Vulnerability Assessment of Indian Himalayan Region ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Indian Institute of Technology - Guwahati & Mandi In collaboration with Indian Institute of Science Bangalore Under the project “Capacity Building on Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment in the States of Indian Himalayan Region”
Featu tures of f IH IHR – Hig ighly Vuln lnerable to CC • The Himalayan ecosystem is vital to the ecological security of the India • Provides forest cover, feeds perennial rivers that are the source of drinking water, irrigation, and hydropower, • Hot spot of Biodiversity; Source of high value agriculture and tourism. • The states are characterized by land degradation, deforestation, proliferation of invasive species, loss of biodiversity, landslides, invasion of commercial crops, low productive agriculture, migration, etc. • Due to varying altitudes, the region experiences diverse climatic conditions; extreme weather events, floods and droughts, high climate variability. • These climatic and non-climatic stresses make the IHR ecosystems and communities highly vulnerable to both the current climate variability and future climate change. • Under climate change scenarios, impacts of climate change are projected to exacerbate, thereby increasing the vulnerability of bio-physical & socio-economic systems.
Definitions – IPCC, 2014 Vulnerability: The propensity or predisposition to be adversely affected. Vulnerability encompasses a variety of concepts and elements including sensitivity or susceptibility to harm and lack of capacity to cope and adapt. Adaptative Capacity; The ability of systems, institutions, humans and other organisms to adjust to potential damage, to take advantage of opportunities or to respond to consequences. Sensitivity : Degree to which a system or species is affected, either adversely or beneficially by climate variability or change. - The effect may be direct (e.g. change in crop yield in response to a change in the mean, range or variability of temperature) or - Indirect (e.g. damages caused by an increase in the frequency of coastal flooding due to sea level rise).
Why Vulnerability Assessment 1. To rank various blocks, districts, and states/ Cropping systems, Watersheds, Forest types, etc. According to vulnerability profile or index 2. To prioritize regions, communities, cropping systems, etc. for adaptation interventions Based on vulnerability profiles 3. To identify drivers of vulnerability To develop targeted Adaptation interventions to address the causes 4. Enable Adaptation planning; Developing Targeted Adaptation plans and practices
vulnerability ’ is considered as a system ‘ hazard ’ is “the potential occurrence of a property representing its “propensity or natural or human-induced physical event or predisposition to be adversely affected”. trend or physical impact that may cause loss - ”Sensitivity and Adaptative of life, injury, or other health impacts, as well as damage and loss to property, Capacity” infrastructure, livelihoods, service provision, ecosystems, and environmental resources ” . IMPACTS SOCIOECONOMIC CLIMATE Vulnerability PROCESSES Natural Socioeconomic Pathways Variability RISK Hazards Adaptation and Mitigation Actions Anthropogenic Climate Change Governance Exposure EMISSIONS and Land-use Change Exposure ’ is “the presence of people, livelihoods, ecosystems, envi. functions, services, and resources, infrastructure, cultural assets in places and settings that could be adversely affected” ; The First step in Adaptation to future climate change – Reduce Vulnerability and Exposure to present Climate Variability
Vuln lnerability Assessment Meth thodology Step 1: Scoping and objectives of vulnerability assessment; Socio-economic Vulnerability Step 2: Selection of type of vulnerability assessment – “Socio - economic vulnerability” Step 3: Selection of tier method – Tier I and 2 Step 4: Selection of scale, period of assessment; State level and Dist Level – Current Vulnerability Step 5: identification, selection and definition of indicators for Vulnerability assessment Step 6: Quantification and measurement of indicators; Largely Secondary Data based Step 7: Normalization of indicators – to make the indicators unitless Step 8: Assigning weights to the indicators; Stakeholders – Govt Depts and Experts Step 9: Aggregation of indicators and development of vulnerabilty index Step 10: Representation of vulnerability: spatial maps, charts and tables of vulnerability profiles and indices Step 11: Vulnerability ranking of sectos, regions, communities, cropping sys., river basins, watersheds, forest types Step 12: Identification of drivers of vulnerability for adaptation planning
Functional relation with Indicators Sub-indicators Vulnerability Population Density (Total population of a state divided by the total geographical area) Positive Percentage of Marginal farmers Positive Socio-economic, Livestock to human ratio (Total livestock population in a state divided by the total population Negative demographic status of that state) and Per Capita Income (2014-15) at current prices as on 31.03.2017 Negative health Number of Primary Health Centres per 100,000 Households (2017) Negative Percentage of women in the overall workforce Negative Percentage area irrigated (2010-11) Negative Yield variability of food grains (2005-2015) - Coefficient of variation calculated for 10 year food grain yield Positive Sensitivity of data agricultural production Percentage area under Horticulture Crops (2016) Negative Percentage area under open forest Positive Forest Dependent Percentage area under forests per thousand rural household (2017) Negative Livelihoods Percentage crop area insured under all Insurance Schemes (2015-16) Negative Percentage farmers taking crop loans (2015-16) Negative Access to Average person days per Household under MGNREGA (2006-2016) Negative information services Percentage area with >30% slope Positive and infrastructure Road Density (surfaced roads in km divided by total geographic area in Sq km) Negative
Vulnerability In Index of f IH IHR States
Vulnerability In Index of f IH IHR States
Dri rivers of f Hig igh Vulnerability - Relative State Drivers of Vulnerability Drivers of Higher Vulnerability: - least area under irrigation; - least forest area available per 1,000 rural households; Assam - 1 - least number of farmers taking loans - lowest per capita income; - low percentage area covered under crop insurance - low MGNREGA participation. Major drivers of Higher vulnerability - highest Crop yield variability, - no area under crop insurance, Mizoram - 2 - largest area under open forests, - largest area under slope >30% as compared to other states. - second lowest percentage area under irrigation Divers of vulnerability; - least road density, Jammu and - No area under crop insurance, Kashmir - 3 - low area under forests per 1,000 rural households, - low percentage area under horticulture crops, low livestock to human ratio and low percentage of women in the overall workforce.
Relatively Lower Vulnerability: Least Vulnerable States Rank State Drivers of Vulnerability 10 Arunachal Drivers of Lower Vulnerability: Pradesh - largest area under forests per 1,000 households - Least population density - Most densely available health care facility. - Relatively low % of marginal farmers - High women participation in labour force that makes reduces the vulnerability of the state. Major Drivers of lower Vulnerability are: 11 Uttarakhand - Low population Density - High per capita Income - Better Health access - Higher % area Irrigated – Low Crop Yield Variability 12 Sikkim Drivers of Low Vulnerability: - highest per capita income - lowest area under open forests, - Low population Density - Very high area under Horticultural / Fruit Orchards
Recommend
More recommend
