Journal article

Assessing vulnerability to natural hazards: Impact-based method and application to drought in Washington state

MM Fontaine, AC Steinemann

Natural Hazards Review | American Society of Civil Engineers | Published : 2009

Abstract

This article presents a technique for performing vulnerability assessments, using measures of exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity. Historically, vulnerability assessments have focused on analyzing the hazard itself, absent information on its causes and mitigations. The vulnerability assessment method (VAM), presented herein, acquires data and information from affected stakeholders to assess not only the hazard, but also the causes of vulnerability, potential for adaptation, previous impacts, and ways to mitigate future impacts. We apply the VAM to a case study of Washington State, assessing drought vulnerability across 34 subsectors. Results indicate highest vulnerability for drylan..

View full abstract

University of Melbourne Researchers

Grants

Awarded by National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration


Awarded by Joint Institute for the Study of the Atmosphere and Ocean (JISAO) under NOAA


Awarded by National Science Foundation


Awarded by Washington Dept. of Ecology and Washington Department of Community, Trade, and Economic Development


Funding Acknowledgements

The writers thank Doug McChesney, Loveday Conquest, and Sara Curran for their valuable expertise and contributions to this study. The writers also thank the reviewers of this article for their important and helpful comments. This research received support from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration under Grant No. NA06OAR4310075; the Joint Institute for the Study of the Atmosphere and Ocean (JISAO) under NOAA Cooperative Agreement No. NA17RJ1232, Contribution No. 1626; the National Science Foundation under Grant No. CMS 9874391; and from the Washington Dept. of Ecology and Washington Department of Community, Trade, and Economic Development through Contract No. 0511100008. Any opinions, findings, or conclusions are those of the writers and do not necessarily reflect the views of the agencies that provided support.