| Literature DB >> 29444086 |
Júlia Alves Menezes1, Ulisses Confalonieri1, Ana Paula Madureira2, Isabela de Brito Duval1, Rhavena Barbosa Dos Santos1, Carina Margonari3.
Abstract
Vulnerability, understood as the propensity to be adversely affected, has attained importance in the context of climate change by helping to understand what makes populations and territories predisposed to its impacts. Conditions of vulnerability may vary depending on the characteristics of each territory studied-social, environmental, infrastructural, public policies, among others. Thus, the present study aimed to evaluate what makes the municipalities of the state of Amazonas, Brazil, vulnerable to climate change in the context of the largest tropical forest in the world, and which regions of the State are the most susceptible. A Municipal Vulnerability Index was developed, which was used to associate current socio-environmental characteristics of municipalities with climate change scenarios in order to identify those that may be most affected by climate change. The results showed that poor adaptive capacity and poverty had the most influence on current vulnerability of the municipalities of Amazonas with the most vulnerable areas being the southern, northern, and eastern regions of the state. When current vulnerability was related to future climate change projections, the most vulnerable areas were the northern, northeastern, extreme southern, and southwestern regions. From a socio-environmental and climatic point of view, these regions should be a priority for public policy efforts to reduce their vulnerability and prepare them to cope with the adverse aspects of climate change.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29444086 PMCID: PMC5812563 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0190808
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Conceptual framework showing the relationships among vulnerability components.
The circle represents a municipality in which the conditions of exposure, sensitivity and adaptive capacity determine the vulnerability profile of the population. The boxes exemplify some of the conditions considered critical for each vulnerability component; the green box is related to exposure, the yellow box to sensitivity and the orange box to adaptive capacity. Climate risk is represented by future climate change. (Adapted from Allen Consulting Group, 2005).
Indices that compose the vulnerability, their calculation, short description, and their relationship to the vulnerability.
| MVI COMPONENT | INDEX AND CALCULATION | DESCRIPTION OF THE INDICATORS | RELATIONSHIP TO THE VULNERABILITY |
|---|---|---|---|
| The higher the vegetation cover, the less exposed/vulnerable. | |||
| The higher the accumulated deforestation for the time series, the more exposed/vulnerable. | |||
| The higher the percentage of people at risk, the more exposed/vulnerable. | |||
| The higher the average CDD, the more exposed / vulnerable. | |||
| The higher the proportion of events in relation to the state, the greater the sensitivity/vulnerability. | |||
| The higher proportion of deaths, the higher sensitivity/vulnerability. | |||
| The higher the proportion of cases in the city, the more sensitive/vulnerable. | |||
| Higher average incidence rates, higher sensitivity/vulnerability. | |||
| If the incidence showed a declining trend, the city was considered less sensitive; if the trend was an increase, the city was considered more sensitive. | |||
| The higher the likelihood of dying before the age 40, the greater the sensitivity/vulnerability. | |||
| The higher the illiteracy rate, the higher the sensitivity. | |||
| Highest percentage of households without sanitation, increased vulnerability. | |||
| More likely to die by the age of 5, higher the sensitivity/vulnerability. | |||
| The higher the percentage of households with up to ½ minimum wage income, the higher the sensitivity/vulnerability. | |||
| The higher the proportion of households headed by women, the greater the vulnerability. | |||
| The higher the proportion of households headed by young individuals, the greater the vulnerability. | |||
| The higher the percentage of infants in the population, the more sensitive/vulnerable. | |||
| The higher the percentage of elderly in the population, the more sensitive/vulnerable. | |||
| The higher the percentage of the population with some form of disability, the more sensitive/vulnerable. | |||
| The higher the percentage of the population considered riverine, the more sensitive/vulnerable. | |||
| The higher the percentage of infants expected in the population for 2040, the more sensitive/vulnerable. | |||
| The higher the percentage of elderly expected in the population for 2040, the more sensitive/vulnerable. | |||
| It reflects governance and encompasses the following: 1) structures for employment and income generation; 2) quality of education; and 3) quality of health care services (primary care). | The higher the score (closer to 1), the more sensitive/vulnerable. | ||
| The greater the number of security institutions, the less vulnerable. | |||
| The larger the number of management instruments, the less vulnerable. | |||
| The higher the number of hospital beds and the coverage of basic care, the less vulnerable. | |||
| The greater the number of councils and consortia, the less vulnerable. | |||
| • | The higher the anomaly, the more vulnerable. | ||
| The higher the anomaly, the more vulnerable. |
* More information about the method and variables used to calculate the FIRJAN Index of Municipal Development can be obtained, in Portuguese, from the institution’s webpage (http://www.firjan.com.br/ifdm/).
Fig 2Microregions of the state of Amazonas, Brazil, and the location of the state capital, Manaus.
Fig 3Methodological scheme.
Organization of the indices chosen to generate the Municipal Vulnerability Index considering a pessimistic emission scenario (RCP8.5).
Fig 4Diagram illustrating the steps of calculating all indicators and indices.
Steps 1 and 2 comprise transforming the raw variables into indicators. Step 1 is representing the assignment of scores and Step 2 is illustrating the procedures of arithmetic mean and standardization to generate the indicators ranging from 0 (least vulnerable) to 1 (most vulnerable). Step 3 illustrates the aggregation of the indices to generate the final index, the Municipal Vulnerability Index.
Fig 5Map of the current Vulnerability Index (VInd) for the municipalities of the state of Amazonas.
Fig 6Values of the sub-indices that compose the current Vulnerability Index (VInd) of the microregions of Amazonas.
Distribution of average values of exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity indices for each microregion of the state of Amazonas.
Fig 7Values of the main indices that compose vulnerability, and each of their components.
(A) Radar chart of the average values of the 62 municipalities in the core vulnerability indices—exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity—demonstrating how they interact to build a unique profile for the population of Amazonas, Brazil. (B) Average values of each sub-index developed as a basis of the core indices of vulnerability. Abbreviations: NDI–natural disasters index; VCI–vegetation cover index; DACI–diseases associated to climate index; PoI–poverty index; SSI–sociodemographic sensitivity index; SEI—socioeconomic structures index; AdapI—institutions, services and infrastructure for adaptation index; SOI–sociopolitical organization index.
Fig 8Representation of the Climate Scenario Index for the municipalities of the state of Amazonas, Brazil.
Fig 9Municipal Vulnerability Index (MVI) of the state of Amazonas, Brazil.
Representation of distribution of MVI values, considering the IPCC’s emission scenario RCP8.5.
Fig 10Distribution of the current Vulnerability Index, Climate Scenario Index, and Municipal Vulnerability Index.
(A) Values of the indices referring to the most vulnerable municipalities and the Amazonas state capital, Manaus, Brazil, according to MVI. (B) Distribution of the indices, in average values, for the microregions of the state of Amazonas, Brazil.