Back to Article

Spatial Mismatches between Cyclone Exposure and Food System Impacts in Vanuatu: Integrating Topographic, Agro-Ecological, and Infrastructure Mediators for Resilience Planning

Universal Journal of Food Security | Vol 3, Issue 1

Table 3. Provincial Food Security Resilience Index (FSRe) Scores andcomponent breakdown

ProvinceExposure sub-index (reversed HEI)Impact sub-index (reversed ISI)Topographic bufferingAgro-ecological bufferingInfrastructure & circulationComposite FSRe score (0–100)Resilience category
Torba0.720.660.740.790.3257Moderate resilience — transitional (hidden hotspot risk)
Sanma0.480.550.620.710.6961Buffered stronghold
Penama0.440.470.560.640.5553Elevated risk
Malampa0.460.520.580.680.6358Moderate resilience — transitional
Shefa0.330.380.450.520.7846Critical / fragile
Tafea0.390.410.490.590.5147Critical / fragile

Component sub-indices are normalized to a 0–1 scale (higher values = greater resilience contribution). The composite FSRe score is expressed on a 0–100 scale derived from the weighted formula: FSRe = 30×(1−HEI) + 30×Agricultural Capacity + 25×Infrastructure Capacity + 15×Recovery Speed, where each component is first normalized to 0–100. Four resilience categories are defined: Buffered stronghold (FSRe ≥ 60); Moderate resilience (FSRe 55–60); Elevated risk (FSRe 50–55); Critical/fragile (FSRe < 50). Provinces scoring within 3 FSRe points of a category boundary (Torba: 57; Malampa: 58) are considered transitional; sensitivity analysis (Spearman ρ > 0.88) confirms that provincial rankings remain stable under ±20% weight variation, with only minor boundary shifts between adjacent categories. Sub-index component scores are presented for analytical transparency and are not independently weighted in the composite score calculation.