Vulnerability and Risk: Some Thoughts from a Political and Policy Perspective

TLDR

Public policies to mitigate extreme events differ depending on whether they aim to reduce risk or vulnerability. The authors aim to present and defend six assertions exploring the benefits of vulnerability‑based policies. They argue that these assertions demonstrate distinct advantages of vulnerability‑based policies over risk‑based approaches. They contend that risk‑based strategies do not rely on vulnerability reduction, depend on accurate probabilistic information, do not require precise event predictions, are context‑driven, face political obstacles on economic grounds, and that vulnerability reduction is a human‑rights issue, whereas risk reduction is not.

Abstract

Public policies to mitigate the impacts of extreme events such as hurricanes or terrorist attacks will differ depending on whether they focus on reducing risk or reducing vulnerability. Here we present and defend six assertions aimed at exploring the benefits of vulnerability‐based policies. (1) Risk‐based approaches to covering the costs of extreme events do not depend for their success on reduction of vulnerability. (2) Risk‐based approaches to preparing for extreme events are focused on acquiring accurate probabilistic information about the events themselves. (3) Understanding and reducing vulnerability does not demand accurate predictions of the incidence of extreme events. (4) Extreme events are created by context. (5) It is politically difficult to justify vulnerability reduction on economic grounds. (6) Vulnerability reduction is a human rights issue; risk reduction is not.