Journal of Natural Resources and Environmental Management http://dx.doi.org/10.29244/jpsl.14.1.1 RESEARCH ARTICLE Vulnerability Assessment to Flash Floods Disasters in the Upper Cisadane Watershed Fitriany Amalia Wardhania, Andrea Emma Pravitasarib,c, Iwan Ridwansyaha a Research Center for Limnology and Water Resources, National Research and Innovation Agency, Indonesia Division of Regional Development Planning, Departement of Soil Science and Land Resources, Faculty of Agriculture, IPB University, Indonesia c Center for Regional, Systems, Analysis, Planning and Development (CRESTPENT), LPPM-IPB University, Indonesia b Article History Received 6 December 2022 Revised 21 June 2023 Accepted 27 June 2023 Keywords flash floods, upper cisadane, vulnerability, watershed ABSTRACT Flash floods are sudden flood disasters that can be triggered by several factors, one of which is landslides that occur in the upper watershed. In Bogor Regency, there are 14 sub-districts located in the Upper Cisadane watershed area that are prone to flash flood disasters. This study aimed to determine the social, economic, physical, and environmental vulnerability assessment of the community in the Upper Cisadane watershed area based on the modification assessment from Regulation of The Head of National Disaster Management Authority Number 12 of 2012. This vulnerability assessment is part of disaster risk assessment, which is an approach to show the potential negative impacts of a disaster that occurs in an area. This potential negative impact can be seen in the potential number of lives exposed, property loss, and environmental damage. According to the vulnerability index, the Upper Cisadane watershed has high and very high classes of flash flood vulnerability, with ten (10) sub-districts having high vulnerability index classes, and fourteen (14) districts having very high vulnerability index classes. The level of vulnerability in the sub-districts is influenced by the level of social, physical, and economic vulnerability, which has high to very high classes compared to other sub-districts. The vulnerability index class maps from this study are expected to be used as references for local governments and related parties in regional spatial planning and flash flood disaster mitigation planning. Introduction Flash flood disasters can cause physical and non-physical damage. It is caused by floating debris from landslide that occurred around steeply sloping valleys of watersheds and small catchment areas [1–3]. Climate change increases the risk of extreme rainfall, landslides, and flash floods in river basins. The large number of victims affected by flash floods indicates that they cause extensive losses and damage to society. According to several studies, flash flooding is the most devastating disaster and causes the worst damage worldwide. It is relatively fast and occurs within a short time [4–7]. A disaster risk assessment is conducted to identify the negative impacts (potential hazards) that could occur if a disaster occurs. Negative impacts can be seen in the number of affected people, property loss, and environmental damage [8]. Vulnerability is the inability of society to resist and respond to a disaster [8]. The impacts of flash floods in each area depend on the ability of society to respond to a disaster; for instance, a certain area with good socioeconomic status is relatively less vulnerable to disasters and has more efficient mitigation [7,9]. Social, economic, physical, and environmental vulnerabilities are affected by several factors. Therefore, it is necessary to understand the characteristics and vulnerability of society to the impact of hazards [7,10]. Index based vulnerability Assessment is a practical tool that helps compare and rank regions in terms of vulnerability [7]. Vulnerability assessment is an important step in determining community resilience to disasters to plan mitigation and disaster management in flash flood disaster-prone area [11–12]. Corresponding Author: Fitriany Amalia Wardhani Research and Innovation Agency, Indonesia. fitr024@brin.go.id Research Center for Limnology and Water Resources, National © 2024 Wardhani et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license, allowing unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided proper credit is given to the original authors. Think twice before printing this journal paper. Save paper, trees, and Earth! Bogor City and Bogor Regency are most likely to experience flash floods and landslide disasters. In Bogor Regency area, medium to severe landslide problem can occur in 26 (twenty-six) sub-districts, while 14 (fourteen) other sub-districts are most likely to be affected by flash floods or the flow of debris, including Caringin, Ciampea, Cibungbulang, Cigombong, Cijeruk, Ciomas, Dramaga, Kemang, Leuwiliang, Pamijahan, Rancabungur, Rumpin, Tamansari, and Tenjolaya. The 14 sub-districts are prone to flash floods and debris flows and are located in the Upper Cisadane watershed [13]. Heavy rainfall has caused flash floods and landslides in Pamijahan and Leuwiliang Districts, Bogor Regency, West Java, on June 22, 2022. At least 1,335 residents from those districts were affected, 335 of those residents were evacuated, three people were reported to have died, 11 bridges collapsed, and 281 houses were damaged [14]. The flash floods and landslides that occurred in the research area have caused many victims from the community. Research to determine the level of community vulnerability to flash flood disasters is needed for disaster mitigation planning in the study area. The objective of this study was to determine the social, economic, physical, and environmental vulnerability of the community in the Upper Cisadane watershed area based on the modification assessment from Regulation of The Head of National Disaster Management Authority Number 2 of 2012. Materials and Methods Study Area The upper Cisadane Watershed covers about 835.79 km 2 which consists of Bogor City with four sub-districts (West Bogor, South Bogor, Central Bogor, East Bogor) and Bogor Regency with twenty sub-districts (Caringin, Ciampea, Ciawi, Cibungbulang, Cigombong, Cigudeg, Cijeruk, Ciomas, Dramaga, Kemang, Leuwiliang, Leuwisadeng, Megamendung, Nanggung, Pamijahan, Rancabungur, Rumpin, Sukajaya, Tamansari, and Tenjolaya) (Error! Reference source not found.). The Upper Cisadane Watershed has a gently undulating and hilly surface, 45.6% of which has heights varying from 200 to 500 msl (mean sea level) [15]. According to the Land Use Land Cover (LULC), the study area was classified into several classes such as primary forest (0.78%), secondary dryland forest (17.96%), plantation forest (6.41%), shrubs (0.24%), plantations (3.57%), settlements (13.36%), open/vacant land (0.14%), water bodies (0.43%), dry land agriculture (23.29%), mixed dry land agriculture (16.94%), rice fields (16.87%), and mining (0.01%)[15] (Error! Reference source not found.). Topographical conditions and slope steepness in the Cisadane Watershed consist of variations in the slope from upstream to downstream. In the upstream area, the slopes were steeper, gentler, and even flatter in the downstream area. The slope was waver and undulating in the upstream area. In mountainous areas such as the Ciawi and Cijeruk sub-districts, the slope of the land is hilly to steep [16]. (a) (b) Figure 1. Map of the study area: (a) watershed boundary, (b) land cover map, 2020 [15]. Data Collection Sources of secondary data include data on disaster events, population, topography, LULC, protected forest area, spatial planning and regional planning map, land use/cover map, and productive land area from 2014 This journal is ©Wardhani et al. 2024 JPSL, 14(1) | 2 to 2021 was used in this study. These data were obtained from relevant agencies, such as the Regional Agency for Disaster Management, Central Agency on Statistics, Geospatial Information Agency, Ministry of Environment and Forestry (MoEF), Bogor Regency Government website (https://opendata.bogorkab.go.id/), West Java Provincial Government website (https://opendata.jabarprov.go.id/), and the website of each subdistrict in the study areas (Table 1). Table 1. Data types and sources in research area. No Objectives 1 Social vulnerability 2 Economic vulnerability 3 Physical vulnerability 4 Environmental vulnerability Data types Population data (gender, poverty, persons with disabilities, age group) Area of productive land and resident occupations Total of residential houses (permanent, semi-permanent, non-permanent), public facilities (mosque, church, school, etc.) and critical facilities (health facilities) and the prices. Total area of natural forests, mangroves, swamps and shrubs. Data forms Tabular Tabular Tabular Map Sources https://opendata.bogorkab.go.id/, https://opendata.jabarprov.go.id/, Central Agency on Statistics https://opendata.bogorkab.go.id/, https://opendata.jabarprov.go.id/ Central Agency on Statistics https://opendata.bogorkab.go.id/, https://opendata.jabarprov.go.id/ Central Agency on Statistics, Geospatial Information Agency MoEF, Geospatial Information Agency Data Analysis The analysis of the vulnerability index (social, economic, physical, and environmental vulnerability) to flas h flood disasters was performed based on a modification of the analytical method in Regulation of The Head of National Disaster Management Authority Number 2 of 2012 about General Guidelines for Disaster Risk Assessment. In this study, each vulnerability type has different parameters. Each parameter has different classes, which are represented by a specific score: three for the high class, two for the medium class, and one for the low class. After the scoring process, the social, economic, physical, environmental, and total vulnerability index values were divided into five classes: very high (2.4–3), high (1.8–2.4), medium (1.21–1.8), low (0.61–1.2) and very low (0–0.6) [8,11,17]. The parameters used to measure the social vulnerability index were population density, sex ratio, poverty ratio, disability ratio, and the ratio of vulnerable age groups. Population density is the number of people divided by the area in km 2. The sex ratio is the ratio between men and women. The poverty ratio is calculated from the percentage of poor people below the poverty line in Bogor Regency/City based on data derived from Bogor Regency in Figures 2021 and Bogor City in Figures 2021. The ratio of disability is the number of people with disabilities divided by the total population in each sub-district. The vulnerable age group ratio is the number of people aged 0–14 years plus the number of people aged over 65 years divided by the total population of each sub-district [8]. The weights of each parameter and equation of the social vulnerability index are listed in Table 2. Table 2. Social vulnerability index. Classes Weight Score Low Medium High (%) Population density 60 <500 people/km2 500 – 1,000 people/km2 >1,000 people/km2 Sex ratio 10 Class/maximum score class Poverty ratio 10 Disability ratio 10 <20% 20 – 40% >40% Vulnerable age groups ratio 10 Parameters Source : [8] Social vulnerability index analysed based on the following equation [8]: 𝑆𝑜𝑐𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝑉𝑢𝑙𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑏𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝐼𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑥 = (0.6 × 𝑃𝑜𝑝𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑑𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑦) + (0.1 × 𝑆𝑒𝑥 𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜) + (0.1 × 𝑃𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑡𝑦 𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜) +(0.1 × 𝐷𝑖𝑠𝑎𝑏𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜) + (0.1 × 𝑉𝑢𝑙𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑔𝑟𝑜𝑢𝑝𝑠 𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜) (1) http://dx.doi.org/10.29244/jpsl.14.1.1 JPSL, 14(1) | 3 The parameters used in the economic vulnerability index in this study were the area of productive land and vulnerable occupations. These parameters were modified from Regulation of The Head of National Disaster Management Authority Number 2 of 2012, which includes productive land areas and gross regional domestic products (GRDP). The available GRDP parameter data are at the district level, so they do not describe the conditions per sub-district. The productive land area in rupiah (including rice fields and secondary crops) and types of vulnerable occupations are used as parameters for the economic vulnerability index analysis. The weight of each parameter and equation of the economic vulnerability index are listed in Table 3. Table 3. Economic vulnerability index. Classes Weight Score Low Medium High (%) Productive land 60 <50 million 50 – 200 million >200 million Class/maximum score class Vulnerable occupation 40 <20% 20 – 40% >40% Parameters Source : [8,17] Economic vulnerability index analysed based on the following equation [8,17]: 𝐸𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑜𝑚𝑖𝑐 𝑣𝑢𝑙𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑏𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑖𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑥 = (0.6 × 𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑢𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑙𝑎𝑛𝑑) + (0.4 × 𝑉𝑢𝑙𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 𝑜𝑐𝑐𝑢𝑝𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛) (2) The physical parameters of the building, such as residential houses (permanent, semi-permanent, nonpermanent), public facilities (mosques, churches, schools, etc.), and critical facilities (health facilities) are the three parameters used for the physical vulnerability index analysis. Residential house density is the number of residential units per hectare multiplied by the unit price of each type of house. The weights of each parameter and the physical vulnerability index equation are listed in Table 4. Moreover, land cover, which consists of natural forests, mangroves, swamps, and shrubs, is used as a parameter for environmental vulnerability index analysis. The weights of each parameter and the equation for the environmental vulnerability index are listed in Table 5. Table 4. Physical vulnerability index. Classes Weight Score Low Medium High (%) Residential house 40 <400 million 400 – 800 million >800 million Public facilities 30 <500 million 500 million – 1 billion >1 billion Class/maximum score class Critical facilities 30 <500 million 500 million – 1 billion >1 billion Parameters Source : [8] Physical vulnerability index analysed based on the following equation[8]: 𝑃ℎ𝑦𝑠𝑖𝑐 𝑣𝑢𝑙𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑏𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑖𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑥 = (0.4 × 𝑅𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑑𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑙 ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑠𝑒) + (0.3 × 𝑃𝑢𝑏𝑙𝑖𝑐 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑒𝑠) +(0.3 × 𝐶𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑒𝑠) (3) Table 5. Environmental vulnerability index. Parameters Weight Classes (ha) Score (%) Low Medium High Protected forests 30 Natural forests 30 Mangrove 10 Shrubs 10 Swamps 20 <20 20 – 50 <25 25 – 75 <10 10 – 30 <10 10 – 30 <5 5 – 20 >50 >75 >30 Class/maximum score class >30 >20 Source : [8] Environmental vulnerability index analysed based on the following equation[8]: 𝐸𝑛𝑣𝑖𝑟𝑜𝑛𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑣𝑢𝑙𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑏𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑖𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑥 = (0.3 × 𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑡𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑠) + (0.3 × 𝑁𝑎𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑎𝑙 𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑠) +(0.3 × 𝑀𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑟𝑜𝑣𝑒) + (0.1 × 𝑆ℎ𝑟𝑢𝑏𝑠) + (0.2 × 𝑆𝑤𝑎𝑚𝑝𝑠) (4) The results from the analysis of social, economic, physical, and environmental vulnerability indices were then converted into a flash flood vulnerability index based on the following equation [8]: This journal is ©Wardhani et al. 2024 JPSL, 14(1) | 4 𝐹𝑙𝑎𝑠ℎ 𝑓𝑙𝑜𝑜𝑑 𝑣𝑢𝑙𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑏𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑖𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑥 = (0.4 × 𝑠𝑜𝑐𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝑣𝑢𝑙𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑏𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑖𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑥) + (0.25 × 𝑝ℎ𝑦𝑠𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝑣𝑢𝑙𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑏𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑖𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑥) + (0.25 × 𝑒𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑜𝑚𝑖𝑐 𝑣𝑢𝑙𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑏𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑖𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑥) +(0.1 × 𝑒𝑛𝑣𝑖𝑟𝑜𝑛𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑣𝑢𝑙𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑏𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑖𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑥) (5) Eventually, the social, economic, physical, environmental, and flash flood disaster vulnerability indices were displayed in a vulnerability index map using ArcGIS 10.3 software. Results and Discussion Social Vulnerability Index Based on the social vulnerability index, the study area was divided into three classes: medium, high, and very high. The Sukajaya sub-district was identified as medium, two sub-districts (Nanggung and Cigudeg) as high, and other sub-districts as very high (Table 6). The social vulnerability index is highly affected by population density. The highest weight of the parameter is the population density, which is approximately 60%. Therefore, the sub-district with more than 1,000 person/km2 has very high vulnerability, while the sub-district with a density between <500 person/km 2 and 1,000 person/km2 has medium to high vulnerability, such as the Nanggung, Cigudeg, and Sukajaya sub-districts. The social vulnerability maps have three different colors: red, very high vulnerability; orange, high vulnerability; and yellow, medium vulnerability (Figure 2a). Table 6. Social Vulnerability Index in the Upper Cisadane Watershed. Population density (people/km2) Sex ratio Poverty ratio Disability ratio Vulnerable age groups ratio Social vulnerability index Sum Score Sum 618.28 2 110.64 Score Sum Score Sum Score Sum Score Score Class 3 7.69 1 1.72 1 28.8 2 1.9 Pamijahan 1,258.31 3 High 107.64 3 7.69 1 7.35 1 29 2 2.5 3 West Bogor 7,112.24 Very high 3 102.1 3 6.68 1 0.02 1 29.94 2 2.5 4 South Bogor Very high 6,622.20 3 104.9 3 6.68 1 0.02 1 29.94 2 2.5 Very high 5 6 Central Bogor 11,839.85 3 101.3 3 6.68 1 0.02 1 29.94 2 2.5 Very high East Bogor 10,278.52 3 102.9 3 6.68 1 0.02 1 29.94 2 2.5 Very high 7 Caringin 2,778.03 3 107.74 3 7.69 1 12.01 1 28.9 2 2.5 Very high 8 Ciampea 5,095.61 3 106.36 3 7.69 1 3.68 1 28.04 2 2.5 Very high 9 Ciawi 1,481.02 3 106.73 3 7.69 1 7.6 1 28.27 2 2.5 Very high 10 Cibungbulang 3,789.49 3 107.99 3 7.69 1 11.52 1 28.33 2 2.5 Very high 11 Cigombong 1,016.46 3 106.37 3 7.69 1 4.66 1 30.01 2 2.5 Very high 12 Cigudeg 754.07 2 110.48 3 7.69 1 2.94 1 28.71 2 1.9 High 13 Cijeruk 1,912.81 3 109.55 3 7.69 1 3.68 1 30.87 2 2.5 Very high 14 Ciomas 9,141.34 3 104.05 3 7.69 1 8.09 1 27.21 2 2.5 Very high 15 Dramaga 4,364.33 3 106.67 3 7.69 1 2.94 1 29.67 2 2.5 Very high 16 Kemang 3,120.26 3 104.37 3 7.69 1 5.39 1 27.65 2 2.5 Very high 17 Leuwiliang 1,369.55 3 107.07 3 7.69 1 7.84 1 28.71 2 2.5 Very high 18 Leuwisadeng 2,185.93 3 109.46 3 7.69 1 2.7 1 26.67 2 2.5 Very high 19 Megamendung 1,448.38 3 110 3 7.69 1 5.15 1 29.29 2 2.5 Very high 20 Rancabungur 2,678.03 3 104.37 3 7.69 1 1.72 1 29.35 2 2.5 Very high 21 Rumpin 1,066.99 3 110.82 3 7.69 1 2.7 1 28.12 2 2.5 Very high 22 Sukajaya 428.49 1 110.14 3 7.69 1 2.45 1 28.35 2 1.3 Medium 23 Tamansari 3,173.46 3 106.79 3 7.69 1 3.19 1 28.66 2 2.5 Very high 24 Tenjolaya 1,772.00 3 107.64 3 7.69 1 2.7 1 29.21 2 2.5 Very high No. Sub-districts 1 Nanggung 2 Source of data: [17–21] Population density greatly affects the social vulnerability of an area to a disaster. Areas with a denser population have a greater chance of social loss from disasters than others because flash flood disasters occur in a relatively short time in a limited area [5,22]. In addition, the number of people who are vulnerable to flash flood disasters is equivalent to the workload of rescue teams in the event of a flood disaster [17]. The http://dx.doi.org/10.29244/jpsl.14.1.1 JPSL, 14(1) | 5 high population density in the study area is caused by various factors. The research area is directly adjacent to the city area, close to the Central Business District (CBD) area and state universities, and is included in the Jabodetabekpunjur area, which has easy access to highway infrastructure (primary arterial roads and toll roads) that are integrated with suburban areas. In addition, the ease of finding large tracts of land at relatively lower prices compared to the surrounding cities has caused many investors to build housing, increasing population density [15,23]. Economic Vulnerability Index The parameters of productive lands were paddy, corn, soybeans, and peanut fields. The income per hectare from each type of productive land uses the data from production values and production costs per planting season per hectare of lowland rice, upland rice, corn, and soybeans in 2017 [18]. The production value per hectare is IDR 4,955,540, which has the following details: IDR 2,284,080 for paddy fields, IDR 4,188,390 for cornfields, and IDR 1,228,460 for soybean field [18,24]. The parameter of job type (profession/occupation) is the type of occupation that is considered more vulnerable to flash floods, including the service sector, small businesses sector, daily wage employees, precarious workers, farmers, and fishermen[18] . The number of residents with vulnerable jobs in Bogor City is the total number of workers in the entire region of Bogor who work in the service sectors, daily wage employees, and small to medium business sectors. To understand economic vulnerability in the study area, there are three classes of economic vulnerability (medium, high, and very high). West Bogor, Central Bogor, South Bogor, and East Bogor are identified as medium, six sub-districts (Caringin, Cigombong, Cigudeg, Ciomas, Sukajaya, and Tenjolaya) as very high, and other sub-districts as high (Table 7 and Figure 2b). Table 7. The economic vulnerability index of Upper Cisadane Watershed. No. Sub district 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Nanggung Pamijahan West Bogor South Bogor Central Bogor East Bogor Caringin Ciampea Ciawi Cibungbulang Cigombong Cigudeg Cijeruk Ciomas Dramaga Kemang Leuwiliang Leuwisadeng Megamendung Rancabungur Rumpin Sukajaya Tamansari Tenjolaya Paddy field (Ha) (2020) 3,578 6,580 0 250 0 141 1,926 1,007 704 2,183 1,301 2,832 1,366 366 268 194 3,920 1,705 274 240 2,652 2,753 658 2,169 Productive lands for corn and soybean (Ha) (2020) 23 0 0 0 0 0 24 27 57 13 25 10 185 10 10 20 24 0 46 60 29 1 29 7 The total of productive lands (Million) The score of productive lands The residents with vulnerable job (%) Score Economic vulnerability index Economic vulnerability class 17,730.92 32,607.45 0 1,238.89 0 698.73 9,544.37 4,990.23 3,488.70 10,817.94 6,530.93 14,034.09 7,229.99 1,813.73 1,328.08 961.37 19,425.72 8,449.20 1,357.82 1,189.33 13,217.48 13,643.83 3,260.75 10,748.57 3 3 1 1 1 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 9.67 13.71 29.92 29.92 29.92 29.92 23.94 14.02 19.13 13.37 20.24 27.15 13.27 20.58 14.22 7.96 14.02 14.65 17.06 8.42 15.33 33.99 11.45 35.06 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 2.2 2.2 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 2.6 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.6 2.6 2.2 2.6 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.6 2.2 2.6 High High Medium Medium Medium Medium Very high High High High Very high Very high High Very high High High High High High High High Very high High Very high Source of data : [18–19] This journal is ©Wardhani et al. 2024 JPSL, 14(1) | 6 In the economic vulnerability index, the highest value of the parameter is the weight of productive land (60%), while the sub-district in Bogor City with a paddy field of less than 500 ha has a medium vulnerability index. Sub-districts with a high number of productive lands and high number of farmers have high vulnerability. Sub-districts with very high vulnerability had a medium class of vulnerable occupation (20–40%). The agricultural sector influences economic vulnerability to natural disasters, especially floods and droughts [25– 26]. Land use in the study area is dominated by dry-land agriculture (23.29%), mixed dry-land agriculture (16,94%), and rice fields (16.87%) [27]. Thus, the agricultural sector contributes to economic vulnerability both in the research area and in Bogor Regency [15]. This is also related to food security in the study area; if agricultural land is damaged by flash floods, economic stability and food security will be disrupted. In addition to disrupting the economy, flash flood disasters also disrupt the movement of residents in their daily activities [28]. The duration of flash flood disasters also affects damage to agricultural land [29]. Physical Vulnerability Index The components of the physical vulnerability index for flash flood disasters are the density of residential houses (permanent, semi-permanent, and non-permanent), public infrastructure (prayer building and school building), and critical facilities (health facility) [18]. In this study, this assumption was used to determine the housing cost. The permanent house is valued at IDR 200,000,000, the semi-permanent house at IDR 150,000,000, and the non-permanent house at IDR 75,000,000. Public infrastructure was valued at IDR 200,000,000, while critical facilities were valued at IDR 250,000,000 (Table 8). Table 8. Physical vulnerability index of Upper Cisadane Watershed. No. Sub district 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10 12 14 15 16 17 18 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Nanggung Pamijahan West Bogor South Bogor Central Bogor East Bogor Caringin Ciampea Ciawi Cibungbulang Cigombong Cigudeg Cijeruk Ciomas Dramaga Kemang Leuwiliang Leuwisadeng Megamendung Rancabungur Rumpin Sukajaya Tamansari Tenjolaya Housing density Public facility Critical facilities Total Score Total Price (Million) Score Total Price (Million) Score 399.38 1,033.80 1,456.74 3,218.24 6,939.24 4,678.62 1,956.80 3,841.71 984.55 2,757.64 1,046.47 611.97 1,584.32 5,062.53 3,840.23 2,816.98 1,070.31 1,654.62 1,106.48 2,021.32 1,029.03 322.51 2,259.32 1,458.06 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 3 3 104 418 318 616 221 137 197 164 339 292 207 150 92 155 160 139 306 136 133 140 251 232 341 271 20,800 83,600 63,600 123,200 44,200 27,400 39,400 32,800 67,800 58,400 41,400 30,000 18,400 31,000 32,000 27,800 61,200 27,200 26,600 28,000 50,200 46,400 68,200 54,200 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 39 18 38 14 11 4 13 3 8 10 5 13 17 7 30 2 8 4 7 4 4 19 500 750 9,750 4,500 9,500 3,500 2,750 1,000 3,250 750 2,000 2,500 1,250 3,250 4,250 1,750 7,500 500 2,000 1,000 1,750 1,000 1,000 4,750 1 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 Physical vulnerability The Total Class Score 1.6 Medium 2.7 Very high 3 Very high 3 Very high 3 Very high 3 Very high 3 Very high 3 Very high 3 Very high 2.7 Very high 3 Very high 2.6 Very high 3 Very high 3 Very high 3 Very high 3 Very high 3 Very high 2.4 Very high 3 Very high 3 Very high 3 Very high 2.2 High 3 Very high 3 Very high Source of data: [18] Physical vulnerability analysis shows that there are three physical vulnerability classes in the study area: medium, high, and very high. The Nanggung sub-district is medium, the Sukajaya sub-district is high, and other sub-districts are relatively high. The highest weight of parameter measurement was the weight of housing (permanent, semi-permanent, and non-permanent), with a score of 40% (Figure 2c). http://dx.doi.org/10.29244/jpsl.14.1.1 JPSL, 14(1) | 7 Settlement location affects the level of damage, as well as access and movement of people when a disaster occurs. Settlements in rural areas in mountains are separated and scattered, which can lead to difficulties accessing residents and rescue teams [28,30]. The effects of flash flood disasters not only affect the damage to each house but also the surrounding environment and infrastructure in one village. This was due to strong flash flood currents accompanied by other materials, causing more severe damage to the environment [31]. Environmental Vulnerability Index The components of the environmental vulnerability index parameters used to flash flood disasters, such as natural forests, mangroves, swamps, and shrubs, are obtained from the LULC Map 2020 from MoEF in Figure 1. The results of the environmental vulnerability index are listed in Table 9. Three classes of environmental vulnerability were identified in the study area: high, medium, and low. The Nanggung and Leuwiliang subdistricts have high environmental vulnerability. Pamijahan, Caringin, Ciawi, Cigombong, Cijeruk, Sukajaya, Tamansari and Tenjolaya are medium, while other sub districts are low (Figure 2d). The protected forest in the study area consisted of primary and secondary dry forests with varying vegetation. The environmental vulnerability index in the study area is influenced by the area of protected forest and natural forest in the upstream area of the river. Flash floods can occur from the accumulation and rapid retention of water from upstream areas owing to landslides and heavy rains. The water flow can carry material in its path, so it has the potential to damage upstream areas, which are usually dominated by forests [2,31]. Therefore, sub-districts with protected forest areas and natural forests upstream are more vulnerable than other sub-districts. Table 9. Environmental vulnerability index of Upper Cisadane Watershed Protected forest Nature forest Mangrove Shrub land Swamp Score Area (Ha) Score Area (Ha) Area (Ha) Area (Ha) Score Areas (Ha) Score Total Score Class 161.98 3 4,206.35 3 0 1 19.29 2 0 1 2.3 High 0 1 3,723.79 3 0 1 0 1 0 1 1.6 Medium West Bogor 0 1 0.00 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 Low 4 South Bogor 0 1 0.00 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 Low 5 Central Bogor 0 1 0.00 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 Low 6 East Bogor 0 1 0.00 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 Low 7 Caringin 0 1 2,588.95 3 0 1 0 1 0 1 1.6 Medium 8 Ciampea 0 1 0.00 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 Low 9 Ciawi 0 1 401.62 3 0 1 0 1 0 1 1.6 Medium 10 Cibungbulang 0 1 0.00 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 Low 11 Cigombong 0 1 941.34 3 0 1 0 1 0 1 1.6 Medium 12 Cigudeg 0 1 0.00 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 Low 13 Cijeruk 0 1 797.65 3 0 1 139.14 3 0 1 1.8 Medium 14 Ciomas 0 1 0.00 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 Low 15 Dramaga 0 1 0.00 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 Low 16 Kemang 0 1 0.00 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 Low 17 Leuwiliang 20.76 2 386.27 3 0 1 0 1 0 1 1.9 High 18 Leuwisadeng 0 1 0.00 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 Low 19 Megamendung 0 1 0.00 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 Low 20 Rancabungur 0 1 0.00 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 Low 21 Rumpin 0 1 0.00 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 Low 22 Sukajaya 0 1 68.28 2 0 1 0 1 0 1 1.3 Medium 23 Tamansari 0 1 998.67 3 0 1 46.08 3 0 1 1.8 Medium 24 Tenjolaya 0 1 994.48 3 0 1 0 1 0 1 1.6 Medium No. Sub district Area (Ha) 1 Nanggung 2 Pamijahan 3 Environmental vulnerability Source of data: [27] Flash Floods Vulnerability Index Upper Cisadane Watershed The flash flood vulnerability index in the Upper Cisadane watershed was calculated from the social, economic, physical, and environmental vulnerability indices based on the formula in Regulation of The Head of National This journal is ©Wardhani et al. 2024 JPSL, 14(1) | 8 Disaster Management Authority Number 2 of 2012. The calculation results from Equation (5) are listed in Table 10. Table 10. Flash Floods Vulnerability Index of Upper Cisadane Watershed. Social vulnerability Physical vulnerability Economic vulnerability Environmental vulnerability The total of vulnerability Nanggung Weight 1.90 Class High Weight 1.60 Class Medium Weight 2.20 Class High Weight 2.30 Class High Weight 1.94 Class High 2 Pamijahan 2.50 Very high 2.70 Very high 2.20 High 1.60 Medium 2.39 High 3 West Bogor 2.50 Very high 3.00 Very high 1.40 Medium 1.00 Low 2.20 High 4 South Bogor 2.50 Very high 3.00 Very high 1.40 Medium 1.00 Low 2.20 High 5 Central Bogor 2.50 Very high 3.00 Very high 1.40 Medium 1.00 Low 2.20 High 6 East Bogor 2.50 Very high 3.00 Very high 1.40 Medium 1.00 Low 2.20 High 7 Caringin 2.50 Very high 3.00 Very high 2.60 Very high 1.60 Medium 2.56 Very high 8 Ciampea 2.50 Very high 3.00 Very high 2.20 High 1.00 Low 2.40 Very high 9 Ciawi 2.50 Very high 3.00 Very high 2.20 High 1.60 Medium 2.46 Very high 10 Cibungbulang 2.50 Very high 2.70 Very high 2.20 High 1.00 Low 2.33 High 11 Cigombong 2.50 Very high 3.00 Very high 2.60 Very high 1.60 Medium 2.56 Very high 12 Cigudeg 1.90 High 2.60 Very high 2.60 Very high 1.00 Low 2.16 High 13 Cijeruk 2.50 Very high 3.00 Very high 2.20 High 1.80 Medium 2.48 Very high 14 Ciomas 2.50 Very high 3.00 Very high 2.60 Very high 1.00 Low 2.50 Very high 15 Dramaga 2.50 Very high 3.00 Very high 2.20 High 1.00 Low 2.40 Very high 16 Kemang 2.50 Very high 3.00 Very high 2.20 High 1.00 Low 2.40 Very high 17 Leuwiliang 2.50 Very high 3.00 Very high 2.20 High 1.90 High 2.49 Very high 18 Leuwisadeng 2.50 Very high 2.40 Very high 2.20 High 1.00 Low 2.25 High 19 Megamendung 2.50 Very high 3.00 Very high 2.20 High 1.00 Low 2.40 Very high 20 Rancabungur 2.50 Very high 3.00 Very high 2.20 High 1.00 Low 2.40 Very high 21 Rumpin 2.50 Very high 3.00 Very high 2.20 High 1.00 Low 2.40 Very high 22 Sukajaya 1.30 Medium 2.20 High 2.60 Very high 1.30 Medium 1.85 High 23 Tamansari 2.50 Very high 3.00 Very high 2.20 High 1.80 Medium 2.48 Very high 24 Tenjolaya 2.50 Very high 3.00 Very high 2.60 Very high 1.60 Medium 2.56 Very high No Sub district 1 Calculation of the flash flood disaster index based on Regulation of The Head of National Disaster Management Authority Number 12 of 2012 indicated that there are two classes of vulnerability (high and very high). According to the vulnerability map of the Upper Cisadane Watershed to flash flood disasters, orange color represents high vulnerability of the sub-district, while red color indicates very high vulnerability of the sub-district. There are ten sub-districts (Nanggung, Pamijahan, West Bogor, South Bogor, Central Bogor, East Bogor, Cibungbulang, Cigudeg, Leuwisadeng, and Sukajaya) are categorized into high vulnerability, while 14 sub districts (Caringin, Ciampea, Ciawi, Cigombong, Cijeruk, Ciomas, Dramaga, Kemang, Leuwiliang, Megamendung, Rancabungur, Rumpin, Tamansari, and Tenjolaya) are categorized into very high class (Figure 3). All sub-districts in the Upper Cisadane Watershed are highly vulnerable to flash floods, based on four types of vulnerability analysis (social, economic, physical, and environmental indexes). Very high vulnerability indicated that the social, economic, physical, and environmental conditions in the subdistrict were relatively more vulnerable than the sub-districts with high vulnerability. Each parameter in social, economic, physical, and environmental vulnerability affects the other. The population density parameter of social vulnerability affects land requirements, infrastructure facilities, housing, and livelihood, as well as economic, physical, and environmental vulnerability [15]. Local governments can lower the value of the vulnerability index by assisting the community in improving the economy and mitigating efforts by carrying out physical and non-physical activities. Increasing economic value can help communities increase agricultural productivity after disasters. The local government can also provide educational activities to the community for socializing the potential hazards of landslides and flash floods in the research area as non-physical activities [32–33]. Vulnerability analysis of flash floods is important for creating a disaster mitigation map and a regional spatial planning map (RTRW) of Bogor Regency and Bogor City. http://dx.doi.org/10.29244/jpsl.14.1.1 JPSL, 14(1) | 9 Figure 2. Vulnerability maps of the Upper Cisadane Watershed: a) Social vulnerability, (b) Economic vulnerability, c) Physical vulnerability, d) Environmental vulnerability. Figure 3. Vulnerability index map of the Upper Cisadane Watershed to flash flood disasters. Conclusions The social, economic, physical, and environmental vulnerability of the community in the Upper Cisadane watershed area needed for disaster mitigation planning in the study area. The study found variations in vulnerability indices for flash floods ranging from moderate to very high. It is worth considering whether these findings are reasonable, given the physical and demographic conditions of the study area. Special attention needs to be given to areas with very high vulnerability, which include districts Kecamatan Caringin, Ciampea, Ciawi, Cigombong, Cijeruk, Ciomas, Dramaga, Kemang, Leuwiliang, Megamendung, Rancabungur, Rumpin, Tamansari, and Tenjolaya are very high. In conclusion, it is hoped that local authorities will consider these study findings seriously and use them to plan measures to reduce community vulnerability to flash floods. This journal is ©Wardhani et al. 2024 JPSL, 14(1) | 10 Regulation of The Head of National Disaster Management Authority Number 2 of 2012 used two parameters of economic vulnerability: productive land area and gross regional domestic product (GRDP). The available GRDP parameter data do not describe conditions per district; therefore, it is modified by the number of people with vulnerable jobs [17]. This modification is expected to show the real economic conditions of the community at the sub-district and village levels. The flash flood disaster vulnerability map from this research sufficiently describes the real conditions, where sub-districts with very high flash flood disaster vulnerability are affected by flash floods. Based on this map, the upstream area is prone to flash flood disasters. Research in downstream areas needs to be conducted to determine the level of vulnerability to flash floods downstream. Acknowledgements I would like to express my gratitude to SAINTEK Scholarship, National Research and Innovation Agency (BRIN), and IPB University for their support in this study. References 1. Tao, J.; Barros, A.P. Prospects for Flash Flood Forecasting in Mountainous Regions - An Investigation of Tropical Storm Fay in the Southern Appalachians. Journal of Hydrology 2013, 506, 69–89, doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2013.02.052. 2. Sene, K. Flash Floods : Forecasting and Warning; Springer: Dordrecht, UK, 2013; ISBN 9789400751637. 3. Azmeri; Hadihardaja, I.K.; Vadiya, R. Identification of Flash Flood Hazard Zones in Mountainous Small Watershed of Aceh Besar Regency, Aceh Province, Indonesia. The Egyptian Journal of Remote Sensing and Space Sciences 2016, 19, 143–160, doi:10.1016/j.ejrs.2015.11.001. 4. Hapuarachchi, H.A.P.; Wang, Q.J.; Pagano, T.C. A Review of Advances in Flash Flood Forecasting. Hydrological Processes 2011, 25, 2771–2784, doi:10.1002/hyp.8040. 5. Terti, G.; Ruin, I.; Anquetin, S.; Gourley, J.J. Dynamic Vulnerability Factors for Impact-Based Flash Flood Prediction. Natural Hazards 2015, 79, 1481–1497, doi:10.1007/s11069-015-1910-8. 6. Cutter, S.L.; Emrich, C.T.; Gall, M.; Reeves, R. Flash Flood Risk and the Paradox of Urban Development. Natural Hazards Review 2018, 19, 1–12, doi:10.1061/(asce)nh.1527-6996.0000268. 7. Khajehei, S.; Ahmadalipour, A.; Shao, W.; Moradkhani, H. A Place-Based Assessment of Flash Flood Hazard and Vulnerability in the Contiguous United States. Scientific Reports 2020, 10, 1–12, doi:10.1038/s41598-019-57349z. 8. BNPB (Badan Nasional Penanggulangan Bencana). Peraturan Kepala BNPB No. 02 Tahun 2012 Tentang Pedoman Umum Pengkajian Risiko Bencana; BNPB: Jakarta, 2012; 9. Klein, R.J.T.; Nicholls, R.J.; Thomalla, F. Resilience to Natural Hazards: How Useful Is This Concept? Environmental Hazards 2003, 5, 35–45, doi:10.1016/j.hazards.2004.02.001. 10. Peduzzi, P.; Dao, H.; Herold, C.; Mouton, F. Assessing Global Exposure and Vulnerability towards Natural Hazards: The Disaster Risk Index. Natural Hazards and Earth System Science 2009, 9, 1149–1159, doi:10.5194/nhess-91149-2009. 11. Fatimah, E. Analisis Tingkat Kerentanan Dan Kapasitas Masyarakat Terhadap Bencana Banjir Bandang Kecamatan Celala Kabupaten Aceh Tengah. Pascasarjana Universitas Syiah Kuala 2015, 8, 33–40. 12. Karagiorgos, K.; Thaler, T.; Hübl, J.; Maris, F.; Fuchs, S. Multi-Vulnerability Analysis for Flash Flood Risk Management. Natural Hazards 2016, 82, 63–87, doi:10.1007/s11069-016-2296-y. 13. BPBD (Badan Penanggulangan Bencana Daerah) Kabupaten Bogor. 40 Kecamatan Di Bogor Rawan LongsorBandang, Ini Datanya Available online: https://bpbd.bogorkab.go.id/40-kecamatan-di-bogor-rawan-longsorbanjir-bandang-ini-datanya/ (accessed on 17 October 2022). 14. BPBD (Badan Penanggulangan Bencana Daerah) Kabupaten Bogor. Update Data Bencana Banjir Bandang Dan Tanah Longsor Kecamatan Pamijahan Dan Leuwiliang. Available online: https://bpbd.bogorkab.go.id/updatedata-bencana-banjir-bandang-tanah-longsor-kecamatan-pamijahan-leuwiliang-2/ (accessed on 8 November 2022). http://dx.doi.org/10.29244/jpsl.14.1.1 JPSL, 14(1) | 11 15. Trimarwanti, T.K.E. Evaluasi Perubahan Penggunaan Lahan Kecamatan Di Daerah Aliran Sungai Cisadane Kabupaten Bogor. Jurnal Pembangunan Wilayah & Kota 2014, 10, 43–58, doi:10.14710/pwk.v10i1.7632. 16. Sudinda, T.W. Penentuan Debit Andalan Dengan Metoda F J Mock Di Daerah Aliran Sungai Ciliwung. Jurnal Air Indonesia 2021, 12, 15–24, doi:10.29122/jai.v12i2.4362. 17. Aisha, M.; Miladan, N.; Utomo, R.P. Kajian Kerentanan Bencana Pada Kawasan Berisiko Banjir DAS Pepe Hilir, Surakarta. Jurnal Pembangunan Wilayah dan Perencanaan Partisipatif 2019, 14, 205–219. 18. BPS Kabupaten Bogor Kabupaten Bogor Dalam Angka 2021; 2021st ed.; BPS Kabupaten Bogor: Kabupaten Bogor, 2021; ISBN 0215-417X. 19. BPS (Badan Pusat Statistik) Kota Bogor. Kota Bogor Dalam Angka (Bogor Municipality in Figures) 2021; 2021st ed.; BPS Kota Bogor: Bogor, ID, 2021; ISBN 0215.5931. 20. Dinas Kependudukan dan Pencatatan Sipil Kabupaten Bogor. Jumlah Penduduk Disabilitas Berdasarkan Kecamatan Jenis Disabilitas Kabupaten Bogor. Available online: https://opendata.bogorkab.go.id/dataset/2738a003-671c-402b-93be-eeaafb9e7aec (accessed on 7 November 2022). 21. Dinas Kependudukan dan Pencatatan Sipil Kabupaten Bogor. Jumlah Penduduk Menurut Jenis Kelamin & Kelompok Umur Kabupaten Bogor Available online: https://opendata.bogorkab.go.id/dataset/ada95651-358643f8-bd74-e0835cfcb829 (accessed on 7 November 2022). 22. You, W.J.; Zhang, Y.L. Evaluation of Social Vulnerability to Floods in Huaihe River Basin: A Methodology Based on Catastrophe Theory. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences Discussions 2015, 3, 4937–4965, doi:10.5194/nhessd-3-4937-2015. 23. Pravitasari, A.E.; Saizen, I.; Rustiadi, E. Towards Resilience of Jabodetabek Megacity: Developing Local Sustainability Index with Considering Local Spatial Interdependency. International Journal of Sustainable Future for Human Security 2016, 4, 27–34, doi:10.24910/jsustain/4.1/2734. 24. BPS (Badan Pusat Statistik). Nilai Produksi Dan Biaya Produksi per Musim Tanam per Hektar Budidaya Tanaman Padi Sawah, Padi Ladang, Jagung, Dan Kedelai. 2017. Available online: https://www.bps.go.id/statictable/2019/04/10/2055/nilai-produksi-dan-biaya-produksi-per-musim-tanam-perhektar-budidaya-tanaman-padi-sawah-padi-ladang-jagung-dan-kedelai-2017.html (accessed on 31 October 2022). 25. Huang, D.; Zhang, R.; Huo, Z.; Mao, F.; E, Y.; Zheng, W. An Assessment of Multidimensional Flood Vulnerability at the Provincial Scale in China Based on the DEA Method. Natural Hazards 2012, 64, 1575–1586, doi:10.1007/s11069-012-0323-1. 26. Hastanti, B.W.; Hutapea, F.J. Analysis of Vulnerability Levels to the Flash Flood Based on Social Economic and Institutional Factors in Wasior, Teluk Wondama, West Papua. Jurnal Wasian 2020, 7, 25–38, doi:10.20886/jwas.v7i1.4785. 27. KLHK (Kementerian Lingkungan Hidup dan Kehutanan). Peta Penggunaan/Penutupan Lahan DAS Cisadane Hulu Tahun 2020; : KLHK: Jakarta, ID, 2020; 28. Bari, M.A.; Alam, L.; Alam, M.M.; Rahman, L.F.; Pereira, J.J. Estimation of Losses and Damages Caused by Flash Floods in the Commercial Area of Kajang, Selangor, Malaysia. Arabian Journal of Geosciences 2021, 14, 1–14. 29. Wang, X.; Liu, Z.; Chen, H. Investigating Flood Impact on Crop Production under a Comprehensive and Spatially Explicit Risk Evaluation Framework. Agriculture 2022, 12, doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12040484. 30. Sharma, T.P.P.; Zhang, J.; Khanal, N.R.; Prodhan, F.A.; Nanzad, L.; Zhang, D.; Nepal, P. A Geomorphic Approach for Identifying Flash Flood Potential Areas in the East Rapti River Basin of Nepal. ISPRS International Journal of GeoInformation 2021, 10, doi:10.3390/ijgi10040247. 31. Laudan, J.; Zöller, G.; Thieken, A.H. Flash Floods versus River Floods-a Comparison of Psychological Impacts and Implications for Precautionary Behaviour. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences 2020, 20, 999–1023, doi:10.5194/nhess-20-999-2020. 32. Gruntfest, E.; Handmer, J. Coping With Flash Floods NATO Science Series; Gruntfest, E.; Handmer, J.; Eds.; Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht: Ravello, 2001; ISBN 9780792368267. 33. Thanh Thi Pham, N.; Nong, D.; Raghavan Sathyan, A.; Garschagen, M. Vulnerability Assessment of Households to Flash Floods and Landslides in the Poor Upland Regions of Vietnam. Climate Risk Management 2020, 28, 100215, doi:10.1016/j.crm.2020.100215. This journal is ©Wardhani et al. 2024 JPSL, 14(1) | 12