However, socially created vulnerabilities beyond an aggregate perspective (i.e., census demographic data) are largely ignored within the climate research literature and neglect the macro-level forces that shape the distribution of resources and inequalities (Hayden et al., 2011; X, 2018). It is important to move past considering social vulnerability as a one-dimensional demographic variable and begin addressing the root causes of vulnerability in terms of injustices. Climate change and disaster research within the context of social work have the opportunity to bring attention to the disparities, injustices, and unequal impacts of climate change on people. While the concept of social vulnerability has gained extensive use in social work scholarship and practice, definitions, measures, and uses of social vulnerability in the context of climate change remain complex and multifaceted.
Climate Change and disaster research within social work has largely focused on qualitative assessment methodologies rather than quantitative risk modeling. In part, due to the complex nature of people, social structures, and culture, a multi-disciplinary approach is required to undertake such research. No single investigation into vulnerability indicators can provide a holistic and comprehensive assessment. However, given the complexities of disasters and the intersection of racial and economic inequality within a climate context, it is imperative that social work research be at the forefront of critical discourse on climate justice and vulnerability.
Social work scholars offer valuable insight into problems of definition and conceptual measurement as well as the ways in which climate and disaster concepts are interpreted within a justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion context. The proposed symposium offers four papers that present research utilizing social vulnerability concepts within a domain of climate/disasters, with the purpose of critically engaging with and enhancing definitions of theoretical constructs as well as uses of justice and vulnerability concepts in practice.
In Paper 1, First et al. assess community-level approaches to assessing extreme heat vulnerability and adaptation. In paper 2, Ferreira, et al. present predictors of disaster preparedness for females faced with chronic climate exposure. In Paper 3, Saltzman proposes technology use as an approach to address climate change and climate-related disasters. Paper 4 Hansel et al. hypothesize climate change experiences contribute to compassion fatigue and related mental health problems among the healthcare and emergency personnel workforce.
These papers and moderated discussion offer a timely opportunity for social work scholars to engage in a critical consideration of the role of justice in climate change in both research and practice, the complexity of defining climate change concepts in a disaster context, and an expanded understanding of the role of social work in addressing climate change at both micro and macro levels.