全球社会经济对自然灾害的抵御能力（英）

11129 Produced by the Research Support TeamAbstractThe Policy Research Working Paper Series disseminates the findings of work in progress to encourage the exchange of ideas about developmentissues. An objective of the series is to get the findings out quickly, even if the presentations are less than fully polished. The papers carry thenames of the authors and should be cited accordingly. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this paper are entirely thoseof the authors. They do not necessarily represent the views of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/World Bank andits affiliated organizations, or those of the Executive Directors of the World Bank or the governments they represent.Policy Research Working Paper11129Most disaster risk assessments use damages to physicalassets as their central metric, often neglecting distributionalimpacts and the coping and recovery capacity of affectedpeople. To address this shortcoming, the concepts ofwell-being losses and socio-economic resilience—the abilityto experience asset losses without a decline in well-being—have been proposed. This paper uses microsimulations toproduce a global estimate of well-being losses from, andsocio-economic resilience to, natural disasters, covering132 countries. On average, each $1 in disaster-related assetlosses results in well-being losses equivalent to a $2 uniformnational drop in consumption, with significant variationwithin and across countries. The poorest income quintilewithin each country incurs only 9% of national asset lossesbut accounts for 33% of well-being losses. Compared tohigh-income countries, low-income countries experienceThis paper is a product of the Urban, Disaster Risk Management, Resilience and Land Global Department, the ClimateChange Group, and the Poverty and Equity Global Department. It is part of a larger effort by the World Bank toprovide open access to its research and make a contribution to development policy discussions around the world. PolicyResearch Working Papers are also posted on the Web at http://www.worldbank.org/prwp. The authors may be contactedat shallegatte@worldbank.org and bjafino@worldbank.org. 67% greater well-being losses per dollar of asset lossesand require 56% more time to recover. Socio-economicresilience is uncorrelated with exposure or vulnerability tonatural hazards. However, a 10 percent increase in GDPper capita is associated with a 0.9 percentage point gain inresilience, but this benefit arises indirectly—such as throughhigher rate of formal employment, better financial inclusion,and broader social protection coverage—rather than fromhigher income itself. This paper assess ten policy optionsand finds that socio-economic and financial interventions(such as insurance and social protection) can effectivelycomplement asset-focused measures (e.g., constructionstandards) and that interventions targeting low-incomepopulations usually have higher returns in terms of avoidedwell-being losses per dollar invested. GlobalSocio-economicResiliencetoNaturalDisastersRobinMiddelanisa,BramkaArgaJafinoaRuthHilla,MinhCongNguyenaStéphaneHallegatteaaTheWorldBankKeywords:natural disasters, risk reduction, well-being, resilience, recoveryJEL codes:Q50, Q54, I30, I32, D63 Disaster risk assessments often inform the design of policies and interventions aimed at reducing the harm to peopleand their well-being. Many of these assessments focus on damages to physical assets (”asset losses” hereafter) as thekey metric to measure risk1–3. This can obscure the disproportionate burden on poorer households, who may lose lessin absolute asset terms but suffer more relative to their means, and experience greater well-being impacts for everydollar lost4,5. Indeed, $1 in asset losses—or even a loss equal to 1% of their total wealth—will have a more severeimpact on the well-being of a poor person than on that of a comparatively well-off person.A more comprehensive disaster risk assessment needs to not only account for the distribution of asset losses acrossthe population, but also for people’s capacity to cope with and recover from these losses6. This capacity depends onsocio-economic factors such as poverty7, sources of income and livelihoods8,9, income diversification, reliance on naturalresources, health, disability, education10, asset ownership, savings, and access to financial services11–13.To more accurately capture the impacts of disasters on heterogeneous populations, the concept of well-being losseshas been proposed14. This approach uses a simple economic model to estimate how asset losses reduce householdconsumption, and then applies a utility function to translate those consumption losses into well-being impacts. Themodel accounts for the differences in households’ ability to maintain their consumption and replace lost assets after adisaster, depending on factors such as asset vulnerability, sources of income, and savings. The utility function capturesthe decreasi