Warning systems as social processes for Bangladesh cyclones

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to connect the theoretical idea of warning systems as social processes with empirical data of people’s perceptions of and actions for warning for cyclones in Bangladesh. / Design/methodology/approach: A case study approach is used in two villages of Khulna district in southwest Bangladesh: Kalabogi and Kamarkhola. In total, 60 households in each village were surveyed with structured questionnaires regarding how they receive their cyclone warning information as well as their experiences of warnings for Cyclone Sidr in 2007 and Cyclone Aila in 2009. / Findings: People in the two villages had a high rate of receiving cyclone warnings and accepted them as being credible. They also experienced high impacts from the cyclones. Yet evacuation rates to cyclone shelters were low. They did not believe that significant cyclone damage would affect them and they also highlighted the difficulty of getting to cyclone shelters due to poor roads, leading them to prefer other evacuation options which were implemented if needed. / Originality/value: Theoretical constructs of warning systems, such as the First Mile and late warning, are rarely examined empirically according to people’s perceptions of warnings. The case study villages have not before been researched with respect to warning systems. The findings provide empirical evidence for long-established principles of warning systems as social processes, usually involving but not relying on technical components

Fostering coastal resilience to climate change vulnerability in Bangladesh, Brazil, Cameroon and Uruguay: a cross-country comparison

© 2017, Springer Science+Business Media B.V. This paper describes a comparative study of four different cases on vulnerability, hazards and adaptive capacity to climate threats in coastal areas and communities in four developing countries: Bangladesh, Brazil, Cameroon and Uruguay. Coastal areas are vulnerable to sea-level rise (SLR), storm surges and flooding due to their (i) exposure, (ii) concentration of settlements, many of which occupied by less advantaged groups and (iii) the concentration of assets and services seen in these areas. The objective of the paper is twofold: (i) to evaluate current evidence of coastal vulnerability and adaptive capacity and (ii) to compare adaptation strategies being implemented in a sample of developing countries, focusing on successful ones. The followed approach for the case evaluation is based on (i) documenting observed threats and damages, (ii) using indicators of physical and socioeconomic vulnerability and adaptive capacity status and (iii) selecting examples of successful responses. Major conclusions based on cross-case comparison are (a) the studied countries show different vulnerability, adaptive capacity and implementation of responses, (b) innovative community-based (CBA) and ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA) and (c) early warning systems are key approaches and tools to foster climate resilience. A recommendation to foster the resilience of coastal communities and services is that efforts in innovative adaptation strategies to sea-level rise should be intensified and integrated with climate risk management within the national adaption plans (NAPAs) in order to reduce the impacts of hazards

A review of vulnerability indicators for deltaic social–ecological systems

The sustainability of deltas worldwide is under threat due to the consequences of global environmental change (including climate change) and human interventions in deltaic landscapes. Understanding these systems is becoming increasingly important to assess threats to and opportunities for long-term sustainable development. Here, we propose a simplified, yet inclusive social–ecological system (SES)-centered risk and vulnerability framework and a list of indicators proven to be useful in past delta assessments. In total, 236 indicators were identified through a structured review of peer-reviewed literature performed for three globally relevant deltas—the Mekong, the Ganges–Brahmaputra–Meghna and the Amazon. These are meant to serve as a preliminary “library” of potential indicators to be used for future vulnerability assessments. Based on the reviewed studies, we identified disparities in the availability of indicators to populate some of the vulnerability domains of the proposed framework, as comprehensive social–ecological assessments were seldom implemented in the past. Even in assessments explicitly aiming to capture both the social and the ecological system, there were many more indicators for social susceptibility and coping/adaptive capacities as compared to those relevant for characterizing ecosystem susceptibility or robustness. Moreover, there is a lack of multi-hazard approaches accounting for the specific vulnerability profile of sub-delta areas. We advocate for more comprehensive, truly social–ecological assessments which respond to multi-hazard settings and recognize within-delta differences in vulnerability and risk. Such assessments could make use of the proposed framework and list of indicators as a starting point and amend it with new indicators that would allow capturing the complexity as well as the multi-hazard exposure in a typical delta SES