Comparative analysis of livelihood vulnerability to climate Change: Rural insights from Vietnam and Pakistan

Climate change has turned out to be an international disaster with an extensive and long-lasting effect on countries and communities. Such effects are more acute in poor and developing nations, which are very susceptible due to the lack of resources. This pattern is not excluded in countries like Vietnam and Pakistan, in which the two countries face major issues that are presented by the interplay of their ecological as well as complex geographical conditions. The current paper focuses on how rural people in Pakistan and Vietnam view their livelihood as being at a risk due to climate change. The research conducted between July and September 2023 involved a survey of 300 households in both countries. The research utilized three analytical frameworks, which included the Livelihood Vulnerability Index (LVI), LVI-IPCC framework, and Livelihood Effect Index (LEI). The study findings also presented significant observations in the two regions. The livelihood vulnerability index (LVI) score for Vietnam ranges between 0.347 and 0.498, while in Pakistan, it spans from 0.367 to 0.502 across the selected regions. The LVI-IPCC was found to be between 0.003–0.041 in Vietnam, with Pa Vay Su recording the highest and Moc Chau the lowest, whereas in Pakistan, it was between 0.108–0.232, with Nowshera District recording the highest overall score. Remarkably, all three Pakistani sampled locations have greater scores on LEI than their Vietnamese counterparts, and the natural element poses specific difficulties throughout Pakistan. Such an arrangement suggests systemic vulnerabilities in Pakistani livelihoods, especially concerning environmental stability and physical infrastructure that are significantly more pronounced than in Vietnam. Some of the policy suggestions include strengthening social safety nets, setting up funds to fund climate-resilient and disaster-resistant infrastructure, supporting sustainable livelihood programmes, and enhancing community-based risk-reduction efforts. Future research ought to concentrate on longitudinal assessments of susceptibility, intervention effectiveness, and extension of comparative analysis to other localities so as to determine the context-specific strategies in improving livelihood resilience.