Beyond the floodwaters: women’s multidimensional vulnerability to flood disasters – a scoping review

@article{rahman2026beyond,
  title = {{Beyond the floodwaters: women’s multidimensional vulnerability to flood disasters – a scoping review}},
  author = {Farah Khalida Abdul Rahman and Nor Aliya Ayub and Rozita Hod and Rosnah Sutan and Idayu Badilla Idris and Nurfashareena Muhamad},
  journal = {BMC Women's Health},
  year = {2026},
  month = jul,
  doi = {10.1186/s12905-026-04683-w},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1186/s12905-026-04683-w},
  note = {CC BY},
}

TY  - JOUR
TI  - Beyond the floodwaters: women’s multidimensional vulnerability to flood disasters – a scoping review
AU  - Farah Khalida Abdul Rahman
AU  - Nor Aliya Ayub
AU  - Rozita Hod
AU  - Rosnah Sutan
AU  - Idayu Badilla Idris
AU  - Nurfashareena Muhamad
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/07/01
JO  - BMC Women's Health
DO  - 10.1186/s12905-026-04683-w
UR  - https://doi.org/10.1186/s12905-026-04683-w
AB  - Background Flood disasters, intensified by climate change, are increasing in frequency and severity globally, disproportionately affecting vulnerable populations, particularly women. Women’s vulnerability during flood disasters extends beyond biological or physical differences and is shaped by broader social, economic, cultural, and institutional conditions. However, synthesised evidence on women’s vulnerabilities in flood contexts remains limited. Methods A scoping review was conducted using the Arksey and O’Malley framework and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines. A systematic search of PubMed, Web of Science (WoS), and Scopus databases identified 19 studies published between 2020 and 2024 that met the predefined inclusion criteria. Studies were eligible if they examined women’s vulnerabilities in the context of flood disasters and were original peer-reviewed articles. Data were extracted and analysed thematically to identify patterns and relationships among factors contributing to women’s vulnerabilities. Results Five interacting vulnerability domains were identified: physical (including sexual and reproductive health), social, psychological, economic, and environmental. Evidence across studies indicated that these domains are influenced by broader structural conditions such as gender norms, governance exclusion, and socioeconomic inequality, which may interact across exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity to shape compounded gendered flood impacts. In addition, findings highlighted cross-domain patterns of adaptive capacity, where women employed context-specific strategies to respond to constrained conditions. Based on this synthesis, a conceptual framework was developed to illustrate how structural conditions relate to vulnerability processes, adaptive responses, and disaster outcomes. Conclusion Women’s vulnerability to flood disasters reflects a complex interplay of multidimensional risks shaped by gendered roles, socioeconomic disadvantage, limited resource access, and gaps in disaster planning and response. While caregiving responsibilities and health risks increase direct exposure, structural constraints may limit coping and recovery capacity. At the same time, adaptive capacity is actively expressed but often constrained and underrecognised within formal disaster systems. The proposed framework positions gender as a cross-cutting determinant and offers a conceptual lens for identifying policy entry points for gender-responsive disaster risk reduction.
SN  - 1472-6874
ER  -