II. Urban Vulnerability and The Potential for Community-Based Responses There is a considerable body of research and literature on urban poverty and vulnerability − including vulnerability to climate change − in urban Bangladesh. While various conceptual frameworks for understanding vulnerability to climate change have been produced, this research draws primarily on the definition used in the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report.
“The degree to which a system is susceptible to, and unable to cope with, adverse effects of climate change, including climate variability and extremes. Vulnerability is a function of the character, magnitude and rate of climate change and variation to which a system is exposed, its sensitivity and its adaptive capacity.”
This provides a suitable framework for examining vulnerability in the particular context of low-income settlements in Khulna – one that takes into account both external (exposure to particular hazards) and internal factors (the sensitivity and adaptive capacity of households, communities, urban institutions and the city as a whole). It informs a recognition that vulnerability in urban areas is shaped by the broader urban context and forces, including informality, rapid urbanization and a lack of infrastructure and basic services. While these factors are recognized by researchers as being important for shaping climate vulnerability in urban Bangladesh, they have, to date, been relatively neglected in the policy domain.
Alam and Rabbani provide one of the first reviews of climate impacts and responses in a Bangladeshi city, examining the case of Dhaka and recognizing the particular impacts of poor air quality and frequent flooding on infrastructure, industry, trade and commerce, utility services, population and health, and livelihoods. Elsewhere in Bangladesh, climate-related hazards in Chittagong include cyclones, flooding, landslides and tidal surges; with anticipated sea level rise expected to contribute to increased flooding (especially flash flooding), water-logging, tidal surges, and salt water intrusion. Hill-cutting (despite being prohibited in the 1995 Chittagong Master Plan) has led to landslides and siltation of waterways, which exacerbates flooding, while a shortage of safe drinking water is associated with a high prevalence of water-borne diseases.
III. Drivers of Vulnerability In Khulna, Bangladesh a. Geographical and bio-physical drivers of vulnerability Khulna is located beside the Rupsha and Bhairab rivers, at an elevation of approximately 2.5 metres above mean sea level, and covers an area of about 47 square kilometres. Overall, 46 per cent of the city’s land area is residential, 18 per cent is farming land, 15 per cent is industrialized areas and five per cent is commercial areas, while the rest consists of official structures, transport infrastructure, community and defence, facility parks and water bodies. The climate is humid during the summer, the average annual temperature is 26.3°C and the average annual rainfall is 1,800 millimetres. Industrial development since the 1960s has had a substantial influence on the city’s demographic composition, as people have migrated for employment in port-related activities, the jute industry and shrimp farming – resulting in larger numbers of industrial labourers and industrial investors. Displacement from rural areas to the city has also taken place as a consequence of major cyclones. The city is therefore densely settled, with a density rate of 3,335 persons per square kilometre.
b. Socioeconomic and legal components of vulnerability Low-income and informal settlements in urban areas exhibit a range of characteristics that contribute to vulnerability to climate variability and change. These settlements are characterized by congested living spaces, poor quality housing, a lack of accessible drinking water and inadequate sanitation facilities. There is a high incidence of urban poverty in Khulna. The city generates a relatively low proportion of national GDP (11.7 per cent) compared to Dhaka (37.2 per cent), Rajshahi (20.5 per cent) and Chittagong (19.3 per cent) (although these figures – the latest available – date from 1999−2000(51)). One analysis suggests that 190,000 of the city’s residents, living in 520 low-income neighbourhoods, are poor − although this is based on data from 2005 and is likely to be a substantial underestimate because of the ways in which urban poverty is defined and measured.