A multi-hazard perspective on equitable adaptation and how to assess it

Toon Haer*, Marleen de Ruiter

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to JournalReview articleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Natural hazards disrupt livelihoods and cause significant economic damage globally, disproportionately burdening vulnerable and marginalized populations. Adaptation efforts must become more equitable to better distribute risk among socio-economic groups, ensure inclusive representation in decision-making, and address root causes of vulnerability. While there are similarities across hazard types in achieving equitable adaptation, attention to their differences is essential, as each hazard type poses distinct adaptation challenges. Additionally, equitable adaptation to compound and consecutive events is complicated by potential maladaptation and adaptation trade-offs, further pressuring the most vulnerable. This study provides a multi-hazard perspective on equitable adaptation across various hazard types and multi-hazard events. We identify challenges for hazards based on magnitude (intensive vs. extensive), onset (rapid vs. slow), and for compound and consecutive events. To advance equitable adaptation to multi-hazards, we recommend that (1) equitable adaptation analyses address specific challenges by hazard type, (2) adaptation efforts are scaled up for extensive events, such as nuisance flooding, due to their cumulative impact on vulnerable groups, and (3) research advances toward multi-hazard thinking to prevent maladaptation and adaptation trade-offs. To support equitable, multi-risk adaptation decisions, methods must integratively capture the complexities of social and environmental systems, especially regarding consecutive and compounding events. This paper highlights recent advancements in qualitative and quantitative methods, as well as decision-making approaches, to tackle socio-environmental complexities. Our analysis includes (1) qualitative approaches for complex socio-environmental systems, (2) quantitative approaches for these systems, and (3) decision-making under deep uncertainty. Combining these in a mixed-methods approach shows potential for more effective modelling of equity and multi-hazard considerations.

Original languageEnglish
Article numbere0000521
Pages (from-to)1-21
Number of pages21
JournalPLOS Climate
Volume3
Issue number12
Early online date19 Dec 2024
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Dec 2024

Bibliographical note

Review

--------------------------------------------------------------------------


Publisher Copyright:
© 2024 Haer, de Ruiter. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Funding

TH received funding from Dutch Research Council (NWO) under grant number vi.vidi.221s.081. MCdR received support from the MYRIAD-EU project, which received funding from the European Union’s 471 Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 101003276. MCdR also received support from the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO) (VENI; grant no. VI.Veni.222.169). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

FundersFunder number
Nederlandse Wetenschaps Organisatievi.vidi.221s.081, VI.Veni.222.169
Horizon EuropeNo 101003276

    Keywords

    • justice
    • adaptation
    • multi-hazard
    • equity

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'A multi-hazard perspective on equitable adaptation and how to assess it'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this