Volume 24, Issue 94 (10-2024)
refahj 2024, 24(94): 0-0 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Torabi F, Saravani K, Sadeghi H A, Jahanbazian S. (2024). A comparative study of household vulnerability: A scoping review of the areas and measurement methods. refahj. 24(94), : 2 doi:10.32598/refahj.24.94.4424.1
URL: http://refahj.uswr.ac.ir/article-1-4260-en.html
URL: http://refahj.uswr.ac.ir/article-1-4260-en.html
Full-Text [PDF 1619 kb]
(201 Downloads)
| Abstract (HTML) (1881 Views)
Full-Text: (72 Views)
Extended Abstract
Introduction
It has been more than two decades since the concept of vulnerability has been highlighted at the global level. However, there is neither a single definition nor standard methods for measurement of this concept. Household characteristics are among the relatively new components of vulnerability assessment whose superiority over the study of individual vulnerability is considered from different points of view. This situation is particularly important considering recent household dynamics in the world, especially in Iran. The most important contemporary developments affecting this trend include the decrease in birth rates, the increase in divorce rates, the increase in participation of women in the workforce, the prevalence of childbearing among unmarried women, the increase in the number of elderly people who live alone and the increase in the number of migrant families (United Nations, 2009).
A glance at the research background of this field shows that little attention has been paid to examining the relationship between household characteristics and vulnerability, so the dispersion and thematic limitation of these studies have challenged a precise understanding of household vulnerability. Therefore, reviewing and integrating the existing literature in this area can create richer horizons for researchers, policymakers, and other interested parties. This article intends to answer the following questions through a review study on household vulnerability. what dimensions the analytical unit of “household” has covered in the studies of the field of vulnerability? How is it theoretically and operationally defined and measured in domestic and foreign literature?
Method
This paper conducts a scoping review. A scoping review is an ideal tool for determining the scope or coverage of the literature related to a certain topic and providing clear indications of the amount of literature and existing studies as well as an overview (broader or detailed) of that topic. in this study, we use the five-step methodological framework for scoping review suggested by Arksey and O’Malley (2005). The reason is its popularity and wide application in previous studies (Colquhoun et al., 2014). The steps of this framework include (1) identifying the research question; (2) identifying relevant studies; (3) selecting studies; (4) graphing the data; and (5) comparing, summarizing, and reporting the findings.
The existing literature in the field of “household vulnerability” was identified through a back-and-forth search process in several English and Persian electronic resources using specific keywords as well as the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Related articles and documents were searched using two main groups of related terms, i.e., “vulnerability” and “household” and a list of synonyms and sub-components was compiled for each of the terms under study.
1376 studies were initially identified based on the titles and abstracts. After removing duplicates, a total number of 189 documents were identified. In the next step, 137 documents were selected based on all the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Finally, 32 cases were removed due to reasons such as unrelated analysis level, lack of thematic connection, and thematic-methodological similarity, leading to 105 cases included in the final review.
Findings
The findings are arranged around several key subcategories, including study areas of household vulnerability, subjects and target households, definitions and theoretical models, and measurement methods.
According to the results, the scope of the household vulnerability studies - whether in domestic or foreign studies- can be classified into four general categories environmental, economic, social, and health. Environmental studies (46 cases or 43/8 percent) are the most frequent and economic, followed by health and social studies (28 cases or 26.7 percent, 19 cases or 18.1 percent, and 12 cases or 11.4 percent, respectively). The absence of an interactive and intertwined look at these four dimensions was the most important weakness identified in this paper. The findings also revealed some basic weaknesses in domestic compared to foreign sources. Firstly, it is not possible to create a coherent link between the different research elements of these studies for the audience. In other words, they are scattered in terms of subject, theory, and methodology. Secondly, domestic studies have performed poorly in selecting the topic and identifying the target households compared to foreign sources. For example, important issues such as fuel poverty and debt burden have not been considered in Iran, and the target households in social and health approaches were mostly urban households. Therefore, the weakness of the theoretical frameworks related to the field of social harm and urban sociology is strongly felt in Iran. In other words, these studies show some differences based on a few typical independent variables such as socio-demographic characteristics of the head of the household.
In addition, multidimensional models were rare in domestic studies and the measurement tools used also had analytical weaknesses. The situation has caused these studies to be limited to analytical-descriptive approaches and simple correlations, and as a result, they deviate towards individualistic explanations.
Discussion
The global literature on household vulnerability includes the selection of risks, vulnerability estimation models, and the use of empirical measurement methods that provide policy recommendations according to the actual situation of each country. Regardless of the research method, an inaccurate measurement of the vulnerability of households can mislead policymaking aimed at enhancing social welfare.
According to the findings of this paper, some suggestions are presented to guide future studies in Iran:
• Transitioning from a superficial view of the household as a context related to individual vulnerability and focusing on the household and its dynamics as an independent unit affecting actions related to collective welfare;
• Adopting a comprehensive approach towards the target population and identifying vulnerable households in terms of various environmental, economic, social, and health aspects;
• Collecting and using longitudinal data to determine the causes and consequences of household vulnerability, as well as monitoring and evaluating policies and interventions designed to reduce and prevent it;
• Expanding the use of mixed and cross-sectional models to measure household vulnerability using a multidimensional approach to this phenomenon.
Ethical considerations
Contribution of authors
All authors have been actively involved in writing all sections of this article.
Funds
This article is taken from a research project supported by the United Nations Population Fund office in Iran.
Conflict of interest
According to the authors, there is no conflict of interest in this article.
Principles of research ethics
Researchers in this study followed all the principles of research ethics in all stages
Acknowledgements
We appreciate the United Nations Population Fund office in Iran for the financial support of this research.
Introduction
It has been more than two decades since the concept of vulnerability has been highlighted at the global level. However, there is neither a single definition nor standard methods for measurement of this concept. Household characteristics are among the relatively new components of vulnerability assessment whose superiority over the study of individual vulnerability is considered from different points of view. This situation is particularly important considering recent household dynamics in the world, especially in Iran. The most important contemporary developments affecting this trend include the decrease in birth rates, the increase in divorce rates, the increase in participation of women in the workforce, the prevalence of childbearing among unmarried women, the increase in the number of elderly people who live alone and the increase in the number of migrant families (United Nations, 2009).
A glance at the research background of this field shows that little attention has been paid to examining the relationship between household characteristics and vulnerability, so the dispersion and thematic limitation of these studies have challenged a precise understanding of household vulnerability. Therefore, reviewing and integrating the existing literature in this area can create richer horizons for researchers, policymakers, and other interested parties. This article intends to answer the following questions through a review study on household vulnerability. what dimensions the analytical unit of “household” has covered in the studies of the field of vulnerability? How is it theoretically and operationally defined and measured in domestic and foreign literature?
Method
This paper conducts a scoping review. A scoping review is an ideal tool for determining the scope or coverage of the literature related to a certain topic and providing clear indications of the amount of literature and existing studies as well as an overview (broader or detailed) of that topic. in this study, we use the five-step methodological framework for scoping review suggested by Arksey and O’Malley (2005). The reason is its popularity and wide application in previous studies (Colquhoun et al., 2014). The steps of this framework include (1) identifying the research question; (2) identifying relevant studies; (3) selecting studies; (4) graphing the data; and (5) comparing, summarizing, and reporting the findings.
The existing literature in the field of “household vulnerability” was identified through a back-and-forth search process in several English and Persian electronic resources using specific keywords as well as the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Related articles and documents were searched using two main groups of related terms, i.e., “vulnerability” and “household” and a list of synonyms and sub-components was compiled for each of the terms under study.
1376 studies were initially identified based on the titles and abstracts. After removing duplicates, a total number of 189 documents were identified. In the next step, 137 documents were selected based on all the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Finally, 32 cases were removed due to reasons such as unrelated analysis level, lack of thematic connection, and thematic-methodological similarity, leading to 105 cases included in the final review.
Findings
The findings are arranged around several key subcategories, including study areas of household vulnerability, subjects and target households, definitions and theoretical models, and measurement methods.
According to the results, the scope of the household vulnerability studies - whether in domestic or foreign studies- can be classified into four general categories environmental, economic, social, and health. Environmental studies (46 cases or 43/8 percent) are the most frequent and economic, followed by health and social studies (28 cases or 26.7 percent, 19 cases or 18.1 percent, and 12 cases or 11.4 percent, respectively). The absence of an interactive and intertwined look at these four dimensions was the most important weakness identified in this paper. The findings also revealed some basic weaknesses in domestic compared to foreign sources. Firstly, it is not possible to create a coherent link between the different research elements of these studies for the audience. In other words, they are scattered in terms of subject, theory, and methodology. Secondly, domestic studies have performed poorly in selecting the topic and identifying the target households compared to foreign sources. For example, important issues such as fuel poverty and debt burden have not been considered in Iran, and the target households in social and health approaches were mostly urban households. Therefore, the weakness of the theoretical frameworks related to the field of social harm and urban sociology is strongly felt in Iran. In other words, these studies show some differences based on a few typical independent variables such as socio-demographic characteristics of the head of the household.
In addition, multidimensional models were rare in domestic studies and the measurement tools used also had analytical weaknesses. The situation has caused these studies to be limited to analytical-descriptive approaches and simple correlations, and as a result, they deviate towards individualistic explanations.
Discussion
The global literature on household vulnerability includes the selection of risks, vulnerability estimation models, and the use of empirical measurement methods that provide policy recommendations according to the actual situation of each country. Regardless of the research method, an inaccurate measurement of the vulnerability of households can mislead policymaking aimed at enhancing social welfare.
According to the findings of this paper, some suggestions are presented to guide future studies in Iran:
• Transitioning from a superficial view of the household as a context related to individual vulnerability and focusing on the household and its dynamics as an independent unit affecting actions related to collective welfare;
• Adopting a comprehensive approach towards the target population and identifying vulnerable households in terms of various environmental, economic, social, and health aspects;
• Collecting and using longitudinal data to determine the causes and consequences of household vulnerability, as well as monitoring and evaluating policies and interventions designed to reduce and prevent it;
• Expanding the use of mixed and cross-sectional models to measure household vulnerability using a multidimensional approach to this phenomenon.
Ethical considerations
Contribution of authors
All authors have been actively involved in writing all sections of this article.
Funds
This article is taken from a research project supported by the United Nations Population Fund office in Iran.
Conflict of interest
According to the authors, there is no conflict of interest in this article.
Principles of research ethics
Researchers in this study followed all the principles of research ethics in all stages
Acknowledgements
We appreciate the United Nations Population Fund office in Iran for the financial support of this research.
Type of Study: review |
Received: 2023/09/27 | Accepted: 2024/05/6 | Published: 2024/10/5
Received: 2023/09/27 | Accepted: 2024/05/6 | Published: 2024/10/5
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
Contact Information
Social Welfare Quarterly
Social Welfare Quarterly, Social Welfare Research Department, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation, Daneshjoo Blvd, Evin, Tehran, Iran, 19857-13834
Journal Tel: 02171732851
Website: http://refahj.uswr.ac.ir
Email: refahj@uswr.ac.ir
