Here the current adjustment is most frequent
among these three strategies which are followed by the households.
There is a lack of documentation of
indigenous knowledge and practices which is found in the literature review. An
attempt has also been made to review how the govt. and NGOs influence coping
strategies. Mukherjee (2009) reflects on the seasonal gender-specific
vulnerabilities to show how the problems compound for poor woman in Bangladesh
during the deficit season.
The study del Niño et al.(2001) reveals the
coping strategies of household following the 1998 Hood including borrowing,
reducing expenditure and selling assets. Among them the major coping mechanism
of the household is borrowing in terms of both the value of the resources. To
cover the shortfalls of consumption, credit were sought from informal sources.
2.2 Basic human needs and vulnerability
Books and adger (2005) point out that the concept
of adaptive capacity makes sense in the context of what resources and systems
would be affected by climate change.
The U.S. Agency for International Development’s project
Famine Early Warning systems(FEWS 1999) focused its vulnerability assessment
guidance on food security.
Books et al. (2005) list 46 proxy variables;
the researchers specially include geography, governance, demography and
technology. They looked for correlations among these vulnerability proxies and
historical decadal mortaliu and derived from these results 11 key indicators of
vulnerability: population with access to sanitation, literacy rate (15-24 years),
voice and life expectancy at birth.
In contrast to Azar et al.(2005) this set of
indicators explicitly considers some aspects of reproductive health and gender
equity. These efforts at compiling indicators do not specify in their lists or
models the interactions and feedbacks among the factors in vulnerability.
2.3 Conceptual and Analytical Framework
To understand why a hazard becomes a disaster
and for whom, the concept of vulnerability is crucial. Using the concept of
vulnerability as a characteristic of exposure to hazards has allowed
researchers to evade the problems of what causes vulnerability (Canon 2001).
In social science, the human dimension of
vulnerability has received significant attention. A person’s vulnerability can
be identified by the interaction of natural events and economical, political
and social factors.
Canon (2001) points out that most usages of
the idea of vulnerability accepts that it is part of a continuum or ranking of people.
That vulnerability implies at the negative end of that scale.
Adger (1999) argues that vulnerability should
be seen as the exposure of a group or individual to stress because of the
environmental and social change .This definition contrast with the dominant
views of vulnerability to disaster.