The DOI matches its Crossref record; 122 of the 122 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Combining analytical frameworks to assess livelihood vulnerability to climate change and analyse adaptation options
Open accessAbstract
Experts working on behalf of international development organisations need better tools to assist land managers in developing countries maintain their livelihoods, as climate change puts pressure on the ecosystem services that they depend upon. However, current understanding of livelihood vulnerability to climate change is based on a fractured and disparate set of theories and methods. This review therefore combines theoretical insights from sustainable livelihoods analysis with other analytical frameworks (including the ecosystem services framework, diffusion theory, social learning, adaptive management and transitions management) to assess the vulnerability of rural livelihoods to climate change. This integrated analytical framework helps diagnose vulnerability to climate change, whilst identifying and comparing adaptation options that could reduce vulnerability, following four broad steps: i) determine likely level of exposure to climate change, and how climate change might interact with existing stresses and other future drivers of change; ii) determine the sensitivity of stocks of capital assets and flows of ecosystem services to climate change; iii) identify factors influencing decisions to develop and/or adopt different adaptation strategies, based on innovation or the use/substitution of existing assets; and iv) identify and evaluate potential trade-offs between adaptation options. The paper concludes by identifying interdisciplinary research needs for assessing the vulnerability of livelihoods to climate change.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Rogers, E. M., Singhal, A., & Quinlan, M. M. (2019) · An Integrated Approach to Communication Theory and Research · doi:10.4324/9780203710753-35 · Cited by 37,322
A BEHAVIORAL MODEL OF RATIONAL CHOICE
Simon, H. A. (1955) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.2307/1884852 · Cited by 15,877
Slovic, P. (1987) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.3563507 · Cited by 9,271
The Problem of Pattern and Scale in Ecology: The Robert H. MacArthur Award Lecture
Levin, S. A. (1992) · Ecology · doi:10.2307/1941447 · Cited by 6,792
At Risk: Natural Hazards, People's Vulnerability and Disasters
Wisner, B., Blaikie, P. M., Cannon, T., & Davis, I. J. (1994) · Cited by 6,286
Rational choice and the structure of the environment.
Simon, H. A. (1956) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0042769 · Cited by 5,919
Adger, W. N. (2006) · Global Environmental Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.02.006 · Cited by 5,417
Adaptation, adaptive capacity and vulnerability
Smit, B., & Wandel, J. (2006) · Global Environmental Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.03.008 · Cited by 5,282
A framework for vulnerability analysis in sustainability science
Turner, B. L., Kasperson, R. E., Matson, P. A., McCarthy, J. J., Corell, R. W., Christensen, L., Eckley, N., Kasperson, J. X., Luers, A., Martello, M. L., et al. (2003) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1231335100 · Cited by 4,358
Stakeholder participation for environmental management: A literature review
Reed, M. S. (2008) · Biological Conservation · doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2008.07.014 · Cited by 4,237
Self-citation
Cited by
Climate-smart agriculture global research agenda: scientific basis for action
Steenwerth, K. L., Hodson, A. K., Bloom, A. J., Carter, M. R., Cattaneo, A., Chartres, C. J., Hatfield, J. L., Henry, K., Hopmans, J. W., Horwath, W. R., et al. (2014) · Agriculture & Food Security · doi:10.1186/2048-7010-3-11 · Cited by 313
An Analytical Framework for Assessing Context-Specific Rural Livelihood Vulnerability
Rahman, H. M. T., & Hickey, G. M. (2020) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su12145654 · Cited by 52
Bauer, T., Ingram, V., De Jong, W., & Arts, B. (2018) · International Forestry Review · doi:10.1505/146554818824063050 · Cited by 23
Metadata
- Authors
- Reed, M. S., Podesta, G., Fazey, I., Geeson, N., Hessel, R., Hubacek, K., Letson, D., Nainggolan, D., Prell, C., Rickenbach, M. G., Ritsema, C., Schwilch, G., Stringer, L. C., & Thomas, A. D.
- Venue
- Ecological Economics
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2013-10
- Volume
- 94
- Pages
- 66-77
- ISSN
- 0921-8009 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1992288766
- Cited by
- 278
- References
- 122
- FWCI
- 9.32
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Combining analytical frameworks to assess livelihood vulnerability to climate change and analyse adaptation options. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.07.007
- The paper
- Reed, M. S., Podesta, G., Fazey, I., Geeson, N., Hessel, R., Hubacek, K., Letson, D., Nainggolan, D., Prell, C., Rickenbach, M. G., Ritsema, C., Schwilch, G., Stringer, L. C., & Thomas, A. D. (2013). Combining analytical frameworks to assess livelihood vulnerability to climate change and analyse adaptation options. Ecological Economics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.07.007
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.