Vulnerability to disaster in the Maldives: The Maamigili and Fenfushi island communities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The relation between vulnerability and environmental threats in islands depends on the geographical conditions of specific islands rather than general assumptions. It is assumed that different island communities may develop different socio-environmental dynamics depending on the ordinary everyday context, which would determine their resilience to real and perceived risks. This research provides data on communities’ perception of their vulnerability to environmental issues, with the objective of understanding the sense of vulnerability of two neighbouring island communities in the Maldives: Maamigili and Fenfushi. The research is based on qualitative and quantitative methods which include semi-structured interviews with national and local entities, and questionnaires distributed among island inhabitants. The study shows that although the islands are located in very similar geographical settings, the socio-environment dynamics within each of the islands determines the communities’ sense of vulnerability. The communities of Maamigili and Fenfushi face different situations and, as such, general assumptions would not address the gaps and needs of communities of specific islands. Even if two islands are relatively close and similar to each other, they still require separate Disaster Risk Reduction strategies so as to address the real and perceived short- and long-term vulnerabilities of the locals as a means to build more resilient communities.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".