Minakhan 0.64 0.65 0.64 0.62 0.61 0.64 0.63
Hingalganj 0.32 0.34 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.29 0.31
Kakdwip 0.53 0.54 0.53 0.52 0.53 0.54 0.53
Sagar 0.52 0.53 0.5 0.5 0.51 0.52 0.51
Basanti 0.42 0.43 0.45 0.42 0.4 0.39 0.41
Gosaba 0.33 0.32 0.34 0.35 0.36 0.34 0.34
Kultali 0.26 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.31 0.33 0.29
Namkhana 0.35 0.33 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34
Patharpratima 0.29 0.28 0.33 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.31
Source: Authors’ own calculations based on field survey (2018).

Table 4. SeVI and its component indices in SBR. 5. Discussion and policy implication
Composite
socio-economic The overall analysis of socio-economic vulnerability to
Exposure Sensitivity Adaptation vulnerability climate change revealed that the majority of the
Blocks indices indices indices index
sampled households in SBR was highly affected by
Canning I 0.23 0.21 0.67 0.37
Jaynagar I 0.27 0.22 0.69 0.39 flood and cyclone hazards. Decrease in fish production
Canning II 0.25 0.23 0.71 0.40 and salinization of agricultural land are the major
Mathurapur II 0.31 0.30 0.65 0.42
Mathurapur I 0.36 0.31 0.62 0.43 threats to coastal communities. Water- and vector-
Haroa 0.32 0.29 0.71 0.44 borne diseases and inadequacy of medical facilities
Jaynagar II 0.31 0.29 0.73 0.44
Hasnabad 0.59 0.41 0.4 0.47 are also affecting the health of the people. Many agri-
Sandeshkhali I 0.55 0.40 0.53 0.49 cultural lands in coastal blocks were severely affected
Sandeshkhali II 0.68 0.41 0.39 0.49
Minakhan 0.53 0.39 0.63 0.52
by salinity intrusion and thus rendered without culti-
Hingalganj 0.78 0.72 0.31 0.60 vations aftermath of Aila cyclone in 2009. Moreover,
Kakdwip 0.69 0.68 0.53 0.63 due to huge losses of mangrove forests, there are
Sagar 0.68 0.71 0.51 0.63
Basanti 0.75 0.79 0.41 0.65 several restrictions from the government for the col-
Gosaba 0.81 0.79 0.34 0.65 lection of forest products. Consequently, large-scale
Kultali 0.86 0.82 0.29 0.66
Namkhana 0.93 0.86 0.34 0.71 migration has occurred from these coastal blocks.
Patharpratima 0.93 0.91 0.31 0.72 This has affected the socio-economic conditions of
Source: Authors’ own calculations based on satellite data and field survey SBR to a larger extent.
(2018).
 GEOLOGY, ECOLOGY, AND LANDSCAPES 9

increasing the knowledge about disaster implication

at the households’ level and assist in location-specific
vulnerability assessment (Ahsan & Warner, 2014;
Kontogianni, Damigos, Kyrtzoglou, Tourkolias, &
Skourtos, 2019; Sorg et al., 2018). SeVI analysis
revealed that Patharpratima, Namkhana, Kultali,
Gosaba, Basanti, Sagar, Kakdwip, Hingalganj,
Minakhan, Sandeshkhali II, Sandeshkhali I, and
Hasnabad blocks require immediate attention to mini-
mize the level of vulnerability (Table 3). These blocks
have registered a high degree of exposure and sensi-
tivity with negligible adaptation. These priority blocks
are located along the coast and have been experiencing
huge devastation due to disasters. Thus, efforts could
be made to increase the adaptive capacity in these
blocks as improving the early warning system, disaster
preparedness, infrastructural development, provision
of basic health facilities, and improvement of infra-
structure to reduce the socio-economic vulnerability.
Jaynagar II, Haroa, Mathurapur I, Mathurapur II,
Figure 6. Degree of household adaptation in SBR. Canning II, Jaynagar I, and Canning I blocks also
require attention to minimize the degree of exposure
SeVI has been identified as an effective tool for while efforts should be made to minimize the sensitiv-
analyzing vulnerability at the household level. It ity in Canning II, Jaynagar I, and Canning I blocks of
enhances disaster management intervention by SBR (Table 5).

Figure 7. IPCC-dimension-wise vulnerability scores for the blocks of SBR.

10 M. SAHANA ET AL.

6. Conclusion
This article has explored the extent of household
vulnerability in the tenuous ecosystem of the
Indian SBR using pragmatic approach. A total of
6 socio-economic components and 36 sub-compo-
nents were used to develop the composite SeVI.
Spatial analysis of composite socio-economic vul-
nerability revealed very high vulnerability in
Basanti, Gosaba, Kultali, Namkhana, and
Patharpratima blocks. These blocks are highly
exposed to extreme weather events and socio-eco-
nomically sensitive. Kakdwip, Sagar, and
Hingalganj blocks experienced high socio-economic
vulnerability due to deprived social structure, fri-
volous infrastructure, low economic condition, and
meagre healthcare facilities. These blocks also suf-
fered from severe water, food, and health problems.
Many of the sampled households were found using
pond or river water as drinking water in these
Figure 8. Composite socio-economic vulnerability index (SeVI) blocks. Mathurapur I, Mathurapur II, Haroa,
of the sampled households in various blocks of SBR. Minakhan, Sandeshkhali I, Sandeshkhali II, and
Hasnabad blocks came under moderate socio-eco-
Table 5. Priority blocks for vulnerability reduction in SBR. nomic vulnerability. Mathurapur I, Mathurapur II,
Exposure Sensitivity Adaptation
and Jaynagar II require immediate attention and
Blocks indices indices indices efficacious policy measures for socio-economic
Canning I √ √ – development in SBR.
Jaynagar I √ √ –
Canning II √ √ – Strengthening the social system with provision of
Mathurapur II √ – – economic opportunities is essential for lessening
Mathurapur I √ – –
Haroa √ – –
socio-economic vulnerability. Education and aware-
Jaynagar II √ – – ness among local communities may ameliorate the
Hasnabad √ √ √ understanding of the magnitude and implications of
Sandeshkhali I √ √ √
Sandeshkhali II √ √ √ severe weather events. Consolidated infrastructural
Minakhan √ √ √ setup, proper early warning system, disaster monitor-
Hingalganj √ √ √
Kakdwip √ √ √ ing centres, and better transport connectivity within
Sagar √ √ √ remote islands may enhance the mobility and provide
Basanti √ √ √
Gosaba √ √ √ long-term sustainability in the development of SBR.
Kultali √ √ √ Improvement in healthcare facilities, indurate
Namkhana √ √ √
Patharpratima √ √ √
embankment along the rivers and villages located
Source: Authors’ own calculation based on SeVI analysis.
along coastal areas, capturing better livelihood oppor-
tunities as tourism, minimizing population pressure
on resources, mangrove conservation, and disaster
Formulation of holistic vulnerability framework, risk management are other measures which if adopted
inclusion of coastal communities in suggesting adaptative may uplift the physical and social structure of the
measures, and effective coastal zone management plan Reserve. Moreover, enhancing the traditional activities
will be helpful in lessening the impact of vulnerability in may have a credible positive impact than advancing
SBR. However, scientific uncertainty leads to decision the new ones. Further, vulnerability studies may
paralysis and biasness in policy for local-level adaptation. include analysis of the magnitude of disaster damages,
Cost-effective solutions, increasing knowledge among and more inherent indicators for vulnerability assess-
coastal communities, enhancing resistance capacity, facil- ment must be incorporated. Use of comprehensive
itating disaster response, and enhancing coordination index may also increase the feasibility of climate
among stakeholders, communities, and regional policy- change-induced vulnerability assessment. Monitoring
makers may help to overcome the policy issues, increase the spatial pattern of physical changes in landscape
in adaptation, and lessening the vulnerability in coastal and adoption of sustainable approach (ecological,
areas. Management of natural resources and increasing social, and economic components) may be effective
adaptation among farmers will also help to reduce the in planning and managing the critical natural
vulnerability in SBR. resources in vulnerable hotspots.
 GEOLOGY, ECOLOGY, AND LANDSCAPES 11

Highlights Bohle, H. G., Downing, T. E., & Watts, M. J. (1994). Climate

change and social vulnerability: Toward a sociology and
● Pragmatic approach was utilized for analyzing socio- geography of food insecurity. Global Environmental
economic vulnerability in SBR Change, 4(1), 37–48.
● Components and sub-components of exposure, sensitiv- Bray, F., Jemal, A., Grey, N., Ferlay, J., & Forman, D. (2012).
ity, and adaptation were analyzed Global cancer transitions according to the Human
● Coastal blocks were highly and very highly vulnerable to Development Index (2008–2030): A population-based
disasters study. The Lancet Oncology, 13(8), 790–801.
● Remoteness, frivolous infrastructural setup, and land Brooks, N. (2003). Vulnerability, risk and adaptation: A
losses restricted development conceptual framework. Tyndall Centre for Climate
● Monitoring centres, early warning system, and awareness Change Research Working Paper, 38(38), 1–16.
mechanism are suggested Challinor, A. J., Simelton, E. S., Fraser, E. D. G., Hemming,
D., & Collins, M. (2010). Increased crop failure due to
climate change: Assessing adaptation options using mod-
Acknowledgments els and socio-economic data for wheat in China.
Environmental Research Letters, 5(3), 034012, (8pp).
The authors are incredibly thankful to the anonymous Ciurean, R. L., Schroter, D., & Glade, T. (2013). Conceptual
reviewers for their constructive comments and suggestions frameworks of vulnerability assessments for natural dis-
which helped to improve the overall quality of the work. asters reduction. In Approaches to disaster management—
Examining the implications of hazards, emergencies and
disasters. Tiefenbacher, J. (Ed.), (pp. 3-31). London, UK:
Disclosure statement IntechOpen. doi:10.5772/55538
Demel, M. S. V., Udayanga, N. W. B. A. L., Gajanayake, B.,
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Hapuarachchi, B., & Perera, D. (2019). Developing a
socioeconomic vulnerability index using two agricultural
communities exposed to climate change: A case study in
ORCID Wanathawilluwa in Puttlam District of Sri Lanka. Applied
Haroon Sajjad http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2007-1266 Economics & Business, 3(1), 70–79.
Dintwa, K. F., Letamo, G., & Navaneetham, K. (2019).
Measuring social vulnerability to natural hazards at the
References district level in Botswana. Jàmbá Journal of Disaster Risk
Studies, 11(1). doi:10.4102/jamba.v11i1.447
Abid, M., Schilling, J., Scheffran, J., & Zulfiqar, F. (2016). Dumenu, W. K., & Obeng, E. A. (2016). Climate change and
Climate change vulnerability, adaptation and risk percep- rural communities in Ghana: Social vulnerability,
tions at farm level in Punjab, Pakistan. Science of the Total impacts, adaptations and policy implications.
Environment, 547, 447–460. Environmental Science & Policy, 55, 208–217.
Abuodha, P. A., & Woodroffe, C. D. (2010). Assessing Fekete, A. (2019). Social vulnerability (re-) assessment in
vulnerability to sea-level rise using a coastal sensitivity context to natural hazards: Review of the usefulness of the
index: A case study from southeast Australia. Journal of spatial indicator approach and investigations of valida-
Coastal Conservation, 14(3), 189–205. tion demands. International Journal of Disaster Risk
Ahmed, R., Sajjad, H., & Husain, I. (2018). Morphometric para- Science, 10(2), 1–13.
meters-based prioritization of sub-watersheds using fuzzy Fischer, G., Shah, M. N., Tubiello, F., & Van Velhuizen, H.
analytical hierarchy process: A case study of lower Barpani (2005). Socio-economic and climate change impacts on
Watershed, India. Natural Resources Research, 27(1), 67–75. agriculture: An integrated assessment, 1990–2080.
Ahsan, M. N., & Warner, J. (2014). The socioeconomic Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B:
vulnerability index: A pragmatic approach for assessing Biological Sciences, 360(1463), 2067–2083.
climate change led risks—A case study in the south- Ghosh, A., Schmidt, S., Fickert, T., & Nüsser, M. (2015). The
western coastal Bangladesh. International Journal of Indian Sundarban mangrove forests: History, utilization,
Disaster Risk Reduction, 8, 32–49. conservation strategies and local perception. Diversity, 7
Ayeb-Karlsson, S., Kniveton, D., Cannon, T., van der Geest, (2), 149–169.
K., Ahmed, I., Derrington, E. M., . . . Opondo, D. O. Golladay, S. W., & Battle, J. (2002). Effects of flooding and
(2019). I will not go, I cannot go: Cultural and social drought on water quality in gulf coastal plain streams in
limitations of disaster preparedness in Asia, Africa, and Georgia. Journal of Environmental Quality, 31(4), 1266–
Oceania. Disasters, 43(4), 752–770. 1272.
Banerjee, K., Senthilkumar, B., Purvaja, R., & Ramesh, R. Gopal, B., & Chauhan, M. (2006). Biodiversity and its con-
(2012). Sedimentation and trace metal distribution in servation in the Sundarban mangrove ecosystem. Aquatic
selected locations of Sundarbans mangroves and Sciences, 68(3), 338–354.
Hooghly estuary, northeast coast of India. Hahn, M. B., Riederer, A. M., & Foster, S. O. (2009). The
Environmental Geochemistry and Health, 34(1), 27–42. livelihood vulnerability index: A pragmatic approach to
Bhattacharjee, N. (2016). Links among drainage density, assessing risks from climate variability and change—A
frequency and flooding in Nanoi Rivers Basin, Assam. case study in Mozambique. Global Environmental
International Journal of Interdisciplinary Research in Change, 19(1), 74–88.
Science Society and Culture, 2(1), 43–57. Hammersley, M. (2018). Routledge revivals: The dilemma of
Blaikie, P., Cannon, T., Davis, I., & Wisner, B. (2005). At qualitative method (1989): Herbert Blumer and the
risk: Natural hazards, people’s vulnerability and disasters. Chicago tradition. Routledge, London. doi:10.4324/
Routledge, London and New York. 9781351037709
12 M. SAHANA ET AL.

Hazra, S., Ghosh, T., DasGupta, R., & Sen, G. (2002). Sea Orencio, P. M. (2014). Developing and applying composite
level and associated changes in the Sundarbans. Science indicators for assessing and characterizing vulnerability
and Culture, 68(9/12), 309–321. and resilience of coastal communities to environmental
IPCC. (2007). Fourth assessment report. Intergovernmental and social change.
Panel on Climate Change Secretariat. Geneva, Owusu, M., & Nursey-Bray, M. (2019). Socio-economic and
Switzerland. Retrieved from https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/ institutional drivers of vulnerability to climate change in
assessment-report/ar4/wg2/ar4_wg2_full_report.pdf urban slums: The case of Accra, Ghana. Climate and
IPCC. (2018). Summary for policymakers. In V. Masson- Development, 11(8), 687–698.
Delmotte, P. Zhai, H. O. Pörtner, D. Roberts, J. Skea, P. R. Pandey, R., & Bardsley, D. K. (2015). Social-ecological vul-
Shukla, . . . T. Waterfield (Eds.), Global warming of 1.5°C. nerability to climate change in the Nepali Himalaya.
An IPCC special report on the impacts of global warming Applied Geography, 64, 74–86.
of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global Papathoma-Köhle, M., Cristofari, G., Wenk, M., & Fuchs, S.
greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of (2019). The importance of indicator weights for vulner-
strengthening the global response to the threat of climate ability indices and implications for decision making in
change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate disaster management. International Journal of Disaster
poverty (pp. 32). Geneva, Switzerland: World Risk Reduction, 36, 101103.
Meteorological Organization. Raha, A., Das, S., Banerjee, K., & Mitra, A. (2012). Climate
Kelkar, U., Balachandra, P., & Gurtoo, A. (2011). Assessing change impacts on Indian Sunderbans: A time series
Indian cities for vulnerability to climate change. In analysis (1924–2008). Biodiversity and Conservation, 21
Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on envir- (5), 1289–1307.
onmental science and development IPCBEE (Vol. 4), Rygel, L., O’sullivan, D., & Yarnal, B. (2006). A method for
IACSIT Press, Singapore. constructing a social vulnerability index: An application
Kontogianni, A., Damigos, D., Kyrtzoglou, T., Tourkolias, to hurricane storm surges in a developed country.
C., & Skourtos, M. (2019). Development of a composite Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change,
climate change vulnerability index for small craft har- 11(3), 741–764.
bours. Environmental Hazards, 18(2), 173–190. Sahana, M., & Sajjad, H. (2019). Vulnerability to storm
Kumar, T. S., Mahendra, R. S., Nayak, S., Radhakrishnan, K., surge flood using remote sensing and GIS techniques: A
& Sahu, K. C. (2010). Coastal vulnerability assessment for study on Sundarban Biosphere Reserve, India. Remote
Orissa State, east coast of India. Journal of Coastal Sensing Applications: Society and Environment, 13, 106–
Research, 263, 523–534. 120.
Luers, A. L., Lobell, D. B., Sklar, L. S., Addams, C. L., & Matson, Sajjad, H., & Nasreen, I. (2016). Assessing farm-level agri-
P. A. (2003). A method for quantifying vulnerability, applied cultural sustainability using site-specific indicators and
to the agricultural system of the Yaqui Valley, Mexico. Global sustainable livelihood security index: Evidence from
Environmental Change, 13(4), 255–267. Vaishali district, India. Community Development, 47(5),
Mahadevia Ghimire, K., & Vikas, M. (2012). Climate change 602–619.
—Impact on the Sundarbans, a case study. International Sam, A. S., Kumar, R., Kächele, H., & Müller, K. (2017).
Scientific Journal: Environmental Science, 2(1), 7–15. Quantifying household vulnerability triggered by
Malakar, K., & Mishra, T. (2017). Assessing socio-economic drought: Evidence from rural India. Climate and
vulnerability to climate change: A city-level index-based Development, 9(7), 618–633.
approach. Climate and Development, 9(4), 348–363. Sathyan, A. R., Funk, C., Aenis, T., Winker, P., & Breuer, L.
Manna, S., & Raychaudhuri, B. (2018). Mapping distribu- (2018). Sensitivity analysis of a climate vulnerability
tion of Sundarban mangroves using sentinel-2 data and index—A case study from Indian watershed development
new spectral metric for detecting their health condition. programmes. Climate Change Responses, 5(1), 1.
Geocarto International, 1–19, Accepted manuscript, Slettebak, R. T. (2013). Climate change, natural disasters,
doi:10.1080/10106049.2018.1520923. and post-disaster unrest in India. India Review, 12(4),
Miettinen, R., Samra-Fredericks, D., & Yanow, D. (2009). 260–279.
Re-turn to practice: An introductory essay. Organization Sorg, L., Medina, N., Feldmeyer, D., Sanchez, A., Vojinovic,
Studies, 30(12), 1309–1327. Z., Birkmann, J., & Marchese, A. (2018). Capturing the
Mitra, A., Banerjee, K., Sengupta, K., & Gangopadhyay, A. multifaceted phenomena of socioeconomic vulnerability.
(2009). Pulse of climate change in Indian Sundarbans: A Natural Hazards, 92(1), 257–282.
myth or reality? National Academy Science Letters (India), Sullivan, C. A., Meigh, J. R., & Fediw, T. S. (2002).
32(1), 19. Derivation and testing of the water poverty index phase
Moss, R. H., Edmonds, J. A., Hibbard, K. A., Manning, M. 1. Final report may 2002. Retrieved from http://nora.nerc.
R., Rose, S. K., Van Vuuren, D. P., . . . Meehl, G. A. (2010). ac.uk/id/eprint/503246
The next generation of scenarios for climate change Szlafsztein, C., & Sterr, H. (2007). A GIS-based vulner-
research and assessment. Nature, 463, 747. ability assessment of coastal natural hazards, state of
Mukhopadhyay, A. (2009). Cyclone Aila and the Pará, Brazil. Journal of Coastal Conservation, 11(1),
Sundarbans: An enquiry into the disaster and politics of 53–66.
aid and relief (pp. 18–20). Kolkata: Mahanirban Calcutta Tian, Q., & Lemos, M. C. (2018). Household livelihood
Research Group. differentiation and vulnerability to climate hazards in
Ogie, R. I., & Pradhan, B. (2019). Natural hazards and social rural China. World Development, 108, 321–331.
vulnerability of place: The strength-based approach Twigg, J. (2004). Disaster risk reduction: Mitigation and
applied to Wollongong, Australia. International Journal preparedness in development and emergency program-
of Disaster Risk Science, 10(3), 404–420. ming, humanitarian practice network. London:
 GEOLOGY, ECOLOGY, AND LANDSCAPES 13

Overseas Development Institute. Retrieved from UNISDR. (2018). Reduction. Economic losses, poverty &
https://www.preventionweb.net/educational/view/ disasters: 1998–2017. Retrieved from https://www.
8450 unisdr.org/we/inform/publications/61119
UNDP: United Nations Development Programme. (2019). Wisner, B., Gaillard, J. C., & Kelman, I. (2012). Framing
NDC global outlook report 2019, The Heat Is On: Taking disaster: Theories and stories seeking to understand
Stock of Global Climate Ambition. Retrieved from hazards, vulnerability and risk. In Handbook of hazards
https://unfccc.int/news/the-heat-is-on-taking-stock-of- and disaster risk reduction.Wisner, B., Gaillard, J. C., &
global-climate-ambition Kelman, I. (Eds.), (pp. 47–62). London: Routledge.