| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立暨南國際大學 === 土木工程學系 === 104 === The preparation of climate change adaptation plan at the county level in Taiwan was started in 2000, and the initiative has moved into the second phase as of 2015. Vulnerability assessment is an important step to be carried out in the comprehensive procedure for drafting adaptation strategies. Various approaches have been proposed for the vital step of vulnerability assessment. Different schemes were used in different counties in Taiwan, when the adaptation plan studies were conducted. It is of great interest to investigate for a rational approach for vulnerability assessment. This study is intended to address this important topic through results of two different types of methods, including one semi-quantitative approach and the other quantitative.
The semi-quantitative approach is based on an Expert Assessment Method (ESA). The elicitation of objective expert opinion is obtained through series of in-depth discussions and workshops of solicited experts. Main results of this approach include (1) qualitative vulnerability report, (2) key issues of the studied subject area, and (3) comparative vulnerability grouping. The quantitative approach used in this study is a combined Delphi-AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process) method. Seven experts were selected for the process of obtaining expert opinions throughout this part of study. Factors to be adopted for the quantitative investigation were first screened by the expert opinions, and then weights for each factor were estimated through results of AHP questionnaire. Finally, the vulnerability index was computed using statistical data of factors and the associated AHP weights, and comparative vulnerability ranking can be obtained.
It is found that both approaches are not perfect. Results of the semi-quantitative approach is likely affected by factors including level of expert participation, preference of authorities, level of issue familiarity of the operating team and else. Whereas results of the quantitative approach are easily affected by the availability and reliability of statistical data of significant factors. This study proposed a scheme that combined the use of both the quantitative analysis results and the semi-quantitative procedures. Should time be permitted, this proposed procedure should yield rational and well-thought assessment of vulnerability.
|
|---|
