Download full issue - PanamJAS

186J. L. NICOLODI & R. M. PETERMANNVulnerability Analysis and the EnvironmentalRisk ConceptThe concept of risk is usually associatedwith an event which may or may not happen.However, the actual risk only occurs when assets arevaluable, whether materially or not, since there is norisk if the perception of losing something does notexist. Therefore, one cannot envision risk if there isno danger of losing something. In this case, societyfaces a risk.The notion of “possible loss”, which isintrinsic to risk, can be broken down into severalcomponents. When we examine spatial location, oreven spatial distribution of hazards, the connectionwith cities – or more precisely, urban centers –becomes more evident. This is because they are thespecific site of production and reproduction ofmanufacturing processes and a lifestyle which favorspopulation concentration, encourages manufacturingoutput, business relationships, and service provision(Castro et al. 2005).In this sense, risk assessment is based on therelationship between reliability and criticality ofcomplex systems, where the dynamic behavior ofnumerous variables must be captured in a select setof indicators capable of monitoring the interactionsthat actually occur along different time scales, i.e., inthe near, medium, and long term (Egler 2005).Environmental risk analysis must be seen asa dynamic indicator of relationships between naturalsystems, the productive structure, and the socialconditions of human reproduction at a given placeand time. It is therefore important to consider theassessment of environmental hazards as theconsequence of three basic categories:a) Natural Risk: related to processes andevents of a natural origin, or resulting from humanactivities. The nature of these processes is quitediverse on time and spatial scales, so the natural riskmay present differing levels of loss, as a result ofintensity (magnitude), spatial extent, and time ofactivity of the processes under consideration.b) Technological Risk: The technologicalrisk is inherent in productive processes and manufacturingactivities. The idea of technological dangerderives chiefly from manufacturing technology, as aresult of inherent flaws, as opposed to naturaldangers, perceived as an external threat (Castro et al.2005). Technological risk may be defined as apotential event that can be life-threatening in thenear, medium, and long term, as a result of investmentdecisions in the manufacturing structure.c) Social Risk: This category can beanalyzed and developed from different standpoints.It is often considered as the damage society (or partof it) can bring about. Another approach stresses therelationship between deprivation and vulnerability tonatural disasters. For the purposes of this study, wehave adopted the bias proposed by Egler (1996),where Social Risk is seen as the result of deprivationof social requirements for full human development,a fact that contributes to deterioration in standards ofliving. Its most obvious consequences are the lack ofadequate living conditions, expressed in terms ofaccess to basic services such as treated water,wastewater, and trash collection services. In the longterm, however, these can affect employability,income, and technical development of the localpopulation, as key elements to a full, sustainable,human development.Taking these three basic dimensions as astarting point for a broader concept of environmentalrisk, a methodology for its evaluation must build onthree basic criteria (Egler 1996):a) Vulnerability of natural systems, seen asthe level between the stability of biophysicalprocesses and unstable situations where there aresubstantial losses of primary productivity;b) Density and potential expansion of theproductive structure, which attempts to express fixedand flowing economic aspects in a certain area of thecountry in a dynamic concept;c) Criticality of housing conditions, in termsof the gap between current standards of living andthe minimum required for full human development.These definitions are in agreement withUNESCO’s IOC, which defines coastal vulnerabilityas the state of coastal communities (including theirsocial structure, physical assets, economy, andenvironmental support) that determine which areaffected to a greater or lesser extent by extremeevents (IOC 2009).The same Commission further establishesthat vulnerability analyses be conducted accordingto different – macro to micro – scales, depending onthe approach to be given by the national integratedcoastal management programs.In this study, the macroscale will be used todefine Brazilian coastal vulnerability by region, thusproviding inputs for planning responses for theirmitigation and adaptation.MethodologyAccording to IOC’s proposed methodology,five stages are necessary to make nationaland regional climate change adaptation plans:1) Identifying and quantifying the hazards;2) Measuring vulnerability; 3) Assessing the risk;4) Enhancing awareness and preparedness;5) Mitigating the risk. This study addresses stagesPan-American Journal of Aquatic Sciences (2010), 5(2): 184-204