Vulnerability and ecological footprint: a comparison between urban Taipei and rural Yunlin, Taiwan

Climate change issues and adaptation strategies have drawn much attention from many fields in recent years. Taiwan, an island state, is deeply threatened by the multiple threats posed by climate change. However, different urban and rural areas have numerous adaptation approaches due to their differences in vulnerability. In Taipei City (urban), its biophysical vulnerability is mainly affected by flooded areas and high flood depths caused by landslides and heavy rains. Its social vulnerability is affected by economic development, high household assets, and population concentration. In Yunlin County (rural), its biophysical vulnerability is also affected by flooded areas and high flood depths caused by heavy rains. Its social vulnerability is affected by the elderly living alone, low household assets, and low healthcare. In order to propose appropriate adaptation strategies of urban and rural areas under different vulnerabilities, this study uses an overlapping method to examine the relationship between the integrated vulnerability (biophysical and social) of Taipei and Yunlin along with the ecological footprint (EF), a measurement of human demands for resources and ecological services. This study reviews the literature and uses Taiwan’s NCDR (National Science and Technology Center for Disaster Reduction) data to analyze the biophysical vulnerability and the social vulnerability and further calculate the integrated vulnerability. In this study, questionnaire surveys were conducted. In Taipei, 446 valid questionnaires were collected, while 393 were collected in Yunlin. The results show that personal EF in Taipei is higher than that in Yunlin. In the end, this study elucidates the relationship between integrated vulnerability and personal EF of Taipei and Yunlin. Four types of risk areas in urban Taipei and rural Yunlin are sorted out (high vulnerability/high EF, high vulnerability/low EF, low vulnerability/high EF, and low vulnerability/low EF). The empirical results can be adopted by local governments, communities, and NGOs to establish appropriate strategies for mitigation and adaptation in the different risk areas.