Journal of Geography and Environmental Hazards

Journal of Geography and Environmental Hazards

A Systematic Review of Earthquake Vulnerability Assessment Studies in Iran

Document Type : Review Article

Authors
Department of Human Geography and Planning, Faculty of Geography, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
Abstract
Iran is located within one of the world’s most seismically active regions, making earthquake vulnerability assessment essential for disaster risk management. Despite the growing number of studies, variations in frameworks, indicators, and methods have limited a coherent understanding of the field. This study systematically reviews earthquake vulnerability assessment research in Iran to identify trends, methodological characteristics, and research gaps. A systematic review was conducted following the PRISMA framework. Relevant studies were identified through a structured screening process and analyzed using qualitative coding in MAXQDA to extract conceptual, methodological, and thematic patterns. Earthquake vulnerability research in Iran has increased over the past two decades but remains concentrated in urban areas, particularly Tehran. Most studies lack theoretical foundations and rely on indicator aggregation. Physical dimensions dominate, while social and institutional aspects receive limited attention. Indicator-based GIS approaches prevail, with weighting based on expert judgment, whereas data-driven methods, sensitivity analysis, and advanced spatial techniques remain limited. Despite substantial growth, earthquake vulnerability research in Iran still faces theoretical and methodological limitations. Strengthening conceptual frameworks, promoting integrated and multidimensional approaches, expanding analytical methods, and strengthening the research-policy link are essential to enhance the reliability and practical value of vulnerability assessments.
Introduction
Iran is situated along the active Alpine–Himalayan seismic belt, making it inherently prone to frequent and often destructive earthquakes. Over recent decades, numerous seismic events have caused extensive human casualties, economic losses, and widespread physical and social disruption. Rapid population growth, accelerating urbanization, the expansion of informal settlements, and increasing spatial inequalities have exacerbated earthquake vulnerability across space. Under such conditions, vulnerability assessment has become a critical prerequisite for effective disaster risk management and for planning strategies aimed at mitigating impacts. However, the concept of vulnerability, due to its multidimensional, dynamic, and interdisciplinary nature, has consistently posed challenges in terms of definition, assessment, and modeling, and no clear consensus has yet emerged within the scientific literature. In Iran, a considerable number of studies on earthquake vulnerability assessment have been conducted over the past two decades. Nevertheless, these studies exhibit substantial diversity and fragmentation in terms of conceptual frameworks, assessment methods, selected indicators, and scales of analysis. This heterogeneity has hindered the development of a comprehensive understanding of the trends, patterns, and research gaps within this field. Accordingly, the main aim of this study is to undertake a systematic review of the Iranian scholarly literature in order to address the question of how earthquake vulnerability assessment has been theoretically conceptualized and methodologically operationalized in Iran, and to identify the key limitations and research gaps that characterize this body of work. By providing a comprehensive overview of the approaches, indicators, and methods used to assess earthquake vulnerability in Iran, the findings of this systematic review can help improve the understanding of the current situation, identify research gaps, and enhance vulnerability assessment frameworks. Furthermore, the study's results can serve as a basis for prioritizing areas requiring further investigation and for supporting earthquake risk reduction planning and crisis management in Iran.
Material and Methods
This research was conducted using a systematic literature review (SLR) approach, following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) framework. To this end, the study progressed through four primary stages: identification, screening, eligibility assessment, and final inclusion. Initially, relevant publications concerning earthquake vulnerability assessment in Iran were retrieved from national scholarly databases. Subsequently, by applying specific inclusion and exclusion criteria, irrelevant studies were filtered out, resulting in a curated set of eligible articles for analysis. In the next phase, a qualitative analysis of the selected studies was performed using MAXQDA software through a systematic coding process. The core analytical themes included: definitions and conceptualizations of vulnerability, theoretical frameworks and models, applied indicators, data collection procedures, weighting and normalization techniques, aggregation methods, spatial and temporal scales, as well as sensitivity and uncertainty analyses. This structured approach enabled a comparative evaluation of the literature, facilitating the extraction of dominant patterns and prevailing trends within the domestic body of research.
Results and Discussion
The findings indicate that research on earthquake vulnerability assessment in Iran began to emerge in the late 1990s and grew significantly in the following years, reaching a peak between 2014 and 2016. This growth can be attributed to increased awareness of natural hazards, the occurrence of major earthquakes, the expansion of academic and research institutions, and the wider use of analytical tools such as Geographic Information Systems (GIS). Although a slight decline in the number of studies is observed after this period, recent years show a renewed upward trend, reflecting continued interest in this field. In terms of spatial distribution, most studies have focused on urban areas, accounting for more than 80 % of the total. In contrast, rural areas and regional-scale studies have received much less attention, indicating a significant imbalance in spatial coverage. Additionally, research is heavily concentrated in a limited number of provinces, particularly Tehran, while several seismically active regions remain understudied. This pattern suggests that the distribution of research is influenced more by factors such as the concentration of academic institutions, data availability, and research infrastructure than by actual seismic risk levels. From a conceptual perspective, many studies lack a clearly defined theoretical framework and instead rely primarily on indicator-based approaches. This limitation reduces the analytical depth and explanatory power of the findings. Among studies that adopt a defined framework, biophysical approaches are the most commonly used, while integrated and internationally recognized frameworks receive less attention. Regarding the dimensions of vulnerability, the physical dimension is dominant. Frequently used indicators include building characteristics, construction materials, urban structure, and transportation networks. In contrast, socio-economic dimensions- such as social capital, public awareness, education, and institutional capacity- are less frequently considered. The natural dimension is typically represented by indicators related to seismicity, geological conditions, and topography. Overall, the results show a strong emphasis on the built environment, with relatively limited attention given to human and institutional factors. From a methodological standpoint, most studies use indicator-based models, with expert-based techniques- particularly the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)- playing a dominant role in weighting indicators. Data-driven approaches are used much less frequently. Normalization is commonly performed using reclassification and scoring methods. A major limitation identified across many studies is the lack of sensitivity analysis and uncertainty assessment, which may affect the reliability and robustness of the results.
Conclusion
The existing body of scientific literature on earthquake vulnerability assessment in Iran, despite its notable quantitative growth, exhibits shortcomings in terms of conceptual coherence and methodological integration. An excessive focus on physical dimensions has led to the neglect of social and institutional aspects of vulnerability. Moreover, the diversity in indicator selection and the absence of standardized frameworks have limited the comparability of study results and hindered the development of a coherent cumulative body of knowledge in this field. At the same time, the predominant focus on local and urban scales- coupled with a lack of multi-scalar analyses- reveals a gap in understanding broader spatial linkages and cross-scale interactions in shaping vulnerability patterns. Challenges related to access to accurate, up-to-date, and integrated data also represent significant barriers to improving the quality of analyses, potentially affecting both the reliability of results and their applicability in decision-making processes. Accordingly, there is a clear need to move toward the development of comprehensive, integrated, and multidimensional frameworks for earthquake vulnerability assessment. Furthermore, the adoption of emerging data-driven approaches, alongside improvements in data quality and accessibility, can play a crucial role in enhancing the accuracy and effectiveness of future studies.
Author Contributions
Authors contributed equally to the conceptualization and writing of the article.
Data Availability Statement
All data used in this study are presented within the text of the article and are accessible.
Acknowledgements
We are grateful to all the scientific consultants of this paper.
Ethical considerations
The authors have observed ethical principles in conducting and publishing this scientific research, and this matter is confirmed by all of them.
Funding
This article is not sponsored.
Conflict of interest
Authors declared no conflict of interest.
Keywords
Subjects

©2026 The author(s). This is an open access article distributed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0)

 
Alipour, F., Khankeh, H., Fekrazad, H., Kamali, M., Rafiey, H., & Ahmadi, S. (2015). Social issues and post-disaster recovery: A qualitative study in an Iranian context. International Social Work, 58(5), 689–703. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020872815584426
Amini Hosseini, K., & Ghayamghamian, M. R. (2012). A survey of challenges in reducing the impact of geological hazards associated with earthquakes in Iran. Natural Hazards, 62(3), 901-926.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-012-0123-7
Amiri, H., Rezapour, M., Nakhaee, N., Nekoei-Moghadam, M., Jahani, Y., & Moslehi, S. (2022). Suicide attempts in residents of Bam: 17 years after the Bam earthquake in Iran. Minerva Psychiatry, 63(1), 61–67. https://doi.org/10.23736/S2724-6612.21.02173-4
Anugwa, I. Q., Obossou, E. A. R., Onyeneke, R. U., & Chah, J. M. (2023). Gender perspectives in vulnerability of Nigeria’s agriculture to climate change impacts: a systematic review. GeoJournal, 88(1), 1139-1155. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-022-10638-z
Armaş, I., Toma-Danila, D., Ionescu, R., & Gavriş, A. (2017). Vulnerability to earthquake hazard: Bucharest case study, Romania. International journal of Disaster Risk Science, 8(2), 182-195.https://doi.org/10.1007/s13753-017-0132-y
Aubrecht, C., Freire, S., Neuhold, C., Curtis, A., & Steinnocher, K. (2012). Introducing a temporal component in spatial vulnerability analysis. Disaster Advances, 5(2), 48–53. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/231179667_Introducing_a_temporal_component_in_spatial_vulnerability_analysis
Azmi, A. (2023). Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of sustainable urban development in Kermanshah. International Review for Spatial Planning and Sustainable Development, 11(4), 224–23.   https://doi.org/10.14246/irspsd.11.4_224
Berberian, M. (2014). Earthquakes and coseismic surface faulting on the Iranian Plateau: A historical, social and physical approach (Developments in Earth Surface Processes, Vol. 17). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Birkmann, J. (2006). Measuring vulnerability to promote disaster-resilient societies: Conceptual frameworks and. Measuring vulnerability to natural hazards: Towards Disaster Resilient Societies, 9.
Birkmann, J., Cardona, O. D., Carreño, M. L., Barbat, A. H., Pelling, M., Schneiderbauer, S., ... & Welle, T. (2013). Framing vulnerability, risk and societal responses: the MOVE framework. Natural Hazards, 67(2), 193-211. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-013-0558-5
Bruno Soares, M., Gagnon, A. S., & Doherty, R. M. (2012). Conceptual elements of climate change vulnerability assessments: A review. International Journal of Climate Change Strategies and Management, 4(1), 6–35. https://doi.org/10.1108/17568691211200191
Caldwell, P. H., & Bennett, T. (2020). Easy guide to conducting a systematic review. Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health, 56(6), 853-856. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpc.14853
 Contreras, D., Chamorro, A., & Wilkinson, S. (2020). The spatial dimension in the assessment of urban socio-economic vulnerability related to geohazards. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 20(6), 1663-1687. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-20-1663-2020
Crane, T. A., Delaney, A., Tamás, P. A., Chesterman, S., & Ericksen, P. (2017). A systematic review of local vulnerability to climate change in developing country agriculture. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 8(4), e464. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.464
Cutter, S. L., & Finch, C. (2008). Temporal and spatial changes in social vulnerability to natural hazards. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105(7), 2301–2306. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0710375105
 Eshghi, S., & Ahari, M. N. (2005). Performance of transportation systems in the 2003 Bam, Iran, earthquake. Earthquake Spectra, 21(S1), 455–468. https://doi.org/10.1193/1. 2098891
Fallahi, A. (2013). Technical report—Sheltering, from relief to reconstruction: One year after the 2010 East Azerbaijan Province earthquake. Archnet-IJAR: International Journal of Architectural Research, 7(3), 122–135. https://www.archnet.org/publications/7283
Farahani, S., Behnam, B., & Tahershamsi, A. (2020). Macrozonation of seismic transient and permanent ground deformation of Iran. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 20(11), 2889–2903. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-20-2889-2020
Farahmand, G., Samet, K., Golmohammadi, H., & Patel, N. (2022). Vulnerability zoning of urban areas against earthquake (case study: Urmia city). Geodesy and Cartography, 48(3), 160–169. https://doi.org/10.3846/gac.2022.14788
Fatemi, F., Ardalan, A., Aguirre, B., Mansouri, N., & Mohammadfam, I. (2017). Social vulnerability indicators in disasters: Findings from a systematic review. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 22, 219-227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2016.09.006
Foong, L. K., Jamali, A., & Lyu, Z. (2020). Ground surface changes detection using interferometric synthetic aperture radar. Smart Structures and Systems, 26(3), 277–290. https://doi.org/10.12989/sss.2020.26.3.277
Ford, J. D., Pearce, T., McDowell, G., Berrang-Ford, L., Sayles, J. S., & Belfer, E. (2018). Vulnerability and its discontents: the past, present, and future of climate change vulnerability research. Climatic Change, 151(2), 189-203.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-018-2304-1
Gerçek, D., & Güven, İ. T. (2023). Urban earthquake vulnerability assessment and mapping at the microscale based on the catastrophe progression method. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 14(5), 768–781. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13753-023-00512-y
Ghafory-Ashtiany, M. (2014). Earthquake risk and risk reduction capacity building in Iran. Extreme natural hazards, disaster risks and societal implications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 267-278. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139523905.026  
Habibi, S., Basirat, M., & Razavi, M. H. (2020). Towards national urban policy in IR of Iran. In Developing National Urban Policies: Ways Forward to Green and Smart Cities (pp. 231-254). Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-3738-7_9
Jena, R., & Pradhan, B. (2019). Earthquake vulnerability assessment using expert-based approach in GIS. In 2019 6th International Conference on Space Science and Communication (IconSpace) (pp. 53–56). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/IconSpace.2019. 8905929
Jena, R., Pradhan, B., & Beydoun, G. (2020). Earthquake vulnerability assessment in Northern Sumatra province by using a multi-criteria decision-making model. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 46, 101518.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2020.101518
Kalantari, M., & Vostanis, P. (2010). Behavioural and emotional problems in Iranian children four years after parental death in an earthquake. International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 56(2), 158–167. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020764008101854
Kuhlicke, C., de Brito, M. M., Bartkowski, B., Botzen, W., Doğulu, C., Han, S., et al. (2023). Spinning in circles? A systematic review on the role of theory in social vulnerability, resilience and adaptation research. Global Environmental Change, 80, 102672.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2023.102672
Matasci, C. (2012). Swiss tourism in the age of climate change: vulnerability, adaptive capacity, and barriers to adaptation (Doctoral dissertation, EPFL). https://doi.org/10.5075/epfl-thesis-5506
Moghabeli, R., Bahadori, F., & Mohammadi, A. R. (2025). Spatio-Temporal Analysis of Earthquake Occurrences in Iran (1996–2024): A Vulnerability Assessment with a Focus on Urban Areas. Journal of Geography and Environmental Hazards, 14(3), 166-189. [in Persian] https://doi.org/10.22067/geoeh.2025.92804.1562
Nikpayam, R. (2013). Reducing the unforeseen incidents damages (earthquake) by using round poles and reducing the pole mounted distribution transformers power. In 22nd International Conference and Exhibition on Electricity Distribution (CIRED 2013) (pp. 1-4). IET.https://doi.org/10.1049/cp.2013.0949
Ommi, S., & Amini, H. (2024). Priority of developing public open spaces based on seismic resilience assessment for Tehran, Iran. Acta Geophysica, 72(5), 3007-3020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11600-023-01269-0
Perestelo-Pérez, L. (2013). Standards on how to develop and report systematic reviews in Psychology and Health. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 13(1), 49-57. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1697-2600(13)70007-3
Pilehvar, A. A. (2021). Spatial-geographical analysis of urbanization in Iran. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 8(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-00741-w
Rajabi, F., Hosseinali, F., & Rabiei-Dastjerdi, H. (2024). An examination and analysis of the clustering of healthcare centers and their spatial accessibility in Tehran metropolis: Insights from Google POI data. Sustainable Cities and Society, 117, 105845. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2024.105845
Ramli, M. W. A., & Alias, N. E. (2024). Multidimensional vulnerability mapping using GIS and catastrophe theory. International Journal of Geoinformatics, 20(8), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.52939/ijg.v20i8.3443
Rashed, T., & Weeks, J. (2003). Assessing vulnerability to earthquake hazards through spatial multicriteria analysis of urban areas. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 17(6), 547–576. https://doi.org/10.1080/1365881031000114071
Shahpari, G., Sadeghi, H., Ashena, M., & Shahpari, M. (2021). Economic effects of earthquakes: Focusing on the health sector. International Journal of Economic Policy in Emerging Economies, 14(1), 85–100. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJEPEE.2021.111935
Talebian, M., Copley, A. C., Fattahi, M., Ghorashi, M., Jackson, J. A., Nazari, H., Walker, R. T., et al. (2016). Active faulting within a megacity: The geometry and slip rate of the Pardisan thrust in central Tehran, Iran. Geophysical Journal International, 207(3), 1688–1699. https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggw347
Tate, E. (2012). Social vulnerability indices: a comparative assessment using uncertainty and sensitivity analysis. Natural hazards, 63(2), 325-347. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-012-0152-2
Tonmoy, F. (2013). Assessment of vulnerability to climate change: theoretical and methodological developments with applications to infrastructure and built environment. Civil Engineering, University of Sydney. PhD Thesis. Access link: http://hdl.handle.net/2123/10167
U.S. Geological Survey. (n.d.). Earthquake Hazards Program. https://earthquake.usgs.gov/
Wolf, S., Hinkel, J., Hallier, M., Bisaro, A., Lincke, D., Ionescu, C., & Klein, R. J. T. (2013). Clarifying vulnerability definitions and assessments using formalisation. International Journal of Climate Change Strategies and Management, 5(1), 54–70. https://doi.org/10.1108/17568691311299363
Send comment about this article
Enter Name.
Enter a valid email address.
Enter a vaid affiliation.
Enter comments (At leaset 10 words)
CAPTCHA Image
Enter Security Code Correctly.

Articles in Press, Accepted Manuscript
Available Online from 08 October 2026

  • Receive Date 16 July 2026
  • Revise Date 06 October 2026
  • Accept Date 08 October 2026
  • Publish Date 08 October 2026