84 M Kammerbauer and C Wamsler
In this chapter, vulnerability is understood as ‘the characteristics and
circumstances of a community, system or asset that make it susceptible to
the damaging effects of a hazard’ (UNDRR). Disaster studies oriented on
human ecology show that the outcomes of disasters are rooted in the everyday lives of those impacted by them (Susman et al. 1983). The confluence
of historic root causes, dynamic factors, and contextual uncertainty can,
in this context, be understood as the process that ‘drives’ vulnerability.
One principal cause for vulnerability is the lack of access to resources (e.g.
disaster insurance) required to cope with a disaster. This is influenced by
variables including social status, occupation, ethnicity, gender, disabilities,
health, age, and migration background (Wisner et al. 2004, p. 11). Viewed
from this perspective, vulnerability can be brought into relation with community-wide social and political structures, while indicating to what extent
households can cope with processes of change. Social networks are also crucial in this context as they can reduce vulnerability by providing related
support (Chambers 1989; Bohle 2001, pp. 3–5). Vulnerability can therefore
be understood as a dynamic process, which is embedded within the respective social, political, and economic context. Its root causes impair access to
resources required for adequate means of risk reduction and adaptation to
rapid onset or long-term change in the context of environmental risk.
Case study context and methods
During May and June 2013, strong and persistent precipitation of up to
300 per cent of the monthly average led to multiple floods in communities in
northern Bavaria, eastern Germany as well as Czechia. As a result, a disaster was officially declared across eight German federal states and 80,000 residents receive an evacuation notice on 10 June 2013. The regional authority
task force in Deggendorf coordinated the local response and 6,000 residents
were notified to evacuate. Along the Danube and the Isar rivers, floodwaters rose up to 8 meters above normal levels. Two dikes breached along the
Danube and the Isar, flooding the adjacent landscape. Floodwaters submerged the Fischerdorf and Natternberg areas of Deggendorf, reaching
2 meters in height.
While first responders tried to repair the breached dike, heating oil tanks
and supply lines in Natternberg and Fischerdorf were ruptured by the flood.
Oil merged with standing floodwaters for up to 18 days, penetrating deep into
walls, contaminating buildings. In the Deggendorf region, nearly 1,000 houses
were impacted, among them 600 in Fischerdorf and 90 in Natternberg
(Kammerbauer & Kaltenbach 2014; Landratsamt Deggendorf 2017b).
The combination of floodwaters and heating oil led to an exceptional
compound disaster that affected the population unevenly throughout the
flooded area. In cooperation with the Rural Development Agency, publicly
appointed expert surveyors were tasked with providing consultation to
impacted homeowners. Due to the severity and depth of oil contamination
In this chapter, vulnerability is understood as ‘the characteristics and
circumstances of a community, system or asset that make it susceptible to
the damaging effects of a hazard’ (UNDRR). Disaster studies oriented on
human ecology show that the outcomes of disasters are rooted in the everyday lives of those impacted by them (Susman et al. 1983). The confluence
of historic root causes, dynamic factors, and contextual uncertainty can,
in this context, be understood as the process that ‘drives’ vulnerability.
One principal cause for vulnerability is the lack of access to resources (e.g.
disaster insurance) required to cope with a disaster. This is influenced by
variables including social status, occupation, ethnicity, gender, disabilities,
health, age, and migration background (Wisner et al. 2004, p. 11). Viewed
from this perspective, vulnerability can be brought into relation with community-wide social and political structures, while indicating to what extent
households can cope with processes of change. Social networks are also crucial in this context as they can reduce vulnerability by providing related
support (Chambers 1989; Bohle 2001, pp. 3–5). Vulnerability can therefore
be understood as a dynamic process, which is embedded within the respective social, political, and economic context. Its root causes impair access to
resources required for adequate means of risk reduction and adaptation to
rapid onset or long-term change in the context of environmental risk.
Case study context and methods
During May and June 2013, strong and persistent precipitation of up to
300 per cent of the monthly average led to multiple floods in communities in
northern Bavaria, eastern Germany as well as Czechia. As a result, a disaster was officially declared across eight German federal states and 80,000 residents receive an evacuation notice on 10 June 2013. The regional authority
task force in Deggendorf coordinated the local response and 6,000 residents
were notified to evacuate. Along the Danube and the Isar rivers, floodwaters rose up to 8 meters above normal levels. Two dikes breached along the
Danube and the Isar, flooding the adjacent landscape. Floodwaters submerged the Fischerdorf and Natternberg areas of Deggendorf, reaching
2 meters in height.
While first responders tried to repair the breached dike, heating oil tanks
and supply lines in Natternberg and Fischerdorf were ruptured by the flood.
Oil merged with standing floodwaters for up to 18 days, penetrating deep into
walls, contaminating buildings. In the Deggendorf region, nearly 1,000 houses
were impacted, among them 600 in Fischerdorf and 90 in Natternberg
(Kammerbauer & Kaltenbach 2014; Landratsamt Deggendorf 2017b).
The combination of floodwaters and heating oil led to an exceptional
compound disaster that affected the population unevenly throughout the
flooded area. In cooperation with the Rural Development Agency, publicly
appointed expert surveyors were tasked with providing consultation to
impacted homeowners. Due to the severity and depth of oil contamination