## 2 Methodology
### Conceptual Framework on Vulnerability
#### 2.1.1 Essential Components and Strategic Spaces  
The vulnerability assessment conducted in this study begins by evaluating essential components crucial to the normal functioning of a city. These components are categorized \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c} \hline \hline
**Global Factors** & **Partial Factors** \\ \hline \multirow{7}{*}{Beginning of the Fire (SF\({}_{\text{I}}\))} & State of conservation of the construction–(PF\({}_{\text{A1}}\)) \\ \cline{2-3}  & Electrical installations–(PF\({}_{\text{A2}}\)) \\ \cline{2-3}  & Gas installations–(PF\({}_{\text{A3}}\)) \\ \cline{2-3}  & Nature of Fire Loads–(PF\({}_{\text{A4}}\)) \\ \cline{2-3}  & Fire Loads–(PF\({}_{\text{B1}}\)) \\ \cline{2-3}  & Development and Propagation of Fire in the  Building (SF\({}_{\text{P}}\)) & Fire compartmentation–(PF\({}_{\text{B2}}\)) \\ \cline{2-3}  & Factors & Fire detection, alarm, and alert–(PF\({}_{\text{B3}}\)) \\ \cline{2-3}  & Security equipment-(PF\({}_{\text{B4}}\)) \\ \cline{2-3}  & Distance between overlapping spans (PF\({}_{\text{B5}}\)) \\ \cline{2-3}  & Factors inherent to evacuation paths–(PF\({}_{\text{C1}}\)) \\ \cline{2-3}  & Building evacuation (SF\({}_{\text{E}}\)) & Building inherent factors–(PF\({}_{\text{C2}}\)) \\ \cline{2-3}  & Correction factors–(PF\({}_{\text{C3}}\)) \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{Efficiency} & \multirow{2}{*}{Firefighting (SF\({}_{\text{C}}\))} & Internal and external firefighting factors in the  building (PF\({}_{\text{D1}}\)) \\ \cline{2-3}  & & Safety teams (PF\({}_{\text{D2}}\)) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Global and partial factors of the simplified ARICA methodology, based on [10; 19; 21]. into three study groups for analysis. The first group pertains to the city's population and its intrinsic needs. Recognizing that cities are composed of citizens, it is crucial to consider their fundamental requirements for well-being, such as access to healthcare and education. The second group to examine is the economic aspects and city governance. This encompasses the city's ability to manage, generate wealth, and administer resources, supported by a range of actors including the private sector, public sector, and civil society. Finally, the last study group is related to networks and infrastructures, mainly known as critical infrastructure. This group primarily comprises transportation infrastructure, telecommunication systems, water supply networks, energy supply systems, fuel distribution networks, and food distribution systems. The quantification of vulnerability involves zoning the area to assess the presence of critical infrastructure within each designated zone. To achieve this, a simple equal interval classification is applied. This method utilizes the highest and lowest count of critical infrastructure within each zone and selects three classes to determine the level of vulnerability: low, medium, and high. Equation (3) is employed to calculate the threshold values that define the vulnerability ranges, determining whether a zone exhibits high, low, or medium vulnerability based on the classification process. These threshold values play a crucial role in assigning the vulnerability levels to each zone, providing valuable insights into the overall vulnerability assessment. \[\text{Vulnerability threshold values}=\frac{(\text{Highest value}-\text{Lowest value})}{\text{Number of classes}} \tag{3}\]  
Two criticality rankings were established. The first ranking, known as the driving power ranking, assessed the criticality of a piece of infrastructure based on the number of other pieces of infrastructure dependent on it. This ranking drew upon a study conducted by [22], which employed expert knowledge to classify critical infrastructure sectors. The second ranking, called the hierarchy of needs, followed guidelines provided by [23] to determine infrastructure criticality based on the support they offer for essential human needs.