Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse




Journal Article

A review of climate security risk assessment tools


Sedova,  Barbora
Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research;


Binder,  Lisa
Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research;


Michelini,  Sidney
Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research;

Schellens,  Marie
External Organizations;

Rüttinger,  Lukas
External Organizations;

External Ressource
No external resources are shared
Fulltext (public)
There are no public fulltexts stored in PIKpublic
Supplementary Material (public)
There is no public supplementary material available

Sedova, B., Binder, L., Michelini, S., Schellens, M., Rüttinger, L. (2024): A review of climate security risk assessment tools. - Environment and Security, 2, 1, 175-210.

Cite as: https://publications.pik-potsdam.de/pubman/item/item_29616
To address climatic risks to human security, various climate security risk assessment (CSRA) tools have been developed. We have systematically reviewed 28 such tools against state-of-the-art research to (i) define best practices in CSRAs, (ii) identify related gaps in these tools and derive recommendations on how to address them, and (iii) outline a policy-relevant research agenda. We suggest the following measures to improve CSRA tools: Global South actors need to be more strongly involved in priority setting, conceptualization, risk analysis, and intervention design. CSRA tools should offer geographically disaggregated analyses, transparently explain choices regarding tools’ temporal and geographical foci, and assess their implications for the evidence. In this regard, any type of sampling bias should be avoided. Mixed methods can offer clear advantages to study the context-specific climate security dynamics across different time scales. The main gaps in the tools’ conceptualizations evolve around comprehensive consideration of risk determinants (climatic hazards, exposure, and vulnerability) and complex climate–security linkages, communication of uncertainty, and implementation of validation routines. These factors need to be better accounted for. To advance CSRAs, future research should, for example, develop methodologies to systematically integrate quantitative and qualitative approaches, improve the performance of risk predictions, and develop conflict projections.