Venezuela: Social vulnerability and integrated risk
Data overview
The social vulnerability indicators for Venezuela are spread over the themes of population, economy, infrastructure, education,and health. The dataset of Venezuela is composed by 47 indicators at level P3 of subnational geographic organization given in 1128 subdivisions distributed into parishes known in Venezuela as parroquias. The chart below (figure 1) explains the percentage of variables in the total dataset under each specific main theme.
Figure 1
Indicators are separated into groups (or sub-indices) that share the same dimension (e.g. population, economy, infrastructure, health, and education). These individual indicators are aggregated into sub-indices, and the sub-indices are, in turn, aggregated to construct the final composite model. Table 1 shows the entire dataset variables for Venezuela divided in the respective themes and subthemes.
Table 1. Venezuela variables of social vulnerability
Theme | Sub-theme | Variable |
---|---|---|
Population | Vulnerable Population | Female Population |
Population | Vulnerable Population | Native Indigeneous Urban Population |
Population | Vulnerable Population | Native Indigeneous Rural Population |
Population | Vulnerable Population | Women Head of Household |
Population | Vulnerable Population | Population not in the labor force (Age 0-15 and 65+) |
Population | Vulnerable Population | Population over 65 |
Population | Vulnerable Population | Total population with a disability |
Population | Vulnerable Population | Population living Dwelling with unadequated physical Characteristics |
Population | Vulnerable Population | Population living in Overcrowded Dwellings |
Population | Vulnerable Population | Building Age 1 - 28 years |
Population | Vulnerable Population | Building Age 29-60+ |
Population | Vulnerable Population | Population under 5 years old |
Population | Vulnerable Population | Native Indigeneous Population |
Population | Vulnerable Population | Age dependance |
Population | Population Structure | Population |
Population | Population Structure | Total Urban Population |
Population | Population Structure | Total Rural Population |
Population | Population Structure | Male Population |
Population | Population Structure | Population Density (inhabitants/km2) |
Population | Population Structure | Number of Households |
Population | Population Structure | Total Dwellings |
Population | Population Structure | Dwelling Type - House |
Population | Population Structure | Dwelling Type - Apartment Building |
Population | Population Structure | Dwelling Type - Tenement (Inquilinato) |
Population | Population Structure | Dwelling Type - Hut |
Population | Population Structure | Number of people per Household |
Population | Labour Market | Labor Force Age 15-64 |
Infrastructure | Transport and Communication | Mobile cellular subscriptions |
Infrastructure | Transport and Communication | Population with Computer Access |
Infrastructure | Energy, Water and Sanitation | Households with accessto improved water source |
Infrastructure | Energy, Water and Sanitation | Households with NO access to improved water source |
Infrastructure | Energy, Water and Sanitation | Househols with no Lifelines, No water Elec, Sewage |
Infrastructure | Energy, Water and Sanitation | Households with No Electric Energy Access |
Infrastructure | Energy, Water and Sanitation | Households with access to Electric Energy Public distribution |
Infrastructure | Energy, Water and Sanitation | Energy provided by own generator |
Infrastructure | Energy, Water and Sanitation | No Sewage system |
Education | Education Outcome | Illiteracy Rate |
Education | Education Outcome | Hoseholds with Education deficit |
Education | Education Outcome | Hoseholds head with Education deficit |
Education | Education Outcome | Education Level Secondary |
Education | Education Outcome | Education Level Completed (Superior, Technical, University) |
Economy | Labour Market | Economically Active Population (EAP) |
Economy | Labour Market | Not Economically Active Population (EAP) |
Economy | Income distribution and Poverty | Population in households with a high economic dependence |
Economy | Income distribution and Poverty | Household with No poverty |
Economy | Income distribution and Poverty | Extreme Poverty |
Economy | Income distribution and Poverty | Total population in poverty |
The entire 47 indicators were statistically analyzed. In addition to a harmonized dataset, a reduction of the socio-economic indicators into a smaller parsimonious set of variables that best represent social and economic vulnerability cluster analysis was performed. The multi-variable statistical analysis was utilized to provide a statistical basis for the choice of indicators.
Final variable selection
A correlation analysis was performed on the above variables (table 1). Highly correlated variables (Spearman’s R>0.700) were eliminated from further consideration to avoid subjectively choosing one variable over another for inclusion in subsequent analyses. The correlation analysis is useful in reducing the data to a set of variables that are parsimonious and acceptable to represent the social vulnerability of the population in Venezuela.
Table 2. Venezuela final variable selection
Theme | Sub-theme | Variable |
---|---|---|
Population | Population structure | Female Population (%) |
Population | Population structure | Population Density (people/sqkm) |
Population | Population structure | Number of people per Household |
Population | vulnerable population | Native Indigeneous Population (%) |
Population | vulnerable population | Age dependance (%) |
Population | vulnerable population | Women Head of Household (%) |
Population | vulnerable population | Population living Dwelling with unadequated physical Characteristics (%) |
Population | vulnerable population | Total Population with a disability (%) |
Education | Education outcome | Hoseholds with Education deficit % |
Education | Education access | Illiteracy Rate |
Economy | Income distribution and poverty | Total population in poverty (%) |
Infrastructure | Energy, water, and sanitation | Households with NO access to improved water source (%) |
Infrastructure | Energy, water, and sanitation | Households with No Electric Energy Access (%) |
Infrastructure | Energy, water, and sanitation | No Sewage system (%) |
Social Vulnerability
The social vulnerability index for Venezuela is composed by the subcomponents vulnerable population, economy, infrastructure, and education (figure 2 A-D). The spatial distribution of the social vulnerability indicates that sub national parishes corresponding to the major cities experience the lowest levels of social vulnerability. The social vulnerability model shows the highest levels of vulnerability in the parishes where there is limited access to basic services and lifelines i.e water and electricity, education, health, and employment opportunities. The economy subcomponent (figure 2D) plays an important role as it increases the levels of social vulnerability in the major cities making reference to the economic dependency that the country and population have to their livelihoods within major urban areas.
Figure 2. Venezuela components of social vulnerability
Integrated Risk
The Integrated risk for Venezuela is obtained from combining the social vulnerability and the risk average annual losses indexes. High integrated risk can be understood as those subnational areas experiencing high seismicity, high physical earthquake risk, and high levels of social vulnerability. The social vulnerability results (figure 3A) showed high levels of vulnerable population in the southern parishes, mostly rural parishes with limited access to basic services. Whereas, the integrated risk spatial distribution reveals high levels of risk in the northern parishes as it is where the physical risk is higher (figure 3B) as high risk seismicity zones are located in the north; it is also the location of most major urban economic centers e.g. Caracas, Maracaibo, Valencia; which are Venezuela’s economic hubs. In terms of social vulnerability, the spatial distribution of the integrated risk (figure 3C) reveals that parishes remain moderate to high as population livelihoods directly depend on the economy activity. Consequently, northern parishes being in high seismic risk zones and socially vulnerable, experience the most losses in terms of livelihoods of the population and economically in the event of an earthquake.
Figure 3. Venezuela Integrated Risk