# Revealing social vulnerability profiles for urban flood management: the case of Ouagadougou (Burkina Faso)

Mwingnè Laure Carolle Da, Hugues Hangnon, Marion Amalric, Aude Nikiema, Elodie Robert, Emmanuel Bonnet

► To cite this version:

Mwingnè Laure Carolle Da, Hugues Hangnon, Marion Amalric, Aude Nikiema, Elodie Robert, et al.. Revealing social vulnerability profiles for urban flood management: the case of Ouagadougou (Burkina Faso). Cybergeo: Revue européenne de géographie / European journal of geography, 2022, 10.4000/cybergeo.38243. hal-03583168

HAL Id: hal-03583168

https://hal.science/hal-03583168

Submitted on 28 Feb 2024

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
# Revealing social vulnerability profiles for urban flood management: the case of Ouagadougou (Burkina Faso)

*Mettre en évidence les profils de vulnérabilité sociale pour la gestion des inondations urbaines : le cas de Ouagadougou (Burkina Faso)*

*Relevando perfiles de vulnerabilidad social para la gestión de inundaciones urbanas: El caso de Ouagadougou (Burkina Faso)*

Mwingnè Laure Carolle Da, Hugues Hangnon, Marion Amalric, Aude Nikiema, Elodie Robert and Emmanuel Bonnet

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

OpenEdition
Journals

**Electronic version**

URL: https://journals.openedition.org/cybergeo/38243

DOI: 10.4000/cybergeo.38243

ISSN: 1278-3366

**Publisher**

UMR 8504 Géographie-cités

Brought to you by Université de Versailles St-Quentin-en-Yvelines

<figure><img src="image_3.png" /></figure>

**Electronic reference**

Mwingnè Laure Carolle Da, Hugues Hangnon, Marion Amalric, Aude Nikiema, Elodie Robert and Emmanuel Bonnet, "Revealing social vulnerability profiles for urban flood management: the case of Ouagadougou (Burkina Faso)", *Cybergeo: European Journal of Geography* [Online], Systems, Modelling, Geostatistics, document 1005, Online since 14 February 2022, connection on 28 February 2024. URL: http://journals.openedition.org/cybergeo/38243; DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/cybergeo.38243

This text was automatically generated on February 16, 2023.

<figure><img src="image_4.png" /></figure>
# Revealing social vulnerability profiles for urban flood management: the case of Ouagadougou (Burkina Faso)

Mettre en évidence les profils de vulnérabilité sociale pour la gestion des inondations urbaines : le cas de Ouagadougou (Burkina Faso)

Relevando perfiles de vulnerabilidad social para la gestión de inundaciones urbanas: El caso de Ouagadougou (Burkina Faso)

Mwingnè Laure Carolle Da, Hugues Hangnon, Marion Amalric, Aude Nikiema, Elodie Robert and Emmanuel Bonnet

## Introduction

1

Since the International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction -1990 to 1999- (UNDP, 2004), the issue of populations' vulnerability has remained at the heart of the international community's preoccupations (Kouassi et al., 2010; Lhomme, Laganier, Diab, Serre, 2013). Indeed, the recurrence of natural disasters and their impact have driven states to take action to help populations to adapt and reduce risks. Worldwide, "in 2015, natural disasters led to economic losses of 92 billion dollars, and average losses of disasters were estimated at over 300 billion dollars per year" (Hallegate, Vogt-Schilb, Rozenberg, 2016). According to CRED's EM-DAT database (CRED, 2020), flooding constitutes the primary risk of natural disasters in the world when one considers the number of events and individuals affected. To that end, many researchers throughout the world have taken on the study of natural disasters in order to understand the causes and to identify objectively the consequences and their inadequate management (Hostache, 2007; Karambiri, Tazen, Traore, Bologo/Traore, Coulibaly, 2015; Lhomme et al., 2013; Ntajal, Lamptey, Mahamadou, Nyarko, 2017; Pradhan, 2010; Van Westen,
2013). In most of the work done on risk disasters, the concept of vulnerability remains a major issue. These works generally show that vulnerability results from intrinsic characteristics of populations, their potential exposure to a hazard, their awareness linked to the exposure (Burton, Kates, White, 1993; Cutter, 1996), the capacity for adaptation which varies from one individual to another (Birkmann, 2007; Buckle, Marsh, Smale, 2001; Turner et al., 2003), the spatial occupancy (Cardona, 2004; Cutter, Boruff, Shirley, 2003) and the characteristics of the hazard (Wilhelmi, Morss, 2013). It comprises two dimensions: biophysical vulnerability related to hazard exposure and social vulnerability related to society (Cutter et al., 2003; Reghezza, 2006).

2

Social vulnerability is a territorially rooted notion, central to risk analysis in the urban environment (Adger, 2006; Quenault, 2015). It denotes the incapacity of a society to anticipate a hazard, to cope with an emergency, to adapt its behaviour during a crisis and to reconstruct itself (Wisner, Blaikie, Cannon, Davis, 2003). It depends upon social factors such as demographic characteristics, discriminations, social inequality, imbalance of power (Becerra, 2012; Birkmann, Wisner, 2006) as well as institutional, economic, cultural, historical and political factors (Meschinet de Richemond, Reghezza, 2010). To these aspects, one can add health (Jonkman, Kelman, 2005; Ruin, 2007; Vinet, Boissier, Defossez, 2011), adaptive capacity (Lallau, Rousseau, 2009; Pelling, 2003), risk perception (Becerra et al., 2013; Bonnet, 2002; Kellens, Zaalberg, Neutens, Vanneuville, De Maeyer, 2011; Ruin, Lutoff, 2004), quality of life in the neighbourhoods and land tenure (Rufat, Tate, Burton, Maroof, 2015).

3

Even if Africa is not the continent which has been the most affected by flooding globally, the impact and consequences of these disasters can prove to be devastating, putting it among the most vulnerable of continents. This is due to the considerable dependence of these countries on natural resources, to social and biophysical vulnerability and to a relatively limited adaptive capacity. These findings are all the more alarming in the countries of West Africa, which are already confronted with a generalized impoverishment and have, for two decades, been victims of flooding practically every year. This situation can be explained not only by extreme rainfall but by transformations in urban spaces, in their rhythm, form and governance (Hangnon, De Longueville, Ozer, 2015).

4

Ouagadougou, the capital of Burkina Faso, is an example of a West African crossroads city whose economy has been badly affected by the consequences of natural disasters. It is an urban centre that has experienced an increase in the frequency of flooding, principally linked to rain runoff overloads and extreme storm events. The major floods of 2009, 2015, 2016 and 2018 caused considerable material damage and loss of human life (Pictures 1 and 2). They revealed certain risky collective behaviours in the post-disaster period, such as the resettlement of populations in flood-prone areas after the 2009 floods (Essone Nkoghe, 2012; Hangnon, Bonnet, Amalric, Nikiema, 2018). They also highlighted the city's exposure and great vulnerability of its populations to flooding in particular.
<figure><img src="image_5.png" /><figcaption>Picture 1: The city centre of Ouagadougou flooded on 1st September 2009</figcaption></figure>

credit: Ahmed OUOBA/ AFP

<figure><img src="image_6.png" /><figcaption>Picture 2: Collapsed house in the undeveloped area of Ouagadougou during the 2015 floods</figcaption></figure>

credit: http://news.aouaga.com

5

Today, although flood risk reduction measures have been implemented after the major floods mentioned above, Ouagadougou is still subject to flooding. The populations also still live in areas declared flood-prone, unbuildable or likely to be flooded and are still strongly impacted by these phenomena. To understand this situation, which incidentally is not specific to the city of Ouagadougou, several authors have worked on the concept of vulnerability and the means to measure it at the local or global level (Adger, Brooks, Kelly, Bentham, Eriksen, 2004; Balica, Wright, van der Meulen, 2012; Cutter et al., 2003; Flanagan, Gregory, Hallisey, Heitgerd, Lewis, 2011; Karambiri et al., 2015; Tazen et al., 2019). Most of these authors agree that social factors have a strong influence on risk management and coping skills and have therefore addressed
vulnerability from a social perspective in their studies, either fully or partially. For instance, the study by Karambiri et al. (2015) assessed the vulnerability of Ouagadougou by determining, among other things, the flood social vulnerability index ($FVI_{social}$). This index, inspired by the work of Balica et al. (2012), is based on the aggregation of social indicators from censuses or reports by adding or multiplying them in some way. Another social vulnerability index that is widely used in the literature is the SoVI index developed by Cutter (2003). This index is also based on the aggregation of variables derived from censuses but this aggregation process is performed using principal component analysis.

All these studies have the common feature of seeking to measure the absolute vulnerability of a given territory by aggregating several variables using various techniques and relying essentially on data from censuses or reports. Overall, this type of approach using vulnerability indexes raises a number of problems. A major limitation noted by Rufat (2013) is that in these studies "vulnerability indicators are added together or multiplied in different ways by different authors without taking their diversity and interaction into account". Moreover, these indexes strongly depend on the initial choice of variables (Tate, 2012). Also, the latter are subject to collinearity bias (Rufat, 2013). The result is an arbitrary, subjective and incomplete presentation of vulnerability levels with indexes that tend to oversimplify the complexity of the concept and erase its heterogeneity at the local level. Because of all these limitations and the validity problems noted by some authors (Rufat, Tate, Emrich, Antolini, 2019; Schmidtlein, Deutsch, Piegorsch, Cutter, 2008; Spielman et al., 2020), this approach to vulnerability remains problematic for operational use by managers.

So, how can we assess the vulnerability of populations in this context in order to better adapt prevention measures? To answer this question, Rufat (2013) proposed shifting the focus from measuring absolute vulnerability, which would be too complex to understand, to relative vulnerability.

Relative vulnerability is related to understanding the processes that make or break vulnerability in a given locality and is more operational than the absolute measure of vulnerability. In other words, analysing relative vulnerability would serve to answer certain operational questions. Which are the most vulnerable populations in a given locality, and why are they vulnerable? Are there aggravating factors related to where they live? Although these questions are central to flood management in the city of Ouagadougou, they have not been given much thought in the city, as the application of relative vulnerability analysis techniques has focused on other regions. It is to compensate for this shortcoming that our study was envisaged.

## Presentation of the study zone

The city of Ouagadougou, located in the heart of West Africa, was chosen as the study area for the implementation of the Rufat approach because of its high exposure to flooding due to its characteristics. Comprising 55 sectors at an average altitude of 310 m, the urban municipality of Ouagadougou extends over 518 km² and has a flat, gently sloping terrain (Picture 3). The morphology of the town is monotonous with gentle slopes of 0.6 to 1% (Kêdowidé, Sedogo, Cissé, 2010). These features lead either to rainwater stagnation or ingress according to the nature of the ground.
<figure><img src="image_7.png" /><figcaption>Picture 3: Ouagadougou seen from the top of a building: a city with flat terrain</figcaption></figure>

Credit: DA M. Laure Carolle

10 The city of Ouagadougou is drained by four principal canals resulting from development of topographical depressions (Figure 1). The hydrographic network, moreover, is made up of watercourses operating intermittently, and of four intra-urban dams. Three of these dams are inter-connected and numbered 1 to 3 from upstream to downstream. They discharge their water into the River Massili crossing the gazetted Bagr-Wéogo forest, the natural outlet of the city's rainwater.

<figure><img src="image_8.png" /><figcaption>Figure 1: Presentation of the study area</figcaption></figure>

Source: Boyer (2009), BNDT (2014)

Author: DA M. Laure Carolle

Date: 05/08/2021

11 Several works based on the analysis of press-reported stories have reported an increase in the frequency of floods over the past 30 years in Burkina Faso in general (Taylor, Traoré/Bologo, Tazen, 2019) and in the capital city of Ouagadougou in particular (Hangnon et al., 2018). Tazen (2019) has noted, for example, an average of five floods per year in the city since the 2000s, with significant impacts on people and property.
12 The problem of flooding is therefore a major issue for the city of Ouagadougou, particularly for the most vulnerable populations. It is important for decision-makers, beyond the aspects related to the hazard, to understand the processes of social vulnerability in order to provide solutions adapted to the context of Ouagadougou. This is the goal of our article.

## Material and methods

13 The analysis of the relative social vulnerability of the inhabitants of Ouagadougou was carried out in this article by adapting the methodology proposed by Rufat (2013)¹. Survey data were used in the process instead of the census or report data used in the Rufat method. Indeed, the census data present several constraints that are particularly important in the context of our study.

14 Census or report data are usually incomplete or on a scale that is inappropriate for urban studies, especially in West Africa. Moreover, when they are available, these data are generally from different sources that may have collected and published them at different times, which may compromise the selection of variables. Indeed, these variables may not correspond to social indicators from comparable periods.

15 Thus, in order to identify the socio-spatial vulnerability profiles of the inhabitants of Ouagadougou based on up-to-date data, a survey using stratified random sampling was conducted from Mars to April 2017 in the city of Ouagadougou by a dozen trained interviewers. This survey allowed us to interview, on the basis of a questionnaire² (Appendix F), a sample of 2137³ persons, each belonging to a household that it represented. The rule for selecting households to be surveyed was to cross two perpendicular streets, leaving at least 200 metres between each house surveyed. Interviews with neighbours were not allowed.

16 The questions were asked of a single representative of the household, namely the head of the family or another member of the household of over 18 years of age living for at least six months in the household. Responses from women were encouraged. During the survey, nine respondents did not meet the selection criteria or did not agree to the survey and were therefore excluded from the analyses. These individuals were not included in the 2137 respondents who all met the selection criteria.

17 The survey sampling was stratified according to four zones (Figure 2), each belonging to a group qualified as exposed or not exposed to floods. The sampling was done so that each group had approximately the same population ratio (46.56% for the exposed group and 53.44% for the unexposed group). The zones, numbered from 1 to 4, were determined according to their status in urban planning⁴. Exposure of a zone to flooding is defined in this study by an identification by the regulation⁵, or by the print media (or by both). All the zones, both formal⁶ and informal, were surveyed. The exposed zones of the city (zones 1 and 2) are located around dams 1, 2 and 3 of the city and to a lesser degree on the outskirts (Figure 2).

18 The number of households to be surveyed in each zone was set to best approximate the ratio of area in each zone to group membership (Table 1), to be spatially representative.
<table><caption>Table 1: Identification of the survey areas</caption><thead><tr><th>Groups</th><th>Area by group (km²)</th><th>Respondents per group</th><th>Zones</th><th>Area per zone (km²)</th><th>% of area by zone</th><th>Respondents per zone</th><th>% respondents per zone</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td rowspan="2">Exposed</td><td rowspan="2">83.5</td><td rowspan="2">995</td><td>Zone 1</td><td>22.49</td><td>26.93%</td><td>212</td><td>21.30%</td></tr><tr><td>Zone 2</td><td>61.01</td><td>73.06%</td><td>783</td><td>78.69%</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">Non exposed</td><td rowspan="2">198.28</td><td rowspan="2">1142</td><td>Zone 3</td><td>111.43</td><td>56.20%</td><td>643</td><td>56.30%</td></tr><tr><td>Zone 4</td><td>86.85</td><td>43.080%</td><td>499</td><td>43.69%</td></tr></tbody></table>

<figure><img src="image_9.png" /><figcaption>Figure 2: Presentation of the study zones according to the four zones of the survey</figcaption></figure>

Source: Regulation, Press newspapers, Boyer 2009

Date: 08/08/2021

Author: DA M. Laure Carolle

19 Analysing social vulnerability requires taking into account its multidimensional basis. With this in mind, the survey questionnaire was developed taking into account the main aspects that can influence social vulnerability. These were about:

- inhabitants' socioeconomic characteristics (household's asset for wealth level, education, etc.)

- knowledge about the flood phenomena (causes, awareness of exposure to risk, etc.)

- experience of floods, damage and ability to recover

- knowledge of prevention and safety regulations

- potential behaviours when a flood occurs
In total, 84 variables, mainly qualitative, considered as drivers for social vulnerability, were gathered to establish socio-spatial vulnerability profiles. The data processing consisted of a statistical analysis in several stages:

Calculation of a wealth index: principal component analysis (PCA)

The wealth index is a composite measure of a household's standard. It was used to understand the socio-economic status of households through a number of variables related to the goods they possess (number of television sets, refrigerators etc.). This is an interesting driver that has a definite impact on the level of social vulnerability of a territory (Fischer, Chhatre, 2016). The method proposed by the World Food Programme (2017) to establish this index consists, with SPSS software, in assigning a standardized weight or score to each selected quantitative variable through a principal component analysis (PCA). Individuals are then classified according to their score. The sample is finally divided into population quintiles. Each quintile corresponds with an economic well-being level from 1 (for the poorest) to 5 (for the richest) (INSD, 2015). We thus obtained a qualitative variable with 5 modalities which can be used thereafter to determine the profiles of vulnerability.

Highlighting of redundancies: Chi2 and Cramer's V⁷

They are calculated to establish the correlations between variables to determine the significant variables, with the least possible redundancy, in order to establish the profiles. The analysis of these correlations and their strength made it possible to eliminate the super-linked variables in order to make the factor analysis more robust (Habib Bawa, 2018; Ritschard, Zighed, Nicoloyannis, 2001; Yabi, Sossou, Akindele, Balogoun, Ogouwale, 2019). According to Rufat et al. (2019), "this process limited collinearity, prevented implicit weighting, strengthened statistical power and preserved a balance between the different dimensions of vulnerability". This stage led to the adoption of 13 variables for the remainder of analyses (Table 2).

<table><caption>Table 2: Variables selected after correlation analysis</caption><thead><tr><th>Variables</th><th>Categories</th><th>Respondents</th><th>%</th><th>Description</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td rowspan="5">Wealth_index</td><td>1</td><td>427</td><td>19.98</td><td rowspan="5">Wealth level (1 for poor and 5 for rich)</td></tr><tr><td>2</td><td>428</td><td>20.03</td></tr><tr><td>3</td><td>427</td><td>19.98</td></tr><tr><td>4</td><td>429</td><td>20.07</td></tr><tr><td>5</td><td>426</td><td>19.93</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="4">Education</td><td>never_school</td><td>883</td><td>41.32</td><td rowspan="4">Level of education (never_school = never been schooled)</td></tr><tr><td>literate</td><td>170</td><td>7.96</td></tr><tr><td>primary</td><td>375</td><td>17.55</td></tr><tr><td>secondary</td><td>436</td><td>20.40</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td>university</td><td>273</td><td>12.77</td><td></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">Flood_Time</td><td>2h</td><td>1039</td><td>48.62</td><td rowspan="3">Minimum length of time during which the water remains to call it a flood</td></tr><tr><td>½ d (1/2 day)</td><td>735</td><td>34.39</td></tr><tr><td>+1day (several days)</td><td>363</td><td>16.99</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">Norm_flood</td><td>normal</td><td>236</td><td>11.04</td><td rowspan="2">Qualifier of a flood: normal? Not normal?</td></tr><tr><td>abnormal</td><td>1901</td><td>88.96</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">Resp_state</td><td>Yes</td><td>1623</td><td>75.95</td><td rowspan="2">Responsibility of the state</td></tr><tr><td>No</td><td>514</td><td>24.05</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">C_urbaniz</td><td>Yes</td><td>1294</td><td>60.55</td><td rowspan="2">Urbanization in flood-prone zone causes flooding</td></tr><tr><td>No</td><td>843</td><td>39.45</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">Percep_zone</td><td>floodable/forbidden</td><td>166</td><td>7.77</td><td rowspan="3">Perception on the residential area</td></tr><tr><td>None</td><td>1553</td><td>72.67</td></tr><tr><td>Idk</td><td>418</td><td>19.56</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">Warning</td><td>Yes</td><td>1738</td><td>81.33</td><td rowspan="3">Knowledge of precautions to be taken in the event of flooding</td></tr><tr><td>No</td><td>243</td><td>11.37</td></tr><tr><td>Idk</td><td>156</td><td>7.30</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">Cp METRIC</td><td>Yes</td><td>319</td><td>14.93</td><td rowspan="3">Instructions from civil protection</td></tr><tr><td>No</td><td>1384</td><td>64.76</td></tr><tr><td>Idk</td><td>434</td><td>20.31</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">home_digging</td><td>Yes</td><td>1253</td><td>58.63</td><td rowspan="2">Digging to let water through</td></tr><tr><td>No</td><td>884</td><td>41.37</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">home_clean</td><td>Yes</td><td>327</td><td>15.30</td><td rowspan="2">Clear gutters to let water through</td></tr><tr><td>No</td><td>1810</td><td>84.70</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">Stay_out</td><td>Yes</td><td>646</td><td>30.23</td><td rowspan="2">Stay outside if a flood surprises one outdoors</td></tr><tr><td>No</td><td>1491</td><td>69.77</td></tr><tr><td>See_out</td><td>Yes</td><td>142</td><td>6.64</td><td>Go and see the flood</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td>No</td><td>1995</td><td>93.36</td></tr></table>

*Idk: I don't know

### Looking for profile characteristics: Multiple correspondence analysis (MCA)

23

Since all the selected variables were qualitative, we opted for a multiple correspondence analysis as factor analysis before the clustering method. MCA is a descriptive statistical technique which also aims to summarize and visualize a table of data containing more than two qualitative variables (Renisio, Sinthon, 2014). The objective is to identify groups of people with a similar profile and to show the associations between variables and modalities. To take into account the sensitivity of the MCA to low numbers (less than 5%), we grouped the rare modalities as recommended by Husson et al. (2010). The factor coordinates obtained were thus used as quantitative variables for the clustering method.

24

### Identification of clusters: Hierarchical Agglomerative Clustering (HAC)

25

It was conducted using the R software employing the FactoMineR package in accordance with Ward's method and Euclidean distance matrix. It consists in dividing the populations into different clusters, based on the MCA results. The advantage of this technique is that the largest possible group of similar individuals can be grouped within the same cluster (cross-cluster homogeneity) and to define the most dissimilar cluster (cross-cluster heterogeneity) (Rérolle, Faisant, Telmon, Saint-Martin, 2015). Along with the inspection of the dendrogram and the analysing of statistics of inertia gain, we also determined the number of clusters retained using the Ratkowsky and Dunn indices. This number is the one that maximizes each of the indices. These indices are ranked by several studies as high performers for determining optimal number of clusters (Charrad, Ghazzali, Boiteau, Niknafs, 2014; Tian, Lemos, 2018). According to these metrics, eight clusters seem to best capture the clustering structure in the data, since they give the highest desired values (Table 3).

<table><caption>Table 3: Quantitative indices to determine optimal number of clusters</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">Number of clusters</th><th colspan="2">Indices for clustering evaluation</th></tr><tr><th>Ratkowsky index</th><th>Dunn Index</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>2</td><td>0.1242</td><td>0.1135</td></tr><tr><td>3</td><td>0.1543</td><td>0.116</td></tr><tr><td>4</td><td>0.1716</td><td>0.1193</td></tr><tr><td>5</td><td>0.1813</td><td>0.1193</td></tr><tr><td>6</td><td>0.1922</td><td>0.1199</td></tr><tr><td>7</td><td>0.1998</td><td>0.1199</td></tr><tr><td>8</td><td>0.2013</td><td>0.1253</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table><tr><td>9</td><td>0.2001</td><td>0.1253</td></tr><tr><td>10</td><td>0.1953</td><td>0.1253</td></tr></table>

# Results

## Representativeness of the sample

26

The random sampling approach resulted in an overall representativeness of the urban population for different socio-demographic variables, as shown in Table 4. Indeed, the verification of the representativeness of our sample is a prerequisite for validating the results, and therefore for interpreting them. Thus, we observe that the ratios of socio-economic variables such as gender, educational level and occupation are close to the ratios found in censuses conducted by the National Institute of Statistics and Demography of Burkina Faso. We can therefore conclude that our sample is somewhat socially representative.

<table><caption>Table 4: comparison of socio-demographic characteristics of respondents with census data</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">Variables</th><th rowspan="2">Survey results (%)</th><th colspan="2">Census data</th></tr><tr><th>% by variables</th><th>Source</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>Gender</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Female</td><td>51.15</td><td>50.93</td><td rowspan="2">RGPH 2020</td></tr><tr><td>Male</td><td>48.85</td><td>49.06</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Educational level</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Never been to school</td><td>41.32</td><td>45.4</td><td rowspan="4">RGPH 2006</td></tr><tr><td>Primary</td><td>14.55</td><td>18.8</td></tr><tr><td>Secondary</td><td>20.40</td><td>24.2</td></tr><tr><td>University</td><td>12.77</td><td>11.3</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Occupation</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Unemployed</td><td>21.99</td><td>22.4</td><td rowspan="2">Statistical yearbook 2017</td></tr><tr><td>In employment</td><td>78.01</td><td>77.6</td></tr></tbody></table>
## Socio-economic profile of populations and spatial distribution of individuals

27 The socio-economic profiles determined by the PCA are presented in figure 3. These profiles are representative of Ouagadougou and show the spatial distribution of the level of economic well-being in the city.

<figure><img src="image_10.png" /><figcaption>Figure 3: Distribution of the population surveyed according to the wealth index</figcaption></figure>

Source: PigéO 2015, RainCell 2017 Survey

N

Wealth index

Poor

Rich

28 Determining the wealth index of the people surveyed confirms that the majority of less well-off populations live in the outlying areas (Figure 3). Their presence can be explained by the level of land speculation in Ouagadougou and the difficulty for households to have access to parcels and dwelling places in the city-centre because of high prices.

29 Two types of proprietors rub shoulders in the informal settlements (Robineau, 2014). On the one hand, there are families in precarious financial situations settling in an informal zone (which has not been divided into lots) because it is easier to acquire a parcel there for a lower price and these areas offer the advantage of access to the city's amenities (e.g. work etc.). These families' houses are generally built using precarious materials (Picture 4). On the other hand, middle-class families generally with lower resources than families in the city centre, however, often acquire an “alibi parcel” in the hope that one day they can benefit from a lot in a subdivided zone. In these cases, houses are built with better amenities (Picture 5).

30 Many “poor” households, therefore, settle on the outskirts of town while hoping to be able to benefit from a parcel when subdivisions take place (Boyer, Delaunay, 2009). They understand the interest of moving from an informal settlement to a property in a subdivided zone, as the value of the parcel rises considerably during the subdivision,
according to the neighbourhood, multiplying by two if not by three the price per square metre. Due to land-use speculation, it is not rare to see households sell parcels allocated to them on completion of the housing development, moving from one informal home to another in the hope of earning some money (Delaunay, Boyer, 2017).

<figure><img src="image_11.png" /><figcaption>Picture 5 : House built in the informal settlement of Zagtouli.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_12.png" /></figure>

31

In addition, the economic level of households, related to the locality of residence of households, has an impact on the damage they are likely to suffer in the event of a flood, but also on their ability to cope and their attitudes towards risk. The constructions using precarious materials due to low resources in the non-settled areas
and the absence of urban planning make populations more vulnerable to the risk. Picture 6 highlights the disorganization in the informal sectors with narrow lanes that do not respect any norms, which makes access by vehicle almost impossible and complicates evacuation in the event of a disaster.

<figure><img src="image_13.png" /><figcaption>Picture 6: Spatial disorganization in undeveloped areas</figcaption></figure>

32 Moreover, some informal settlements such as Zongo in the west and Yaamtenga in the east (Figure 3), known as “non-lotis” or “not subdivided housing”, have existed for 20 years. In these neighbourhoods lacking in basic amenities with no rainwater drainage infrastructures, a high density of the population lives in precarious conditions. The “eviction”⁸ on the grounds of risk prevention in these zones is made difficult owing to the length of time households have been settled there.

33 Thus, the economic well-being of households has an impact on the spatial occupation of the city but also, as will be shown in more detail, on its social vulnerability.

## Underlying factors of vulnerability

34 The multiple component factor analysis (MCA) resulted in the extraction by using the Kaizer criterion of 10 dimensions, which explained a total of 54.93% of the variance in the data set. The first and the second dimension explained 8.77% and 6.77% variability of the data, respectively. The details of eigenvalue and percentage variance explained by 10 dimensions using MCA output are provided in the supplementary information (Appendix B).

35 MCA was used in our study to understand the distribution of individuals and variables (Appendix C). Figure 4 shows the weight of different variables and categories on the first factorial plane. The first dimension is differentiated on the basis of categories of wealth index (Wealth_index= 0.48) and level of education (education= 0.42). It seemed to explain the social level of residents. Thus, this first axis produced by the analysis structures the population of the survey and distinguishes:

* poor individuals (low wealth_index =<3), who have never been to school and who do not know if their zone is at risk of flooding or not,

* and individuals who do not present these characteristics;

36 The second dimension opposes two aspects:

* the modalities at the bottom of the graph indicate a doubt about awareness of the instructions (on the right) and the precautions (on the left) and on perceptions of risk in the residential zone;
* and the modalities at the top of the graph, which correspond to the representation of those who have a clear position as to their knowledge of the guidelines and the risk in the residential zone.

37 This dimension is discriminated on the basis of representations (percep_zone=0.18) and knowledge of precautions (warnings=0.33) and civil protection instructions (cp_instruc= 0.31).

<figure><img src="image_14.png" /><figcaption>Figure 4: Profile of the people surveyed according to their responses on axes 1 and 2 of the MCA</figcaption></figure>

38 The factor score generated for the 10 dimensions was used as input data for cluster analysis by Hierarchical Agglomerative Clustering.

## Profiles of the most vulnerable populations in the city

39 The HAC undertaken following the MCA makes it possible to highlight eight clusters with a certain diversity within each group (Figure 5).
<figure><img src="image_15.png" /><figcaption>Figure 5: Dendrogram of individuals resulting from Hierarchical Agglomerative Clustering of Ouagadougou's inhabitants</figcaption></figure>

40

A scale of vulnerability from one to eight, based on the interpretation of these clusters, is constructed, with level 1 the lowest level of vulnerability and 8 the highest. This scale depends on an interpretation of statistical results obtained. It is therefore at least partially subjective, despite all the efforts made. Thus, the scales revealed by this method are not comparable from one study to another, even if the approach is reproducible.

41

Figure 6 shows the distribution of the eight levels of vulnerability and summarizes the main factors that differentiate all these clusters of residents on the first factor plane. It shows that the groups are organized according to their social level as well as knowledge and representations. Details of each profile are mentioned in the different boxes.
<figure><img src="image_16.png" /><figcaption>Figure 6<sup>9</sup>: Distribution of the surveyed populations into eight clusters on the 1st factor plane</figcaption></figure>

42 The specific characteristics of each cluster are analysed in the sub-sections below.

43 Type 1 - vulnerability level 1. The first group (n=18.20%) with the lowest level of vulnerability is the affluent households (wealth_index = 5), whose representatives have mostly a high level of education and a good knowledge of flood precautionary measures. They are convinced that their residential area is not subject to flooding or prohibited for construction probably because they have very rarely been flooded.

44 Type 2 - vulnerability level 2. The second group (n=6.46%) concerns mostly middle class households (wealth_index= 3). Their household-representatives are aware of the precautions to take, do not have risk behaviour but are ignorant of the causes of the floods.

45 Type 3 - vulnerability level 3. The third group (n=10.11%) concerns the households with representatives who think they live in a zone which is liable to flooding or is a prohibited area, who know the civil protection guidelines¹⁰ and the precautions to take¹¹ and who are well aware of the causes of floods. They do not have any risk behaviour (going to see the flood).

46 Type 4 - vulnerability level 4. The fourth group (n=17.69%) concerns household-representatives who claim to be aware of the precautions to take but do not know the civil protection guidelines. They have risk behaviour (wanting to return home during a flood) but they know about the causes of flooding. They think furthermore that the state is responsible for floods.

47 Type 5 - vulnerability level 5. The fifth group (12.72%) concerns households whose representatives are mainly illiterate, and have doubts about their knowledge (precaution, perception of the area, civil protection guidelines). They do not have risk
behaviour (going to see the flood) but do not think about clearing gutters to allow water to run off.

48 Type 6 - vulnerability level 6. The sixth group (6.27%) concerns poor households with household-representatives possessing a low level of education. They are aware of the precautions to take but not the civil protection instructions nor the cause of floods. They do not have risk behaviour.

49 Type 7 - vulnerability level 7. The seventh group (10.81%) concerns the household-representatives with a low level of education who do not know the civil protection guidelines nor the precautions to take and have risk behaviour. They do not want to be warned in the event of a flood.

50 Type 8 - vulnerability level 8. The eighth group (17.74%) concerns household-representatives with a low level of education, who have several risk behaviours (going to see the flood, not staying where the flood took them by surprise) despite some knowledge of the causes of flooding. They have no knowledge, moreover, of the civil protection guidelines.

## Spatial distribution of vulnerability profiles

51 Figure 7 shows the spatial location of respondents according to their vulnerability profile. This enables identification of settlements of the less vulnerable populations in the central zone of Ouagadougou, in particular the neighbourhoods of Koulouba, Larlé, Ouidi, Gounghin, Zogona-Wemtenga and Dassasgho. A wealth index and a high level of education as well as knowledge of the precautions to take contribute to a low vulnerability in this part of the city (Appendix D).

<figure><img src="image_17.png" /><figcaption>Figure 7: Vulnerability profile of Ouagadougou populations</figcaption></figure>

Source: PigéO 2015, Raincell 2017 Survey
52

The sectors near the intra-urban dams (Dapoya, Tanghin, Somgandé) have themselves a low socio-spatial vulnerability index. This can be explained by the victim relocation measures that were undertaken by the municipality (Hangnon et al. 2018). As well, the effectiveness of the awareness campaign undertaken by the civil protection services in these neighbourhoods, and the acquisition of a certain risk culture, could also have contributed to improving the profile of the populations in this zone.

53

However, the most vulnerable zone is located in the outskirts of Ouagadougou, principally in the western zone in the neighbourhoods of Rimkieta, Bassinko, Marcoussi, Nonghin and Bissighin. A low level of education, risk behaviour as well as a lack of knowledge of the safety guidelines characterize the individuals in this group (Appendix C). Furthermore, the zones of Rimkieta-west and Balkuy are zones where no flood-linked regulations are applied, despite strong social vulnerability. These sectors, in fact, have been seriously affected by flooding in the last 20 years (Arcens Somé, 2012). These are zones situated near the shallows with a great biophysical vulnerability. A certain discrepancy exists, therefore, between the effective vulnerability and the flood regulations in these zones because the topography and social aspects are not criteria which are taken into account when delineating the zones at risk.

54

Vulnerability of the populations in the Rimkieta zone is all the greater as it constitutes, together with the neighbourhoods of Marcoussi and Zongo, places with the lowest wealth index (see Figure 3). Their inhabitants will consequently find it much harder to recover from the impact of a flood since the means at their disposal are not substantial enough.

55

What is more, Bassenko and Yagma constitute a new subdivided zone dating from the 2000s (Boyer, Delaunay, 2009) and displaced person sites from the 2009 flood (Essone Nkoghe, 2012). These displaced persons were not necessarily made aware of the precautions and behaviour to adopt, hence their great vulnerability.

# Discussion

## Natural flood-linked risks: the benefits of creating socio-spatial vulnerability profiles based on survey data

56

Social vulnerability is a complex, dynamic process which varies in time and space. Vulnerability indexes are a means with which to describe this complex reality simply and to enable inter-locality and intra-locality comparisons. For about twenty years, the emergence of the use of composite indicators has been observed in risk management, which denotes the desire of stakeholders and decision-makers to have an objective basis from which to direct their actions. Therefore, several stakeholders have worked to set up indexes to quantify the probability that a society will be adversely affected by a hazard (Fekete, 2009; Flanagan et al., 2011; Flanagan, Hallisey, Adams, Lavery, 2018; Rygel, O'sullivan, Yarnal, 2006). These different indexes make it possible, inter alia, to understand the vulnerability of diverse localities in the same country or continent and to establish comparisons (SoVI¹², World Risk Index, Floods vulnerability index etc.) or predict the resilience of societies (BRIC¹³...) (Cutter et al., 2003; Cutter, Burton, Emrich, 2010; Hugon, 2017; Karambiri et al., 2015). There are, moreover, a certain number of indexes (like the human development index, the economic vulnerability index, the physical vulnerability to climate change index, the living planet index, the city
development index, the ecological footprint, etc.) implemented in related disciplines in order to have a better understanding of societies (Böhringer, Jochem, 2007; Cutter et al., 2010).

57

However, all of these indexes cannot properly assess vulnerability because information is lost when attempting to synthesize it, despite its multidimensional nature, into a single index. Thus, they have been highly criticized in the scientific literature (Rakotoarisoa et al., 2018). Our typology approach, inspired by the work of Rufat (2013; 2019), which groups the population into several levels of vulnerability based on several specific factors, is therefore very appropriate.

58

Many of the aforementioned works on vulnerability assessment using indexes actually focus on the exposure of a population, an asset or a locality to risk. They therefore focus on the quantifiable characteristics of societies in order to analyse the potential of damage. However, social representations are essential aspects to take into consideration in order to understand how a risk is likely to have impacts on the territory (D'Ercole, Metzger, 2009). Indeed, the extent of losses, although linked to quantifiable socio-economic characteristics, will not be the same depending on the attitude of the populations affected by a risk. Indeed, social vulnerability cannot be reduced to a simple analysis of exposure to risk.

59

Vulnerability assessment therefore goes beyond exposure issues by analysing the occupancy of unsuitable buildings (Jonkman, Kelman, 2005; Vinet et al., 2011) and more generally land use, population behaviour before, during and after a flood (Ruin, 2007; Wilson, 2006), socio-economic conditions (financial and psychological capacities) as well as non-compliance with safety instructions. It is therefore necessary to determine different profiles that take into consideration the specificities of each area, taking into account both quantifiable socio-economic characteristics and psychosocial aspects, which incidentally remain undetectable by census data.

60

These census data are often either outdated or at scales that do not allow for local vulnerability analysis. For instance, in the case of Burkina Faso, the reports presenting the results of the 2020 general population census only presented data at a scale greater than or equal to the municipality. Analysing vulnerability at lower levels (e.g. by neighbourhood) is almost impossible with this type of data. Moreover, they tend to ignore the particularities and heterogeneity in each municipality. Our approach based on survey data is therefore more interesting.

61

Although there are limits to the profiles that we are putting in place, in particular in terms of replicability because of the costs of the surveys, it nevertheless makes it possible to mitigate certain deficiencies of indicators based only on quantifiable aspects of census data (Böhringer, Jochem, 2007; Jones, Andrey, 2007; Tate, 2012). For example, the selection of variables is not limited to available census data, but was thought out prior to the survey to take into account the holistic nature of vulnerability.

## An original approach to determine vulnerability profiles and their underlying drivers

62

Our study on vulnerability profiles in Ouagadougou is essentially based on a sociological approach. The study of social vulnerability profiles is an alternative approach to indices that quantifies the vulnerability of a territory by aggregating
several variables into a single synthetic index. This method combines factor analysis and classification to determine spatially coherent vulnerability profiles. In our study, we opted for a hierarchical agglomerative clustering, which remains one of the most widely used methods in the literature. This clustering approach has been used to highlight population typologies in several studies with or without factor analysis as an input (Chang, Yip, Conger, Oulahen, Marteleira, 2018; Fischer, Chhatre, 2016; Rufat, 2013; Shukla, Agarwal, Gornott, Sachdeva, Joshi, 2019; Wood, Jones, Spielman, Schmidtlein, 2015).

63
The value of this approach is that it indicates the level of vulnerability of each profile but also explains the reasons for that vulnerability. At a spatial scale, the method is an opportunity to explain why some local areas are more vulnerable than others and thus to adopt targeted measures to improve the situation. Spatially representing vulnerability profiles therefore has policy implications by highlighting priority areas for assistance and coping capacity. As our results show, many variables are likely to have an impact on social vulnerability. The MCA carried out before the clustering is a good way to make a sparing selection of these variables. Combined with classification methods, it also offers the advantage of determining profiles on the basis of qualitative data.

64
However, some simplifications may threaten the validity of the method. The analysis, for example, is based on the relatively subjective choice of the number of dimensions to be retained in the MCA, which can have a significant effect on the final result. This subjectivity is linked to the existence of various criteria (elbow rule, Kaizer criterion, analysis of variance, etc.) for the choice of dimensions.

65
Although the employee classification method provides interesting results, it seems appropriate to consider a consolidation of the typology highlighted by the HAC. Indeed, many clustering methods have emerged for several years now (dynamic clouds method, fuzzy method, self-organizing map...). Some of them, such as the K-means method, have already been used in studies successfully and could be considered in our case to reinforce the coherence of clusters.

Urban policies, risk behaviours and social status: three key factors
of social-spatial vulnerability

66
Individuals showing a high level of social vulnerability can be found in particular on the urban fringes on the outskirts, essentially in non-subdivided housing areas.

67
The most vulnerable populations, therefore, shown by our analysis, are the populations which have a tendency to adopt risk behaviours in going to see the flood or in not staying where they are when a flood occurs. Observable risk-taking behaviour could be justified by minimizing the impacts of the disaster and the belief in the effectiveness of coping strategies. These behaviours can largely be understood as "*the thrill of the sight of a flood*" (Wilson, 2006, p. 59), the desire to offer assistance in the event of people in difficulty or of not wanting to leave their goods unattended. Wilson (2006) talks of a "*normality bias*" for the loss of goods is often interpreted by the victims in terms of known consequences whereas the risk of death from a flood is unknown, difficult to predict and often minimized. Risk behaviour is seen in the same vein, therefore, as strategies implemented by populations to "cope" with risks. Colbeau (2002) shows that these strategies take account of cognitive and social aspects in conjunction with the
perception of risk, of relativizing the situation, the desire to regain a certain control and the level of stress induced by danger.

68

Beyond these cognitive aspects highlighted by our study, some studies on West African towns have already confirmed the heightened vulnerability to floods of populations living in the outskirts (Diongue, 2014; Ould Sidi Cheikh, Ozer, Ozer, 2007). These spaces in Ouagadougou, built using precarious materials and not complying with any planning laws, testify to the difficulties that the public authorities have in implementing planning schedules capable of anticipating urban growth. Despite a voluntary urban policy under the revolutionary regime, determined to curb definitively these housing pockets of often precarious populations (Fournet, Meunier-Nikiema, Salem, 2008), these forms of space occupancy have remained. Indeed, urban spatial extension has contributed progressively to the absorption of rural territories, encroached on by the city, with no urban planning document defining the places and spaces of installation of rainwater collection systems to counter the effects of runoff¹⁴.

69

To reduce social vulnerability in Ouagadougou, policies to fight against poverty and flooding should be implemented as well as awareness systems which can be effectively disseminated to populations. Awareness has already been initiated by the state using the print media to disseminate the proper conduct to have in the event of flooding, but the question arises as to the effectiveness and adequacy of this written mode of raising awareness in a country where the rate of illiteracy is close to 75% (INSD, 2015).

## Conclusion

70

Preparing for, coping with, protecting against, and recovering from floods depends as much on an individual's intrinsic characteristics (socio-demographics, income, knowledge etc.) as their ability to correctly assess hazards, adopt appropriate behaviour, and cope with risk. In our study, the large amounts of data collected and the statistical techniques used allowed for a comprehensive analysis without preconceived ideas about the knowledge and spatial distribution of social vulnerability levels in Ouagadougou.

71

Our study provides managers with a framework for understanding and assessing social vulnerability. However, although the implemented classification method is highly interesting, it can be improved, mainly through consolidation techniques for identified clusters.

72

In view of the results obtained, it appears that for a more effective management of flood risks, the city of Ouagadougou should focus on certain measures. These include improving the living conditions of the population (fighting poverty and illiteracy) and raising their awareness to promote appropriate behaviour. Furthermore, improvement in housing conditions by means of better spatial organization of dwellings is an important line to define in urban planning documentation. Developing social housing in the city might reduce the pressure on informal settlements and limit land-use speculation.

73

In our study, we have discussed the constraints of using census data for classification. However, the costs of implementing the urban survey we used (about 10 000 euros just for the survey) can be a significant barrier to identifying and characterizing
vulnerability profiles. Reflection is therefore necessary to facilitate this type of
evaluation on a regular basis and in several localities.

74

If alternatives are developed to facilitate access to data, particularly qualitative data, the social vulnerability profiles method could be considered as a multi-scale technique for assessing and understanding vulnerability at both local and sub-regional levels.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

ADGER W. N., 2006, "Vulnerability", *Global Environmental Change*, Vol.16, N°3, 268-281.

ADGER W. N., BROOKS N., KELLY M., BENTHAM G., ERIKSEN S., 2004, *New indicators of vulnerability and adaptive capacity tyndall project*. Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research.

ARCENS SOMÉ M.-T., 2012, "Familles en survie dans un espace défavorisé à Ouagadougou", 33-48 in: *Negotiating the Livelihoods of Children and Youth in Africa's Urban Spaces*. African Books Collective.

BALICA S. F., WRIGHT N. G., VAN DER MEULEN F., 2012, "A flood vulnerability index for coastal cities and its use in assessing climate change impacts", *Natural Hazards*, Vol.64, N°1, 73-105.

BECERRA S., 2012, "Vulnérabilité, risques et environnement : l'itinéraire chaotique d'un paradigme sociologique contemporain", *VertigO- La revue en sciences de l'environnement*, Vol.12, N°1, 1-27.

BECERRA S., PELTIER A., ANTOINE J. M., LABAT D., CHORDA J., RIBOLZI O., ET AL., 2013, "Comprendre les comportements face à un risque modéré d'inondation - Etude de cas dans le périurbain toulousain (Sud-Ouest de la France)", *Hydrological Sciences Journal*, Vol.58, N°5, 945-965.

BIRKMANN J., 2007, "Risk and vulnerability indicators at different scales: applicability, usefulness and policy implications", *Environmental Hazards*, Vol.7, N°1, 20-31.

BIRKMANN J., WISNER B., 2006, *Measuring the un-measurable: the challenge of vulnerability*. Bonn, Germany, UNU-EHS.

BÖHRINGER C., JOCHEM P. E. P., 2007, "Measuring the immeasurable - A survey of sustainability indices", *Ecological Economics*, Vol.63, N°1, 1-8.

BONNET E., 2002, *Risques industriels : évaluation des vulnérabilités territoriales : le cas de l'estuaire de seine*. Université Le Havre, 327 p.

BOYER F., DELAUNAY D., 2009, *Ouaga2009 - Peuplement de Ouagadougou et développement urbain*.

BUCKLE P., MARSH G., SMALE S., 2001, *Assessing resilience and vulnerability: Principles, strategies and actions*. Victorian Government Publishing Services.

BURTON I., KATES R. W., WHITE G. F., 1993, *The environment as hazard*. New York, Taylor & Francis e-Library, 290 p.

CARDONA O. D., 2004, "The need for rethinking the concepts of vulnerability and risk from a holistic perspective: a necessary review and criticism for effective risk management", 37-51 in: *Mapping Vulnerability: Disasters, Development and People*. Routledge.
CHANG S. E., YIP J. Z. K., CONGER T., OULAHEN G., MARTELEIRA M., 2018, "Community vulnerability to coastal hazards: Developing a typology for disaster risk reduction", *Applied Geography*, Vol.91, 81–88.

CHARRAD M., GHAZZALI N., BOITEAU V., NIKNAFS A., 2014, "NbClust: An R Package for Determining the Relevant Number of Clusters in a Data Set", *Journal of Statistical Software*, Vol.61, N°1, 1–36.

COLBEAU-JUSTIN L., 2002, *Stratégies de faire face dans le cas d'une inondation catastrophique : analyse des paramètres psychosociaux dans les procédures de gestion de crise*. Ministère de l'Ecologie et du Développement durable.

CRED., 2020, *Human Cost of Disasters (2000-2019)*. Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters CRED; UCLouvain; USAID. https://cred.be/sites/default/files/CRED-Disaster-Report-Human-Cost2000-2019.pdf

CUTTER S. L., 1996, "Vulnerability to environmental hazards", *Progress in Human Geography*, Vol.20, N°4, 529–539.

CUTTER S. L., BORUFF B. J., SHIRLEY L. W., 2003, "Social vulnerability to environmental hazards", *Social Science Quarterly*, Vol.84, N°2, 242–261.

CUTTER S. L., BURTON C. G., EMRICH C. T., 2010, "Disaster resilience indicators for benchmarking baseline conditions", *Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management*, Vol.7, N°1, 1–22.

DELAUNAY D., BOYER F., 2017, *Habiter Ouagadougou*. Institut d'étude du développement économique et social (IEDES), Université Paris 1 Panthéon Sorbonne.

D'ERCOLE R., METZGER A., 2009, "La vulnérabilité territoriale : unenouvelle approche des risques en milieu urbain", *Cybergeo : European Journal of Geography* [En ligne], N°Document 447, 16.

DIONGUE M., 2014, "Périphérie urbaine et risques d'inondation à Dakar (Sénégal) : le cas de Yeumbeul Nord", *ESO*, N°37, 45–54.

ESSONE NKOGHE J. P., 2012, *Transports actifs et stratégies d'accès à l'emploi des populations des quartiers périphériques dans les villes africaines : le cas de Ouagadougou*. Université du Québec à Montréal, 399 p.

FEKETE A., 2009, "Validation of a social vulnerability index in context to river-floods in Germany", *Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences*, Vol.9, N°2, 393–403.

FISCHER H. W., CHHATRE A., 2016, "Assets, livelihoods, and the ‘profile approach’ for analysis of differentiated social vulnerability in the context of climate change", *Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space*, Vol.48, N°4, 789–807.

FLANAGAN B. E., GREGORY E. W., HALLISEY E. J., HEITGERD J. L., LEWIS B., 2011, "A Social Vulnerability Index for Disaster Management", *Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management*, Vol.8, N°1. https://www.degruyter.com/view/j/jhsem.2011.8.issue-1/jhsem.2011.8.1.1792/jhsem.2011.8.1.1792.xml

FLANAGAN B. E., HALLISEY E. J., ADAMS E., LAVERY A., 2018, "Measuring Community Vulnerability to Natural and Anthropogenic Hazards: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Social Vulnerability Index", *Journal of environmental health*, Vol.80, N°10, 34–36.

FOURNET F., MEUNIER-NIKIEMA A., SALEM G., 2008, *Ouagadougou, 1850-2004 : une urbanisation différenciée*. Marseille, Institut de Recherche pour le Développement (IRD), 143 p.

HABIB BAWA I., 2018, "Sentiment d'efficacité personnelle et performances des étudiants de l'Université de Lomé : impact du sexe", *Les cahiers du CEDIMES*, Vol.12, N°3, 29–39.
HALLEGATE S., VOGT-SCHILB A., ROZENBERG J., 2016, *Indestructible- renforcer la résilience des plus pauvres face aux catastrophes naturelles*. World Bank Group.

HANGNON H., BONNET E., AMALRIC M., NIKIEMA A., 2018, "Prévention et stratégies d'adaptation face aux risques : mesures règlementaires et comportements individuels suite aux inondations de 2009 à Ouagadougou (Burkina Faso)", 241-266 in : *L'Etat réhabilité en Afrique : réinventer les politiques publiques à l'ère néolibérale*. Paris.

HANGNON H., DE LONGUEVILLE F., OZER P., 2015, "Précipitations “extrêmes” et inondations à Ouagadougou : quand le développement urbain est mal maîtrisé", 497-502 in : Liège.

HOSTACHE R., 2007, *Analyse d'images satellitaires d'inondations pour la caractérisation tridimensionnelle de l'aléa et l'aide à la modélisation hydraulique*. Montpellier, École Nationale du Génie Rural, des Eaux et Forêts (ENGREF), 257 p.

HUGON P., 2017, "Les trappes à vulnérabilité et les catastrophes : niveaux d'analyse et approches systémiques", *Mondes en développement*, Vol.45, N°180, 13-34.

HUSSON F., JOSSE J., PAGES J., 2010, *Principal component methods - hierarchical clustering - partitional clustering: why would we need to choose for visualizing data? Agrocampus ouest.*

JONES B., ANDREY J., 2007, "Vulnerability index construction: methodological choices and their influence on identifying vulnerable neighbourhoods", *International Journal of Emergency Management*, Vol.4, N°2, 269.

JONKMAN S. N., KELMAN I., 2005, "An analysis of the causes and circumstances of flood disaster deaths: an analysis of the causes and circumstances of flood disaster deaths", *Disasters*, Vol.29, N°1, 75-97.

KARAMBIRI H., TAZEN F., TRAORE K., BOLOGO/TRAORE M., COULIBALY M. G., 2015, *Floods vulnerability index “Grand Ouaga Area” (Burkina Faso)*. AMMA-2050.

KÉDOWIDÉ C. M. G., SEDOGO M. P., CISSÉ G., 2010, "Dynamique spatio temporelle de l'agriculture urbaine à Ouagadougou : Cas du Maraîchage comme une activité montante de stratégie de survie", *VertigO- La revue en sciences de l'environnement* [En ligne], Vol.10, N°2, 1-21.

KELLENS W., ZAALBERG R., NEUTENS T., VANNEUVILLE W., DE MAEYER P., 2011, "An Analysis of the Public Perception of Flood Risk on the Belgian Coast", *Risk Analysis*, Vol.31, N°7, 1055-1068.

KOUASSI A. M., KOUAMÉ K. F., KOFFI Y. B., DJE K. B., PATUREL J. E., OULARE S., 2010, "Analyse de la variabilité climatique et de ses influences sur les régimes pluviométriques saisonniers en Afrique de l'Ouest : cas du bassin versant du N'zi (Bandama) en Côte d'Ivoire", *Cybergeo : European Journal of Geography*. https://journals.openedition.org/cybergeo/23388

LALLAU B., ROUSSEAU S., 2009, "De la vulnérabilité à la résilience : une approche par les capabilités de la gestion des risques", 171-183 in : *Risques et environnement : recherches interdisciplinaires sur la vulnérabilité des sociétés*. Paris.

LHOMME S., LAGANIER R., DIAB Y., SERRE D., 2013, "La résilience de la ville de Dublin aux inondations : de la théorie à la pratique", *Cybergeo : European Journal of Geography*. https://journals.openedition.org/cybergeo/26026#tocto2n3

MESCHINET DE RICHEMOND N., REGHEZZA M., 2010, "La gestion du risque en France : contre ou avec le territoire ?", *Annales de géographie*, Vol.3, N°673, 248-267.
NTAJAL J., LAMPTEY B. L., MAHAMADOU I. B., NYARKO B. K., 2017, "Flood disaster risk mapping in the Lower Mono River Basin in Togo, West Africa", *International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction*, Vol.23, 93-103.

OULD SIDI CHEIKH M. A., OZER P., OZER A., 2007, "Risques d'inondations dans la ville de Nouakchott", *Revue internationale de géologie, de géographie et d'écologie tropicales*, N°31, 19-42.

PELLING M., 2003, *Natural Disasters and Development in a Globalizing World*. London and New York, Taylor & Francis Group, 267 p.

PRADHAN B., 2010, "Flood susceptible mapping and risk area delineation using logistic regression, GIS and remote sensing", *Journal of Spatial Hydrology*, Vol.9, N°2. http://www.hydromap.com/josh/index.php/JOSH/article/view/81

PRÉSIDENT DU FASO., 2009, "Décret N°2009-793/PRES/PM/MHU/MATD/MEF/MID/MAHRH/MECV portant réglementation des servitudes des canaux primaires d'évacuation des eaux pluviales, des zones inondables inconstructibles et des zones submersibles dans la ville de Ouagadougou.", *Journal officiel n° 50 du 10 décembre 2009*.

QUENAULT B., 2015, "La vulnérabilité, un concept central de l'analyse des risques urbains en lien avec le changement climatique", *Les Annales de la recherche urbaine*, Vol.110, N°1, 138-151.

RAKOTOARISOA M. M., FLEURANT C., TAIBI A. N., ROUAN M., CAILLAULT S., RAZAKAMANANA T., ET AL., 2018, "Un modèle multi-agents pour évaluer la vulnérabilité aux inondations : le cas des villages aux alentours du Fleuve Fiherenana (Madagascar)", *Cybergeo : European Journal of Geography*. https://journals.openedition.org/cybergeo/29144#tocto2n4

REGHEZZA M., 2006, *Réflexions autour de la vulnérabilité métropolitaine : la métropole parisienne face au risque de crue centennale*. Université Paris X- Nanterre, 385 p.

RENISIO Y., SINTHON R., 2014, "L'analyse des correspondances multiples au service de l'enquête de terrain : Pour en finir avec le dualisme « quantitatif » / « qualitatif »", *Genèses*, Vol.4, N°97, 109-125.

RÉROLLE C., FAISANT M., TELMON N., SAINT-MARTIN P., 2015, "Mise en évidence des profils individuels des assurés impliqués dans les expertises de sécurité sociale", *La Revue de Médecine Légale*, Vol.6, N°2, 53-59.

RITSCHARD G., ZIGHED D., NICOLoyANNIS N., 2001, "Maximisation de l'association par regroupement de lignes ou de colonnes d'un tableau croisé", *Mathématiques et sciences humaines*, Vol.39, N°154-155, 81-97.

ROBINEAU O., 2014, "Les quartiers non-lotis : espaces de l'entre-deux dans la ville burkinabé", *Carnets de géographes*, N°7, 1-11.

RUFAT S., 2013, "Spectroscopy of Urban Vulnerability", *Annals of the Association of American Geographers*, Vol.103, N°3, 505-525.

RUFAT S., TATE E., BURTON C. G., MAROOF A. S., 2015, "Social vulnerability to floods: Review of case studies and implications for measurement", *International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction*, Vol.14, 470-486.

RUFAT S., TATE E., EMRICH C. T., ANTOLINI F., 2019, "How Valid Are Social Vulnerability Models?", *Annals of the American Association of Geographers*, Vol.109, N°4, 1131-1153.

RUIN I., 2007, *Conduite à contre-courant. Les pratiques de mobilité dans le Gard : facteur de vulnérabilité aux crues rapides*. Université Joseph Fourier, 363 p.
RUIN I., LUTOFF C., 2004, "Vulnérabilité face aux crues rapides et mobilités des populations en temps de crise", *La Houille Blanche*, N°6, 114-119.

RYGEL L., O'SULLIVAN D., YARNAL B., 2006, "A Method for Constructing a Social Vulnerability Index: An Application to Hurricane Storm Surges in a Developed Country", *Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change*, Vol.11, N°3, 741-764.

SCHMIDTLEIN M. C., DEUTSCH R. C., PIEGORSCH W. W., CUTTER S. L., 2008, "A Sensitivity Analysis of the Social Vulnerability Index", *Risk Analysis*, Vol.28, N°4, 1099-1114.

SHUKLA R., AGARWAL A., GORNOTT C., SACHDEVA K., JOSHI P. K., 2019, "Farmer typology to understand differentiated climate change adaptation in Himalaya", *Scientific Reports*, Vol.9, N°1, 20375.

SORY I., TALLET B., 2012, "Des choix d'aménagement urbain porteurs d'inégalités sociales et environnementales : la gestion des déchets solides à Ouagadougou (Burkina Faso)", *Flux*, Vol.3, N°89-90, 79-89.

SPIELMAN S. E., TUCCILLO J., FOLCH D. C., SCHWEIKERT A., DAVIES R., WOOD N., ET AL., 2020, "Evaluating social vulnerability indicators: criteria and their application to the Social Vulnerability Index", *Natural Hazards*, Vol.100, N°1, 417-436.

TATE E., 2012, "Social vulnerability indices: a comparative assessment using uncertainty and sensitivity analysis", *Natural Hazards*, Vol.63, N°2, 325-347.

TAYLOR C., TRAORÉ/BOLOGO M., TAZEN F., 2019, "Burkina Faso : vers plus de phénomènes d'inondation dans la zone de Ouagadougou", *AGRIPADE*, N°Numéro spécial. http://www.iedafrique.org/Burkina-Faso-Vers-plus-de-phenomenes-d-inondation-dans-la-zone-de-Ouagadougou.html

TAZEN F., TRAORÉ K., OUEDRAOGO H., BOLOGO/TRAORÉ M., COULIBALY G., KARAMBIRI H., 2019, "Evaluation de la vulnérabilité des populations aux inondations à Ouagadougou : cas des secteurs de paspanga, Kilwin et Kossodo", *AGRIDAPE*, N°numéro spécial.

TIAN Q., LEMOS M. C., 2018, "Household Livelihood Differentiation and Vulnerability to Climate Hazards in Rural China", *World Development*, Vol.108, 321-331.

TIENDREBEOGO Y., 1963, "Histoire traditionnelle des Mossi de Ouagadougou", *Journal des Africanistes*, Vol.33, N°1, 7-46.

TURNER B. L., KASPERSON R. E., MATSON P. A., MCCARTHY J. J., CORELL R. W., CHRISTENSEN L., ET AL., 2003, "A framework for vulnerability analysis in sustainability science", *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences*, Vol.100, N°14, 8074-8079.

UNDP., 2004, *Reducing disaster risk: a challenge for development; a global report*. New York, United Nations Development Programme. https://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/librarypage/crisis-prevention-and-recovery/reducing-disaster-risk--a-challenge-for-development.html

VAN WESTEN C. J., 2013, "3.10 Remote Sensing and GIS for Natural Hazards Assessment and Disaster Risk Management", 259-298 in: *Treatise on Geomorphology*. Elsevier. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/B9780123747396000518

VINET F., BOISSIER L., DEFOSSEZ S., 2011, "La mortalité comme expression de la vulnérabilité humaine face aux catastrophes naturelles : deux inondations récentes en France (Xynthia, var, 2010)", *VertigO- La revue en sciences de l'environnement*, Vol.11, N°2, 1-23.

WILHELMI O. V., MORSS R. E., 2013, "Integrated analysis of societal vulnerability in an extreme precipitation event: A Fort Gollins case study", *Environmental Science & Policy*, Vol.26, 49-62.
WILSON T., 2006, "Les risques de blessures et de décès par imprudence lors des inondations", *Responsabilité & environnement*, N°43, 57-63.

WISNER B., BLAIKIE P., CANNON T., DAVIS I., 2003, *At risk- Natural hazards, people's vulnerability and disasters*. Routledge, 124 p.

WOOD N. J., JONES J., SPIELMAN S., SCHMIDTLEIN M. C., 2015, "Community clusters of tsunami vulnerability in the US Pacific Northwest", *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences*, Vol.112, N°17, 5354-5359.

WORLD FOOD PROGRAMME, 2017, *Creation of a wealth index*.

YABI H., SOSSOU K. B., AKINDELE A. A., BALOGOUN R. A., OGOUWALE E., 2019, "Effets des actions des PTF et échelle d'adaptation des communautés rurales aux inondations dans le doublet Karimama-Malanville (Bénin, Afrique de l'Ouest)", *European Scientific Journal*, Vol.15, N°9, 336-352.

# APPENDIXES

## Appendix A: Chi-square test on variables

<table><thead><tr><td></td><td>p.value</td><td>df</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Wealth_index</td><td>0</td><td>28</td></tr><tr><td>warning</td><td>0</td><td>14</td></tr><tr><td>see_out</td><td>0</td><td>7</td></tr><tr><td>percep_zone</td><td>4.93E-272</td><td>14</td></tr><tr><td>education</td><td>2.60E-217</td><td>28</td></tr><tr><td>cp_instruc</td><td>1.27E-177</td><td>14</td></tr><tr><td>c_floodplain_urb</td><td>8.01E-74</td><td>7</td></tr><tr><td>flood_time</td><td>2.65E-64</td><td>14</td></tr><tr><td>home_digging</td><td>5.07E-61</td><td>7</td></tr><tr><td>stay_out</td><td>1.09E-53</td><td>7</td></tr><tr><td>resp_state</td><td>1.11E-50</td><td>7</td></tr><tr><td>home_clean</td><td>2.06E-17</td><td>7</td></tr><tr><td>norm_flood</td><td>2.69E-06</td><td>7</td></tr></tbody></table>
## Appendix B: Eigenvalues and percentage variance explained by 10 dimensions using MCA output

<table><thead><tr><th></th><th>eigenvalue</th><th>Variance explained (%)</th><th>Cumulative variance (%)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>dim 1</td><td>0.149</td><td>8.41</td><td>8.41</td></tr><tr><td>dim 2</td><td>0.120</td><td>6.77</td><td>15.18</td></tr><tr><td>dim 3</td><td>0.106</td><td>5.99</td><td>21.18</td></tr><tr><td>dim 4</td><td>0.101</td><td>5.71</td><td>26.89</td></tr><tr><td>dim 5</td><td>0.089</td><td>5.04</td><td>31.93</td></tr><tr><td>dim 6</td><td>0.087</td><td>4.92</td><td>36.84</td></tr><tr><td>dim 7</td><td>0.083</td><td>4.68</td><td>41.52</td></tr><tr><td>dim 8</td><td>0.082</td><td>4.64</td><td>46.16</td></tr><tr><td>dim 9</td><td>0.079</td><td>4.48</td><td>50.63</td></tr><tr><td>dim 10</td><td>0.076</td><td>4.30</td><td>54.93</td></tr></tbody></table>

## Appendix C: Variable loadings of different variables and categories on the resultant 10 factors

<table><thead><tr><th></th><th>Dim.1</th><th>Dim.2</th><th>Dim.3</th><th>Dim.4</th><th>Dim.5</th><th>Dim.6</th><th>Dim.7</th><th>Dim.8</th><th>Dim.9</th><th>Dim.10</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Wealth_index</td><td>0.480</td><td>0.109</td><td>0.053</td><td>0.037</td><td>0.131</td><td>0.247</td><td>0.148</td><td>0.210</td><td>0.531</td><td>0.280</td></tr><tr><td>education</td><td>0.420</td><td>0.060</td><td>0.111</td><td>0.108</td><td>0.216</td><td>0.124</td><td>0.171</td><td>0.237</td><td>0.069</td><td>0.290</td></tr><tr><td>flood_time</td><td>0.136</td><td>0.272</td><td>0.221</td><td>0.009</td><td>0.037</td><td>0.019</td><td>0.030</td><td>0.065</td><td>0.112</td><td>0.082</td></tr><tr><td>norm_flood</td><td>0.026</td><td>0.000</td><td>0.001</td><td>0.003</td><td>0.329</td><td>0.013</td><td>0.019</td><td>0.207</td><td>0.000</td><td>0.037</td></tr><tr><td>resp_state</td><td>0.153</td><td>0.001</td><td>0.044</td><td>0.012</td><td>0.107</td><td>0.034</td><td>0.013</td><td>0.015</td><td>0.020</td><td>0.089</td></tr><tr><td>c_floodplain_urb</td><td>0.196</td><td>0.001</td><td>0.018</td><td>0.207</td><td>0.001</td><td>0.003</td><td>0.030</td><td>0.000</td><td>0.073</td><td>0.005</td></tr><tr><td>percep_zone</td><td>0.193</td><td>0.185</td><td>0.035</td><td>0.050</td><td>0.140</td><td>0.100</td><td>0.261</td><td>0.112</td><td>0.052</td><td>0.007</td></tr><tr><td>warning</td><td>0.099</td><td>0.335</td><td>0.190</td><td>0.227</td><td>0.045</td><td>0.071</td><td>0.165</td><td>0.034</td><td>0.014</td><td>0.002</td></tr><tr><td>cp_instruc</td><td>0.152</td><td>0.313</td><td>0.044</td><td>0.074</td><td>0.111</td><td>0.160</td><td>0.048</td><td>0.101</td><td>0.028</td><td>0.086</td></tr><tr><td>home_digging</td><td>0.014</td><td>0.210</td><td>0.017</td><td>0.003</td><td>0.008</td><td>0.132</td><td>0.099</td><td>0.015</td><td>0.071</td><td>0.084</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table><tr><td>home_clean</td><td>0.048</td><td>0.002</td><td>0.215</td><td>0.091</td><td>0.002</td><td>0.104</td><td>0.069</td><td>0.014</td><td>0.010</td><td>0.007</td></tr><tr><td>stay_out</td><td>0.017</td><td>0.027</td><td>0.001</td><td>0.406</td><td>0.005</td><td>0.120</td><td>0.023</td><td>0.001</td><td>0.043</td><td>0.013</td></tr><tr><td>see_out</td><td>0.001</td><td>0.042</td><td>0.427</td><td>0.087</td><td>0.026</td><td>0.003</td><td>0.001</td><td>0.054</td><td>0.005</td><td>0.006</td></tr></table>

## Appendix D: Main categories correlated to each cluster

<table><thead><tr><th>Vulnerability level</th><th>Variables</th><th>Cla.Mod</th><th>Mod.Cla</th><th>Global</th><th>p.value</th><th>v.test</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td rowspan="8">1</td><td>see_out=see_out_No</td><td>19.0</td><td>100.0</td><td>93.4</td><td>0.0</td><td>7.3</td></tr><tr><td>warning=warning_Yes</td><td>20.7</td><td>95.0</td><td>81.3</td><td>0.0</td><td>8.4</td></tr><tr><td>percep_zone=percep_zone_none</td><td>22.7</td><td>93.1</td><td>72.7</td><td>0.0</td><td>10.9</td></tr><tr><td>resp_state=resp_state_Yes</td><td>21.4</td><td>91.6</td><td>75.9</td><td>0.0</td><td>8.5</td></tr><tr><td>norm_flood=abnormal</td><td>16.5</td><td>82.8</td><td>89.0</td><td>0.0</td><td>-4.0</td></tr><tr><td>c_floodplain_urb=c_floodplain_urb_Yes</td><td>24.0</td><td>82.1</td><td>60.6</td><td>0.0</td><td>9.9</td></tr><tr><td>Wealth_index=5</td><td>62.9</td><td>70.7</td><td>19.9</td><td>0.0</td><td>24.7</td></tr><tr><td>home_digging=home_digging_No</td><td>24.0</td><td>55.9</td><td>41.4</td><td>0.0</td><td>6.3</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="5">2</td><td>education=university</td><td>72.9</td><td>52.5</td><td>12.8</td><td>0.0</td><td>22.2</td></tr><tr><td>see_out=see_out_No</td><td>13.6</td><td>99.6</td><td>93.4</td><td>0.0</td><td>5.5</td></tr><tr><td>warning=warning_Yes</td><td>15.4</td><td>98.2</td><td>81.3</td><td>0.0</td><td>9.1</td></tr><tr><td>Wealth_index=3</td><td>60.0</td><td>94.1</td><td>20.0</td><td>0.0</td><td>29.5</td></tr><tr><td>home_digging=home_digging_Yes</td><td>14.3</td><td>65.8</td><td>58.6</td><td>0.0</td><td>2.6</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="6">3</td><td>see_out=see_out_No</td><td>11.4</td><td>98.3</td><td>93.4</td><td>0.0</td><td>3.6</td></tr><tr><td>warning=warning_Yes</td><td>12.8</td><td>96.1</td><td>81.3</td><td>0.0</td><td>7.0</td></tr><tr><td>resp_state=resp_state_Yes</td><td>12.6</td><td>88.7</td><td>75.9</td><td>0.0</td><td>5.1</td></tr><tr><td>c_floodplain_urb=c_floodplain_urb_Yes</td><td>12.8</td><td>71.9</td><td>60.6</td><td>0.0</td><td>3.8</td></tr><tr><td>flood_time=2h</td><td>15.2</td><td>68.4</td><td>48.6</td><td>0.0</td><td>6.4</td></tr><tr><td>cp_instruc=cp_instruc_Yes</td><td>48.0</td><td>66.2</td><td>14.9</td><td>0.0</td><td>19.4</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table><tbody><tr><td></td><td>percep_zone=percep_zone_floodable/forbidden</td><td>79.5</td><td>57.1</td><td>7.8</td><td>0.0</td><td>22.5</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>home_digging=home_digging_No</td><td>14.7</td><td>56.3</td><td>41.4</td><td>0.0</td><td>4.8</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="9">4</td><td>see_out=see_out_No</td><td>18.9</td><td>99.7</td><td>93.4</td><td>0.0</td><td>6.8</td></tr><tr><td>warning=warning_Yes</td><td>21.3</td><td>97.9</td><td>81.3</td><td>0.0</td><td>10.7</td></tr><tr><td>percep_zone=percep_zone_none</td><td>22.1</td><td>90.7</td><td>72.7</td><td>0.0</td><td>9.4</td></tr><tr><td>resp_state=resp_state_Yes</td><td>20.1</td><td>86.5</td><td>75.9</td><td>0.0</td><td>5.5</td></tr><tr><td>stay_out=stay_out_No</td><td>21.5</td><td>84.9</td><td>69.8</td><td>0.0</td><td>7.4</td></tr><tr><td>home_digging=home_digging_Yes</td><td>24.6</td><td>81.5</td><td>58.6</td><td>0.0</td><td>10.3</td></tr><tr><td>c_floodplain_urb=c_floodplain_urb_Yes</td><td>20.2</td><td>69.3</td><td>60.6</td><td>0.0</td><td>3.9</td></tr><tr><td>cp_instruc=cp_instruc_No</td><td>15.4</td><td>56.3</td><td>64.8</td><td>0.0</td><td>-3.7</td></tr><tr><td>flood_time=1/2d</td><td>24.8</td><td>48.1</td><td>34.4</td><td>0.0</td><td>6.1</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Wealth_index=2</td><td>40.9</td><td>46.3</td><td>20.0</td><td>0.0</td><td>13.0</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="9">5</td><td>see_out=see_out_No</td><td>6.8</td><td>98.6</td><td>93.4</td><td>0.0</td><td>2.9</td></tr><tr><td>home_clean=home_clean_No</td><td>7.3</td><td>95.7</td><td>84.7</td><td>0.0</td><td>4.1</td></tr><tr><td>warning=warning_1dk</td><td>74.4</td><td>84.1</td><td>7.3</td><td>0.0</td><td>24.5</td></tr><tr><td>resp_state=resp_state_Yes</td><td>5.7</td><td>67.4</td><td>75.9</td><td>0.0</td><td>-2.4</td></tr><tr><td>percep_zone=percep_zone_1dk</td><td>20.3</td><td>61.6</td><td>19.6</td><td>0.0</td><td>11.3</td></tr><tr><td>education=never_school</td><td>9.6</td><td>61.6</td><td>41.3</td><td>0.0</td><td>4.9</td></tr><tr><td>flood_time=2h</td><td>7.8</td><td>58.7</td><td>48.6</td><td>0.0</td><td>2.4</td></tr><tr><td>cp_instruc=cp_instruc_1dk</td><td>18.4</td><td>58.0</td><td>20.3</td><td>0.0</td><td>10.1</td></tr><tr><td>cp_instruc=cp_instruc_No</td><td>4.1</td><td>41.3</td><td>64.8</td><td>0.0</td><td>-5.8</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="7">6</td><td>see_out=see_out_No</td><td>19.4</td><td>99.7</td><td>93.4</td><td>0.0</td><td>6.9</td></tr><tr><td>warning=warning_Yes</td><td>21.8</td><td>97.4</td><td>81.3</td><td>0.0</td><td>10.5</td></tr><tr><td>norm_flood=abnormal</td><td>19.5</td><td>95.1</td><td>89.0</td><td>0.0</td><td>4.6</td></tr><tr><td>cp_instruc=cp_instruc_No</td><td>24.1</td><td>85.9</td><td>64.8</td><td>0.0</td><td>10.2</td></tr><tr><td>home_digging=home_digging_Yes</td><td>22.3</td><td>72.0</td><td>58.6</td><td>0.0</td><td>6.0</td></tr><tr><td>c_floodplain_urb=c_floodplain_urb_No</td><td>33.1</td><td>71.7</td><td>39.4</td><td>0.0</td><td>14.3</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table><tbody><tr><td></td><td>education=never_school</td><td>28.5</td><td>64.8</td><td>41.3</td><td>0.0</td><td>10.3</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>stay_out=stay_out_Yes</td><td>36.8</td><td>61.2</td><td>30.2</td><td>0.0</td><td>14.1</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Wealth_index=1</td><td>51.8</td><td>56.8</td><td>20.0</td><td>0.0</td><td>18.4</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>percep_zone=percep_zone_none</td><td>13.9</td><td>55.5</td><td>72.7</td><td>0.0</td><td>-8.1</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>resp_state=resp_state_Yes</td><td>12.1</td><td>50.4</td><td>75.9</td><td>0.0</td><td>-12.3</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>resp_state=resp_state_No</td><td>37.5</td><td>49.6</td><td>24.1</td><td>0.0</td><td>12.3</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>percep_zone=percep_zone_Pdk</td><td>40.2</td><td>43.2</td><td>19.6</td><td>0.0</td><td>12.1</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="10">7</td><td>see_out=see_out_No</td><td>10.6</td><td>98.1</td><td>93.4</td><td>0.0</td><td>3.3</td></tr><tr><td>home_clean=home_clean_No</td><td>11.4</td><td>95.4</td><td>84.7</td><td>0.0</td><td>5.1</td></tr><tr><td>cp_instruc=cp_instruc_No</td><td>14.5</td><td>93.1</td><td>64.8</td><td>0.0</td><td>10.2</td></tr><tr><td>percep_zone=percep_zone_none</td><td>12.9</td><td>92.6</td><td>72.7</td><td>0.0</td><td>7.7</td></tr><tr><td>warning=warning_No</td><td>81.5</td><td>91.7</td><td>11.4</td><td>0.0</td><td>31.0</td></tr><tr><td>stay_out=stay_out_No</td><td>12.3</td><td>84.7</td><td>69.8</td><td>0.0</td><td>5.3</td></tr><tr><td>norm_flood=abnormal</td><td>9.6</td><td>84.3</td><td>89.0</td><td>0.0</td><td>-2.2</td></tr><tr><td>home_digging=home_digging_No</td><td>19.3</td><td>79.2</td><td>41.4</td><td>0.0</td><td>11.9</td></tr><tr><td>flood_time=2h</td><td>16.3</td><td>78.2</td><td>48.6</td><td>0.0</td><td>9.4</td></tr><tr><td>resp_state=resp_state_Yes</td><td>9.4</td><td>70.4</td><td>75.9</td><td>0.0</td><td>-2.0</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>education=never_school</td><td>16.4</td><td>67.1</td><td>41.3</td><td>0.0</td><td>8.1</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>c_floodplain_urb=c_floodplain_urb_Yes</td><td>9.0</td><td>53.7</td><td>60.6</td><td>0.0</td><td>-2.2</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="10">8</td><td>see_out=see_out_Yes</td><td>90.8</td><td>96.3</td><td>6.6</td><td>0.0</td><td>29.0</td></tr><tr><td>c_floodplain_urb=c_floodplain_urb_Yes</td><td>9.4</td><td>91.0</td><td>60.6</td><td>0.0</td><td>8.1</td></tr><tr><td>stay_out=stay_out_No</td><td>7.9</td><td>88.1</td><td>69.8</td><td>0.0</td><td>5.1</td></tr><tr><td>cp_instruc=cp_instruc_No</td><td>7.8</td><td>80.6</td><td>64.8</td><td>0.0</td><td>4.1</td></tr><tr><td>warning=warning_Yes</td><td>5.8</td><td>74.6</td><td>81.3</td><td>0.0</td><td>-2.0</td></tr><tr><td>resp_state=resp_state_Yes</td><td>5.4</td><td>65.7</td><td>75.9</td><td>0.0</td><td>-2.8</td></tr><tr><td>home_clean=home_clean_No</td><td>4.5</td><td>61.2</td><td>84.7</td><td>0.0</td><td>-6.9</td></tr><tr><td>education=never_school</td><td>7.6</td><td>50.0</td><td>41.3</td><td>0.0</td><td>2.1</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table><tr><td>flood_time=+1day</td><td>14.9</td><td>40.3</td><td>17.0</td><td>0.0</td><td>6.6</td></tr><tr><td>home_clean=home_clean_Yes</td><td>15.9</td><td>38.8</td><td>15.3</td><td>0.0</td><td>6.9</td></tr><tr><td>resp_state=resp_state_No</td><td>8.9</td><td>34.3</td><td>24.1</td><td>0.0</td><td>2.8</td></tr><tr><td>Wealth_index=1</td><td>8.7</td><td>27.6</td><td>20.0</td><td>0.0</td><td>2.2</td></tr></table>

## Appendix E: Factor map

<figure><img src="image_18.png" /></figure>

## Appendix F: Questionnaire

### Introduction

Hello,

I'm part of a project aiming at understanding how flooding appears in Ouagadougou and its effects. Would you agree to participate in this survey? It takes 15 minutes and is anonymous.

**a. Have you lived here for more than 2 years?**

Yes

No → go to the end

**b. As a resident, are you**

Permanent

Temporary → go to the end

**c. Are you the head of the household (or the wife/husband, child, cousin)?**

Yes

No → go to the end
d. How old are you?

(integer)

Under 18 → go to the end

e. Explicit agreement to answer

Yes

No → go to the end

VOLUNTARY PARTICIPATION

Your household was chosen to be part of our one-off flood survey. The questionnaire is anonymous and we ensure the confidentiality of your participation in the study and the content of your answers.

When analysing the results, there will be no mention of your identity or any statement that may allow you to be recognized. The results of the study will provide the authorities with tools to improve the prevention of flood risk.

Your participation is up to you and voluntary. Failure to participate does not entail any sanction whatsoever.

CONTACT FOR MORE INFORMATION:

If you have any questions, please ask them now or later on. If you prefer to do it later, you can contact:

Emmanuel Bonnet, IRD, tel: 00 226 66 98 35 69

Aude Nikiema, INSS, tel: 00 226 70 22 16 30

Electronic signature

Yes

No → go to the end

Personal information

Sex

Male

Female

Marital status

Married

Cohabitation

Widowed

Single

Divorced

How many people regularly live there (more than 6 months and under the authority of the household's head)?

(integer)
**What is your religion?**

Animist

Christian

Muslim

Other

None

**What is your main occupation?**

Student

Farmer / vegetable producer

Fisherman / cattle breeder

Craftsman

Public employee

Private employee

Liberal Profession

Shopkeeper

Retired

Business Executive

Unemployed

**What is your educational background?**

Never went to go school

Literate

Koranic school

Primary school

Secondary school

Higher education / University

**Ownership status of the household**

The head of the household is the owner

The head of the household rents

The head of the household occupies the house for free

**How long has your family lived in the area?**

2 to 5 years

6 to 10 years

10 to 20 years

More than 29 years
Always

Now, we are going to talk about flooding in general, according to what you know.

**Generally speaking, have you ever experienced a flood?**

Yes

No

**According to you, to consider there is a flood, the water should remain for at least**

2 hours

Half a day

One day

Many days

**According to you, to consider there is a flood, the water should reach at least**

Up to the ankle

Up to the knee

Up to the waist

Up to the shoulder

**According to you, during the rainy season, floods are**

Normal

Not normal

**Would you say that the effects of floods are a disaster**

That cannot be prevented

That can partly be prevented

That can largely be prevented

That can totally be prevented

**Would you say that the state authorities are responsible for floods?**

Yes

No

**Would you say that local communities are responsible for floods?**

Yes

No

**Would you say that some people are responsible for the floods?**

Yes

No

**Would you say it is God's will?**

Yes
No

**According to you, what causes floods?**

Lack of dams

Construction in flood prone areas

Lack of gutters

Garbage in gutters

The climate change

**Would you say that the place you're living is prone to floods?**

Very slightly

Slightly

Strongly

Very strongly

Not at all

We are now talking about the way your plot is adapted to floods

**Has this plot already been damaged by floods?**

Yes

No → go to Q31

**When was this?**

(integer)

**That year, what damage was caused among the following:**

Wall partly fallen

Crack in the wall

Damaged roof

Damaged furniture and goods in the house

Loss of personal belongings

Loss of cattle or crops

No damage

**How high was the water that time?**

Up to the ankle

Up to the knee

Up to the waist

Up to the shoulder

**After that, did you rebuild or buy again what was damaged/missing?**

Yes
No → go to Q31

**Did you rebuild fallen walls?**

No

Partly

As before

Better than before

**Did you rebuild the roof?**

No

Partly

As before

Better than before

**Did you get your goods back?**

No

Partly

As before

Better than before

**Did you get your cattle and crops back?**

No

Partly

As before

Better than before

**What did you rebuild your home with?**

Mud (“banco”)

Enhanced mud (mud melted with cement)

Cement and other materials

Building bricks and cement

**How did you rebuild your home?**

Same level

Higher

With an extra floor

**To evaluate the potential damage, we would like to know how many of these you have?**

Car

Motorcycles
Bike

Fridge

TV

Radio

Mobile phone

**Are you connected to the electricity service (Sonabel)?**

Yes

No

**Are you connected to the water supply (Onéa)?**

Yes

No

Now, I'd like to talk about the regulations and laws

**Have you ever heard of a law for floods?**

Yes

No

Don't know

**Indeed, there is a law with regard to floods. Do you think you live in an area**

Where it is prohibited to build because of flooding

Prone to floods

Neither one nor the other

Don't know

**Whatever area you live, do you think you should take precautions concerning floods?**

Yes

No → go to Q39

Don't know → go to Q39

**If yes, what would be the precautions concerning materials?**

Build with enhanced mud (mud melted with cement)

Build with cement and other materials

Build with bricks and cement

**If yes, what would be the precautions with the house?**

Higher foundations

Build with an extra floor

Do not rebuild there
**Have you ever heard of precautionary instructions concerning floods disseminated by the civil defense?**

Yes

No

Before we finish, let's speak about the warning system

**Nowadays it is possible to announce heavy rains many hours before it falls. If possible, would you like to receive that information?**

Yes

No → go to Q42

**How would you prefer to be informed?**

Town crier

Announcements on all radio stations

Phone text

Announcements on all TV channels

App on a smartphone

Alert announced by siren?

Others: __

**When at home, what do you do if you're informed of such heavy rain?**

I dig so that the water can flow

I clean gutters

I block doors and windows

I raise furniture up

I do nothing

**When out, what should you do if you're informed of such heavy rain?**

Stay where you are and wait for the rain to stop

Go back home

Move to another area

Go and see the flood

**The survey is now over; would you agree to be contacted to test a flood alarm system?**

Yes

No → go to Q46

**If Yes, phone number**

(phone number)

Observations (interviewer only)
**Main material of construction**

Mud (“banco”)

Enhanced mud (mud melted with cement)

Cement and other materials

Building bricks and cement

**Foundations**

No foundations

Foundations with mud (“banco”)

Foundations with enhanced mud (mud melted with cement)

Foundations with cement and other materials

Foundations with building bricks and cement

Hidden

**Household type**

Simple house

Executive house

Collective housing for singles (“celibatorium”)

Residential building

Family court

Other:

**Shop in the plot**

Yes

No

**Gutters in front of the house**

Yes

No

**Asphalted road**

Yes

No

**Spatial sample**

Zone 1

Zone 2

Zone 3

Zone 4

**GPS coordinates**
Date

Interviewer's name

Id survey

Comments

NOTES

1. This method is based on a two-step approach: determining vulnerability profiles through a factor analysis and a clustering method, and using GIS to analyse the spatial distribution of vulnerability profiles.

2. This questionnaire, written in French and Moré, was implemented on a smartphone using the kobotoolbox application to ensure that all the questions were answered and to allow for the geolocation of respondents.

3. The size of the sample is calculated by means of the formula of Réa et al. (1997) cited by par Gabert (Gabert, 2018):

$$n = \frac{t_{p}^{2} * P(1-P) * N}{t_{p}^{2} * P(1-P) + (N-1) * y^{2}} \quad \text{n: size of the sample}$$

N: estimated size of the target population

P = 0.5

tp = 2.69 for a confidence interval of 99%.

y = 3% margin of error of the sampling

After calculation, the sample size was determined to be at least 2000 people at the 99% confidence level.

4. Zone 1: zone of application of the law on flooding: building is prohibited or subject to specific construction rules. The settlement of populations in these zones, particularly to the south of the dams, notably in the districts of Dapoya, Ouidi and Larlé, part of which is in a flood zone, dates back to pre-colonial times. These were traditional villages located near the palace of the Mogho-naba, the traditional chief of Ouagadougou (Tiendrebeogo, 1963), but also near the marshes. With the various subdivisions of the city, particularly during the years 1983-1987, these villages evolved into the current neighbourhoods. Also, the large *marigots* have gradually been transformed into urban dams (Fournet et al., 2008).

Zone 2: zone where no regulations apply despite numerous floods since 2009 according to the written press

Zone 3: zone where no flood regulations apply and where floods remain very rare even in the press

Zone 4: zone with "slums", despite the law on no construction, outside zone 1 and 2

5. After the floods of 01/09/2009, decree N°2009-793/PRES/PM/MHU/MATD/MEF/MID/MAHRH/MECV (Président du Faso, 2009) relating to the delineation of Ouagadougou's flood-prone zones was adopted. It stipulates that the non-constructible flood-prone zones comprise easement areas of 100 metres on both sides of the boundaries of primary runoff canals, and the areas below the shores of the dams' lakes and natural ponds corresponding to the ten-year flood.

6. Formal zones are legally urbanized areas listed in urban planning documents while informal areas are the result of anachronistic and unplanned occupation

7. correlation tests are presented in Appendix A

8. Eviction: is a term used in Ouagadougou and refers to the expropriation and relocation of populations by the local authorities for the application of urban policies or for the requirements of management (protection of populations in the face of risks, etc.)
9. Figure 6 is inspired by the results of the factor map presented in appendix E and obtained by hierarchical agglomerative clustering

10. The civil protection guidelines: concern the advice disseminated by the civil protection services on what to do in the event of flood risk. Certain populations received the leaflet following the 1st September 2009 floods, which furthermore were published in the print media (Lefaso.net, 2011).

11. The precautions to take: concern the behaviour and actions to adopt to protect oneself from floods. This refers to personal and/or collective knowledge which can include the civil protection instructions or not. For example, clearing gutters is a precaution to take which is not mentioned in the guidelines disseminated by the civil protection.

12. SoVI: Social Vulnerability index. Implemented by Cutter, makes it possible to compare the vulnerability of several localities based on the data from the population census.

13. Baseline Resilience Index for Community. This index, implemented in the United States of America by Cutter, makes it possible to determine and compare the resilience of communities of several zones based on social, economic, institutional, community factors and infrastructures.

14. In addition to deficiencies in terms of rainwater collection facilities, the question of maintaining them arises in order to prepare for flood risks. Deficiencies have been observed despite an almost annual flushing of the few gutters that are there. There is a tendency of part of the population to use the collection tanks to dispose of refuse during the rainy season. This situation is made worse by widespread fly-tipping done by the populations themselves using the official sites to dump the waste (Sory, Tallet, 2012).

ABSTRACTS

The inhabitants of the city of Ouagadougou, the capital of Burkina Faso, suffer significant damage every year due to floods, which constitute a major risk for the country. To mitigate the impact of these phenomena, a good understanding of the criteria involved in the vulnerability of populations is necessary.

This article sets out to analyse the populations of Ouagadougou's vulnerability to floods, with the objective of drawing up and spatially representing the social vulnerability profile of populations. It is part of phase 2 of the Raincell Africa project, which aims to understand the social vulnerability of Sahelian populations to the risks of urban flooding.

The study is based on a quantitative approach developed by means of a socio-demographic survey of 2137 households in the city of Ouagadougou.

Statistical processing of the survey data using factor analysis and Hierarchical Agglomerative Clustering revealed eight vulnerability profiles in the city. The spatial distribution of these profiles indicates greater vulnerability in the margins of the city, characterized by unplanned settlements. This high exposure of informal settlements to flooding is linked to socio-demographic characteristics such as the level of education, risky behaviours in terms of urbanization and the populations' false perception of danger. These elements must necessarily be taken into account for better flood management.

Les habitants de la ville de Ouagadougou, capitale du Burkina Faso, subissent chaque année d'importants dégâts à cause des inondations, qui constituent d'ailleurs un risque majeur pour le pays. Pour atténuer l'impact de ces phénomènes, une bonne compréhension des critères
impliqués dans la vulnérabilité des populations est nécessaire. Cet article se propose d'analyser la vulnérabilité des Ouagalais face aux inondations, avec pour objectif de dresser et de représenter spatialement le profil de vulnérabilité sociale des populations. Il s'inscrit dans le cadre de la phase 2 du projet Raincell Africa, qui vise à comprendre la vulnérabilité sociale des populations sahéliennes face aux risques d'inondations urbaines. L'étude repose sur une approche quantitative développée à travers une enquête sociodémographique auprès de 2137 ménages de la ville de Ouagadougou. Le traitement statistique des données d'enquête par analyse factorielle et classification ascendante hiérarchique a permis de mettre en lumière huit profils de vulnérabilité dans la ville. La répartition spatiale de ces profils indique une plus grande vulnérabilité dans les marges de la ville, caractérisées par un habitat spontané informel. Cette forte exposition des populations des quartiers informels aux inondations est liée aux caractéristiques sociodémographiques telles que le niveau d'étude, les comportements à risque en termes d'urbanisation et une perception erronée du danger par les populations. Ces éléments doivent nécessairement être pris en compte pour une meilleure gestion des crues.

Los habitantes de la ciudad de Uagadugú, capital de Burkina Faso, cada año experimentan considerables daños a causa de las inundaciones, las cuales constituyen un elevado riesgo para el país. Para mitigar el impacto de tal fenómeno, resulta necesario un acabado conocimiento de los elementos que intervienen en la vulnerabilidad de la población.

Este artículo propone analizar la vulnerabilidad de los habitantes de Ouagadougou frente a las inundaciones, con el objetivo de elaborar y representar espacialmente el perfil de vulnerabilidad social de tal población. El trabajo se enmarca en la segunda fase del proyecto Raincell África, que tiene como objetivo comprender la vulnerabilidad social de las poblaciones del Sahel frente a los riesgos de inundaciones urbanas.

El estudio se sostiene en un enfoque cuantitativo desarrollado por medio de una encuesta sociodemográfica a 2137 hogares en la ciudad de Uagadugú, a la cual se le aplica un análisis factorial y clasificación ascendente jerárquica, dando como resultado ocho perfiles de vulnerabilidad en la ciudad. La distribución espacial de estos perfiles indica una mayor vulnerabilidad y alta exposición en los márgenes de la ciudad, caracterizados por asentamientos humanos que no han sido sujetos a planificación y los cuales se asocian a características sociodemográficas como el nivel de educación, comportamientos de riesgo en cuanto a la urbanización y la falsa percepción de peligro de la población. Tales aspectos deben ser considerados para propiciar una mejor gestión de las inundaciones.

## INDEX

**geographyun** 903, 914, 854

**Mots-clés:** vulnérabilité urbaine, inondation, comportement humain individuel et collectif, perception du risque, enquête de terrain

**Keywords:** urban vulnerability, flood, individual and collective human behaviour, risk perception, survey

**Palabras claves:** vulnerabilidad urbana, inundación, comportamiento humano individual y colectivo, percepción del riesgo, trabajo de campo
## AUTHORS

### MWINGNÈ LAURE CAROLLE DA

CEMOTEV - UVSQ, Université Paris Saclay & UMI Résiliences, Institut de Recherche pour le Développement, France) & LPCE, Université Joseph KI-ZERBO, Burkina Faso; PhD in environmental science and Geography; lcarolleda@gmail.com

### HUGUES HANGNON

UR SPHERES, Hugo Observatory, University of Liège, Belgium; PhD student in Environmental science and management; yinguihugorin@yahoo.fr

### MARION AMALRIC

Université de Tours, CNRS, UMR CITERES, France; MCF HDR; marion.amalric@univ-tours.fr

### AUDE NIKIEMA

Institut des Sciences des Sociétés (INSS/CNRST), Burkina Faso; Maître de recherche; nikiaude@yahoo.fr

### ELODIE ROBERT

UMR LETG, CNRS, Université de Nantes (France); chargé de recherche; elodie.robert@universantes.fr

### EMMANUEL BONNET

Institut de Recherche pour le Développement - UMI Résiliences, France; directeur de recherche, Emmanuel.bonnet@ird.fr