Vulnerability Assessment of 5 Green Aimags: Case of ... · Uyanga! Bat Ulzii! Khairhandulaan!...

Vulnerability Assessment of 5 Green Aimags: Case of Uvurkhangai & Arkhangai

M.Altanbagana, T.Chuluun & B.Suvdantsetseg

National Development Institute of Mongolia Institute for Sustainable Development, NUM

Project title: Vulnerability Assessment for Social-Ecological Systems and Policy Recommendation for

Green Development Policy for 5 aimags at Local Level NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

INSTITUTE OF MONGOLIA

Khovd, Uvurkhangai, Arkhangai, Khentii and Bulgan

Tokyo Jan 13-‐15, 2015

MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENTAL, GREEN DEVELOPMENT & TOURISM, MONGOLIA

Contents

• Research Objec,ve & Study Areas •  Indicators & Design of Vulnerability Assessment • Result of Vulnerability Assessment & Analysis at Sum Level (Case of Uvurhangai, Arhangai aimags)

•  Ecological vulnerability •  Social vulnerability •  Integrated Vulnerability Assessment of Social-‐Ecological Syatems

• Dissocia,on & coopera,on

Research Objec1ve

Analysis & Vulnerability Assessment •  Analysis for indicators of Ecological and Social systems

•  RelaJon analyze for vulnerability indicators

•  Ecological & Social Vulnerability Assessment by each sums of 5 aimags

•  Integrated assessment for vulnerability analyze of social-‐ecological systems in sum level

Analysis of local Development Plan and Budget each 5 aimags and Sum level •  To idenJfy the Green development Criterion for local level

•  Analyze of Local Development Plan by Green development Criterion

•  Analyze of Local Budget by Green development Criterion

•  Field survey in selected sums

Policy Recommendation of Green Development Policy for 5 aimags •  Syntheses and Conclusion •  Result of Vulnerability Assessment •  Analysis of local Development Plan and Budget

•  Result of field survey

Sec$on I Sec$on II Sec$on III

Study areas: Khovd, Uvurkhangai, Arkhangai, Khentii and Bulgan Indicators for selec$ng sums Ø  Ecological region Ø  Popula>on Ø  Remoteness Ø  Infrastructure

Total 86 sums of 5 aimags

Uvurkhangai aimag have 19 sums

General schema of Vulnerability assessment

Integrated vulnerability assessment of social-ecological systems

NDVI

Poverty

Desertification

Drought & Zud

Livestock loss

Environmental indicators

Combine to indicators of ecological

Combine to indicators of social

Surface water loss

Social indicators

Another variables

Unemployment

Migration

Another variables

Ecological indicators

Level № Indicators Unit of

Indicators

Date Method of Combine

Sum level

1 Dougth, Zud index Index 1995-‐2013

Geometric mean

2 VegetaJon index (NDVI), May to Oct average Index 1998-‐2013

3 DeserJficaJon Percent 2010 4 Surface water loss Percent 2011

5 Pasture use index Index 1990-‐2013

6 Land degradaJon (wind erosion, soil Loss) Percent 2010

7 Prepared forage and hay cu`ng (per capita livestock) kg/sheep.unit 2011-‐2013

8 Livestock loss Percent 1990-‐2013

Aimag level

9 Air polluJon mg/m3 2004-‐2013 ArithmeJc mean 10 Water polluJon mg/l 2011-‐2013

11 Soil polluJon mg/kg 2011-‐2013

Indicators of Social systems at sum level

Level № Indicators Unit of Indicators Date Method of Combine

Sum level

1 Crop products (per capita person) kg/person 2011-‐2013

ArithmeJc mean

2 MigraJon, PopulaJon changes (growth & decrease) Percent 1989-‐2000, 2000-‐2012

3 Unemployment Percent 2012-‐2013

4 Poverty Percent 2000, 2010

5 Bank saving (per capita person) tug/person 2010-‐2013

6 Livestock risk based on livestock loss during drought and zud years Ган-‐зудын эрсдлийг тооцсон нэг хүнд ногдох мал

Sheep.unit/person

2013

7 Livestock per capita person Sheep.unit/person

2002-‐2013

8 Number of Doctor and medical nurse (per capita person) Percent 2002-‐2013

9 In-‐paJents number in hospital Percent 2002-‐2013

Uvurkhangai aimag: Some Result of Analysis and Vulnerability assessment

Dynamics of drought, zud and integrated drought-‐zud in Uvurkhangai aimag

1.82

0.20 0.93

4.81 4.78

-‐2.82

1.68

3.15 2.12

-‐0.42

1.03

y = -‐0.06x + 1.85 -‐4.00 -‐3.00 -‐2.00 -‐1.00 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

Drou

ght ind

ex

years

In dynamic of drought index from 1995 to 2013 when the highest value was 4.81 in 2000 and 4.78 in 2001.

2.84

14.54

3.72

-‐1.91

6.52

-‐4.37

-‐0.15 2.13

y = -‐0.49x + 7.36

-‐10.00

-‐5.00

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

Zud inde

x

years

If zud index shown minus value that means observed more zud. In dynamic of zud index from 1995 to 2013 when the lowest value of zud index was -1.91 in 2000 and -4.37 in 2010.

Drought Zud

Integrated drought-‐zud

-‐1.02 -‐3.87

6.71

2.24

-‐3.23

6.29

-‐0.26 3.30

-‐1.11

y = 0.43x -‐ 5.51

-‐20.00

-‐15.00

-‐10.00

-‐5.00

0.00

5.00

10.00 1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

Drou

ght-‐zud index

years

In dynamic of drought-zud index from 1995 to 2013 when the highest value of drought-zud index was 6.71 in 2000 and 6.29 in 2010.

Livestock loss, Uvurkhangai aimag

2.12 2.83 1.11 3.42

0.82

26.33

14.87

0.54 0.95 5.63

45.97

1.01 0.61

0.00

6.00

12.00

18.00

24.00

30.00

36.00

42.00

48.00

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

2010

2012

Livestock loss, %

, sheep.unit

4.02

4.49

4.66

5.03

5.07

5.19

5.31

5.64

5.81

6.28

6.44

6.60

6.62

6.75

6.87

7.10

7.47

8.51

9.25

4.00 5.50 7.00 8.50 10.00

Богд Нарийн тээл

Хайрхандулаан Баруунбаян-‐Улаан

Баянгол Гучин ус

Бүрд Бат-‐Өлзий

Төгрөг Уянга Сант

Хужирт Өлзийт

Зүйл Хархорин

Баян-‐Өндөр Тарагт

Арвайхээр Зүүнбаян-‐Улаан

Livestock loss, 1990-‐2013, %, sheep.unit

Dynamic of livestock loss for 1990-‐2013 at aimag level

Livestock loss by each sums, average of 1990-‐2013

In dynamic of livestock loss from 1990 to 2013 when high value was 26.3% in 2000 and 45.9 in 2010.

Khujirt

Kharhorin

Uyanga

Bat-‐Ulzii

Khairhandulaan

Taragt

Ulziit

Nariinteel

Zuunbayan-‐Ulaan

Esunzuil

Burd

Bayan-‐Undur

Arvaiheer

Sant

Bayangol

Tugtug

Guchin-‐Us

Bogd

Baruunbayan-‐Ulaan

Analysis between drought-‐zud index and livestock loss in Uvurkhangai aimag level

1.03 1.77

26.33

18.86 14.87

3.51 5.63

2.74

45.97

1.01 0.61

-‐1.02 -‐2.79

6.71

2.24

-‐7.73

5.33

6.29

-‐0.26

3.30

-‐1.11

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

30.00

35.00

40.00

45.00

50.00

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013 -‐20.00

-‐15.00

-‐10.00

-‐5.00

0.00

5.00

10.00

Livestock loss, %

, sheep.unit

years

Drou

ght-‐zud index

Малын зүй бус хорогдол, % Ган-‐зудын индекс, ∆S

y = 0.14x2 + 2.06x + 5.33 R² = 0.53, r=0.73

-‐10.00

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

-‐20.00 -‐15.00 -‐10.00 -‐5.00 0.00 5.00 10.00

Livestock loss, %

, sheep.unit

Drought-‐zud index

Drought-‐zud index Livestock loss, %

The results of dynamical analysis shown that drought-zud index were increased and the number of livestock loss were increased. Correlation coefficient was 0.73 for 1995-2013.

2.01 3.65 4.46 5.33 5.51

6.91 7.53 8.11 8.21 8.28 9.49 9.96 10.35 10.47 11.49 12.11

13.60 17.02

18.46

0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00

Богд Баян-‐Өндөр

Бүрд Гучин-‐Ус Баянгол

Уянга Баруунбаян-‐Улаан

Төгрөг Хайрхандулаан

Нарийнтээл Өлзийт

Есөнзүйл Хужирт Тарагт Сант

Арвайхээр Бат-‐Өлзий

Зүүнбаян-‐Улаан Хархорин

Prepared forage and hay cuRng, kg/sheep.unit

Prepared forage and hay cuBng at sum level

Prepared forage and hay cuRng per capita livestock for average of 2011-‐2013 (kg/

sheep.unit)

Khujirt

Kharhorin

Uyanga

Bat-‐Ulzii

Khairhandulaan

Taragt

Ulziit Nariinteel

Zuunbayan-‐Ulaan

Esunzuil

Burd Bayan-‐Undur

Arvaiheer Sant

Bayangol

Tugtug

Guchin-‐Us

Bogd


VegetaDon index (NDVI), Uvurkhangai

0.29

0.24

0.22

0.28

0.23 0.25 0.24

0.27

0.30

y = 0.002x + 0.24

0.20

0.22

0.24

0.26

0.28

0.30

0.32

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

NDV

I

years

0.12

0.13

0.13

0.14

0.18

0.18

0.23

0.24

0.24

0.24

0.26

0.30

0.33

0.33

0.36

0.37

0.39

0.46

0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50

Богд

Баруунбаян-‐

Төгрөг

Гучин-‐ус

Баянгол

Сант

Нарийнтээл

Хайрхандулаан

Тарагт

Баян-‐Өндөр

Өлзийт

Есөн зүйл

Бүрд

Зүүнбаян-‐Улаан

Уянга

Хархорин

Хужирт

Бат-‐Өлзий

NDVI, average of 1998-‐2013

Khujirt Kharhorin Uyanga

Bat-‐Ulzii

Khairhandulaan

Taragt

Ulziit

Nariinteel

Zuunbayan-‐Ulaan

Esunzuil Burd

Bayan-‐Undur

Sant Bayangol

Tugtug

Guchin-‐Us

Bogd Baruunbayan-‐Ulaan

Dynamic of NDVI for 1998-2013

NDVI by sums, average of 1998-2013

Surface water distribuDon and dry-‐up in sums by ecological regions, Uvurkhangai aimag

Source: Surface water count data . 2011. Ministry of Environment, Green Development and Tourism, Mongolia

Lake River Spring Well Mineral water

Dried Total

F o r e s t steppe

Steppe

Dry steppe

Gobi

Khujirt Kharhorin Uyanga Bat-‐Ulzii

Khairhandulaan Taragt Ulziit

Nariinteel Zuunbayan-‐Ulaan

Esunzuil Burd

Bayan-‐Undur Arvaiheer

Sant Bayangol

Tugtug Guchin-‐Us


DeserDficaDon & land degradaDon of Uvurkhangai aimag

Source: Desertification Atlas. 2010. Geoecology Institute, Mongolian Academy of Science & Environmental Information Center, National Agency of Meterlogy and Environmental Monitoring.

PopulaDon changes at sum level, Uvurkhangai

•  National level (NL) −  Average annual

growth was 1.59% from 2000 to 2012.

•  How changes population in Sums, if

<0 −> Decreased 0 – NL −> Normal growth NL < −> Mechanical growth

•  Population changes form 2000 to 2012 (total 19 sums) −  16 sums was

Decreased −  1 sum was Normal

growth (Bat-Ulzii) −  2 sums was

Mechanical growth (Uyanga, Arvaiheer)

a). Average annual growth in sums, 1989-2000

Legend Sum center Sum boundary Popula,on, % -‐1.63 < 0.00 decreased 0.00 − 1.34 normal growth 1.34 < 4.00 mechanical growth

b). Average annual growth in sums, 2000-2012


Population changes form 1989 to 2000 (total 19 sums) •  2 sums was

Decreased (Khujirt, Burd)

•  3 sums was Normal growth (Zuunbayan-Ulaan, Arvaiheer, Taragt)

•  14 sums was Mechanical growth

National level (NL) − Average annual growth was 1.34% from 1989 to 2000.

How changes population in Sums, if <0 , −> Decreased 0 – NL, −> Normal growth NL <, −> Mechanical growth

Analysis for populaDon changes and livestock loss by sums

Arvaiheer


Bat-‐Ulzii

Bayangol Bayan-‐undur Bogd

Burd

Guchin-‐Us Esunzuil

Zuunbayan-‐Ulaan

Nariinteel

Ulziit Sant

Taragt

Tugrug

Uyanga

Khairhandulaan

Kharhorin Hujirt

-‐3.20

-‐1.60

0.00

1.60

3.20

4.80

0.10 0.13 0.16 0.19 0.22 0.25 0.28

Averag

e an

nual growth in su

ms, 2000-‐2012

Total livestock loss, million.head, 2000-‐2012

Population normal growth (0÷1.59%) Population decreased (<0)

Population methanical growth (1.59%<)

b). Average annual growth in sums, 2000-2012


Spatial relation for average annual population changes and total livestock loss by sums.

This analysis showing that total livestock loss increased when population number were deceased from 2000-2012.

•  National level (NL) •  Average annual growth is 1.14% from 2002 to 2013

•  How changes population in Sum center and remote countryside area, if

•  Decreased <0 •  Normal growth 0 - 1.14 •  Mechanical growth 1.14 <

•  Sum center population •  7 sum centers was Decreased •  3 sum centers was Normal growth •  9 sum centers was Mechanical growth

•  Remote countryside area population (without Arvaiheer sum of aimag center)

•  13 sums are Decreased •  3 sums are Normal growth •  2 sums are Mechanical growth

Remote countryside population (Herders) are decreased and more inconstant

Total 19 sums

PopulaDon changes by locaDon, Uvurkhangai Average annual growth by sum center and remote countryside in sums, 2000-2012

Legend Sum center Sum boundary Sum center popula,on, % < 0.00 decreased 0.00 − 1.14 normal growth 1.59 < mechanical growth Remote countryside popula,on, % < 0.00 decreased 0.00 − 1.14 normal growth 1.14 < mechanical growth

Poverty at sum level, 2000, Uvurkhangai

15.50 25.50 25.50 27.00 27.00 27.00 27.00 27.90 27.90 28.80 29.10 29.10 30.10 30.10 30.10 33.30 34.60 35.50

42.80

14 19 24 29 34 39 44

Арвайхээр Бүрд

Баян-‐Өндөр Тарагт

Баянгол Төгрөг Сант

Өлзийт Есөн зүйл

Зүүнбаян-‐Улаан Гучин-‐Ус

Баруунбаян-‐Улаан Хайрхандулаан

Нарийнтээл Уянга Богд

Бат-‐Өлзий Хужирт

Хархорин

Poverty, %, 2000 (2002/2003)

Poverty at Na>onal average 36.1

Rural poverty at Na>onal level 43.4

Source: Mongolia Census-based Poverty Map in 2000: Region, aimag and sun level. 2009. National Statistical Office, Mongolia & UNDP

Spatial relation for poverty and total livestock loss by sums.

Khujirt Kharhorin

Uyanga

Bat-‐Ulzii

Khairhandulaan

Taragt

Ulziit

Nariinteel

Zuunbayan-‐Ulaan Esunzuil

Burd Bayan-‐Undur

Arvaiheer

Sant

Bayangol Tugtug

Guchin-‐Us

Bogd


Poverty by sums, Uvurkhangai. 2000

Arvaiheer


Bat-‐Ulzii

Bayangol

Bayan-‐Undur

Bogd

Burd

Guchunis

Zuunbayan-‐Ulaan

Nariinteel

Esunzuil [CELLREF]

Tugrug

Uyanga Hairhandulaan

Harhorin

Khujirt

y = 138.65x + 20.367 R² = 0.20, r=0.45

15

19

23

27

31

35

39

43

0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1

Poverty, % , 2000, (2002/2003) он

Total livestock loss, million.head, 2000-‐2003

Poverty at sum level, 2010, Uvurkhangai

41.1 42.4

44.4 44.7 44.7 45.1 45.8 45.8 46.4 46.7 46.7 46.7 47.2

48 48 48

50.1 50.1

52.9

40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54

Арвайхээр Хархорин

Зүүнбаян-Улаан Бүрд

Баян-Өндөр Хужирт Өлзийт

Есөн зүйл Тарагт Баянгол Төгрөг Сант

Бат-Өлзий Хайрхандулаан

Нарийнтээл Уянга

Гучин-Ус Баруунбаян-Улаан

Богд

Poverty, %, 2010

Rural poverty at National level 47.8

Poverty at National average 39.2

Khujirt

Kharhorin

Uyanga

Bat-‐Ulzii Khairhandulaan

Taragt

Ulziit

Nariinteel

Zuunbayan-‐Ulaan

Esunzuil

Burd Bayan-‐Undur

Arvaiheer

Sant

Bayangol Tugtug

Guchin-‐Us


Poverty by sums, Uvurkhangai. 2000

Bank saving by sums, Uvurkhangai

Bank saving, million.tug, average of 2010-2013

Average annual growth of Bank saving, %, from 2010 to 2013

Bank saving per capita person, thousand.tug, average of 2010-2013

6 26 42 47 47 50 63 70 73 75 83 83 86 86 88 88 96 104 107

-‐ 20 40 60 80 100 120

Арвайхээр Хархорин

Уянга Хужирт

Бат-‐Өлзий Зүүн Баян-‐Улаан

Тарагт Зүйл

Төгрөг Нарийн тээл

Хайрхандулаан Сант Богд

Бага Баян-‐Улаан Баянгол Өлзийт

Баян-‐Өндөр Гучин ус

Бүрд

Livestock number, per capita person, sheep.unip

Livestock number per capita person by

sheep.unit, avarege of 2003-‐2013

Khujirt

Kharhorin Uyanga

Bat-‐Ulzii

Khairhandulaan

Taragt

Ulziit

Nariinteel

Zuunbayan-‐Ulaan

Esunzuil

Burd

Bayan-‐Undur

Arvaiheer

Sant

Bayangol

Tugtug

Guchin-‐Us


Livestock number per capita person by sheep.unit, avarege of 2003-‐2013

Livestock number, per capita person

Vulnerability assessment, Uvurkhangai aimag Combined ecological vulnerability

assessment by sums Combined social vulnerability

assessment by sums

Sum center Sum boundary

Legend

Vulnerability index

Sum center Sum boundary

Legend

Vulnerability index

Arvaikheer

Baruunbayan Ulaan

Bat Ulzii

Bayangol Bayan Undur

Bogd

Burd

Guchin Us

Esunzuil

Zuunbayan Ulaan

Ulziit Sant

Taragt

Tugrug

Uyanga

Khaikhandulaan Kharkhorin

Khujirt

0.300

0.350

0.400

0.450

0.500

0.550

0.100 0.200 0.300 0.400 0.500 0.600 0.700

Soci

al v

ulne

rabi

lity

inde

x

Ecological vulnerability index

Average value of the environmental vulnerability index is 0.310

Average value of the social and economic vulnerability index is 0.417

Integrated vulnerability assessment of social-ecological systems by sums

Arkhangai aimag: Some Result of Analysis and Vulnerability assessment

4.09

0.73 0.73

6.31

29.66

4.33

8.07

2.09 1.59

30.21

2.83 5.42

-‐3.90

-‐25.42

-‐8.97

2.32 1.19 -‐1.55

-‐10.77

-‐5.58

-‐11.67

0.09

-‐14.26

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

30.00

35.00

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013 -‐32.00

-‐28.00

-‐24.00

-‐20.00

-‐16.00

-‐12.00

-‐8.00

-‐4.00

0.00

4.00

8.00

Livestock loss, %

, sheep.unit

Он

Drou

ght-‐zud index, (∆

S)

Малын зүй бус хорогдол, % Ган-‐зудын индекс, ∆S

y = 0.02x2 + 0.72x + 8.26 R² = 0.10, r=0.31

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

30.00

35.00

-‐30.00 -‐25.00 -‐20.00 -‐15.00 -‐10.00 -‐5.00 0.00 5.00 Livestock loss, %

, sheep.unit

Drought-‐zud index, (∆S)

2.99

3.12

3.44

3.65

3.70

4.38

4.49

4.58

4.68

4.70

5.46

5.63

5.77

5.86

5.92

6.30

6.37

6.45

7.45

2.50 3.50 4.50 5.50 6.50 7.50

Чулуут

Хангай

Хайрхан

Ихтамир

Эрдэнэмандал

Өндөр-‐Улаан

Булган

Тариат

Батцэнгэл

Жаргалант

Өгийнуур

Цэцэрлэг

Цэнхэр

Цахир

Эрдэнэбулган

Өлзийт

Төвшрүүлэх

Хашаат

Хотонт

Livestock loss, %, sheep.unit

Ba�sengel

Bulgan Jargalant Ih-‐tamir

Ugii-‐nuur

Ulziit

Undur-‐Ulaan

Tariat

Hairhan Hangai

Hashaat

Hotont

Tsahir

Tuvshruuleh

Tsetserleg

Chuluut

Erdenebulgan

Erdenemandal

y = 0.01x2 + 0.28x + 6.33 R² = 0.26, r=0.51

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

7.00

8.00

9.00

-‐15.00 -‐12.00 -‐9.00 -‐6.00 -‐3.00 0.00 3.00 Livestock loss, %

, sheep.unit

Drought-‐zud index, (∆S)

SpaJal relaJon for drought-‐zud index and livestock loss by sums, Arkhangai, average of 1995-‐2013

Livestock loss by sums, average of 1990-‐2013, Arkhangai

Rela>on for Livestock loss and drought-‐zud index for 1990-‐2013, Arkhangai

Dynamic of livestock loss and drought-‐zud index for 1990-‐2013, Arkhangai

Ih-‐tamir

Hangai Hairhan

Erdenemandal

Ugiinuur

Bulgan

Ulziit

Jargalant

Undur-‐ulaan

Tariat

Hotont

Tuvshruuleh

Chuluut

Tsetserleg

Erdenebulgan

Ba�sengel

Hashaat

Tsenher Tsahir

Ulziit

Livestock loss, % Drought-‐zud index

Vulnerability assessment, Arkhangai aimag Combined ecological vulnerability

assessment by sums Combined social vulnerability

assessment by sums

Battsengel Bulgan

Jargalant

Ikh Tamir

Ugiinuur

Ulziit

Undur Ulaan

Tariat

Tuvshruuleh

Khairkhan

Khangai

Khashaat

Khotont

Tsakhir

Tsenkher

Tsetserleg

Chuluut

Erdenemandal

0.250

0.300

0.350

0.400

0.450

0.500

0.100 0.150 0.200 0.250 0.300 0.350 0.400 0.450 0.500

Soci

al v

ulne

rabi

lity

inde

x

Ecological vulnerability index

Average value of the environmental vulnerability index is 0.291

Average value of the social and economic vulnerability is 0.471

Integrated vulnerability assessment of social-ecological systems by sums

Discussion & Coopera1on

• We idenJfied more vulnerabiliJes areas and sectors in the Five aimags by this research.

•  The results of this study is giving good messages for the policy makers •  More vulnerable sums are need to implement green policy such as increasing “green” budget, to develop capacity of adaptaJon and resilience, to decrease the vulnerability and to coordinate the policy plan and budget based on this research.

•  IdenJfy needs of FREEZING SYSTEM in which sum to linking vulnerability and adaptaJon opJons.

Thank you very much for your aHen1on. Баярлалаа...

Livestock risk based on livestock loss during drought and zud years

3

13

15

22

25

27

27

28

28

34

40

47

59

60

62

66

66

67

72

0 20 40 60 80

Арвайхээр

Хархорин

З-Баян-Улаан

Тарагт

Хужирт

Бат-Өлзий

Төгрөг

Сант

Уянга

Зүйл

Баянгол

Өлзийт

Баян-Өндөр

Хайрхандулаан

Бүрд

Богд

Нарийн тээл

Гучин ус

Б-Баян-Улаан

Нэг хүнд ногдох мал, хон.тол/ хүн

Vulnerability Assessment of 5 Green Aimags: Case of ... · Uyanga! Bat Ulzii! Khairhandulaan!...

Documents

Transcript of Vulnerability Assessment of 5 Green Aimags: Case of ... · Uyanga! Bat Ulzii! Khairhandulaan!...