Social Vulnerability in Three High-Poverty Climate Change Hot Spots: What Does the Climate Change Literature Tell Us?
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Reg Environ Change DOI 10.1007/s10113-014-0741-6 REVIEW Social vulnerability in three high-poverty climate change hot spots: What does the climate change literature tell us? Josephine Tucker • Mona Daoud • Naomi Oates • Roger Few • Declan Conway • Sobona Mtisi • Shirley Matheson Received: 29 July 2013 / Accepted: 28 November 2014 Ó Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014 Abstract This paper reviews the state of knowledge on however, characterization of cross-scalar interactions is social vulnerability to climate change in three hot spots poorly developed in the majority of studies reviewed. Most (deltas, semi-arid regions and snowpack- or glacier-fed studies are either large scale, such as broad comparisons of river basins) in Africa, Central Asia and South Asia, using vulnerability across countries, or local, documenting elements of systematic review methods. Social vulnera- community-level processes. Detailed understanding of the bility is defined as a dynamic state of societies comprising interactions between climate change impacts on natural exposure, sensitivity and adaptive capacity. We examine systems, and socio-economic trajectories, including adap- whether the hot spots have specific characteristics that tend tation, also emerges as a knowledge gap. to increase or decrease social vulnerability, consider suit- able scales of analysis for understanding vulnerability, and Keywords Social vulnerability Á Semi-arid Á Delta Á River explore the conceptions of vulnerability adopted in the basin Á Africa Á Asia climate change literature and the nature of the insights this generates. Finally, we identify knowledge gaps in this lit- erature. All three hot spots are characterized by high levels Introduction of natural resource dependence, with increasing environ- mental degradation. They also exhibit unequal policies and This paper is one of seven commissioned by the Collabo- patterns of development, which benefit certain segments of rative Adaptation Research Initiative in Africa and Asia society while making others more vulnerable. Vulnerability (CARIAA) to explore the current state of knowledge on is driven by multiple factors operating at different scales; climate adaptation in three climate change ‘hot spots’ (De Souza et al. this issue). CARIAA defines hot spots as ‘geographical area[s] where a strong climate signal is Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10113-014-0741-6) contains supplementary combined with a large concentration of vulnerable, poor or material, which is available to authorized users. J. Tucker (&) Á N. Oates D. Conway Overseas Development Institute, 203 Blackfriars Road, The Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the London SE1 8NJ, UK Environment, London School of Economics and Political e-mail: [email protected] Science, Houghton Street, London WC2A 2AE, UK e-mail: [email protected] N. Oates e-mail: [email protected] S. Mtisi Independent consultant, Harare, Zimbabwe M. Daoud Á R. Few e-mail: [email protected] School of International Development, University of East Anglia, Norwich Research Park, Norwich NR4 7TJ, UK S. Matheson e-mail: [email protected] Independent consultant, Pretoria, South Africa R. Few e-mail: [email protected] e-mail: [email protected] 123 J. Tucker et al. marginalized people’. The selected hot spots are semi-arid Collaboration, for example, publishes systematic reviews regions, deltas and glacier- or snowpack-dependent river which provide evidence on the effectiveness of policy basins. De Souza et al. (this issue) provide an overview of interventions in crime and justice, education, social welfare climate change issues in each hot spot and the rationale for and international development. While still adopting a pri- hot spot selection. marily formal quantitative approach, its guidelines also This review examines the state of knowledge found in provide for the inclusion of qualitative research, in par- climate change-related literature (see below for how this is ticular to address questions about why and under what defined) on social vulnerability in these hot spots, using conditions interventions are effective. elements of a systematic review approach. While recog- Berrang-Ford et al. (this issue) identify at least three nizing that an extensive literature exists relating to the types of systematic review, which do not conform to social, economic and political factors which underlie vul- Cochrane guidelines but nonetheless adopt explicit and nerability, here we are concerned with the depth of transparent approaches to data selection and analysis: (1) knowledge found in the literature which explicitly refers to meta-syntheses, which use theory-driven analysis and ‘climate’ or ‘adaptation’, as this is most likely to be that inductive reasoning rather than statistical analysis of used by adaptation decision-makers. The review analyses aggregated data to answer explanatory questions (whys and 87 high-quality articles published since 2006 (see ‘Methods’ hows); (2) realist reviews, which again use theory-based section). An overarching question guides the analysis of analysis to explore complex or interdisciplinary questions content: are there specific characteristics of the hot spots and usually take a more iterative approach to data identi- that are identified as increasing or decreasing social vul- fication than database searches alone; and (3) qualitative nerability, and which aspects of vulnerability are poorly comparative analysis, which uses formal statistical analysis characterized in the climate-related literature? This is to analyse the results of multiple qualitative studies. They complemented by an exploration of the conceptions of argue that rather than being limited to a single method, vulnerability and scales of analysis used, and the extent to systematic review should be seen as a process founded on which they capture various dimensions of social vulnera- transparent, explicit approaches to: (1) identification of bility. Lastly, we consider which aspects of vulnerability research questions and the scope of analysis; (2) document are explicitly identified as research gaps and reflect on what selection procedures; and (3) data extraction and analysis. this means for the possible direction of future scholarship in this area. Methods Systematic review methodologies: an overview This study adopts the following elements of a systematic approach: A systematic review has been defined as a ‘focused review Question setting and scope The research questions have of the literature that seeks to answer a specific research been defined as stated above. The geographical scope is question using a set of standardized techniques and defined by the CARIAA list of priority countries across the explicitly outlined methods’ (Berrang-Ford et al. this three hot spots (see De Souza et al. this issue), and the issue). At the heart of the systematic review approach is the temporal scope is limited to documents published from use of explicit and transparent methods for data selection 2006 onwards (because the IPCC reports published in 2006 and analysis, to avoid hidden bias in the inclusion of evi- were included and should represent an authoritative sum- dence, and to enable replication. The term ‘systematic mary of the state of the knowledge up to 2005). review’ has been in widespread use since the 1990s in the health sciences. It has generally been used to refer to sta- Document selection Document selection was based on a tistical meta-analyses aimed at testing a particular combination of database searches, citation tracking and hypothesis (of the form ‘does x treatment for y condition expert judgement. Initially, a set of authoritative keystone work?’), following the Cochrane guidance for formal documents were identified using database searches and research synthesis issued in 1989. Many consider this to be expert knowledge. Citation tracking was conducted from the definition of a true systematic review. However, others these keystone documents, using an explicit set of criteria have argued for the recognition of a wider range of to select documents for inclusion in the review. Gaps in approaches under the label of a systematic review, making thematic or geographical coverage (as defined by the the case that systematic data selection and methodological research question and scope of the review) were filled transparency can still be applied in more qualitative using targeted database searches and expert consultation reviews, which seek to answer exploratory (rather than with colleagues and contacts with knowledge of specific simple hypothesis-testing) questions. The Campbell regions or sectors. Citation tracking and expert knowledge 123 Social vulnerability in three high-poverty climate change hot spots have been found to be efficient approaches to identify changes in the three hot spots—the biophysical aspects of documents, in comparison with database searches (Green- vulnerability—are dealt with by Kilroy (this issue). halgh and Peacock 2005; Booth 2006), and there is prec- Social vulnerability is dynamic in time and space and edent for their use in systematic reviews, broadly defined may increase or decrease in response to government poli- (Ford et al. 2010a). cies and investments, external shocks, stresses or oppor- tunities (environmental, economic, political) and the Data extraction and analysis Data extraction was guided aggregate effects of people’s daily actions (e.g. migration, by an extraction form, using categories based on the