...
首页> 外文期刊>Economics of Disasters and Climate Change >Measuring Natural Risks in the Philippines: Socioeconomic Resilience and Wellbeing Losses
【24h】

Measuring Natural Risks in the Philippines: Socioeconomic Resilience and Wellbeing Losses

机译:测量在菲律宾自然风险:社会经济弹性和健康损失

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Traditional risk assessments use asset losses as the main metric to measure the severity of a disaster. Here, an expanded risk assessment is proposed based on a framework that adds "socioeconomic resilience" — that is, the ability of affected households to cope with and recover from disaster asset losses — and uses "wellbeing losses" as its main measure of disaster severity. Using a new agent-based model that represents explicitly the recovery and reconstruction process at the household level, thisrisk assessment provides new insights into disaster risks in the Philippines. Its first conclusion is the close link between natural disasters and poverty. On average, estimates suggest that almost half a million Filipinos per year face transient consumption poverty due to natural disasters. Nationally, the bottom income quintile suffers only 9% of the total asset losses, but 31 % of the total well-being losses. As a result of the disproportionate impact on poor people, the average annual wellbeing losses due to disasters in the Philippines is estimated at US$3.9 billion per year, more than double the asset losses of US$1.4 billion. The second conclusion is the fact that the regions identified as priorities for risk-management interventions differ depending on which risk metric is used. While cost-benefit analyses based on asset losses direct risk reduction investments toward the richest regions and areas, a focus on poverty or wellbeing rebalances the analysis and generates a different set of regional priorities. Finally, measuring disaster impacts through poverty and wellbeing impacts allows the quantification of the benefits from interventions like rapid post-disaster support and adaptive social protection. While these measures do not reduce asset losses, they efficiently reduce their wellbeing consequences by making the population more resilient.
机译:传统的风险评估使用资产损失主要的指标来衡量的严重性灾难。提出了一个框架,补充道“社会经济活力”——也就是能力受影响的家庭应对和恢复从灾难资产损失,使用“健康灾难的严重性损失”作为其主要的措施。使用一种新的基于代理模型表示明确的恢复和重建过程在家庭层面,thisrisk评估提供了新的见解的灾难在菲律宾的风险。自然灾害和之间的紧密联系贫困。每年近一百万菲律宾人的脸由于自然过渡消费贫困灾害。也只有9%的总资产损失,但31日%的总福利损失。对穷人的不成比例的影响,年平均健康损失的灾害在菲律宾估计为39亿美元每年的资产损失的两倍多14亿美元。这一地区确定为优先事项风险管理干预措施取决于不同使用哪种风险度量。分析基于资产的直接损失风险减少投资向最富有的地区和地区,关注贫困和健康再平衡分析和生成一个不同的的地区优先考虑。通过贫困和灾难影响健康影响允许量化的好处从干预措施快速灾后支持和适应社会保护。这些措施不会减少资产损失,他们有效地减少他们的健康后果通过人口更有弹性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号