.png){kind=icon}
返回
How Valid Are Social Vulnerability Models?
.png){kind=icon}
OA
AI
DOI：10.1080/24694452.2018.1535887.png)
.png){kind=icon}
.png){kind=icon}
分享.png){kind=icon}
收藏
摘要
En 中文
Social vulnerability models are becoming increasingly important for hazard mitigation and recovery planning, but it remains unclear how well they explain disaster outcomes. Most studies using indicators and indexes employ them to either describe vulnerability patterns or compare newly devised measures to existing ones. The focus of this article is construct validation, in which we investigate the empirical validity of a range of models of social vulnerability using outcomes from Hurricane Sandy. Using spatial regression, relative measures of assistance applicants, affected renters, housing damage, and property loss were regressed on four social vulnerability models and their constituent pillars while controlling for flood exposure. The indexes best explained housing assistance applicants, whereas they poorly explained property loss. At the pillar level, themes related to access and functional needs, age, transportation, and housing were the most explanatory. Overall, social vulnerability models with weighted and profile configurations demonstrated higher construct validity than the prevailing social vulnerability indexes. The findings highlight the need to expand the number and breadth of empirical validation studies to better understand relationships among social vulnerability models and disaster outcomes.
Keyword:
index
hazards
spatial regression
social vulnerability
validation
AI总结
对已上传原文的论文进行重点信息的提取，主要内容包括：简要概述、研究摘要、背景介绍、关键亮点、图文解析、展望与总结。
期刊
IF:
2.9
论文数:
1.4K
被引数:
4.5K
机构
引用论文
.png){kind=icon}
Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) or Blood Glucose Monitoring (BGM): Interactions and ImplicationsOAAI
OAAI分享收藏A PRACTICAL AND LOW COST MICROBIOTEST TO ASSESS THE PHYTOTOXIC POTENTIAL OF GROWING MEDIA AND SOIL
PREAI
分享收藏
查看更多内容