Purpose Conceptual interpretations of sustainability and resilience are widening with discursive use and altering the relationship and understanding of both concepts. By using three city case studies in the USA, this paper aims to consider which conceptual interpretations are operational and what is being measured in the context of city policy, municipal planning and built environment practice. With increasing pressures of urbanisation, it is imperative to consider which conceptual interpretations of resilience and sustainability are being measured in frameworks for the built environment if Risk-Informed Sustainable Development across multiple sectors is to be delivered. Design/methodology/approach Three case studies with semi-structured interviews have been thematically analysed to explore how sustainability and resilience have been operationalised at policy, planning and practice levels. Findings City policies, municipal planning and practitioners are working with different interpretations. Collectively Risk Informed Sustainable Development is not formally recognised. Policies recognise GHG reductions and natural hazard events; planning guidance stipulates Environmental Impact Assessments based on legal requirements; and practitioners consider passive-survivability and systematic thinking. Across the sectors, the Leadership in Environmental and Energy Assessment Method provides a common foundation but is used with varying requirements. Practical implications Decision-makers should incorporate risk-informed sustainable development, update codes of practice and legal requirements leading to exemplary practice becoming normalised. Social implications Passive-survivability should be affordable and adopt risk-informed sustainable development principles. Originality/value Three US city case studies with data collected from interviews have been analysed simultaneously at policy, planning and practice levels. Interrelated implications have been outlined on how to improve decision-making of sustainability and resilience across sectors.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to present reflections of five early career researchers on the challenges of journal publishing and how to tackle them. Design/methodology/approach The authors attended a participatory workshop on demystifying academic publications. Working individually and in groups the authors shared, discussed, analysed, visualised and ranked perceived challenges and opportunities concerning academic publishing. The authors then delved into the existing literature on the subject. Following their enhanced understanding of the area, the authors reflected on the experience and learnings. Findings Personal confidence relating to the development of a scholarly identity was found to be a critical factor in the attitude towards journal publishing. Supervisory and peer support, accessibility to journal editors, as well as opportunities to reflect on the writing, publishing and peer review processes through participatory workshops and writing groups, were deemed more effective than formal and conventional guidance schemes. Research limitations/implications This work adds to the available literature regarding the issue of academic publishing for PhD students and early career researchers. Originality/value The paper contributes to a deeper understanding of issues surrounding publishing apprehension, by laying out thoughts that are seldom expressed.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract