Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Ocean and Coastal Management journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ocecoaman Examination of coastal vulnerability framings at multiple levels of governance using spatial MCDA approach Asif Ishtiaque a,∗ , Hallie Eakin b , Netra Chhetri c , Soe W. Myint a , Ashraf Dewan d , Mohammad Kamruzzaman e a School of Geographical Sciences & Urban Planning, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA b School of Sustainability, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA c School of Future of Innovations in Society, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA d School of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Curtin University, Perth, Australia e Bangladesh Institute of Planners, Dhaka, Bangladesh ARTICLEINFO Keywords: Multilevel Organizations Vulnerability Hotspots Framings Bangladesh ABSTRACT The multidimensional impacts of climate change necessitate participation of large scale organizations in the management of vulnerability to climate change. Operating at multiple levels of governance, these organizations help manage the deleterious efects of changing climate for diferent sectors of human-environment systems. How they frame vulnerability, what infuences their framings, why are their framings aligned or misaligned: while these are critical questions for managing vulnerability, they are often overlooked in the literature. By ‘framing’ we mean how actors understand and evaluate key factors of vulnerability. Through a case study in Bangladesh, we analyze how vulnerability is framed by the leading organizations across fve sectors and three levels of governance. Drawing from key-informant interviews, we developed a spatial multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) approach and identifed vulnerability hotspots. With few variations, our study reveals that the framings of vulnerability are mostly aligned across scale irrespective at which stakeholders are operating. Collectively, proximity to river/sea along with poverty, schooling, cropping intensity, soil salinity, and avail- ability of multipurpose disaster shelters are identifed as key determinants of vulnerability by all organizations. They prioritize infrastructural and agricultural development as basis for vulnerability management. We argue that similarity of the understanding of vulnerability across scale would facilitate adaptation decision-making process. However, less focus on socio-economic criteria can undermine the success of adaptation initiatives. While the fndings of this study can assist the decision-makers of Bangladesh in coastal vulnerability manage- ment,themethodologicalapproachshouldbeusefultoassesscoastalvulnerabilityinotherpartsoftheworldas well. 1. Introduction Operating at diferent levels of governance (e.g. national, regional, local), governmental and non-governmental organizations manage vulnerability to climate change by undertaking or enabling adaptation actions (Pahl-Wostl, 2009; Keskitalo, 2010; Termeer et al., 2010). The diferent ways that such organizations frame vulnerability – in other words, how they understand and evaluate vulnerability – are likely to afect how they interact in their eforts to ensure successful manage- ment of vulnerability across scales (Adger et al., 2005; O'Brien et al., 2004). Similarity in vulnerability framings of these organizations has the potential to increase the efciency, efectiveness, equity, and le- gitimacy of vulnerability management, while signifcant misalignment can cause economic wastage, resource misallocation, maladaptation, governancefailures,andfragmenteddevelopment(WilbanksandKates, 1999; Gibsonetal.,2000; O'Brienetal.,2004; Adgeretal.,2005; Eakin and Luers, 2006; Pahl-Wostl, 2009; Engle, 2011). Similarity in framing can also ensure that diverse agencies pinpoint the same vulnerable areas and thus facilitate coordinated management. Contrarily, a mis- alignment in framing may suggest there is no agreement in what con- stitutes vulnerable areas, bafing decision-makers. By analyzing vul- nerability framings, researchers can shed light on which criteria have been prioritized by what agencies and why, and thus which sector of engagement needs particular attention in future adaptation policy making. ‘Vulnerability’, in this study, is defned as the degree or extent to https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2019.01.020 Received 16 August 2018; Received in revised form 23 January 2019; Accepted 25 January 2019 ∗ Corresponding author. School of Geographical Sciences and Urban Planning, Arizona State University, 5th Floor, 975 S. Myrtle Ave., Tempe, AZ 85287, USA. E-mail address: Asif.Ishtiaque@asu.edu (A. Ishtiaque). Ocean and Coastal Management 171 (2019) 66–79 0964-5691/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. T