Thesis start date: 10/1/2025
Thesis end date: 9/30/2028
Expected defense date: December 2028
Abstract
Successive IPCC reports warn of global warming and its consequences for the human (technosphere) and natural (biosphere) systems of our planet (IPCC, 2018). Climate change is intensifying not only the frequency but also the magnitude of natural hazards (Masson-Delmotte et al., 2021; ONERC, 2022), as tragically illustrated by the recent floods in Givors, France, and Valencia, Spain, which severely impacted populations, infrastructure, and local economic activities. At the same time, increasing urbanization and metropolization are leading to greater land artificialization (Agreste, 2022), thereby increasing risks and challenges.
In this context, cities, which concentrate a wide diversity of human activities and infrastructure, are exposed to increasingly severe hazards and ever-higher levels of vulnerability. Faced with this reality, United Nations frameworks for action, such as those of Hyogo and Sendai, call for more systematic integration of risk assessment into urban planning and management, particularly in densely populated and rapidly growing areas (UNISDR, 2005, 2015). Understanding the impacts of these phenomena on structures and populations has become crucial for mitigating risk factors and strengthening the resilience of our cities.
Numerous studies on the characterization and/or spatial representation of the vulnerability, risk, or resilience of buildings, infrastructure, or residents themselves in the face of various natural hazards have been conducted in recent decades. Thus, no fewer than 198 articles were published between 1997 and 2022 (Luo et al., 2023) on topics related to landslide risk; 2,589 on flood vulnerability in developing countries between 2010 and 2020 (Membele et al., 2022), and more than 3,900, between 1996 and 2022, on urban resilience to floods (Prashar et al., 2023). These characterization and/or representation studies generally rely on physical and/or socio-economic aspects. However, despite this volume of work, there is a noted lack of studies that compile these criteria into a single index in order to provide a holistic view of the problem (Roldán-Valcarce et al., 2023).
At the same time, the scale of risk analysis and characterization is predominantly limited to macro levels (territory), setting aside the question of downscaling and thus the fine-grained territorialization of resilience. For example, for floods, studies often focus on watersheds or at best at the metropolitan scale (de Moel et al., 2015). At the level of institutional actors and the economic sector, numerous tools have been developed to support decision-making and action. In this regard, we can cite:
- Natural hazard maps at varying scales;
- Tools or approaches that automatically characterize vulnerability but at meso or even national scales;
- Tools for conducting individual self-assessments of housing vulnerability to these hazards.
However, none of these tools offers an adequate solution for characterizing the risk/resilience/vulnerability level of buildings in the face of climate risks at a fine scale (address) and large scale (EPCI). Indeed, while some automatic characterizations at the city or even neighborhood scale exist, no analysis is conducted at the building level except in the case of individual self-assessments carried out on a case-by-case basis by residents or real estate professionals.
At the same time, regarding individual and social vulnerability, it remains approximate (statistical scale) or derived from occasional census campaigns. As a result, in the current state of knowledge, both scientific and operational, there is no method for instantly and comprehensively obtaining a view of the vulnerability/resilience of a territory in the face of climate hazards and changes at the building granularity.
Initially, the research will focus on identifying physical, social, and individual indicators to characterize building resilience in the face of different types of natural hazards (with particular attention to flood hazards). This first phase will be based on a bibliographic review of scientific and “gray” literature, a benchmark of various self-assessment tools, and discussions with sector stakeholders (consulting firms, urban planning offices, etc.). The identification of indicators will be facilitated by a systemic representation of the “built environment” object confronted with natural hazards.
In parallel, an identification of various spatial databases (INSEE databases, IMOPE, land registry data, etc.) containing information to evaluate these indicators will be conducted. In a second phase, procedures for evaluating indicators using information from these databases will be formalized (for example, how to use INSEE data to attribute them to a building). Finally, these indicators will be organized into one or more criteria reflecting the resilience of buildings in the territory. This will involve selecting a multi-criteria analysis method, defining scoring/weighting, conducting a sensitivity study, etc. Finally, this method will be tested on one or more study territories and the results discussed with relevant stakeholders.
Keywords
Built environment, Resilience, Flooding, Climate change, Indicators
Partners and/or Funders
This work is funded by the French Agency for Ecological Transition (ADEME) and the Eco-design Center
Relevant Sustainable Development Goals
