Scenarios of Human Responses to Unprecedented Social-Environmental Extreme Events

The challenges of dynamic vulnerability and how to assess it

Recent disasters have demonstrated the challenges faced by society as a result of the increasing complexity of disaster risk. In this perspective article, we discuss the complex interactions between hazards and vulnerability and suggest methodological approaches to assess and include dynamics of vulnerability in our risk assessments, learning from the compound and multi-hazard, socio-hydrology, and socio-ecological research communities. We argue for a changed perspective, starting with the circumstances that determine dynamic vulnerability. We identify three types of dynamics of vulnerability: (1) the underlying dynamics of vulnerability, (2) changes in vulnerability during long-lasting disasters, and (3) changes in vulnerability during compounding disasters and societal shocks. We conclude that there is great potential to capture the dynamics of vulnerability using qualitative and model-based methods, both for reproducing historic and projecting future dynamics of vulnerability. We provide examples using narratives, agent-based models, and system dynamics.

Drought and society: Scientific progress, blind spots, and future prospects

Human activities have increasingly intensified the severity, frequency, and negative impacts of droughts in several regions across the world. This trend has led to broader scientific conceptualizations of drought risk that account for human actions and their interplays with natural systems. This review focuses on physical and engineering sciences to examine the way and extent to which these disciplines account for social processes in relation to the production and distribution of drought risk. We conclude that this research has significantly progressed in terms of recognizing the role of humans in reshaping drought risk and its socioenvironmental impacts. We note an increasing engagement with and contribution to understanding vulnerability, resilience, and adaptation patterns. Moreover, by advancing (socio)hydrological models, developing numerical indexes, and enhancing data processing, physical and engineering scientists have determined the extent of human influences in the propagation of drought hazard. However, these studies do not fully capture the complexities of anthropogenic transformations. Very often, they portray society as homogeneous, and decision-making processes as apolitical, thereby concealing the power relations underlying the production of drought and the uneven distribution of its impacts. The resistance in engaging explicitly with politics and social power-despite their major role in producing anthropogenic drought-can be attributed to the strong influence of positivist epistemologies in engineering and physical sciences. We suggest that an active engagement with critical social sciences can further theorizations of drought risk by shedding light on the structural and historical systems of power that engender every socioenvironmental transformation. This article is categorized under:Climate, History, Society, Culture > Disciplinary Perspectives.