WG 2 - Vulnerability• Habiba Gitay (Chair)• Marc Levy• Joush-Tai Wang• Feng Tyan Lin• Susan Cutter• Upasna Sharma• N.D. Tuan• Emma Porio• Moshiuzzaman Khan• Perlyn Pulhin• Louis Lebel• Md. Nurul Islam• Orawan Sirratpiriya• Mafiz Uddin Ahmed

WG2 - Vulnerability

Goals• Gap analysis

– Compare state of vulnerability science with practice, identify gaps

• Recommendations on next steps

Structure of the discussion

• Multi-dimensional notion of vulnerability • Multiple units of analysis • Processes

– Processes involved in identifying factors affecting vulnerability and measuring them

– Causes, feedback, contexts and circumstances

• Communication and use of vulnerability information • Challenge of integrating across scales

Common understanding about vulnerability

• Vulnerability can be defined as the potential harm to a particular entity, X, from a from a given threat, Y

• Vulnerability is an inherent property of a complex system involving biophysical and social elements

Vulnerability is multidimensional

• In terms of the relevant risks• In terms of the affected entities• In terms of the potential impacts• In terms of the factors that influence

vulnerability

Vulnerability manifests itself differently across different units of analysis

Social units Ecological units

Organizational units

Economic units

Political units

IndividualsHouseholdsKinship groupsEthnic groups…

OrganismsWatershedsEcosystemsPopulations…

FirmsNGOsNetworks…

SectorsInfrastructure Supply chainsTrading

VillagesDistrictsRegional management authoritiesNational governmentsInternational

For example – Different Social Network structure could be compared or ‘critical’ nodes In the network could be identified

Challenges of scale

Vulnerability comes to be understood in a particular social context through complex

mechanisms

• Framing• Deliberation• Political struggle• Decision-making

Scientific understanding

Causes and feedbacks

We aren’t doing as well as we could at putting vulnerability science into

practice• Science-policy interactions• Communication with public / groups• Engagement of relevant stakeholders

appropriately• Overcome language/translation challenges

(“vulnerability” doesn’t always translate)

Recommendations / Next Steps

• Acknowledge knowledge gap Invest in Learning Strategies

• Communicating vulnerability more effectively• Build capacity within all stakeholders

Acknowledge knowledge gap / Invest in Learning Strategies

• Need new approaches to generate policy-relevant integrative science that is relevant to appropriate scales of decision-making (IHDP is not enough)

• Research into resilience indicators that could be used to establish baselines and in monitoring and evaluating of interventions

Communicating vulnerability more effectively

• Visioning / scenario / storyline exercises to help cities understand and make choices with respect to vulnerability pathways (dynamic nature)

• Communication for more effective integration of Development-CC outcomes into the development agenda

Build Capacity

• Participatory deliberations, within local development process (slum and other civil society leaders, organizations, relevant sectors, government agencies) to understand dimensions and contexts of vulnerability, as related to climate/weather and development interactions

• New, better institutions to promote peer-to-peer learning among most-vulnerable cities