热不热?制定一系列基于指标的评估,以应对气候变化的脆弱性

IF 1.1 4区 社会学 Q4 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Australasian Journal of Environmental Management Pub Date : 2022-01-02 DOI:10.1080/14486563.2022.2034672
M. Fernandez, N. Golubiewski, Jennifer L. R. Joynt, Lauren A. Rhodes
{"title":"热不热?制定一系列基于指标的评估,以应对气候变化的脆弱性","authors":"M. Fernandez, N. Golubiewski, Jennifer L. R. Joynt, Lauren A. Rhodes","doi":"10.1080/14486563.2022.2034672","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Vulnerability assessments to climate change are instruments to support the design of mitigation and adaptation strategies. They are relevant to cities or regions where the impacts may be significant and politicians are keen to avoid economic losses due to maladaptation or inefficient policy courses. Despite the relative simplicity of indicator-based assessments (IbAs), their reliability has been questioned due to their non-robustness and inconsistent outcomes due to changes in modelling assumptions. Nonetheless, politicians still require evidence-based tools to make decisions to signal adaptation and policy approaches. This article develops a range of IbAs through the Ordered WeightedAverage (OWA) approach to construct a decision space for policy-makers. The OWA incorporates the possibility of non-robustness and inconsistency, and improves our understanding about vulnerability. We take Auckland, New Zealand, as a case study and find that if policymakers are risk averse, policy focus is on minimising vulnerability to coastal inundation due to sea level rise. As policymakers ease risk aversion, focus switches to enhancing natural capital and ecosystem services. The OWA reveals the trade-offs prevalent in complex socio-ecological systems and coupled human-infrastructure systems. Therefore, it consolidates a knowledge base for decision-making, which could be adapted internationally and create knowledge spillover and exchange of expertise.","PeriodicalId":46081,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Journal of Environmental Management","volume":"29 1","pages":"24 - 45"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Hot or not? Developing a spectrum of indicator-based assessments in approaching vulnerability to climate change\",\"authors\":\"M. Fernandez, N. Golubiewski, Jennifer L. R. Joynt, Lauren A. Rhodes\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14486563.2022.2034672\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Vulnerability assessments to climate change are instruments to support the design of mitigation and adaptation strategies. They are relevant to cities or regions where the impacts may be significant and politicians are keen to avoid economic losses due to maladaptation or inefficient policy courses. Despite the relative simplicity of indicator-based assessments (IbAs), their reliability has been questioned due to their non-robustness and inconsistent outcomes due to changes in modelling assumptions. Nonetheless, politicians still require evidence-based tools to make decisions to signal adaptation and policy approaches. This article develops a range of IbAs through the Ordered WeightedAverage (OWA) approach to construct a decision space for policy-makers. The OWA incorporates the possibility of non-robustness and inconsistency, and improves our understanding about vulnerability. We take Auckland, New Zealand, as a case study and find that if policymakers are risk averse, policy focus is on minimising vulnerability to coastal inundation due to sea level rise. As policymakers ease risk aversion, focus switches to enhancing natural capital and ecosystem services. The OWA reveals the trade-offs prevalent in complex socio-ecological systems and coupled human-infrastructure systems. Therefore, it consolidates a knowledge base for decision-making, which could be adapted internationally and create knowledge spillover and exchange of expertise.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46081,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australasian Journal of Environmental Management\",\"volume\":\"29 1\",\"pages\":\"24 - 45\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australasian Journal of Environmental Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14486563.2022.2034672\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australasian Journal of Environmental Management","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14486563.2022.2034672","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

摘要气候变化脆弱性评估是支持制定缓解和适应战略的工具。它们与可能产生重大影响的城市或地区有关,政治家们热衷于避免因适应不良或政策过程效率低下而造成的经济损失。尽管基于指标的评估相对简单,但由于建模假设的变化,其不稳健性和结果不一致,其可靠性受到质疑。尽管如此,政治家们仍然需要循证工具来做出决定,以表明适应和政策方法。本文通过有序加权平均(OWA)方法开发了一系列IbA,为决策者构建决策空间。OWA包含了不健壮性和不一致性的可能性,并提高了我们对脆弱性的理解。我们以新西兰奥克兰为例研究,发现如果政策制定者规避风险,政策重点是最大限度地减少海平面上升导致的沿海洪水的脆弱性。随着政策制定者缓解风险规避,重点转向加强自然资本和生态系统服务。OWA揭示了复杂的社会生态系统和耦合的人类基础设施系统中普遍存在的权衡。因此,它巩固了决策的知识基础,可以在国际上进行调整,创造知识溢出和专业知识交流。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Hot or not? Developing a spectrum of indicator-based assessments in approaching vulnerability to climate change
ABSTRACT Vulnerability assessments to climate change are instruments to support the design of mitigation and adaptation strategies. They are relevant to cities or regions where the impacts may be significant and politicians are keen to avoid economic losses due to maladaptation or inefficient policy courses. Despite the relative simplicity of indicator-based assessments (IbAs), their reliability has been questioned due to their non-robustness and inconsistent outcomes due to changes in modelling assumptions. Nonetheless, politicians still require evidence-based tools to make decisions to signal adaptation and policy approaches. This article develops a range of IbAs through the Ordered WeightedAverage (OWA) approach to construct a decision space for policy-makers. The OWA incorporates the possibility of non-robustness and inconsistency, and improves our understanding about vulnerability. We take Auckland, New Zealand, as a case study and find that if policymakers are risk averse, policy focus is on minimising vulnerability to coastal inundation due to sea level rise. As policymakers ease risk aversion, focus switches to enhancing natural capital and ecosystem services. The OWA reveals the trade-offs prevalent in complex socio-ecological systems and coupled human-infrastructure systems. Therefore, it consolidates a knowledge base for decision-making, which could be adapted internationally and create knowledge spillover and exchange of expertise.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
期刊最新文献
Bioanalytical tools in water quality assessment (2nd ed.) Bioanalytical tools in water quality assessment (2nd ed.) , by Beate Escher, Peta Neale, and Frederic Leusch, London, UK, IWA Publishing, 2021, 462 pp., £115 (paperback), ISBN: 9781789061970 Farm dam accounting for healthy and safe agricultural catchments A property rights schema for cultural flows in the Murray Darling Basin, Australia How environmental beliefs influence the acceptance of reallocating government budgets to improving coastal water quality: a hybrid choice model Activating electricity system demand response for commercial and industrial organisations
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1