Critical review of urban community resilience indicators

Abstract

PurposeUrban communities can be faced with many destructive events that can disrupt the daily functioning of activities and livelihood of people living in the communities. In this regard, during the last couple of years, many governments have put a lot of efforts into building resilient urban communities. Essentially, a resilient urban community has the capacity to anticipate future disasters, prepare for and recover timely from adverse effects of disasters and unexpected circumstances. Considering this, it is therefore important for the need to continuously review the existing urban community resilience indicators, in order to identify emerging ones to enable comprehensive evaluation of urban communities in the future against unexpected events. This study therefore aims to conduct a systematic review to develop and critically analyse the emerging and leading urban community resilience indicators.Design/methodology/approachFollowing the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRSIMA) protocol, 53 journal articles were selected using Scopus. The selected papers were subjected to thorough content analysis.FindingsFrom the review, 45 urban community resilience indicators were identified. These indicators were grouped into eight broad categories namely, Socio-demographic, Economic, Institutional Resilience, Infrastructure and Housing Resilience, Collaboration, Community Capital, Risk Data Accumulation and Geographical and Spatial characteristics of community. Further, the results indicated that the U.S had the highest number of publications, followed by Australia, China, New Zealand and Taiwan. In fact, very few studies emanated from developing economies.Originality/valueThe outputs of this study will inform policymakers, practitioners and researchers on the new and emerging indicators that should be considered when evaluating the resilience level of urban communities. The findings will also serve as a theoretical foundation for further detailed empirical investigation.

Investigating risk of public–private partnerships (PPPs) for smart transportation infrastructure project development

“…In a smart transport infrastructure project, creating trust and enabling negotiation in good faith will be useful antidotes to project resistance. It is recommended that the government not make independent decisions for urban communities since this will create resistance in community members (Osei-Kyei et al ., 2023). There is no doubt that “trust” is a central factor in any “smart” PPP form, so it is essential to bring sufficient awareness regarding this to the key parties via transparent communication mechanism with the support of new technology.…”

Urban resilience and sustainability through and beyond crisis – evidence-based analysis and lessons learned from selected European cities

“…But the trajectory of the recent crises suggest that the occurrence and intensity of the events related to climate change and other crisis such as wars or civic conflicts have increased. Recent studies have placed emphasis on three angles: (a) developing frameworks and indicators for resilience (Clarke et al, 2020;Abusaada and Elshater, 2023a;Osei-Kyei et al, 2023); (b) examining specific city cases (Peres et al, 2017;Slaev and Nedovic-Budic, 2017); and (c) examining a specific type of crisis in specific contexts (Majewska et al, 2022;Abusaada and Elshater, 2023b), or focusing on sustainability at micro scale (Dessouky et al, 2023a, b). While these studies offer important insights on sustainable urban development and urban resilience as they relate to cities, settlements, or neighbourhoods, recent research interests do not appear to establish a wider inclusive schema on urban resilience and sustainability in cities that have experienced crisis.…”

“…But the trajectory of the recent crises suggest that the occurrence and intensity of the events related to climate change and other crisis such as wars or civic conflicts have increased. Recent studies have placed emphasis on three angles: (a) developing frameworks and indicators for resilience (Clarke et al ., 2020; Abusaada and Elshater, 2023a; Osei-Kyei et al ., 2023); (b) examining specific city cases (Peres et al. , 2017; Slaev and Nedovic-Budic, 2017); and (c) examining a specific type of crisis in specific contexts (Majewska et al ., 2022; Abusaada and Elshater, 2023b), or focusing on sustainability at micro scale (Dessouky et al ., 2023a, b).…”