Resumen
This systematic literature review gathers societal vulnerability factors linking climate change and conflict from 53 existing studies. The findings reveal three main points. First, four relevant factors are missing from a previous vulnerability analysis framework proposed by Pearson and Newman: land degradation/land cover, gender, customs, and geographical conditions. Second, two factors, access to technology (e.g., for climate change adaptation) and partially democratic states, are insufficiently studied. Third, classification criteria in the previous framework need revision for accuracy. Considering these points, this study proposes a modified vulnerability analysis framework and offers five suggestions for future research directions in climate security research. First, more qualitative case studies are needed to complement the quantitative work. Second, in particular, cases where conflict was avoided or cooperation was established in high vulnerability areas need further research. Third, further research is needed on understudied factors (e.g., access to technology and partial democracy) and on factors the conventional framework cannot explain (e.g., land degradation/land cover, gender, customs, and geographical conditions). Fourth, no single vulnerability factor leads to conflict in isolation, but only in interaction; their connections must be studied. Finally, case studies are needed on vulnerability factors in countries and regions that have suffered from climate change but have not experienced conflict.