ArticlePopulation and environment2026
Who is exposed and who is harmed? Social disparities in flood exposure and impact in Pernambuco, Brazil.
Article in Population and environment, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
How do geospatial sorting and social stratification condition natural-disaster exposure and impact? Using the case of the May 2022 flash floods in Pernambuco, Brazil, we address this question with a dual-source approach that captures disparities in both exposure to anomalously high rainfall and the reported impacts of resulting floods. While exposure to anomalous rainfall is tied to geospatial segregation patterns, reported impacts may also reflect localized infrastructure, such as drainage systems or piped water availability, that capture municipality-level investment and capacity to withstand flooding. Findings from exposure analysis reveal significant disparities by race, religion, maternal education, and income. However, these relationships fully attenuate after adjustment for municipal location, suggesting that settlement patterns and geospatial marginalization drive the observed exposure disparities. Findings from the analysis of self-reported flood impact also show disparate impacts by race, employment status, number of children under 15, and household income, but in this case, only racial disparities are fully attenuated after spatial adjustments. Further findings show that low-income households and those with more children report significantly greater impacts even after adjusting for both municipal fixed effects and hazard exposure. Interaction models reveal steeper dose-response relationships between rainfall and impacts for low-income households, and we find evidence that household infrastructure significantly mediates economic disparities in flood impacts. Combined, results demonstrate that relying solely on externally measured exposure to gauge the stratified impacts of extreme precipitation or flash floods may miss important socioeconomic disparities. Both geospatial segregation patterns and household-level capacities to withstand environmental shocks shape vulnerability. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11111-026-00523-z.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.