Assessing the dynamics of urban vulnerability to climate change: Case of Helsinki, Finland

Alexandra Jurgilevich,Aleksi Räsänen,Sirkku Juhola

doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2021.08.002

Alexandra Jurgilevich, Aleksi Räsänen + Show 1 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2021.08.002

Copy DOI

Abstract

Future climate risk is not only dependent on future climatic changes but also on how exposure and vulnerability develop in the future. There is a gap in understanding what drives future climate vulnerability, and how to account for its spatial emergence. This issue is particularly pertinent for cities due to the concentration of assets and population at risk, and rapid socio-economic and land use changes. We develop a mixed methods approach, which integrates quantitative, qualitative and participatory methods to (1) identify internal and external drivers of socio-economic development and land use change, (2) explore a range of future pathways using local socio-economic scenarios, and (3) visualize changes in vulnerability indicators with the help of a participatory mapping exercise. We test the approach in the City of Helsinki with the timeframe up to 2050. Our results show the connections between the drivers and changes in vulnerability indicators, while maps developed in a stakeholder workshop visualize the potential spatial changes in indicators. Our approach of connecting indicators, drivers and adaptation/planning needs, as well as scenario analysis, provides a deeper understanding of vulnerability dynamics as a process and provides insights for different sectors of urban policy and planning.

Highlights

Assessing future climate risks includes accounting for both climatic and non-climatic factors (Oppenheimer et al, 2014)
We develop and apply a mixed methods approach to explore the dynamics of climate change vulnerability of urban population as a process and to visualize the changes spatially
We identify the key drivers of change, use a range of urban socio-economic and land use change scenarios, and utilize a participatory SoftGIS tool (Rantanen and Kahila, 2009) to map changes in vulnerability indicators

Summary

Introduction

Assessing future climate risks includes accounting for both climatic (hazards) and non-climatic (exposure and vulnerability) factors (Oppenheimer et al, 2014). Their interlinkages, as well as indirect and cascading effects of socio-economic changes on future vulnerability is limited and needs to be studied further (Ford et al, 2018). This pre supposes acknowledging system complexity in the assessments, embedding vulnerability in a socio-economic context, and accounting for cross-scale interactions (Ford et al, 2018; Dilling et al, 2015; O’Brien et al, 2007)

Objectives

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion