Rethinking the relationships of vulnerability, resilience, and adaptation from a disaster risk perspective

Lei, Yongdeng; Wang, Jing’ai; Yue, Yaojie; Zhou, Hongjian; Yin, Weixia

doi:10.1007/s11069-013-0831-7

Cited by 138 publications

(67 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Existing classifications are confined to identification of broad definitional characteristics (Manyena 2006, Cretney 2014, or lists of illustrative definitions (Zhou et al 2010, Aldunce et al 2014, Lei et al 2014, while there are limited examples of more refined resilience classifications (Brand andJax 2007, Bhamra et al 2011). Our objectives of demonstrating convergence and evolution among the selected resilience domains and contributing to conceptual clarity necessitated a more conceptually sophisticated classification system.…”

Section: Formentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, recent disaster experiences, such as the catastrophe inflicted on New Orleans by Hurricane Katrina, have exposed the limitations of this approach (Boin and McConnell 2007) so that DR is moving toward a more integrated paradigm (Boin and McConnell 2007, Park et al 2011, Cox 2012, Djalante et al 2012, that has shifted from prevention/control and mitigation/vulnerability to adaptation/ transformation (O'Brien 2012, Lei et al 2014. Hence, emphasis increasingly centers on the ability of complex systems to deal with hazards (Berkes 2007) and community capacities to respond well to crises through building and maintaining social capital and social resilience (Norris et al 2008, Cutter et al 2010, Brown and Westaway 2011, Cox 2012, Cohen et al 2013).…”

Section: Comparison Of Resilience Definitions and Conceptual Traditionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Interrogating resilience: toward a typology to improve its operationalization

Davidson¹,

Jacobson²,

Lyth³

et al. 2016

E&S

222

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. In the context of accelerated global change, the concept of resilience, with its roots in ecological theory and complex adaptive systems, has emerged as the favored framework for understanding and responding to the dynamics of change. Its transfer from ecological to social contexts, however, has led to the concept being interpreted in multiple ways across numerous disciplines causing significant challenges for its practical application. The aim of this paper is to improve conceptual clarity within resilience thinking so that resilience can be interpreted and articulated in ways that enhance its utility and explanatory power, not only theoretically but also operationally. We argue that the current confusion and ambiguity within resilience thinking is problematic for operationalizing the concept within policy making. To achieve our aim, we interrogate resilience interpretations used within a number of academic and practice domains in the forefront of contending with the disruptive and sometimes catastrophic effects of global change (primarily due to climate change) on ecological and human-nature systems. We demonstrate evolution and convergence among disciplines in the interpretations and theoretical underpinnings of resilience and in engagement with cross-scale considerations. From our analysis, we identify core conceptual elements to be considered in policy responses if resilience is to fulfill its potential in improving decision making for change. We offer an original classification of resilience definitions in current use and a typology of resilience interpretations. We conclude that resilience thinking must be open to alternative traditions and interpretations if it is to become a theoretically and operationally powerful paradigm.

show abstract

Section: Formentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Comparison Of Resilience Definitions and Conceptual Traditionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interrogating resilience: toward a typology to improve its operationalization

Davidson¹,

Jacobson²,

Lyth³

et al. 2016

E&S

222

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…13 below. Resilience, vulnerability, disaster risk reduction and adaptation are inter-related concepts though their mutual relationships are still not well-documented (Lei et al, 2014). These concepts are common in environmental management, climate change, social−ecological and disaster risk sciences (Lei et al, 2014).…”

Section: Building Wetlands Resiliencementioning

confidence: 99%

Building Resilience in Natural Capital to Reduce Disaster Risks and Adapt to Climate Change: A Case of Wetlands in the Eastern Free State; South Africa

Belle¹,

Collins²,

Jordaan³

2017

American Journal of Environmental Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Wetlands are a form of natural capital which provide services that improve the welbeing of the local community. Unfortunately many wetlands have been degraded before their values and functions were realised. Using a system thing appraoach and a mixed research method, this article collected primary data from 176 respondents using questionnaires. Besides, 21 wetlands were observed using field observation data sheet while interviews were conducted with 31 environmental, disaster and climate change experts. Lastly secondary data were obtained from the South Africa Weather Service on two climate parameters. All these data were used to investigate the vulnerability and functions of wetlands as a natural capital and how to build wetland resilience in the eastern Free State of South Africa. The main findings were that wetlands especially those in communal land were still very vulnerable partly due to ignorance of wetland values and functions. The dominant function of the wetlands in the study area was agriculture (both crop production and grazing). These wetlands also perform other functions that support the welbeing and safety of the local community. Despites these valuable functions, wetland degradation is still going on and the management is still predominantly reactive. The main recommendation therefore was a proposed integrated management framework that build wetland resilience to the changing environment characterised by increasing extreme weather events and disaster risks exacerbated by negative impacts of climate change.

show abstract

“…These ideas are implicitly laid out in Francis andBekera, 2014, andexplicitly in Rose, 2004a. In the disaster literature, the concept of resilience appears to stem from three separate concepts: vulnerability, risk assessment, and adaptive capacity. All of these ideas are linked to a common goal of reducing a community's risk to external forces (Lei et al, 2014). , and others have noted, resilience and vulnerability should be viewed as complements rather than at odds with each other.…”

Section: Foundations Of Resiliencementioning

confidence: 99%

Landscape Survey to Support Flood Apex National Flood Decision Support Toolbox: Definitions and Existing Tools

Strong¹,

Knopman²

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rethinking the relationships of vulnerability, resilience, and adaptation from a disaster risk perspective

Cited by 138 publications

References 34 publications

Interrogating resilience: toward a typology to improve its operationalization

Interrogating resilience: toward a typology to improve its operationalization

Building Resilience in Natural Capital to Reduce Disaster Risks and Adapt to Climate Change: A Case of Wetlands in the Eastern Free State; South Africa

Landscape Survey to Support Flood Apex National Flood Decision Support Toolbox: Definitions and Existing Tools

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About