Next Article in Journal
Technical Note on the Dynamic Changes in Kalman Gain when Updating Hydrodynamic Urban Drainage Models
Next Article in Special Issue
Developing an Approximation of a Natural, Rough Gravel Riverbed Both Physically and Numerically
Previous Article in Journal
Present Glaciers of Tavan Bogd Massif in the Altai Mountains, Central Asia, and Their Changes since the Little Ice Age
Previous Article in Special Issue
Re-Aeration on Stepped Spillways with Special Consideration of Entrained and Entrapped Air
Open AccessArticle

How to Define Priorities in Coastal Vulnerability Assessment

Department of Civil, Environmental, Land, Building Engineering and Chemistry (DICATECh), Polytechnic University of Bari (Italy), 70125 Bari BA, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Geosciences 2018, 8(11), 415; https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences8110415
Received: 21 September 2018 / Revised: 31 October 2018 / Accepted: 7 November 2018 / Published: 12 November 2018
Awareness of coastal landscapes vulnerability to both natural and man-made hazards induce to monitor their evolution, adaptation, resilience and to develop appropriate defence strategies. The necessity to transform the monitoring results into useful information is the motivation of the present paper. Usually, to this scope, a coastal vulnerability index is deduced, by assigning ranking values to the different parameters governing the coastal processes. The principal limitation of this procedure is the individual discretion used in ranking. Moreover, physical parameters are generally considered, omitting socio-economic factors. The aim of the present study is to complement a geographical information system (GIS) with an analytical hierarchical process (AHP), thus allowing an objective prioritization of the key parameters. Furthermore, in the present case, socio-economic parameters have been added to physical ones. Employing them jointly, an integrated coastal vulnerability index (ICVI) has been estimated and its effectiveness has been investigated. To show how it works, the proposed method has been applied to a portion of the Adriatic coastline, along the Apulian region in southern Italy. It has permitted to identify and prioritize the most vulnerable areas, revealing its efficacy as a potential tool to support coastal planning and management. View Full-Text
Keywords: coastal morphodynamics; coastal vulnerability index; geographic information systems (GIS); analytical hierarchical process (AHP) coastal morphodynamics; coastal vulnerability index; geographic information systems (GIS); analytical hierarchical process (AHP)
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

De Serio, F.; Armenio, E.; Mossa, M.; Petrillo, A.F. How to Define Priorities in Coastal Vulnerability Assessment. Geosciences 2018, 8, 415. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences8110415

AMA Style

De Serio F, Armenio E, Mossa M, Petrillo AF. How to Define Priorities in Coastal Vulnerability Assessment. Geosciences. 2018; 8(11):415. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences8110415

Chicago/Turabian Style

De Serio, Francesca; Armenio, Elvira; Mossa, Michele; Petrillo, Antonio F. 2018. "How to Define Priorities in Coastal Vulnerability Assessment" Geosciences 8, no. 11: 415. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences8110415

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Search more from Scilit
 
Search
Back to TopTop