Exploring Vulnerability and Risk Perception: A Case Study of Gwang Khola Watershed, Nepal

§ Tribhuvan University

Send Message

To: Author

Exploring Vulnerability and Risk Perception: A Case Study of Gwang Khola Watershed, Nepal

Article Fingerprint

ReserarchID

72MM8

Exploring Vulnerability and Risk Perception: A Case Study of Gwang Khola Watershed, Nepal Banner

Key Research Insights

Synthesized scholarly intelligence & interactive research assistant
  • English
  • Afrikaans
  • Albanian
  • Amharic
  • Arabic
  • Armenian
  • Azerbaijani
  • Basque
  • Belarusian
  • Bengali
  • Bosnian
  • Bulgarian
  • Catalan
  • Cebuano
  • Chichewa
  • Chinese (Simplified)
  • Chinese (Traditional)
  • Corsican
  • Croatian
  • Czech
  • Danish
  • Dutch
  • Esperanto
  • Estonian
  • Filipino
  • Finnish
  • French
  • Frisian
  • Galician
  • Georgian
  • German
  • Greek
  • Gujarati
  • Haitian Creole
  • Hausa
  • Hawaiian
  • Hebrew
  • Hindi
  • Hmong
  • Hungarian
  • Icelandic
  • Igbo
  • Indonesian
  • Irish
  • Italian
  • Japanese
  • Javanese
  • Kannada
  • Kazakh
  • Khmer
  • Korean
  • Kurdish (Kurmanji)
  • Kyrgyz
  • Lao
  • Latin
  • Latvian
  • Lithuanian
  • Luxembourgish
  • Macedonian
  • Malagasy
  • Malay
  • Malayalam
  • Maltese
  • Maori
  • Marathi
  • Mongolian
  • Myanmar (Burmese)
  • Nepali
  • Norwegian
  • Pashto
  • Persian
  • Polish
  • Portuguese
  • Punjabi
  • Romanian
  • Russian
  • Samoan
  • Scots Gaelic
  • Serbian
  • Sesotho
  • Shona
  • Sindhi
  • Sinhala
  • Slovak
  • Slovenian
  • Somali
  • Spanish
  • Sundanese
  • Swahili
  • Swedish
  • Tajik
  • Tamil
  • Telugu
  • Thai
  • Turkish
  • Ukrainian
  • Urdu
  • Uzbek
  • Vietnamese
  • Welsh
  • Xhosa
  • Yiddish
  • Yoruba
  • Zulu
Reading Preferences
Font Size
Line Spacing
Background
This converted HTML version may contain rendering inconsistencies. Please refer to the PDF for the authoritative version, or click here to provide feedback.

Abstract

Natural hazard are spatial phenomena causing location specific disaster. Disaster previously considered as natural phenomena, is now understood as manifestation of sociocultural environment. Understanding the physical and social vulnerability and risk perception of natural hazard is rising research agenda to help address the issue of social resilience in disaster risk management context. The current study investigate the landslide and flood susceptibility based on multi-criteria analysis and explores risk perception of local people in Gwang Khola watershed of Sindhuli district, Nepal. The study adopted GIS based susceptibility mapping for landslide and flood hazard risk assessment and sample household questionnaire survey, KIS, FGD and field observation to explore risk perception.

References

41 Cites in Article
  1. 1. Rishiraj Dutta,Senaka Basnayake,Atiq Ahmed (2010). Assessing Gaps and Strengthening Early Warning System to Manage Disasters in Cambodia. Journal of Integrated Disaster Risk Management, 5(2), 167-175.
  2. 2. Juan Arias,Nicolás Bronfman,Pamela Cisternas,Paula Repetto (2017). Hazard proximity and risk perception of tsunamis in coastal cities: Are people able to identify their risk?. PLOS ONE, 12(10), e0186455.
  3. 3. I Armas,A Gavris (2016). Census-based social vulnerability assessment for Bucharest. Procedia Environmental Sciences, 32, 138-146.
  4. 4. Komal Aryal (2012). The history of disaster incidents and impacts in Nepal 1900–2005. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 3(3), 147-154.
  5. 5. S Arlikatti,M Lindell,C Prater,Y Zhang (2006). Risk area accuracy and hurricane evacuation expectations of coastal residents. Environment and Behavior, 38(2), 226-247.
  6. 6. Johan Askman,Olof Nilsson,Per Becker (2018). Why People Live in Flood-Prone Areas in Akuressa, Sri Lanka. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 9(2), 143-156.
  7. 7. F Bernardo (2013). Impact of place attachment on risk perception: Exploring the multi-dimensionality of risk and its magnitude. Studies in Psychology, 34(3), 323-329.
  8. 8. H Bohle (2001). Vulnerability and criticality: perspectives from social geography. IHDP update: Newsletter of IHDP, 2(1), 3-5.
  9. 9. Samuel Brody,Sammy Zahran,Arnold Vedlitz,Himanshu Grover (2008). Examining the Relationship Between Physical Vulnerability and Public Perceptions of Global Climate Change in the United States. Environment and Behavior, 40(1), 72-95.
  10. 10. Samuel Brody,Wes Highfield,Letitia Alston (2004). Does Location Matter?. Environment and Behavior, 36(2), 229-250.
  11. 11. (2018). District Development Committee, Sindhuli. District Development Committee, Sindhuli
  12. 12. Tanvir Dewan (2015). Societal impacts and vulnerability to floods in Bangladesh and Nepal. Weather and Climate Extremes, 7, 36-42.
  13. 13. Katherine Donovan,Aris Suryanto,Pungky Utami (2012). Mapping cultural vulnerability in volcanic regions: The practical application of social volcanology at Mt Merapi, Indonesia. Environmental Hazards, 11(4), 303-323.
  14. 14. Israel Drori,Ephraim Yuchtman‐yaar (2002). Environmental Vulnerability in Public Perceptions and Attitudes: The Case of Israel's Urban Centers. Social Science Quarterly, 83(1), 53-63.
  15. 15. Rishiraj Dutta,Senaka Basnayake,Atiq Ahmed (2010). Assessing Gaps and Strengthening Early Warning System to Manage Disasters in Cambodia. Journal of Integrated Disaster Risk Management, 5(2), 167-175.
  16. 16. C Gonçalves,J Zezere (2018). Combining social vulnerability and physical vulnerability to analyse landslide risk at the municipal scale. Geosciences, 8, 294.
  17. 17. (2014). Understanding Risk in an Evolving World : Emerging Best Practices in Natural Disaster Risk Assessment. Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery, GFDRR. International Bank for Reconstruction and Development
  18. 18. Sony Maharjan,Shobha Shrestha (2018). An Assessment of Earthquake Risk in Thecho of Kathmandu Valley Nepal: Scenario and Reality. Geographical Journal of Nepal, 11, 127-136.
  19. 19. Sony Maharjan,Shova Shrestha (2017). Disaster Risk Management: From Preparedness to Response in Thecho of Kathmandu Valley, Nepal. The Third Pole: Journal of Geography Education, 17, 99-108.
  20. 20. Renato Miceli,Igor Sotgiu,Michele Settanni (2008). Disaster preparedness and perception of flood risk: A study in an alpine valley in Italy. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 28(2), 164-173.
  21. 21. Subrata Mitra (2016). Governance by stealth, and India’s Ministry of Home Affairs. Governance by Stealth, 1-29.
  22. 22. Sasmita Mishra,Sanjoy Mazumdar,Damodar Suar (2010). Place attachment and flood preparedness. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30(2), 187-197.
  23. 23. D Parker,D Harding (1979). Natural Hazard Evaluation, Perception and Adjustment. Geography, 64(4), 307-316.
  24. 24. Pctmcdb (2017). EUFEMED 2017. EUFEMED 2017
  25. 25. Santosh Rayamajhi,Ridish Pokharel,Krishna Tiwari,Binod Heyojoo,Bir Chhetri,Pem Kandel (2019). An Assessment of the President Chure-Tarai Madhesh Conservation Development Program. Forestry: Journal of Institute of Forestry, Nepal, 16, 101-110.
  26. 26. M Rakib,Shakibul Islam,Iliopoulos Nikolaos,Md Bodrud-Doza,Mohammad Bhuiyan (2017). Flood vulnerability, local perception and gender role judgment using multivariate analysis: A problem-based “participatory action to Future Skill Management” to cope with flood impacts. Weather and Climate Extremes, 18, 29-43.
  27. 27. Samuel Rufat,Eric Tate,Christopher Burton,Abu Maroof (2015). Social vulnerability to floods: Review of case studies and implications for measurement. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 14, 470-486.
  28. 28. P Salvati,C Bianchi,F Fiorucci,P Giostrella,I Marchesini,F Guzzetti (2014). Perception of flood and landslide risk in Italy: a preliminary analysis. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 14(9), 2589-2603.
  29. 29. M Siegrist,H Gutscher (2006). Flooding risks: A comparison of lay people's perceptions and expert's assessments in Switzerland. Risk Analysis, 26(4), 971-979.
  30. 30. L Sjoberg (2000). Factors in risk perception. Risk Analysis, 20, 1-11.
  31. 31. Alexa Spence,Wouter Poortinga,Nick Pidgeon (2012). The Psychological Distance of Climate Change. Risk Analysis, 32(6), 957-972.
  32. 32. K Tierney,M Lindell,R Perry (2001). Facing the Unexpected. Facing the unexpected: Disaster preparedness and response in the United States
  33. 33. (2015). Conclusion: Making development sustainable. Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction (GAR), 247-266.
  34. 34. C Van Wasten,Van Asch,Twj (2006). Landslide hazard and risk zonation: Why is it so difficult?. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the environment, 65(2), 167-184.
  35. 35. C Van Wasten (2000). The Modelling Of Landslide Hazards Using Gis. Surveys in Geophysics, 21(2-3), 241-255.
  36. 36. C Van Westen,N Rengers,Mtj Terlien,R Soeters (1997). Prediction of the occurrence of slope instability phenomena through GIS-based hazard zonation. Geologische Rundschau, 86, 404-414.
  37. 37. D Varnes (1984). Publications received. Bulletin of the International Association of Engineering Geology, 31(1), 143-146.
  38. 38. Gisela Wachinger,Ortwin Renn,Chloe Begg,Christian Kuhlicke (2013). The Risk Perception Paradox—Implications for Governance and Communication of Natural Hazards. Risk Analysis, 33(6), 1049-1065.
  39. 39. Gisela Wachinger,Ortwin Renn,Chloe Begg,Christian Kuhlicke (2010). The Risk Perception Paradox—Implications for Governance and Communication of Natural Hazards. Risk Analysis, 33(6), 1049-1065.
  40. 40. N Walton (2014). Assessing seismic risk reduction in the Kathmandu Valley using cost-benefit analysis to evaluate loss prevention in schools. Assessing seismic risk reduction in the Kathmandu Valley using cost-benefit analysis to evaluate loss prevention in schools
  41. 41. Hongjian Zhou,Xi Wang,Jing’ai Wang (2016). A Way to Sustainability: Perspective of Resilience and Adaptation to Disaster. Sustainability, 8(8), 737.

Funding

No external funding was declared for this work.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

No ethics committee approval was required for this article type.

Data Availability

Not applicable for this article.

How to Cite This Article

Shobha Shrestha. 2019. "Exploring Vulnerability and Risk Perception: A Case Study of Gwang Khola Watershed, Nepal". Global Journal of Human-Social Science GJHSS-B Volume 19 (GJHSS Volume 19 Issue B3).

More Citation Formats

Download Citation

Journal Specifications

Crossref Journal DOI 10.17406/GJHSS

Print ISSN 0975-587X

e-ISSN 2249-460X

Keywords
Classification
GJHSS-B Classification FOR Code:040699
Version of record

v1.2

Issue date
September 18, 2019

Language
English
Order Article Reprint
Experience in AR

Explore published articles in an immersive Augmented Reality environment. Our platform converts research papers into interactive 3D books, allowing readers to view and interact with content using AR and VR compatible devices.

Read in 3D

Your published article is automatically converted into a realistic 3D book. Flip through pages and read research papers in a more engaging and interactive format.

Article Matrices
Total Views: 1.4K
Total Downloads: 117
All Trends

Request Access

Please fill out the form below to request access to this research paper. Your request will be reviewed by the editorial or author team.
X

This is the heading

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut elit tellus, luctus nec ullamcorper mattis, pulvinar dapibus leo.

High-quality academic research articles on global topics and journals.

Exploring Vulnerability and Risk Perception: A Case Study of Gwang Khola Watershed, Nepal

Shobha Shrestha
Shobha Shrestha Tribhuvan University