How is CORVI different?  

CORVI builds on the work of previous indices but is distinct in three ways.  

1. City- and Coastal Region-Based: Unlike many other indices which tend to focus on the national level, CORVI looks at cities and/or coastal regions and/or one of the islands of small island states, providing sub-national level detail on the nature and impact of climate and ocean risks. This focus is based on extensive interviews with potential issuers of the CORVI tool, who noted the difficulty of down-scaling national level risk and vulnerability data to inform policy action to build climate resilience in specific communities.
2. Holistic: CORVI looks across a broad set of ecological, financial, and political risk factors connected to climate change impacts and that influence vulnerability of coastal cities/regions/islands and their residents. As part of the category and indicator selection process, indicator inclusion was primary based on its ability to capture and explain climate change risks in coastal cities/regions/islands, and not if data were available—as is the case in many existing climate risk indices. This approach promotes a holistic understanding of climate change impacts.
3. Data and Expert Driven: CORVI is suited to producing actionable insights in data sparse environments through the use of structured expert judgement. By combining empirical and survey data across a wide range of indicators, CORVI fills data gaps to provide a holistic assessment, while reducing data availability bias. This approach provides a contextual and data driven assessment of climate and ocean risk vulnerability.

What types of data are used in CORVI Assessments and how are they integrated?

CORVI Assessments use pre-existing empirical data from sources such as the World Bank, survey data from subject matter experts, interviews with local experts, and desktop research.

• Pre-existing data and survey data are used together to calculate CORVI risk scores for each of the nearly 100 indicators in a full assessment or 35 indicators in a Rapid Assessment.
• The CORVI risk scores, desktop research, and expert interviews inform the analysis, narrative, and recommendations in the Climate Risk Report (for full assessments) or Climate Risk Summary Report (for rapid assessments).
• The information from interviews is especially valuable for contextualizing and filling gaps in the desktop research.

What scale do the CORVI risk scores use?  

Each risk indicator is scored using a 0-10 risk scale relative to other locations in the region.

• Low Risk (0-2.50) scores mean that either the coastal city / region / island state has successfully built resilience in the issue area or the indicator is not as relevant for understanding risk in that area.
• Medium Risk (2.51-5.00) scores indicate that while resilience has been built to address the specific risk, future changes could destabilize resilience gains.
• Medium-High Risk (5.01-7.50) scores mean that current measures are insufficient and more attention is required to build resilience against future climate security impacts.
• High Risk (7.51-10.00) scores indicate that the issue represents a key threat to the coastal city/region/island with the potential to undermine the security of its residents. 

How are CORVI Risk Scores calculated?

To ensure that the CORVI indicator scores provide a holistic risk rating, each is made up of five factors: current, past, and expected trends, the rate of change of the risk, and the impact of this risk on the coastal city, region, or small island-state. 

1. The BASELINE measures the current level of risk for each indicator relative to other coastal cities/regions/islands in the wider region. Baseline data for economic and social indicators are derived from the most recent year of complete data. Climate indicators use a longer time period of 15 years. Essentially, the baseline factor records the current status for each indicator.
2. PAST TREND assesses the trend of risk for the past 10 years, measured from the baseline year. The only exception to the 10-year trend measure are the climate indicators, which use a 15-year trend horizon to account for slow onset changes. The past trend factor helps us to understand if the risk is getting worse or better.
3. EXPECTED TREND assesses the anticipated trend of risk in the next 10 years, measured from the baseline year. The only exception to the 10-year trend measure are the climate indicators, which use a 15-year trend horizon to account for slow onset changes. The expected trend factor helps us to understand if current efforts are likely to reduce risk, or if more attention is warranted.
4. MAGNITUDE assesses the degree of expected future trend change relative to other coastal cities/regions/islands in the wider region. Change that happens more quickly than expected is assumed to increase risk when compared to changes that take place over a longer time scale. It is assumed that longer time periods of change contribute to less risk, as decision makers have more time to adapt and build resilience. The magnitude factor helps to identify which risks are likely to have the greatest change over the next decade.
5. Finally, IMPACT assesses the importance of change for each indicator in describing future risk in the coastal city/region or island state. The impact factor helps us to understand the specific local importance of each risk compared to the other risks affecting the coastal city/region/island.

What is Structured Expert Judgement (SEJ) and how is it used in CORVI?

CORVI combines structured expert surveys with existing empirical data using the approach of structured expert judgement (SEJ) to produce a comparative score for each indicator in the assessment. SEJ is well-established social science technique that seeks to quantify risk when pre-existing existing empirical data is inadequate. To apply SEJ to CORVI, subject matter experts across academia, government, civil society, and the private sector are identified through research and extensive outreach to stakeholders in the target coastal cities/regions/islands. These experts then refer the project team to other experts and stakeholders with appropriate expertise using “snowball sampling.” To guard against confirmation bias, survey answers are compared to a regional dataset to weigh the expert responses by utilizing a coherence check. Experts whose answers do not reflect existing empirical data are not weighed as highly as those who do. 

How does CORVI advance the Sustainable Development Goals? 

CORVI aims to contribute to the delivery of the SDGs – an essential framework to guide lasting, positive change. By providing data and information to measure climate risks in coastal cities/regions/islands, this project supports the delivery of the following SDGs:

How does a CORVI rapid assessment differ from a CORVI full assessment?  

CORVI Rapid Assessments are a condensed version of the CORVI methodology. Rapid Assessments:

• Provide a high-level overview of climate risks and vulnerabilities, whereas a full CORVI results in a more detailed climate risk assessment.
• Take place on a condensed timeframe of around 6 months, instead of the 12-18 months for a full assessment.
• Assess 35 priority CORVI risk indicators identified by reviewing the results of previous CORVI assessments in the region and informed by local stakeholders, instead of the 96 risk indicators used in the full CORVI assessment.
• Require a minimum of 3 stakeholder surveys per indicator category; full assessments require a minimum of 6 stakeholder surveys per indicator category.
• Include fewer interviews than full assessments, and interviews may be replaced by stakeholder workshop discussions.
• Do not provide as detailed an understanding of local context as a CORVI full assessment.  
• Provide governments with a high-level overview of climate risks that coastal cities and island states face. However, the analysis, recommendations, and narrative are less specific than those in a CORVI full assessment.