Framework

​

Several vulnerability frameworks with an emphasis on policy responses to climate change have emerged from the literature, (Kelly & Adger, 2000). Vulnerability frameworks are also classified as biophysical or social. Biophysical vulnerabilities are related to the impact from natural hazards (Brooks, 2003), while social vulnerabilities are viewed as the societal respond to such impacts (Emrich & Cutter, 2011). 

 

Social vulnerability can also be classified between “starting-points vulnerabilities” and “ending-points vulnerabilities”. The “ending-points vulnerabilities” approach measures the impacts of climate change on a social system (Füssel, 2005), while the “starting-points vulnerability” approach takes into consideration a pre-existing state generated by socio-economic conditions that determine the ability of a society to respond to a climate change impact (KC, Shepherd & Johnson, 2015). 

 

Generally, studies indicate that poverty is the main driving factor to social vulnerability; however, the interaction among social, economic, and environmental factors (i.e., the three pillars of sustainability) may provide a better framework of the conditions in which climate vulnerability is taking place. As such, this study takes into consideration these three pillars for the climate vulnerability analysis of Downtown atlanta as it was performed by the City of Minneapolis.