Understanding climate impacts on vulnerable people Local Health and Wellbeing in a changing climate, Nottingham Friday 1 st March 2013 Sarah Lindley, University of Manchester Justice, vulnerability and climate change Full report available at vulnerability vulnerability

Vulnerability  How external stresses impact on well-being.  A lower ability to respond to stresses placed on well-being  higher vulnerability.  The central question: how is vulnerability distributed across different individuals and groups? 1. Likelihood and severity of the weather related event – flood, heatwave. 2. Vulnerability: The conversion of the event into welfare impacts (individual, social and environmental) 3. Climate disadvantage is a function of 1 and 2.  The characterisation of vulnerability raises: 1. How should well-being be conceptualised and measured? 2. What factors are relevant to understanding how external stresses convert into changes in well-being?

 Geographical expression of the potential for an event to convert into the loss of wellbeing  Dimensions reveal a different picture and requires different actions Ability to respond Ability to recover Adaptive capacity Exposure (Enhanced) Vulnerability Sensitivity Ability to prepare Socio-spatial vulnerability Hazard Exposure Climate disadvantage  But understanding related climate disadvantage requires consideration of the potential for contact with a flood or heat-related event too

Socio-spatial flood/heat vulnerability domains DimensionDomain Sensitivity: Biophysical characteristicsAge Health Exposure: Physical neighbourhood attributes Physical environment Housing characteristics Preparation: Taking precautionsIncome Tenure Information use Local knowledge Insurance Response: Avoiding lossesIncome Information use Local knowledge Insurance Social networks Mobility Crime General accessibility Recovery: Recovering from a flood eventIncome Information use Insurance Social networks Mobility Housing mobility DimensionDomain Sensitivity: Biophysical characteristics Age Health Exposure: Physical neighbourhood attributes Physical environment Physical geography Housing characteristics Preparation: Taking precautions Income Tenure Information use Response: Avoiding heat stress during an event Income Information use Social networks Mobility Crime General accessibility General infrastructure Recovery: Recovering from heat stress if it occurs Information use Social networks Mobility Service access

Socio-spatial flood vulnerability in England Coastal Built-up areas, basement dwellings e.g. possible insurance access issues

NameSSFVPotential flood exposure * Flood disadvantage L’boro EEH76%ED L’boro WEH30%ED *Land area with significant or moderate flood likelihoods(EA) English mean = 8.4% NB: NOT properties exposed

Both neighbourhoods have relatively low adaptive capacity East has population & local physical characteristics close to English norm West has less sensitive population but a local environment which can enhance flood exposure

Selected indicators – L’boro E  Sensitivity around average overall  Higher than expected % of young children  Physical characteristics balance out to English norm  Proportions of basement dwellings above average (5.1% compared to 2.6%)  but not as built up as the average English neighbourhood taken as a whole

Selected indicators – L’boro E  Lower adaptive capacity - preparing for, responding to and recovering from events may be difficult  Potential for insurance access problems  Lower HH incomes £280 (vs. £390)  Relatively high rates of new arrivals  42.3% HHs without a car (vs. 26.3%)  Lower than expected increase in house prices  Higher than average rates of social and private tenants  Large proportion of residents born overseas (20.6% compared to 8.2%)

Regional breakdowns  % of total neighbourhoods in each English region estimated to be extremely socially flood vulnerable  % estimated to be extremely flood disadvantaged (high socio spatial vulnerability & high potential for flood exposure)

Heat disadvantage in England  London’s high average socio-spatial heat vulnerability is coupled with tendency for higher temperatures  England’s climate gradient also offsets some of the low socio- spatial heat vulnerability in South East  But  There is a differential in the tolerance of high temperatures from place to place  Alternative measures required

Socio-spatial heat vulnerability compared to local temperature patterns

There is variation in what drives heat-related social vulnerability Selection accounted for relative temperature pattern (class 5)

Selected indicators – St Matthews & St Peters Leicester 018  Sensitivity – relatively sensitive  Young children rather than older residents  Reported ill-heath  Physical environment enhances heat  Around 4.8% HHs >= 5 th floor (vs. 0.7%)  Relatively small gardens  Less greenspace (85.9% not GS vs. 48.3% )  Lower adaptive capacity  Lower incomes £160 per HH (vs. £390)  Relatively high % of lone parents & social renters  Lower mobility: personal mobility &access to private transport: 59.1% HHs no car  Relatively good access to health services & local refuges

Key findings and conclusions  Key socially vulnerable groups:  Poverty and deprivation  New residents  Mobility and access  Sensitivity (inherent susceptibility to impacts, age & health)  Enhanced exposure (physical characteristics of neighbourhoods)  Drivers vary  local case studies provide further insight  Almost all neighbourhoods will have some socially vulnerable people but the key characteristics of neighbourhoods can help in targeting and designing local measures alongside other activities Evidence of joint socio-spatial vulnerabilities in the UK – up to 2/3 of the top 10% most socially vulnerable neighbourhoods were so for both flood & heat

ClimateJust - a new decision-support web portal  Aim  the primary entry point for learning about climate justice & what constitutes a just response to the challenges of climate change in the UK  ClimateJust will assist users with Awareness Raising; Learning; Responding.  Key element  distributive justice with respect to negative welfare impacts, but drawing on evidence, tools and guidance for other justice elements  The resource is aimed at local authorities and service providers working with local communities.  Development/Testing  Data/case study work  SWOT/’stakeholder’ mapping  Wider dissemination  Interested? Please Increasing engagement & different modes of engagement