Advertisement

GeoJournal

pp 1–13 | Cite as

Assessing social vulnerability of villages in Mt. Kasigau area, Kenya, using the analytical hierarchy process

  • Njoroge GathongoEmail author
  • Liem Tran
Article

Abstract

This research assesses the social vulnerability of five villages (Jora, Kiteghe, Makwasinyi, Bungule, and Rukanga) in Mt. Kasigau, Kenya. Our goal was to develop a social vulnerability model by adopting a vulnerability conceptual framework that conceptualizes vulnerability into three major components: exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity and using the analytical hierarchy process (AHP). Employing the AHP, the three components of vulnerability were decomposed into its constituent components and structured into a hierarchical format where each component was represented by different societal and environmental criterions and stressors. Next, we performed a pairwise comparison at each level of the hierarchy to obtain local priorities. Finally, we aggregated the local priorities from the bottom up to obtain global priorities of the social vulnerability of each village. The results from this study revealed that Makwasinyi was the most vulnerable village followed by Bungule, Kiteghe, Jora, and Rukanga respectively. Further, the results suggested that adaptive capacity and exposure played a critical role in determining the social vulnerability compared to sensitivity. Considering this, reducing social vulnerability in the area should focus much on improving the adaptive capacity of the people and reducing their exposure specifically in Makwasinyi village.

Keywords

Exposure Adaptive capacity Sensitivity Social Vulnerability Analytical hierarchy process Vulnerability assessment 

Notes

Funding

This study was partial funded by The W. K. McClure Scholarship Program of the University of Tennessee.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all participants that were interviewed and participated in the focus group discussion sessions.

References

  1. Adger, W. N. (1999). Social vulnerability to climate change and extremes in coastal Vietnam. World Development, 27(2), 249–269.Google Scholar
  2. Adger, W. N. (2006). Vulnerability. Global Environmental Change, 16(3), 268–281.Google Scholar
  3. Alcantara-Ayala, I. (2002). Geomorphology, natural hazards, vulnerability and prevention of natural disasters in developing countries. Geomorphology, 47(2–4), 107–124.Google Scholar
  4. Baxter, J. (2010). Case studies in qualitative research. In I. Hay (Ed.), Qualitative research methods in human geography (3rd ed., pp. 81–98). Melbourne: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Baxter, J., & Eyles, J. (1997). Evaluating qualitative research in social geography: Establishing ‘Rigour’ in interview analysis. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 22(4), 505–525.Google Scholar
  6. Birkmann, J., Cardona, O. D., Carreno, M. L., Barbat, A. H., Pelling, M., Schneiderbauer, S., et al. (2013). Framing vulnerability, risk and societal responses: The MOVE framework. Natural Hazards, 67(2), 193–211.Google Scholar
  7. Blaikie, P., Cannon, T., Davis, I., & Wisner, B. (1994). At risk: Natural hazards, people’s vulnerability and disasters (1st ed.). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  8. Blaikie, P., Cannon, T., Davis, I., & Wisner, B. (2014). At risk: Natural hazards, people’s vulnerability and disasters. Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. Brunelli, M. (2014). Introduction to the analytic hierarchy process. Springer.Google Scholar
  10. Burgess, N. D., Butynski, T. M., Cordeiro, N. J., Doggart, N. H., Fjeldsa, J., Howell, K. M., et al. (2007). The biological importance of the Eastern Arc Mountains of Tanzania and Kenya. Biological Conservation, 134(2), 209–231.Google Scholar
  11. Chen, W., Cutter, S. L., Emrich, C. T., & Shi, P. (2013). Measuring social vulnerability to natural hazards in the Yangtze River Delta region, China. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 4(4), 169–181.Google Scholar
  12. Clark, G. E., Moser, S. C., Ratick, S. J., Dow, K., Meyer, W. B., Emani, S., et al. (1998). Assessing the vulnerability of coastal communities to extreme storms: The case of Revere, MA., USA. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 3(1), 59–82.Google Scholar
  13. Cutter, S. L. (1996). Vulnerability to Environmental Hazards. Progress in Human Geography, 20(4), 529–539.Google Scholar
  14. Cutter, S. L., Barnes, L., Berry, M., Burton, C., Evans, E., Tate, E., et al. (2008). A place-based model for understanding community resilience to natural disasters. Global Environmental Change, 18(4), 598–606.Google Scholar
  15. Cutter, S. L., Boruff, B. J., & Shirley, W. L. (2003). Social vulnerability to environmental hazards. Social Science Quarterly, 84(2), 242–261.Google Scholar
  16. Cutter, S. L., & Emrich, C. T. (2006). Moral hazard, social catastrophe: The changing face of vulnerability along the hurricane coasts. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 604(1), 102–112.Google Scholar
  17. Cutter, S. L., & Finch, C. (2008). Temporal and spatial changes in social vulnerability to natural hazards. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105(7), 2301–2306.Google Scholar
  18. Cutter, S. L., Mitchell, J. T., & Scott, M. S. (2000). Revealing the vulnerability of people and places: A case study of Georgetown County, South Carolina. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 90(4), 713–737.Google Scholar
  19. Delgado-Galvan, X., Perez-Garcia, R., Izquierdo, J., & Mora-Rodriguez, J. (2010). An analytic hierarchy process for assessing externalities in water leakage management. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 52(7–8), 1194–1202.Google Scholar
  20. Dow, K. (1992). Exploring differences in our common future(s): The meaning of vulnerability to global environmental change. Geoforum, 23(3), 417–436.Google Scholar
  21. Dunn, K. (2010). Interviewing. In I. Hay (Ed.), Qualitative research methods in human geography (3rd ed., pp. 101–137). Melbourne: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Eakin, H., & Luers, A. L. (2006). Assessing the vulnerability of social-environmental systems. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 31(1), 365–394.Google Scholar
  23. Fernandez, P., Mourato, S., & Moreira, M. (2016). Social vulnerability assessment of flood risk using GIS-based multicriteria decision analysis. A case study of Vila Nova de Gaia (Portugal). Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk, 7(4), 1367–1389.Google Scholar
  24. Fussel, H. M. (2007). Vulnerability: A generally applicable conceptual framework for climate change research. Global Environmental Change, 17(2), 155–167.Google Scholar
  25. Gallopín, G. C. (2006). Linkages between vulnerability, resilience, and adaptive capacity. Global Environmental Change, 16(3), 293–303.Google Scholar
  26. Government of Kenya (2010). Kenya population and housing census. Nairobi, Kenya National Bureau of Statistics. Retrieved March 20, 2018, from http://kenya.opendataforafrica.org/KEPOPHUS2015/population-and-housing-census-of-kenya-2009.
  27. Griffith, D. A., Morris, E. S., & Thakar, V. (2016). Spatial autocorrelation and qualitative sampling: The case of snowball type sampling designs. Annals of the American Association of Geographers, 106(4), 773–787.Google Scholar
  28. Gupta, S., Dangayach, G. S., Singh, A. K., & Rao, P. N. (2015). Analytic hierarchy process (AHP) model for evaluating sustainable manufacturing practices in Indian electrical panel industries. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 189, 208–216.Google Scholar
  29. Henkin, M. A., Medley, K. E., & Maingi, J. K. (2015). Biophysical analysis of afromontane forest community types at Mount Kasigau, Kenya. African Journal of Ecology, 53(4), 454–464.Google Scholar
  30. Ho, W. (2008). Integrated analytic hierarchy process and its applications—A literature review. European Journal of Operational Research, 186(1), 211–228.Google Scholar
  31. Humphrey, C., & Lee, B. (2008). The real life guide to accounting research: A behind the scenes view of using qualitative research methods. Amsterdam: Elsevier/CIMA Pub.Google Scholar
  32. Janssen, M. A., Schoon, M. L., Ke, W., & Borner, K. (2006). Scholarly networks on resilience, vulnerability and adaptation within the human dimensions of global environmental change. Global Environmental Change, 16(3), 240–252.Google Scholar
  33. Kalibo, H. W., & Medley, K. E. (2007). Participatory resource mapping for adaptive collaborative management at Mt. Kasigau, Kenya. Landscape and Urban Planning, 82(3), 145–158.Google Scholar
  34. Kamau, P. N. (2017). The political ecology of human–elephant relations: Comparing local perceptions of elephants around Chyulu Hills and Mount Kasigau in Southern Kenya. Journal of Political Ecology, 24(1), 801–820.Google Scholar
  35. Kearns, R. A. (2010). Seeing with clarity: Undertaking observational research. In I. Hay (Ed.), Qualitative research methods in human geography (3rd ed., pp. 241–258). Melbourne: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Kiker, G. A., Bridges, T. S., Varghese, A., Seager, T. P., & Linkov, I. (2005). Application of multicriteria decision analysis in environmental decision making. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management, 1(2), 95–108.Google Scholar
  37. Knutson, C., Hayes, M., & Philips, T. (1998). How to reduce drought risk. A guide prepared by the preparedness and mitigation working group of the Western Drought Coordination Council, National Drought Mitigation Center, Lincoln, Nebraska. Retrieved March 10, 2018, from https://drought.unl.edu/archive/Documents/NDMC/Planning/risk.pdf.
  38. Lawal, O., & Arokoyu, S. B. (2015). Modelling social vulnerability in sub-Saharan West Africa using a geographical information system. Jàmbá: Journal of Disaster Risk Studies, 7(1), 155.Google Scholar
  39. Leiter, M., Levy, J., Mutiti, S., Boardman, M., Wojnar, A., & Deka, H. (2013). Drinking water quality in the Mount Kasigau region of Kenya: A source to point-of-use assessment. Environmental Earth Sciences, 68(1), 1–12.Google Scholar
  40. Luers, A. L. (2005). The surface of vulnerability: An analytical framework for examining environmental change. Global Environmental Change, 15(3), 214–223.Google Scholar
  41. Mardani, A., Jusoh, A., & Zavadskas, E. K. (2015). Fuzzy multiple criteria decision-making techniques and applications—Two decades review from 1994 to 2014. Expert Systems with Applications, 42(8), 4126–4148.Google Scholar
  42. Masud, A., & Ravindran, A. (2008). Multiple criteria decision making. In A. Ravindran (Ed.), Operations research and management science handbook (pp. 1–35). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press Taylor and Francis Group.Google Scholar
  43. McLaughlin, P., & Dietz, T. (2008). Structure, agency and environment: Toward an integrated perspective on vulnerability. Global Environmental Change, 18(1), 99–111.Google Scholar
  44. Medley, K. E., & Kalibo, H. W. (2005). An ecological framework for participatory ethnobotanical research at Mt. Kasigau, Kenya. Field Methods, 17(3), 302–314.Google Scholar
  45. Medley, K. E., & Kalibo, H. W. (2007). Global localism: Recentering the research agenda for biodiversity conservation. Natural Resources Forum, 31(2), 151–161.Google Scholar
  46. Mendoza, G. A., & Martins, H. (2006). Multi-criteria decision analysis in natural resource management: A critical review of methods and new modelling paradigms. Forest Ecology and Management, 230(1–3), 1–22.Google Scholar
  47. Meng-Tsung, L., Kuo-Huan, T., Kun-Lung, L., Wen-Hong, L., & Hao-Tang, J. (2015). Assessment of social vulnerability to climate change and its disaster prevention in Pingtung County. In Proceedings of the 2015 AASRI international conference on circuits and systems.Google Scholar
  48. Mu, E., & Pereyra-Rojas, M. (2018). Practical decision making using super decisions v3: An introduction to the analytic hierarchy process. Cham: Springer International Publishing.Google Scholar
  49. Myers, N., Mittermeier, R. A., Mittermeier, C. G., Fonseca, G. A., & Kent, J. (2000). Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature, 403(6772), 853–858.Google Scholar
  50. Newmark, W. D. (2002). Conserving biodiversity in East African forests: A study of the Eastern Arc Mountains (Vol. 155). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  51. Ouma, Y. O., & Tateishi, R. (2014). Urban flood vulnerability and risk mapping using integrated multi-parametric AHP and GIS: Methodological overview and case study assessment. Water, 6(6), 1515–1545.Google Scholar
  52. Palinkas, L. A., Horwitz, S. M., Green, C. A., Wisdom, J. P., Duan, N., & Hoagwood, K. (2015). Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 42(5), 533–544.Google Scholar
  53. Panahi, M., Rezaie, F., & Meshkani, S. A. (2014). Seismic vulnerability assessment of school buildings in Tehran City Based on AHP and GIS. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 14(4), 969–979.Google Scholar
  54. Ramanathan, R., & Ganesh, L. S. (1995). Energy resource allocation incorporating qualitative and quantitative criteria: An integrated model using goal programming and AHP. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 29(3), 197–218.Google Scholar
  55. Roy, D. C., & Blaschke, T. (2013). Spatial vulnerability assessment of floods in the coastal regions of Bangladesh. Risk, 6(1), 21–44.Google Scholar
  56. Roy, D. C., & Blaschke, T. (2015). Spatial vulnerability assessment of floods in the coastal regions of Bangladesh. Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk, 6(1), 21–44.Google Scholar
  57. Saaty, T. L. (1990). How to make a decision: The analytic hierarchy process. European Journal of Operational Research, 48(1), 9–26.Google Scholar
  58. Saaty, T. L. (2008). Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Services Sciences, 1(1), 83–98.Google Scholar
  59. Shah, K. U., Dulal, H. B., Johnson, C., & Baptiste, A. (2013). Understanding livelihood vulnerability to climate change: Applying the livelihood vulnerability index in Trinidad and Tobago. Geoforum, 47, 125–137.Google Scholar
  60. Stefanidis, S., & Stathis, D. (2013). Assessment of flood hazard based on natural and anthropogenic factors using analytic hierarchy process (AHP). Natural Hazards, 68(2), 569–585.Google Scholar
  61. Thokala, P., Devlin, N., Marsh, K., Baltussen, R., Boysen, M., Kalo, Z., et al. (2016). Multiple criteria decision analysis for health care decision making—An introduction: Report 1 of the ISPOR MCDA emerging good practices task force. Value in Health, 19(1), 1–13.Google Scholar
  62. Turner, B. L., Kasperson, R. E., Matson, P. A., McCarthy, J. J., Corell, R. W., Christensen, L., et al. (2003). A framework for vulnerability analysis in sustainability science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 100(14), 8074–8079.Google Scholar
  63. Wu, C. C., Jhan, H. T., Ting, K. H., Tsai, H. C., Lee, M. T., Hsu, T. W., et al. (2016). Application of social vulnerability indicators to climate change for the southwest coastal areas of Taiwan. Sustainability, 8(12), 1270.Google Scholar
  64. Wu, S. Y., Yarnal, B., & Fisher, A. (2002). Vulnerability of coastal communities to sea-level rise: A case study of Cape May County, New Jersey, USA. Climate Research, 22(3), 255–270.Google Scholar
  65. Zhang, N., & Huang, H. (2013). Social vulnerability for public safety: A case study of Beijing, China. Chinese Science Bulletin, 58(19), 2387–2394.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Tennessee, KnoxvilleKnoxvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations