Rethinking vulnerability analysis and governance with emphasis on a participatory approach

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><modsCollection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3 http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/v3/mods-3-8.xsd">
<mods version="3.8">
<titleInfo>
<title>Rethinking vulnerability analysis and governance with emphasis on a participatory approach</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="MAPA20150010292">
<namePart>Delvenne, Pierre</namePart>
<nameIdentifier>MAPA20150010292</nameIdentifier>
</name>
<name type="personal" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="MAPA20150010308">
<namePart>Turcanu, Catrinel</namePart>
<nameIdentifier>MAPA20150010308</nameIdentifier>
</name>
<typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource>
<genre authority="marcgt">periodical</genre>
<originInfo>
<place>
<placeTerm type="code" authority="marccountry">usa</placeTerm>
</place>
<dateIssued encoding="marc">2015</dateIssued>
<issuance>serial</issuance>
</originInfo>
<language>
<languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm>
</language>
<physicalDescription>
<form authority="marcform">print</form>
</physicalDescription>
<abstract displayLabel="Summary">This article draws on vulnerability analysis as it emerged as a complement to classical risk analysis, and it aims at exploring its ability for nurturing risk and vulnerability governance actions. An analysis of the literature on vulnerability analysis allows us to formulate a three-fold critique: first, vulnerability analysis has been treated separately in the natural and the technological hazards fields. This separation prevents vulnerability from unleashing the full range of its potential, as it constrains appraisals into artificial categories and thus already closes down the outcomes of the analysis. Second, vulnerability analysis focused on assessment tools that are mainly quantitative, whereas qualitative appraisal is a key to assessing vulnerability in a comprehensive way and to informing policy making. Third, a systematic literature review of case studies reporting on participatory approaches to vulnerability analysis allows us to argue that participation has been important to address the above, but it remains too closed down in its approach and would benefit from embracing a more open, encompassing perspective. Therefore, we suggest rethinking vulnerability analysis as one part of a dynamic process between opening-up and closing-down strategies, in order to support a vulnerability governance framework.</abstract>
<note type="statement of responsibility">Nicolas Rossignol, Pierre Delvenne and Catrinel Turcanu</note>
<subject xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="MAPA20080571009">
<topic>Vulnerabilidad</topic>
</subject>
<subject xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="MAPA20080591182">
<topic>Gerencia de riesgos</topic>
</subject>
<subject xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="MAPA20080588953">
<topic>Análisis de riesgos</topic>
</subject>
<classification authority="">7</classification>
<relatedItem type="host">
<titleInfo>
<title>Risk analysis : an international journal</title>
</titleInfo>
<originInfo>
<publisher>McLean, Virginia : Society for Risk Analysis, 1987-2015</publisher>
</originInfo>
<identifier type="issn">0272-4332</identifier>
<identifier type="local">MAP20077000345</identifier>
<part>
<text>01/01/2015 Volumen 35 Número 1 - enero 2015 , p. 129-141</text>
</part>
</relatedItem>
<recordInfo>
<recordContentSource authority="marcorg">MAP</recordContentSource>
<recordCreationDate encoding="marc">150505</recordCreationDate>
<recordChangeDate encoding="iso8601">20150512135814.0</recordChangeDate>
<recordIdentifier source="MAP">MAP20150017307</recordIdentifier>
<languageOfCataloging>
<languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">spa</languageTerm>
</languageOfCataloging>
</recordInfo>
</mods>
</modsCollection>