Although the integrated indicator methods have become popular for assessing vulnerability to climate change, their proliferation has introduced a confusing array of scales and indicators that cause a science-policy gap. I argue for a clear adaptation pathway in an “integrative typology” of regional vulnerability that matches appropriate scales, optimal measurements and adaptive strategies in a six-dimensional and multi-level analysis framework of integration and typology inspired by the “5W1H” questions: “Who is concerned about how to adapt to the vulnerability of what to what in some place (where) at some time (when)?” Using the case of the vulnerability of wheat, barley and oats to drought in Australian wheat sheep zones during 1978–1999, I answer the “5W1H” questions through establishing the “six typologies” framework.

Original Source