No. 31 (2026): Risks and built environment: From knowledge to project
Research and Experimentation

Disasters and Vulnerability: a multidimensional dynamic approach

PDF
  • Maddalena Coccagna,
  • Elisabetta Schiavone,
  • Stefano Zanut
Maddalena Coccagna
Dipartimento di Architettura, Università degli Studi di Ferrara, Italia
Bio
Elisabetta Schiavone
Soluzioni Emergenti, Italia
Bio
Stefano Zanut
CERPA Italia ets, Italia
Bio
DOI: https://doi.org/10.36253/techne-18574

Published 2026-07-29

Keywords

  • Vulnerability,
  • Co-production,
  • coping,
  • functional resilience

How to Cite

Coccagna, M., Schiavone, E., & Zanut, S. (2026). Disasters and Vulnerability: a multidimensional dynamic approach. TECHNE - Journal of Technology for Architecture and Environment, (31), 143–150. https://doi.org/10.36253/techne-18574

Copyright (c) 2026 Maddalena Coccagna, Elisabetta Schiavone, Stefano Zanut

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

Abstract

The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction highlighted the multidimensional and dynamic nature of vulnerability. Since the second half of the last century, several tools have been developed to predictively identify or quantify vulnerabilities, often with poor operational results. The CORE research (Science and Human Factors for Resilient Society) is part of a new set of methods that enable knowledge co-production processes through argumentative and dynamic collaboration between first responders and people with reduced adaptive capacity. The aim is to assess intersectional factors linked to inequalities, and the presence of systemic risks. A critical comparison of knowledge, experiences, and perceptions, based on scenarios, allows to identify hidden problems, to propose dynamic solutions, and to improve the functional resilience of both buildings and the environment.

PDF

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. Aldrich, D.P., Meyer, M.A. (2015), “Social capital and community resilience”, Am. Behav. Sci., 59(2), pp. 254-269. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764214550299
  2. Beccari B. (2016), “Comparative Analysis of Disaster Risk, Vulnerability and Resilience Composite Indicators”, PLOS Currents Disasters, vol. 14 (1). Available at: 10.1371/currents.dis.453df025e34b682e9737f95070f9b970
  3. Birkmann, J., Cardona, O.D., Carreño, M.L. et al. (2013), “Framing vulnerability, risk and societal responses: the MOVE framework”. Natural Hazards, vol. 67, pp. 193-211. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-013-0558-5
  4. BISE, Biodiversity Information System for Europe (2013). Available at: https://biodiversity.europa.eu/green-infrastructure (Accessed on 01/09/2025).
  5. Boal, A. (2013), Theatre of the Oppressed, Theatre Communications Group.
  6. BuilDERS, Building Resilience in Europe. Available at: https://buildersproject.eu/ (Accessed on 01/09/2025).
  7. CANSO – Civil Air Navigation Services Organisation (2008), Safety Culture Definition and Enhancement Process. Available at: https://www2023.icao.int/NACC/Documents/Meetings/2018/ASBU18/OD-10-Safety%20Culture%20Definition%20and%20Enhancement%20Process.pdf
  8. Clark, N., Boersma, K., Raju, E. et al (2025), Strengthening all-of-society approaches for disaster resilient societies through competency building: A European research agenda, Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduction, vol.121, 105345. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2025.105345.
  9. CMINE, SRC – Societal resilience cluster of projects. Available at: https://www.cmine.eu/topics/20936 (Accessed on 01/09/2025)
  10. CORE (2023), Human centeredness and safety culture measurement toolkit, Deliv. 5.1.1. Available at: https://www.euproject-core.eu/achievements/public-deliverables.html (Accessed on 01/09/2025).
  11. Cutter, S.L. (2024), “The origin and diffusion of the social vulnerability index (SoVI)”, International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, vol. 109, 104576. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2024.104576.
  12. de Ruiter, M.C., van Loon, A.F. (2022), “The challenges of dynamic vulnerability and how to assess it”, iScience, vol. 25(8), 104720. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2022.104720.
  13. Eklund, L.G., Sibilia, A., Salvi, A. et al. (2023), Towards a European wide vulnerability framework, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC118850
  14. Fanzini, D. and Rotaru, I. (2018), “Anticipazione progettuale come strumento per la resilienza sociale dell’ambiente costruito”, Techne, n.15, pp.101-107; DOI: 10.13128/Techne-22089
  15. Gaspari, J., Gianfrate, V., Ginocchini, G., Bigi, M. (2020), “Accessibility as design tool: a comfortable environment through the public space”, Techne, vol. 19, pp. 223-231. Available at: https://doi.org/10.13128/techne-7786
  16. Jarnkvist K. (2020), “Intersectional perspectives of house owner narratives on climate risks”, Journal of Risk Research, vol. 23(9), pp.1211-1224. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2019.1646314.
  17. Karma, S., Zanut, S., Crișan, M. et al. (2024), “People Vulnerability before, during and after a Disaster: A Dynamic Taxonomic Approach”, IntechOpen. Available at: doi: 10.5772/intechopen.1005205
  18. Krüger, M. (2019), “Building instead of imposing resilience: revisiting the relationship between resilience and the state”, Int. Polit. Sociol., vol. 13(1), pp. 53-67. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/ips/oly025.
  19. Kuran, C.H.A., Morsut, C., Kruke, B.I. et al. (2020), “Vulnerability and vulnerable groups from an intersectionality perspective”, Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduction, vol. 50, 101826. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2020.101826.
  20. Mussinelli, E., Tartaglia, A., Bisogni, G.L., Malcevschi, S. (2018), “The role of Nature-Based Solutions in architectural and urban design”, Techne, vol. 15, pp. 116-123. Available at: https://doi.org/10.13128/Techne-22112
  21. NBS, Nature-Base Solutions. Available at: https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/research-area/environment/nature-based-solutions_en (Accessed on 01/09/2025).
  22. Orru, K., Hansson, S. and Nero, K. (2025), “Social vulnerability triage: a dynamic scenario-based system for disaster planning and response”, Journal of Risk Research, vol. 28(6), pp. 549-570. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2025.2522660.
  23. Orru, k., Nævestad, T.O. (2023), “What makes individuals fall through the safety nets during disasters?”, special issue in Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduction, vol. 96, 103874. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2023.103874.
  24. Orru, K., Hansson, S., Gabel, F. et al. (2021), “Approaches to ‘vulnerability’ in eight European disaster management systems”, Disasters, vol. 46, 742–767. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/disa.12481.
  25. Pozek, N. (2022), Avoiding “failure of imagination”: Informing scenario planning with creative practices, UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction, GAR Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction Available at: https://www.undrr.org/media/80338/download?startDownload=20250903 (Accessed on 01/09/2025).
  26. Proulx, G.; Pineau, J. (1996), Review of evacuation strategies for occupants with disabilities, Internal Report (National Research Council of Canada. Institute for Research in Construction); no. IRC-IR-712, 1996-04-01. Available at: https://doi.org/10.4224/40003083.
  27. Schobert, M., Orru, K., Gabel, F. et al. (2023), “The three A’s of social capital in crises: challenges with the availability, accessibility and activatability of social support”, Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduction, vol. 92, 103704. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2023.103704.
  28. Slovic, P. (2010), The feeling of risk: New perspective on Risk Perception, Earthscan from Routledge, New York.
  29. Spielman, S.E., Tuccillo, J., Folch, D.C. et al. (2020), “Evaluating social vulnerability indicators: criteria and their application to the Social Vulnerability Index”, Natural Hazards, vol. 100, pp.417-436. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-019-03820-z.
  30. Thomas, D.S., Phillips, B.D., Lovekamp, W.E., Fothergill A. (a cura di) (2013), Social Vulnerability to Disasters, CRC Press, London.
  31. UNDRO – United Nations Disaster Relief Organization (1976), Guidelines for Disaster Prevention. Volume I: Pre-disaster Physical Planning of Human Settlements, United Nations, Geneva.
  32. UNISDR (2016), Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030, Climate-ADAPT. Available at: http://www.preventionweb.net/files/43291_sendaiframeworkfordrren.pdf (Accessed on 01/09/2025).
  33. Villagra-Islas, P., Alves, S. (2016), “Open space and their attributes, uses and restorative qualities in an earthquake emergency scenario: The case of Concepción, Chile”, Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, vol. 19, pp. 56-67. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2016.06.017.
  34. Wachtendorf, T., Kendra, J. (2007), “Improvisation, Creativity, and the Art of Emergency Management”, Understanding and Responding to Terrorism. NATO science for peace and security series. E. Human and societal dynamics. IOS Press. pp.324-335. Available at: https://udspace.udel.edu/handle/19716/3054.