Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Towards a Formal Framework of Vulnerability to Climate Change

  • Published:
Environmental Modeling & Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

There is confusion regarding the notion of “vulnerability” in the climate change scientific community. Recent research has identified a need for formalisation, which would support accurate communication and the elimination of misunderstandings that result from the use of ambiguous terminology. Moreover, a formal framework of vulnerability is a prerequisite for computational approaches to its assessment. This paper presents an attempt at developing such a formal framework. We see vulnerability as a relative concept in the sense that accurate statements about vulnerability are possible only if one clearly specifies (1) the entity that is vulnerable, (2) the stimulus to which it is vulnerable and (3) the preference criteria to evaluate the outcome of the interaction between the entity and the stimulus. We relate the resulting framework to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change conceptualisation of vulnerability and two recent vulnerability studies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Brooks, N. (2003). Vulnerability, risk and adaptation: A conceptual framework. Tyndall Centre Working Paper 38, Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, Norwich, UK.

  2. Callaway, J. (2004). Adaptation benefits and costs: Are they important in the global policy picture and how can we estimate them? Global Environmental Change, 14(3), 273–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Carter, T. R., Parry, M. L., Harasawa, H., & Nishioka, S. (1994). IPCC technical guidelines for assessing climate change impacts and adaptations. Technical report, Department of Geography, University College London, UK and the Center for Global environmental Research, National Institute for Environmental Studies, Japan.

  4. Copi, I. M., & Cohen, C. (1998) Introduction to logic (10th Edn.). Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  5. DINAS-COAST Consortium (2006). DIVA 1.5.5. Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, Potsdam, Germany, CD-ROM.

  6. Downing, T., Bharwani, S., Franklin, S., Warwick C., & Ziervogel, G. (2004). Climate adaptation: Actions, strategies and capacity from an actor oriented perspective. Unpublished Manuscript. Oxford, UK: Stockholm Environment Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Fankhauser, S., Smith, J., & Tol, R. (1999). Weathering climate change: Some simple rules to guide adaptation decisions. Ecological Economics, 30(1), 67–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Füssel, H. M., & Klein, R. J. T. (2006). Climate change vulnerability assessments: An evolution of conceptual thinking. Climatic Change, 75(3), 301–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Hinkel, J., & Klein, R. J. T. (2003). DINAS-COAST: Developing a method and a tool for dynamic and interactive vulnerability assessment. LOICZ Newsletter, 27, 1–4.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Hinkel, J., & Klein, R. J. T. (2007). Integrating knowledge for assessing coastal vulnerability to climate change. In: L. McFadden, R. J. Nicholls & E. Penning-Rowsell (Eds.), Managing coastal vulnerability (pp. 61–77). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.

    Google Scholar 

  11. IISD, IUCN & SEI (2003). Livelihoods and climate change: Combining disaster risk reduction, natural resource management and climate change adaptation in a new approach to the reduction of vulnerability and poverty. Winnipeg, Canada: International Institute for Sustainable Development.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Jaeger, C. C. (2003). A note on domains of discourse - logical know-how for integrated environmental modelling. Technical Report 86, PIK Report, Potsdam, Germany.

  13. Jones, R. (2001). An environmental risk assessment/management framework for climate change impact assessments. Natural Hazards, 23(2–3), 197–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Kalman, R., Falb, P., & Arbib, M. (1969). Topics in mathematical system theory. New York: International Series in Pure and Applied Mathematics, McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Kates, R. (1985). The interaction of climate and society. In: R. Kates, J. Ausubel & M. Berberian (Eds.), Climate impact assessment: Studies of the interaction of climate and society (Vol. 27 of SCOPE Report, pp. 3–36). Chichester, UK: John Wiley and Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Kreps, D. (1988). Notes on the theory of choice. Boulder, CO, USA: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Lotka, A. (1925). Elements of physical biology. Baltimore, MD, USA: Williams & Wilkins.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Luers, A. (2005). The surface of vulnerability: An analytical framework for examining environmental change. Global Environmental Change, 15(3), 214–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Luers, A., Lobell, D., Sklar, L., Addams, C., & Matson, P. (2003). Method for quantifying vulnerability, applied to the agricultural system of the Yaqui Valley, Mexico. Global Environmental Change, 13(4), 255–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. McCarthy, J., Canziani, O., Leary, N., Dokken D., & White, K. (Eds.) (2001). Climate change 2001: Impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Contribution of Working Group II to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Metzger, M., Leemans, R., Schröter, D., Cramer, W., & the ATEAM Consortium (2004). The ATEAM vulnerability mapping tool. Quantitative Approaches in Systems Analysis 27, C.T. de Wit Graduate School for Production Ecology and Resource Conservation, Wageningen, The Netherlands, CD-ROM.

  22. Metzger, M., & Schröter, D. (2006). Towards a spatially explicit and quantitative vulnerability assessment of environmental change in europe. Regional Environmental Change, 6(4), 201–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. O’Brien, K., Eriksen, S., Schjolden, A., & Nygaard, L. (2004). What’s in a word? Conflicting interpretations of vulnerability in climate change research. CICERO Working Paper 2004:04, iii+16.

  24. Patt, A. G., Klein, R. J. T., & de la Vega-Leinert, A. C. (2005). Taking the uncertainty in climate change vulnerability assessment seriously. Comptes Rendus Geoscience, 337(4), 411–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Schröter, D., Cramer, W., Leemans, R., Prentice, I., Arajo, M., Arnell, N., & et al. (2005). Ecosystem service supply and vulnerability to global change in Europe. Science, 310(5752), 1333–1337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Smit, B., Pilifosova, O., Burton, I., Challenger, B., Huq, S., Klein, R. J. T., & Yohe, G. (2001). Adaptation to climate change in the context of sustainable development and equity. In: J. J. McCarthy, O. F. Canziani, N. A. Leary, D. J. Dokken & K. S. White (Eds.), Climate change 2001. Impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability (pp. 877–912). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Soanes, C., & Stevenson, A. (Eds.) (2003). Oxford dictionary of english (2nd Ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Suppes, P. (1968). The desirability of formalization in science. The Journal of Philosophy, 65(20), 651–664.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Turner, B. L., Kasperson, R., Matson, P., McCarthy, J. J., Corell, R., Christensen, L., et al. (2003). A framework for vulnerability analysis in sustainability science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 100, 8074–8079.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Volterra, V. (1926). Variazioni e fluttuazioni del numero d’individui in specie animali conviventi. Memorie della Reale Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei Serie 6, 2(3), 31–113.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work in progress has benefited greatly from discussions with Paul Flondor, Anthony Patt, Dagmar Schröter, Gerhard Petschel-Held, Matthias Lüdeke, Carlo Jaeger, the participants of the first NeWater WB2 meeting (Oxford, UK, 18-22 April 2005) and those of the second workshop on Modelling Social Vulnerability (Montpellier, France, 3–7 April 2006). Three anonymous reviewers helped to improve the manuscript substantially. Their patience and persistence is greatly appreciated. Jeroen Aerts, Sandy Bisaro, Nicola Botta, Tom Downing, Klaus Eisenack, Hans-Martin Füssel, Roger Jones, Anders Levermann, Daniel Lincke, Robert Marschinski, Karen O’Brien, Anthony Patt, Colin Polsky, Dagmar Schröter, Pablo Suarez, Frank Thomalla, Saskia Werners and Sarah Wolf also commented on earlier versions of this paper, one of which has appeared as FAVAIA Working Paper 1. Funding has been provided by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (grant KL 611/14) and the Research Directorate-General of the European Commission (project NeWater; contract number 511179 (GOCE)). K.S. Kavi Kumar was funded by the START Visiting Scientist Program. Starbucks Coffee Company offered work-inducive environments in a variety of locations, although their chai tea latte invariably tends to be a tad sweet. Work on this paper began as a co-operation between the former PIK EVA project and the PIRSIQ activity, and has led to the joint PIK-SEI FAVAIA project.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, P.O. Box 601203, 14412, Potsdam, Germany

    Cezar Ionescu & Jochen Hinkel

  2. Stockholm Environment Institute, Kräftriket 2B, 106 91, Stockholm, Sweden

    Richard J. T. Klein

  3. Madras School of Economics, Gandhi Mandapam Road, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, 600025, India

    K. S. Kavi Kumar

  4. Freie Universität Berlin, Arnimallee 2-6, 14195, Berlin, Germany

    Rupert Klein

Authors
  1. Cezar Ionescu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Richard J. T. Klein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jochen Hinkel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. K. S. Kavi Kumar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Rupert Klein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Richard J. T. Klein.

Additional information

This paper is dedicated to the memory of Gerhard Petschel-Held, whose pioneering work on syndromes of global change has been a source of inspiration for us and for others across various schools of thought on vulnerability.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ionescu, C., Klein, R.J.T., Hinkel, J. et al. Towards a Formal Framework of Vulnerability to Climate Change. Environ Model Assess 14, 1–16 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10666-008-9179-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10666-008-9179-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation