User:Mggale/- Contextual vulnerability/Liv Davis Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing? Marion (Mggale) Contextual Vulnerability


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Mggale/- Contextual vulnerability


 * Link to the current version of the article: there is no current article

Evaluate the drafted changes
(Compose a detailed peer review here, considering each of the key aspects listed above if it is relevant. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what feedback looks like.)

Overall Impressions:

Overall this is a really strong start to an article and upon reading it I have now have an understanding on what is contextual vulnerability. I was really impressed by the clarity at which you could state a fairly confusing topic. I think it would be beneficial for in your article to expand more on the controversy surrounding using a contextual vulnerability approach versus other traditional approaches. Additionally can you give a separate section of a case study how this is used in order to demonstrate how this concept of viewing vulnerability is used in the real world. You are not doing it yet but be careful of not seeming bias towards Karen O'Brien as it was getting a little iffy towards the end. Strong lead and information I think some grammatical edits and slight re-organization of paragraphs will help get your concept across a bit better! You seem to have a decent amount of good sources I just think some sources with more individual case studies would be very beneficial.

Grammatical and Logistic Edits: Plain text is original, Bold Text is edited and Italics Text is reasoning behind recommended edits

Introduction Section:
An outcome approach focuses solely on actual losses, while a contextual approach focuses on the conditions, processes, and contextual dynamics that enable loss. →  Contextual Vulnerability focuses on the conditions, processes and contextual dynamics that enable loss while outcome approach focuses solely on actual losses. I would recommend starting with what you article is about and put the comparison second.

The notion that vulnerability ought to be…. → The concept that vulnerability must be…. This is just a stylistic change to a more formal tone.

Add period after Karen O’Brien Was becoming a run on sentence, you had multiple strong points which needed multiple sentences

…..characterized by Karen O'Brien, who worked to try and approach vulnerability to climate impacts in a number of ways, as the numerous ways that vulnerability had been interpreted in the past had not yet been made distinct from one another → '''She worked in approaching vulnerability to climate impacts from a variety of ways. Prior to her work the numerous ways that vulnerability had been interpreted in the past had not yet been made distinct from one another.' This is just a reformatting of the run-on sentence so it is more organized and concise''

Definition Section:
Karen O’Brien, a key thinker in the discussion around vulnerability, states…. → Karen O’Brien states You have already introduced her so I do not think it is necessary to do it again.

...he discussion → the discussion simply a typo

Contextual vulnerability aims to approach vulnerability through a human-security lens,  as it is meant to help analyze how different social conditions can affect how susceptible some groups are to climate impacts. → Through a human-security lens it is possible to analyze how different social conditions can affect how susceptible some groups are to climate change impacts. You mentioned above in the same paragraph already how it works with contextual vulnerability so here it would be better just to explain the human-security lens

Switch second and third sentence placement This is just a logistics edit to help the paragraph flow better

Outcome vulnerability uses a cost-benefit lens to look at climate impact, which ultimately ends up with mitigation tactics being used as a solution. → It utilizes a cost-benefit lens to look at climate impact on a region, which ultimately ends up with mitigation tactics being used as a solution. You already mentioned when outcome variability is in the sentence prior and with saying it again it becomes redundant

Relevance Section:
Delete For Example

For example, a population living in an impoverished region might not have the resources to deal with higher temperatures caused by climate change. Increased temperatures could cause dangerous conditions for many people, and without access to water and areas with cooler temperatures, the affected population could face serious consequences. → '''A population living in an impoverished region might not have the resources to deal with higher temperatures caused by climate change and could cause dangerous conditions for many people. Communities can experience devastating consequences as a result of heightened temperatures and decreased access to water.' Combine the sentences in order to form a better flow between the concepts''

Delete This differs from the lens of outcome vulnerability, which focuses on loss and the linear impact of climate change.  you have mentioned this before and it is not necessary here.

Impact Section:
The newly set definitions of vulnerability... → The new set of definitions regarding vulnerability… This is a flow and grammar edit

Definitions → terms you used definition just a line prior so saying it again is a bit redundant.

For example, Jesse Ribot states in an editorial that the concept of adaptation does not describe a community's ability "to cope, reduce their vulnerability and improve their livelihoods in the face of climate stress," and that the term "vulnerability reduction" should be used instead. → Jesse Ribot states in an editorial that the concept of adaptation does not describe a community's ability "to cope, reduce their vulnerability and improve their livelihoods in the face of climate stress," and that the term "vulnerability reduction" should be used instead. Delete for example as it is not necessary and just act as filler words

I would also recommend adding additional research here!