Beyond vulnerability assessment: Integrating risk and capacity measurement in Tunisian communes adaptation—Evidence from nine communes

IF 5.5 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Tarek Gasmi , Ramzi Guesmi , Safouane Gaddour , Neila Akrimi
{"title":"Beyond vulnerability assessment: Integrating risk and capacity measurement in Tunisian communes adaptation—Evidence from nine communes","authors":"Tarek Gasmi ,&nbsp;Ramzi Guesmi ,&nbsp;Safouane Gaddour ,&nbsp;Neila Akrimi","doi":"10.1016/j.indic.2026.101160","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Climate adaptation planning in resource-constrained contexts requires systematic assessment tools integrating vulnerability with capacity measurement, yet existing frameworks focus either on community vulnerability without institutional dimensions or institutional maturity without quantitative risk weighting. This gap leaves communes unable to demonstrate climate finance readiness or prioritize investments.</div><div>We address this through a three-index model integrating Climate Risk and Vulnerability Assessment with institutional capacity measurement. Documentary analysis, structured questionnaires assessing five capacity dimensions (local capabilities, governance, partnerships, gender integration, technical tools), and participatory workshops generate three metrics: a Risk Index (RI) quantifying threats, an Adaptation Capacity Index (ACI) measuring resources, and a Climate Maturity Index (CMI) expressing capacity relative to system state.</div><div>Applied to nine Tunisian communes, assessment reveals systematic patterns. Risk scores range from 2.33 to 3.00, with maturity (CMI) spanning 16.7% to 50.7%. Socioeconomic sensitivity rather than physical hazards serves as the primary differentiator, with agricultural dependency above 60% associated with maximum sensitivity. Socioeconomic sensitivity and adaptive capacity exhibit inverse correlation (<span><math><mrow><mi>ρ</mi><mo>=</mo><mo>−</mo><mn>0</mn><mo>.</mo><mn>69</mn></mrow></math></span>, <span><math><mrow><mi>p</mi><mo>=</mo><mn>0</mn><mo>.</mo><mn>04</mn></mrow></math></span>), with 89% showing adaptation deficits averaging +1.54 points. Universal weakness in gender integration (mean=0.78) and technical tools (mean=0.67) persists across readiness categories, explained by 44% concordance between community priorities emphasizing infrastructure and technical assessments identifying governance, gender, and tools as critical capacity determinants.</div><div>These findings challenge climate finance allocation equity, revealing eligibility criteria may favor communes already possessing capacity. The model offers a quantitative readiness tool for vulnerability-weighted resource allocation, with patterns identified across these nine diverse communes generating hypotheses for validation in broader Middle East and North Africa (MENA) contexts.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":36171,"journal":{"name":"Environmental and Sustainability Indicators","volume":"30 ","pages":"Article 101160"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental and Sustainability Indicators","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2665972726000462","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/2/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Climate adaptation planning in resource-constrained contexts requires systematic assessment tools integrating vulnerability with capacity measurement, yet existing frameworks focus either on community vulnerability without institutional dimensions or institutional maturity without quantitative risk weighting. This gap leaves communes unable to demonstrate climate finance readiness or prioritize investments.
We address this through a three-index model integrating Climate Risk and Vulnerability Assessment with institutional capacity measurement. Documentary analysis, structured questionnaires assessing five capacity dimensions (local capabilities, governance, partnerships, gender integration, technical tools), and participatory workshops generate three metrics: a Risk Index (RI) quantifying threats, an Adaptation Capacity Index (ACI) measuring resources, and a Climate Maturity Index (CMI) expressing capacity relative to system state.
Applied to nine Tunisian communes, assessment reveals systematic patterns. Risk scores range from 2.33 to 3.00, with maturity (CMI) spanning 16.7% to 50.7%. Socioeconomic sensitivity rather than physical hazards serves as the primary differentiator, with agricultural dependency above 60% associated with maximum sensitivity. Socioeconomic sensitivity and adaptive capacity exhibit inverse correlation (ρ=−0.69, p=0.04), with 89% showing adaptation deficits averaging +1.54 points. Universal weakness in gender integration (mean=0.78) and technical tools (mean=0.67) persists across readiness categories, explained by 44% concordance between community priorities emphasizing infrastructure and technical assessments identifying governance, gender, and tools as critical capacity determinants.
These findings challenge climate finance allocation equity, revealing eligibility criteria may favor communes already possessing capacity. The model offers a quantitative readiness tool for vulnerability-weighted resource allocation, with patterns identified across these nine diverse communes generating hypotheses for validation in broader Middle East and North Africa (MENA) contexts.
超越脆弱性评估:在突尼斯社区适应中整合风险和能力衡量——来自9个社区的证据
资源受限环境下的气候适应规划需要将脆弱性与能力衡量相结合的系统评估工具,然而现有框架要么侧重于社区脆弱性,而缺乏制度维度,要么侧重于制度成熟度,而缺乏定量风险权重。这一差距使社区无法展示气候融资准备或优先考虑投资。我们通过将气候风险和脆弱性评估与机构能力测量相结合的三指数模型来解决这一问题。文献分析、评估五个能力维度(地方能力、治理、伙伴关系、性别融合、技术工具)的结构化问卷和参与式研讨会产生了三个指标:量化威胁的风险指数(RI)、衡量资源的适应能力指数(ACI)和表达相对于系统状态的能力的气候成熟度指数(CMI)。应用于九个突尼斯公社的评估揭示了系统的模式。风险评分从2.33到3.00,成熟度(CMI)从16.7%到50.7%。社会经济敏感性而非物理危害是主要的区分因素,农业依存度超过60%与最大敏感性相关。社会经济敏感性与适应能力呈负相关(ρ= - 0.69, p=0.04), 89%的人表现出平均+1.54分的适应缺陷。性别融合(平均=0.78)和技术工具(平均=0.67)的普遍弱点在准备程度类别中仍然存在,原因是强调基础设施的社区优先事项与确定治理、性别和工具为关键能力决定因素的技术评估之间存在44%的一致性。这些发现挑战了气候资金分配的公平性,揭示了资格标准可能有利于已经拥有能力的社区。该模型为脆弱性加权资源分配提供了一个定量准备工具,在这九个不同的社区中确定的模式产生了假设,以便在更广泛的中东和北非(MENA)环境中进行验证。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Environmental and Sustainability Indicators
Environmental and Sustainability Indicators Environmental Science-Environmental Science (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
2.30%
发文量
49
审稿时长
57 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书