沿岸脆弱性指数是合适的指数吗?审查并提出沿海地区易受海平面上升影响的替代指数

IF 1.4 4区 地球科学 Q3 GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Javier Alcántara-Carrió, Luz Marleny García Echavarría, Alfredo Jaramillo-Vélez
{"title":"沿岸脆弱性指数是合适的指数吗?审查并提出沿海地区易受海平面上升影响的替代指数","authors":"Javier Alcántara-Carrió, Luz Marleny García Echavarría, Alfredo Jaramillo-Vélez","doi":"10.1007/s00367-024-00770-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The Coastal Vulnerability Index (CVI) has been widely applied around the world. This study provides a review of the suitability of the variables and mathematical expression of the CVI and proposes a new Integrated Coastal Vulnerability Index (ICVI), comparing both indices for 4 study areas in the southern Caribbean. The ICVI assesses vulnerability to sea level rise by integrating the Environmental Vulnerability Index (EVI) and the Socioeconomic Vulnerability Index (SVI). Regarding the variables that constitute the indices, it is noted that the CVI includes vulnerability and hazard variables and therefore it should be considered a risk index rather than a vulnerability index. The EVI includes geomorphological vulnerability variables, like the CVI, but also ecological ones. Regarding the mathematical expression, the use of the arithmetic mean versus the formula proposed for the CVI is discussed based on the comparison of the results obtained for EVI and SVI in the 4 study areas. In addition, the use of absolute (between 0 and 1) or relative (based on percentiles) limits in these indices, and the use of weights or not, are also discussed. The conclusion is that the use of relative thresholds necessarily forces the identification of very low to very high vulnerability zones for any study, and the use of weights on the variables increases the subjectivity of the assessment, all of which impedes the comparability of the index at a global level. Therefore, the ICVI, with the formula based on the arithmetic mean, with absolute limits between 0 and 1 and without variable weightings, is preferable to the CVI for use at the global level.</p>","PeriodicalId":12500,"journal":{"name":"Geo-Marine Letters","volume":"116 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Is the coastal vulnerability index a suitable index? Review and proposal of alternative indices for coastal vulnerability to sea level rise\",\"authors\":\"Javier Alcántara-Carrió, Luz Marleny García Echavarría, Alfredo Jaramillo-Vélez\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00367-024-00770-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The Coastal Vulnerability Index (CVI) has been widely applied around the world. This study provides a review of the suitability of the variables and mathematical expression of the CVI and proposes a new Integrated Coastal Vulnerability Index (ICVI), comparing both indices for 4 study areas in the southern Caribbean. The ICVI assesses vulnerability to sea level rise by integrating the Environmental Vulnerability Index (EVI) and the Socioeconomic Vulnerability Index (SVI). Regarding the variables that constitute the indices, it is noted that the CVI includes vulnerability and hazard variables and therefore it should be considered a risk index rather than a vulnerability index. The EVI includes geomorphological vulnerability variables, like the CVI, but also ecological ones. Regarding the mathematical expression, the use of the arithmetic mean versus the formula proposed for the CVI is discussed based on the comparison of the results obtained for EVI and SVI in the 4 study areas. In addition, the use of absolute (between 0 and 1) or relative (based on percentiles) limits in these indices, and the use of weights or not, are also discussed. The conclusion is that the use of relative thresholds necessarily forces the identification of very low to very high vulnerability zones for any study, and the use of weights on the variables increases the subjectivity of the assessment, all of which impedes the comparability of the index at a global level. Therefore, the ICVI, with the formula based on the arithmetic mean, with absolute limits between 0 and 1 and without variable weightings, is preferable to the CVI for use at the global level.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12500,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Geo-Marine Letters\",\"volume\":\"116 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Geo-Marine Letters\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"89\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00367-024-00770-9\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"地球科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Geo-Marine Letters","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00367-024-00770-9","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

海岸脆弱性指数(CVI)已在世界各地广泛应用。本研究对 CVI 的变量和数学表达的适用性进行了审查,并提出了新的综合沿海脆弱性指数 (ICVI),对加勒比海南部 4 个研究地区的这两个指数进行了比较。综合沿海脆弱性指数通过整合环境脆弱性指数(EVI)和社会经济脆弱性指数(SVI)来评估面对海平面上升的脆弱性。关于构成这些指数的变量,需要指出的是,CVI 包括脆弱性和灾害变量,因此应将其视为风险指数而非脆弱性指数。生态脆弱性指数(EVI)与地貌脆弱性指数(CVI)一样,包括地貌脆弱性变量和生态脆弱性变量。在数学表达方面,根据对 4 个研究区域的 EVI 和 SVI 所获结果的比较,讨论了算术平均值与 CVI 拟议公式的使用问题。此外,还讨论了在这些指数中使用绝对限值(介于 0 和 1 之间)还是相对限值(基于百分位数),以及是否使用权重。结论是,在任何研究中,使用相对阈值必然会迫使确定非常低到非常高的脆弱性区,而对变量使用加权则会增加评估的主观性,所有这些都妨碍了指数在全球范围内的可比性。因此,在全球范围内使用基于算术平均值公式的国际脆弱程度指数(ICVI),其绝对限值介于 0 和 1 之间,且不使用变量加权,要优于综合脆弱程度指数(CVI)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Is the coastal vulnerability index a suitable index? Review and proposal of alternative indices for coastal vulnerability to sea level rise

Is the coastal vulnerability index a suitable index? Review and proposal of alternative indices for coastal vulnerability to sea level rise

The Coastal Vulnerability Index (CVI) has been widely applied around the world. This study provides a review of the suitability of the variables and mathematical expression of the CVI and proposes a new Integrated Coastal Vulnerability Index (ICVI), comparing both indices for 4 study areas in the southern Caribbean. The ICVI assesses vulnerability to sea level rise by integrating the Environmental Vulnerability Index (EVI) and the Socioeconomic Vulnerability Index (SVI). Regarding the variables that constitute the indices, it is noted that the CVI includes vulnerability and hazard variables and therefore it should be considered a risk index rather than a vulnerability index. The EVI includes geomorphological vulnerability variables, like the CVI, but also ecological ones. Regarding the mathematical expression, the use of the arithmetic mean versus the formula proposed for the CVI is discussed based on the comparison of the results obtained for EVI and SVI in the 4 study areas. In addition, the use of absolute (between 0 and 1) or relative (based on percentiles) limits in these indices, and the use of weights or not, are also discussed. The conclusion is that the use of relative thresholds necessarily forces the identification of very low to very high vulnerability zones for any study, and the use of weights on the variables increases the subjectivity of the assessment, all of which impedes the comparability of the index at a global level. Therefore, the ICVI, with the formula based on the arithmetic mean, with absolute limits between 0 and 1 and without variable weightings, is preferable to the CVI for use at the global level.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Geo-Marine Letters
Geo-Marine Letters 地学-地球科学综合
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Geo-Marine Letters is an international peer-reviewed journal focussing on the rapid publication of concise original studies and reviews dealing with processes, products and techniques in marine geology, geophysics, and geochemistry. Coverage spans - structural geology, including plate tectonics of recent active and passive margins - sea-bed morphology, physiography and morphodynamics - sediment transport, depositional processes and sedimentary facies analysis - stratigraphy, basin analysis and paleoenvironmental reconstruction - sea-level history, paleoproductivity, gas hydrates, salt domes and brines - sediment-water interaction and organism-sediment relationships - geochemical tracers, stable isotopes and authigenic mineral formation - geotechnical properties and application of new geo-marine techniques, and more. In addition to regular articles, reviews, discussion/reply articles and technical papers, Geo-Marine Letters welcomes contributions by guest editors in the form of conference/workshop proceedings, or bundles of papers dealing with specific themes.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信