Explore the vast range of titles available.

Many areas of the world are prone to several natural hazards, and effective risk reduction is only possible if all relevant threats are considered and analyzed. However, in contrast to single-hazard analyses, the examination of multiple hazards poses a range of additional challenges due to the differing characteristics of processes. This refers to the assessment of the hazard level, as well as to the vulnerability toward distinct processes, and to the arising risk level. As comparability of the single-hazard results is strongly needed, an equivalent approach has to be chosen that allows to estimate the overall hazard and consequent risk level as well as to rank threats. In addition, the visualization of a range of natural hazards or risks is a challenging task since the high quantity of information has to be depicted in a way that allows for easy and clear interpretation. The aim of this contribution is to give an outline of the challenges each step of a multi-hazard (risk) analysis poses and to present current studies and approaches that face these difficulties.

The paper deals with the development of a general as well as integrative and holistic framework to systematize and assess vulnerability, risk and adaptation. The framework is a thinking tool meant as a heuristic that outlines key factors and different dimensions that need to be addressed when assessing vulnerability in the context of natural hazards and climate change. The approach underlines that the key factors of such a common framework are related to the exposure of a society or system to a hazard or stressor, the susceptibility of the system or community exposed, and its resilience and adaptive capacity. Additionally, it underlines the necessity to consider key factors and multiple thematic dimensions when assessing vulnerability in the context of natural and socio-natural hazards. In this regard, it shows key linkages between the different concepts used within the disaster risk management (DRM) and climate change adaptation (CCA) research. Further, it helps to illustrate the strong relationships between different concepts used in DRM and CCA. The framework is also a tool for communicating complexity and stresses the need for societal change in order to reduce risk and to promote adaptation. With regard to this, the policy relevance of the framework and first results of its application are outlined. Overall, the framework presented enhances the discussion on how to frame and link vulnerability, disaster risk, risk management and adaptation concepts.

A multi-criteria risk analysis to identify and to rank the most critical UNESCO World Heritage Sites (WHSs) in Europe was implemented in the framework of the JPI-CH PROTHEGO project. The presented approach considers three natural geo-hazards (i.e. landsliding, seismic shaking and volcanic activity) for which homogenous European hazard maps are available. The methodology is based on a quantitative and reproducible heuristic assessment of risk through the development of a new UNESCO Risk Index (URI), which combines the level of hazard with a potential damage vector. The latter expresses the expected level of damage as a function of the type of heritage site (monuments, cultural routes, rock-art sites, cultural landscapes, earthworks/hominid sites, walls and natural sites), the position with respect to the ground (underground or overground) and the hazard type. The methodology was applied both to the entire WHS site and to the different properties that compose the site, with the purpose of identifying areas, inside the same site, with different level of risk. At European scale, the spatial distribution of risk reflects the fact that only three hazards were implemented in the analysis so far, with highest values in the Mediterranean area due to the importance of seismic hazard.

Flooding is the most common natural hazard in Greece, and most of low-lying urban centers are flood-prone areas. Assessment of flood hazard zones is a necessity for rational management of watersheds. In this study, the coupling of the analytical hierarchy process and geographical information systems were used, in order to assess flood hazard, based either on natural or on anthropogenic factors. The proposed method was applied on Kassandra Peninsula, in Northern Greece. The morphometric and hydrographic characteristics of the watersheds were calculated. Moreover, the natural flood genesis factors were examined, and subsequently, the anthropogenic interventions within stream beds were recorded. On the basis of the above elements, two flood hazard indexes were defined, separately for natural and anthropogenic factors. According to the results of these indexes, the watersheds of the study area were grouped into hazard classes. At the majority of watersheds, the derived hazard class was medium (according to the classification) due to natural factors and very high due to anthropogenic. The results were found to converge to historical data of flood events revealing the realistic representation of hazard on the relating flood hazard maps.

From the beginning of 21st century, there has been an awareness of risk in the environment along with a growing concern for the continuing potential damage caused by hazards. In order to ensure environmental sustainability, a better understanding of natural disasters and their impacts is essential. It has been recognised that a holistic and integrated approach to environmental hazards needs to be attempted using common methodologies, such as risk analysis, which involves risk management and risk assessment. Indeed, risk management means reducing the threats posed by known hazards, whereas at the same time accepting unmanageable risks and maximizing any related benefits.

Social vulnerability indices have emerged over the past decade as quantitative measures of the social dimensions of natural hazards vulnerability. But how reliable are the index rankings? Validation of indices with external reference data has posed a persistent challenge in large part because social vulnerability is multidimensional and not directly observable. This article applies global sensitivity analyses to internally validate the methods used in the most common social vulnerability index designs: deductive, hierarchical, and inductive. Uncertainty analysis is performed to assess the robustness of index ranks when reasonable alternative index configurations are modeled. The hierarchical design was found to be the most accurate, while the inductive model was the most precise. Sensitivity analysis is employed to understand which decisions in the vulnerability index construction process have the greatest influence on the stability of output rankings. The deductive index ranks are found to be the most sensitive to the choice of transformation method, hierarchical models to the selection of weighting scheme, and inductive indices to the indicator set and scale of analysis. Specific recommendations for each stage of index construction are provided so that the next generation of social vulnerability indices can be developed with a greater degree of transparency, robustness, and reliability.

This comprehensive overview of global emergency management provides practitioners and students alike with an understanding of the disaster management profession by using a global perspective, including the different sources of risk and vulnerability, the systems that exist to manage hazard risk, and the many stakeholders involved. This update examines the impact of recent large-scale and catastrophic disaster events on countries and communities, as well as their influence on disaster risk reduction efforts worldwide. It expands coverage of small-island developing states and explores the achievements of the United Nations Hyogo Framework for Action (2005-2015) and the priorities for action in the Post-2015 Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction currently under development.

Background Resilience is vital for facing natural disasters and public health challenges. Despite the significance of resilience-building activities, there is a scarcity of locally-tailored planning and response strategies, leaving communities incapable of addressing the unique challenges posed by natural disasters and public health crises. This study aims to explore how the “One Community at a Time” approach enhances community resilience in facing natural hazards and public health challenges. Methods A systematic review was conducted over journal articles published from January 2001 to April 2023 through PRISMA approach. Multiple databases such as Web of Science and Scopus were thoroughly searched. We used independent screening by two researchers and painstaking data extraction using standardized forms. This approach was adopted to assure the reliability, validity, and precision of our study selection and analysis. The included studies’ quality was evaluated by the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Results In the evaluation, 35 studies were deemed eligible for inclusion and underwent in-depth examination. Several major components of “One Community at a Time” have been identified, including social capital and networks, local knowledge and learning, effective governance and leadership, preparedness and response capacity, and adaptive infrastructure and resources. This framework highlights the significance of individualized approaches to resilience-building initiatives, recognizing that each community has specific strengths, needs, and challenges. Conclusion Relevant stakeholders can adapt suitable resilient strategies to help prepare and recover from natural hazards and public health challenges. By adopting a localized strategy, stakeholders can collaborate to develop a culture of readiness and resilience, ultimately leading to more sustainable and resilient communities. This framework advises community-based groups, local government, and other stakeholders on prioritizing partnerships, preparedness planning, community participation, and leadership as essential components of creating and maintaining resilience. “One Community at a Time” framework offers practical guidance for community-based organizations, local government, and other stakeholders to prioritize partnerships, preparedness planning, community participation, and leadership as essential components of creating and sustaining resilience.

China’s macroeconomic policy framework has been determined to ensure steady growth, adjust the industrial structure and advance the socioeconomic reforms in recent years. And urbanization is supposed to be one of the most important socioeconomic reform directions. Meanwhile, China also committed to reduce carbon emissions intensity by 2020, then it should be noted that what kind of impact of these policy orientations on carbon emission intensity. Therefore, based on the historical data from 1978 to 2011, this paper quantitatively studies the impact of China’s economic growth, industrial structure and urbanization on carbon emission intensity. The results indicate that, first, there is long-term cointegrating relationship between carbon emission intensity and other factors. And the increase in the share of tertiary industry [i.e., the ratio of tertiary industry value added to gross domestic product (GDP)] and economic growth (here we use the real GDP per capita) play significant roles in curbing carbon emission intensity, while the promotion of population urbanization (i.e., the share of population living in the urban regions of total population) may lead to carbon emission intensity growth. Second, there exists significant one-way causality running from the urbanization rate and economic growth to carbon emission intensity, respectively. Third, among the three drivers, economic growth proves the main influencing factor of carbon emission intensity changes during the sample period.

Worldwide, there is a need to enhance our understanding of vulnerability and to develop methodologies and tools to assess vulnerability. One of the most important goals of assessing coastal flood vulnerability, in particular, is to create a readily understandable link between the theoretical concepts of flood vulnerability and the day-to-day decision-making process and to encapsulate this link in an easily accessible tool. This article focuses on developing a Coastal City Flood Vulnerability Index (CCFVI) based on exposure, susceptibility and resilience to coastal flooding. It is applied to nine cities around the world, each with different kinds of exposure. With the aid of this index, it is demonstrated which cities are most vulnerable to coastal flooding with regard to the system’s components, that is, hydro-geological, socio-economic and politico-administrative. The index gives a number from 0 to 1, indicating comparatively low or high coastal flood vulnerability, which shows which cities are most in need of further, more detailed investigation for decision-makers. Once its use to compare the vulnerability of a range of cities under current conditions has been demonstrated, it is used to study the impact of climate change on the vulnerability of these cities over a longer timescale. The results show that CCFVI provides a means of obtaining a broad overview of flood vulnerability and the effect of possible adaptation options. This, in turn, will allow for the direction of resources to more in-depth investigation of the most promising strategies.