A Comparative Analysis of Disaster Risk, Vulnerability and Resilience Composite Indicators.

摘要: INTRODUCTION: In the past decade significant attention has been given to development of tools that attempt measure vulnerability, risk or resilience communities disasters. Particular composite indices quantify these concepts mirroring their deployment in other fields such as sustainable development. Whilst some authors have published reviews disaster and indicator methodologies, a limited nature. This paper seeks dramatically expand efforts by analysing 106 methodologies understand breadth depth practice. METHODS: An extensive search academic grey literature was undertaken for scorecard addressed multiple/all hazards; included social economic aspects risk, vulnerability resilience; were sub-national scope; explained method variables used; focussed on present-day; and, had tested implemented. Information index construction, geographic areas application, used relevant data collected analysed. RESULTS: Substantial variety construction practices indicators found. Five key approaches identified literature, with use hierarchical deductive being most common. Typically chosen experts, came from existing statistical datasets combined simple addition equal weights. A minimum 2 maximum 235 used, although approximately two thirds less than 40 variables. The 2298 unique variables, frequently common population density unemployment rate. Classification found average 34% each methodology related environment, 25% 20% 13% built 6% natural environment 3% indices. However specifically measuring action mitigate prepare disasters only comprised 12%, average, total number index. Only 19% employed any sensitivity uncertainty analysis single case this comprehensive. DISCUSSION: potential limitations present state practice how might impact decision makers are discussed. particular low direct measures could significantly limit quality reliability methodologies. Recommendations improvements made, well suggested future research directions enhance theoretical empirical knowledge base Language: en