MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7108607010 · doi:10.38159/ehass.202561233

Assessment and Mitigation of Flood Risk in Urban Settlement: A Case of Ethekwini Metropolitan Area

2025· article· en· W7108607010 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueE-Journal of Humanities Arts and Social Sciences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFlood Risk Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEconomy and Environment Program for Southeast AsiaInternational Development Research CentreNational Defense Medical College
KeywordsFlood mythVulnerability (computing)Metropolitan areaNatural hazardResilience (materials science)Flood mitigationNatural disasterPsychological resilienceClimate changeFlood risk assessment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Flooding is one of the most destructive natural hazards globally, with impacts intensified by climate change and systemic gaps in disaster risk governance. This study assesses the vulnerability of the eThekwini Metropolitan Area (EMA) in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa, to recurrent flood disasters. Using an indicator-based methodology, the research analyses quantitative data across five dimensions: socio-economic, physical, health and wellbeing, institutional and governance, and environmental factors. The aim is to identify structural weaknesses and inform inclusive, long-term mitigation strategies. In April 2022, KwaZulu-Natal experienced a devastating flood disaster that illustrates the region’s exposure and fragility to floods, leading to a 0.7% drop in national GDP, disrupted manufacturing and agriculture, and reversed post-COVID economic recovery. EMA’s coastal location, prevalence of informal settlements, and limited infrastructure amplify its flood risk. Findings reveal inadequate preparedness, slow recovery, unequal distribution of incentives, and prolonged lack of essential services, such as clean water and healthcare, in affected communities. The research highlights how climate-induced hazards compound vulnerabilities, affecting livelihoods, public health, and service delivery. Institutional fragmentation and reactive planning hinder effective risk reduction. The study recommends a multi-stakeholder approach to flood mitigation, emphasising coordinated governance, equitable recovery, and proactive investment in resilient infrastructure and community engagement. This research contributes a localised vulnerability assessment framework and actionable insights for urban flood mitigation in climate-sensitive regions. By integrating diverse vulnerability indicators and emphasising inclusive planning, it offers a strategic foundation for enhancing resilience and reducing future flood impacts in South Africa’s urban settlements.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.235
Threshold uncertainty score0.292

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.279 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueE-Journal of Humanities Arts and Social SciencesSame topicFlood Risk Assessment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207