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

Towards a methodology for assessing urban systemic vulnerability

PDF
  • Cristina Visconti,
  • Martina Bosone
Cristina Visconti
Dipartimento di Architettura, Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II, Italia
Bio
Martina Bosone
Dipartimento di Architettura, Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II, Italia
DOI: https://doi.org/10.36253/techne-18631

Published 2026-07-29

Keywords

  • Systemic vulnerability,
  • Urban resilience,
  • Socio-ecological-technological systems,
  • Multi-criteria evaluation framework,
  • Multidimensional indicators

How to Cite

Visconti, C., & Bosone, M. (2026). Towards a methodology for assessing urban systemic vulnerability. TECHNE - Journal of Technology for Architecture and Environment, (31), 160–171. https://doi.org/10.36253/techne-18631

Copyright (c) 2026 Cristina Visconti, Martina Bosone

Creative Commons License

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

Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

Abstract

Traditional vulnerability assessments often address single hazards, overlooking the systemic interdependencies that characterise cities as socio-ecological-technological systems (SETS). This study advances the concept of systemic vulnerability by proposing a multidimensional framework integrating physical, social, economic, and ecological dimensions. The research applies a structured literature review to identify key criteria and indicators influencing systemic vulnerability. Building on these findings, we outline the development of a Climate Vulnerability Index (CVI), focusing on urban heat stress as a case application. Results reveal three core dimensions that capture the complexity of systemic vulnerability and underscore the need for integrated approaches to support adaptive planning and GIS-based spatial assessments, addressing critical gaps in urban resilience.

PDF

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. Adger, W.N. (2006), “Vulnerability”, Global Environmental Change, Vol. 16, No. 3, pp. 268-281. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.02.006
  2. Birkmann, J. (2006), “Indicators and criteria for measuring vulnerability: theoretical bases and requirements”, in Birkmann, J. (Ed.), Measuring Vulnerability to Natural Hazards: Towards Disaster Resilient Societies, United Nations University Press, Tokyo, pp. 55-77.
  3. Birkmann, J., Cardona, O.D., Carreño, M.L., Barbat, A.H., Pelling, M., Schneiderbauer, S., Welle, T. and others (2013), “Framing vulnerability, risk and societal responses: the MOVE framework”, Natural Hazards, Vol. 67, No. 2, pp. 193-211.
  4. Birkmann, J., Cutter, S.L., Rothman, D.S., Welle, T., Garschagen, M., Van Ruijven, B., O’Neill, B. and Pulwarty, R. (2015), “Scenarios for vulnerability: opportunities and constraints in the context of climate change and disaster risk”, Climatic Change, Vol. 133, pp. 53-68.
  5. Blaikie, P., Cannon, T., Davis, I. and Wisner, B. (2014), At Risk: Natural Hazards, People’s Vulnerability and Disasters, Routledge, London.
  6. Cutter, S.L. (2016), “Resilience to what? Resilience for whom?”, The Geographical Journal, Vol. 182, No. 2, pp. 110-113.
  7. Cutter, S.L. (2021), “The changing nature of hazard and disaster risk in the Anthropocene”, Annals of the American Association of Geographers, Vol. 111, No. 3, pp. 819-827.
  8. D’Ambrosio, V. and Di Martino, F. (2016), “The METROPOLIS research: experimental models and decision-making processes for the adaptive environmental design in climate change”, UPLanD – Journal of Urban Planning, Landscape & Environmental Design, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 187-217. Available at: https://doi.org/10.6092/2531-9906/5038
  9. Füssel, H.M. (2010), “How inequitable is the global distribution of responsibility, capability, and vulnerability to climate change: a comprehensive indicator-based assessment”, Global Environmental Change, Vol. 20, No. 4, pp. 597-611.
  10. Galderisi, A. and Limongi, G. (2021), “A comprehensive assessment of exposure and vulnerabilities in multi-hazard urban environments: a key tool for risk-informed planning strategies”, Sustainability, Vol. 13, No. 16, 9055.
  11. Gencer, E., Folorunsho, R., Linkin, M., Wang, X., Natenzon, C.E., Wajih, S., Mani, N., Esquivel, M., Ali Ibrahim, S., Tsuneki, H., Castro, R., Leone, M., Panjwani, D., Romero-Lankao, P. and Solecki, W. (2018), “Disasters and risk in cities”, in Rosenzweig, C., Solecki, W., Romero-Lankao, P., Mehrotra, S., Dhakal, S. and Ali Ibrahim, S. (Eds), Climate Change and Cities: Second Assessment Report of the Urban Climate Change Research Network, Cambridge University Press, New York, pp. 61-98.
  12. Gill, J.C. and Malamud, B.D. (2014), “Reviewing and visualizing the interactions of natural hazards”, Reviews of Geophysics, Vol. 52, No. 4, pp. 680-722. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1002/2013RG000445
  13. Gunaratne, M.S., Firdaus, R.R. and Sosai, A. (2023), “The importance of multidimensional vulnerability analysis in sustainable development”, Journal of Sustainability Science and Management, Vol. 18, No. 9, pp. 38-57.
  14. Limongi, G. and Galderisi, A. (2021), “Twenty years of European and international research on vulnerability: a multi-faceted concept for better dealing with evolving risk landscapes”, International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, Vol. 63, 102451.
  15. Mohammadi, S., De Angeli, S., Boni, G., Pirlone, F. and Cattari, S. (2024), “Current approaches and critical issues in multi-risk recovery planning of urban areas exposed to natural hazards”, Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, Vol. 24, No. 1, pp. 79-107.
  16. Revi, A., Satterthwaite, D., Aragón-Durand, F., Corfee-Morlot, J., Kiunsi, R.B., Pelling, M. and Sverdlik, A. (2014), “Towards transformative adaptation in cities: the IPCC’s Fifth Assessment”, Environment and Urbanization, Vol. 26, No. 1, pp. 11-28.
  17. Romero-Lankao, P. and Dodman, D. (2011), “Cities in transition: transforming urban centers from hotbeds of GHG emissions and vulnerability to seedbeds of sustainability and resilience”, Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, Vol. 3, No. 3, pp. 113-120.
  18. Romero-Lankao, P., Hughes, S., Qin, H., Hardoy, J., Rosas-Huerta, A., Borquez, R. and Lampis, A. (2014), “Scale, urban risk and adaptation capacity in neighborhoods of Latin American cities”, Habitat International, Vol. 42, pp. 224-235.
  19. Schneiderbauer, S., Ehrlich, D. and Birkmann, J. (2006), “Social levels and hazard (in) dependence in determining vulnerability”, in Birkmann, J. (Ed.), Measuring Vulnerability to Natural Hazards: Towards Disaster Resilient Societies, United Nations University Press, Tokyo, pp. 78-102.
  20. Sharifi, A. (2023), “The resilience of urban social-ecological-technological systems (SETS): a review”, Sustainable Cities and Society, article 104910.
  21. Tricco, A.C., Lillie, E., Zarin, W., O’Brien, K.K., Colquhoun, H., Levac, D., Moher, D., Peters, M.D.J., Horsley, T., Weeks, L., Hempel, S. and others (2018), “PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation”, Annals of Internal Medicine, Vol. 169, No. 7, pp. 467-473. Available at: https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-0850