You are currently viewing a new version of our website. To view the old version click .
Sustainability
  • Article
  • Open Access

4 September 2024

Assessing Future Agricultural Vulnerability in Kashmir Valley: Mid- and Late-Century Projections Using SSP Scenarios

,
,
,
,
,
,
and
1
Centre for Climate Change and Water Research, Suresh Gyan Vihar University, Jaipur 302017, India
2
Department of Geography, School of Environment and Earth Sciences, Central University, Bathinda 151401, India
3
Department of Ecosystem Studies, Graduate School of Agricultural and Life Sciences, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-8654, Japan
4
Applied Research Center for Environment and Marine Studies, King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals, Dhahran 31261, Saudi Arabia
This article belongs to the Special Issue Agricultural Drought and Climate Change: Drought Indices, Impacts, and Projections

Abstract

The fragile environment of the Himalayan region is prone to natural hazards, which are intensified by climate change, leading to food and livelihood insecurity for inhabitants. Therefore, building resilience in the most dominant livelihood sector, i.e., the agricultural sector, has become a priority in development and planning. To assess the perils induced by climate change on the agriculture sector in the ecologically fragile region of Kashmir Valley, a study has been conducted to evaluate the risk using the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) framework. The risk index has been derived based on socioeconomic and ecological indicators for risk determinants, i.e., vulnerability, hazard, and exposure. Furthermore, the study also evaluated the future risk to the agriculture sector under changing climatic conditions using Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs) for SSP2-4.5 and SSP5-8.5 at mid- and late-century timescales. It was observed that districts such as Bandipora (0.59), Kulgam (0.56), Ganderbal (0.56), and Kupwara (0.54) are most vulnerable due to drivers like low per capita income, yield variability, and areas with >30% slope. Shopian and Srinagar were found to be the least vulnerable due to adaptive capacity factors like livelihood diversification, crop diversification, percentage of tree crops, and percentage of agriculture labor. In terms of the Risk index, the districts found to be at high risk are Baramulla (0.19), Pulwama (0.16), Kupwara (0.15), and Budgam (0.13). In addition, the findings suggested that the region would experience a higher risk of natural hazards by the mid- (MC) and end-century (EC) due to the projected increase in temperature with decreasing precipitation, which would have an impact on crop yields and the livelihoods of farmers in the region.

1. Introduction

Climate change is widely recognized as the most critical global issue and the greatest challenge facing humanity in the twenty-first century [1]. Its effects are pervasive, transcending political boundaries and impacting all regions and populations indiscriminately [2]. Environmental damage in one part of the world can have significant repercussions in distant, seemingly unrelated areas [3]. Researchers have long been studying these interconnected dynamics and their influence on the Earth’s atmosphere [4]. Observable evidence, such as the accelerated melting of polar ice caps [5], rising sea levels, and increasing global temperatures [6], provides clear indicators of shifting environmental conditions. Climate change manifests in a variety of forms, including a rise in the frequency and intensity of extreme weather events, record-breaking temperatures [7], heavy rainfall, hailstorms, floods, droughts [8], and the proliferation of pests and diseases [9]. Such phenomena can have both immediate and long-term consequences on economies and livelihoods [10], underscoring the urgent need for comprehensive and coordinated global action.
Changing weather patterns are expected to significantly impact agriculture [11]. These effects include increased variability in productivity, regional declines, and shifts in the geography of production. Agricultural economics will be affected by climate change through variations in farm productivity, costs, supply and demand, trade, and regional resource availability [12,13,14]. Climatic variability has already been observed to adversely influence crop efficiency and production [15,16], heightening concerns about food and livelihood security. Long-term climatic stress could further impact agriculture and horticulture by altering average temperatures, precipitation patterns, atmospheric carbon dioxide levels [17], and water availability. These changes may also degrade soil quality and affect the nutritional value and growth of essential crops. IPCC has also reported on the consequences of climate change, regarding the prediction of reduced crop yields by 2030, focusing on two issues, viz., agriculture and food security [18].
Ensuring food security to meet the anticipated needs of a growing global population is essential. In India, agriculture remains a critical economic activity, supporting 65% of the working population, even as its contribution to the country’s GDP continues to decline. The combination of moderate developments in the agrarian sector and the impacts of climate change must be given significant attention, as they are closely tied to food security and poverty levels for a large portion of the population [19,20]. The heavy reliance on farming practices, coupled with the risks posed by increasing climatic stress, heightens the vulnerability of farmers and poses a serious threat to the economy, development, and sustainability. Over the past few decades, the impacts of climate change in the Himalayas, including the Jammu and Kashmir regions, have become increasingly evident. These changes are marked by rising temperatures, retreating glaciers, and altered precipitation patterns [21,22,23,24].
The agriculture sector, which is crucial to the economy of Jammu and Kashmir, is particularly vulnerable to these changes. Approximately 70% of the population depends on agriculture and related activities, either directly or indirectly. The region’s key crops, such as paddy, maize, oilseeds, pulses, vegetables, fodder, and wheat, face growing risks due to shifting climate conditions. Additionally, Kashmir, renowned for cultivating high-quality saffron, is experiencing the strain of climate change, which threatens the sustainability of this unique and valuable crop.
The Kashmir Valley exhibits significant variations across its districts in terms of socioeconomic and ecological indicators, necessitating the development of a specific Inherent Vulnerability Index. These disparities arise from differences in factors such as population density, literacy rates, economic reliance on agriculture, access to healthcare, and the availability of natural resources like water bodies and forests. Ecological factors—including susceptibility to climate change, the presence of fragile ecosystems, and the degree of environmental degradation—further contribute to this variability. The Inherent Vulnerability Index aims to capture and quantify these differences, offering a more precise assessment of each district’s capacity to withstand and recover from environmental and socioeconomic challenges. This tailored approach ensures that vulnerability assessments and subsequent interventions are context-specific, addressing the unique challenges faced by each district in the valley.
This study, aligned with Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 2 and 13, focuses on the initial phases of analyzing climate change in the region with three primary objectives: characterizing the region’s vulnerability and risk to climate change, observing forecasted trends in climate variables, and evaluating the performance of agriculture under current and future climatic conditions. SDG 2 seeks to end hunger, achieve food security, and promote sustainable agriculture, while SDG 13 emphasizes urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts. By integrating these goals into current research framework, the study aims to provide insights that not only enhance an understanding of climate vulnerability but also contribute to sustainable agricultural practices and resilience-building strategies in the region.
Vulnerability assessment, which estimates the extent of climate change hazards, is defined as the region’s susceptibility and degree of risk from long-term climatic variability. This assessment depends on a range of geographic, economic, cultural, social, demographic, governance, institutional, and environmental factors [25]. The methodologies and determinant variables used to estimate vulnerability vary across studies [26,27]. A comprehensive assessment of a system or region’s vulnerability and risk to climate change is widely recognized [28] as involving key components like: sensitivity, adaptive capacity, exposure and hazard [29,30].
This study aims to provide a comprehensive analysis of how the diverse districts within the Kashmir Valley are likely to experience and respond to the challenges posed by climate change. The investigation focuses on assessing the risk in the agriculture sector of the Kashmir Valley by utilizing vulnerability, adaptive capacity, sensitivity, and hazard indices. The primary objective is to determine the susceptibility of Kashmir’s agricultural sector to climate change, identify the key indicators contributing to the region’s vulnerability, and simulate potential risk outcomes based on Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs) for the middle and later parts of this century. The findings of this study are crucial for supporting India’s national efforts to achieve SDGs 2 and 13 and emphasize the need for urgent action to adapt to the evolving climate patterns in the Himalayan region of Kashmir.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Area

The study area (Kashmir Valley), is located in the far north-western corner of the country, within the northernmost state of India, Jammu and Kashmir. The valley is elliptical and bowl-shaped, stretching between 32°22′–34°43′ N latitude and 73°52′–75°42′ E longitudes, covering an area of 15,948 square kilometers at an altitude of 1577 m above mean sea level (Figure 1). Surrounded by the Himalayan ranges, the region exhibits the characteristics of a semi-closed ecosystem and is drained by the river Jhelum, a tributary of the larger Indus. The Kashmir Valley experiences a temperate climate, which is suitable for both horticultural and agricultural crops. The valley receives 60% of its annual precipitation in the form of rain and snow during December and January. The temperature varies significantly from the valley floor to the rim region, often decreasing with elevation. This variation contributes to the highly varied temperature and precipitation conditions at the meso and micro scales.
Figure 1. Location of the study area.
Agriculture is the primary livelihood for most of the people in the valley. Any changes in agriculture can significantly affect their livelihood patterns. The region is fragile and highly susceptible to climate change, particularly in the mountainous areas. Rice is the staple crop of the region, with other crops including maize, apple, and pear. The Kashmir Valley comprises ten districts: Budgam, Bandipora, Anantnag, Baramulla, Ganderbal, Kulgam, Pulwama, Kupwara, Shopian, and Srinagar.

2.2. Methods

2.2.1. Assessment of Inherent Vulnerability

The Inherent Vulnerability Index has been calculated by utilizing an indicator-based approach as a function of sensitivity and adaptive capacity. When creating a composite index, it is crucial to use indicators/variables that accurately represent the fundamental concept, as this will ensure the validity of the vulnerability index [31,32]. The selection of indicators for this study was based on the availability of data across time and space (districts), a review of the pertinent literature, and consultation with experts in agriculture, water resources, and climate change. A set of 32 indicators pertaining to ecological (biophysical) and socioeconomic variables were divided into sixteen indicators of sensitivity and sixteen measures of adaptive capacity. The rationale for use and derivation methods are described below and summarized in Figure 2.
Figure 2. Flowchart for the calculation of inherent vulnerability.
The overview of the major indicators related to agricultural vulnerability, including descriptions and sources/methods for data derivation, is given in Table 1. Each row lists an indicator, a description of how it influences agricultural practices or sustainability, and the method/source used to derive the data.
Table 1. Key agricultural vulnerability indicators and data sources for Kashmir.
The calculation of the vulnerability index involves four major steps, viz., data segregation, the processing of data, the computation of the index, and reclassification. During the initial phase of data processing, all indicators were systematically classified into two dimensions, sensitivity and adaptive capacity, throughout the region. The subsequent step included establishing the functional association of each indicator with vulnerability, identifying whether it had a positive or negative impact on vulnerability. Following this, processing was carried out using the linear minimum–maximum scaling method, which is often employed in hierarchical systems and brings all indications onto a common, dimensionless measuring scale. Since there is a positive relationship between sensitivity and vulnerability and a negative relationship with adaptive capacity, the following equations were used to standardize the indicators using Equations (1) and (2):
N o r m a l i z e d   V a l u e   ( N V ) = A c t u a l   V a l u e M i n i m u m   V a l u e M a x i m u m   v a l u e M i n i m u m   V a l u e
N o r m a l i z e d   V a l u e   ( N V ) = M a x i m u m   v a l u e A c t u a l   V a l u e M a x i m u m   v a l u e M i n i m u m   v a l u e
Each indicator’s normalized value was relative, falling between 0 and 1, with 0 being the least vulnerable and 1 being the most. After normalizing the chosen indicators, they were each given the same weight in the final analysis [35]. In the absence of data or consensus regarding distinct weights, giving all assessment markers the same importance is possible [36].
The Inherent Vulnerability Index was computed using Equation (3).
V u l n e r a b i l i t y   ( V ) = f [ S e n s i t i v i t y   S ,   A d a p t i v e   C a p a c i t y   A C ]
Additionally, two composite indices were computed to examine the distribution of these characteristics throughout the districts, viz., the sensitivity and adaptive capacitance index.
After applying the criteria, the districts showed varying levels of vulnerability. The vulnerability index and rankings were calculated by summing the normalized scores for each indicator and adjusting them based on their relative importance. This process helps pinpoint the specific factors contributing to a region’s vulnerability, providing decision-makers and stakeholders with clear insights into the extent and distribution of associated hazards. This information aims to support effective decision-making and targeted interventions by highlighting the most critical vulnerabilities.
D r i v e r   o f   V u l n e r a b i l i t y   ( V d ) = S i i = 1 n S i

2.2.2. Assessment of Hazards

A hazard is defined as “a process, phenomena, or human activity that has the potential to result in loss of life, injury or other health impacts, property damage, social and economic disruption, or environmental degradation” [37]. The assessment of hazards was conducted with a focus on key environmental threats, including drought, flood, and landslides (Table 2), to evaluate their potential impacts and risks using Equation (5),
Table 2. Key hazard indicators and data sources for Kashmir.
The total hazard for the district was calculated using the following formula:
H = f   ( F l o o d ,   L a n d s l i d e s ,   D r o u g h t )

2.2.3. Assessment of Exposure

“Exposure” refers to the degree of climate stress that a community or region experiences, indicating the susceptibility of resources, infrastructure, and people as consequences of climate change. The exposure indicators are given in Table 3.
Table 3. Exposure indicators and data sources for Kashmir.
The exposure indicators included Temperature (Max), Temperature (Min), and Precipitation. For studying the future climate, the bias-corrected data of 13 models within the latest generation of the coupled model inter-comparison project (CMIP6) were utilized, using empirical quantile mapping (EQM) over the South Asian domain at a daily temporal scale and 0.25° spatial resolution [38].
Over the Indian region, bias correction was carried out using IMD’s gridded rainfall and temperature datasets. The future analysis was carried out for two Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSP), viz., SSP2-4.5 (“middle of the road”) and SSP5-8.5 “fossil-fueled development” [39,40,41]. Districtwise composite exposure was calculated using Equation (6).
E = f   ( T m a x ,   T m i n ,   P r e c i p i t a t i o n )

2.2.4. Assessment of Risk

The term “risk” can be used in two different ways, depending on the context: (a) as a synonym for the likelihood that an adverse event will occur, and (b) as a synonym for the mathematical expectation of the severity of that occurrence [37]. The assessment of risk involved analyzing the exposure, hazard, and vulnerability associated with key threats such as drought, flood, and landslide. This comprehensive approach was essential for understanding the potential impacts and identifying areas most at risk to develop targeted mitigation strategies. The risk was calculated using Equation (7):
R i s k   R = f V u l n e r a b i l i t y   V ,   H a z a r d   p ,   E x p o s u r e   E
The overall approach to arrive at the risk is shown in Figure 3.
Figure 3. Overall methodology for risk calculations.

3. Results

3.1. Vulnerability

The 10 Districts in Kashmir Valley have been categorized and mapped into different vulnerability groups using indicator of Sensitivity and Adaptive Capacity shown in Figure 4 & Table 4. There are differences amongst the districts of Kashmir Valley in terms of socioeconomic and ecological indicators. Bandipora was found to be the most vulnerable district with a vulnerability index of 0.59, followed by Kulgam, Ganderbal, and Kupwara with vulnerability indices ranging from 0.56, 0.54, and 0.54, respectively. Srinagar (0.42) and Shopian (0.43) were among the least venerable districts.
Figure 4. Respective range and ranking of (a,b) sensitivity, (c,d) adaptive capacity, and (e,f) vulnerability.
Table 4. Sensitivity, adaptive capacity, and vulnerability across districts.
The detailed vulnerability analysis carried out shows that the key drivers of vulnerability are large percentage of cultivators and agricultural laborers, fewer land holdings, lack of crop diversification, high dependency on the agriculture sector for primary sector production, a low number of agriculture credit societies, and a smaller number of livestock per household. The districts with low vulnerability had adaptive capacity factors such as livelihood diversification, crop diversification, a higher percentage of tree crops, and a higher percentage of agricultural labor. Therefore, there is a need to focus more on the vulnerable districts and the indicators contributing to increased vulnerability.

3.2. Hazard

(a)
Flood Hazard
The peak September 2014 flood level has been mapped using Digital Globe World View-2. District Srinagar has the highest area/infrastructure (29.07 sqkm) under flood hazard, which indicates that the district is more prone to flood hazard, making the infrastructure of the capital city risk-prone. It is followed by District Pulwama (13.05 sqkm). District Shopian has the least area (0.20) under flood risk, while District Kupwara has shown no flooding (Table 5 and Figure 5a).
Table 5. Districtwise hazard assessment in Kashmir.
Figure 5. Spatial representation of the (a) flood hazard, (b) landslide hazard, and (c) drought hazard area of the Kashmir Valley.
(b)
Landslide Hazard
Landslide susceptibility maps have been made possible by the availability of diverse and easily accessible remote sensing data, as well as thematic layers of GIS-based contributing-causes data. District Bandipora has the highest percentage of area (50%) prone to landslides, followed by districts Ganderbal (49%) and Kupwara (44%). District Shopian has the lowest percentage (3%) of area prone to landslides (Table 5 and Figure 5b).
(c)
Drought Hazard
Drought statistics were gathered from the State Disaster Management Department in Jammu and Kashmir. The average annual loss due to drought for each crop was used to determine the drought index for each district. District Budgam shows the highest impact of droughts (1.00 Cr), and District Kulgam has shown the least impact of drought among all other districts (Table 5 and Figure 5c).
Based on the findings, the hazard index ranged from 0.17 to 0.55 (Table 5). Two districts show the highest hazard index, viz., Bandipora (0.55) is the most vulnerable, followed by Baramulla (0.54). The following five districts were moderately prone to hazard: Anantnag (0.49), Kupwara (0.47), Pulwama (0.46), Srinagar (0.46), and Budgam (0.43). Ganderbal (0.39), Shopian (0.28 and Kulgam (0.17) were the least hazard-prone districts (Table 5). In order to facilitate efficient decision-making, the GIS environment was also used to create the hazard ranking and index maps, which are displayed in Figure 5 and Figure 6, respectively.
Figure 6. Spatial representation of the (a) hazard index and (b) hazard ranking of the districts of Kashmir Valley.

3.3. Exposure

Tmax, Tmin, and precipitation were used as exposure (climatic) indicators. The outcomes of each indicator are discussed below:
(a)
T(max)
The maximum projected temperatures for Kashmir Valley and its districts have been examined using ensemble means of CMIP6 South Asia climate data for IPCC AR6 SSP2-4.5 and SSP5-8.5 scenarios. According to these scenarios, Table 6 shows the expected changes in annual maximum temperatures towards the mid- and end-century with respect to baseline (BL). Figure 7a–d depict the shift in yearly peak temperature from BL to MC and EC (Table 6). The following is a synopsis of the expected maximum temperature change for the SSP2-4.5 and SSP5-8.5 scenarios:
Table 6. Districtwise Tmax (°C) under different climate scenarios in Kashmir.
Figure 7. Spatial representation of the Tmax of the Kashmir Valley under (a) SSP2-4.5 (MC) and (b) SSP2-4.5 (EC) scenarios and the (c) SSP5-8.5 (MC) and (d) SSP5-8.5 (EC) scenarios.
  • The average annual maximum temperature in Kashmir Valley is expected to rise by approximately 1.4 °C and 2.5 °C by MC and EC under the SSP2-4.5 scenario respectively. Under SSP5-8.5 the temperature is expected to increase by 1.6 °C and 5.0 °C by MC and EC respectively. As a result, the predicted rise in temperature at the end of the century is more than that for the middle of the century.
  • The projected increase in maximum temperature towards MC varies from 1.5 °C in the Kupwara sub-mountain and low-hills zone to 2.0 °C in the Bandipora, Ganderbal, and Anantnag belt lying in the very-high-hills temperate zone for the SSP2-4.5 scenario. Under SSP5-8.5 scenario the temperature varies from 1.8 °C in the Kupwara to 2.5 °C in Bandipora, Ganderbal, and Anantnag belt.
  • The projected increase in maximum temperature towards EC varies from 4.4 °C in the Kupwara to 5.8 °C in the Bandipora, Ganderbal, and Anantnag in the SSP2-4.5 scenario, and from 2 °C in the Kupwara to 6 °C in the Bandipora, Ganderbal, and Anantnag in the SSP5-8.5 scenario.
  • The northeastern districts of the valley show a higher projected increase than the southwestern districts.
(b)
Tmin
In Table 7, shows that annual minimum temperatures are expected to shift toward MC and EC relative to BL in Kashmir Valley and its districts under the SSP2-4.5 and SSP5-8.5 scenarios. Annual minimum temperatures shift from BL to MC and EC in Figure 8a–d under the SSP2-4.5 and SSP5-8.5 scenarios, as below:
Table 7. Districtwise Tmin (°C) under different climate scenarios of the Kashmir Valley.
Figure 8. Spatial representation of the Tmin of the Kashmir Valley under the (a) SSP2-4.5 (MC) and (b) SSP2-4.5 (EC) scenarios and the (c) SSP5-8.5 (MC) and (d) SSP5-8.5 (EC) scenarios.
  • In the valley, annual minimum temperatures are expected to rise by an average of 1.4 °C and 2.7 °C by MC and EC respectively under the SSP2-4.5 scenario. Under SSP5-8.5 scenario the average minimum temperature is expected to rise by 1.8 °C. As a result, the predicted temperature rise heading toward EC is greater than MC.
  • The projected increase in minimum temperature towards MC varies from 1.4 °C in the Bandipora, Ganderbal, and Anantnag belt to 1.7 °C in Pulwama, Kulgam, Baramulla zone for SSP2-4.5 scenario, and from 1.8 °C in the Bandipora, Ganderbal, and Anantnag to 2.5 °C in Pulwama, Kulgam, Baramulla zone for the SSP5-8.5 scenario.
  • The projected increase in minimum temperature towards EC varies from 2.5 °C in Bandipora, Ganderbal, and Anantnag to 1.7 °C in Pulwama, Kulgam, Baramulla zone for SSP2-4.5 scenario, and from 1.8 °C in Bandipora, Ganderbal, and Anantnag to 2.5 °C in Pulwama, Kulgam, Baramulla zone for the SSP5-8.5 scenario.
  • The southwestern districts show a higher projected increase than the northeastern districts of the valley.
  • The rise is greater in the SSP5-8.5 scenario compared to the SSP2-4.5 scenario.
(c)
Precipitation
The annual precipitation in Kashmir Valley and its districts evaluated using the ensemble mean of the CMIP6 SSP2-4.5 and SSP5-8.5 scenarios shown in Table 8 and Figure 9a–d depicting the expected annual changes in MC and EC in relation to BL as given below:
Table 8. Districtwise precipitation under different climate scenarios of the Kashmir Valley.
Figure 9. Spatial representation of the precipitation of the Kashmir Valley under the (a) SSP2-4.5 (MC) and (b) SSP2-4.5 (EC) scenarios and the (c) SSP5-8.5 (MC) and (d) SSP5-8.5 (EC) scenarios.
  • In the SSP2-4.5 scenario, average annual rainfall is anticipated to increase by 5.9 % by MC and roughly 13.8 % by EC for the valley, whereas, in the SSP5-8.5 scenario, it is forecasted to increase by about 14 % by MC and EC. This means that both the MC and EC projections for increased rainfall are not significant.
  • Districts namely Kulgam, Shopian, and Anantnag, show the highest projected increase (18%) in rainfall towards MC, while the Srinagar, Baramulla, and Kupwara districts in the south show the lowest projected increase (16%) in annual rainfall as compared to the other districts of valley towards EC with respect to BL for the SSP2-4.5 scenario. The Ganderbal district shows a moderate projected increase towards both MC and EC.
  • It is observed that the northeastern districts show a higher projected increase than the western districts of the valley.
  • The rise is greater in the SSP5-8.5 scenario compared to the SSP2-4.5 scenario.

3.3.1. Inherent Exposure (Baseline Data)

The exposure index ranged from 0.29 to 0.82 as shown in Figure 10. Baramulla District has the highest exposure (0.82), followed by Pulwama and Srinagar (0.76) and Kupwara (0.71). These are the four districts with the highest exposure indices. Shopian (0.68) and Budgam were the two districts with the moderate exposure. For baseline (BL) data, the least amount of exposure was found in Kulgam, Anantnag, Bandipora (0.33), and Ganderbal (0.29) (Table 9).
Figure 10. Exposure index and ranking. (a,b) BL, (c,d) SSP2-4.5 (MC and EC), and (e,f) SSP5-8.5 (MC and EC) for various districts of Kashmir Valley.
Table 9. Inherent exposure of the evaluated districts of the Kashmir region.

3.3.2. Exposure (SSP2-4.5 MC) and (SSP2-4.5 EC)

According to SSP2-4.5 MC, District Shopian has the highest exposure (0.95), followed by Pulwama (0.80) and Baramulla (0.76). Districts Budgam (0.69), Srinagar (0.65), Kulgam (0.65), and Kupwara (0.62) are moderately exposed, while districts Anantnag (0.32), Bandipora (0.03), and Ganderbal (0.01) fall in low-exposure zones (Figure 10c).
Under SSP2-4.5 EC, District Shopian again has the highest exposure (0.955), followed by Pulwama (0.774) and Baramulla (0.768). Districts Budgam (0.693), Srinagar (0.651), Kulgam (0.659), and Kupwara (0.630) are moderately exposed, while districts Anantnag (0.286), Bandipora (0.036), and Ganderbal (0.012) fall in low-exposure zones (Figure 10d).

3.3.3. Exposure (SSP5-8.5 MC) and (SSP5-8.5 EC)

As per the analysis, under SSP5-8.5 MC District Shopian again has the highest exposure (0.954), followed by Pulwama (0.802) and Baramulla (0.775). Districts Budgam (0.693), Kulgam (0.654), Srinagar (0.653), and Kupwara (0.627) are moderately exposed, while districts Anantnag (0.283), Bandipora (0.037), and Ganderbal (0.012) fall in low-exposure zones (Figure 10e).
For SSP5-8.5 EC, District Shopian again has the highest exposure (0.948), followed by Baramulla (0.793), Pulwama (0.785), and Budgam (0.701). Districts Kulgam (0.665), Kupwara (0.652), and Srinagar (0.642) are moderately exposed, while districts Anantnag (0.270), Bandipora (0.033), and Ganderbal (0.007) fall in low-exposure zones (Figure 10f).

3.4. Risk

The BL, MC and EC Risk scenarios were calculated risk using IPCC (2014) risk model which is the function of vulnerability, hazard and exposure and is presented in Table 10. This projected calculation of climate risks provides planners and stakeholders with information that may be beneficial in preparing for the future.
Table 10. Overall districtwise values of vulnerability, hazard, exposure, and risk of the Kashmir region.

3.4.1. Risk (BL)

Based on the assessment, the risk index ranged from 0.010 to 0.193 (Figure 11a,b). Five districts show the highest risk index, viz., District Baramulla has the highest risk (0.193), followed by Pulwama (0.167), Kupwara (0.158), Budgam (0.136), and Srinagar (0.122). The following three districts were moderately prone to risk: Shopian (0.090), Ganderbal (0.065), and Anantnag (0.062). Kulgam (0.033) and Bandipora (0.010) have the least risk for BL.
Figure 11. Risk index and ranking. (a,b) BL, (c,d) SSP2-4.5 (MC and EC). and (e,f) SSP5-8.5 (MC and EC) for various districts of Kashmir Valley.

3.4.2. Risk (SSP2-4.5 MC) & (SSP2-4.5 EC)

As per SSP2-4.5 MC, Baramulla has the highest risk (0.198), followed by Pulwama (0.174), Kupwara (0.160), Budgam (0.144), Srinagar (0.131), and Shopian (0.124). The: Anantnag (0.070) and Ganderbal (0.066) districts were moderately prone to risk. Kulgam (0.064) and Bandipora (0.012) were least at risk for the SSP2-4.5 mid-century scenario (Figure 11c).
Under SSP2-4.5 EC, Baramulla has the highest risk (0.203), followed by Pulwama (0.176), Kupwara (0.166), Budgam (0.145), Srinagar (0.133), and Shopian (0.124). The Anantnag (0.073) and Ganderbal (0.067) districts were moderately prone to risk. Kulgam (0.065) and Bandipora (0.014) were least at risk (Figure 11d).

3.4.3. Risk (SSP5-8.5 MC) & (SSP5-8.5 EC)

According to SSP5-8.5 MC, Baramulla has the highest risk (0.198), followed by Pulwama (0.174), Kupwara (0.159), Budgam (0.144), Shopian (0.124), and Srinagar (0.121). The Anantnag (0.069) and Kulgam (0.064) districts were moderately prone to risk. Bandipora (0.012) and Ganderbal (0.003) were least at the risk (Figure 11e).
Under SSP5-8.5 EC, District Baramulla has the highest risk (0.197), followed by Pulwama (0.174), Kupwara (0.158), Budgam (0.143), Shopian (0.124), and Srinagar (0.121). The Anantnag (0.079) and Kulgam (0.064) districts were moderately prone to risk. Bandipora (0.011) and Ganderbal (0.003) were least at risk (Figure 11f).
In both of the climate scenarios, the risk to the Kashmir Valley and its districts will rise from the BL by the EC. By EC, the SSP5-8.5 scenario is more likely to result in a more risk in districts than the SSP2-4.5 scenario.

4. Discussion

The assessment of vulnerability, hazard, exposure, and risk in the Kashmir Valley districts provides crucial insights into climate-related challenges and their implications for Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 2 (Zero Hunger) and 13 (Climate Action). These findings highlight the interplay between climate impacts and development objectives, underscoring the need for targeted strategies to address food security and climate resilience.
The correlation analysis (Figure 12) among vulnerability, hazard, exposure, and risk reveals intricate relationships that challenge common assumptions about risk factors. Notably, there is a moderate negative correlation between vulnerability and risk (−0.617), suggesting that higher vulnerability in agriculture sector in Kashmir valley does not necessarily equate to higher risk based on the dataset and indicators used [42]. This finding is contrary to typical risk assessment frameworks, where vulnerability is often considered a direct driver of risk. In this context, high vulnerability districts like Bandipora maintain low risk in the agriculture sector primarily due to low exposure [43] as the district is having less area under cropland/plantation hence the influence of climatic factors leading to droughts and floods is minimal, underscoring the critical role exposure plays in amplifying risk. The relationship between hazard and risk (0.378) is weakly positive, indicating that while an increase in hazard levels tends to raise risk, the impact is not pronounced. This could be attributed to the variability in how districts are exposed or prepared for potential hazards, demonstrating that hazard intensity alone is insufficient to determine overall risk without considering exposure and vulnerability [44].
Figure 12. Correlation matrix among Vulnerability, Hazard, Exposure and Risk.
Exposure, with a strong positive correlation to risk (0.873), emerges as the most significant factor contributing to the overall risk levels. This strong association underscores that districts with higher exposure, such as Baramulla and Pulwama, as the districts are having maximum area under agriculture/horticulture, which faces substantial risk regardless of their vulnerability or hazard levels. Climate variability and extreme weather events pose substantial threats to agricultural productivity, potentially leading to crop failures and increased food insecurity [45]. During the recent years the extreme weather events like untimely and heavy rainfall/snowfall, hailstorms, high temperatures, etc have severely damaged the standing crop in these districts [46]. Conversely, districts such as Kupwara and Srinagar show elevated risk levels due to the combined effect of moderate hazards and high exposure. Hazard itself has a varying influence, as seen in districts like Anantnag, where moderate hazard and vulnerability do not translate into very high risk due to relatively lower exposure. This is attributed to Kupwara district’s increasing precipitation trends [47], coupled with its extensive vegetative cover and cultivated land, which collectively elevate its risk profile. In contrast, Srinagar district’s low-lying topography makes it inherently vulnerable to frequent flood events, particularly during periods of heavy precipitation. The flat terrain and inadequate drainage capacity in Srinagar exacerbate its susceptibility to flooding, posing persistent risks to agriculture sector and livelihoods [48]. These contrasting conditions highlight the need for differentiated risk management approaches, where Kupwara’s land use and precipitation trends necessitate enhanced soil and water conservation measures, while Srinagar requires robust flood mitigation strategies to address its chronic exposure to flood hazards.
The analysis highlights that managing exposure is crucial for effective risk mitigation, as it consistently exacerbates the impacts of hazards, independent of the district’s baseline vulnerability. This underscores the necessity of incorporating climate resilience into agricultural practices [49]. Enhancing soil health, diversifying crop varieties, and optimizing water management strategies are critical for bolstering food security and advancing the objectives of Sustainable Development Goal 2 (SDG 2).
Institutional mechanisms and mainstream initiatives are essential for implementing climate-resilient adaptation measures [50]. Reviewing national-level plans reveals elements that support water and agricultural management. Although achieving institutional convergence for development is challenging, testing and implementing mainstream solutions can help overcome financial limitations and improve adaptation efforts.

5. Conclusions and Future Scope

The study comprehensively assessed agricultural vulnerability and risk in the Kashmir Valley using the IPCC framework and SSP based climate scenarios for Mid and End Century. The results revealed significant disparities in vulnerability across different districts. Bandipora emerged as the most vulnerable district followed closely by Kulgam and Ganderbal. These districts are particularly susceptible due to factors such as low per capita income, high yield variability, and large areas with slopes greater than 30%. In contrast, Shopian and Srinagar were identified as the least vulnerable districts, benefiting from adaptive capacities like livelihood diversification, a higher percentage of tree crops, and a significant proportion of agricultural labor. In terms of risk, Baramulla, Pulwama, Kupwara, and Budgam were identified as the highest-risk districts, primarily due to their high exposure levels to hazards like floods, landslides, and droughts. The analysis highlighted that while vulnerability and hazard levels play crucial roles, exposure emerged as a significant determinant of overall risk. For instance, Baramulla and Pulwama, with high agricultural and horticultural land areas, are particularly exposed to climate variability, increasing their risk levels regardless of their inherent vulnerability. Projected future climate scenarios indicate a marked increase in temperature and variability in precipitation, which could exacerbate the region’s risk profile, significantly impacting crop yields and agricultural sustainability. The findings underline the necessity for district-specific adaptation strategies to mitigate these risks, align with Sustainable Development Goals 2 and 13, and enhance the resilience of the agricultural sector in the Kashmir Valley.
Future research on agricultural vulnerability and risk in the Kashmir Valley should aim to incorporate a broader range of climate scenario models, including more extreme conditions, to better capture potential future impacts on the region. Additionally, integrating future socioeconomic changes such as population growth, economic development, and land-use changes could provide a more dynamic understanding of how these factors might influence vulnerability and risk over time. There is also a need for more localized assessments at the village or panchayat level, as this would enable a finer resolution in identifying specific at-risk communities and allow for more targeted and effective adaptation strategies. Advanced statistical methods like Principal Component Analysis (PCA), factor analysis, and cluster analysis could enhance future studies by providing deeper insights into the interrelationships among various vulnerability indicators and refining assessment models. Furthermore, expanding the scope of research to include other sectors such as health, water resources, and forestry would offer a more comprehensive view of climate vulnerability and aid in developing holistic adaptation strategies.
One major uncertainty is the limitation of data quality and availability, which can affect the accuracy of vulnerability and risk assessments. Additionally, the inherent variability in climate models and the assumptions made in projecting future climate conditions can lead to differing outcomes, thereby influencing the reliability of risk predictions. There is also uncertainty regarding the adaptive capacity of local communities, as this can vary widely depending on future policy interventions, economic changes, and technological advancements. Despite these uncertainties, vulnerability and risk assessments are invaluable tools for policymakers. They provide crucial insights that can guide the design of adaptation strategies aimed at reducing climate risks and enhancing resilience. By identifying the most vulnerable areas and understanding the factors contributing to their risk, these assessments help prioritize resource allocation and inform targeted interventions. This, in turn, supports the development of policies that are proactive and responsive to the specific needs of different regions, ultimately contributing to sustainable development and climate resilience in the Kashmir Valley.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.F., S.K. and S.K.S.; methodology, M.F., S.K., S.K.S. and G.M.; software, M.F., S.K., F.M. and G.M.; validation, M.F., G.M., S.K. and J.H.; formal analysis, M.F., S.K.S., F.M. and G.M.; investigation, M.F., G.M. and S.K.; resources, F.M. and S.K.; data curation, M.F., G.M. and S.K.; writing—original draft preparation, M.F., G.M., S.K. and B.Đ.; writing—review and editing, F.M. and Q.B.P.; visualization, M.F., S.K. and F.M.; supervision, S.K.S., B.Đ. and J.H.; project administration, M.F., S.K.S. and Q.B.P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data are available upon request to the corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest. All ideas expressed in this document do not necessarily represent the views of the organizations/institutions the authors belong to.

References

  1. Steffen, W.; Persson, Å.; Deutsch, L.; Zalasiewicz, J.; Williams, M.; Richardson, K.; Crumley, C.; Crutzen, P.; Folke, C.; Gordon, L.; et al. The anthropocene: From global change to planetary stewardship. Ambio 2011, 40, 739–761. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Ericson, J.P.; Vörösmarty, C.J.; Dingman, S.L.; Ward, L.G.; Meybeck, M. Effective sea-level rise and deltas: Causes of change and human dimension implications. Glob. Planet. Chang. 2006, 50, 63–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. York, R.; Rosa, E.A.; Dietz, T. Footprints on the earth: The environmental consequences of modernity. Am. Sociol. Rev. 2003, 68, 279–300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Seneviratne, S.I.; Lüthi, D.; Litschi, M.; Schär, C. Land–atmosphere coupling and climate change in Europe. Nature 2006, 443, 205–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Shahgedanova, M. Climate change and melting glaciers. In The Impacts of Climate Change; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2021; pp. 53–84. [Google Scholar]
  6. Cazenave, A.; Dieng, H.-B.; Meyssignac, B.; von Schuckmann, K.; Decharme, B.; Berthier, E. The rate of sea-level rise. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2014, 4, 358–361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Garreaud, R.D. Record-breaking climate anomalies lead to severe drought and environmental disruption in western Patagonia in 2016. Clim. Res. 2018, 74, 217–229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Aldous, A.; Fitzsimons, J.; Richter, B.; Bach, L. Droughts, floods and freshwater ecosystems: Evaluating climate change impacts and developing adaptation strategies. Mar. Freshw. Res. 2011, 62, 223–231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Skendžić, S.; Zovko, M.; Živković, I.P.; Lešić, V.; Lemić, D. The impact of climate change on agricultural insects pests. Insects 2021, 12, 440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Sheikh, M.R.; Akter, T. An assessment of climate change impacts on livelihood patterns: A case study at Bakergonj Upazila, Barisal. J. Health Environ. Res. 2017, 3, 42–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  11. Shakoor, U.; Saboor, A.; Ali, I.; Mohsin, A.Q. Impact of climate change on agriculture: Empirical evidence from arid region. Pak. J. Agri. Sci. 2011, 48, 327–333. [Google Scholar]
  12. Lanfranchi, M.; Giannetto, C.; De Pascale, A. Economic implications of climate change for agricultural productivity. WSEAS Trans. Environ. Dev. 2014, 10, 233–241. [Google Scholar]
  13. Mendelsohn, R.O.; Dinar, A. Climate Change and Agriculture: An Economic Analysis of Global Impacts, Adaptation and Distributional Effects; Edward Elgar Publishing: Cheltenham, UK, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  14. Parry, M.; Rosenzweig, C.; Iglesias, A.; Livermore, M.; Fischer, G. Effects of climate change on global food production under SRES emissions and socio-economic scenarios. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2004, 14, 53–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Porter, J.R.; Semenov, M.A. Crop responses to climatic variation. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 2005, 360, 2021–2035. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Ray, D.K.; Gerber, J.S.; MacDonald, G.K.; West, P.C. Climate variation explains a third of global crop yield variability. Nat. Commun. 2015, 6, 5989. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Bender, J.; Weigel, H.-J. Changes in atmospheric chemistry and crop health: A review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2011, 31, 81–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Change, C. Agriculture and Food Security. In The State of Food and Agriculture; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  19. Fonta, W.; Edame, G.; Anam, B.E.; Duru, E.J.C. Climate change, food security and agricultural productivity in Africa: Issues and policy directions. Int. J. Humanit. Soc. Sci. 2011, 1, 205–223. [Google Scholar]
  20. Devereux, S.; Edwards, J. Climate change and food security. IDS BULLETIN 2004, 35, 22–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Romshoo, S.A.; Bashir, J.; Rashid, I. Twenty-first century-end climate scenario of Jammu and Kashmir Himalaya, India, using ensemble climate models. Clim. Chang. 2020, 162, 1473–1491. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Mushtaq, F.; Lala, M.G.N. Assessment of climatic variability in the catchments of Himalayan Lake, Jammu & Kashmir. Geocarto Int. 2017, 32, 1090–1104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Gujree, I.; Wani, I.; Muslim, M.; Farooq, M.; Meraj, G. Evaluating the variability and trends in extreme climate events in the Kashmir Valley using PRECIS RCM simulations. Model. Earth Syst. Environ. 2017, 3, 1647–1662. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Rashid, I.; Majeed, U.; Aneaus, S.; Pelto, M. Linking the recent glacier retreat and depleting streamflow patterns with land system changes in Kashmir Himalaya, India. Water 2020, 12, 1168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Bharti, S.; Haq, A.U.; Guite, L.T.S.; Kanga, S.; Mushtaq, F.; Farooq, M.; Singh, S.K.; Kumar, P.; Meraj, G. Development of Inherent Vulnerability Index within Jammu Municipal Limits, India. Climate 2024, 12, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Farooq, M.; Singh, S.K.; Kanga, S. Inherent vulnerability profiles of agriculture sector in temperate Himalayan region: A preliminary assessment. Indian J. Ecol. 2021, 48, 434–441. [Google Scholar]
  27. Chauhan, N.; Shukla, R.; Joshi, P.K. Assessing inherent vulnerability of farming communities across different bio-geographical zones in Himachal Pradesh, India. Environ. Dev. 2020, 33, 100506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Bera, A.; Meraj, G.; Kanga, S.; Farooq, M.; Singh, S.K.; Sahu, N.; Kumar, P. Vulnerability and risk assessment to climate change in Sagar Island, India. Water 2022, 14, 823. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Swami, D.; Parthasarathy, D. Dynamics of exposure, sensitivity, adaptive capacity and agricultural vulnerability at district scale for Maharashtra, India. Ecol. Indic. 2021, 121, 107206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Yu, J.; Castellani, K.; Forysinski, K.; Gustafson, P.; Lu, J.; Peterson, E.; Tran, M.; Yao, A.; Zhao, J.; Brauer, M. Geospatial indicators of exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity to assess neighbourhood variation in vulnerability to climate change-related health hazards. Environ. Health 2021, 20, 31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Nguyen, K.-A.; Liou, Y.-A.; Terry, J.P. Vulnerability of Vietnam to typhoons: A spatial assessment based on hazards, exposure and adaptive capacity. Sci. Total. Environ. 2019, 682, 31–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Fischer, A.P.; Frazier, T.G. Social vulnerability to climate change in temperate forest areas: New measures of exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity. Ann. Assoc. Am. Geogr. 2017, 108, 658–678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. District Census Handbook. Directorate of Census Operation, Jammu and Kashmir. Retrieved 25 September 2022. 2011. Available online: https://censusindia.gov.in/nada/index.php/catalog/532/download/1776/DH_2011_0122_PART_A_DCHB_SAMBA.pdf (accessed on 22 August 2024).
  34. Digest of Statistics. Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Government of Jammu and Kashmir. Retrieved 10 March 2022. 2021. Available online: https://www.ecostatjk.nic.in (accessed on 22 August 2024).
  35. Ahmadi, V.; Arlos, P.; Casalicchio, E. Normalization Framework for Vulnerability Risk Management in Cloud. In Proceedings of the 2021 8th International Conference on Future Internet of Things and Cloud (FiCloud), Rome, Italy, 23–25 August 2021; pp. 99–106. [Google Scholar]
  36. Runfola, D.; Stefanidis, A.; Lv, Z.; O’Brien, J.; Baier, H. A multi-glimpse deep learning architecture to estimate socio-economic census metrics in the context of extreme scope variance. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 2024, 38, 726–750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Gaborit, P. Climate adaptation to Multi-Hazard climate related risks in ten Indonesian Cities: Ambitions and challenges. Clim. Risk Manag. 2022, 37, 100453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Supharatid, S.; Aribarg, T.; Nafung, J. Bias-corrected CMIP6 climate model projection over Southeast Asia. Theor. Appl. Clim. 2022, 147, 669–690. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Mishra, V.; Bhatia, U.; Tiwari, A.D. Bias-corrected climate projections for South Asia from Coupled Model Intercomparison Project-6. Sci. Data 2020, 7, 338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Singh, V.P.; Singh, R.; Paul, P.K.; Bisht, D.S.; Gaur, S. Climate Change Impact Analysis. In Hydrological Processes Modelling and Data Analysis: A Primer; Springer: Singapore, 2024; pp. 105–126. [Google Scholar]
  41. Raj, A.D.; Kumar, S.; Sooryamol, K.R. Downscaling future precipitation with shared socioeconomic pathway (SSP) scenarios using machine learning models in the North-Western Himalayan region. Model. Earth Syst. Environ. 2024, 10, 1–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Tate, E. Uncertainty analysis for a social vulnerability index. Ann. Assoc. Am. Geogr. 2013, 103, 526–543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Frischen, J.; Meza, I.; Rupp, D.; Wietler, K.; Hagenlocher, M. Drought risk to agricultural systems in Zimbabwe: A spatial analysis of hazard, exposure, and vulnerability. Sustainability 2020, 12, 752. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Carrão, H.; Naumann, G.; Barbosa, P. Mapping global patterns of drought risk: An empirical framework based on sub-national estimates of hazard, exposure and vulnerability. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2016, 39, 108–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Thornton, P.K.; Ericksen, P.J.; Herrero, M.; Challinor, A.J. Climate variability and vulnerability to climate change: A review. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2014, 20, 3313–3328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Bhat, M.S.; Mir, S.; Parrey, H.A.; Thoker, I.A.; Shah, S.A. Climate change, hailstorm incidence, and livelihood security: A perspective from Kashmir valley India. Nat. Hazards 2024, 120, 2803–2827. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Ahmad, L.; Qayoom, S. Precipitation and rainy day trends in Kashmir valley, Jammu & Kashmir, India. Indian J. Ecol. 2019, 46, 83–87. [Google Scholar]
  48. Bhatt, C.M.; Rao, G.S.; Farooq, M.; Manjusree, P.; Shukla, A.; Sharma, S.V.S.P.; Kulkarni, S.S.; Begum, A.; Bhanumurthy, V.; Diwakar, P.G.; et al. Satellite-based assessment of the catastrophic Jhelum floods of September 2014, Jammu & Kashmir, India. Geomat. Nat. Hazards Risk 2017, 8, 309–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Farooq, M.; Mushtaq, F.; Yousuf, U. Estimation of loss in arable land and irrigation requirements using high-resolution imagery and Google Earth Engine. Irrig. Drain. 2024, 73, 1151–1167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Farooq, M.; Singh, S.K.; Kanga, S. Mainstreaming adaptation strategies in relevant flagship schemes to overcome vulnerabilities of climate change to agriculture sector. Res. J. Agri. Sci. Int. J. 2021, 12, 637–646. [Google Scholar]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.