| Literature DB >> 28358338 |
Gulrez Azhar1,2, Shubhayu Saha3, Partha Ganguly4,5, Dileep Mavalankar6,7, Jaime Madrigano8.
Abstract
Assessing geographic variability in heat wave vulnerability forms the basis for planning appropriate targeted adaptation strategies. Given several recent deadly heatwaves in India, heat is increasingly being recognized as a public health problem. However, to date there has not been a country-wide assessment of heat vulnerability in India. We evaluated demographic, socioeconomic, and environmental vulnerability factors and combined district level data from several sources including the most recent census, health reports, and satellite remote sensing data. We then applied principal component analysis (PCA) on 17 normalized variables for each of the 640 districts to create a composite Heat Vulnerability Index (HVI) for India. Of the total 640 districts, our analysis identified 10 and 97 districts in the very high and high risk categories (> 2SD and 2-1SD HVI) respectively. Mapping showed that the districts with higher heat vulnerability are located in the central parts of the country. On examination, these are less urbanized and have low rates of literacy, access to water and sanitation, and presence of household amenities. Therefore, we concluded that creating and mapping a heat vulnerability index is a useful first step in protecting the public from the health burden of heat. Future work should incorporate heat exposure and health outcome data to validate the index, as well as examine sub-district levels of vulnerability.Entities:
Keywords: India; heat vulnerability index; heatwave; mapping; vulnerability; vulnerability assessment
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28358338 PMCID: PMC5409558 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph14040357
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Heat-health vulnerability data for 640 districts of India.
| Category | Source | Variable | Mean | Standard Deviation | Minimum | Maximum | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Demographic | Census 2011 | Elderly (%) | 6.941611 | 1.85144 | 1.911948 | 16.31032 |
| 2 | Demographic | Census 2011 | Under five (%) | 11.77559 | 2.430698 | 6.39814 | 19.94178 |
| 3 | Demographic | Census 2011 | Sex ratio | 945.4773 | 60.60111 | 533.5676 | 1184.402 |
| 4 | Social Class | Census 2011 | Scheduled castes (%) | 14.85952 | 9.127914 | 0 | 50.17002 |
| 5 | Social Class | Census 2011 | Scheduled tribes (%) | 17.70213 | 26.97455 | 0 | 98.57509 |
| 6 | Socio-economic | Census 2011 | Literacy (%) | 62.4771 | 10.52398 | 28.77288 | 88.73746 |
| 7 | Socio-economic | Census 2011 | Workers (%) | 41.19976 | 7.02642 | 25.83138 | 66.8953 |
| 8 | Socio-economic | DLHS 3 | Lowest wealth quintile (%) | 18.69547 | 17.8634 | 0 | 85 |
| 9 | Household Amenities | Census 2011 | Drinking water inside premises (%) | 42.35347 | 22.93822 | 2.426598 | 93.86555 |
| 10 | Household Amenities | Census 2011 | Living in a good house (%) | 51.01322 | 14.27142 | 13.01783 | 88.05314 |
| 11 | Household Amenities | Census 2011 | Having only mobiles (%) | 51.21369 | 14.46154 | 7.97389 | 79.62046 |
| 12 | Household Amenities | Census 2011 | Owning radios (%) | 20.44393 | 11.38917 | 2.827992 | 77.2401 |
| 13 | Household Amenities | Census 2011 | Owning TVs (%) | 43.6372 | 24.04314 | 5.787766 | 95.40281 |
| 14 | Population Health | DLHS 3 | Children (12–23 months) fully immunized (%) | 56.89797 | 21.96324 | 3.8 | 100 |
| 15 | Population Health | DLHS 3 | Villages having Sub-Center within 3 km (%) | 69.91922 | 18.23694 | 0 | 100 |
| 16 | Land Cover | ISRO | Vegetation Fraction | 73.24128 | 38.98999 | 10.60944 | 255 |
| 17 | Land Cover | ISRO | Normalized Difference Vegetation Index | 84.19634 | 32.20057 | 35.78857 | 255 |
Factor loadings from varimax rotation based on data from 640 districts.
| Variable | Factor 1 | Factor 2 | Factor 3 | Factor 4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Elderly | –0.41 | 0.11 | 0.13 | –0.19 |
| Under five | 0.42 | –0.03 | –0.01 | –0.05 |
| Sex ratio | –0.27 | 0.34 | –0.10 | –0.25 |
| Scheduled castes | –0.11 | –0.03 | 0.38 | –0.20 |
| Scheduled tribes | 0.11 | 0.24 | –0.30 | 0.24 |
| Literacy | 0.35 | 0.10 | 0.10 | –0.04 |
| Workers | –0.18 | 0.42 | –0.01 | 0.33 |
| Lowest wealth quintile | 0.20 | 0.30 | 0.13 | –0.18 |
| Drinking water inside premises | 0.07 | 0.41 | 0.01 | 0.07 |
| Living in a good house | 0.27 | 0.12 | 0.02 | –0.39 |
| Having only mobiles | 0.05 | 0.43 | –0.10 | –0.07 |
| Owning radios | –0.07 | 0.33 | 0.30 | 0.09 |
| Owning TVs | 0.32 | 0.22 | 0.03 | –0.15 |
| Children (12–23 months) fully immunized | 0.39 | –0.06 | 0.02 | 0.10 |
| Villages having sub-center within 3 km | 0.07 | 0.03 | 0.08 | 0.66 |
| Vegetation fraction | 0.03 | –0.01 | 0.55 | 0.10 |
| Normalized difference vegetation index | 0.03 | –0.01 | 0.55 | 0.08 |
Figure 1PCA results. (a) Scree plot of Eigenvalues after PCA; (b) component loadings on orthogonal (Varimax) rotation; (c) score variables on orthogonal (Varimax) rotation.
Figure 2HVI mapping.
Number (%) of districts by HVI (Heat Vulnerability Index) Categories.
| HVI Category | Number (%) of Districts |
|---|---|
| Very high | 10 (1.56) |
| High | 97 (15.16) |
| High normal | 213 (33.28) |
| Low normal | 225 (35.16) |
| Low | 75 (11.72) |
| Very low | 20 (3.13) |
Districts with a “very high” HVI score.
| District | State |
|---|---|
| Dakshin Bastar Dantewada | Chhattisgarh |
| Pakur | Jharkhand |
| Alirajpur | Madhya Pradesh |
| Sheopur | Madhya Pradesh |
| Barwani | Madhya Pradesh |
| Banswara | Rajasthan |
| Jhabua | Madhya Pradesh |
| Malkangiri | Odisha |
| Dohad | Gujarat |
| Bijapur | Chhattisgarh |