Taiwan’s Five Major Metropolitan Areas of Taiwan Vulnerability Assessment of Flood Disaster Comparison Study

  • Jen-te PaiEmail author
Part of the Strategies for Sustainability book series (STSU)


This study explores the connotations of vulnerability, the proposed indicators of vulnerability using the Fuzzy Delphi expert panel, and the establishment of an indicators system. Afterward, a multi-criteria assessment of the Analytic Hierarchy Process and Analytic Network Process was applied to be able to identify the indicators of the vulnerability of urban class relations and the weight of the metropolitan area, in order to finalize the vulnerability and resilience of the indicators system. Finally, the proposed assessment framework was applied to the five major metropolitan areas in Taiwan as an empirical analysis. Research results satisfied all relevant vulnerability assessments, including exposure, sensitivity, and resilience; Fuzzy Delphi survey was utilized to adjust the indicators system for the metropolitan areas of Taiwan to establish the vulnerability of the flood disaster assessment framework. This study also found that hardware and software infrastructure, preparedness, and response capabilities and the ability to reconstruct and rehabilitate the assessment of vulnerability get more than half the weight. The study considers the opinions of different decision-making groups to assess the typhoon hazard vulnerability of each metropolitan area. The overall typhoon hazard vulnerability is Tainan> Taichung> Taoyuan Chungli> Kaohsiung> Taipei. Comparisons were made of the different aspects of vulnerability indicators for each area, and some policy suggestions were proposed, such as the following: (1) through hazard information, integrate and establish a complete disaster-prevention database; (2) strengthen preparation, emergency responsiveness, and resilience and adaptation ability; (3) balance the needs of disaster prevention among all regions; and (4) undertake preparation and disaster-prevention planning in different scales.


Vulnerability Analytic Hierarchy Process Analytic Network Process 


  1. Bankoff G (2004) Mapping vulnerability: disasters, development, and people. James & James/Earthscan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  2. Birkmann J (2007) Risk and vulnerability indicators at different scales: applicability, usefulness and policy implications. Environ Hazards 7:20–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Blaikie P, Cannon T, Davis I, Wisner B (1994) At risk: natural hazards, people’s vulnerability, and disasters. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  4. Chang YH (1998) Transportation plan assessment and decision-making – study and application of fuzzy theory. Hwatai Culture, TaipeiGoogle Scholar
  5. Chang KF (2009) Super decisions software manual-breakthrough of AHP research limit by ANP. Maoding Publishing, TaipeiGoogle Scholar
  6. Chen CH (2001) Study of Asian Pacific port competitiveness and core strength index. Transportation 13(1):1–25Google Scholar
  7. Chen LC (2003) Application of earthquake hazard risk- effect analysis on land use planning: HAZ-Taiwan System. Urban Plann 30(4):281–299Google Scholar
  8. Chen LC, Chen HL (2007) Investigation of disaster-prone urban spatial development: formation of flood in Taipei basin as example. Urban Plann 34(3):293–315Google Scholar
  9. Cheng TB (2001) Fuzzy assessment model for software organization to increase personnel ability maturity. Master thesis, Information Management, National Taiwan University of Science and TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  10. Dalkey NC (1969) The Delphi Method: 9n experimental study of group opinion. RM-5888-PR. 48, The Rand Corporation, Santa MonicaGoogle Scholar
  11. Delbecq AL et al (1975) Group techniques for program planning: a guide to nominal group and Delphi processes. Scott, Foresman and Company, GlenviewGoogle Scholar
  12. Gallopin GC (2006) Linkage between vulnerability, resilience and adaptive capacity. Glob Environ Chang 16(3):235–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hsiao HC (2008) Establishment of flood vulnerability assessment model – Sijhih City as an example. PhD thesis, Department of Geology, Chinese Culture UniversityGoogle Scholar
  14. Lin KH (2004) Vulnerability and adaptation research method and methodology study under global climate change. Glob Climate Change Commun 43:33–38Google Scholar
  15. Turner BL II et al (2003) A framework for vulnerability analysis in sustainability science. In: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.
  16. White GF (1945) Human adjustment to floods. Research Paper 29. Department of Geography, University of Chicago, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  17. White GF, Haas JE (1975) Assessment of research on natural hazards. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Land EconomicsNational Chengchi UniversityTaipei CityTaiwan

Personalised recommendations