This paper presents an empirical verification of the measurement of baseline characteristics for fostering regional resilience. A set of indicators was selected from previous studies of disaster resilience, and an environmental element was added. The aims of the study were (1) to select a set of indicators that could be used for measuring disaster resilience, based on a review of the research literature, (2) to evaluate these indicators using the statistical approach of standardization, and to visualize the results using Geographic Information System (GIS) technology, and (3) to identify the key resilience characteristics using principal component analysis (PCA). The study focused on 29 municipalities in Osaka Prefecture, Japan. From the literature review, a total of 17 disaster resilience indicators were selected, covering economic, social, and community connection factors. The novel environmental attributes were selected from the literature on environmental sustainability. The standardized measures demonstrated that municipalities with a high level of resilience were also ranked highly on both the "social" and "community connection" attributes. The GIS mapping resulted a prominent urban-suburban divide, with urban areas having a lower level of resilience than suburban areas. The PCA demonstrated significant variation across the 29 municipalities, characterized by the factors "living standard" and "regional involvement." An understanding of these baseline characteristics would allow governments to monitor chronological changes in the resilience of specific regions. This information can be used to support the establishment of an evaluation platform, and can contribute to a more systematic management of resilience.

Risk management has developed as an important aspect of sustainability. In order to manage risk more effectively, an overall evaluation of regional resilience needs to be performed. Therefore, this paper develops a framework to measure overall resilience in a community, focusing on risk perceptions of citizens of Suita City, Japan. The framework includes three main phases: (1) identifying multiple risks in the city through discussions with local experts and city workers; (2) prioritizing those risks by applying principal component analysis (PCA); and (3) understanding the relationships among them using decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory (DEMATEL) analysis. As a result, 21 risks were identified, and subsequently, four risks were prioritized: climate change, lack of self-sufficient energy, damage to the ecosystem, and natural disasters. Lastly, the application of DEMATEL analysis revealed that climate change and natural disasters have the greatest cause-effect relationships among the risks. The framework proves that multiple risks can be prioritized and gives overall suggestions on what kinds of risk a community is facing; where to start considering how to manage resilience; and which functions/services a community should improve to boost resilience. The identification, prioritization, and visualization of significant risk relationships completed in this study can support decision-making processes in strengthening community resilience.

In order to increase the resilience of cities, there has been substantial effort to improve preparedness for, and response to, unexpected disasters. However, there is no specific measurement framework to address the degree of preparedness of a city. This study proposes the development of such a framework, in three phases: (1) identify multiple risks to a city, using risk perception theory, (2) evaluate and categorize these risks, according to public risk perception, using principal components analysis (PCA), and, (3) following the selection of risks, evaluate the resilience policy structure by counting the number of existing policies and using analytic hierarchy process (AHP). This study was customized for eight representative cities in Japan. Twenty-eight risks were identified and categorized as "Risk anxiety level" and "Preventive controllability", based on public risk perception. Following the selection of four risks -greenhouse gas generation, energy shortage, ecological destruction, and earthquakethe policy evaluation indicated that earthquakes have the strongest resilience policy structure in all eight cities. This was also reflected in the degree of city preparedness for resilience, which suggested that every city has relatively higher preparedness for earthquakes among the risks. These findings suggest that these cities' policies are well engaged with public concern. The study provides information that can help policy makers to improve communication with the public to meet well-intentioned policy, to predict public response to potential risks, and to direct educational efforts. Such information can also be helpful in redefining policy approaches to strengthen cities' and residents' preparedness for external stresses.