Professional Documents
Culture Documents
The Routledge Handbook of Urban Resilience-Routledge
The Routledge Handbook of Urban Resilience-Routledge
of Urban Resilience
This volume provides a comprehensive discussion and overview of urban resilience, including socio-
ecological and economic hazard and disaster resilience. It provides a summary of state of the art thinking
on resilience, the different approaches, tools and methodologies for understanding the subject in urban
contexts, and brings together related reflections and initiatives.
Throughout the different chapters, the handbook critically examines and reviews the resilience con-
cept from various disciplinary and professional perspectives. It also discusses major urban crises, past and
recent, and the generic lessons they provide for resilience. In this context, the authors provide case studies
from different places and times, including historical material and contemporary examples, and studies
that offer concrete guidance on how to approach urban resilience. Other chapters focus on how current
understanding of urban systems –such as shrinking cities, green infrastructure, disaster volunteerism, and
urban energy systems –are affecting the capacity of urban citizens, settlements and nation-states to respond
to different forms and levels of stressors and shocks. The handbook concludes with a synthesis of the state
of the art knowledge on resilience and points the way forward in refining the conceptualization and appli-
cation of urban resilience.
The book is intended for scholars and graduate students in urban studies, environmental and sustain-
ability studies, geography, planning, architecture, urban design, political science and sociology, for whom
it will provide an invaluable and up-to-date guide to current approaches across these disciplines that con-
verge in the study of urban resilience. The book also provides important direction to practitioners and
civic leaders who are engaged in supporting cities and regions to position themselves for resilience in the
face of climate change, unpredictable socio-environmental shocks and incremental risk accumulation.
Michael A. Burayidi is Professor of Urban Planning in the Department of Urban Planning at Ball State
University, Indiana, US.
Adriana Allen is Professor of Development Planning and Urban Sustainability at the Bartlett
Development Planning Unit at University College London, UK.
Christine Wamsler is Professor of Sustainability Science at Lund University Centre for Sustainability
Studies (LUCSUS) and former co-director of the Societal Resilience Centre, Sweden.
The Routledge Handbook
of Urban Resilience
List of figures ix
List of tables xiii
List of contributors xv
Foreword by Allan Lavell xxix
PART I
Critical review from different disciplinary perspectives 15
v
Contents
PART II
Urban systems under stress 83
PART III
Dimensions of resilience 195
vi
Contents
PART IV
Resilience building in practice 329
vii
Contents
32 Social resilience and capacity building: A case study of a granting agency 445
Laura Tate
Index 488
viii
Figures
ix
Figures
x
Figures
xi
Figures
33.2 View from the center towards the east of Manizales. High-r ise
buildings are constructed on the plateau of the city, while small
residential houses remain invisible from this perspective 462
33.3 DRM institutions related to Manizales 464
33.4 Critical juncture: Land use plan 2001–2013 465
33.5 Informal housing constructed on the southern slopes around 2010 468
33.6 Critical juncture: Land use plan 2017–2029 469
xii
Tables
xiii
Tables
xiv
Contributors
Adenrele Awotona, Professor of Sustainable Urban Development in the School for the
Environment, is the founder and Director of the Center for Rebuilding Sustainable Communities
after Disasters at the University of Massachusetts, Boston. He was previously Director of Studies
for the British Council International Seminars (“Reconstruction after disasters”) in the United
Kingdom. He has also organized major international conferences (on Afghanistan, China, Iraq,
Japan, etc.), and hosted a workshop for the US Department of State (with participants from
Brazil, Chile, Uruguay, Argentina, and Paraguay). A stream of publications has emanated from
both his research and consultancy services.
Adriana Allen is Professor of Development Planning and Urban Sustainability at the Bartlett
Development Planning Unit at University College London, where she leads the research cluster
on Environmental Justice, Urbanization and Resilience (EJUR). She is also the Bartlett’s Vice-
Dean International and is actively engaged in various initiatives promoting trans-local learning
and enhanced research capacity, both within UCL and internationally. Originally trained as
an urban planner in Argentina, she specialized over the years in the fields of urban environ-
mental governance and political ecology. Adriana has over 30 years of international experi-
ence in research, postgraduate teaching, and consultancy undertakings in over 20 countries
across the Global South. Through the lens of risk, water, land, food, and health, her work looks
at the interface between everyday city-making practices and planned interventions and their
capacity to generate transformative spaces, places, and social relations. Her most recent books
include: Untamed Urbanisms (2015), Environmental Justice and Resilience in the Global South (2017),
Urban Water Trajectories (2017) and the Routledge Handbook of Global Urban Health (2019).
Ali Adil is an interdisciplinary urban energy scholar who holds a PhD in Urban Planning and
Public Policy from the University of Texas at Arlington. His research efforts are focused on the
transactional spaces at the intersection of social sciences and energy studies and devoted towards
identifying and examining innovative strategies and creatives approaches to achieve a clean
energy future for all. His research interests include socio-technical energy transitions, energy and
environmental governance, and local policy studies. In addition to his doctoral degree, he holds
a Master’s degree in Engineering and Management from University of Glasgow and a Bachelor’s
degree in Electrical and Electronics Engineering from Osmania University. His prior work
experiences include ICLEI-Local Governments for Sustainability and the National Renewable
Energy Laboratory.
Amod Mani Dixit completed his Doctorate of Engineering from the Graduate School of
Science and Engineering, Ehime University. His professional experience of more than four
xv
Contributors
decades comprises stints with the the Department of Mines and Geology (GON), a private
engineering consultancy, and also a visiting professorship of engineering geology in Tribhuvan
and Kathmandu universities. In 2017– 2018, Dr Dixit was Visiting Professor with Ehime
University. Dr Dixit is a founder of NSET and is currently serving as its General Secretary.
Dr Dixit also chairs the Asian Disaster Reduction and Response Network (ADRRN) that
has membership of more than 50 civil society organizations working in disaster risk reduc-
tion from 20 countries in. Asia. Dr Dixit has received several national and international awards
and decorations for his works in disaster risk reduction. Dr Dixit has presented more than 100
papers at national and international conferences and published many peer-reviewed research
papers and book chapters.
Antti Silvast is a researcher at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Department
of Interdisciplinary Studies of Culture. Previous to this, he worked in Princeton University,
Durham University, and the University of Edinburgh. His main research interests include
Science and Technology Studies (STS), energy infrastructures, risk, and resilience. He is the
author of Making Electricity Resilient (Routledge, 2017) and the first editor of three special issues
on “Energy in Society” (Science & Technology Studies, 2013–2014). He serves as an editor of Science
& Technology Studies, the official journal of the European Association for the Study of Science and
Technology, and is the coordinator of the Disaster, Conflict and Social Crisis Research Network
of the European Sociological Association.
Åse Johannessen is currently an international post doctorate researcher at the Division of Risk
Management and Societal Safety, Lund University, , based at the Delft University of Technology
(TU Delft) in The Netherlands. Her research focuses on social learning for holistic water man-
agement and governance in relation to various water crisis issues, especially flooding, where she
also engages in knowledge exchange and policy dialogue. Åse has a PhD in Risk Management
(2017) and MSc in Biology/Systems Ecology (1999) and has worked for about 20 years with
research, education, technical support, managing programs, and policy advice to various water
and environmental initiatives worldwide, for example the Stockholm Environment Institute
(SEI), the World Conservation Union (IUCN), the Department of Environment and Rural
Affairs (Defra, UK), the Stockholm International Water Institute (SIWI) and the International
Water Association (IWA).
Austin Zwick is an Assistant Teaching Professor in the Maxwell School of Public Affairs and
Citizenship at Syracuse University. He previously obtained a PhD in Planning from the
University of Toronto and an MPA in Public Finance and Fiscal Policy from Cornell University.
He is interested at how cities and regions economically transform, triggered by technological
innovation.
xvi
Contributors
and awareness, structural design, research and study of the Nepal National Building Code. He
has attended several international/national training programs and conferences on earthquake
risk management. Mr Baskota is a trained instructor and has been involved in various training
courses.
Braima Koroma is Director of Research and Training at the Sierra Leone Urban Research
Centre (SLURC) and Lecturer in the Institute of Geography and Development Studies, School
of Environmental Sciences, Njala University. He has a special interest in urban livelihoods, envir-
onmental management, climate change, and development impact evaluation. Braima has over
10 years’ experience of teaching, research, training and facilitation, and consultancy on a broad
spectrum of interdisciplinary research to examine complex environmental and development
problems. He has worked for clients that have included the African Development Bank, the
World Bank, Japan International Cooperation Agency, the UK Department for International
Development (Justice Sector Development Programme), the German Technical Cooperation
Agency, UNEP, the World Food Programme, the Ministry of Lands, Country Planning and the
Environment, the Ministry of Finance and Economic Development, NASSIT, NaCSA, Plan
International-Sierra Leone, and World Vision International. He is presently the Science and
Technology Correspondent for the United Nation Convention to Combat Desertification and
Land Degradation. His recent research has been on improving the living conditions of commu-
nities and ecosystems facing land degradation and climate change in Sierra Leone.
Cassidy Johnson is Associate Professor at the Bartlett Development Planning Unit, University
College London, where she researches and teaches about disaster risk, post-disaster recovery
and climate change adaptation. Cassidy Johnson’s research contributes to the area of disaster risk
reduction and recovery and to the role of local governments and civil society in this (and to
integrating an understanding of disaster) risk into development. This has encompassed issues of
urban planning, housing quality, building code regulations, informal settlements (and upgrading),
and evictions. Cassidy’s work engages internationally with policymakers as well as with local
communities in more than ten countries across Asia and Africa, including Turkey, Thailand,
Bangladesh, India, Tanzania, Uganda, and Malawi.
xvii
Contributors
Charles John Kelly has over 40 years of field experience in disasters, having dealt with com-
pound disasters, droughts, food insecurity, earthquakes, insect infestation, hurricanes, epidemics,
floods, war, and other emergencies, predominantly in developing countries. Mr Kelly has
recently been involved in the development of a risk assessment tool for sand and dust storm.
Earlier work has included contributions to the Rapid Environmental Impact Assessment
process, the Green Relief and Recovery Toolkit, and the Natural and Nature-Based Flood
Management: A Green Guide. Mr Kelly provides environmental support capacities for the
Global Shelter Cluster and via the WWF Environment and Disaster Management Help Desk.
Mr Kelly is a member of the International Association of Impact Assessment and co-chairs the
Disasters and Conflict Section.
Chingwen Cheng is Assistant Professor of Landscape Architecture at the Design School and
Senior Sustainability Scientist at Global Institute of Sustainability at Arizona State University.
Her integrated research, teaching, and practice aim to understand social-ecological-technological
vulnerability to climate change and investigate the role of green infrastructure planning and
design via transdisciplinary collaboration to enhance community resilience and address climate
justice.
Christian Kuhlicke is leading the working group Environmental Risks and Extreme Events at the
Department of Urban and Environmental Sociology at the Helmholtz Centre for Environmental
Research –UFZ in Leipzig. He is also Professor at the Institute of Environmental Sciences and
Geography at the University of Potsdam. His research focuses on environmental risks, extreme
events, and how vulnerabilities, risk, and resilience are produced in governance and management
processes as well as in practices of everyday life.
Claudia Cárdenas Becerra is a senior expert in disaster risk management with 20 years of
working experience in Latin America and the Caribbean regions where she has advised public
and private organizations. She holds a Master’s in Educational Sciences from the Universidad de
Panamá and has specialized in disaster risk reduction, education and gender. Claudia is member
of La Red and founder member of GRID Chile.
xviii
Contributors
David Rouse is a Fellow of the American Institute of Certified Planners and a registered land-
scape architect with nearly 40 years of experience in community planning and design. He is
the former Managing Director of Research and Advisory Services for the American Planning
Association, where he led APA’s applied research programs, including the Planning Advisory
Service, Green Communities, Hazards Planning, and Planning and Community Health. Prior
to joining APA in 2013, he was a principal at the firm Wallace Roberts & Todd (WRT) in
Philadelphia.
Dieter Rink is Senior Researcher and Deputy Head of the Department of Urban and
Environmental Sociology at the Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research –UFZ in
Leipzig. Additionally he is Honorary Professor for Urban Sociology at the University of Leipzig,
Institute for Cultural Studies. His main research fields are sustainable urban development, urban
governance and social movements, urban nature, and urban ecology.
xix
Contributors
Henrik Thorén is a postdoctoral research fellow at the University of Helsinki at the Helsinki
Institute of Sustainability Science (HELSUS) and the Department of Practical Philosophy. He
has an MA in Theoretical Philosophy and History from the University of Gothenburg. He hold a
PhD in Theoretical Philosophy from Lund University, where he worked on philosophical aspects
of interdisciplinarity and scientific integration in sustainability science at the Lund University
Center of Excellence for the Integration of Social and Natural Dimensions of Sustainability
(LUCID). He has written on a range of philosophical and conceptual issues with relevance in
sustainability science including inter-and transdisciplinarity, the concept of resilience, ecosystem
services, and the value of nature.
Ivonne Audirac teaches City and Regional Planning in the Department of Planning and
Landscape Architecture at the University of Texas, Arlington’s College of Architecture, Planning
and Public Affairs (CAPPA). Her research is theory driven and interdisciplinary. It focuses on the
social, ecological, economic, and policy dimensions of the processes of urbanization and urban
development. She undertakes collaborative international comparative research regarding global-
ization and urban restructuring resulting in shrinking cities –a twenty-first century perspective
on urban decline, re-urbanization, and city resilience. She is founding member of the Shrinking
xx
Contributors
Cities International Research Network (SCIRN) –an international group of planning scholars
and urbanists from across five continents. In addition to publishing numerous book chapters
and refereed journal articles in planning and urban studies journals including the Journal of the
American Planning Association, TRB, International Regional Review, International Journal of Urban and
Regional Research, Progress in Planning, she published the edited books Rural Sustainable Development
(1997) and Shrinking Cities South/North (with Jesus Arroyo Alejandre, 2010).
James LaGro, Jr is a Professor and former Chair of the Department of Urban and Regional
Planning at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. His research, teaching, and outreach examine
the public policies and planning and design practices that shape the built environment and
impact community sustainability. His professional experience includes positions in higher edu-
cation, private practice, and public service at local, state, and federal levels.
John Twigg is an independent researcher and Honorary Professor at University College London.
He has worked in the field of disaster risk reduction and resilience for more than 25 years, in the
NGO sector and as a lecturer, researcher, and consultant. His research interests include commu-
nity resilience, understanding disaster institutions, urban resilience, post-disaster recovery, equity
and inclusion, risk assessment methodologies, and disability and disasters. His research crosses the
disciplinary boundaries between geography, sociology, engineering, planning, and humanitar-
ianism, with the application of academic research to improve operational practice being a par-
ticular concern. He is the author of more than 90 academic and other publications on disaster
risk reduction and is an editor of the journal Disasters.
John H. West has been Assistant Professor of Urban Planning at Ball State University since
2015. His current research examines community development practice in shrinking cities with
a particular interest in land banks. His mixed-method approach explores the how legal and eco-
nomic factors effect land bank efficacy and describes the challenges of creating new institutions
in the context of resource scarcity, population loss, and disillusionment. He is leading an effort
in Muncie, Indiana to create a land banking and working on a national study of land banking
practices.
Julia Wesely is a Research Fellow at the Bartlett Development Planning Unit (DPU), University
College London, where she is involved in research on co-learning and capacity building for
urban planners. She recently completed her PhD on integrated disaster risk management, which
analyzed the development of an enabling institutional environment for urban risk management
in the city of Manizales in Colombia. Her work aims to contribute to a better understanding
and promotion of individual, collective as well as institutional capabilities for fostering social-
environmental justice and urban equality.
Kapil Bhattarai is a civil engineer by profession and currently pursuing a Master’s in Structural
Engineering at the Asian Institute of Technology. He served as Deputy Program Manager for
the USAID/OFDA funded and NSET implemented program “Technical Support for Building
Code Implementation in Municipalities of Nepal (TSBCIN)” where his major responsibilities
include mobilizing project staff into various municipalities; providing supervision, monitoring
and guidance to implement program activities in respective municipalities. Apart from this, Mr
Bhattarai is also engaged in earthquake risk assessment, community-based disaster risk reduction
activities as well as seismic vulnerability and damage assessment of buildings. Mr Bhattarai is a
trained instructor and has been involved in various training courses.
xxi
Contributors
Kes McCormick, with a background in political science and environmental science, engages in
a combination of research, education, communication, and innovation activities. He is Associate
Professor at the International Institute for Industrial Environmental Economics (IIIEE) at
Lund University as well as an Fellow at the Melbourne Sustainable Society Institute (MSSI) at
Melbourne University. He works in the fields of sustainability, governance, cities, and greening
the economy.
Laura E. Tate is an urban planning lecturer, scholar and consultant with deep interests in how the
social world interacts with material landscapes and objects in planning and policy. She has been
a visiting lecturer at Eastern Washington University as well as at the California Polytechnic State
University. She has co-edited two books: Planning for AuthentiCITIES with Brettany Shannon,
and Actor Networks of Planning with Yvonne Rydin. Laura has an extensive practice background,
in land use and growth management planning at local and senior government levels, as well as in
community mental health policy and nonprofit funding.
Lynne Reeder is Adjunct Research Fellow in the School of Health and Life Sciences at
Federation University Australia, where she researches the evidence base of empathy and com-
passion. She is a director of Australia21 and, in that role, founded the Mindful Futures Network,
which is mapping how and where mindfulness, empathy, and compassion are being applied in
Australian organizations.
Manish Raj Gouli has completed a Bachelor of Civil Engineering degree from the Institute
of Engineering,Tribhuvan University. Mr. Gouli joined NSET in 2017 as a technical officer –
engineer for the USAID supported and NSET implemented program “Baliyo Ghar”, which
is providing technical assistance for post-earthquake reconstruction in Nepal to support
Nepal government’s initiative to “Build Back Better”. Mr Gouli is engaged mainly in earth-
quake risk reduction activities including design and implementation in seismic retrofitting
of buildings. He is involved in preparing documents related to post-earthquake reconstruc-
tion in Nepal with critical comparison among various components as well. He has also
presented papers and participated in various national/international conferences, training and
symposiums.
xxii
Contributors
Maxwell Hartt is a lecturer in Spatial Planning in the School of Geography and Planning at
Cardiff University. He is a former Fulbright scholar and holds a PhD in Planning from the
University of Waterloo. His research focuses on the intersection of demographic change and
urban planning. Specifically, his work examines prosperity and vitality in shrinking and aging
cities.
Miren Onaindia is Professor of Ecology at the University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU)
and UNESCO Chair in Sustainable Development and Environmental Education. She is director
of the Master’s program in “Environment, Sustainability and Sustainable Development Goals”
of the UPV/EHU. Her research topic focuses on the study of biodiversity, landscape, and evalu-
ation of ecosystems, with application to landscape sustainable management. She has supervised
15 doctoral dissertations and 30 Master’s projects, and published a total of 70 papers in scientific
journals, books, and book chapters. She has been a visiting professor at several universities: the
University of Oxford,Veracruz, Santo Domingo, Nevada, the National University of La Pampa,
and Universidad Regional Amazónica-Ecuador.
xxiii
Contributors
Mtafu Manda is Senior Lecturer in Planning in Land Management Department. His research
interests are urban informality, disaster risk management, tenure security, and urban livelihoods.
Through the not-for-profit Urban Research and Advocacy Centre (Urac), Mtafu also supports
community-based organizations including the Mzuzu Urban Farmers Network (MUFNet) and
the Child Development Support Organisation (CHIDESO). He is instrumental in the establish-
ment of the Malawi Urban Network (Malawi UrbaNet), a grouping of civil society, professional
institutes, research organizations and individuals in Malawi.
Narae Lee is a PhD candidate in the Department of Urban Planning & Public Policy at the
University of California, Irvine. Her research focuses on the relationship between the built envir-
onment and human behavior and psychological well-being. She is interested in using multiple
methods to measure psychological well-being. Currently, she is working on sentiment analysis of
social media data and building a mood prediction model for better understanding of urbanites’
psychological well-being.
Nick Revington is a doctoral candidate in the School of Planning at the University of Waterloo.
His research focuses on housing markets, as inflected by urban policy, politics, and planning, with
particular interest in the transition to a knowledge economy. His current work examines the role
of private investment in student housing in Canada.
Nisha Shrestha is an environmentalist by profession and has more than ten years of experi-
ence in the field of disaster risk reduction. She has been associated with NSET since 2006,
where she has had different responsibilities. Ms Shrestha has been leading the Monitoring and
Evaluation Unit (MEL) at NSET and is involved in designing and implementing monitoring
and evaluation systems and conducting project monitoring and evaluations. Ms Shrestha has
also been involved in various disaster risk management and emergency response training
courses conducted by NSET as an instructor. For Views from the Frontline, a global initiative of
GNDR, Ms Shrestha has worked as Regional Coordinator for South and South-East Asia and
also National Coordinator for Nepal. Ms Shrestha is a trained instructor and has been involved
in various training courses.
Pramod Khatiwada is a civil engineer graduated from the Institute of Engineering, Tribhuvan
University,. Mr Khatiwada joined NSET in 2014 for the USAID/OFDA funded and NSET
implemented Building Code Implementation support program.After the 2015 Gorkha Earthquake,
NSET started providing technical assistance for earthquake reconstruction through the USAID
supported “Baliyo Ghar” program. Mr Khatiwada served for that program as District Lead for
Dhading, one of the 14 most affected districts. He is currently working at NSET as a program
coordinator/civil engineer for the NSET implemented consortium program “Nepal Safer Schools
Project (NSSP)” supported by DFID. His major works include planning and implementation of
various earthquake risk-reduction activities, including capacity building and awareness, struc-
tural design, research and study of the Nepal National Building Code. He has attended several
international/national training programs and conferences on earthquake risk management. Mr
Khatiwada is a trained instructor and has been involved in various training courses.
Ramesh Guragain has acquired a PhD in Earthquake Engineering from the University of Tokyo.
Dr Guragain has been working in the field of earthquake risk reduction/management for two
decades. He has worked as team leader for various programs related to seismic risk assessment of
buildings, infrastructures, and settlements in Nepal as well as in the south Asian region. Currently,
xxiv
Contributors
Dr Guragain works in the position of Deputy Executive Director of NSET and also leads the
USAID supported and NSET implemented “Baliyo Ghar Program”, which is a housing recon-
struction project for the technical assistance on housing reconstruction to support the GON.
He has led teams of NSET professionals in the formulation of various training curricula and
provided trainings to different target audiences. Dr Guragain is a trained instructor and has been
involved in various training courses.
Ranjan Dhungel is a senior civil engineer having a Master’s degree in Risk and Environmental
Hazard from Durham University. He is a mid career professional, since December 2008 designated
as program manager at NSET, with a progressive performance record. Currently, he is leading the
Gorkha earthquake housing reconstruction program implemented by NSET with support from
USAID. Mr Dhungel’s efforts on housing reconstruction have become instrumental to provide
technical assistance on housing reconstruction following the government of Nepal’s (GON)
plan and policies. Mobilization and supervision of the work of around 200 professional staff
and experts highlights the special importance of his work in the aftermath of this disaster event.
He has published and presented more than 15 national and international conference papers,
contributed to writing book chapters, and is active in difference research work with multidis-
ciplinary research teams in Nepal and outside –for example “Scoping study on Building Rural
Resiliency in Seismically Active Region –Nepal with Durham university study team-Durham”
(www.dur.ac.uk/resources/ihrr/nepalresiliencereportFinal.pdf).
Rita Lambert is an urban development planner originally from Ethiopia. She is currently a
senior teaching fellow and researcher at the Bartlett Development Planning Unit, University
College London, and a co-investigator on several research projects in Africa and Latin America.
Her current research addresses the relationship between planning and informality with a focus
on the production, manipulation and circulation of spatial knowledge, and the development
of participatory mapping methodologies to expand the room for manoeuvre towards socio-
environmentally just urbanization.
Rita Thakuri is working as Executive Secretary at NSET and is currently pursuing her Master’s
degree in Crisis Management. In her eight years of professional association with NSET, Ms
Thakuri has been responsible for managing the overall secretarial tasks of NSET Executive
Director and Deputy Executive Directors that includes coordination, communication as well
as providing support to various national and international events, workshop, training programs,
seminars organized by NSET and many other stakeholders. Ms Thakuri is also Manager for
ADRRN, which has as members more than 50 civil society organizations working in dis-
aster risk reduction from 20 countries of Asia. She has 19 years of experience on administra-
tion in various organizations in Nepal. She is currently doing her research focusing on women
masons in earthquake reconstruction in Nepal and has presented a paper at the First South Asia
Conference on Earthquake Engineering (SACEE 2019) in Karachi.
Roanel Herrera is a commercial real estate appraiser at the Flynn Group. Mr. Herrera was also a
Peace Corps volunteer in Panama. He received his BA in Anthropology from UCLA and MA in
Community and Regional Planning from the University of Oregon.
xxv
Contributors
Sanglim Yoo is an assistant professor in the Department of Urban Planning at Ball State
University. She has a doctoral degree in environment and natural resources policy and specializes
in the geospatial analysis of the urban environment and its vulnerability.
Sigrun Kabisch is head of the Department of Urban and Environmental Sociology at the
Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research –UFZ in Leipzig. Additionally she is Professor
for Urban Geography at the University of Leipzig. She acts as chair of the Scientific Advisory
Board of the Joint Programming Initiative (JPI) Urban Europe. Her main research interests
refer to interdependencies between social, built, and natural environments in urban landscapes,
urban transformations towards sustainability, interdisciplinary approaches, and comparative case
studies.
Sophie Peter is a PhD candidate, focusing on the socio-cultural dynamics of ecosystem services
at the Department of Social Sciences of Goethe University. Her research is part of the large-
scale and long-term German project “Biodiversity Exploratories”. This project connects with
Sophie’s expertise in environmental sciences, policy, and management, concentrating on the
relationship between humans and nature, seen from a social science perspective.
Sujan Raj Adhikari is a geologist by profession, currently pursuing a PhD in Geophysics at the
University of Western Ontario focusing on Seismic microzonation, and 3D velocity model. He
has more than 13 years of local and international experience in the field of geo-engineering and
geo-environment. He started his career from ITECO Nepal in 2004, working on road sector and
hydropower projects, where he spent most of his time on borehole logging, geological mapping,
and assessing environmental impacts in addition to landslide mitigation work. He worked in
the National Society for Earthquake Technology Nepal (NSET) from 2011–2018 as a geologist
during his tenure Mr Adhikari has mostly engaged in earthquake risk assessment, urban and
community-based disaster risk reduction activities with a focus on natural hazards and risk. He
has published and presented numbers of journal/conference paper on his areas of works and
expertise.
Suman Pradhan is a structural engineer and has more than 10 years’ professional experience in
Disaster risk management and earthquake engineering in Nepal and abroad. He is working on
the USAID/OFDA supported program “Technical Assistance for Building Code Implementation
in Nepal (TSBCIN)” as Program Manager from its Phase I –“Building Code Implementation
Program in Municipalities of Nepal (BCIPN)” in 2013. After the 2015 Gorkha Earthquake, Mr
Pradhan worked as team leader to conduct detailed damage assessment of 200,000 buildings
in 15 affected municipalities. He joined NSET in April 2007 as a civil engineer with core
involvement in seismic vulnerability assessment, retrofitting design, and construction. He holds
a Bachelor’s degree in Civil Engineering from Kantipur Engineering College, Tribhuvan
University and a Master’s degree in Evaluation Control and Reduction of Environmental
Seismic Risk (MECRES) from Sapienza University, Rome, under the EUNICE-ERASMUS
MUNDUS program. He combines his technical expertise and program management and coord-
ination skills to oversee the delivery of disaster resilience programs.
Surya Bhakta Sangachhe has worked as Senior Technical Advisor for NSET since July 2010. He
is former Director General of Department of Urban Development and Building Construction
(DUDBC), GON. Mr Sangachhe is an architect planner with a Master’s degree in Architecture
xxvi
Contributors
from the Kiev Civil Engineering Institute (1975) and another Master’s degree in Conservation
of Cultural Heritage from the Institute of Advanced Architectural Studies (IAAS), University of
York (1986). Mr Sangachhe served with the Department of Urban Development and Building
Construction, GON (1976–2008) and led the Lumbini Development Project (1976–1988) and
urban land development, specially the land pooling projects (1990–1998) in the Kathmandu
Valley. He is the co-author of Land Pooling Manual. He led the team of architects, planners,
and engineers, responsible for the Strategic Development Plan of Kathmandu Valley (KV
Development Plan 2020) in 1999–2000. Mr Sangachhe is a trained instructor and has been
involved in various training courses.
Surya Narayan Shrestha has acquired an MSc in Structural Engineering from the Institute
of Engineering, Tribhuvan University and is now pursuing a PhD at the same university, with
research at teh University of Basilicata. In his two decades of professional experience, Mr Shrestha
has worked as team leader of several programs implemented by NSET focused on earthquake
risk reduction in Nepal and the region. As Executive Director, his main responsibilities are to
lead NSET’s operation to help make “Earthquake Resilient Nepali Communities”, develop and
implement strategic plans, programs, and innovative ideas, provide regular guidance and monitor
implementation of NSET program activities. Mr Shrestha is a trained instructor and has been
involved in various training courses.
Suwan Shen is an assistant professor in the Department of Urban and Regional Planning at
the University of Hawaii Manoa. She holds an MA and PhD in Urban Planning and MSc in
Civil Engineering from the University of Florida. Suwan’s primary research focuses on the
interaction between critical infrastructure system and the changing environment, with a par-
ticular emphasis on climate change vulnerability. Suwan’s work examines the vulnerability of
critical infrastructures and explores the adaptation options to climate change using transporta-
tion and land use models, spatial analysis, and environment projection and simulations. Suwan
has conducted research to examine the vulnerability of emergency facilities to projected storm
surge, estimate the impacts of sea level rise and changing rainfall patterns on the transporta-
tion network, evaluate the preference and effectiveness of adaptation strategies with stakeholder
engagement, and explore the socio-economic factors influencing local vulnerability and adaptive
capacity. Currently, Suwan is working on projects investigating the social sensitivity to sea level
rise induced coastal flooding.
Quan Yuan is a postdoctoral research associate in the Department of City and Regional Planning
at the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill. His research interests lie in urban transportation
and land use, particularly in freight, parking, environmental sustainability, urban resilience, and
transportation technology.
xxvii
Foreword
By Allan Lavell
xxix
Allan Lavell
outliers in the 1990s. It, as sustainability, is underlined by hopes of progress, advance, increased
stability, and rationality. However, it is fundamentally a concept developed in northern aca-
demic circles and “exported” to the south. Written contributions to the debate on concept
and application are not that prevalent from the south, although for some what is now referred
to as resilience has existed for a long time. Moreover, perhaps reflecting this spatial concentra-
tion of academic pursuit, many resilience programs stimulated by international agencies and
organizations are heavily weighted in favor of developed country cities. This is the case of the
in-transition Rockefeller Hundred Cities program, which includes only some 30 cities are from
the south and these are in general large metropolitan centers, national or regional capitals, not
rapidly growing intermediate cities that could possibly most benefit from close attention.
This is significant, because the way in which resilience can be used in northern and southern
cities, post impact, post crisis, is in many ways very different. In the former, crisis many times
occurs in the frame of basically well-organized and planned cities with low levels of exclusion
and marginality (this is not to say this is always true as the cases of New Orleans and San Juan
during Katrina and Maria well demonstrated), but challenged by new tends and stressors. In the
latter case, cities are basically socially and economically segregated, constructed on the existence
of exclusion, marginality and poverty, often unplanned and almost routinely affected by more
traditional or common disasters, euphemistically referred to still as natural disasters. Thus, the
notion of resilience with or without transformation assumes a very different stance in one and
the other and the weight of basic underlying structural deficits do so also.Thus, as more than one
observer has commented somewhat cynically, resilience in the north basically refers to if you can
afford insurance. In the south very few can (or it may not be available at all), so progress depends
much more on the opportunities for structural transformation, not on a daily post-impact basis
but rather through public policy and continued efforts to change the balance of society and the
ways it distributes wealth and opportunity, so all can be “insured” and assured.
Resilience does show a significant difference to such notions as “coping” or “survival strat-
egies”, also essentially engineered in the north decades ago, as concepts and strategic approaches
to provide guidance on paths to increased welfare in the south, when faced with the adverse
impacts of dependent development. Such concepts, in retrospect, seemed to “condemn” the
developing south to a constant struggle, a constant getting by, within the ever-existing and seem-
ingly complex structural burden of poverty. Resilience, however, can be seen in its intention to
go beyond such “getting on with things as they are”, and has evolved in its original meaning of
“bouncing back” to include ideas on moving on and transformation –but, a “transformation”
that is essentially very different in its meaning and scope in developing and developed contexts.
Resilience is also many times seen as the opposite of vulnerability and its negative connotations,
a context that led, towards the end of the 1980s, to an increased emphasis on capacities for over-
coming development deficits and impacts, an idea borne in the debates on post-disaster rehabili-
tation and reconstruction.
Going beyond origins and appropriateness, and the debates around this, it is fascinating to
be face to face with an idea, whether it be seen as a notion, a concept, an ordering principle, a
platform or fulcrum, which exists, is used ubiquitously, seems to be the basis for much work in
development contexts, but which essentially is not understood, agreed on or consensus based,
and is constantly in a process of “definition” and establishment or fixing of its content and limits.
It is widely employed but not consensually concretized, exists but floats in a world of difference
of interpretation.
Definition and constant redefinition, or maybe manipulation, come after use, as has been the
case with “adaptation”. It is what each researcher from a different school of thought believes it
to be, and, while the basic precepts and assumptions of original resilience theory are respected,
xxx
Foreword
additions and manipulations are all seen to be valid. And, due to this, as Meerow, Newell and
Stults found in their systematization of definitions of urban resilience, dozens of different
definitions exist.
A central question broached wittingly or not, in the sum of essays published in this innova-
tive collection refers to the outstanding question how a macro concept that is so undefined and
contested and that is basically built on the basis of already existing understandings or interpret-
ations of multiple “urban” processes, discussed and debated widely (from urban theories on socio
spatial and economic segregation, poverty and inequality, on urban rent notions through to dis-
aster risk and social construction, to gender studies and ethnicity etc.), can so quickly have taken
a lead in the scene of development debates. This then obliges us to consider its ideological and
political, social interaction and cohesion usage as opposed to direct scientific and practical appli-
cation. Here experience has shown us that much still needs to be done to advance the incorp-
oration of the concept in everyday decision-making and provide tangible, comparable indicators
of advance if the concept of resilience is to someday have widespread measurable results on the
ground. The book The World Without Us by Alan Weisman asked how long it would take for the
world to return to a “natural” configuration if human society was to disappear tomorrow, leaving
all its artifacts behind. Maybe it is interesting to ask here: if the concept of resilience were to dis-
appear from use and discussion tomorrow, how much would change and where would it change
in terms of advance on the problems that resilience is used to announce and searches to help
comprehend and resolve? This book provides a comprehensive exploration the concept and its
application to urban areas. It deserves to be read by all who are concerned with the development
of urban areas in this century.
xxxi
1
Introduction
Rethinking Urban Resilience
Michael A. Burayidi, John Twigg,
Christine Wamsler, and Adriana Allen
Tom and Arlette Stuip were enjoying breakfast and relaxing on a terrace overlooking the
beach and the Andaman Sea in Khao Lak, Thailand when the Tsunami hit in 2004. The couple
observed the ocean begin to recede, which at first created a spectacular site for the sunbathing
tourists. Instinctively, however, Tom remembered there was an earthquake earlier in the day and
realized this forebode of a disaster about to unfold, so he took Arlette’s hand and they sought
higher ground. Within minutes a wall of water was coming at them at a speed of 50 miles an
hour. When it was all over many of their friends were either swept away, dead or wounded, and
the hotel and beachfront buildings were destroyed (Ryder and Dafedjaiye 2014).
Alice Jackson is a reporter who for 30 years lived on the coast of Mississippi. Until the advent
of hurricane Katrina in 2005, she had weathered five hurricanes and numerous tropical storms.
When the weather forecast warned of a hurricane that one night, she boarded up her house and
gathered her family to safer ground at a friend’s house. Only later did she realize the eye of the
hurricane was heading their way. Late that night, strong winds walloped the house they were
staying in and woke up the family.When the radio reported that all emergency operation centers
in the area were washed away, the gravity of the storm began to sink in. Suddenly and without
warning, a giant pine tree in a neighbor’s yard crashed through the house, giving way to the
strong winds (Jackson and Lang 2005).
As day broke, what the family saw was worse than they had imagined. Streets and parking lots
were turned into lakes, houses were blown off their basements, dead bodies were strewn on the
streets, and destruction was everywhere they looked. Debris and waterlogged streets prevented
them from getting to her mother’s house to check on its condition. From afar, they could see
what remained of the house, a concrete slab. Reflecting on her experience, Alice remarked; “I
no longer want to live in Mississippi. I no longer want to go to sleep at night in a graveyard.You
know you’ve seen it all when you’ve watched deputies taking ice chests from the local Winn-
Dixie to store bodies” (Jackson and Lang 2005).
Typhoon Haima hit the Phillippines in 2016 and disrupted the lives of close to a million
people. It is said to have been the third most intense tropical cyclone in the world. As World
Vision communicator, Joy Malujo recounts, Jonas Pagcanlungan, a farmer, lost his farm and
investment following the disaster. He was counting on raising $300 from his rice farm that year
to help pay his medical bills and the education of his two children. Now he has no farm and no
1
Burayidi, Twigg, Wamsler, and Allen
money to pay his bills. Elena, whose house was also destroyed by typhoon Haima, had to live in a
tarp shelter on the side of the road with ten other families but was grateful she made it out alive
with her children (Malujo 2016).
Tropical storm Vinta struck Mindanao, the Philippines in 2017 claiming 30 lives and
causing massive flooding. ABS-CBN News reported that it caused landslides that killed 47
people in Zamboanga del Norte, and 17 people in Barangay Panganuran in the town of
Gutalac, and floods that drowned 18 people in the municipality of Sibuco (ABS-CBN News
2017). Maulana Malunay, a 75-year-old elder from the village of Panganan counted herself
lucky. She survived the floods and was able to salvage her favorite necklace and a few belong-
ings. Maulana is a member of the Matigsalug tribe who had lived along the Salug river for
generations but have had to evacuate when the flood inundated their farms and washed away
their homes.
Zlata Filipović, Kon Kelei, Grace Akallo, Shena A. Gacu, and Emmanuel Jal are all former
child soldiers from different continents of the world, forced to fight in wars they did not under-
stand. They chronicled their harrowing stories in books and through artistic performances. Zlata
was doing his homework in the evening when he heard the first gunshots in his native Bosnia.
That gunshot interrupted his schooling and took his innocence. His school in Sarajevo was
bombed and eventually closed. Zlata recollects how wars affect the lives of children like him:
We know what emergencies are: we have felt them on our skin, they crept into our lives,
blew them away, sliced them, fragmented them. They stole our innocence, humanity,
childhood, families, our right to education.
One day our pens were dropped, notebooks abandoned, benches deserted. Rooms that
were once covered with our drawings, lingering with giggles and passed notes became
empty. The fear of being called up to the board to solve a math problem and the excite-
ment of discovering the magic of writing were gone. Learning how to play, how to pull a
pen across paper and how to leave a permanent mark in this world was snatched from us.
Instead, our schools became shelters, places where humanitarian aid was distributed. Schools
transformed into bombed-out ghost buildings, vandalized spaces, storerooms for weapons,
demarcations of enemy zones and front lines.
(Filipović 2009)
These stories speak of the catastrophic events that cause hazards and disasters and disrupt lives.
Many others are just as disastrous although they may be less traumatic in nature. Sea level rise
for example is a slow-burn phenomenon that may not cause the type of sudden chaotic events
recounted in the vignettes of lives shared above but it is just as pernicious in the long run. Every
day stressors such as extreme urban heat, drought that leads to low crop production, and lack of
access to potable water and adequate sanitation in urban areas eventually build up to a crisis if
they are not recognized and attended to in their incipient stages.
This book is about these and many other types of hazards and disasters that confront urban
residents on a daily basis. Some such as earthquakes are fast-burn, high impact disasters, while
others, such as fuel poverty and air pollution, are chronic stressors that impact the everyday lives
of urban residents (Allen et al, 2017).
This book also recognizes resilience in its various forms –such as engineering, ecological, and
evolutionary resilience. The contributing authors therefore discuss urban resilience not only as
the ability to “bounce back” but also to “bounce forward” and adapt, reconstituting themselves
into functional units, as well as their ability to withstand unpredictable catastrophes.
2
Introduction: Rethinking urban resilience
Several international organizations track the number and severity of hazards and disasters.
The data tell us that we should expect more disasters in the future due to climate change. But
we already have far too many hazards and disasters in the world. As we have seen in the vignette
of people stories narrated above, disasters disrupt livelihoods, destroy property, maim and kill
people. Disasters flip people’s lives upside downtown, turn thriving communities into places of
despair, wreak havoc on urban and rural environments, destabilize lifestyles, and create humani-
tarian crisis.The problem is not a lack of information about disasters and their severity but about
how urban areas can more appropriately mitigate disasters and adapt to their new environments
following a disaster. Moreover, there is limited guidance for civic leaders on how cities can avert
both fast burn and slow burn disasters and adapt to both acute shocks and chronic stressors. The
goal of The Routledge Handbook of Urban Resilience is to fill this gap.
3
Burayidi, Twigg, Wamsler, and Allen
stress. Suburban development has also proliferated on fire prone land and exacerbated the
“wildland-urban interface” that has made residents in such communities vulnerable to wild
fires. It is estimated that 32 per cent of housing units in the United States are in the wildland–
urban interface (Radeloff et al. 2005) and this is projected to grow. The result is that wildfires
have become more ferocious, difficult to fight, and deadly when they erupt as was the case of
the Yarnell Hill wildfire that took the lives of 19 elite fire fighters in Prescott, Arizona in 2013.
In 2018, the wildfire in Paradise, California was the most destructive and deadliest in California
history, consuming a total of 1.9 million acres and costing close to $4 billion in damages.
The World Bank estimates that by 2050 some 680 million people in urban areas will be
exposed to cyclones and that 870 million will face earthquake risks, up from 310 million and
370 million respectively in 2013 (Lall and Deichmann 2009). With climate change, urban risk
and disasters are projected to increase, particularly in the coastal regions of the world. It is
estimated that already 87 per cent of disasters are climate related as opposed to geophysical in
nature. At the same time, urban settlements contribute to climate change through profligate use
of fossil fuels: “With more than 50 per cent of the world’s population, cities account for between
60 and 80 per cent of energy consumption, and generate as much as 70 per cent of the human-
induced greenhouse gas emissions primarily through the consumption of fossil fuels for energy
supply and transportation” (UN Habitat, p. 16).
The Routledge Handbook of Urban Resilience is conceived to be a reference manual that will
provide guidance to postgraduates, academics and practitioners looking to get a synoptic over-
view of the state of the art of the field and its trajectory. The book will also be beneficial to
civic leaders and organizations seeking information on how to pursue urban development that is
environmentally friendly, reduces the risk of urban residents to vulnerabilities, show them ways
to the root causes of such vulnerabilities, and the steps needed to respond and recover, should
they be affected by a disaster.
4
Introduction: Rethinking urban resilience
to urban contexts), and the convergence and divergence of theories on urban resilience and sus-
tainability. In doing so, the authors point out the void and the need for a more comprehensive
approach to understanding resilience in the urban context.
In urban systems under stress, Part II, contributing authors discuss major urban crises, past
and recent, with the generic lessons they provide for resilience. The authors include case study
discussions from different places and times, including historical material as well as more contem-
porary examples. The urban heat island effects on the elderly, the effects of climate change on
the provision of urban infrastructure, the distribution of urban utilities under extreme weather
conditions and socio-economic inequities, the effects of deindustrialization in the creation of
urban blight and how cities are building the capacities and the governance systems to address
these problems, are the subjects of discussion in this part of the book.
Part III is devoted to a discussion of the many dimensions of resilience (social, ecological,
and technological). Specific examples and reviews of how urban settlements have been affected
by and/or adapted to particular shocks and stresses are provided in this section of the book.
Included in this section are contributions that discuss how current understanding of urban
systems such as shrinking cities, green infrastructure, disaster volunteerism, and urban energy
systems, is affecting the capacity of urban settlements and nation-states to respond to different
forms and levels of stressors and shocks.
Part IV provides lessons on resilience building in practice from different countries of the
world. Examples of local, national, and international initiatives and approaches to promote urban
resilience or tackle particular risks and the lessons learned are discussed. Specific examples and
reviews of how urban settlements have been affected by and/or adapted to particular shocks and
stresses are also provided in Part IV.
5
Burayidi, Twigg, Wamsler, and Allen
of a systems approach. They seek to bridge this gap by proposing the inclusion of personal well-
being and emotional/cognitive capacities, such as mindfulness, in resilience discussions and as a
means to improve recovery and call for putting people with their values, beliefs, emotions, and
capacities to be at the center of urban resilience planning.
Cassidy Johnson and Emmanuel Osuteye in Chapter 6 discuss ways to gather risk and resili-
ence data particularly in the informal settlements of developing countries and how to use such
data for policy formulation. The three methods identified by the authors are impact and loss
studies, urban resilience frameworks, and community-generated methods. The authors note that
while loss and impact studies are useful for measuring risks, this method lacks longitudinal
data and has a limited geographic coverage. The urban resilience frameworks method and the
community-generated data method are obtained from field studies, but these approaches also
have deficiencies that need to be ameliorated to maximize their usefulness.They suggest a scaling
up of the methods of data collection as well as a more intentional and systematic process for
gathering the data to make it useful for disaster planning and for building urban resilience in
informal settlements of the global south.
James A. LaGro, Jr. in Chapter 7 examines the role of urban open systems as multipurpose
infrastructure that can aid in building community resilience, but he observes that the amenity
is often undervalued in urban infrastructure provision. He enumerates the many ways in which
urban design and location of this infrastructure can help decrease community vulnerability to
natural hazards and help restore critical ecosystem services. LaGro, Jr. suggests the need for
a multidisciplinary education and collaboration in the design professions to produce a more
effective approach in the use of urban open systems in decreasing susceptibility to hazards, and
in building resilience.
6
Introduction: Rethinking urban resilience
and the cascading effects these have on the functioning of urban areas following a disaster.
Shen points out the goal of urban infrastructure resilience, which is to ensure that critical
infrastructure is maintained and continues to function during and after a disaster so that the
well-being of urban residents is not adversely impacted. Shen outlines strategies for adapting
urban infrastructure for climate change, including climate change adaptation strategies in
spatial development, increasing infrastructure flexibility, and mainstreaming adaptation in
legislation.
In Chapter 11 Quan Yuan notes that China has a lengthy experience in building disaster-
resilient cities and towns and that the wisdom of maintaining a harmonious relationship with
nature is deeply embedded in Chinese culture. Yuan goes on to discuss current practices to
facilitate urban resilience in Chinese cities, observing that outdated infrastructure coupled with
the rapid growth of Chinese cities make them highly vulnerable to hazards and external shocks.
Quan uses two case studies, one involving urban floods and the use of “sponge cities” to mitigate
the impacts of urban floods, and the other relating to earthquakes and the creation of earth-
quake resilient cities, to show the mismatch between the growing threats of hazards and the
limited capacities of Chinese cities to respond to the threats. Yuan suggests the modification of
the top-down policy formulation and implementation process in China and greater collabor-
ation between the public and private sectors to improve disaster preparedness and response and
to make Chinese cities more resilient to disasters.
The megalopolis of Mexico City (MMC) has been the urban “laboratory” for testing disaster
prevention measures and policies in Mexico for decades. In Chapter 12, Fernando Aragón-
Durand takes a closer look at these policies and how effective they have been in making Mexico
City resilient to disasters. He found that whereas the city has emphasized mitigation, it has not
made significant progress with respect to adaptation to climate change. Despite the fact that the
city is constantly exposed to weather-related hazards (floods, drought, and heat waves) that may
be amplified by climate change, adaptation policy and responses are insufficient and isolated from
urban development planning and policy. Moreover, the prevailing discourse on adaptation in
Mexico City frames climate hazards and risks as unique components of weather-related disaster
and fails to link these to disaster risk management and development. Aragón-Durand’s chapter
contributes to our knowledge of resilience building at the megalopolitan scale.
In Chapter 13, Åse Johannessen, Christine Wamsler, and Sophie Peter use Metro Cebu, a city
with a high-density population in the Philippines, to make a convincing case of how the resili-
ence of cities is threatened by the availability and access to water services. The authors however
contend that current efforts in urban water management in Metro Cebu are siloed in different
agencies and this weakens policy effectiveness and erodes urban resilience. Additionally, vested
power structures and corruption limit organizational restructuring that could bring about trans-
parency, improve urban governance and build more effective public institutions in the country.
The authors suggest a comprehensive approach to redressing the systemic water services problem
that links urban planning, better management of urban water systems, waste management, and
urban governance, rather than the current “crisis-response” approach.
In Chapter 14, Maxwell Hartt, Austin Zwick, and Nick Revington examine the economies
of midwestern cities in the United States, many of which have been shrinking in population
following deindustrialization in the mid-twentieth century. The authors contend that despite
their economic problems, midwestern US cities have potential and provide opportunities that
could be utilized to revitalize their economies. These include the availability of space, cheap
rent, and as testing grounds for urban innovation. The authors point to the location of anchor
institutions such as universities that are located in these cities that help attract talent to these
places and to investment in research and development that can lead to innovation. Using this as
7
Burayidi, Twigg, Wamsler, and Allen
a lynchpin to test their hypothesis, the authors analyzed patent data as a proxy for innovation in
five US cities and found that indeed cities with large research universities generated high patent
registration. In such cities, the ability of attract talent and innovation has helped to stabilize the
population of the cities and helped transform their economies. Not all cities in the midwest
have such large anchor institutions of course, but those that do may be able to capitalize on
these amenities to bounce forward if they provide the environment that nurtures innovation and
research investment.
In Chapter 15, John West follows the argument made by the authors in the previous chapter
about midwestern cities with a discussion of how civic leaders in these cities address urban blight
and decay by reorganizing civic capacities to create urban resilience. As many legacy cities tackle
the problem of property abandonment in the wake of deindustrialization, West wonders how
these cities can recreate their economies in the context of declining economic prospects, the
recent housing foreclosure crisis, and austere state government policies that cut public sources of
funding. The author discusses the use of land banks in Muncie, Indiana to show how this may
be one strategy for civic leaders to re-engage civil society and build urban resilience in distressed
cities.
8
Introduction: Rethinking urban resilience
plans. Rouse shows how incorporating green infrastructure into urban development can assist in
building community resilience and reduce risks from natural hazards.
Suburbanization has hollowed out the downtowns of many post-industrial cities and weakened
their downtown economies. Recent immigrants to the United States have taken advantage of
the cheap real estate values and high vacancy rates in downtowns to start their businesses and
invest in the abandoned or underutilized properties. In Chapter 19 Gerardo Sandoval discusses
this process in Woodburn, a town in Oregon’s Willamette Valley that has experienced rapid
Latino population growth over the last several decades. The author critiques the two conflicting
views of the response to “blight” in the city; historic preservation versus Latino placemaking,
observing that the racialized context of revitalization in the city hampers Latino small business
revitalization efforts. He draws from the community capitals framework (CCF) to contextualize
ethnic resiliency and how generative revitalization practices are built upon various forms of pol-
itical, financial, and cultural capital. Sandoval uses this case to illustrate how conflicting cultural
capitals in placemaking efforts hinder generative revitalization efforts by Latino small businesses
in a historical racialized context.
Hanna A. Ruszczyk in Chapter 20 argues that urban resilience should be linked with gen-
dered aspects of the city, particularly the role of women in cities of the Global South. Using a
case study of Bharatpur in Nepal, Ruszczyk showcases the invisible role of women in providing
social, economic and physical infrastructure and how women’s role is limited through the urban
governance structure that prevents women from reworking the urban network systems to suit
their needs. The chapter furthers our understanding of women’s role in supporting urban resili-
ence through the intersection of urban service provision, urban governance, social invisibility,
and gender.
In Chapter 21, Eva Lema, Matthew Liesch and Marcello Graziano discuss the ‘economic
resilience’ taking place in four Great Lakes cities (Grand Rapids, MI, South Bend, IN, Duluth,
MN, and Racine, WI) in the US. The authors show how these cities are transitioning away from
their manufacturing past and initiating strategies for diversifying their economic base, reflecting
an ‘adaptive’ element in the resilience process of the cities. The transformation of the economy
of the cities is examined through economic clusters, with emphasis on the manufacturing and
service-oriented clusters, and through the use of location quotient analysis of each of the cities’
economies. The authors conclude that economic diversity, availability of skilled labor and insti-
tutional capacity have been important factors in the adaptive resilience of these cities.
In Chapter 22 Antti Silvast makes the case that energy resilience is important to the
functioning of urban areas and thus the ability of the energy supply system to “bounce back”
to delivering energy after a disaster is paramount. However, he contends that the energy sector
is often overlooked in discussions on urban resilience. Antti Silvast provides an overview of this
complex and still emerging sector. He first considers what resilience means in the context of
urban energy supplies, drawing from various commentators from academic research to policy
works on energy infrastructure resilience. He then turns to specific examples of energy infra-
structure resilience to unpack how various urban energy systems have “bounced back” from the
impacts of particular shocks and stresses. Silvast discusses the growing share of renewable energy
in the energy mix, the marketization of energy, and the digitalization of energy infrastructures
and how these enhance or reduce the capacity of urban energy infrastructure to respond to
different stress and shock events and resilience.
In Chapter 23, Adenrele Awotona discusses vulnerabilities to climate change in Iraq and
Nigeria and the implications for human development and national security. Acknowledging that
the two countries are vulnerable to disasters resulting from climate change, he then discusses
how the two countries are responding to climate variability and the effectiveness of these
9
Burayidi, Twigg, Wamsler, and Allen
responses. Awotona notes that, although various UN agencies have provided financial and tech-
nical assistance to Iraq, the country is yet to adopt an adaptation strategy. He attributes this to the
country’s political instability and a divided political system, fractured along sectarian lines, that
prevents it from addressing long-term issues. On the other hand, Nigeria has a national adapta-
tion strategy but Awotona does not see that it will have a positive impact in helping the country
adapt to climate change because the country is a “failed state”. Nigeria also has a top-down,
fragmented and uncoordinated governance structure that excludes stakeholder participation in
policy formulation and implementation. Awotona concludes with policy proposals to redress the
stalemate in the two countries and return them to a path of resilience building.
In Chapter 24, Elizabeth Wagemann and Margarita Greene explore the transformative poten-
tial of reconstruction through experiences from Chile, aiming at enriching the evolutionary per-
spective of resilience and sustainable development. After discussing different forms of resilience,
the authors note that the dominant view of resilience that expects a system to return to a state
of normality is problematic because “normality” is neither adequate nor desirable, since that state
is what caused the vulnerability in the first place. The authors privilege evolutionary resilience,
which is not based on equilibrium but on the understanding of the world as a complex, chaotic,
uncertain, and unpredictable system. They argue that this vision of resilience allows for a trans-
formative potential, alternative trajectories, and opportunities for adaptation, where the objective
is not to return to “normality” but to evolve. Chile, a country that has faced an array of natural
disasters periodically, is used as a natural laboratory for the discussion on disaster management,
risk reduction, and on the transformative potential of cities.
10
Introduction: Rethinking urban resilience
awareness among municipal leaders about the need to pursue risk-reduction measures in devel-
opment following several high-profile destructive events in Chile, they are constrained in what
they can do because they lack technical capacity and financial resources at the local level. The
authors suggest a need for mainstreaming risk reduction and resilience thinking into municipal
planning and development strategies as crucial for risk reduction to be effective and to increase
disaster resilience.
Charles John Kelly acknowledges that the resilience of a city comes from its social and eco-
nomic fabric in Chapter 28. However, this fabric is complex, multifaceted, and not consistent
across locations or social strata. As a result, resilience can vary from place to place and between
residents of the same place. Therefore, knowing the nature and fabric of the urban social struc-
ture is critical to identifying where and by whom disaster damage may be felt most severely,
and where resilience building is most critical. Kelly provides recommendations for a better
understanding of the urban socio-economic fabric to improve disaster response and for building
resilience.
In Chapter 29, Amod Mani Dixit et al. share lessons from Nepal to show how the country
has evolved and worked to increase its urban seismic resilience. These included the enactment
and enforcement of adaptation and mitigation laws, and requirements for building earthquake-
resilient structures. The authors share lessons from 20 years of Nepal’s experience that may be
useful to other countries in helping them build resilience.
In Chapter 30, Narae Lee laments the lack of adequate green space in urban areas as most
land is converted to impervious land cover and artificial environments. She notes how such an
environment has a negative effect on mental and psychological wellbeing of urban residents and
contributes to anxiety and depression, violent criminality, and in some cases post-traumatic stress
disorders. This has led to a growing interest in ecotherapy and nature-based therapy. Narae Lee
used a three-part empirical study to test the psychological benefits of green roofs on the psy-
chological health of urban residents. The results show that roof gardens have restorative qualities
and can be used in conjunction with urban parks to decrease psychological stress and improve
resilience of urban dwellers.
In Chapter 31, Bernadett Kiss, Kes McCormick, and Christine Wamsler discuss the potential
of nature-based solutions (NBS) to enhance urban resilience. The authors note that NBS can be
designed to address multifaceted challenges in urban areas such as enhance biodiversity, improve
environmental quality, contribute to economic vitality, support social wellbeing, and climate risk
reduction. To demonstrate how such an approach can be implemented to increase resilience to
climate change, the authors assess the use of NBS solutions in select cities in Sweden (Malmö),
Australia (Melbourne), and Germany (Munich).The chapter concludes by providing suggestions
for making the adoption and implementation of NBS solutions more effective for realizing its
full potential in urban resilience building.
In Chapter 32, Laura Tate states that the goal of planning for resilience is to position com-
munities to effectively respond to crisis and stresses.To do so, she argues there is a need for more
local initiatives that build community resilience at a social level and for a better understanding
of the processes that make these initiatives successful. Tate uses the lens of Action Network
Theory (ANT) to unpack key collaboration dynamics behind an initiative to promote local
resilience in communities in British Columbia, Canada. The goal of the initiative was to boost
the capacities of various non-profit and indigenous agencies to foster resilience. The initia-
tive sought to improve the respective groups’ skills for working with larger systems and was
funded by private and public agencies. Following her analysis, the author concluded that to
be successful, building social resilience requires greater awareness of the impact of distributed
11
Burayidi, Twigg, Wamsler, and Allen
agency on resilience-focused projects and the need to build social cohesion of participating
agencies and beneficiaries.
In Chapter 33 Julia Wesely provides an historical–institutional analysis of the critical junctures
in the development of a framework for integrated risk management in the context of a medium-
sized city, Manizales, Colombia. The city has experienced multiple hazard events in its his-
tory and is recognized as an “urban laboratory” and “good practice” case study in disaster risk
management. The chapter examines the genealogy, the path dependencies and the underlying
non-linear dynamics, which work towards integrated risk management. In so doing the author
seeks to uncover the underlying reasons and capacities that created an enabling environment
for this city to address risks. The author applies a critical junctures framework to identify key
moments and their antecedent conditions and legacies, which triggered significant changes in
Manizales’ approach to risk management.Wesely argues that understanding the dynamics under-
lying the development of integrated risk management has the potential to contribute to our
understanding of resilience building from an institutional perspective.
Conclusion
The concluding chapter of the book (Chapter 34) synthesizes and integrates the discussions in
the book and provides a way forward in building urban resilience.The lessons learnt about resili-
ence from the multiple perspectives and disciplinary frameworks are summed in the discussion
of resilience to what, for what, by whom, and for what purpose. These suggestions are aimed
at helping cities and countries to develop urban governance systems and build the capacity to
withstand shocks and stresses and increase their resilience.
References
ABS-CBN News (2017). At least 47 dead in Zamboanga del Norte after “Vinta” onslaught. Dec 23 2017
02:50 PM. https://news.abs-cbn.com/news/12/23/17/at-least-47-dead-in-zamboanga-del-norte-
after-vinta-onslaught. (Accessed December 19, 2018).
Allen, A., Griffin, L., and Johnson, C. (eds.) (2017) Environmental Justice and Urban Resilience in the
Global South. London: Palgrave MacMillan.
Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters (2016). Annual Disaster Statistical Review 2015: The
Numbers and Trends. Brussel: Université catholique de Louvain.
Filipović, Z. (2009). Every surviving war child has two stories: One from the war and one from its aftermath.
UN Chronicle: The Magazine of the United Nations. XLVI 1 & 2. https://unchronicle.un.org/art-
icle/every-surviving-war-child-has-two-stories-one-war-and-one-its-aftermath. (Accessed December
23, 2019).
Jackson, A. and Lang, A. (2005). One survivor’s story. People. https://people.com/celebrity/one-survivors-
story/. (Accessed May 13, 2019).
Lall, Somik V. and Deichmann, U. (2009). Density and Disasters: Economics of Urban Hazard Risk.
Washington, DC: The World Bank.
Lang, A. (2015). One survivor’s story. https://people.com/celebrity/one-survivors-story/. (Accessed
December 19, 2018).
Malujo, J. (2016). 3 survival stories from the worst disaster you never heard about. www.worldvision.
org/disaster-relief-news-stories/survival-stories-worst-disaster-you-never-heard-about. (Accessed
December 12, 2018).
Radeloff, V.C., Hammer, R.B., Stewart, S.I., Fried, J.S., Holcomb, S.S., and McKeefry, J.F. (2005). The
wildland–urban interface in the United States. Ecological Applications. 15(3): 799–805.
Ryder, S. and Helen, D. (2014). Tsunami stories: Your experiences. www.bbc.com/ news/ 30462238.
(Accessed December 19, 2018).
12
Introduction: Rethinking urban resilience
United Nations (2018). 68% of the world population projected to live in urban areas by 2050, says UN. www.
un.org/development/desa/en/news/population/2018-revision-of-world-urbanization-prospects.html.
(Accessed May 9, 2019).
UN-HABITAT (2016). World Cities Report 2016: Urbanization and Development -Emerging Futures.
New York: UN.
Wamsler, C. (2007). Bridging the gaps: Stakeholder-based strategies for risk reduction and financing for the
urban poor. Environment & Urbanization. 19(1): 115–142.
Wamsler, C. (2013). Cities, Disaster Risk and Adaptation. London and New York: Routledge.
13
Part I
Critical review from different
disciplinary perspectives
2
Urban resilience and urban
sustainability
Christian Kuhlicke, Sigrun Kabisch, and Dieter Rink
Introduction
This chapter delivers an overview on definitions of and the distinction between urban resilience
and urban sustainability. In the first part, we offer the reader a short description of the origins
as well as key understandings of resilience and sustainability in order to open up a comparative
assessment of both concepts.
Based on this, in the second part we draw attention to the specific urban perspectives on
both terms. Using the four topics of instabilities and disturbances, distribution of responsibility,
normative orientation, and space–time dimension, we discuss commonalities and differences.
In the third part, we offer some critical reflection of how both concepts are utilized in scien-
tific and in more operational urban contexts.
Resilience
The term “resilience” comes from the Latin resilire, resilio (Alexander 2013; Manyena et al. 2011);
it passed into Middle French (résiler) and then into English, during the sixteenth century, as
the verb “resile”. According to Alexander, the word looks back on a “long history of multiple,
interconnected meanings in art, literature, law, science and engineering. Some of the uses invoked
a positive outcome or state of being, while others invoked a negative one. Before the 20th cen-
tury, the core meaning was ‘to bounce back’” (Alexander 2013, 2710). This notion dominates in
different academic disciplines such as physics, textile and material science, as well as engineering
sciences or psychology (de Bruijne et al. 2010; for an overview, see Mykhnenko 2016).
A further conceptual approach was introduced by Holling (1973) in his influential publica-
tion “Resilience and stability of ecological systems”. He rejected the idea of restricting resili-
ence primarily to the ability of ecosystems to bounce back to a pre-disturbance state. Instead,
Holling proposed to distinguish resilience more clearly from stability. In his view, resilience
would be a much more appropriate concept for understanding and managing the dynamics of
ecosystems, since such systems are defined by multiple states of stability (Holling 1978). Holling,
17
C. Kuhlicke, S. Kabisch, and D. Rink
therefore, attempted to integrate three separate stability properties under the unifying umbrella
term “resilience”: recovery (return to the status quo after disturbance), resistance (buffering the
impact of a disturbance), and persistence (staying intact as an identifiable object/subject over
time) (Grimm and Wissel 1997).
Another approach to resilience was developed with the analysis of the interaction of social
and ecological systems (Brand and Jax 2007; de Bruijne et al. 2010) by including aspects of
adaptability, learning, and transformation. In this reading, the idea of bouncing back has been
increasingly replaced by the metaphor of “bouncing forward”; an idea that is regarded as more
appropriate since it acknowledges the interplay of disturbances and reorganization, as well as
long-term societal adaptation processes (Romero-Lancao et al. 2016, 5).
Whereas resilience was, for a long time, primarily a concept utilized in the academic com-
munity, in more recent years it has also been taken into account on the policy level, in order
to make infrastructures, institutions, and communities more resilient. It is often argued that the
increasing relevance of the concept results from a deep-seated feeling of exposure and vul-
nerability resulting from “environmental change, threats to national and international security,
and an array of issues associated with international migration and growing global economic
turbulences” (Mykhnenko 2016, 176). A prominent example is the UN International Strategy
for Disaster Reduction (UN-ISDR) campaign, “Making Cities Resilient”, which was launched
in 2010 (Molin Valdés et al. 2013). This campaign provided a checklist containing principles that
local governments should consider for building resilience. Subsequently, at the World Urban
Forum in Naples in 2012, UN-ISDR and UN-HABITAT jointly promoted disaster-resilient
cities. Complementing international activities at national and sub-national levels, attempts have
been introduced to make the concept of resilience more policy-relevant and to include it on the
operational level in disaster risk management, infrastructure planning, as well as urban develop-
ment (for an overview, see Weichselgartner and Kelman 2014).
Sustainability
The term “sustain” is of Latin origin. In a Latin dictionary from 1879, the verb “sustinere” was
translated as “sustain” or “maintain”. The Oxford English Dictionary dates the word “sustain” back
to the Middle English period (1150–1350), and it encompasses a group of meanings: “to keep
in being”, “to cause to continue in a certain state”, “to keep or maintain at the proper level of
standard”, and “to preserve the status of ” (Grober 2012, 19). At the beginning of the eighteenth
century, the Saxonian forest governor, Carlowitz, introduced the concept of sustainability into
forestry with the connotation that no more wood should be felled than grows back (Grober
2012, 81 ff.). In the following centuries, sustainability became a key principle in forestry. At its
core, it emphasizes the restriction of resource use to a level that guarantees a continuous resource
reuse for current and future human generations.
Not surprisingly, the results of a literature search in the Web of Science reveal that the term
“sustainability” appeared for the first time in an article about forestry science (Mykhnenko 2016,
183). However, its prominence goes back to the United Nations (UN) and when it formulated
the principles of sustainable development as a global political statement and leitmotif in the late
1980s.The UN World Commission on Environment and Development defined sustainable devel-
opment as development “that meets the needs of the present generation without compromising
the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”, in its report “Our Common Future”
(WCED 1987, 41). WCED has also stressed that “sustainable development must not endanger
the natural systems that maintain life on earth” (WCED 1987, 46). Sustainability represents the
attempt to develop a concept for the long-term protection of natural resources, the long-term
18
Urban resilience and urban sustainability
satisfaction of social needs, and the long-term conservation of economic resources. Thus, it
goes beyond traditional ideas of environmental protection and nature conservation, which focus
above all on natural resources; it rather demands for intergenerational and intragenerational
justice on a global scale. It is important to note that sustainability, in this sense, is first and fore-
most a normative political expression. However, its wording, understanding, and definition have
been adopted by various scientific disciplines without critically engaging with its normative
political underpinning.
Sustainability was implemented subsequently also on the local level. At the 1992 UN Summit on
Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro, more than 170 countries committed themselves
to the idea of sustainable development, including greening the economy and society and calling
for greater equality of opportunity within and between societies (UN 1992). Since the 1992 UN
Summit, sustainability has become a central, perhaps even the decisive, narrative for decision-making
processes in different spheres (e.g. political, economic, environmental) and was implemented inter-
nationally in a top-down process. The direct appeal to municipalities to consult with their citizens
on ways to achieve more sustainable urban development within the so-called “Local Agenda 21” also
transferred the political sustainability concept to the urban context (ICLEI 2012).
19
C. Kuhlicke, S. Kabisch, and D. Rink
London, etc. But urban resilience has also attracted considerable attention as a result of other
symptoms of crises. These include the financial crisis in 2007/2008 and its repercussions for
cities’ budgets, as well as rapid urban changes (e.g. population shrinkage and re-g rowth) and their
enormous impacts on the urban infrastructure. Most definitions of urban resilience therefore
offer suggestions about how to enhance the “generic adaptability, flexibility, or adaptive capacity”
of urban areas (Meerow et al. 2016, 44).
The role that disturbances play in the conceptualization of sustainable urban development is
less obvious. Some researchers even argue that resilience is superior to sustainability, because the
latter would be based on a “static conception” shaped by the idea of a “durable, stable, […] fail-
safe” urban development and, hence, would be blind towards urban crises and radical changes
(Ahern 2011, 341). However, a closer reading reveals that the concept of sustainability is linked
to potential disturbances in at least two different ways. First, it is based on the assumption that
strong efforts are not only necessary; they are essential to prevent future devastating disturbances.
Because natural resources are limited and not simply reproducible, such limits need to be taken
into account. If they are ignored, the consequences for future generations are potentially devas-
tating as the natural environment is irreparably destroyed.This is also reflected in what one might
label the “urban turn” of the sustainability debate. This is an attempt to solve global problems –
particularly mitigation of climate change –on the local level by, for instance, advancing the idea
of a post-fossil city (i.e. the complete conversion of the energy basis to regenerative carriers).
Second, urban areas themselves should develop in ways that do not merely reflect environmental
concerns, but also consider the social and economic dimension. Particularly with regard to social
sustainability in an urban context, access to resources and inclusiveness, but also social security,
are considered to be decisive components of urban sustainability (Barton 2000; Dempsey et al.
2011). This includes the postulate to be able to live in an urban environment that is safe and
secure.
The concept of resilience implies a different understanding of how to make urban areas
secure. It accepts dynamics and the occurrences of radical surprises (Evans 2011) and demands
anticipating and preparing for them. The aim is to contain and mitigate surprises by no longer
assuming that urban environments are “fail-safe”, but rather to develop procedures that follow
a “safe-to-fail” strategy (Ahern 2011, 341). The concept of resilience thus accepts potential
disturbances and catastrophic events as inevitable and, consequently, pleads in favor of pre-
paring for such events as well as for learning relevant lessons, in order to reduce the respective
consequences. These general characteristics are translated into more specific features of urban
resilience; these include, among others, robustness, redundancy, diversity, equity, decentralization,
flexibility, adaptive capacity, and predictability of failure (Meerow et al. 2016; Ahern 2011). This
also encompasses the view that catastrophes can no longer simply be considered as negative
events that are associated with loss, damages, and trauma. They can also be seen as a “window
of opportunity” to initiate transformations towards a less vulnerable and, thus, more sustainable
development. According to this reading, to be resilient even becomes a pre-condition for sustain-
able urban development (Romero-Lancao 2016).
In this view, the move from urban sustainability towards urban resilience is based on a shifting
understanding of urban security, as well as of the risks urban areas are facing. By highlighting the
idea of resilience, risks are no longer easy to detect before they occur, and they are no longer easy
to contain. On the contrary, they can occur everywhere and always, potentially with cascading
effects. The attractiveness of the idea of making urban areas more resilient is thus grounded in
the underlying premise that the concept offers an answer to urban threats by going beyond
established approaches to control, secure, and, in the final sense, on how to govern urban areas
(Pospisil 2013).
20
Urban resilience and urban sustainability
21
C. Kuhlicke, S. Kabisch, and D. Rink
processes (Cote and Nightingale 2012). Such questions, however, are currently not at the core
of the discussion on urban resilience (Evans 2011).
By contrast, sustainability is based on the normative postulate of inter-and intragenerational
justice, as mentioned above. At the same time, responsibility towards people living today and
towards future generations are regarded as being of equal importance and as belonging together.
This concept addresses central access problems with regard to natural resources, but also distri-
bution issues with regard to economic goods, income, rights and obligations, etc. (Grunwald
and Kopfmüller 2006). From a global perspective, all people have the moral right to satisfy at
least their basic needs (WCED 1987, 44–46). This requires a holistic, integrative understanding
of sustainable development, in which economic, ecological, social, and cultural aspects of social
development are to be taken into account on an equal footing. Referring to the urban context,
this normative content of sustainability has to be systematically concretized, spelled out, and
operationalized. There is a need to tailor sustainability efforts according to context conditions in
a given community and to integrate them into the local setting (Hartmuth et al. 2008).
22
Urban resilience and urban sustainability
The concept of resilience, again, is less broad spatially. It is, rather, a place-based and, thus,
location-specific concept, which is less concerned about inter-or even trans-local connectivity.
It aims at increasing the capacity of specific locations, communities, neighborhoods, or cities
to adapt to, cope with, and learn from disturbances. Nevertheless, these learning effects can be
distributed to other places facing similar risks.
Conclusions
Urban resilience and urban sustainability have become influential notions providing orientation
on how to deal with major societal challenges.This includes provision of safe and livable habitats,
which should develop in a way that is not based on the excessive use of scarce environmental
resources. Both concepts are often mentioned in close connection and sometimes even inter-
changeably. However, as both terms seem to become more and more interchangeable, the risk of
losing conceptual clarity grows. The emerging debate on whether both concepts complement
each other and which concept is superior is an attempt to bring some clarity to the debate.
However, we argue it makes more sense to draw attention to key characteristics of both concepts,
how they conform and where they differ.
More specifically, we structured our argument, firstly, around the role that is attributed to
instabilities and disturbances. Here, the concept of resilience places greater emphasis on the
very occurrence of disturbing events and how to adapt, cope with, and recover from them.
Sustainability, on the other hand, focuses more on the “root causes” of future disturbance by
emphasizing climate mitigation (e.g. post-fossil city) and, at the same time, the idea of social
safety. Thus, urban residents should have the right to feel safe in their neighborhood and such
safety standards should be provided equally. Secondly, as a consequence of the previous argu-
ment, the distribution of responsibility is governed quite differently.Whilst it is often argued that
resilience would allow authorities to assign responsibility to the individual and local level, sus-
tainability demands, instead, an egalitarian approach that highlights the right of most vulnerable
groups to be protected. Thirdly, both concepts are quite different with regard to their normative
underpinning. Sustainability is based on the normative postulate of justice between generations
and social groups. By contrast, becoming more resilient is often understood as a more neutral
endeavor that depends mostly on guidance from some general principles derived from ecology
(flexibility, adaptability, etc.), and, to a lesser extent, a task that is based on political and wider
societal debates and decisions (i.e. how much resilience is enough resilience?). Fourthly, and
finally, both concepts differ with regard to their space–time dimension. Whereas resilience is
more location-oriented and not very specific with regard to its temporal orientation, sustain-
ability has a long-term trajectory and a global orientation.
By providing these specifications, we hope to contribute to the conceptual debate. In this
sense, we place attention on the existing terminological imbroglio by stressing the particular foci,
as well as the commonalities and differences of both concepts. We are convinced that pursuing
such a conceptual debate will lead to an increase of the explanatory power of urban resilience
and urban sustainability.
References
Ahern, J. (2011). From fail-safe to safe-to-fail: Sustainability and resilience in the new urban world.
Landscape and Urban Planning. 100: 341–343.
Alexander, D.E. (2013). Resilience and disaster risk reduction: An etymological journey. Nat. Hazards Earth
Syst. Sci. 13: 2707–2716.
23
C. Kuhlicke, S. Kabisch, and D. Rink
Anderson, B. (2010). Preemption, precaution, preparedness: Anticipatory action and future geographies.
Progress in Human Geography. 34: 777–789.
Asprone, D. and Manfredi, G. (2015). Linking disaster resilience and urban sustainability: a glocal approach
for future cities. Disasters. 39: 96–111.
Barton, H. (2000). Conflicting perceptions of neighborhood. In: H. Barton (ed.): Sustainable
Communities: The Potential for Eco–Neighborhoods. London: Earthscan, 3–18.
Begg, C., Ueberham, M., Masson,T., and Kuhlicke, C. (2017). Interactions between citizen responsibilization,
flood experience and household resilience: insights from the 2013 flood in Germany. International
Journal of Water Resources Development. 33: 591–608.
Brand, F.S. and Jax, K. (2007). Focusing the meaning(s) of resilience: resilience as a descriptive concept and
a boundary object. Ecology and Society. 12(1).
Cannon, T. and Müller-Mahn, D. (2010).Vulnerability, resilience and development discourses in context of
climate change. Natural hazards. 55(3): 621–635.
Cote, M. and Nightingale, A.J. (2012). Resilience thinking meets social theory. Progress in Human
Geography. 36(4): 475–489.
Davies, W.K.D. (2015). Background to sustainable cities. In: W.K.D. Davies (ed.): Theme Cities: Solutions
for Urban Problems. Dordrecht: Springer, 151–205.
de Bruijne, M., Boin, A., and Eeten,V. (2010). Resilience –exploring the concept and its meanings. In: L.K.
Comfort, A. Boin, and C.C. Demchak, (eds.): Desingning Resilience: Preparing for Extreme Events.
Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 13–32.
Dempsey, N., Bramley, G., Power, S., and Brown, C. (2011). The social dimension of sustainable develop-
ment: Defining urban social sustainability. Sustainable Development. 19(5): 289–300.
Evans, J.P. (2011). Resilience, ecology and adaptation in the experimental city. Transactions of the Institute
of British Geographers. 36(2): 223–237.
Grimm, V. and Wissel, C. (1997). Babel, or the ecological stability discussions: an inventory and analysis of
terminology and a guide for avoiding confusion. Oecologia. 109: 323–334.
Grober, U. (2012). Sustainability: A Cultural History. Totnes: Green Books.
Grunwald, A. and Kopfmüller, J. (2006). Nachhaltigkeit. Stuttgart: Campus Verlag.
Handmer, J.W. and Dovers, S.R. (1996). A typology of resilience: rethinking institutions for sustainable
development. Organization & Environment. 9: 482–511.
Hartmuth, G., Rink, D., and Huber, K. (2008). Operationalisation and contextualisation of sustainablility at
the local level: Stages in the development of a sustainability indicator system. Sustainable Development.
16: 261–270.
Holling, C.S. (1973). Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annual Review of Ecology and
Systematics. 4: 1–23.
Holling, C.S. (1978). Adaptive Environmental Assessment and Management. New York: John Wiley.
ICLEI (Local Governments for Sustainability) (2012). Local Sustainability 2012. Taking Stock and Moving
Forward. Global Review.
Kabisch, S., Koch, F., Gawel, E., Haase, A., Knapp, S., Krellenberg, K., Nivala, J., and Zehnsdorf, A. (eds.)
(2018). Urban transformations –Sustainable urban development through resource efficiency, quality of
life and resilience. Future City 10. Cham: Springer International Publishing.
Kuhlicke, C. (2019). Risk and Resilience in the Management and GovernanceProcesses, Oxford
Encyclopedia of Natural Hazards Governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press. http://
oxfordre.com/ n aturalhazardscience/ v iew/ 1 0.1093/ a crefore/ 9 780199389407.001.0001/
acrefore-9780199389407-e-299?print=pdf.
Manyena, S.B., O’Brien, G., O’Keefe, P., and Rose, J. (2011). Disaster resilience: a bounce back or bounce
forward ability? Local Environment. 16: 417–424.
Marchese, D., Reynolds, E., Bates, M.E., Clark, S.S., and Linkov, I. (2018). Resilience and sustain-
ability: Similarities and differences in environmental management applications. Science of Total
Environment: 613–614: 1275–1283.
Meerow, S., Newell, J.P., and Stults, M. (2016). Defining urban resilience: A review. Landscape and Urban
planning. 147: 38–49.
Molin Valdés, H., Amaratunga, D., and Haigh, R. (2013). Making cities resilient: from awareness to imple-
mentation. International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment. 4: 5–8.
Mykhnenko, V. (2016). Resilience. A right-winger’s ploy? In: Springer, S., Birch, K., and MacLeavy, J.
(eds): The Handbook of Neoliberalism. London: Routledge, 190–206.
24
Urban resilience and urban sustainability
Pospisil, J. (2013). Resilienz: Die Neukonfiguration von Sicherheitspolitik im Zeitalter von Risiko.
Österreichische Zeitschrift für Politikwissenschaft. 42(1): 35–42.
Rink, D. and Kabisch, S. (2017). Urbane Transformationen und die Vision nachhaltiger Stadtentwicklung.
In: K.-W. Brand (ed.) Die sozial-ökologische Transformation der Welt: ein Handbuch. Frankfurt/
Main: Campus, 243–266.
Romero-Lankao, P., Gnatz, D.M., Wilhelmi, O., and Hayden, M. (2016). Urban sustainability and resili-
ence: From theory to practice. Sustainability. 8(12): 1224, 1–19.
Tobin, G.A. (1999). Sustainability and community resilience: The holy grail of hazards planning? Global
Environmental Change Part B: Environmental Hazards. 1: 13–25.
UN (United Nations) (1992). United Nations Conference on Environment and Development. Agenda 21.
New York.
UN (United Nations) (2015). Sustainable Development Goals. 17 Goals to transform our world. New York..
UN (United Nations) (2016). HABITAT III. The New Urban Agenda. Quito.
WCED (World Commission on Environment and Development) (1987). Our Common Future. New York.
Weichselgartner, J. and Kelman, I. (2014). Geographies of resilience: Challenges and opportunities of a
descriptive concept. Progress in Human Geography. 39(3): 249–267.
Welsh, M. (2014). Resilience and responsibility: Governing uncertainty in a complex world. The
Geographical Journal. 180(1), 15–26.
Zhang, X. and Li H. (2018). Urban resilience and urban sustainability: What we know and what do not
know? Cities. 72: 141–148.
25
3
Against general resilience
Henrik Thorén
Introduction
In recent discussions on resilience many have found it useful to distinguish between two kinds
of resilience: general resilience and specific resilience. For example, Fiona Miller and colleagues
(2010) consider specific resilience to involve –in the frequently used slogan of Carpenter et al.
(2001) –“the resilience of what to what,” whereas general resilience “concerns the resilience of
all aspects of a system to unspecified, including novel and unforeseen, disturbances” (Miller et al.
2010). Brian Walker and David Salt (2012) in a recent volume discuss the distinction as follows:
Specified resilience, as its name suggests, is the resilience of some specified part of the system
to a specified shock –a particular kind of disturbance. General resilience is the capacity of
a system that allows it to absorb disturbances of all kinds, including novel, unforeseen ones,
so that all parts of the system keep functioning as they have in the past.
(Walker and Salt 2012, 18)
In their recent review Sara Meerow, Joshua Newell, and Melissa Stults (2016) cash out the
distinction in terms of the ability of systems to adapt and note that more than half of the
definitions they include in their review –they collected 25 definitions of urban resilience –asso-
ciate resilience with “general adaptive capacity as opposed to adaptedness” (Meerow et al. 2016,
42). Adaptedness is understood as the property of being adapted to specific and “known threats”
(Meerow et al. 2016, 44) whereas general adaptive capacity, on the other hand, is associated with
the ability to adapt to whatever may come; known or unknown.
In what follows I focus on the idea of general resilience more broadly and try to show why
this notion is unhelpful and even obstructive. Any resilience concept applied to a real system,
it will be argued, needs to involve some specification of what that system is, and the kinds of
disturbances involved.
Concepts of resilience
Writing about resilience is in some respects a perilous affair. The concept is famously a mess
of different definitions, and there are wildly different ideas about what the concept does, and
26
Against general resilience
should do, and what is significant about it. Is it a useful metaphor not to be taken too seriously,
a powerful way to conceptualize sustainability, or a framework that gives scientific legitimacy to
a political agenda? Hence, it is useful to make some preliminary remarks.
There is a considerable literature on the different versions of the concept of resilience and its
historical background (see e.g. Meerow et al. 2016, Thorén 2014, Zebrowski 2013, Olsson et al.
2003) and any attempt at analyzing the concept at this junction is prone to complaints of not
covering all relevant definitions.This chapter will not primarily concern itself with that, but assume
a wide, albeit perhaps somewhat simplified, understanding of the notion: Namely resilience as the
ability to absorb a disturbance or the ability to adapt to a change. Such an understanding of resili-
ence is perhaps somewhat vague, but nonetheless, substantive enough to be subject to analysis, as
well as broadly representative of a range of definitions and characterizations (Thorén 2014).
It is nonetheless good to have some kind of idea about what we might mean by “resilience”.
I have argued elsewhere for an understanding of this concept as the ability of a system to keep
some property fixed through a disturbance (Thorén 2014, Thorén and Olsson 2017). This idea
both highlights the distinction between stability (or engineering resilience) and resilience (eco-
logical resilience) that has sometimes been thought to be important (Holling 1973, Holling
1996), and it is representative of many, although certainly not all, uses of this notion across
disciplinary contexts (Thorén 2014).1 For the present argument, however, it does not matter a
great deal which precise definition of resilience one prefers. The core issues here revolve around
persistence, change, and identity in complex systems in general, and social systems in particular,
and how these notions are to be made operable in scientific practice. Such notions will figure in
most, if not all, concepts of resilience in one way or the other and for this reason I will in this
chapter use notions such as “resilience” and “adaptability” more or less interchangeably (unless
otherwise indicated).
27
Henrik Thorén
then would it not imply that it is specifically resilient in every way? Or should we understand
the magnitude of general resilience rather as being specifically resilient in many ways? Neither
of these understandings, however, jive particularly well with how the distinction is typically
portrayed. On the official take of the Resilience Alliance specific resilience and general resilience
(see Resilience Alliance 2009, section 1.5) it is claimed that optimizing the specific resilience of
some system may come at the expense of the general resilience. At the very least this interrela-
tionship remains elusive in the literature.
Moreover, and keeping to the issue of trade-offs, it is clearly the case that for many, if not all
systems –from the simplest to the most complex –resilience with respect to one kind of disturb-
ance often comes at the expense of the resilience of that system with respect to some other kind
of specific disturbance. A simplistic example: A tennis ball may be resilient to compression in
the sense that it retains its structural integrity by being flexible. But the rubber construction that
makes this possible may also result in the “system” not being resilient with respect to some other
kind of disturbance, such as being put in an open fire or cut up with a pair of scissors. Although
it is perhaps possible to provide a model of the system and its resilience given a focus on a par-
ticular kind of disturbance, the inter-relationship between different kinds of resilience has to do
with any number of different qualitative aspects of that particular system, and the specifics of the
disturbance in question, that can be difficult to integrate in a single model.
Here, one suspects, there is more work to do. But then perhaps I am using the concept of
resilience too loosely. After all many, if not most, of those who use the concept of resilience
to begin with are committed in one way or the other to a particular ontology. Namely, that
the systems they are looking at are instances of, or can be described as, complex (adaptive)
systems. This is itself an abstract way of thinking about aspects of reality, but it nonetheless
points to certain ways in which resilience is in fact realized in systems. That is, as a function of
the interrelations and interaction of the components of that system and how they respond to
external or internal disturbances.
So, let us now move to discuss a set of concerns that have to do with identity and persistence
in complex systems and how different ways of thinking about real systems impinge on how
resilience is understood in those systems.
28
Against general resilience
as resilient or not? How this question is to be answered depends on what it means for that com-
munity to persist. If persistence is conceived to hinge on e.g. inhabiting some specific physical
space then migration, clearly, involves the collapse of that system. But there is nothing about the
notion of resilience itself that forces this conclusion. A different idea about what constitutes per-
sistence for this community might have the community persisting by adapting to a change in
circumstances. Ceteris paribus, migration might just as well be seen as the dynamic adaptation of a
highly resilient community (see also Thorén and Olsson 2017).
Similarly, psychologists, to whom resilience also has been an important concept, have argued
about whether depression should be perceived to be an adaptation to psychological trauma, or
the “collapse” of that individual (Rutter 1993, 627).
Now I am not suggesting either of these issues are as a matter of fact controversial in their
respective fields –they do not seem to be –but rather to point out that landing on one side or
the other depends on how persistence is construed for the relevant system. There are however
related concerns that have indeed been controversial. The Arctic Council recently released a
report on the topic of resilience (Arctic Council 2016). The report contains a wealth of cases of
how a changing climate (and other “disturbances” such as tourism and mining) are impinging
on indigenous and local communities in the region.The willingness of the inhabitants of the city
of Kiruna in northern Sweden to move as a consequence of the mining operation in the area is
portrayed as a sign of the resilience of these local communities and their ability to adapt. But, as
Thorén and Olsson (2017) point out, this way of representing the situation obscures conflicts of
interest and power differentials among stakeholders and thus hides crucial normative dimensions
of the development in this area.3
29
Henrik Thorén
All these authors emphasize the role of the observer or inquirer in studying complex systems.
The implication is pluralism with respect to system descriptions. That is to say, there is no defini-
tive single description of a given system but many. But let us make that more precise. Pluralism
is usually understood to be normative in the sense that it provides some prescriptive claim
(Mäki 1997). In this case, that there should be a plurality of system descriptions. Undergirding
any specific form of pluralism, however, are the justifications, and here pluralists tend to differ.
Some have motivated pluralism as a kind of temporarily useful state of affairs eventually to be
discarded once relevant uncertainties can be sufficiently minimized (Kitcher 1991). Others have
maintained that pluralism is neither a stepping stone towards a more enlightened situation, nor
as it were the sorry imposition we happen to find ourselves in: pluralism reflects the complexity
of the world. Mitchell (2002) writes “the diversity of views found in contemporary science is not
an embarrassment or sign of failure, but rather the product of scientists doing what they must do
to produce effective science” (p. 55).
The perspectival pluralism of e.g. Collier, Cummings, seems to go beyond the less substan-
tive forms of the dogma.4 That is to say, they are not merely claiming that there are practical, or
indeed in-principle, epistemological limits –i.e. that we cannot for some reason access the true
nature of the systems (but that there nonetheless may be such a true nature). If this is correct the
position could be summarized as involving two claims: (1) a perspective is necessary for the system
to emerge in the first place, and (2), there are several legitimate options.5
In many ways it seems clear that for ecosystems, as for many other kinds of systems, the
representations used by scientists to investigate and understand real systems are constrained in
ways that the systems themselves are not. For example, whereas actual ecosystems are rarely
unambiguously bounded –although they may on occasion approach such an ideal –models of
ecosystems have to be bounded. There is just no way of constructing them otherwise. Not to
speak of all the further simplifications and idealizations that have to be deployed in order to make
the models cognitively tractable and usefully manipulable.
For social systems these issues are further exacerbated, for several reason. An argument could
be mounted that ecologists to a greater extent than social scientists share values and norms that
dictate what is important and central about what they are studying as well as tools and practices
(cf. Kuhn 1996/1962). Diagnosing the roots of this difference lays bare central conflict lines in
the social sciences that is quite beyond the scope of this particular chapter. But let us just sur-
mise that social systems are both highly complex and, in particular with respect to contemporary
social systems, imbued with values. Descriptive claims about what it means for a social system
to persist are often inseparable from normative claims about what that system should be. Deeply
contested values come to the fore and remain there. This makes descriptions of social systems
inherently unstable and tentative in a way that is obscured by an ontological notion of general
resilience.
Now someone may object that complete and permanent destruction would surely pass
for collapse on any reasonable construal of persistence thus providing a kind of baseline for
distinguishing collapse and adaptation. Indeed, if one would consider Lotka-Volterra predator–
prey models used in population ecology (and elsewhere) as an analogue –not unreasonable
given that is whence the concept once sprung –such systems collapse when they are put on
inescapable trajectories that lead towards the extinction of one (and then all) species.This is true,
of course, but often enough we are interested in something more than the survival of the species,
or the persistence of some city in a nominal sense. Thomas Campanella notes that “the modern
city is virtually indestructible” (Campanella 2006, 142) if considered merely in terms of its phys-
ical manifestation. But a city is something more than its buildings, obviously, and reconstructing
30
Against general resilience
it after a disaster still can involve some crucial breach of the continuity upon which its identity
would hinge.
31
Henrik Thorén
of their resilience. In order to understand resilience at all we have to come to terms with what
it is that is resilient. If this is indeed true, general resilience, at least on some formulations, starts
to look like something of an oxymoron. There is a risk that one mistakes conceptual flaws for a
genuine adaptive capacity.
The focus in this chapter has been on the concept of general resilience understood in onto-
logical terms. One point was to show that this particular understanding is difficult to marry to
an (arguably) sensible pluralism about system descriptions. This particular construal of concept
is not perhaps necessary, but the notion does appear to have such connotation. That in turn risks
obfuscating important aspects of how the concept works when applied to concrete situations.
Towards the end of the last section, it was hinted at one possible understanding of the descrip-
tion that captures some of the aspects of the distinction. But let us now return to a different
understanding of the distinction altogether –namely as a primarily epistemological distinc-
tion. On their online Wiki-style workbook on resilience thinking, the Resilience Alliance, in
discussing this precise distinction, do warn that too narrow a focus on a particular construal of
the system (specific resilience) is dangerous.
The distinction between these two aspects of resilience [specific and general resilience] is
important because there is a danger in focusing too much on known or suspected thresholds
[…]. If all the attention and resources of management are channeled into managing for
identified (specified) resilience and associated thresholds, the management may inadvert-
ently be reducing resilience in other ways –resilience to completely novel “surprises”.
There is therefore a need to consider both general and specified resilience.
(Resilience Alliance 2009, section 1.5)
The over-arching idea captured in this quote is in line with what has been claimed here.What is
objectionable about general resilience as a concept is not that one should not be wary of unknown
unknowns. We have only a limited perspective of the consequences on urban areas of e.g. cli-
mate change and efforts to build resilience should be carried out whilst minimizing new vulner-
abilities. The warning of the dangers of a singular focus on certain types of disturbances at the
expense of all others is hence well taken. If this is indeed all that the general/specific distinction
aims to do in this context, then the charge here should be understood as concerning termin-
ology. General resilience brings unfortunate connotations that engenders rather than makes us
wary of precisely the sort of myopia the Resilience Alliance implores us to be wary of. Here the
focus has been on how a notion of general resilience tends to lead towards a monistic view of
systems that simplifies the relationship between system descriptions and systems they describe.
Some other concerns, like the tenability of a notion of universal and unconstrained adaptability,
have been more tangentially touched upon.
Finally, the conclusion here is thus neither that resilience as such is an inherently flawed con-
cept, nor somehow unworkable for social systems such as urban systems, but that care needs to
be taken to avoid overly reductive accounts that the notion of general resilience in this context
can be counter-productive.
Notes
1 It is notable that the stability/resilience distinction that so much turns on in early texts, such as Holling
(1973) is now sometimes explicitly conflated. For an example of this see Meerow et al. (2016). See also
32
Against general resilience
Hansson and Helgesson (2003) for a careful conceptual analysis of these two notions are related to one
another.
2 In his original paper on resilience Holling emphasised that measurability was a crucial aspect of the
concept (Holling 1973, 19). In the social sciences measurements are typically introduced in the form of
(sometimes aggregated) indicators, see e.g. Cutter et al. (2010) and Sherrieb et al. (2010).
3 These issues even flared up in the popular press briefly (see e.g. Reid and Skoglund, 2017).
4 For instructive overviews of the idea of pluralism see e.g. Kellert et al. (2006) and Mäki (1997). See also
Mitchell (2009).
5 This can be contrasted against the reductionism of e.g. Holling when he writes that the “complexity
of living systems of people and nature emerges not from a random association of a large number of
interacting factors rather from a smaller number of controlling processes” (Holling 2001, 391).
References
Adger, W. (2000). Social and ecological resilience: are they related? Progress in Human Geography.
Arctic Council. (2016). Arctic Resilience Report. (M. Carson and G. Peterson, eds.). Stockholm: Stockholm
Environment Institute and Stockholm Resilience Centre. www. arctic-council.org/arr.
Campanella,T. (2006). Urban resilience and the recovery of New Orleans. Journal of the American Planning
Association. 72(2):141–146.
Carpenter, S., Walker, B., Anderies, J., and Abel, N. (2001). From metaphor to measurement: Resilience of
what to what? Ecosystems. 4(8): 765–781.
Collier, J. and Cumming, G. (2011).A dynamical approach to ecosystem identity. In: B. Brown, K. deLaplante,
and K. Peacock (eds.) Philosophy of Ecology. Oxford: Elsevier.
Cumming, G.S. and Collier, J. (2005). Change and identity in complex systems. Ecology and Society.
10(1): 29.
Cutter, S.L., Burton, C.G., and Emrich, C.T. (2010). Disaster resilience indicators for benchmarking baseline
conditions. Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management. 7(1): 51
Hansson, S.O. and Helgesson, G. (2003). What is stability? Synthese. 136: 219–235.
Holling, C. (1973). Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annual Review of Ecology and
Systematics, 1–23.
Holling, C. (1996). Engineering resilience versus ecological resilience. In: P. Schulze (ed.) Engineering with
ecological constraints. Washington DC: National Academy Press.
Holling, C. (2001). Understanding the complexity of economic, ecological, and social systems. Ecosystems.
4(5): 390–405.
Ismael, J.T. (2011). Self-organization and self-governance. Philosophy of the Social Sciences. 41(3): 327–
351. http://doi.org/10.1177/0048393110363435.
Kay, J.J. (2008). Framing the situation: Developing a system description. In: D. Waltner-Toews, J.J. Kay,
and N.- M. Lister (2008). The Ecosystem Approach: Complexity, Uncertainty, and Managing for
Sustainability. New York: Columbia University Press, 16–34.
Kellert, S., Longino, H., and Waters, K. (2006). Introduction. In: S. Kellert, H. Longino, and K. Waters
(eds.): Scientific Pluralism, volume XIX of Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science.
Minneapolis: Minnesota University Press.
Kitcher, P. (1991). ‘The division of cognitive labor’, Journal of Philosophy. 87: 5–22.
Kuhn,T. (1996/1962).The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, third
edition.
Mäki, U. (1997). The one world and the many theories. Pluralism in Economics: New Perspectives in
History and Methodology. Aldershot: Edward Elgar, 37–47.
Meerow, S., Newell, J.P., and Stults, M. (2016). Defining urban resilience: A review. Landscape and Urban
Planning. 147: 38–49. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2015.11.011.
Miller, F., Osbahr, H., and Boyd, E. (2010). Resilience and vulnerability: Complementary or conflicting
concepts? Ecology and Society. 15 (3).
Mitchell, S.D. (2002). Integrative pluralism. Biology and Philosophy. 17: 55–70.
Mitchell, S.D. (2009). Unsimple Truths: Science, Complexity, and Policy. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
Olsson, C.A., Bond, J.M. Burns, D.A. Vella-Brodrick, and Sawyer, S.M. (2003). “Adolescent resilience: A
concept analysis.” Journal of Adolescent Health. 26: 1–11.
33
Henrik Thorén
Reid, J. and Skoglund, A. (2017). Problematisk forskning. Uppsala Nya Tidning. www.unt.se/asikt/debatt/
problematisk-forskning-4585302.aspx.
Resilience Alliance (2009) http://wiki.resalliance.org/index.php/1.5_Specified_and_General_Resilience.
Rutter, M. (1993). Resilience: Some conceptual considerations. Journal of Adolescent Health. 14(8): 626–631.
Sherrieb, K., Norris, F.H., and Galea, S. (2010). Measuring capacities for community resilience. Social
Indicators Research. 99(2): 227–247. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-010-9576-9.
Thorén, H. (2014). Resilience as a unifying concept. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science.
28(3): 303–324.
Thorén, H. and Olsson, L. (2017). Is resilience a normative concept? Resilience. 31(5): 1–17. http://doi.
org/10.1080/21693293.2017.1406842.
Walker, B. and Salt, D. (2012). Resilience Practice. Washington, DC: Island Press.
Weinberg, G.M. (1975). An Introduction to Systems Thinking. New York: Wiley.
Zebrowski, C. (2013). The nature of resilience. Resilience. 1(3): 159–173. doi:10.1080/21693293.2013.
804672.
34
4
Urban resilience
A call to reframing planning discourses
Genealogy of resilience
Engineering resilience
The first known use of the term “resilience” was in the study of natural properties of physical
objects (Klein et al. 2004; McAslan 2010). Tredgold (1818) used it to refer to timber’s “stiffness,
strength and its power to resist a body in motion” (p. 216). In its subsequent use in physics of
materials and engineering, resilience conveyed the notion of resistance, rigidity, and represented
the property of materials to revert to their original form or structure after being deformed by
external forces. An object that reverted or “bounced back”, following the impact of an external
force, without collapsing or breaking, was more resilient than one that either collapsed or took
longer to bounce back. This understanding of “engineering resilience” held sway for more than
a century and even influenced how natural ecosystems were conceived –in terms of stable states
with natural and human activity acting as external forces or perturbations. It was against this
orthodoxy that the resilience of natural systems was redefined by ecologist C.S. Holling, thereby
sharply departing from its initial equilibrist focus (Holling 1973).
Ecological resilience
While in the 1970s, Rachel Carson and Barry Commoner catalyzed the environmental
movement, Holling undermined the dominant equilibrium-centered understanding of the
natural world (Holling 1973). Instead of conceptualizing natural ecosystems as being endlessly
capable of recovering from losses due to natural or human causes –a view that reinforced
expanded exploitation of natural resources –Holling was advancing a non-equilibrium view
of resilience, described as “persistence of systems and of their ability to absorb change and
disturbance and still maintain the same relationships between populations or state variables”
(Holling 1973, p. 14). This view of resilience was dynamic, demonstrating not resistance but
rather a response to either an internal or external distrubance that was absorbed by recon-
stitution of system structure to preserve its function. Ecosystems were resilient in so far as
the system structure was capable of self-reconstitution to maintain system functionality, but
35
Ali Adil and Ivonne Audirac
would collapse in cases where this was no longer possible (Holling 1973). The implications of
this view for natural ecosystems management in the face of “limits to predictive knowledge,
emphasized prevalence of the unexpected” (Walker and Cooper 2011, p. 147) and underscored
that human activity and natural ecosystems health were inextricably linked (Holling 2001); a
view that eventually matured into socio-ecological systems (SES) under the rubric of evolu-
tionary resilience.
Evolutionary resilience
Whereas early Holling remained cautious about the transfer of analogies from the natural to
the social, and recommeded “smaller scale interventions and decentralized efforts” (Holling
and Goldberg 1971, p. 228), the latter Holling saw “resilience as integral to the co-evolution
of societies and ecosystems as a total complex system” (Walker and Cooper 2011, p. 147).
In the case of the former, the non-equilibrium or ecological view emphasized “presumption
of ignorance over presumption of knowledge” (Holling and Goldberg 1971, p. 221), while
the latter highlighted the capacity of complex SESs to self-organize without the need for
centralized management and control. In so far as Holling’s original conceptualization of resili-
ence encouraged pessimissm about predictability of interventions, its application to coupled
SESs tended to undermine the role of any centralized governing authority.1 Practically, the
application of SES resilience drew on notions of “positive adaptability” or “bouncing forward”
(Mykhnenko 2016), which were developed by mental health professionals in the 1920s and
1930s to refer to the ability to recover from misfortune or preserve mental immunity or mental
hygiene (Scoloveno 2016). Initially introduced in the context of child psychology (Clauss-
Ehlers and Weist 2010), the concept gained traction to enhance the forward-looking adaptive
capacity of SESs (Holling 2001, p. 404). While the adaptive capacity view helped explore and
hypothesize resilience of SESs, it encouraged state roll-back on the one hand and promoted
market-oriented forward-looking adaptive planning on the other, opening the door for conser-
vative social policy and planning approaches. In effect, translating resilience thinking into urban
planning carries the possibility not only of eschewing progressive transformation in favor of the
dominant and highly institutionalized social order but also enjoins greater liberties for unre-
stricted market-oriented mechanisms (Davoudi and Porter 2012; MacKinnon and Derickson
2012;Vale 2014).
Conceptualized under the notion of Panarchy, evolutionary or SES resilience is seen as the
property of dynamic and nested complex adaptive systems consisting of continuous interconnected
phases of stability and change. In fact, resorting to Greek mythology (Pan, the unpredictable god
of nature) and human action, Panarchy labels “revolt” “the smaller, faster, nested levels [that]
invent, experiment and test, while the larger, slower levels [labeled “remember”] stabilize and
conserve accumulated memory of system dynamics” (Resilience Alliance n.d.). In Panarchy,
“the slower and larger levels set the conditions within which faster and smaller ones function”
(Resilience Alliance n.d.). However, suggesting a unified theory of resilience, premised on the
ontological similarity of natural and social systems, via Panarchy,“all systems (and SESs especially)
exist and function at multiple scales of space, time and social organization, and the interactions
across scales are fundamentally important in determining the dynamics of the system at any par-
ticular focal scale” (Resilience Alliance n.d.). Therefore, even though resilience thinking may aid
our understanding and analysis of social and ecological systems, evolutionary resilience suffers
from blind spots theoretically and at the level of policy or planning prescriptions. Many of these
drawbacks, as illustrated by Olsson et al. (2015), stem from incompatibilities between resilience
thinking and non-functionalist social science.
36
Reframing planning discourses
37
Ali Adil and Ivonne Audirac
Wikström 2013). Furthermore, this inadequacy tends to run deeper, especially given the “top-
down” conceptualization not only of disasters but also of disaster-stricken populations, because:
In the life of this nation, we have often been reminded that nature is an awesome force, and
that all life is fragile…our [second] commitment is to help the citizens of the Gulf Coast to
overcome this disaster, and rebuild their communities.
(George W. Bush after Hurricane Katrina on August 31, 2005)
In contrast, when the perturbation is a slow-burn process, like lake eutrophication, long-term
droughts, or urban shrinkage, post-disaster revitalization roadmaps emphasize renewal and
reconstruction. In this case, the perturbation itself is conceived not as a shock or unexpected
aberration, but rather as an expected function (i.e. feedback processes) of system dynamics.
Not only does construing these processes as gradual or slow-burn stresses, whether natural or
social, suggests a semblance of control, but also embraces the existence of multiple interlocking
systems and their periodic growth and decline as a normal socio-ecological feature (Haase et al.
2014; Holling 1973; Holling and Goldberg 1971).
The notion of resilience, in general, considers “very different events (a flood, a war, a social upheaval)
as essentially equal, without distinguishing what is unexpected from what is contentious or unwanted”
(Pizzo 2015, p. 134). How crises are construed and reacted to, under different circumstances, provides
insight into the preferred approach to resilience, viz., engineering, ecological or evolutionary. On
the one hand, resilience in reference to sudden shocks –for instance in national security discourses
against cyberattacks and terrorist threats –emphasizing elimination of risk and vulnerabilities, expan-
sion of structural and functional redundancies and hardening of physical infrastructures in order
to “quickly respond to shortages, disruptions and emergencies” (Hartman 2013; Moteff 2012) –
indicates alignment with the engineering or “equilibrium” view of resilience as discussed earlier. On
the other hand, responses to slow burns, for instance, through long-range redevelopment and reinvest-
ment programs in shrinking cities have tended to emphasize reconstitution of tax bases through right-
sizing policies, landbanking schemes, demolition of abandoned structures, reuse and redevelopment of
38
Reframing planning discourses
vacant land by private development and growth coalitions.These policies and programs, which signify
efforts at reconstituting the system structure in response to external disturbances in order to preserve
function, embody the ecological view of resilience.
The Detroit Strategic Framework marks the first time in decades that Detroit has considered
its future not only from a standpoint of land use or economic growth, but in the context of
city systems, neighborhood vision, the critical question of vacant land and buildings, and the
need for greater civic capacity to address the systemic change necessary for Detroit’s success.
This plan is also the first to accept and address Detroit’s future as a city that will not regain
its peak population of nearly 2 million people.
(Detroit Future City 2012, Detroit Strategic Framework Plan, p. 5)
The policies and plans set into motion by post-disaster roadmaps, whether addressing sudden
shocks or slow burns, carry deeply normative implications for recovery and reconstruction. In
this regard, we are in agreement with Barbara Pizzo (2015), who contends that while “we need
to correctly and specifically narrow the concept and its use […] this is not the primary problem.
Instead […] its political meaning [is] of the utmost importance” (p. 134).Translation of resilience
into urban planning, either against sudden or slow-acting perturbations, is, therefore, a far cry
from the supposedly uncontroversial mobilization of metaphors from the physical and natural
sciences (Carpenter et al. 2014; Pickett et al. 2004).
Take, for instance, the strategies to reduce risk and eliminate vulnerabilities against sudden
shocks. For physical systems, like energy infrastructures, these strategies emphasize increasing
investments to harden transmission lines and expand distribution network redundancies (Amin
2002; Arghandehet al. 2015; Moteff 2012). For social systems, these same strategies, quite rightly,
entail reducing poverty and eliminating social vulnerabilities. But as progressive as this recom-
mendation may seem, one need look no further than post-Katrina New Orleans to appreciate
its controversial application in practice. As Lawrence Vale (2014), referring to the post-disaster
demographic shift in the city asks,“Is ‘the city’ resilient even if many of its poorest former citizens
have not been able to return? Or, as is the view of some, is the city’s resilience actually dependent
on the departure of many of its most vulnerable residents?” (p. 197; see also Long, 2007). Owing
to its functionalist systems ontology, resilience theory remains conceptually committed to con-
struing society and social change as conceived in early functionalist (Parsonian) social theory,
namely consensus-driven, orderly and stable –a perspective mostly abandoned in current social
theory for leaving no room for agency, power and conflict (Olsson et al. 2015). Inherently
depoliticized and conservative, resilience thinking concedes little, if any, conceptual space to pov-
erty and social justice. And thus, one might ask if enhancing systemic resilience at the expense of
the resilience of communities and individuals is justifiable (Levine et al. 2012), since what may
enhance resilience for some may increase vulnerability for others.
Strategies to improve resilience of societies against slow-burn processes –such as the gradual
deindustrialization and depopulation of cities –carry greater normative overtures. The slow-
acting impact of the perturbation tends to open the scene for experts not only to determine
when and how to intervene, but also, more critically, where to do so. It is no surprise, then, that
the top-down determination of particular neighborhoods as “blighted” or “rundown”, or of
entire cities, like Detroit or Youngstown, as “hollowed out” or “wasteland”, is often met with
resistance by existing residents (Audirac 2018; Keene and Padilla 2010; Pedroni 2011).
Furthermore, improving system resilience through self-organization and adaptive capaci-
ties, to slow-burn processes of cities and communities officially designated as needing expert
intervention, carries subtle recommendations for “rolling back the state” (Davoudi and Porter
39
Ali Adil and Ivonne Audirac
2012). Rather than an arbitrary or naive conception of social and individual self-organization
based on market mechanisms, the recommendation is, we argue, quite deliberate and embedded
in the concept of resilience. In fact, it follows directly from Holling (1971) who, comparing
ecological management and urban planning, argued in favor of pricing and similar market-
oriented means of self-organizing (see Holling 2001) to “guide people towards socially desirable
ends” (p. 229). Holling’s attempt to preserve complexity was, by default, conceived without
regulatory influences of the state which he considered stifling, leading to the recommendation
that “We must reduce the size of our institutions to ensure their flexibility and respect for the
system of which they are a small interacting part” (p. 229). Rather than ignoring the concept
of agency, Holling renders it internal to the self-organizing dynamics of the whole system by
foregrounding systems learning and adaptation (Folke 2006; Holling 2001). This conceptualiza-
tion of agency is expounded in the literature emphasizing critical reflection and collaborative
deliberation (McCarthy et al. 2011) and through explicit references to values, morality and ethics
(Adger et al. 2009; Stokols et al. 2013). However, with social learning and adaptive capacities
in modern societies understood consistently and predominantly in terms of market-oriented
mechanisms and pricing signals, several authors also highlight the inherent limits to social and
individual adaptation (Adger et al. 2009; Wikström 2013). Offering reasons for why this is so,
MacKinnon and Derickson (2012) suggest that
the proffered solutions of greater public participation and accountability seem inad-
equate, since they continue to be underpinned by a notion of adaptive management that
subordinates communities and local groups to the imperative of greater resilience as defined
by external experts and policy-makers.
(p. 261)
40
Reframing planning discourses
“objectively measurable external and internal factors” (Christmann et al. 2014, p. 146). While
acknowledging the practical necessity to predict and plan for the uncertainties of unforeseeable
magnitude facing humanity (Rockström et al. 2009; Westley et al. 2011), the emphasis on essen-
tialist conceptualizations of vulnerability and resilience, as Christmann et al. (2014) note, “make
the mistake of conceiving the endangerment of a social entity in a rather one-sided manner, as an
objectively –naturally and socially –given exposure, since they usually consider it independently
of the ‘threat perceptions’ that members of an entity have with respect to a potential exposure”
(p. 146, emphasis added). Arguably, such essentialist determinations of vulnerability and resilience,
against perturbations anticipated to occur sometime in the future, play into the hands of multi-
national private entities like the Rockefeller Foundation (Rockefeller Foundation 2015) and
supranational agencies like the World Bank (World Bank 2013). On the one hand, urban resiliency
planning is increasingly performed for cities and their residents by non-local/non-state actors. On
the other hand, the list of perturbations to prepare and plan for has grown beyond natural disasters,
to encompass cyber-physical attacks on critical infrastructure systems (Evans and Penner 2015;
Sharifi and Yamagata 2015, 2016), financial crises, food riots and violent demonstrations (ARUP
2014; Kim and Lim 2016).Without denying that cities do, in fact, potentially face numerous such
perturbations, criticism of urban resilience and climate adaptation plans, for example by Bulkeley
and Betsill (2013), problematizes the co-existence of “glocalized urban politics” with forms of
“municipal voluntarism” due to “the growing influence of a range of non-state actors in shaping
urban climate governance and an ever more complex political economy of climate change, woven
between notions of carbon control, resource scarcity, resilience and security” (pp. 15–16).
41
Ali Adil and Ivonne Audirac
a well-established term in academic discourse, “shrinking cities” invoke the image of urban
distress, often popularized through negative monikers like “decay”, “destruction”, and “run-
down” (Audirac 2018). From the perspective of resilience thinking, shrinking city planning falls
under the category of post-disaster roadmaps often combined with climate adaptation efforts,
emphasizing not only policies for “right-sizing” and market-oriented landbanking schemes
(Hackworth 2014) but also landscape restructuring strategies that leverage green infrastructure
to signal and, eventually, determine future land uses (Desimini 2014). Such mainstream planning
approaches introduced as remedies to vacant land, abandoned properties and loss of tax base,
frame the challenges encountered by shrinking cities in predominantly economic terms, with
little regard for critical socio-political constructs like poverty, race, and class, thereby limiting a
greater understanding of relative deprivation across the population (Hackworth 2014).
Yet, under the metanarrative of resilience, undergirding mainstream responses to urban
shrinkage, insurgent responses evident in emerging grassroots urbanisms (Kinder 2014) are
broadening the scope of solutions beyond purely market-based strategies. Take, for example,
grassroots community action in Buffalo, New York for sustainable housing tackling low-
income vulnerability against electric utility shut-offs (PUSH Buffalo 2014); designation
of community gardens as spaces of post-disaster refuge and sources of community resili-
ence (Chan et al. 2015; Colding and Barthel 2013) and establishment of formal cooperative
organizations that draw on community assets and resources to drive community-led grassroots
energy projects (Fairchild and Weinrub 2017; Pahl 2012). In describing these responses as
insurgent, we call attention to their distinctive character, which, while rooted in civil society,
is not necessarily incompatible with mainstream approaches, but rather crucial for practically
engaging with critical social concepts like social inequality and conflict, power, and agency.
Such an understanding of insurgency helps uncover a continuum of strategies falling rela-
tively closer or further away from contemporary approaches to planning in shrinking cities.
For instance, civic engagement in top-down planning and policymaking, often by non-state
actors, as in the “100 resilient cities” initiative by the Rockefeller Foundation, would fall
much closer to mainstream practices as compared to insurgent, DIY, or guerilla interventions
encompassing creation of urban alternatives towards
defamiliarisation and the identification of new possibilities; refamiliarisation and the occu-
pation of alienated spaces; decommodification that asserts use over exchange value; and a
collaboration across difference that involves emergent rather than pre-fixed subjects.
(Wendler 2014, citing Crawford 2001, 1999)
Conclusion
Following a genealogical account from engineering to evolutionary resilence, we traced the
migration of resilience across disciplinary domains and illustrated how different notions of resili-
ence have gained saliency in accordance to different crisis conditions addressed under climate
adaptation plans, emergency management, and post-disaster roadmaps.
42
Reframing planning discourses
Recognizes no role for central governing The state acts to enable equity through its support
authority, whether by the state or centralized of grassroots and community-driven and -
market controlled efforts
Overemphasizes market-oriented mechanisms Expanded understanding of self-organization that
for societal self-organization acknowledges existing power differentials in
society to support coalitions outside and, often,
contrarian to extant market principles
Emphasizes value capture for individual self-gain Emphasizes value creation for communitarian ideals
and self-preservation in the face of scarce and towards commonly shared goals
resources
Responsibility-based; emphasis on personal Capability-based; emphasis on capabilities of
responsibility and potential of individual individuals as well as communities to express
choices to influence the market their choices so as to acknowlege and address the
influence of broader power differentials
Examples: Resiliency planning by Rockefeller Examples: Energy Democracy movement in several
Foundation; Energy Assurance Planning north eastern cities to drive local community
sanctioned under American Recovery and action in the domain of utility-controlled energy
Reinvestment Act of 2009 services
Focusing on policy and planning responses in shrinking cities helped identify the mobil-
ization of evolutionary resilience, which internalizes critical urban problems like social
inequality and conflict, power, and agency. We referred to these as the conceptual blind spots
inherent in the mainstream view of resilience, which are as much a consequence of the
underlying functionalist ontology on which the original concept is predicated, as an outcome
of Holling’s over reliance on market mechanisms behind societal self-organization. Critical
review of these blind spots throws into relief alternative conceptualizations of resilience nei-
ther accommodated nor acknowledged within the mainstream understanding of the concept
(see Table 4.1).
The alternatives to the mainstream view of resilience can be found in grassroots urbanisms,
such as identified above, which are grounded in insurgent notions of community solidarity and
ownership, participatory democracy, and social justice. It is in seeking to elevate this latter view
of resilience, against the mainstream view, that planning discourses should be reformulated.
This position does not suggest outright abandonment of market-oriented approaches, rather it
sympathizes with Victor Ostrom’s advice to avoid being “trapped within narrowly constrained
intellectual horizons […] [and to] usefully think about combinations of private and public
economies existing side by side” (Smith et al. 2003, p. 1). At the theoretical level, this rec-
ommendation requires breaching the functionalist orthodoxy inherent within resilience by
reconceptualizing the concept using theoretical perspectives that remain explicit about social
inequality and conflict, power and agency. Steps in this direction are evident in Wagenaar and
Wilkinson (2013) performative account for governing urban resilience as well as in the broader
trend in scholarship acknowledging aspects of materiality, narratives and cross-disciplinary trans-
actional processes conceptualizing socio-ecological resilience (Lejano and Stokols 2013; Stokols
et al. 2013). On the practical level, reformulating planning discourses requires that planners and
43
Ali Adil and Ivonne Audirac
local policymakers pay increased attention and offer greater institutional and financial support
to grassroots efforts without placing unrealistic institutional demands on citizen-led actions.
In contexts punctuated by increasing state roll-back and a greater reliance on private social
enterprises and entrepreneurs, we envision the broadenening of the planning discourse on
resilience within the interstitial intellectual spaces outlined by traditional state, market and civil
society boundaries (Adil forthcoming).
Note
1 To this end, ideologically speaking, Holling’s prescriptions aligned with Frederick von Hayek’s neo-
liberal philosophy set against the “hubris of predictive modelling in the face of unknowable complexity”
(Walker and Cooper, 2011, p. 149).
References
Adger, N., Dessai, S., Goulden, M., Hulme, M., Lorenzoni, I., Nelson, D.R., … Wreford, A. (2009). Are
there social limits to adaptation to climate change? Climatic Change. 93(3–4): 335–354. http://doi.org/
10.1007/s10584-008-9520-z.
Adil, A.M. (n.d.). Societal impacts of emerging grassroots energy communities: A capabilities based
assessment. In: Energy Impacts: A Multidisciplinary Exploration of North American Energy
Development. Utah: Social Ecology Press and Utah State University Press.
Amin, M. (2002). Toward secure and resilient interdependent infrastructures. Journal of Infrastructure
Systems. 8 (September): 67–75. http://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1076-0342(2002)8:3(67).
Arghandeh, R., von Meier, A., Mehrmanesh, L., and Mili, L. (2015). On the definition of cyber-physical
resilience in power systems, 20. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.12.193.
ARUP (2014). Research Report Volume 3 Urban Measurement Report. Arup (Vol. 3).
Audirac, I. (2018). Shrinking cities: An unfit term for American urban policy? Cities. 75 (July 2016): 12–19.
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2017.05.001.
Baggio, J.A., Brown, K., and Hellebrandt, D. (2015). Boundary object or bridging concept? A citation net-
work analysis of resilience. Ecology and Society. 20(2).
Bene, C., Mehta, L., McGranahan, G., Cannon, T., Gupte, J., and Tanner, T., (2017). Resilience as a Policy
Narrative: Potentials and limits in the context of urban planning. Climate and Development. (March,
2017): 1-18 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17565529.2017.1301868
Bulkeley, H. and Betsill, M. (2013). Revisiting the urban politics of climate change. Environmental Politics.
1: 136–154. http://doi.org/10.1063/1.2756072.
Carpenter, S., Walker, B., Anderies, M., and Abel, N. (2014). From metaphor to measurement: Resilience of
what to what? Ecosystems. 4(8): 765–781. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-001-0045-9.
Chan, J., DuBois, B., and Tidball, K.G. (2015). Refuges of local resilience: Community gardens in post-
Sandy New York City. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening. 14(3): 625–635. http://doi.org/10.1016/
j.ufug.2015.06.005.
Christmann, G., Balgar, K., and Mahlkow, N. (2014). Local constructions of vulnerability and resilience in
the context of climate change. A comparison of Lübeck and Rostock. Social Sciences. 3(1): 142. http://
doi.org/10.3390/socsci3010142.
Clauss-Ehlers, C.S. and Weist, M.D. (2010). Community Planning to Foster Resilience in Children.
New York: Springer US. https://books.google.com/books?id=41BDBAAAQBAJ.
Colding, J. and Barthel, S. (2013). The potential of “urban green commons” in the resilience building of
cities. Ecological Economics. 86: 156–166. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.10.016.
Crawford, M. (1999). Introduction. In Everyday Urbanism. New York: Monacelli Press, pp. 8–15.
Crawford, M. (2011).The right to the city. In The Right to the City Conference and Exhibition. University
of Sydney.
Davoudi, S. and Porter, L. (2012). Resilience: A bridging concept or a dead end? Planning Theory Practice.
13(2): 299–333. http://doi.org/10.1080/14649357.2012.677124.
Desimini, J. (2014). From planned shrinkage to formerly urban: Staking landscape architecture’s
claim in the shrinking city debate. Landscape Journal. 33(1): 17–35. http://doi.org/10.1353/
lnd.2014.0005.
44
Reframing planning discourses
Evans, P.C. and Penner, P.F. (2015). Resilient and sustainable infrastructure for urban energy systems.
The Solutions Journal. 5(5): 48-54. www.thesolutionsjournal.com/article/resilient-and-sustainable-
infrastructure-for-urban-energy-systems/.
Fairchild, D. and Weinrub, A. (2017). Energy Democracy: Advancing Equity in Clean Energy Solutions.
(D. Fairchild and A. Weinrub (eds.). Washington DC: Island Press. https:// books.google.com/
books?id=td4yDwAAQBAJ.
Folke, C. (2006). Resilience: The emergence of a perspective for social-ecological systems analyses. Global
Environmental Change. 16: 253–267. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.04.002.
Haase, A., Rink, D., Grossmann, K., Bernt, M., and Mykhnenko,V. (2014). Conceptualizing urban shrinkage.
Environment and Planning A. 46: 1519–1534. http://doi.org/10.1068/a46269.
Hackworth, J. (2014). The limits to market-based strategies for addressing land abandonment in shrinking
American cities. Progress in Planning. 90: 1–37. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.progress.2013.03.004.
Hartman, K. (2013). Protecting the Nation’s Energy Infrastructure: States Address Energy Security. National
Conference of State Legislatures. www.ncsl.org/documents/energy/EnergySecurityFinal-10-13.pdf.
Holling, C.S. (1973). Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annual Review of Ecology and
Systematics. 4 (1973): 1–23. http://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.es.04.110173.000245.
Holling, C.S. (2001). Understanding the complexity of economic, ecological, and social systems. Ecosystems.
4 (5): 390–405. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-00.
Holling, C.S. and Goldberg, M.A. (1971). Ecology and planning. Journal of the American Institute of Planners.
Keene, D.E. and Padilla, M.B. (2010). Race, class and the stigma of place: Moving to “opportunity” in
Eastern Iowa. Health and Place. 16(6): 1216–1223. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2010.08.006.
Kim, D. and Lim, U. (2016). Urban resilience in climate change adaptation: A conceptual framework.
Sustainability. 8(5): 405. http://doi.org/10.3390/su8040405.
Kinder, K. (2014). Guerrilla-style defensive architecture in Detroit: A self-provisioned security strategy in a
neoliberal space of disinvestment. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research. 38(5): 1767–
1784. http://doi.org/10.1111/1468–2427.12158.
Klein, R.J.T., Nicholls, R.J., Thomalla, F., Klein, R.J.T., Nicholls, R.J., Thomalla, F., … Thomalla, F. (2004).
Resilience to natural hazards: How useful is this concept? (Vol. 7891). Potsdam Institute for Climate
Impact Research: Potsdam.
Lejano, R. and Stokols, D. (2013). Social ecology, sustainability, and economics. Ecological Economics.
89: 1–6. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.01.011.
Levine, S., Pain, A., Bailey, S., and Fan, L. (2012). The Relevance of “Resilience”? London: Overseas
Development Institute.
Lhomme, S., Serre, D., Diab,Y., and Laganier, R. (2013). Analyzing resilience of urban networks: a prelim-
inary step towards more flood resilient cities. Natural Hazards and Earth System Science. 13(2): 221–
230. http://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-13-221-2013.
Long, A.P. (2007). Poverty is the new prostitution: race, poverty, and public housing in post-Katrina New
Orleans. The Journal of American History. 94(3): 795–803. http://doi.org/10.2307/25095141.
MacKinnon, D. and Derickson, K.D. (2012). From resilience to resourcefulness: A critique of resilience policy
and activism. Progress in Human Geography. 37(2): 253–270. http://doi.org/10.1177/0309132512454775.
McAslan, A. (2010). The Concept of Resilience: Understanding its Origins, Meaning and Utility. .
Adelaide: Torrens Resilience Institute.
McCarthy, D.D.P., Crandall, D.D., Whitelaw, G.S., General, Z., and Tsuji, L.J.S. (2011). A critical systems
approach to social learning: Building adaptive capacity in social, ecological, epistemological (SEE)
systems. Ecology and Society. 16(3): 18. http://doi.org/10.5751/ES-04255-160318.
McEntire, D. (2004). The status of emergency management theory: Issues, barriers, and recommendations
for improved scholarship. FEMA Higher Education Conference, 1– 25. http://doi.org/10.1017/
CBO9781107415324.004.
Meerow, S., Newell, J.P., and Stults, M. (2016). Defining urban resilience: A review. Landscape and Urban
Planning. 147: 38–49. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2015.11.011.
Moteff, J.D. (2012). Critical Infrastructure Resilience: The Evolution of Policy and Programs and Issues for
Congress, 1–20. http://doi.org/R42683.
Mykhnenko,V. (2016). Resilience: A right -winger’s ploy? In S. Springer, K. Birch, and J. MacLeavy (eds.),
The Handbook of Neoliberalism (pp. 190–206). London: Routledge.
Olsson, L., Jerneck, A., Thoren, H., Persson, J., and O’Byrne, D. (2015). Why resilience is unappealing
to social science: Theoretical and empirical investigations of the scientific use of resilience. Science
Advances. 1(4): e1400217–e1400217. http://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1400217.
45
Ali Adil and Ivonne Audirac
Ostadtaghizadeh, A., Ardalan, A., Paton, D., Javvari, H., and Khankeh, H.R. (2015). Community disaster
resilience: A Systematic review on assessment models and tools. PLOS Currents Disasters, 1–21. http://
doi.org/10.1371/currents.dis.f224ef8efbdfcf1d508dd0de4d8210ed.Revisions.
Pahl, G. (2012). Power from the People: How to Organize, Finance, and Launch Local Energy Projects.
White River Junction,VT: Chelsea Green Pub. https://books.google.com/books?id=zzqGKrthyOoC.
Pedroni, T.C. (2011). Urban shrinkage as a performance of whiteness: Neoliberal urban restructuring,
education, and racial containment in the post-industrial, global niche city. Discourse. 32(2): 203–215.
http://doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2011.562666.
Pickett, S., Cadenasso, M.L., and Grove, J.M. (2004). Resilient cities: meaning, models, and metaphor
for integrating the ecological, socio-economic, and planning realms. Landscape and Urban Planning.
69(4): 369–384. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2003.10.035.
Pizzo, B. (2015). Problematizing resilience: Implications for planning theory and practice. Cities. 43: 133–
140. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2014.11.015.
PUSH Buffalo (2014). PUSH Buffalo Energy Democracy Campaign. http://pushbuffalo.org/Websites/
pushbuffalo/images/PUSH_Buffalo_Energy_Democracy_Campaign_info.pdf.
Resilience Alliance (n.d.). Resilience Alliance. www.resalliance.org/.
Rockefeller Foundation (2015). 100 Resilient Cities Challenge | 100 Resilient Cities. www.100resilientcities.
org/pages/100-resilient-cities-challenge#/-_/.
Rockström, A., Steffen, J.W., Noone, K., Persson, Å., Chapin III, F.S., Lambin, E., … Fole, J. (2009). Planetary
boundaries: Exploring the safe operating space for humanity. Ecology And Society. 14(2). http://doi.
org/10.1038/461472a.
Scoloveno, R. (2016). A concept analysis of the phenomenon of resilience. Journal of Nursing & Care. 5(4).
http://doi.org/10.4172/2167-1168.1000353.
Sharifi, A. and Yamagata, Y. (2015). A conceptual framework for assessment of urban energy resilience.
Energy Procedia. 75: 2904–2909. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2015.07.586.
Sharifi, A. and Yamagata, Y. (2016). Principles and criteria for assessing urban energy resilience: A litera-
ture review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 60: 1654–1677. http://doi.org/10.1016/
j.rser.2016.03.028.
Shaw, K. (2012). “Reframing” resilience: Challenges for planning theory and practice. Planning Theory
Practice. 13(2): 308–312.
Smith,V., Tullock, G., and Aligica, P. (2003). Rethinking institutional analysis: interviews with vincent and
elinor ostrom. http://hdl.handle.net/10535/6156.
Stokols, D., Lejano, R., Hipp, J., Perez Lejano, R., and Hipp, J. (2013). Enhancing the resilience of human-
environment systems: A social ecological perspective. Ecology and Society. 18(1). http://doi.org/http://
dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-05301-180107.
Tredgold, T. (1818). On the Transverse Strength and Resilience of Timber. London: Taylor & Francis.
https://books.google.com/books?id=tJaHHAAACAAJ.
Vale, L.J. (2014). The politics of resilient cities: whose resilience and whose city? Building Research &
Information. 42(July): 37–41. http://doi.org/10.1080/09613218.2014.850602.
Wagenaar, H. and Wilkinson, C. (2013). Enacting resilience: A performative account of governing for urban
resilience. Urban Studies. 52(May). http://doi.org/10.1177/0042098013505655.
Walker, J. and Cooper, M. (2011). Genealogies of resilience From systems ecology to the polit-
ical economy of crisis adaptation. Security Dialogue. 42(2): 143–160. http://doi.org/10.1177/
0967010611399616.
Wendler, J. (2014). Experimental urbanism: Grassroots alternatives as spaces of learning and innovation
in the city. Manchester: University of Manchester. http://easyaccess.lib.cuhk.edu.hk/login?url=http://
search.proquest.com/docview/1775430358?accountid=10371%5Cnhttp://findit.lib.cuhk.edu.hk/
852cuhk/?url_ver=Z39.88–2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:dissertation&genre=dissertations
+%26+theses&sid=ProQ:P.
Westley, F., Olsson, P., Folke, C., Homer-Dixon, T., Vredenburg, H., Loorbach, D., … van der Leeuw, S.
(2011). Tipping toward sustainability: Emerging pathways of transformation. Ambio. 40(7): 762–780.
http://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-011-0186-9.
Wikström,A. (2013).The Challenge of Change: Planning for Social Urban Resilience. Stockholm: Stockholm
University.
World Bank (2013). Building Urban Resilience (A.K. Jha, T.W. Miner and Z. Stanton- Geddes
(eds.)). Washington, DC: The World Bank. http://elibrary.worldbank.org/doi/book/10.1596/
978-0-8213-8865-5.
46
5
The being of urban resilience
Christine Wamsler, Lynne Reeder, and Mark Crosweller
Introduction
The nature of urban risk and disasters is changing. For the first time in human history, more
people live in cities than in rural areas. Recent figures from the United Nations estimate that 6.3
billion people –68 per cent of the world’s population –will be living in urban areas by 2050
(UN 2018; UN-Habitat 2017). Many of these growing cities are located on the coast or in other
hazardous areas that are increasingly threatened by floods, storms, earthquakes, fires, heat or cold
waves and drought (IPCC 2014). As urban corridors continue to be built in areas where hazards
are commonplace, more and more people will be living with the continual threat of environ-
mental upheaval and climate change.
The unpredictable nature and intensity of hazards and disasters has a significant impact
on mental wellbeing, and the level of suffering and stress that occurs during difficult times
and following loss is profound. Nevertheless, disaster risk reduction and management and
associated policy responses have, so far, mainly focused on building, sustaining or restoring
socio-economic, environmental, and physical structures and systems for issues such as housing
rehabilitation, water and sanitation, the enforcement of building codes, compulsory insurance,
livelihood and food security.
While it is important that the community infrastructure and economy in susceptible areas
are adaptive and capable of being restored swiftly, it is equally important to pay attention to the
wellbeing of residents and responders in these emergent “at risk” spaces. However, there is an
almost total absence of literature on the mental wellbeing of “at risk” populations, as sources of
resilience that go beyond the individual.
Much of resilience theory has its roots in either natural resource management, or psych-
ology and mental health literature (Cork 2010; Doppelt 2016). While the former highlights the
importance of systems and governance, the latter focuses on individual wellbeing.
At the same time, there is a growing consensus that the complex global challenges posed
by an increasing number of disasters and climate change cannot simply be solved by “business
as usual” policy approaches. They require new social practices and a broader cultural shift to
support resilience. As a result, the potential role of people’s inner dimensions and transformation
is attracting increased attention from researchers and practitioners (O’Brien and Sygna 2013;
Parodi and Tamm 2018; Wamsler et al. 2017; Wamsler 2018).
47
C. Wamsler, L. Reeder, and M. Crosweller
For example, recent advances in neuroscience research and other fields suggest that cer-
tain inner capacities, such as mindfulness, can open new pathways towards societal resilience
(Goleman and Davidson 2017; Sharma 2017; Parodi and Tamm 2018). However, in the fields
of disaster risk reduction, climate change adaption and resilience their potential role has, to
date, been largely ignored (Wamsler 2018). Mindfulness is generally defined as intentional, non-
judgmental attentiveness to the present moment (Kabat-Zinn 1990). While rooted in Buddhist
psychology, it is commonly seen as “an inherent quality of human consciousness” that is access-
ible to –and empirically assessable in –individuals, independent of their religious or spiritual
beliefs (Black 2011:1). Since its introduction into Western science around 40 years ago, extensive
research has linked mindfulness to established theories of attention, awareness and emotional
intelligence (Buss 1980; Brown et al. 2007; Goleman 2011; Carroll 2016). Different theories and
methods have also been developed for its understanding and assessment as cognitive/emotional
capacity or dispositional characteristic (a medium to long-lasting trait, e.g. Baer et al. 2011;
Sharma 2017), a state/outcome (resulting from inner capacity training, e.g.Valk et al. 2017) and
a process or practice (mindfulness training itself; e.g., Black 2011; Condon et al. 2013). On this
basis, it is increasingly claimed to have the potential to support societal transformation (Goleman
and Davidson 2017; Wamsler 2018).
The questions that underpin the lack of research into the role of mental wellbeing and mind-
fulness in building societal resilience include:
• How does the changing nature of hazards, and their impact, relate to individual wellbeing and
resilience building? (section 2)
• What is the interface between disaster risk reduction, resilience building and mindfulness in
current research? (section 3)
• What is the potential influence of mindfulness on building urban resilience? Or, in other
words: What are the options for the inclusion of mindfulness considerations when developing
a comprehensive framework for urban disaster resilience? (sections 4 and 5)
We assess these questions based on a review of current risk reduction, resilience and mind-
fulness theory and the literature on how socio-cognitive and socio-affective mindfulness, and
associated practices, support the development of resilience. The results provide an overview of
how the human mind, and mindfulness in particular, influences resilience at different scales.
These observations lead to some initial conclusions and recommendations regarding how
organizations can address resilience more comprehensively. Examples from practice and a poten-
tial operationalization of this approach are described in the context of sections 2–5.
48
The being of urban resilience
Such urban expansion will inevitably see more people exposed to more frequent and intense
natural hazards, leading to increasing inequality as a result of the uneven distribution of disaster
impacts. This uneven distribution is due to differential risk-reducing capacities, hazard exposure,
and vulnerabilities with respect to geographic location, together with other issues such as access
to public services, income, gender, age, health, and associated wellbeing (Wisner et al. 2004;
Wamsler 2014).
The interlinkages between disasters, mental wellbeing, and resilience are manifold.
Individual wellbeing influences people’s vulnerability. At the same time, the most devas-
tating impacts of hazards and disasters are often on mental health. In addition to the physical
impacts (e.g. the destruction of structures and systems), hazards and natural disasters affect
mental health and psycho-social-spiritual wellbeing at individual and societal levels through,
for instance:
To this, we can add other mental aspects related to climate change, such as the link between
global warming, consumerism, and capitalism (Moore 2015).
In order to prepare for the effects on mental health and wellbeing, different organizations
and stakeholders are increasingly promoting the need for individuals to be resilient. During the
past three decades, over a dozen theories of individual resilience have been proposed, including
a debate regarding whether it is a capacity, trait, a process or an outcome (which is similar to the
discourse on mindfulness; cf. section 1). Although there are many differences, several common
features and concepts emerge. Two pivotal concepts are adversity and positive adaptation (Fletcher
and Sarkar 2013), which are (implicitly and/or explicitly) reflected in a number of resilience
definitions. These include: the ability of people in otherwise normal situations who are exposed
to an isolated and highly disruptive event, such as death or a violent situation, to maintain rela-
tively stable and healthy levels of psychological and physical functioning (Bonanno 2004), the
capacity to rebound from adversity, misfortune, trauma, or other transitional crises with greater
strength and more resourcefulness (McCubbin et al. 1997), and a dynamic process encompassing
positive adaptation despite challenging or threatening circumstances (Masten et al. 1990) or in a
context of significant adversity (Luthar et al. 2000).Windle (2011) adds a third concept: resistance.
Resistance is the ability to counteract the negative effects of adversity and seek positive adapta-
tion, rather than resist adversity itself. It is achieved through the application of assets (capacities
and efficacy) and resources (contextual and environmental influences such as family support and
community services). Together, assets and resources may be regarded as strengths.
49
C. Wamsler, L. Reeder, and M. Crosweller
50
The being of urban resilience
values; (3) consumption and sustainable behavior; (4) the human–nature connection; (5) equity
issues; (6) social activism; and (7) deliberate, flexible, and adaptive responses (Brown and Ryan
2003; Brown and Kasser 2005; Shapiro et al. 2006; Brown et al. 2007, 2004; Amel et al. 2009;
Goleman 2009; Jacob et al. 2009; Sheth et al. 2010; Ericson et al. 2014; cf. section 4). However,
while all of these capacities are crucial in all phases and contexts of disasters, there are almost no
studies on mindfulness that focus on disaster risk reduction and associated resilience building
(Wamsler 2018).
The few studies that explicitly link mindfulness with risk reduction have examined mindful-
ness in the context of post-disaster response and recovery (with links to response and recovery
preparedness) (Wamsler et al. 2018).They focus on assessing the potential of specific mindfulness-
related interventions to improve mental resilience in a post-disaster context (cf. section 2).
These interventions include mindfulness meditation or relaxation techniques aimed at disaster
victims, aid workers (such as firefighters, health care professionals, and volunteers), and disaster
researchers (e.g.Waeldeet al. 2008; Cataniet al. 2009; Matanle 2011; Smithet al. 2011; Hoeberichts
2012; Srivatsaet al. 2013; Eriksen and Ditrich 2015; Hechanovaet al. 2015; Yoshimuraet al. 2015;
Zelleret al. 2015).
However, emerging research also indicates that mindfulness may open up new perspectives
and facilitate cognitive/emotional, managerial, structural, ontological, and epistemological
change that could support broader risk reduction and resilience building (Schwartz 2011; Bai
2013; Osborne and Grant-Smith 2015; Wamsler et al. 2017; Wamsler 2018). It can in fact lead to
a fundamental shift in the way we think about –and ultimately act on –local and global eco-
nomic, social and ecological crises, such as increasing disasters and climate change (Scharmer
2009; Ericson et al. 2014; Carroll 2016; Wamsler et al. 2017). Empirical research is though vastly
lacking.
The first empirical study by Wamsler and Brink from 2018 addresses this gap by linking indi-
viduals’ intrinsic mindfulness (i.e. their mindfulness disposition as opposed to external mind-
fulness interventions; cf. section 1) to both pro-and reactive risk reduction. Based on a survey
of citizens at risk from severe climate events, it found that individual mindfulness is correlated
with: greater motivation to take or support risk-reduction actions; deeper engagement in
pro-social and pro-environmental actions; a reduction in fatalist attitudes; and an increased
acknowledgement of climate change, which influences people’s risk perception (Wamsler and
Brink 2018).
51
C. Wamsler, L. Reeder, and M. Crosweller
52
The being of urban resilience
“see” and respond to personal suffering could allow policymakers and first responders to better
interpret and act in effective ways when alleviating suffering. In addition, it has been shown
that mental training can also discourage competitiveness (Gilbert 2017). Developing a com-
passionate and empathic mind can thus create “certain patterns in our brains that organize our
motives, emotions and thoughts in ways that are conducive for our own and other people’s
well-being” (Gilbert 2013, p. 87).
When we put ourselves in someone else’s shoes, we use a part of the brain that is linked
with creativity and social connections (specifically, the right inferior parietal lobe and the
right lateral prefrontal cortex) (McGilchrist 2009). Developing this “empathy muscle”, based
on a deep appreciation of another’s perspective, is pivotal for compassionate decision making,
which is especially relevant in traumatic contexts. In order to make what Krznaric (2014)
calls the “imaginative leap of empathy”, we need first to learn to humanize the other and
discover what we have (or do not have) in common. Mental training, such as mindfulness
meditation, can be used to support empathy and related processes (Valk et al. 2017). At a
minimum, such training should be considered for strategic planners who have to deal with
the human aspects of urban adversity. Scientific evidence also suggests that the quality and
form of relationships between humans, shapes connections between nerve cells in the brain.
This indicates that mindfulness interventions cannot be encapsulated in “business as usual”
policy options, but rather must be built into wider risk and disaster policy approaches e.g.
by supporting platforms, structures and mechanisms for cooperation, personal development,
and self-authoring (as in the past has been promoted in Nordic countries; Andersen and
Björkman 2017).
One of the key insights of recent social neuroscience research is that mental training, such
as mindfulness, can alter traits in the human body (Goleman and Davidson 2017). The defin-
ition of an altered trait is “a new characteristic that arises from a meditation practice –one that
endures. Altered traits shape how we behave in our daily lives, not just during or immediately
after we meditate” (Goleman and Davidson 2017, pp. 6–7). The most compelling impacts and
relevance of mindfulness are thus not necessarily short-term interventions that can increase indi-
vidual wellbeing (e.g. during response or recovery phases), but the wider and long-term personal,
interpersonal, and socio-environmental outcomes that are key for proactive risk reduction and
resilience building.
Conclusions
This chapter highlights the importance of addressing individual inner dimensions and
associated cognitive/emotional capacities to support urban resilience. In particular, it shows
that mindfulness disposition, practices, and training have the potential to contribute to all
phases of risk reduction (development, response, and recovery) and at all scales –from the
individual, to the institutional and societal levels:
• Individual risk reduction: for instance, by increasing psychological resilience, improving indi-
vidual post-disaster response, recovery and growth.
• Public risk reduction: for instance, by influencing motivation to support risk-reduction efforts,
risk perceptions and bias, risk communication, and new social relational approaches that
challenge the business-and-power-as-usual norm. In this context, it is crucial to acknowledge
that people are heterogenous in their thinking, and too often it is wrongly assumed that there
is a simple, direct link between evidence and behavior, and policy and implementation.
53
C. Wamsler, L. Reeder, and M. Crosweller
Taken together, these four aspects form the key conceptual trajectories of what has been coined
“Mindful Risk Reduction” (Wamsler 2018). They have a bearing on measures designed to
increase resilience (i.e. hazard reduction and avoidance, vulnerability reduction, response and
recovery preparedness, and associated mainstreaming). New cognitive/emotional methods,
such as mindfulness-based approaches, have a role to play in enhancing decision making for
pro-environmental and prosocial behavior and fostering compassionate and empathic neural
responses that allow us to better connect with others in times of need, particularly groups we
may not feel a natural connection to (cf. Weng et al. 2017).
As we expand our knowledge of the workings of the human mind, we are reaching a tipping
point where this new understanding can be applied to urban resilience theory and practice. Some
initial policy approaches are currently being tested. An example is the Mindfulness, Behaviour
Change and Decision Making Programme that was conducted with municipal officials of the
Welsh Government (including disaster and climate managers) to enable people to take greater
control of their own behavioral systems and influence resilience-related issues (Pykett et al. 2016).
Similarly, the Red Cross and the University of Miami offer mindfulness training to high-stress
groups, ranging from the disaster-affected to firefighters and teachers, while the Garrison Institute
offers similar programs to frontline trauma workers in Africa and the Middle East.3
New approaches should include, but not be limited to, mindfulness-based training that supports
socio-affective (compassion, dealing with difficult emotions, and prosocial motivations) and socio-
cognitive (perspective taking on self and others and metacognition) skills (Valk et al. 2017). Offering
such training modules could help urban risk managers and planners to enquire into the relationships
between emotion/cognition and bias and put people (with their values, beliefs, worldviews, and
associated cognitive/emotional capacities) at the center of resilience planning to improve decision
and better assist those directly affected. In addition, we need to create structures and mechanisms
that can support and create conditions for such approaches, allowing to better integrate policy,
practical and personal spheres of transformation (cf. O’Brien and Sygna 2013). Such approaches are
still emerging, and only with a better understanding of our minds can we start to think about the
social structures and mechanisms that are conducive to both wellbeing and resilience.
Therefore, while the two dominant responses to disasters and climate change –emission
reductions (usually called climate mitigation) and ensuring that physical infrastructure and natural
resources can withstand impacts (framed as disaster risk reduction or climate adaptation) –are essen-
tial, they are insufficient for the challenges that lie ahead. We also need to foster personal spheres
of transformation and support the “being of resilience”. Through this, not only will we build the
individual resilience that will help to mitigate harmful personal and social impacts and reactions, we
will also improve societal wellbeing and resilience in times of increasing disasters and climate change.
Notes
1 www.ontrack.org.au/floodandstormrecovery/
2 https://sharpbrains.com/blog/2018/07/11/study-finds-clear-yet-surprisingly-different-benefits-in-3-
types-of-meditation-based-mental-training/
3 www.garrisoninstitute.org/blog/fostering-resilience-among-aid-workers/
54
The being of urban resilience
References
Amel, E.L., Manning, C.M., and Scott, B.A. (2009). Mindfulness and sustainable behavior: Pondering
attention and awareness as means for increasing green behavior. Ecopsychology. 1(1): 14–25.
AMRA (2016). Database of the American Mindfulness Research Association (AMRA). https://goamra.
org/resources/. (Accessed May 21, 2017).
Andersen L.R. and Björkman, T. (2017). The Nordic Secret. Stockholm: Fri Tanke.
Australian Red Cross (2015). After the emergency podcast. Mindfulness meditation from Smiling
Mind. www.redcross.org.au/resilience-newsletter/issue5/2012/01/27/mindfulness.html. (Accessed
June 1, 2016).
Baer, R.A., Smith G.T., Hopkins J., Krietemeyer, J., and Toney, L. (2006). Using self-report assessment
methods to explore facets of mindfulness, Assessment. 1: 27–45.
Bai, H. (2013). Peace with the earth: animism and contemplative ways. Cult Stud Sci Educ. 10(1):
135–147.
Black, D.S. (2011). A brief definition of mindfulness. Mindfulness Research Guide. www.mindfulexperience.
org.
Bonanno, G.A. (2004). Loss, trauma, and human resilience; have we underestimated the human capacity
to thrive after extremely aversive events?(Author Abstract). The American Psychologist. 59(1): 20.
doi:10.1037/0003-066X.59.1.20.
Brown, K.W. and Kasser, T. (2005). Are psychological and ecological well-being compatible? The role of
values, mindfulness, and lifestyle. Social Indicators Research. 74(2): 349–368.
Brown, K.W. and Ryan, R.M. (2003). The benefits of being present: mindfulness and its role in psycho-
logical well-being. Journal of personality and social psychology. 84(4): 822.
Brown, K.W., Kasser, T., Ryan, R.M., and Konow, J. (2004). Having and Being: Investigating the Pathways
from Materialism and Mindfulness to Well-being. Unpublished data, University of Rochester.
Brown, K.W., Ryan, R.M., and Creswell, J.D. (2007). Mindfulness: theoretical foundations and evidence for
its salutary effects. Psychol Inq. 18(4): 211–237.
Buss, A.H. (1980). Self-Consciousness and Social Anxiety. San Francisco, CA: Freeman.
Carroll, J. (2016). Formless meditation and sustainability. In: S. Dhiman and J. Marques (eds.): Spirituality
and Sustainability: New Horizons and Exemplary Approaches. Switzerland: Springer.
Cash, M. and Whittingham, K. (2010). What facets of mindfulness contribute to psychological well-being
and depressive, anxious, and stress-related symptomatology? Mindfulness. 1(3):177–182.
Catani, C., Kohiladevy, M., Ruf, M., Schauer, E., Elbert, T., and Neuner, F. (2009). Treating children
traumatized by war and Tsunami: a comparison between exposure therapy and meditation-relaxation in
North-East Sri Lanka. BMC psychiatry. 9(1): 22.
Condon, P., Desbordes, G., Miller,W., and DeSteno, D. (2013). Meditation increases compassionate responses
to suffering. Psychological Science. 24(10): 2125–2127.
Congress, US (2006). Hurricane Katrina: A Nation Still Unprepared. www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/
CRPT-109srpt322/pdf/CRPT-109srpt322.pdf. Washington DC: US Government Printing Office.
Cork, S. (2010). Resilience and Transformation, Preparing Australia for Uncertain Futures. Canberra: CSIRO
publishing/Australia21.
Desonie, D. (2007). Climate Causes and Effects of Climate Change. New York: Infobase Publishing.
Donovan, Jenny. (2018). Designing the Compassionate City: Creating Places Where People Thrive.
New York: Routledge.
Doppelt (2016). Transformational resilience: How building human resilience to climate disruption can
sateguard society and increase wellbeing. New York: Routledge.
Ericson, T., Kjønstad, B.G., and Barstad, A. (2014). Mindfulness and sustainability. Ecological Economics.
104: 73–79.
Eriksen, C. and Ditrich, T. (2015). The relevance of mindfulness practice for trauma-exposed disaster
researchers. Emot Sp Soc. 17:63–66.
Fletcher, D. and Sarkar, M. (2013). Psychological resilience: A review and critique of definitions, concepts,
and theory. European Psychologist. 18(1):, 12–23. doi:10.1027/1016–9040/a000124
Flynn, S.E. (2008). America the resilient: Defying terrorism and mitigating natural disasters. Foreign Affairs.
87(2): 2–8.
Greater Good Magazine (2018). Study finds clear-yet surprisingly different-benefits in 3 types of meditation-
based mental training. Sharpbrains. https://sharpbrains.com/blog/2018/07/11/study-finds-clear-yet-
surprisingly-different-benefits-in-3-types-of-meditation-based-mental-training/.
55
C. Wamsler, L. Reeder, and M. Crosweller
Gilbert, P. (2013) Mindful Compassion. Oakland, CA: New Harbinger Publications, Inc.
Gilbert, P. (2017). Living Like Crazy.York: Annwyn House.
Goleman, D. (2009). Ecological Intelligence: How Knowing the Hidden Impacts of What We Buy Can
Change Everything. New York: Doubleday.
Goleman, D. (2011).The Brain and Emotional Intelligence: New Insights. More than Sound. www.mindful.
org/daniel-goleman-new-insights-on-emotional-intelligence/. (Accessed August 19, 2018).
Goleman, D. and Davidson, R.J. (2017). Altered Traits: Science Reveals How Meditation Changes Your
Mind, Brain, and Body. New York: Penguin.
Hechanova, R.M., Ramos, P.A.P., and Waelde, L. (2015). Group-based mindfulness-informed psychological
first aid after Typhoon Haiyan. Disaster Prevention and Management. 24(5): 610–618.
Hillman, J. (1983). Healing Fiction. New York: Station Hill Press.
Hoeberichts, J.H. (2012). Teaching council in Sri Lanka: A post disaster, culturally sensitive and spiritual
model of group process. Journal of religion and health. 51(2): 390–401.
Hölzel, B.K., Carmody, J., Vangel, M., Congleton, C., Yerramsetti, S.M., Gard, T., and Lazar, S.W.
(2011). Mindfulness practice leads to increases in regional brain gray matter density. Psychiatry
Research: Neuroimaging. 191(1): 36–43.
IPCC (2014). Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to
the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Core Writing Team,
R.K. Pachauri and L.A. Meyer (eds.)). Geneva, Switzerland: IPCC.
Jacob, J., Jovic, E., and Brinkerhoff, M.B. (2009). Personal and planetary well-being: Mindfulness meditation,
pro-environmental behavior and personal quality of life in a survey from the social justice and ecological
sustainability movement. Social Indicators Research. 93(2): 275–294.
Kabat-Zinn J (1990). Full Catastrophe Living: Using the Wisdom of Your Body and Mind to Face Stress,
PAin and Illness. New York: Delacourt.
Krznaric, R. (2014). Empathy: A Handbook for Revolution. London: Ebury Publishing.
Luders, E., Toga, A.W., Lepore, N., and Gaser, C. (2009). The underlying anatomical correlates of long-term
meditation: larger hippocampal and frontal volumes of gray matter. Neuroimage. 45(3): 672–678.
Luthar, S.S., Cicchetti, D., and Becker, B. (2000). The construct of resilience: A critical evaluation and
guidelines for future work. Child Development. 71(3): 543–562. doi:10.1111/1467–8624.00164
Malik, A. (2008). Causes of Climate Change (1st ed.). Delhi: Rajat Publications.
Matanle, P. (2011). The Great East Japan Earthquake, tsunami, and nuclear meltdown: towards the (re) con-
struction of a safe, sustainable, and compassionate society in Japan’s shrinking regions. Local Environment.
16(9): 823–847.
Masten, A.S., Best, K.M., and Garmezy, N. (1990). Resilience and development: Contributions from
the study of children who overcome adversity. Development and Psychopathology. 2(4): 425–444.
doi:10.1017/S0954579400005812.
McCubbin, H.I., McCubbin, M.A., Thompson, A.I., Han, S.-Y., and Allen, C.T. (1997). Families under
stress: what makes them resilient. (based on 1997 American Association of Family and Consumer
Sciences Commemorative Lecture). Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences. 89(3): 2.
McGilchrist, I. (2009). The Master and His Emissary The Divided Brain and the Making of he Western
World. London: Yale University Press.
Mechler, R. and Bouwer, L. (2015). Understanding trends and projections of disaster losses and climate change: is
vulnerability the missing link? Climatic Change. 133(1): 23–35. doi:10.1007/s10584-014-1141-0.
Moore, J. (2015). Capitalism in the Web of Life: Ecology and the Accumulation of Capital. London: Verso
publishing.
Norman, B., Steffen, W., and Stafford-Smith, M. (2014). Cities in Future Earth: A Summary of Key
Considerations. Paper presented at the Cities in Future Earth: Third Australian Earth System Outlook
Conference, Canberra, Australia. www.science.org.au/news-and-events/events/third-australian-earth-
system-outlook-conference/cities-future-earth-summary.
O’Brien, K. and Sygna, L. (2013). Responding to climate change: The three spheres of transformation.
Proceedings of Transformation in a Changing Climate, June 19–21, 2013, Oslo, Norway. University of
Oslo (pp.16–23).
Osborne, N. and Grant-Smith, D. (2015). Supporting mindful planners in a mindless system: limitations to
the emotional turn in planning practice. Town Planning Review. 86(6): 677–698.
Parodi, O. and Tamm, K. (2018). Personal Sustainability: Exploring the Far Side of Sustainable Development,
Routledge Studies in Sustainability. London: Routledge.
56
The being of urban resilience
Pykett, J., Lilley, R., Whitehead, M., Howell, R., and Jones, R. (2016). Mindfulness, Behavior Change and
Decision-Making, Birmingham: University of Birmingham and Aberystwyth University. 52 pages.
Scharmer, O. (2009/2016). Theory U: Leading from the Future as it Emerges. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-
Koehler Publishers.
Schwartz, J.M. (2011). Mindfulness and materialist paradigm: mind-brain interaction and the breakdown of
the materialist paradigm. www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ff2cnQ69LK8. (Accessed May 2, 2016).
Shapiro, S.L., Carlson, L.E., Astin, J.A., and Freedman, B. (2006). Mechanisms of mindfulness. Journal of
clinical psychology. 62(3): 373–386.
Sharma, M. (2017). Radical Transformational Leadership: Strategic Action for Change Agents. Berkeley,
CA: North Atlantic Books.
Sheth, J.N., Sethia, N.K., and Srinivas, S. (2010). Mindful consumption: a customer-centric approach to
sustainability. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science. 39(1): 21–39.
Siegel, D. (2017). Mind: A Journey to the Heart of Being Human. New York: W W Norton & Company Ltd.
Smith, B.W., Ortiz, J.A., Steffen, L.E., Tooley, E.M., Wiggins, K.T.,Yeater, E.A., Montoya, J.D., and Bernard,
M.L. (2011). Mindfulness is associated with fewer symptoms, depressive symptoms, physical symptoms,
and alcohol problems in urban firefighters. J Consult Clin Psychol. 79(5): 613.
Srivatsa, U.N., Ekambaram, V., Saint Phard, W., and Cornsweet, D. (2013). The effects of a short term
Stress Alleviating Intervention (SAI) on acute blood pressure responses following a natural disaster.
International journal of cardiology. 168(4): 4483–4484.
UN (2018). World Urbanization Prospects 2018: Key Facts. https://esa.un.org/unpd/wup/Publications/
Files/WUP2018-PressRelease.pdf.
UN-Habitat (2017). UN-Habitat global activities report 2017. Strengthening partnerships in support of
the New Urban Agenda and the Sustainable Development Goals. unhabitat.org/wp-content/uploads/
2017/02/GAR2017-FINAL_web.pdf.
UNISDR (2009). UNISDR terminology on disaster risk reduction, Geneva, Switzerland: The United
Nations International Strategy for Disaster Risk Reduction, www.unisdr.org/we/inform/publications/
7817.
UNISDR (2015). Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030. Geneva, Switzerland: The
United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction. www.preventionweb.net/ files/
43291_
sendaiframeworkfordrren.pdf.
Valk, S. Bernhardt, Fynn-Mathis, T. Böckler, A. Kanske, P, Guizard, N. Collins, L., and Singer, T. (2017).
Structural plasticity of the social brain: Differential change after socio-affective and cognitive mental
training. Science Advances. 3(10).
Vestergaard-Poulsen, P., van Beek, M., Skewes, J., Bjarkam, C.R., Stubberup, M., Bertelsen, J., and Roepstorff,
A. (2009). Long-term meditation is associated with increased gray matter density in the brain stem.
Neuroreport. 20(2): 170–174.
Waelde, L.C., Uddo, M., Marquett, R., Ropelato, M., Freightman, S., Pardo, A., and Salazar, J. (2008). A pilot
study of meditation for mental health workers following Hurricane Katrina. Journal of Traumatic Stress.
21(5): 497–500.
Wamsler, C. (2014). Cities, Disaster Risk and Adaption. London: Routledge.
Wamsler, C. (2018). Mind the gap: The role of mindfulness in adapting to increasing risk and climate
change. Sustainability Science. 13(4): 1121–1135. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-017-0524-3.
Wamsler, C. and Brink, E. (2018). Mindsets for sustainability: exploring the link between mindfulness and
sustainable climate adaptation, ecological economics. Ecological Economic. 151: 55–61.
Wamsler, C., Brossmann, J., Hendersson, H., Kristjansdottir, R., McDonald, C., and Scarampi, P. (2017).
Mindfulness in sustainability science, practice and teaching. Sustainability Science. 13:143–162. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s11625-017-0428-2.
Watkins, M.B., Ren, R., Umphress, E.E., Boswell, W.R., Triana, M.D.C., and Zardkoohi, A. (2015).
Compassion organizing: Employees’ satisfaction with corporate philanthropic disaster response and
reduced job strain. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology. 88(2): 436–458.
Weng, H.Y., Schuyler, B., and Davidson, R.J. (2017).The Impact of Compassion Meditation Training on the
Brain and Prosocial Behavior. Oxford: The Oxford Handbook of Compassion Science.
Windle, G. (2011). What is resilience? A review and concept analysis. Reviews in Clinical Gerontology.
21(2): 152–169. doi:10.1017/S0959259810000420.
Wisner, B., Blaikie, P., Cannon, T., and Davis, I. (2004). At Risk: Natural Hazards, People’s Vulnerability and
Disasters (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.
57
C. Wamsler, L. Reeder, and M. Crosweller
Worline, M.C. and Dutton, J.E. (2017). 31 How Leaders Shape Compassion Processes in Organizations.
Oxford: The Oxford Handbook of Compassion Science, p. 435.
Yoshimura, M., Kurokawa, E., Noda,T.,Tanaka,Y., Hineno, K., Kawai,Y., and Dillbeck, M.C. (2015). Disaster
relief for the Japanese earthquake–tsunami of 2011: Stress reduction through the transcendental medi-
tation® technique. Psychological reports. 117(1): 206–216.
Zeller, M., Yuval, K., Nitzan-Assayag, Y., and Bernstein, A. (2015). Self-compassion in recovery following
potentially traumatic stress: Longitudinal study of at-r isk youth. Journal of abnormal child psychology.
43(4): 645–653.
58
6
Data gaps and resilience metrics
Cassidy Johnson and Emmanuel Osuteye
Introduction
Understanding the spectrum of urban risks women, men, and children living in urban areas face
on a regular basis is key for developing policy and programming responses for urban develop-
ment and disaster risk reduction. The importance of understanding risks as an integral part of
disaster risk management was emphasised in the Hyogo Framework and now the Sendai frame-
work. As such there have been many initiatives to develop data to underpin our understanding of
the scale of risks. Nonetheless, the amount of risk information available for urban areas, particu-
larly in low-income countries, is still seriously lacking. In response to this, there have been many
initiatives that seek to bridge the gap, between top-down information generated by experts and
bottom-up information generated by communities, and to develop risk information that can
represent the realities faced by people and in a form that can be useful for policy-makers and
practitioners. The notion of “urban resilience” in this context has been employed in different
multistakeholder methods for measuring and understanding risks, and usually encompassing
action-planning to tackle those risks.
This chapter seeks to review a number of these methods that have been developed in recent
years to generate policy-relevant information and analysis about the spectrum of urban risks.
By “the spectrum of urban risks” we mean not just risks to large-scale disaster events, but also
small localized disasters as well as everyday events resulting in premature death, illness or injury
and impoverishment, that are environmentally related and within the context of urban areas
(Adelekan et al. 2015). Everyday risks are systemic, and high-frequency conditions and hazards
that people and communities are continually exposed to, and that could lead to losses.These may
be related to mortality or the destruction of property and may even become normalized phe-
nomena in the lives of those affected.These include: protracted periods of illnesses from endemic
infectious and parasitic diseases (not epidemics), automobile accidents, isolated cases of domestic
fires, persistent air pollution, poor waste management, and frequent flash flooding (Osuteye and
Leck 2017).
In many cities, small and everyday risks are concentrated in particular districts or settlements
with “development deficits” in relation to risk-reducing infrastructure and services. This is also
generally where urban governments lack the resources and capacities to address these deficits.
59
Cassidy Johnson and Emmanuel Osuteye
In addition, there is often little in the way of local government accountability to citizens, posing
a major obstacle in the potential of urban areas to support improved health outcomes, better
living conditions, and stronger economies. The residents in such areas are also likely to lack
secure tenure, which reduces their incentive to upgrading housing and invest in amenities, are
more likely to be recent migrants, and have low incomes or a reduced capacity to recover from
disasters. Consequently, small-scale events, and everyday risks, are more likely to impact those
living in informal settlements.
The perspectives that are portrayed here have been developed out of research looking into
the metrics of urban resilience, which has sought to understand how to measure the risks faced
by women, men, and children in urban areas and how this information can be taken up by urban
resilience initiatives, or how risk information is acted on by policymakers and practitioners at the
local level.1 Additionally, the analysis presented in this chapter draws from the authors’ involve-
ment in the Urban Africa Risk Knowledge (Urban ARK) research project, which trialled a
number of different methodologies for understanding risk at the city level and sought to engage
with city stakeholders to identify needs and to support demand-driven approaches to generating
evidence (Dodman et al., 2018).
This chapter departs from two key premises. The first is that risk is socially constructed.
That is, in order to fully understand disaster risks, we need to understand the causes and drivers
that create situations of vulnerability or exposure to hazards. We need to understand how the
risks affect people’s lives. This has been a point of discourse for the last 30 years in disaster
studies, emanating originally from Latin American scholars, and reflects the need to combine
thinking about inequalities in development with our understanding of how people are impacted
by disasters. The second premise is that we need to consider not only large-scale disaster events
that affect a whole area at one time, but also small-scale and everyday events across the spectrum
of urban risks, which may not be immediately perceptible, but which cumulatively place an
equal or greater burden on people, households, and cities. Both of these premises underline the
need for understanding risks, that is, the causes and drivers of risks and why they accumulate, as
well as the scale and frequency of disaster events, as a crucial component to addressing disasters.
60
Data gaps and resilience metrics
Hazards ACTION AT
(what?) THE
Impacts/losses FRONTLINE
(to what extent) SDI SETTLEMENT
MANDISA PROFILES
Vulnerability
REMAPRISK (who/why?)
DESINVENTAR
Exposure
(where?) RESILIENCE
FRAMEWORKS
Capacity
(what actions?)
Figure 6.1 Schematic diagram showing different approaches to measuring risks covered in this
chapter.
Source: Authors
it is to happen, and what are the consequences if it does happen. Once an analysis has been
carried out, this is usually followed by a process of evaluating the results of the risk analysis in
order to determine whether the identified risk is tolerable or not (Wamsler 2014).
This section outlines three distinct types of risk measurement at the local level, which we
have come across in our research: (1) detailed inventories of impacts or losses; (2) urban resili-
ence measurement frameworks; (3) community-generated information that profile risk and seek
action to address those risks. Each of these three types have been elaborated through different
initiatives, which are plotted in Figure 6.1 and will be discussed in more detail below.These types
can be differentiated by a number of factors, which offer an analytical framing for the chapter.
Firstly, they are differentiated by viewpoint, that is who creates the measurement, which poten-
tially impacts what is valued. Secondly, they vary in the physical scale that they measure and the
degree to which they provide enough coverage for a clear understanding of risks. Third, the
amount to which they uncover the root causes or social construction of risks, and, fourth, whether
or not they are action-oriented and therefore concerned with resilience-building. These factors
will be elaborated below as a way of framing the discussion of each method.
DesInventar
DesInventar, is an evidence-based methodology and database that shows that risks are not
always big disaster events, but that in fact small-scale disasters are more harmful and account
for greater losses overall than big disaster events. As a methodological tool, DesInventar is used
61
Cassidy Johnson and Emmanuel Osuteye
to systematically document losses from disasters. This data is available in an intuitive portal that
can be used to generate national and sub-national inventories of events that reveal the effects
of disasters in a selected locality.3 The database provides a strong tool for analysing the trends
of past events and therefore can tell us a lot about small disaster risks (Marulanda et al. 2010).
The utility of DesInventar and its distinction over other comparable globalized databases is the
lowered threshold of disaster impact or losses that is required for events to be captured in the
database. DesInventar database creates a log for an event if it records one or more deaths or
produces a $1 or more in economic losses, and thus is a much lower threshold than the EM-
DAT database. DesInventar uses national and local newspapers, police, and public health reports
as sources of information and will include a disaster event if there is any kind of human or
economic loss.
This broadened framing of risks portrayed in DesInventar is based on the premise, orginally
developed through the Network for Social Studies on Disaster Prevention in Latin America (LA
RED), that in many rapidly urbanizing areas in low-income countries the growth is increas-
ingly associated with risk in varying scales, frequency and patterns that need to be adequately
recognized, captured, understood, and addressed (Bull-Kamanga et al. 2001). Moving from a
sole focus on large-scale disasters towards a recognition of small-scale disasters was a paradigm
shift, because, this framing allows for the appreciation of the full spectrum of urban risks and
for making a useful distinction between scales of disaster risk. Considerable analysis has been
undertaken to understand the differences between losses from large (intensive) disaster events
and smaller scale (extensive) events (see the UNISDR Global Assessment Reports4) and is more
conducive to understanding the breadth of everyday losses, small disasters, and large disasters in
urban areas.
There are, however, still large gaps in the data provided through the DesInventar, which
is currently limiting its usefulness as a means of understanding the risk or making detailed
assessments at the city-scale or below. Marulanda et al. (2012) concede that, at best, DesInventar
“is a wide sample of disasters and is limited by the characteristics of the information and its
sources” (p. 555).
Overall the data for most of the cities and urban areas is not of sufficient quality to reli-
ably make conclusions about the totality of disaster losses in a particular urban area, but it does
give an overview about the city and the kinds of events that are prevalent. For some databases,
this is because the data comes from newspapers that may not be representative of all cities in a
country. In some cases where data comes from newspapers –even local ones –small disasters
in certain areas tend to be under-reported. Allen et al. (2015) found this to be the case in Lima,
where most events reported concerned central areas of the city, while the periphery where small
disasters are more frequent tended to be invisible. Often data is entered for one year and not
others. Commonly, lots of entries exist for certain kinds of events (i.e. fires or traffic accidents,
or floods) but not for other kinds of events. This depends on where the data comes from and
who is responsible for upkeep of the dataset. One gets the impression that some low-impact dis-
aster events are still vastly unreported, so the actual extent of losses is much greater than what is
reported by this tool (Osuteye et al, 2017).
As part of the Urban ARK project, Adelekan (2019) has developed a detailed DesInventar
database for Ibadan, Nigeria, using data from local newspapers and from state and hospital health
records. As detailed in the 2019 paper, the city lacks systematic data on everyday hazards and
disasters. Adelekan outlines a number of limitations of the quality of the data used for the
DesInventar, but this effort does show the possibilities of the DesInventar methods to show a
detailed picture of risks. Based on the newspaper data, she identifies vehicle accidents, crime,
62
Data gaps and resilience metrics
violence, fire, and flood to be the most prevalent events in the city. Detailed city data in
DesInventar also exists for some cities, for example Cali, Colombia (OSSO 2008).
For cities where there is detailed data available that represents the range and scale of risks,
DesInventar offers a strong analytical tool that can show the prevailing trends over time, and
organized by neighborhood. There is less evidence, however, that the risk information in
DesInventar is being used for local-level policy making or planning, or that it is being taken up
by communities. It seems to be a powerful tool for analysis and used by researchers, who may
communicate results to decision-makers, rather than being used directly by practitioners.
MANDISA
In addition to these initiatives to understand and capture broad risk profiles, some attempts
to create detailed databases on particular risks exist. For instance, on the issue of fire risk in
informal settlements, an exemplar of thorough and extensive data collection to support decision-
making and strategic planning is the Monitoring, Mapping and Analysis of Disaster Incidents in
Southern Africa (MANDISA) project, which collected data on fires in Cape Town from 1990
to 2004. During this period 8,787 fires affecting 41,301 dwellings in the city’s rapidly growing
informal settlements were recorded, with informal dwellings accounting for over half of all fires
by 2005 (Pharoah 2009). Unfortunately, this effort to collect fire data has been discontinued. It
is argued that this kind of detailed information is needed to better grasp the magnitude of the
problems (Twigg et al. 2017).
These examples are but a few of the existing databases that show detailed inventories of
impacts or losses that are being used to understand the spectrum of urban risks. The databases
paint a strong picture of what is happening in a particular place, especially if the data is rep-
resentative of the cities impacted. While on their own the databases do not make explicit the
root causes of the events, further analysis is often used to make these connections (OSSO 2008;
Pharoah 2008). Using community-generated experiences of risks can also help to expand on the
qualitative aspects of the data (Adelekan 2019; Twigg 2017).
63
Cassidy Johnson and Emmanuel Osuteye
For the most part the purpose of these urban resilience tools are to catalyse actions at the city
level, thus they place emphasis on action-planning or being action-oriented. Some examples of
this include the UNISDR Ten Essentials for Making Cities Resilient,5 UNISDR City Resilience
Scorecard,6 City Resilience Index developed by ARUP and Rockefeller,7 the City Resilience
Action Planning Tool (CityRAP),8 and UN-Habitat City Resilience Profiling Tool.9
These methods are designed to be led by local or municipal governments in consultation
with a range of stakeholders. Some of the more complicated methods may be led by outside
consultants, but most of them are intended to be convened from within the city, with some
assistance from external facilitators. They are based on a multistakeholder diagnosis that seeks
inputs from many different actors as well as residents in the city.This means that the methods are
designed to be focused on the values that would be important for local governments and their
constituents. For example, the UNISDR Making Cities Resilient campaign is targeted at city
governments, and their 10 Essentials for Making Cities Resilient Tool, and the City Resilience
Scorecard, are meant to be undertaken in a multistakeholder workshop format, with the pro-
cess led by the local government. The CityRAP tool is led by the municipality with external
facilitators to guide the process. It aims to bring in strong community perspectives, by using
community-led gathering of data about risks, especially from the most vulnerable, as well as
building consensus across communities and city management on the prioritization of key issues
for enhancing resilience. The tool is intended to be low-cost to implement, does not require
technical expertise, and helps to build the capacity of the local government to address resilience
issues jointly with communities.
The scale of the resilience frameworks is based on the whole city, or municipality. They seek
to understand particularities of the city, and what makes it resilient to a range of disasters. These
frameworks often seek to draw on existing studies or experiences to understand the kinds of
hazards that exist, so the characterization of the hazard may be general or detailed, pragmatic-
ally depending on the kinds of information that are available in the city. These methods may
also draw on detailed loss, vulnerability, capacity, or exposure data, if these exist. If they do not
exist, they are designed to make use of multistakeholder generated information or experiences.
Some of the information or viewpoints integrated into the diagnosis may be at settlement or
neighborhood level. They are also multihazard oriented, so they can look across the spectrum of
disaster events.
The particular problems of women, men, and children living in informal settlements form part of
the analysis in these measurements, but are not central.This may be because they aim to enter the
problem from the perspective of the local government, or municipal authority. While they seek
a range of different perspectives within the process, they tend look at a balance of the different
issues going on in the city, of which the particular problems of informal settlements may form
only a small part.
In our research we have focused on the methods that provide information that is of signifi-
cance to those living in informal settlements to better understand how this information could
be used for change, both instrumental changes in addressing risks, as well as systemic change that
is needed to address the underlying conditions that cause disasters.
Community-generated information
More recently, there have been many different initiatives to better understand the small-scale and
everyday risks that people face on a daily or frequent basis and are most common in informal
settlements. Two features that are common to these initiatives are that the methods of data
collection are community-based and participatory in nature, and often designed at smaller
64
Data gaps and resilience metrics
sub-city scales that give a more refined lens to the risk profile in the locality or community
(although they can be further scaled up to cover entire towns or the city). The key distinction
in this approach is that in contrast with the approaches previously outlined, the starting point
is the actual experience of those living at risk, so residents’ views and values are central to the
data-gathering exercises.
As mentioned above, large databases like DesInventar often describe disaster losses without
exploring their underlying drivers, which requires collecting different strands of data on social
factors (e.g. age, gender, income, ability, migrant status), environmental factors (e.g. access to
good-quality housing and basic services) and political and institutional factors related to planning
and decision-making processes at different levels. This holistic approach to data collection is
more conducive to in situ community-based initiatives that generate rich contextual data in the
process and can improve our understanding of underlying factors that drive risk generation and
accumulation.
A growing number of studies have focused on the potential and value of these community-
based processes where comprehensive data are lacking, and use a mix of research methods
to assess the profile and scale of risk, identify key issues, and recommend improvements.
Capturing risk and risk accumulation across space and time is a first and necessary step towards
addressing the systemic drivers of risk. In data-scarce contexts, this requires engendering
grassroots-led processes to assess not only how, where, why, and with what consequences
risk accumulates but also what responses are adopted, by whom, and with what impact
(Allen et al. 2019). This gives an understanding of not only the risk impacts in that particular
place but of the resilience of people and communities through the understanding of their
individual and collective coping strategies. The methods often adopted in addition to quan-
titative approaches of documenting metrics on disaster risk (number of events, frequency,
and losses) include the creation of settlement timelines that plot risk events over time and
outline demographic change and the actions adopted, community-led mapping methods to
build georeferenced risk profiles and initiatives, and qualitative interviews and focus group
discussions to gather further details on people’s experiences, vulnerability and coping capaci-
ties (see also chapter by Allen et al. in this volume).
Three such notable initiatives include the Action at the Frontline (AFL), “ReMapRisk”, and
the Slum and Shack Dwellers International (SDI) process of settlement profiling.The AFL meth-
odology, developed by the Global Network of Civil Society Organisations for Disaster Reduction
(GNDR), involves a series of interviews and focus group discussions with the communities to
capture and rank the threats/r isks and impacts experienced. It also captures some coping strat-
egies and the perceived barriers to remedial action by both the authorities and the communities
themselves. The process is useful in generating community awareness and conversation about
risk and resilience, but also creates a situated metrics based on the rankings of perceptions and
experiences of risk, as seen in the case of work done in Vingunguti and Masasani, two wards in
Dar es Salaam (Osuteye et al. 2018). The community-generated metrics in Dar es Salaam have
formed the basis of meaningful engagements with their respective municipal offices and DRM
officials to invest in risk prevention activities from their dedicated budgets. A related method-
ology also developed by the GNDR, called Frontline, has been applied in 15 countries and can
be used for cross-country comparisons or for research purposes (Gibson and Wisner 2016).
ReMapRisk10 is a methodology and tool that enables local communities to document and
monitor how risk accumulation cycles materialise over time, where and why, feeding spatial and
temporal details into an interactive online database that hosts different media files (photographs,
audio, video and text), where all information collected is georeferenced (Allen et al. 2018; Allen et al.
2019). The database stores information about hazards, vulnerability and capacity to act and enables
65
Cassidy Johnson and Emmanuel Osuteye
public enquiries across all fields of information recorded that can be visualised through maps in
response to each query, while excluding information considered confidential by local communities.
The SDI settlement profiling collects data on informal settlements using predesigned surveys,
and its entries are not limited to risk, but also collects data, using standardised questions, on their
everyday lives and living conditions such as service provision and health. This policy-relevant
data is a means to communicate the scale and extent of informality and deprivation in the spaces
they occupy in their cities. Community profiling and mapping is important for identifying and
taking action on disaster risk and fills a large data gap at local government level. Affiliates of
SDI are working in 33 nations across Africa and Asia and have so far profiled 7,712 settlements
across 224 cities11. SDI’s experience shows that standardising this data helps particularly informal
settlement dwellers establish partnerships with governments and allow them to collaborate with
other stakeholders and agencies (Beukes 2014). The cardinal point in SDI’s approach is the
attempt at standardization of the data that can provide citywide comparable settlement profiles,
and aid city-level decision-makers in planning for informal settlements. It points to the fact that
small, disaggregated data on risk can potentially contribute to wider-city level processes if it is
presented in a useful manner to planners and decision-makers. A first step of many, however
Beukes (2014) argument remains valid, that in many developing country contexts such processes
are the only credible hope that the realities of informal settlement residents will become factored
into the formal city-planning processes.
Three common challenges with the community-based data is that, although the data is often
held at a smaller scale, entries are often not geolocated, making them lose a layer of potential
utility (for instance in various advanced techniques of data visualization that are of interest to
researchers and practitioners alike) (Gaillard and Mercer 2012). Secondly the documentation
processes and archiving of such data appears rather fragmented and uncoordinated with other
similar efforts that are occurring in the cities. So, for instance, multiple NGOs would have their
own forms of risk registers created without recourse to or building on other previous works, as
well as the added difficulty of gaining access to these data sets where they exist. The third and
arguably biggest challenge is the uptake and utility of community-generated data by decision-
makers. The first two appear to be progressively being addressed with the data uptake being the
lingering challenge (see section 3 below).
The challenge of data georeferencing has become less arduous as modern technology is
increasingly used to enhance more traditional participatory mapping processes with local
community actors in order to produce detailed risk profiles of communities. The traditional
approach involves participants undertaking transect walks in the community to identify factors
of interest (such as landmarks, hazards, safety mechanisms, and sites of previous disasters), plotting
them onto a printed map and annotating the information being gathered. This process is now
enhanced by training participants to use digital processes in a number of open-source mobile
phone applications such as Epicollect+, MyTracks (developed by Google Inc., Mountain View,
CA, USA), and Ramblr (developed by Imperial College London, UK), which helps with the
parallel, systematic, and speedy collection of georeferenced data, whilst embedding pictorial,
video, and audio files. Training provided for participants prepares them to use these tools and
visualize the information gathered (Lambert and Allen 2016). Data sharing and public acces-
sibility is increasing, and also as a result of the growth of action research projects that create
websites or sharing portals for outputs, such as ReMapRisk, and see the filling of risk data gaps
as integral project outcomes.
The main challenge is, though, to implement this kind of data collection at a larger scale, so
that it can support processes of decision-making and strategic planning at the scale of the whole
city (Boonyabancha 2005).There are also potential drawbacks with experiential data, as residents’
66
Data gaps and resilience metrics
recollection of the risks and events or outcomes may not always yield reliable results. Therefore,
a mixture of experiential data and loss data would be optimal.
Unfortunately, if [community-driven] tools prove very useful for achieving their primary
goal, i.e. identifying local knowledge and issues, and planning actions at the community
level, they remain insufficient to integrate stakeholders from beyond local communities and
NGO partners. Local government institutions and scientists have been reluctant to seriously
consider both the tools themselves and the knowledge they produce for improving policies.
This is because participatory tools are not primarily geared towards producing quantitative
data, which are primary importance to government decisions makers.
(p102)
To foster the dialogue required to exchange knowledge and discuss consensual actions there
should be tools that allow all stakeholders to participate in the same activity, around the same
table, at the same time.These tools should enable an assessment of the needs and capacities of
local communities and to plan from the inside what can and should be done at the commu-
nity level. They should also provide space for NGOs and local government officials to plan
and plot, in collaboration with local people, top-down actions intended to sustain local needs.
(p103)
It is quite interesting to note that the methods we have reviewed in this chapter, many of which
have been developed in the last few years, respond quite directly to these points. Methods
for community-generated data have radically advanced in recent years and, consequently, most
methods offer strong elements of quantitative data.
Strategic action-planning has become integral to the community-led and urban resilience
frameworks, both as a means to collectively validate findings, but also as a capacity building
step which is instrumental in inducing ways of “doing things”. This allows the community
to concretize learning and arm them with prioritized agendas for disaster risk reduction at
scale, capitalizing on the resources and mobilization capacities that already exist. Very effective
responses typically do emerge from joint initiatives of residents and the city council or other
public agencies, such as fire awareness and hazard monitoring in the case of recent studies in
Freetown (Allen et al. 2017).
Small steps at collecting local data that are “good enough” can be valuable in the beginning for
a city that is starting on disaster risk management (Spaliviero et al. 2019). As all of the initiatives
reviewed in this chapter have shown, understanding risks requires information; however that infor-
mation does not have to be perfect or complete in order to begin actions to address disaster risks.
The depth of the participatory processes when conducted at scale provides very good opportun-
ities to develop information through people’s existing knowledge and decision-support tools.
67
Cassidy Johnson and Emmanuel Osuteye
However, moving on from these small-scale processes of providing good contextual data
on risk involving local decision-makers, the critical multiplier at a scale requires an overhaul
and improvement in the current established means of data collection. Improving official data
collection, such as census, vital registration systems, and health care records will be neces-
sary to systematically address disaster and health risks in informal settlements (Adelekan and
Satterthwaite 2019). Censuses should provide valuable data on housing and living conditions
and other health determinants on all households. Most census authorities do not provide city
governments with data broken down to the level of the street and ward –needed for planning,
and in the context of many developing cities and urban centers, will also require a radical
approach to expressly recognize and include demographics and a distinction for informal settle-
ment that often fall outside or straddle formal boundaries.
Finally, there is a need for a paradigm shift in the conceptualization of risk for risk govern-
ance professionals, local decision-makers, and various practitioners to consider risk as a spec-
trum that marks a departure from the dominance of intensive risks in most policy frameworks.
While this is well documented in the literature, it is less exercised in practice. It is only
when the small-scale and everyday risks are measured that we can understand the scale of the
problem.
Notes
1 This research has been funded by the AXA Research Fund under the grant “AXA Outlook: Metrics
for Policy Action in Urban Areas: Characterising risks facing low-income groups”.
2 www.emdat.be/
3 The database is available at www.desinventar.net. See further background notes on DesInventar www.
desinventar.net/whatisdesinventar.html (last accessed 6 March, 2018).
4 www.unisdr.org/we/inform/gar?
5 www.unisdr.org/campaign/resilientcities/home/index
6 www.unisdr.org/we/inform/publications/53349
7 www.cityresilienceindex.org
8 http://dimsur.org/city_rap/
9 http://urbanresiliencehub.org/tools-for-action/
10 ReMapRisk methodology and tool was developed and first applied in Lima by Allen and Lambert in
the context of a project entitled cLIMA sin Riesgo, and later applied in Karonga and Freetown, as part
of the ESRC/DFID funded Urban Africa Risk Knowledge (Urban ARK) project, led by team from the
Bartlett Development Planning Unit (DPU), University College London.
11 https://knowyourcity.info/
References
Adelekan, I.O. (2019). Urban dynamics, everyday hazards and disaster risks in Ibadan, Nigeria. Environment
and Urbanization.
Adelekan, I., Johnson, C., Manda, M., Matyas, D., Mberu, B.U., Parnell, S., Pelling M., Satterthwaite, D.,
and Vivekananda, J. (2015). Disaster risk and its reduction: an agenda for urban Africa. International
Development Planning Review. 37(1): 33–43.
Adelekan, I.O. and Satterthwaite, D. (2019). Filling the data gaps on everyday and disaster risks in cities: The
case of Ibadan. Urban Africa Risk Knowledge Briefing, No 22. January 2019.
Allen, A., Belkow, T. de los Ríos, S., Escalante Estrada, C., Lambert, R., Miranda, L., Poblet Alegre, R., and
Zilbert Soto, L. (2015). Urban Risk: In search of new perspectives. Disrupting urban ‘risk traps’: Bridging
Finance and Knowledge for Climate Resilient Infrastructural Planning in Lima. Policy Brief No.1, June
2015. www.climasinriesgo.net.
Allen, A., Koroma, B., Lambert, R., and Osuteye, E. in collaboration with Macarthy, J., Kamara, S., Sellu,
S., Bertin, A., and Stone, A. (2018). ReMapRisk Freetown. Online platform produced for Urban Africa
Risk Knowledge (Urban ARK) www.urbanark.org. (Accessed March 8, 2019.)
68
Data gaps and resilience metrics
Allen,A., Koroma, B., Osuteye, E., and Rigon,A. (2017). Urban risk in Freetown’s informal settlements: making
the invisible visible. Urban Africa Risk Knowledge Briefing, No. 6.
Allen, A., Osuteye, E., Koroma, B., and Lambert, R. (2019). Unlocking urban risk trajectories: Participatory
approaches to uncover risk accumulation in Freetown’s informal settlements. In: M. Pelling (ed.): African
Cities: Lessons and Leadership for Integrating Risk into Development. Nairobi: UN-Habitat.
Béné, C., Headey, D., Haddad, L., and von Grebmer, K. (2016). Is resilience a useful concept in the con-
text of food security and nutrition programmes? Some conceptual and practical considerations. Food
Security. 8(1): 123–138.
Beukes, A. (2014) Know Your City: community profiling of informal settlements, IIED Briefing Paper.
(Accessed March 7, 2019).
Boonyabancha, S. (2005). Baan Mankong: Going to scale with “slum” and squatter upgrading in Thailand.
Environment and Urbanization. 17(1): 21–46.
Bull-Kamanga, L., Diagne, K., Lavell, A., Leon, E., Lerise, F., MacGregor, H., Maskrey, A., Meshack, M.,
Pelling, M., Reid, H., Satterthwaite, D., Songsore, J.,Westgate, K., and Yitambe, A. (2003), From everyday
hazards to disasters: the accumulation of risk in urban areas. Environment and Urbanization. 15
(1): 193–204.
Dodman, D., Adelekan, I., Brown, D., Leck, H., Manda, M., Mberu, B., Pelling, M., Rusca, M.,
Satterthwaite, D., and Taylor, F. (2018). A spectrum of methods for a spectrum of risk: Generating
evidence to understand and reduce urban risk in sub-Saharan Africa. Area. 00: 1–9.
Gaillard, J.C. and Mercer, J. (2012). From knowledge to action: Bridging gaps in disaster risk reduction.
Progress in Human Geography. 37(1): 93–114. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0309132512446717.
Gibson, T. and Wisner, B. (2016). “Let’s talk about you…” Opening space for local experience, action and
learning in disaster risk reduction. Disaster Prevention and Management. 25(5): 664–684. https://doi.
org/10.1108/DPM-06-2016-0119.
Lambert, R. and Allen, A. (2016). Participatory mapping to disrupt unjust urban trajectories in Lima.
In: P. Imperatore and A. Pepe (eds.): Geospatial Technology – Environmental and Social Applications.
InTech Open Science. 2016. www.intechopen.com/books/geospatial-technology-environmental-
and-social-applications/participatory-mapping-to-disrupt-unjust-urban-trajectories-in-lima. (Accessed
on March 7, 2019).
Lavell, A. and Maskrey, A. (2014). The future of disaster risk management. Environmental Hazards. 13(4).
https://doi.org/10.1080/17477891.2014.935282.
Marulanda, M.C., Cardona, O.D., and Barbat, A.H. (2010). Revealing the socioeconomic impact of
small disasters in Colombia using the DesInventar database. Disasters. 34(2): 552–570. https://doi.
org/10.1111/j.1467-7717.2009.01143.x.
Oliver-Smith, A, Alcántara-Ayala, I. Burton, I., and Lavell, A.M. (2016). Forensic Investigations of Disasters
(FORIN): A Conceptual Framework and Guide to Research (IRDR FORIN Publication No.2).
Beijing: Integrated Research on Disaster Risk.
OSSO, 2008. Anexo. 11. Urbanización, marginalización y prefiguración de desastres en ciudades “medianas”
de países en desarrollo: Estudio de caso, Cali, Colombia. Analisis del riesgo extensivo, Urbanización
de los riesgos y su expansión territorial en América Latina. www.preventionweb.net/english/hyogo/
gar/2011/en/bgdocs/GAR-2009/background_papers/Chap3/LAC-overview/OSSO/11_Capitulo_
Cali_Riesgo-extensivo_V3.doc. (Accessed April 10, 2019).
Osuteye, E., Johnson, C., and Brown, D. (2017). The data gap: An analysis of data availability on disaster
losses in sub-Saharan African Cities. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction. 26: 24–33.
Osuteye, E. and Leck, H. (2017). Freetown’s mudslides and the slippery slope of urban risk in Africa,
Opinion Piece, IRIN News: Inside Story on Emergencies. www.irinnews.org/opinion/2017/08/23/
freetown-s-mudslides-and-slippery-slope-urban-risk-africa. (Accessed March 13, 2019).
Osuteye, E., Leck, H., Johnson, C., Ndezi, T., Makoba, F.D., and Pelling, M. (2018). Communicating risk
from the frontline: projecting community voices into disaster risk management policies across scales.
Urban ARK Policy Briefing 19.
Pharoah, R. (2009). Fire risk in informal settlements in Cape Town, South Africa. In: M. Pelling and B.
Wisner (eds.): Disaster Risk Reduction: Cases from Urban Africa. London: Earthscan, 105–124.
Schipper, L., Lisa, F., and Langston, L. (2015). A Comparative Overview of Resilience Measurement
Frameworks: Analysing Indicators and Approaches. ODI Working Paper, London. https:// pdfs.
semanticscholar.org/2d45/b8f15d521051d7af464e607b465b164f03cc.pdf. (Accessed April 12, 2019).
Spaliviero, M., Rochell, K., Pelling, M., Tomaselli, C., Lopez, F.L., and Guambe, M. (2019). Urban resilience
building in fast-growing African Cities. Urban Africa Risk Knowledge Briefing, No. 20, January 2019.
69
Cassidy Johnson and Emmanuel Osuteye
Tanner, T., Bahadur, A., and Moench, M. (2017). Challenges for Resilience Policy and Practice.
London: Overseas Development Institute.
Twigg, J., Christie, N., Haworth, J., Osuteye, E., and Skarlatidou, A. (2017) Improved methods for fire risk
assessment in low-income and informal settlements. International Journal of Environmental Research
and Public Health. 14: 139
UN-Habitat (2017). Trends in Urban Resilience 2017. Nairobi: United Nations Human Settlements
Programme.
Wamsler, C. (2014). Cities, Disaster Risk and Adaptation. London and New York: Routledge.
70
7
Urban open space systems
Multifunctional infrastructure
Introduction
Spanning the social and health sciences, scholarship on resilience shares a common interest in
how individuals and groups of people cope with adversity. The definition of resilience from
pediatric psychology, for example, is “the capacity of a system to adapt successfully to challenges
that threaten the function, survival, or future development of the system” (Masten and Barnes
2018, p.2). This emphasis on adaptive capacity is equally germane to cities and to the design of
integrated infrastructure systems.
The spatial structure or physical morphology of cities is shaped by four infrastructure
domains: (1) building infrastructure, (2) transportation infrastructure, (3) utility infrastruc-
ture (water, energy, waste, communications), and (4) open space infrastructure. These systems
fundamentally influence urban sustainability, livability, and resiliency (Ramaswami et al. 2012;
Zhang and Li 2018). Sustainable cities conserve water, energy, biodiversity, and other natural
resources, and minimize environmental degradation (Burby 1998; Hough 2004; Lehmann 2010).
Livable cities promote human health, safety, and wellbeing by providing convenient and equit-
able access to affordable housing, multimodal transportation options, and public parks and open
spaces (Beatley 2011; Wheeler 2013). Resilient cities minimize risks from natural hazards and
their potential social and economic impacts (Godschalk 2003; Meerow et al. 2016; Mileti 1999).
Urban ecology, the science of cities, provides evidence that can inform the policies and
paradigms that shape the structure and function of the built environment (Forman 2014; Grimm
et al. 2008). A better understanding of urban ecology can help cities enact evidence-based pol-
icies that adapt their communities to changing social, economic, and environmental conditions
(Nursey-Bray et al. 2014; Ramaswami et al. 2012). Local leaders often underestimate the import-
ance of their city’s architecture, public spaces, and transportation systems, failing to fully grasp
their effects on environmental quality, economic prosperity, and human health and wellbeing
(United Nations 2017).
This chapter focuses on urban open space systems. This infrastructure can play vital
roles in protecting environmental quality, reducing risks from natural hazards, and advancing
human health and wellbeing. Grounded in the expanding literature of urban science and urban
design, three key principles are proposed to help local governments advance urban resiliency: (1)
71
James A. LaGro, Jr.
identify built environments that are vulnerable to natural hazards and remove or retrofit the
built infrastructure in harm’s way, (2) identify and protect critical urban natural areas and restore
the integrity of fragmented and degraded ecosystem components, and (3) reform the policies,
institutions, and planning paradigms that exacerbate hazard risks and impede resiliency, sustain-
ability, and livability. This chapter concludes with recommendations on potential reforms in the
education, licensing, and certification of four professions that directly shape the structure and
function of the built environment.
Nature’s infrastructure
The Earth is a dynamic, living planet, sustaining human life while also presenting risks to human
health, safety, and wellbeing.The complex interrelationships between natural and human systems
have direct implications for urban resiliency (Forman 2014; Ramaswami et al. 2012). Most
cities are vulnerable to one or more natural hazards, including earthquakes, volcanos, landslides,
avalanches, heat waves, drought, wildfires, floods, and coastal subsidence and erosion (Birkmann
et al. 2014). Geologic hazards have posed risks to urban settlements for millennia. Thousands
died, for example, when the volcanic eruption of Mount Etna led to Pompeii’s demise more
than 2,000 years ago. In coastal areas subject to hurricanes and typhoons, these massive storms are
responsible for losses of life, billions of dollars in property damage, and lasting psychological and
economic impacts (Mileti 1999; Wisner et al. 2004). History has repeatedly demonstrated, how-
ever, that catastrophes from geologic and climate hazards are often linked to human decisions –
to the land use patterns that place people and property in harm’s way (Mileti 1999; Moffatt and
Kohler 2008).
Urban morphology profoundly influences public health, safety, and wellbeing (Sallis et al.
2015; Wheeler 2013). Vulnerability assessments identify the locations where people and
property are exposed to risks from climate change and other natural hazards (Wisner et al. 2004).
With rising sea levels, new vulnerabilities to buildings, utility and telecommunication networks,
and machinery are emerging in coastal cities (Gagliano et al. 2003; Zou et al. 2016). Land
use changes can also increase the exposure and magnitude of potential hazard risks. In heavily
farmed regions of the US midwest and Great Plains, fence-row to fence-row crop cultivation
has destroyed most native vegetation in these landscapes, greatly increasing runoff –and river
flooding –from early spring storms and snowmelt. Hundreds of thousands of wetland hectares
have been drained for agricultural crop production; thousands more wetland hectares have been
filled in, built on, and paved over for urban development (Davidson 2014). Cities and villages
along major rivers –the Missouri and Mississippi, for e xample –suffer the consequences of cata-
strophic flooding.
Hazard vulnerability is often exacerbated by lack of local capacity to collect, analyze, and
act on evidence that could mitigate risks (Godschalk 2003). Moreover, interventions to reduce
risks may be adaptive, maladaptive, or have no effect at all. Levees, sea walls, and storm pumps,
for example, can protect development in river floodplains and low-lying coastal areas.Yet, these
public works projects may provide a false sense of security.This engineered infrastructure can fail,
and sometimes does, dramatically amplifying the subsequent flooding impacts (Josephson 2002,
Mileti 1999). In some cases, infrastructure failures concentrate the destructive forces, with devas-
tating effects on highly vulnerable lower-income populations. When catastrophic infrastructure
failures occur, they are often considered unavoidable.Yet, as Gilbert F. White (1945), the “father”
of floodplain management, wryly observed: “Floods are ‘acts of God,’ but flood losses are largely
acts of man.”
72
Urban open space systems
73
James A. LaGro, Jr.
codes (Chriqui et al. 2016), comprehensive plans (Brody et al. 2004), and hazard mitigation
plans (Berke et al. 2015) reveals substantial variation in governance capacity. Providing technical
assistance and environmental data to local governments is one way that higher levels of govern-
ment can mitigate hazard risks in urban areas. State agencies in California and Utah, for example,
produce statewide geologic hazard maps that assist local governments in urban planning and
growth management.
74
Urban open space systems
surfaces (Reese 2001). Adapting to climate change requires that stormwater management mimic
the landscape’s natural hydrology and hydraulics, employing decentralized, small-scale stormwater
control and infiltration measures (Ahiablame et al. 2012; Dietz 2007; Pyke et al. 2011). In coastal
areas subject to sea level rise or in river floodplains, strategic retreat from flooding hazards can
reduce losses and allow new wetland formation. Buildings may be removed or retrofitted to ele-
vate finished interior spaces above expected flooding levels. Waterfront parks, as in New York
City, can help communities become more resilient to extreme storms and the effects of rising
sea levels (New York City Parks, 2017).
Environmental benefits
Urban open space systems provide ecosystem services, including the protection of water and
air quality. This infrastructure helps to mitigate the effects of urban heat islands, reduce energy
demand for heating and cooling buildings, and sequester carbon. By integrating green infra-
structure within parking lots, along streets, and on rooftops, a city’s “effective” imperviousness
can be reduced. Rooftop gardens provide convenient outdoor spaces for building occupants and,
by adding a natural insulation layer, green roofs reduce building heating and cooling costs, limit
stormwater runoff, and extend roof longevity.
Plants and soil-borne microbes in rain gardens, bio-infiltration basins, and bioswales help
to prevent the transport of pollutants from streets and parking lots to natural water bodies.
Groundwater recharge in metropolitan areas also helps to maintain seasonal base flow rates of
nearby streams and rivers. Rainwater harvesting and non-potable “grey water” recycling also
helps to conserve water resources, especially in arid and semi-arid landscapes.
If widely planted throughout a community, trees reduce air pollution through leaf uptake
and contact removal and slow the temperature-dependent photochemical reaction that forms
75
James A. LaGro, Jr.
ground-level ozone pollution (Roy et al. 2012). Native trees also sustain pollinating insect species
and birds, creating a richer and more diverse ecosystem (Forman 2014). By reintroducing bio-
diversity into the built environment, people are brought closer to their ancient genetic heritage
(Wilson 2017).
76
Urban open space systems
and Tanner 2014; Miller et al. 2018; Moffatt and Kohler 2008). Yet, the ability of local
governments to enact urban resiliency initiatives varies widely across municipalities (Cervero
and Arrington 2008; Ekkel and de Vries 2017; Koop et al. 2017; Sallis et al. 2015). Governance
challenges include conflicting policy decisions, insufficient coordination across jurisdictions,
and lack of capacity to gather and plan effectively with relevant environmental data (Göçmen
and LaGro 2016).
Good governance
Public policy reforms are fundamental to paradigm change in urban infrastructure planning,
design, funding, and management. Land use and transportation policies can be leveraged to
reduce carbon emissions and incrementally adapt cities to changing social, economic, and envir-
onmental conditions. Public subsidies for rebuilding properties damaged by natural hazards
can, and often do, create incentives for maladaptive land use practices, especially in coastal and
riverine landscapes threatened by extreme flooding. Market-based initiatives, including flood
insurance reforms, are needed to reduce the financial incentives that encourage unsustainable
behaviors, such as building in locations at risk from repeated flooding (Jacob and Showalter
2007). Impact fees for new real estate development can help finance land acquisitions and new
public open space infrastructure.
Natural disasters can change attitudes, however, and precipitate actions that increase urban
resilience (Ernston et al. 2010). After a devastating hurricane struck the city of Houston, Texas
in 2017, a major bond referendum was passed to purchase flood-prone properties and expand
the region’s public green space system. Grants from the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation
(NFWF) in the United States fund green infrastructure conservation projects and capacity
building and demonstration projects. These initiatives build working relationships among
stakeholders, fund training workshops in assessing local vulnerability, and build community cap-
acity for collective impact.
Strategies to foster urban resilience can benefit from holistic, systems thinking (Bahadur and
Tanner 2014; Miller et al. 2018; Moffatt and Kohler 2008).“Upstream” policy factors, for example,
have countless “downstream” effects on both the built and natural environments (Chapman
et al. 2016; Ramaswami et al. 2012). Coordinated initiatives –bridging all four infrastructure
domains –can help municipalities conserve natural and fiscal resources, while protecting public
health, safety, and wellbeing (Fink et al. 2011; Frantzeskaki and Kabisch 2016).
Cities require enormous amounts of energy. And the generation of renewable solar, wind,
hydro, and geothermal energy is another potential social and economic benefit of urban open
space systems. More needs to be done to explore the potential for public-private partnerships.
For example, leased public open spaces could enable geothermal district heating and cooling
systems, or small-scale wind and solar arrays.
Parks and open spaces are often viewed as non-essential community amenities. Consequently,
a fuller accounting of the costs and benefits of urban open space systems could strengthen
arguments for public investment in this infrastructure (Jacob and Showalter 2007). New metrics
are needed to help communities understand their return on investment in urban open spaces
(Brown et al. 2016). A metric that has long been used in municipal park planning is park sur-
face area per 1,000 residents. This metric is a “benchmark” indicator for inter-city, peer group
comparisons by city parks agencies and non-profit advocacy organizations.Yet as urban districts
and neighborhoods densify through infill and redevelopment, this metric is sure to decline at
these granular scales. Importantly, this metric does not measure the quality or connectivity of
public open spaces.
77
James A. LaGro, Jr.
Higher education
Cities are complex adaptive systems. They are the cultural and biophysical legacies of multiple
actors, including policy-makers and planners, land developers, landscape architects, architects and
engineers, and residents whose housing choices influence urban growth patterns. As centers of
creativity and innovation, cities are central to our species’ effective adaptation to global sustain-
ability challenges (Grimm et al. 2008; Miller et al. 2018).
Universities can play pivotal roles in local sustainability and resiliency initiatives by helping to
transform the paradigms that influence urban planning, design, and management. Accreditation
standards for professional degree programs, for example, influence the decisions that shape the
structure and function of the built environment. Professional degree programs convey to students
the analytic and design paradigms that guide problem conceptualization and problem solving in
their chosen fields. In higher education as well as in professional practice, disciplinary silos can
lead to insular pedagogies and parochialism (Fink 2011; Miller et al. 2018). Professional degree
programs in urban planning, architecture, landscape architecture, and civil engineering should be
training the next generation of practitioners to embrace system-level approaches to reshaping
the built environment. Professional licensing and certification requirements can reinforce the
importance of interdisciplinary, collaborative approaches to professional practice.
Faculty in public universities, especially, are engaging in community partnerships, evaluating
natural experiments, and developing the evidence-base to inform public policies (Hodges and
Dubb 2012; Jacob and Showalter 2007; Nursey-Bray 2014; Schaffer and Vollmer 2010). These
collaborative initiatives have great potential to transform urban infrastructure by raising the
capacity of professions and elected decision-makers to transform cities into more sustainable,
resilient, and livable habitats. Transdisciplinary initiatives like these have the potential to reshape
the trajectory of urban futures, worldwide.
References
Ahiablame, L.M., Engel, B.A., and Chaubey, I. (2012). Effectiveness of low-impact development practices: lit-
erature review and suggestions for future research. Water, Air, & Soil Pollution. 223: 4253–4273.
78
Urban open space systems
Bahadur, A. and Tanner,T. (2014).Transformational resilience thinking: putting people, power and politics at
the heart of urban climate resilience. Environment & Urbanization. 26(1): 200–214.
Beatley, T. (2011). Biophilic Cities: Integrating Nature into Urban Design and Planning. Washington,
DC: Island Press.
Berke, P., Newman, G., Lee, J., Combs, T., Kolosna, C., and Salvesen, D. (2015). Evaluation of networks of
plans and vulnerability to hazards and climate change: A resilience scorecard. Journal of the American
Planning Association. 81(4): 287–302.
Birkmann, J., Kienberger, S., and Alexander, D.E. (2014). Assessment of Vulnerability to Natural Hazards: A
European Perspective. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Bogar, S. and Beyer, K.M. (2015). Green space, violence, and crime: a systematic review. Trauma,Violence,
& Abuse, 1–12.
Brody, S.D., Highfield, W., and Carrasco, V. (2004). Measuring the collective planning capabilities of local
jurisdictions to manage ecological systems in southern Florida. Landscape and Urban Planning.
69: 33–50.
Brown, V., Diomedi, B.Z., Moodie, M., Veerman, J.L., and Carter, R. (2016). A systematic review of eco-
nomic analyses of active transport interventions that include physical activity benefits. Transport Policy.
45: 190–208.
Burby, R.J. (ed.) (1998). Cooperating with Nature: Confronting Natural Hazards with Land-Use Planning
for Sustainable Communities. Washington, DC: Joseph Henry Press.
Cervero, R. and Arrington, G.B. (2008).Vehicle trip reduction impacts of transit-oriented housing. Journal
of Public Transportation. 11(3): 1–17.
Chapman, R., Howden-Chapman, P., and Capon, A. (2016). Understanding the systematic nature of cities
to improve health and climate change mitigation. Environment International. 94: 380–387.
Chriqui, J.F., Nicholson, L.M., Thrun, E., Leider, J., and Slater, S.J. (2016). More active living-oriented
county and municipal zoning is associated with increased adult leisure time physical activity –United
States, 2011. Environment and Behavior. 48(1): 111–130.
Cohen-Shacham, E., Walters, G., Janzen, C., and Maginnis, S. (eds.) (2016). Nature-Based Solutions to
Address Global Societal Challenges. Gland, Switzerland: International Union for Conservation of
Nature (IUCN).
Compton, J.L. (2005). The impact of parks on property values: Empirical evidence from the past two
decades in the United States. Managing Leisure. 10: 203–218.
Davidson, N.C. (2014). How much wetland has the world lost? Long-term and recent trends in global wet-
land area. Marine and Freshwater Research. 65: 934–941.
Dietz, M.E. (2007). Low-impact development practices: A review of current research and recommendations
for future directions. Water, Air, & Soil Pollution. 186: 351–363.
Dudley, N. (ed.) (2008). Guidelines for Applying Protected Area Management Categories. Gland,
Switzerland: IUCN.
Ekkel, E.D. and de Vries, S. (2017). Nearby green space and human health: Evaluating accessibility metrics.
Landscape and Urban Planning. 157: 214–220.
Ernstson, H., van der Leeuw, S.E., Redman, C, Meffert, D.J., Davis, G., Alfsen, C., and Elmqvist, T. (2010).
Urban transitions: on urban resilience and human-dominated ecosystems. AMBIO 39(8), 531–545.
Fink, J.H. (2011). Cross-sector integration of urban information to enhance sustainable decision making.
IBM Journal of Research and Development. 55(1.2): 12:1–12:8.
Forman, R.T.T. (2014). Urban Ecology: Science of Cities. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Frantzeskaki, N. and Kabisch, N. (2016). Designing a knowledge co-production operating space for urban
environmental governance –Lessons from Rotterdam, Netherlands and Berlin, Germany. Environmental
Science & Policy. 62: 90–98.
Gagliano, S.M., Kemp, E.B. III, Wicker, K.M., and Wiltenmuth, K.S. (2003). Active Geological Faults
and Land Change in Southeastern Louisiana: Executive Summary. Baton Rouge, LA: Coastal
Environments, Inc. (prepared for the US Corps of Engineers, New Orleans District, Contract No.
DACW 29-00-C-0034).
Garvin, E.C., Cannuscio, C.C., and Branas, C.C. (2012). Greening vacant lots to reduce violent crime: A
randomized control trial. Injury Prevention. 19: 198–203.
Geddes, P. (1915). Cities in Evolution: An Introduction to the Town Planning Movement and the Study of
Civics. New York: Ernest Benn.
Göçmen, A. and LaGro, J. (2016). Assessing local planning capacity to promote environmentally sustainable
residential development. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management. 59(8): 1513–1535.
79
James A. LaGro, Jr.
Godschalk, D.R. (2003). Urban hazard mitigation: creating resilient cities. Natural Hazards Review.
4(3): 136–143.
Grimm, N.B., Faeth, S.H., Golubiewski, N.E., Redman, C.L., Wu, J., Bai, X., and Biggs, J.M. (2008). Global
change and the ecology of cities. Science. 319: 756–760.
Harnik, P. (2010). Urban Green: Innovative Parks for Resurgent Cities. Washington, DC: Island Press.
Hodges, R.A. and Dubb, S. (2012). The Road Half Traveled: University Engagement at a Crossroads. East
Lansing, MI: Michigan State University Press.
Hough, M. (2004). Cities and Natural Process: A Basis for Sustainability, 2nd edn. New York: Routledge.
Jacob, J.S. and Showalter, S. (2007). The Resilient Coast: Policy Frameworks for Adapting the Built
Environment to Climate Change and Growth in Coastal Areas of the US Gulf of Mexico. College
Station, TX: Sea Grant Texas at Texas A&M University.
Josephson, P.R. (2002). Industrialized Nature: Brute Force Technology and the Transformation of the
Natural World. Washington, DC: Island Press/Shearwater Books.
Koop, S.H.A., Koetsier, L., Doornhof, A., Reinstra, O.,Van Leeuwen, C.J., Brouwer, S., Dieperink, C., and
Driessen, P.P.J. (2017). Assessing the governance capacity of cities to address challenges of water, waste,
and climate change. Water Resources Management. 31: 3427–3443.
LaGro, J. (2013). Site Analysis: Informing Context-Sensitive and Sustainable Site Planning and Design.
Hoboken, NJ: Wiley & Sons.
Lehmann, S. (2010). Green urbanism: Formulating a series of holistic principles. Sapiens (Surveys and
Perspectives Integrating Environment and Society. 3(2): 1–11.
Leigh, N.G. and Blakely, E.J. (2016). Planning Local Economic Development: Theory and Practice, 6th edn.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Leinberger, C. (2008). The Option of Urbanism: Investing in a New American Dream. Washington,
DC: Island Press.
Louv, R. (2008). Last Child in the Woods: Saving Our Children from Nature-Deficit Disorder. Chapel Hill,
NC: Algonquin Books.
Marsh, W.M. (2010). Landscape Planning: Environmental Applications. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley & Sons.
Masten, A.S. and Barnes, A.J. (2018). Resilience in children: development perspectives. Children. 5, 98: 1–16.
McHarg, I. (1969). Design with Nature. New York: Doubleday/Natural History Press.
Meerow, S., Newell, J.P., and Stults, M. (2016). Defining urban resilience: A review. Landscape and Urban
Planning. 147: 38–49.
Mileti, D. (1999). Disasters by Design: A Reassessment of Natural Hazards in the United States.Washington,
DC: Joseph Henry Press.
Miller, T.R., Chester, M., and Muñoz-Erickson, T. (2018). Infrastructure for a stormy future: A more
integrated and systemic approach is needed to ensure the nation’s resilience in the face of a changing
climate. Issues in Science and Technology. Winter: 47–58.
Moffat, S. and Kohler, N. (2008). Conceptualizing the built environment as a social-ecological system.
Building Research & Information. 36(3): 248–268.
New York City Parks (2017). Design and Planning for Flood Resiliency: Guidelines for NYC Parks.
New York: City of New York Parks and Recreation.
Nolan, J.R. (2016). Enhancing the urban environment through green infrastructure. Environmental Law
Reporter. 46: 10071–10086.
Nursey-Bray, M.J.,Vince, J., Scott, M., Haward, M., O’Toole, K., Smith,T., Harvey, N., and Clarke, B. (2014).
Science into policy? Discourse, coastal management and knowledge. Environmental Science & Policy.
38: 107–119.
Pyke, C., Warren, M.P., Johnson, T., LaGro, J., Scharfenberg, J., Groth, P., Freed, R., Schroeer, W., and Main,
E. (2011). Assessment of low impact development for managing stormwater with changing precipitation
due to climate change. Landscape and Urban Planning. 103: 166–173.
Ramaswami, A., Weible, C., Main, D., Heikkila, T., Siddiki, S., Duvall, A., Pattison, A., and Bernard, M.
(2012). A social-ecological-infrastructural systems framework for interdisciplinary study of sustainable
city systems. Journal of Industrial Ecology. 16(6): 801–813.
Reese, A. (2001). Stormwater paradigms. Stormwater Magazine, July–August. Santa Barbara, CA: Forester
Media, Inc.
Roy, S., Byrne, J., and Pickering, C. (2012). A systematic quantitative review of urban tree benefits, costs,
and assessment methods across cities in different climatic zones. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening.
11(4): 351–363.
80
Urban open space systems
Sallis, J.F., Spoon, C., Cavill, N., Engelberg, J.K., Gebel, K., Parker, M., Thornton, C.M., Lou, D., Wilson,
A.L., Cutter, C.L., and Ding, D. (2015). Co-benefits of designing communities for active living: an
exploration of literature. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity. 12: 30.
Schaffer, D. and Vollmer, D. (2010). Pathways to Urban Sustainability: Research and Development on Urban
Systems. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Schwab, J.C. (ed.) (2010). Hazard Mitigation: Integrating Best Practices into Planning. Planning Advisory
Service Report 560. Chicago, IL: American Planning Association.
Steiner, F. (2008). The Living Landscape: An Ecological Approach to Landscape Planning, 2nd edn.
Washington, DC: Island Press.
Tibbetts, J. (2005). Combined sewer systems: down, dirty, and out of date. Environmental Health Perspectives.
113(7): A464–467.
Uhlir, E.K. (2005). The Millennium Park effect. Economic Development Journal. 4(2): 7–11.
United Nations (2014). A World of Cities. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs.
Population Facts, No.2014/2.
United Nations (2017). New Urban Agenda. Habitat III: UN Conference on Housing and Sustainable
Urban Development.
Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation (2014).Vermont Green Infrastructure Strategic Plan
2014–2019. Montpelier,VT: Watershed Management Division, Agency of Natural Resources.
Weisshohn, P. (2019). Indexing the vulnerability of biotopes to landscape change. Ecological Indicators.
102: 316–327.
Whalen, P.J., Toth, L.A., Koebel, J.W., and Strayer, P.K. (2002). Kissimmee River restoration: a case study.
Water Science and Technology. 45(11): 55–62.
Wheeler, S.M. (2013). Planning for Sustainability: Creating Livable, Equitable, and Ecological Communities,
2nd edn. New York: Routledge.
White, G.F. (1945). Human Adjustments to Floods: A Geographical Approach to the Flood Problem in the
United States. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago.
Wilson, E.O. (2017). The Origins of Creativity. New York: Liveright Publishing Corporation.
Wisner, B., Blaikie, P., Cannon,T., and Davis, I. (2004). At Risk: National Hazards, People’s Vulnerability and
Disasters, 2nd edn. New York: Routledge.
Wolch, J.R., Byrne, J., and Newell, J.P. (2014). Urban green space, public health, and environmental justice: The
challenge of making cities “just green enough.” Landscape and Urban Planning. 125: 234–244.
Zhang, X. and Li, H. (2018). Urban resilience and urban sustainability: What we know and what do not
know? Cities. 72: 141–148.
Zou, L., Kent, J., Lam, N.S.N., Cai, H., Qiang, Y., and Li, K. (2016). Evaluating land subsidence rates and
their implications for land loss in the Lower Mississippi River Basin. Water. 8(1), 1–15.
81
Part II
Urban systems under stress
8
Climate justicescape and
implications for urban resilience
in American cities
Chingwen Cheng
Introduction
Climate Justicescape refers to spatial patterns of climate justice. Climate justice in the global con-
text has revealed disparity between contributors to climate change and victims of climate change
impacts (Schlosberg and Collins 2014). The inequitable negative impacts in vulnerable nations
can result in significant social impacts such as climate refugees from island nations as a result of
sea level rises.To put climate justice in local context, climate justice refers to disparities of vulner-
ability and adaptive capacity to cope with climate change. When communities have insufficient
coping capacity for the shocks and disturbances in the coupled natural and human systems, they
are likely to become more vulnerable to the adverse effects of uncertainty and extreme variation
under climate change and result in climate injustice (Cheng 2013; 2016).
Climate change is linked to increased intensity and frequency of extreme weather and
associated hazards such as heat waves, droughts, heavy downpours, floods, hurricanes, and winter
storms across the United States (IPCC 2014; Melillo et al. 2014). The aftermath of Hurricane
Katrina in 2005 was a wakeup call that revealed climate justice issues (Myers et al. 2008) when
hundreds of people were killed, thousands were strained in the shelters, and millions were
displaced –th emajority of them were considered socially vulnerable groups (e.g. the minorities,
the poor, the elderly, children) (Colten 2006). As population continues to grow in American
cities, more people are likely to be exposed to a range of extreme events and climate change
associated hazards. Some have argued that equity planning is overlooked in American cities
(Schrock et al. 2015), thus addressing climate justice should be a priority in urban resilience
planning.
Resilience refers to the capacity to absorb disturbance and retain the same functions of
a social-ecological system (Holling 1973; 2001). Urban resilience emphasizes the capacity to
move forward and the ability to transform cities into new development pathways in the face of
dynamic change (Folke 2016). Resilience theory is pertinent for studying the concept of vul-
nerability.Vulnerability reflects the dynamic phases in resilience and applies to multiple levels of
inter-linked social–ecological–technological systems (SETS) (Grimm et al. 2017; Cheng 2013).
An integrated SETS approach as a framework applied for vulnerability assessment to evaluate
climate justice is corresponding to three dimensions of vulnerability: exposure, sensitivity, and
85
Chingwen Cheng
adaptability (Polsky, Neff, and Yarnal 2007). Climate justice assessment in SETS framework
considers ecological vulnerability as climate change associated hazards to which communi-
ties are exposed. Social vulnerability includes demographic variables associated with sensitivity
and adaptive capacity to climate change impacts. Technological vulnerability is considered an
inverse of the adaptive capacity to cope with climate change impacts through interventions
in infrastructure design. The concept of SETS describes the interlinked complex systems and
interactions between social, ecological, and technological drivers, processes, and outcomes in the
real world (Grimm et al. 2017). Applying SETS framework in spatial planning allows a compre-
hensive understanding of intersections between the systems. The construct of climate justice is
underpinned by the complex SETS and only by intersecting those three dimensions spatially can
we start to reveal climate justicescape.
To build technological adaptive capacity, green infrastructure is considered as a “no-regret”
strategy for climate change adaptation (Casal-Campos et al. 2015). Green infrastructure, a system
with both natural and man-made open space that can provide multiple ecosystem services –pro-
visional, supporting, regulating, and cultural –benefits the health and wellbeing of communities
(Benedict and McMahon 2006; Demuzere et al. 2014), is considered one of the fundamental infra-
structure systems in cities. Just as transportation is important to provide a means of transporting
people, goods, and services essential to the functioning of cities, green infrastructure offers multiple
essential functions to sustain cities. For example, a healthy green infrastructure system provides
clean air, water, food, and shelter to sustain all living beings. In the context of enhancing urban
resilience, green infrastructure is particularly critical in regulating and mitigating climate change-
induced floods (e.g. Cheng et al. 2017). Lacking access to green infrastructure resources therefore
can be an indicator of infrastructure vulnerability in a community. As a result, green infrastructure
plays a vital role in addressing climate justice in communities. Past spatial assessment of vulnerability
based on the hazards-of-place (HOP) model (Cutter 1996) included a Social Vulnerability Index
(SoVI) and measures the biophysical vulnerability of a community based on its geographic context,
which is in consonance with the ecological vulnerability defined in this chapter. This paper aims
to fill the gap of knowledge in incorporating technological vulnerability assessment, in particularly
using green infrastructure as an indicator for assessing climate justicescape.
Methodology
Climate Justicescape was evaluated using the framework of integrated spatial social-ecological-
technological vulnerability assessment including the following procedures:
(1) The county is the unit of analysis for 48 states in this study. A total of 3,108 counties were
analyzed.
(2) Constructing a Social Vulnerability Index (SoVI). Social vulnerability indicators to climate
change associated hazards have been identified in decades of hazard and resilience studies
in American cities (e.g. Cutter et al. 2003; Cutter et al. 2013; Flanagan et al. 2011). A SoVI
was constructed following methods provided by Cutter et al. (2003) using statistical methods
applied to 15 variables that were standardized with z-scores and summed up the results
from principal component analysis using varimax rotation and Kaiser criterion for compo-
nent selection. Data sources are from 2010–2014 American Community Survey (US Census
Bureau 2010). Indicators included the percent of the population over 65 years, age below 17,
female, minority (non-white), education less than high school, living under the poverty level,
mobile homes, per capital income, civilian over age 16 that is unemployed, households with
no vehicle available, single parent household with children under age 18, and persons above
86
Climate justicescape
age five who speak English “less than well”. The SoVI was ranked from one to ten based on
each decile: one being the least and ten being the most vulnerable.
(3) Ecological vulnerability, which relates to climate change associated hazards was measured by
the total number of events of all hazard types associated with climate change (i.e. droughts,
floods, heavy precipitation, winter storms, tropical storms, extreme heat, extreme cold, and
wild fires), and the economic loss (as a proxy for the magnitudes and impacts of the hazards)
from 2005 to 2015.The data was provided by the National Weather Service.The costs of eco-
nomic losses were adjusted for inflation to the year 2015.The overall Ecological Vulnerability
Index was the average of the two variables that were ranked from one to ten; one being the
least and ten being the most vulnerable.
(4) Technological vulnerability refers to a lack of access to green infrastructure. It was measured
by the percent coverage of urban and water land covers. Land cover data was provided
through publicly accessible National Land Cover Database 2011 (NLCD 2011). There are
16 classes in NLCD and seven of them are urban, water, and barren land covers compared
to the vegetated land covers (i.e. forests, shrubs, wetlands, grasses, agriculture lands). Green
Infrastructure Vulnerability Index was constructed by the decile ranking of the percentage
deficiency of green infrastructure (urban and water land covers) in each county. Each index
was then ranked from one to ten based on each decile; one being the least and ten being the
most vulnerable.
(5) A Climate Justice Index was calculated by averaging rankings of the social, ecological, and
technological vulnerability indices above.
(6) Hot Spot Analysis (Getis-Ord Gi*) was used via Geographic Information System (GIS) spa-
tial analysis to identify statistically significant clusters of high rankings (Hot Spot) and low
rankings (Cold Spot) within a given spatial variable.
Results
87
Chingwen Cheng
Table 8.1 Results of principal component analysis with social vulnerability variables
Total 71.72
remaining years appeared to have relatively high total number counts of damages, yet the total
loss did not exceed $30 million annually. Therefore, it is imperative for Ecological Vulnerability
Index to take into account both the frequency and magnitude of hazards. Figure 8.4 illustrates
the results of the spatial analysis of Ecological Vulnerability Index showing clustered patterns of
high vulnerability in parts of the midwest and west, and almost the entire northeast.
88
Figure 8.1 Social Vulnerability Index (SoVI) for the continental United States illustrating decile ranking and HotSpot
spatial analysis of counties with high social vulnerability
Chingwen Cheng
Figure 8.2 Climate change associated hazards by types and frequency in the United States,
2005–2015
Figure 8.3 The number of total hazard events in the United States 2005–2015 and total eco-
nomic loss in 2015 million US dollars
deficiency of green infrastructure land covers. The hotspots of high technological vulnerability
areas are predominately in densely urbanized areas such as in the megaregion of the northeast,
the Great Lakes (e.g. Detroit, Chicago, Cleveland, Minneapolis) and Florida, as well as counties
around New Orleans in Louisiana, San Diego, Los Angeles, and San Francisco in California, Salt
Lake City in Utah, and in Atlanta, Georgia.
90
Climate justicescape
Discussion
(1) Gaps between urban and rural communities. As shown in Figure 8.6, not only large cities are
facing climate injustice but also small communities in rural areas of the United States. The
disparity of available resources for communities to build adaptive capacity can be a drastic
factor for socially vulnerable communities encountering disasters, while large cities tend to
have more access to resources for risk management and climate change adaptation.Therefore,
navigating the distribution of resources coupled with Climate Justicescape can particularly help
to find rural communities that are experiencing climate injustice and seek further research
for understanding their needs.
(2) Gaps between calculated and perceived risks. The empirical study in this project demonstrated
risks based on past events. In a pilot study conducted by Cheng et al. (2017) in Michigan’s
Huron River watershed, residents living in climate justice cities do not perceive to be more
vulnerable to future risks compared to residents living in non-climate justice areas. The
research indicated the potential threats in adaptive capacity building of urban resilience in
communities when the gaps exist in risk information communication derived from the
disparity between calculated and perceived risks. Further research can combine with risk
perception studies in climate justice hotspots. Moreover, climate change scenarios and popu-
lation change over time can be further studied to identify future Climate Justicescapes.
(3) Gaps in making climate justice accountable.The Rockefeller Foundation has funded 100 Resilience
Cities in the world. The political will and resources have made it possible for cities around the
world to put urban resilience and climate change adaptation as one of their top agendas in
planning.With great power comes great responsibility.While the resilient city officers and urban
planners have been charged to make policies for adapting to climate change, Hughes (2015) has
91
Figure 8.4 Ecological Vulnerability Index for the continental United States illustrating decile ranking and HotSpot spatial
analysis of counties with high ecological vulnerability
Figure 8.5 Technological Vulnerability Index for the continental United States illustrating in decile ranking and HotSpot
spatial analysis of counties with a lack of green infrastructure land covers
Figure 8.6 Climate Justice Index in decile raking and Climate Justicescape in American cities illustrating cities that are
within HotSpot of counties with high climate justice index
Climate justicescape
revealed that current adaptation policies in the United States have neglected building resilience
for vulnerable communities. Similarly, Schrock et al. (2015) found current municipal plans
in over 200 American cities have overlooked achieving equity goals. As more resources have
become available for building adaptive capacity for resilient cities, it is critical to make equity
and climate justice count. One of the goals in community and urban planning should therefore
be to address social vulnerability and inequitable capacity in coping with climate change.
(4) Gaps in making green infrastructure count for adaptive capacity. Green infrastructure has been iden-
tified as one critical strategy for climate change adaptation (Demuzere et al. 2014). Green
infrastructure, for example, has great potential to be implemented at various scales to enhance
adaptive capacity for mitigating climate change-induced flooding (Cheng et al. 2017). The
US Green Building Council conducted a review of 28 cities’ climate action plans in 2016
and found 75 per cent of the plans mentioned green infrastructure in various depths for
implementing climate change adaptation. As green infrastructure has been promoted as a
policy-making force in community development and urban planning, the question is how we
prioritize the investment in building green infrastructure systems that can ensure that they
meet the need to mitigate climate change-induced hazards while addressing climate justice.
Conclusion
Climate justice and green infrastructure has a place for understanding the need for building
adaptive capacity to achieve urban resilience in local communities. While large cities have more
resources to build urban resilience, there are considerable rural areas in the United States that
remain in high vulnerability to climate change and require more resources to manage and adapt.
Priority should therefore be given to communities that show high vulnerability and low adaptive
capacity. This study applied SETS vulnerability assessment framework for understanding the
spatial pattern of Climate Justicescape that can be employed for identifying gaps in urban resili-
ence planning and to help in prioritizing resources in investing in socially vulnerable commu-
nities and using green infrastructure for building adaptive capacity in achieving urban resilience.
Finally, urban resilience should enhance both biophysical and institutional capacity to ensure
equity planning and make climate justice central to climate action plans and planning policies in
order to enable vulnerable communities build resilience to climate change.
Acknowledgement
This work is primarily supported by the Seed Grant from the Herberger Institute for Design
and the Arts (HIDA) at Arizona State University (ASU) and partially supported by the National
Science Foundation (NSF) Sustainability Research Network (SRN) the Urban Water Innovation
Network (UWIN) (grant 1444758), and the NSF Urban Resilience to Extremes Sustainability
Research Network (grant 1444750). The author would like to thank research assistants Wan-
Hwa Cheng, Joomee Lee, and Lianzheng Mu for their contribution of data collection and pre-
liminary analysis to this work.
References
Benedict, M.A., and McMahon, E.T. (2006). Green Infrastructure: Linking Landscapes and Communities.
Washington, DC: Island Press.
Casal-Campos, A., Fu, G., Butler, D., and Moore, A. (2015). An integrated environmental assessment of green
and gray infrastructure strategies for robust decision making. Environmental Science & Technology.
49(14): 8307–14.
95
Chingwen Cheng
Cheng, C. (2013). Social Vulnerability, Green Infrastructure, Urbanization and Climate Change-induced
Flooding: A Risk Assessment for the Charles River Watershed, Massachusetts, USA. Open Access
Dissertations. https://scholarworks.umass.edu/open_access_dissertations/781/.
Cheng, C. (2016). Spatial climate justice and green infrastructure assessment: A case for the Huron River
watershed, Michigan, USA. GI_Forum. 1: 179–190.
Cheng, C., Ryan, R.L., Yang, E.Y.-C., Yu, Q., and Brabec, E. (2017). Assessing climate change-induced
flooding mitigation for adaptation in Boston’s Charles River Watershed. Landscape and Urban Planning.
167: 25–36. doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2017.05.019.
Colten, C.E. (2006). Vulnerability and place: Flat land and uneven risk in New Orleans. American
Anthropologist. 108(4): 731–734.
Cutter, S.L. (1996).Vulnerability to environmental hazards. Progress in Human Geography. 20(4), 529–539.
https://doi.org/10.1177/030913259602000407.
Cutter, S.L., Boruff, B.J., and Shirley, W.L. (2003). Social vulnerability to environmental hazards. Social
Science Quarterly. 84(2): 242–261.
Cutter, S.L., Emrich, C.T., Morath, D.P., and Dunning, C.M. (2013). Integrating social vulnerability into
federal flood risk management planning. Journal of Flood Risk Management. 6(4): 332–344.
Demuzere, M., Orru, K., Heidrich, O., Olazabal, E., Geneletti, D., Orru, H., Bhave, A.G., Mittal, N., Feliue,
E., and Faehnle, M. (2014). Mitigating and adapting to climate change: Multi-functional and multiscale
assessment of green urban infrastructure. Journal of Environmental Management. 146: 107–115. doi.
org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2014.07.025.
Flanagan, B.E., Gregory, E.W., Hallisey, E.J., Heitgerd, J.L., and Lewis, B. (2011). A social vulnerability index
for disaster management. Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management. 8(1).
Folke, C. (2016). Resilience (Republished). Ecology and Society. 21(4): 44. doi.org/ 10.5751/
ES-09088-210444.
Grimm, N.B., Pickett, S.T.A., Hale, R.L., and Cadenasso, M.L. (2017). Does the ecological concept of
disturbance have utility in urban social– ecological– technological systems? Ecosystem Health and
Sustainability. 3(1): E01255. doi.org/10.1002/ehs2.1255.
Holling, C.S. (1973). Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annual Review of Ecology and
Systematics. 4:1–23
Hughes, S. (2015). A meta-analysis of urban climate change adaptation planning in the US Urban Climate.
14: 17–29. doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2015.06.003.
IPCC (2014). Summary for policymakers. In: C.B. Field, V.R. Barros, D.J. Dokken, K.J. Mach, M.D.
Mastrandrea, T.E. Bilir, M. Chatterjee, K.L. Ebi, Y.O. Estrada, R.C. Genova, B. Girma, E.S. Kissel,
A.N. Levy, S. MacCracken, P.R. Mastrandrea, and L.L. White (eds.): Climate Change 2014: Impacts,
Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to
the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Cambridge,
United Kingdom, and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1–32.
Melillo, J.M., Richmond, T.C., and Yohe, G.W. (eds.) (2014). Climate Change Impacts in the United
States: The Third National Climate Assessment. US Global Change Research Program, 841 pp.
doi:10.7930/J0Z31WJ2.
Myers, C.A., Slack, T., and Singelmann, J. (2008). Social vulnerability and migration in the wake of dis-
aster: The case of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. Population and Environment. 29(6): 271–291.
NLCD 2011 Land Cover (2011 Edition, amended 2014) -National Geospatial Data Asset (NGDA) Land
Use Land Cover. www.mrlc.gov.
Polsky, C.D., Neff, R., andYarnal, B. (2007). Building comparable global change vulnerability assessments: The
vulnerability scoping diagram. Global Environmental Change. 17(3), 472–485.
Schlosberg D. and Collins L.B. (2014). From environmental to climate justice: Climate change and the dis-
course of environmental justice. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change. 5: 359–374.
Schrock, G., Bassett, E.M., and Green, J. (2015). Pursuing equity and justice in a changing climate: Assessing
equity in local climate and sustainability plans in u.s. cities. Journal of Planning Education and Research.
35(3), 282–295. doi: 10.1177/0739456x15580022.
US Census Bureau (2010). 2010–2014 American Community Survey 5-year estimates. www.census.gov/
programs-surveys/acs/technical-documentation/table-and-geography-changes/2014/5-year.html/
96
9
Assessing urban vulnerability
to extreme heat-related
weather events
Sanglim Yoo
97
Figure 9.1 Typical urban heat island effects in a US city by day and night
Credit: US EPA 2017
Figure 9.2 Area of contiguous 48 states with unusually hot summer temperatures, 1910–2015
Credit: US EPA 2016
Extreme heat-related weather events
night lows has increased at an even faster rate. For urban residents, the UHI effect further
exacerbates the heat stress caused by heat waves. The interaction of rising temperatures, more
heat waves, and the heat island effect will be increasingly harmful to people’s health and to the
air and water quality in our communities. Exposure to extreme heat can overwhelm a person’s
ability to thermoregulate and lead to physiologic heat stress, heat-related illness or even death
(Luber et al. 2006).
Despite their severity, heat waves and heat-related weather events get less public attention
than other natural disasters, such as hurricanes, tornados, wildfires, or earthquakes, because
the former fail to generate property damage and “media perfect” scenes of destruction that
the latter typically leave behind. The truth is, the total number of deaths by heat waves has
outnumbered other disaster mortality (see Figure 9.3). That is the reason heat waves are com-
monly known as “the silent killer” (Goering 2017; NOAA 2014). Figure 9.3 shows annual dis-
aster mortality in the United States between 1999 and 2012 for earthquakes, tornados, floods,
and heat waves. Surprisingly, more people died in heat waves than in all other extreme weather
events combined. Tornadoes or hurricanes may get all the attention from media, but the data
indicate that heat is the number one weather-related killer in the United States. Unfortunately,
deadly heat waves are going to be a much bigger problem in the coming decades, becoming
more frequent and occurring over a greater portion of the planet due to climate change
(Miller 2018).
99
Sanglim Yoo
100
Extreme heat-related weather events
vulnerability is the result of both social inequality and place inequality (Cutter et al. 2003), and
these two aspects of the social vulnerability should be addressed simultaneously.
However, disaster management often ignores the social vulnerability component, only
focusing on the physical hazard component (Flanagan et al. 2011). This is mainly due to the
difficulty in quantifying the social vulnerabilities, which also explains why social losses are gen-
erally absent in after-disaster assessment (Cutter et al. 2003). Against this backdrop, the hazard-
of-place model of vulnerability, first introduced by Cutter (1996), was developed to examine the
components of social vulnerability.
In the above conceptualization of hazard and place, risk interacts with mitigation to produce
the hazard potential (Cutter 1996; Cutter et al. 2000; Cutter et al. 2003). Risk stands for an
objective measure of the likelihood of a hazard event, and mitigation means an effort to lessen
risks or reduce their impacts (Cutter et al. 2003). As Klinenberg (2002) describes in his book, the
hazard potential is either weakened or enhanced by the geographic filter of the place as well as
its social fabric. Essential components of biophysical vulnerability include the identification of
potential hazards, their frequency, and their location impacts. Biophysical vulnerability is largely
dependent upon the characteristics of the environmental and natural systems, while social vul-
nerability to disaster or hazard is generally dependent upon the following social factors (Cutter
1996; Cutter et al. 2000; Cutter et al. 2003; Lundgren and Jonsson 2012):
Then, as in Figure 9.4, social and biophysical vulnerability interact to produce the overall place
vulnerability. Place vulnerability has a feedback loop to the initial risk and mitigation inputs,
Geographic
Risk Context
■ Elevation Biophysical
■ Proximity Vulnerability
Hazard Place
Potential Vulnerability
Social
Fabric Social
■ Experience Vulnerability
Mitigation
■ Perception
■ Built environ-
ment
101
Sanglim Yoo
allowing for the enhancement or reduction of both risk and mitigation, which in turn would
lead to increased or decreased vulnerability (Cutter et al. 2000). This study focuses on the social
vulnerability to heat-related weather events and its various social components.
As interest in social vulnerability to hazards grows, more indices have been formulated for
identifying and mapping population groups that may experience differential consequences from
natural hazards. Here I introduce two popular methods for social vulnerability mapping: (1)
The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Agency for Toxic Substances and
Disease Registry (ATSDR)’s Social Vulnerability Index (ATSDR SVI), and (2) The Hazards &
Vulnerability Research Institute at the University of South Carolina’s Social Vulnerability Index
(SoVI). Both models aim to locate the most socially vulnerable communities by using public data
from the US Census to represent various aspects of social vulnerability.Then I discuss studies that
have investigated social vulnerability to heat-related weather events, including those by Wilhelmi
and Heyden (2010) and Reid et al. (2009), among others. The former provided an extreme heat
vulnerability framework to explain the components of extreme heat vulnerability and adaptation
at both individual and community levels, and the latter is one of the earliest studies that mapped
the heat vulnerability of all US urban areas.
102
Extreme heat-related weather events
census tract as well as each county is calculated as the sum of the domain percentile rankings to
construct the final SVI. This method allows the user to interpret the scores easily. For example, a
census tract that has a ranking of .135 (or 13.5 per cent) is more socially vulnerable than one that
is ranked 13.5 per cent. This model uses hierarchical design as the researchers grouped variables
by social vulnerability themes, as opposed to SoVI, which grouped variables based on principal
components analysis (Tate 2012).
103
Sanglim Yoo
Figure 9.5 ATSDR SVI 2016, showing overall vulnerability of the United States
Source: Data retrieved from ATSDR. Map drawn by the author in ArcGIS
understand the social burdens of risk. It represents the pre-existing conditions that drive social
vulnerability to hazards irrespective of the hazards themselves (Cutter and Emrich 2017).
The purpose of SoVI is to quantify social vulnerability to environmental hazards in the
United States.When mapped, the results show an uneven capacity for disaster risk reduction and
pinpoint areas where policy and resources for disaster risk management would be most useful
(Hazards & Vulnerability Research Institute 2013). The SoVI is used for assessing differences
across the United States in overall capacity of communities to prepare for, respond to, and recover
from hazards (Cutter and Emrich 2017). A major strength of SoVI is in its comparative nature,
which helps determine where resources and social programs might be used more effectively to
reduce vulnerability prior to an event. It has been published since 2000, and the most current
version is SoVI 2010–14 utilizing the US Census’ Five-Year American Community Survey,
2010–2014.
The SoVI 2010– 14 uses variables at the county level from the US Census’ American
Community Survey. The variables are proxies for characteristics known to influence hazards
vulnerability based on the research evidence over the past 60 years and include socio-economic
status, gender, race and ethnicity, age, special needs populations, education, occupation, and
more (Cutter and Emrich 2017). The input data are normalized using percentages, per capita,
or density (per square mile) function, then the standardized variables are analyzed using the
principal components analysis (PCA). The PCA is a mathematical procedure that transforms a
104
Extreme heat-related weather events
Table 9.2 Summary of US Census tract level variables used to construct SoVI 2010–20141
number of possibly correlated variables into a smaller number of uncorrelated variables called
principal components or factors (NIST/SEMATECH 2012). For the United States as a whole,
these seven factors explain 71 per cent of the variation in the data. For each state at the census
tract level, the amount of variation explained ranged from a low of 66.8 per cent (in South
Carolina with six factors) to 79.6 per cent (in the District of Columbia with seven factors)
(Cutter and Emrich 2017).
The components and their directional adjustments are placed into an additive model to
compute the overall SoVI score. The final SoVI score for the factors presented in Table 9.2 is
calculated based on the following equation:
SoVI= Factor 1 –Factor 2 + Factor 3 + Factor 4 + Factor 5 + Factor 6 + Factor 7 Eq. (3)
Each factor is weighted equally as there is no theoretical basis for determining weights. Factor
2, which is wealth, has negative value as it is the only factor that negatively contributes to the
105
Sanglim Yoo
Figure 9.6 Social Vulnerability Index (SoVI) 2010–2014 for South Carolina census tract
Source: Data retrieved from Hazards & Vulnerability Research Institute, map drawn by the author
overall social vulnerability. The final SoVI scores are mapped based on standard deviations from
the mean and illustrated in Figure 9.6 and Figure 9.7.
106
Extreme heat-related weather events
Figure 9.7 Social Vulnerability Index (SoVI) 2010–2014 for South Carolina counties
Source: HVRI n.d.
In Figure 9.8,Wilhelmi and Heyden (2010) define the vulnerability of the system as a function
of three interactive components: exposure (i.e. climate and synoptic weather conditions that
are exacerbated by the reflective, storage, and transportation characteristics of urban materials
and vegetation), sensitivity (i.e. the extent to which a system or population can absorb impacts
107
External Adaptation/
Extreme Heat Vulnerability
Drivers Response
without suffering long-term harm), and adaptive capacity (the potential of a system or popu-
lation to modify its features and behavior so as to better cope with existing and anticipated
stresses). Each component consists of a set of dynamic, spatially variable indicators, which in
turn are affected by external drivers, such as climate change, macro-scale socio-economic and
environmental stressors, and urbanization trajectories (Wilhelmi and Heyden 2010). Differences
in exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity will create more or less vulnerable population
segments (Wilhelmi and Heyden 2010). According to their framework, the exposure compo-
nent builds on quantitative data from models or measurements and the sensitivity on quantitative
aggregated demographic data, but the adaptive capacity is studied using quantitative data from
household-level interviews in addition to surveys. Their extreme heat vulnerability framework
provides a step toward including drivers of vulnerability at multiple scales, connecting people
and place-based vulnerability assessment approaches and enhancing the ability of communities
and stakeholders to develop proactive programs to mitigate risk and respond effectively to heat
emergencies.
Reid et al. (2009) map vulnerability to extreme heat in the urban areas of the United States
using tract-level census data to create a cumulative heat vulnerability index for intervention
and further research. They argue that while understanding vulnerability to heat at an indi-
vidual biomedical level (e.g. a person’s pre-existing health conditions) is important, community-
level factors (e.g. median household income of a census tract) are equally important because
understanding how factors beyond the individual level contribute to differing levels of risk may
help in finding preventive solutions. As extreme heat events are geographically heterogeneous
throughout the United States, published literature on mapping heat vulnerability has mostly
focused on smaller geographic areas such as a city or a county. The work of Reid et al. (2009) is
one of the pioneering studies that expands heat vulnerability mapping to a national scope using
variables identified as significant in public health and epidemiologic literature proven to increase
heat-related vulnerability in urban areas.
Applying similar methodologies used to map social vulnerability to environmental hazard
by Cutter et al. (2003), Reid et al. (2009) also used the PCA approach to analyze variables for
inclusion in the final heat vulnerability index and selected four factors indicating social/envir-
onmental vulnerability: social isolation, prevalence of no air conditioning, proportion of elderly
residents, and numbers of people with diabetes. Of the vulnerability factors in Table 9.3, Factor
3, the prevalence of no air conditioning shows the most national spatial variability, and regions
with highest air conditioning prevalence show some of the lowest heat vulnerability values
(Reid et al. 2009). They argue that efforts should be made to create incentives for people to use
air conditioning during a heat wave because the economic costs of air conditioning deter even
some of those who have some kind of air conditioning system in their homes from turning it on
during a heat wave (Sheridan 2007). Promoting the use of air conditioning during the heat wave
should be done with caution, however, as its use will eventually intensify the UHIs because this
will increase the energy use to generate electricity and heat from the outdoor AC unit will act
as a major contributor of UHIs. This kind of solution should be implemented with caution and
cannot be used as a sole heat wave adaptation strategy. Other than that, modification of the built
environment, such as increasing urban green spaces by planting more trees and natural vegetation
(a part of Factor 1, see Table 9.3), can reduce heat exposure and accumulation in a more sustain-
able manner (Reid et al. 2009).
The final heat vulnerability index was calculated by cumulatively adding all of the factors.
A national map of heat vulnerability by Reid et al. (2009) shows the location of hot spots of
heat vulnerability through the entire United States (see Figure 9.9). Note that heat vulnerability
109
Sanglim Yoo
varies nationally and is concentrated in central city areas. From their heat vulnerability map, a
nationally varying pattern of heat vulnerability and its concentration in the urban areas, espe-
cially in central city areas, can be observed. Regardless of access to air conditioning, downtowns
of metropolitan areas are always more vulnerable than areas farther from the city center or
110
Extreme heat-related weather events
outside it (Reid et al 2009).This finding confirms that the UHIs is one of the major contributors
to urban heat vulnerability and also shows why attention needs to be paid primarily to urban
areas and their socially vulnerable groups of people at the time of heat-related weather extreme.
As heat warning systems and interventions are often implemented at the municipal or local
levels, identifying these regions within cities is essential.
Due to the spatiotemporally heterogeneous nature of heat, a within-city analysis of heat
vulnerability assessment may offer more information about local heat vulnerability than the
national map, although urban planners and public health professionals would still need to observe
common trends for the entire United States to prepare climate change adaptation and heat miti-
gation plans for their communities.
111
+ Mitigation
–
Antecedent Conditions Post-Event
High
No
Hazard
s
Event or Absorptive
Bu
- Characteristic Coping Disaster Capacity Degree
ilt
+ +
tem
- Immediate – Responses Impact Exceeded? of
ys
En
Inherent effects
S
Recovery
vir
Vulnerability Yes
ial
on
c
Yes Adaptive
So
me
Inherent
nt
Resilience
Resilience?
- Improvisation
Low
- Social Learning
Natural Systems
No
Short-Term Long-Term
+ Preparedness
–
Figure 9.10 Schematic representation of the disaster resilience of place (DROP) model
Source: Figure illustrated by the author, based on Cutter et al. (2008)
Extreme heat-related weather events
(Cutter et al. 2008). The authors state that antecedent conditions interact with the hazard event
characteristics to produce immediate effects. Then the immediate effects are lessened or ampli-
fied by the presence or absence of mitigating actions and coping responses in the community,
the members of which are themselves a function of antecedent conditions. Therefore, the total
hazard or disaster impact is presented as a cumulative effect of the antecedent conditions, event
characteristics, and coping responses.
The DROP model sees the degree of recovery as a continuum ranging from high to low. If
a community’s absorptive capacity is not exceeded, higher rates of recovery are reached quickly.
If the absorptive capacity is exceeded, and the adaptive resilience process does not occur, a lower
degree of recovery may result. This is illustrated in the diagram with the “no” arrow following
adaptive resilience. However, if the absorptive capacity is exceeded and the adaptive resilience
process does occur, the community may be more likely to achieve a higher degree of recovery.
Regardless, overall recovery is an ongoing process and can continue until the next event. Both
the degree of recovery and the potential knowledge gained from the adaptive resilience process
influence the state of the social, natural, and built environment systems and the resultant ante-
cedent conditions for the next event.
(1) Risks can be lowered by identifying their different types and levels and developing strat-
egies to deal with them accordingly. Vulnerability index tools and their individual variables
discussed above can be utilized for risk identification and risk management strategy develop-
ment. For example, FEMA is using Hazards & Vulnerability Research Institute’s SoVI as one
of its sources for constructing the national risk index for 18 natural hazards by calculating
standardized risk values for every US Census tract. Public employees, local officials, commu-
nity planners, research institutions, insurance companies, and individual property owners are
able to use it to develop risk management and mitigation plans.
(2) Risk management also requires multiple collaborators and stakeholders. For example,
after the city of Chicago’s 1995 deadly heat wave, the city created the Chicago Office of
Emergency Management & Communications (OEMC), a collaborative program integrating
all city departments with public utilities and the National Weather Service as partners.
Though created in 1995, OEMC became the city’s one-stop shop for emergency response
after the 9/11 bombings.
(3) Heat waves, together with other environmental hazards, are local phenomenon. Even though
heat vulnerabilities can be addressed at the national level by standardized criteria, such as
CDC’s SVI and SoVI, communities are unevenly affected by hazards since they vary in size,
antecedent conditions, and the levels of hazards to which they are exposed. Thus a one-size-
fits-all strategy that does not consider the uniqueness and complexities of a community’s bio-
physical and socio-economic structure cannot be effective (Cutter et al. 2013). For example,
frequent rains in the midwestern United States allow for tree planting and increasing green
113
Sanglim Yoo
spaces to reduce the UHIs and lessen the thermal stress of the area. However, the same miti-
gation plan in a desert area will require more economic cost and efforts.
(4) Resilience has many different sides, such as ecosystem, environmental, economic, institu-
tional, and social resilience. There have been many efforts to measure a community’s resili-
ence (e.g. Cutter et al. 2010; Sherrieb et al. 2009), but there is no consensus regarding the
resilience measures, variables, or items. Some common core elements include critical infra-
structure performance after disasters, social factors that influence the capacity to recover,
the ability of structures to withstand the impact from disasters as related directly to building
codes and their enforcement, the ability of businesses and markets to recover, and caring for
a special needs population in times of crisis (Cutter et al. 2013).
(5) To enhance disaster resilience, individuals, communities, neighborhoods, the private sector,
and government at all levels need to make coordinated efforts with shared responsibility
(Cutter et al 2013). Only then, can resilienc lead to sustainability.
Notes
1 Modified from Cutter and Emrich (2017).
2 Modified from Reid et al.(2009)
References
Agency for Toxic Substances & Disease Registry (2018). The Social Vulnerability Index. https://svi.cdc.
gov/.
Arnfield, A.J. (2003). Two decades of urban climate research: a review of turbulence, exchanges of energy
and water, and the urban heat island. International Journal of Climatology. 23(1): 1–26 DOI: 10.1002/
joc.859.
Cutter, S.L. (2013). Building disaster resilience: Step toward sustainability. Challenges in Sustainability.
1(2): 72–79. DOI: 10.12924/cis2013.01020072.
Cutter, S.L., Barnes, L., Berry, M., Burton, C., Evans, E., Tate, E., and Webb, J. (2008). A place-based model
for understanding community resilience to natural disasters. Global Environmental Change. 18: 598–
606. DOI: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2008.07.013.
Cutter, S.L., Boruff, B.J., and Shirley, W.L. (2003). Social vulnerability to environmental hazards. Social
Science Quarterly. 84(2): 242–261. DOI: 10.1111/1540–6237.8402002.
Cutter, S.L., Burton, C.G., and Emrich, C.T. (2010). Disaster resilience indicators for benchmarking baseline
conditions. Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management. 7(1): 1–22. DOI: 10.2202/
1547–7355.1732.
Cutter, S.L. and Emrich, C.T. (2017). Social Vulnerability Index (SoVI): Methodology and Limitations.
https://data.femadata.com/FIMA/Documentation/Social%20Vulnerability%20-%20SoVI/Social%20
Vulnerability%20Index%20Primer.pdf.
Cutter, S.L., Mitchell, J.T., and Scott, M.S. (2000). Revealing the vulnerability of people and places: a case
study of Georgetown County, South Carolina. Annals of the Association of American Geographers.
90(4): 713–737. DOI: 10.1111/0004-5608.00219.
Dwyer, A., Zoppou, C., Nielsen, O., Day, S., and Roberts, S. (2004). Quantifying social vulnerability: A
methodology for identifying those at risk to natural hazards. Geoscience Australia Record.
Flanagan, B.F., Gregory, E.W., Hallisey, E.J., Heitgerd, J.L., and Lewis, B. (2011). A social vulnerability index
for disaster management. Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management. 8(1): 1–22.
DOI: 10.2202/1547–7355.1792.
Gallopín, G.C. (2006). Linkages between vulnerability, resilience, and adaptive capacity. Global
Environmental Change. 16(3): 293–303. DOI:10.1016/J.GLOENVCHA.2006.02.004.
Goering, L. (2017). Feature: Silent killer: Sweltering planet braces for deadly heat shocks. www.reuters.com/
article/us-singapore-landrights-farming-feature/with-farms-atop-malls-singapore-gets-serious-about-food-
security-idUSKCN1P202A.
114
Extreme heat-related weather events
Habeeb, D., Vargo, J., and Stone, Jr. B. (2015). Rising heat wave trends in large US cities. Natural Hazards.
76(3): 1651–1665. DOI: 10.1007/s11069-014-1563-z.
Hamilton, B. and Erickson, C.L. (2012). Urban heat islands and social work: opportunities for intervention.
Advances in Social Work. 13(2): 420–30.
Hart, M.A. and Sailor, D.J. (2009). Quantifying the influence of land-use and surface characteristics on
spatial variability in the urban heat island. Theoretical and Applied Climatology. 95 (3): 397–406.
DOI: 10.1007/s00704-008-0017-5.
Hausefather, Z. (2018). State of the climate: Warm starts to 2018 despite La Niña event leading to a rela-
tively cooler start to the year, compared to recent record warmth. Carbon Brief. www.carbonbrief.org/
state-of-the-climate-warm-start-to-2018-despite-la-nina-conditions.
Hazards & Vulnerability Research Institute (2013). http://artsandsciences.sc.edu/geog/hvri/front-page.
Huang, G., Zhou,W., and Cadenasso, M.L. (2011). Is everyone hot in the city? Spatial pattern of land surface
temperatures, land cover and neighborhood socioeconomic characteristics in Baltimore, MD. Journal of
Environmental Management. 92: 1753–1759. DOI: 10.1016/j/jenvman.2011.02.006.
Johnson, D.P. and Wilson, J.S. (2009). The socio- spatial dynamics of extreme urban heat events: the
case of heat- related deaths in Philadelphia. Applied Geography. 29(3): 419– 34. DOI: 10.1016/
j.apgeog.2008.11.004.
Klinenberg, E. (2002). Heat Wave: A Social Autopsy of Disaster in Chicago. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
Krieger, N. (2006). A century of census tracts: Health and the body politic (1906–2006). Journal of Urban
Health. 83(3): 355–361. DOI: 10.1007/s11524-006-9040-y.
Luber, G., Sanchez, C., and Conklin, L. (2006). Heat-related deaths –United States, 1999–2003. Morbidity
and Mortality Weekly Report. 55(29):796–798.
Lundgren, L. and Jonsson, A. (2012). Assessment of Social Vulnerability: A Literature Review of Vulnerability
Related to Climate Change and Natural Hazards. CSPR Briefing. Norrköping: Linköping University.
Miller, B. (2018). Deadly heat waves becoming more common due to climate change. https://edition.cnn.
com/2017/06/19/world/killer-heat-waves-r ising/index.html.
NIST/SEMATECH e-Handbook of Statistical Methods. (2012). www.itl.nist.gov/div898/handbook/.
NOAA (2014). Excessive heat, a “silent killer”: Heat exhaustion or heatstroke? Know the signs of heat
illness. www.noaa.gov/stories/excessive-heat-silent-killer.
Oke,T.R. (1982).The energetic basis of the urban heat island. Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological
Society. 108(455): 1–24. DOI: 10.1002/qj.49710845502.
Oke. T.R. (1987). Boundary Layer Climates. New York: Routledge.
Oke, T.R. (1997). Urban climates and global environmental change. In: R.D. Thompson and A. Perry
(eds.): Applied Climatology: Principles & Practices. New York: Routledge, 273–287.
Reid, C.E., O’Neill, M.S., Gronlund, C.J., Brines, S.J., Brown, D.G., and Diez-Roux, A.V. (2009). Mapping
community determinants of heat vulnerability. Environmental Health Perspectives. 117(11): 1730–1736.
DOI: 10.1289/ehp.0900683.
Sheridan, S.D. (2007). A survey of public perception and response to heat warnings across four North
American cities: An evaluation of municipal effectiveness. International Journal of Biometeorology.
52(1): 3–15. DOI: 10.1007/s00484-006-0052-9.
Sherrieb, K., Norris, F., and Galea, S. (2009). Measuring capacities for community resilience. Social Indicators
Research. 99(2): 227–247. DOI: 10.1007/s11205-010-9576-9.
Shim, J.H. and Kim, C. (2015). Measuring resilience to natural hazards: towards sustainable hazard mitiga-
tion. Sustainability. 7: 14153–14185. DOI:10.3390/su71014153.
Stone, B., Vargo, J., and Habeeb, D. (2012). Managing climate change in cities: Will climate action plans
work? Landscape and Urban Planning. 107 (3): 263–271. DOI: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2012.05.014.
SVI 2016 Documentation, ATSDR –The Social Vulnerability Index. (2018). https:// svi.cdc.gov/
Documents/Data/2016_SVI_Data/SVI2016Documentation.pdf.
Tate, E. (2012). Social vulnerability indices: A comparative assessment using uncertainty and sensitivity ana-
lysis. Natural Hazards. 63(2): 325–347. DOI: 10.1007/s11069-012-0152-2.
US Census Bureau (2015). US cities are home to 62.7 percent of the US population, but comprise just
3.5 percent of land area. www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2015/cb15-33.html.
US Census Bureau (2016). Annual estimate of the resident population 2010–2016. American Community
Survey 5 – year estimates. https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.
xhtml?src=bkmk.
115
Sanglim Yoo
US Environmental Protection Agency (2017). Learn about heat islands. www.epa.gov/ heat-islands/
learn-about-heat-islands.
US Environmental Protection Agency (2016). Climate Change Indicators in the United States, 2016, 4th
edn. www.epa.gov/climate-indicators.
US Environmental Protection Agency (2008). Reducing urban heat islands: Compendium of strategies.
Draft. www.epa.gov/heat-islands/heat-island-compendium.
Wilhelmi, O.V. and Hayden, M.H. (2010). Connecting people and place: a new framework for reducing
urban vulnerability to extreme heat. Environmental Research Letters. 5: 1–7. DOI:10.1088/1748–
9326/5/1/014021.
116
10
Critical infrastructure
and climate change
Suwan Shen
Introduction
Networked urban infrastructure systems are the backbone of society and the economy. The
day-to-day operations of society and responses to emergency situations all depend on urban infra-
structure systems such as the power grid, transportation networks, telecommunication systems,
water distribution networks, and wastewater treatment facilities.The US federal government (US
White House Office 2003) identified a variety of critical infrastructure sectors that are vital for
national security, including but not limited to electrical power grids, transportation, water supply
systems, telecommunication, emergency services, gas and oil storage, banking and finance, and
government. However, past extreme weather events like Hurricane Katrina demonstrated how
vulnerable these critical infrastructures can be to climatic hazards, which are projected to increase
in both intensity and frequency with climate change. The consequences of such vulnerability
would be of particular concern in relatively restricted urban areas where 80.7 per cent of the US
population and 54.8 per cent of the world population lives (Revi et al. 2014; US Census Bureau
2010;World Bank 2018).Therefore, understanding the vulnerability of network infrastructure and
its relevance to urban resilience is indispensable in the face of climate change.
This chapter explores the factors contributing to critical infrastructure’s vulnerability and
potential adaptability to climate change in the broad context of urban resilience. It begins with
a review of climate change impacts on urban infrastructure sectors, followed by a summary of
the physical, social, and institutional factors that contribute to infrastructure vulnerability. Then
the relationship between critical infrastructure vulnerability and urban resilience is examined.
Finally, it discusses the potential and limitations of the current infrastructure transformation
trend towards climate resilience.
117
Suwan Shen
of sea level rise, increased temperatures, storm surges, flooding, and precipitation on transpor-
tation based on empirical literature. Ruth et al. (2007) investigated the possible future needs
for water infrastructure in Hamilton, New Zealand given a range of climate and population
projections. Taking advantage of extensive data provided by recent continuous monitoring of
the wastewater system, Langeveld et al. (2013) looked into the impacts of climate change on
wastewater system and identified weak components through the case of Eindhoven wastewater
system in the Netherlands. Rübbelke and Vogele (2011) revealed how electricity exchanges
between countries in Europe are threatened by the more frequent drought and heat-wave
occurrence due to climate change.
At the global level, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fifth Assessment Report
(2014) assessed the exposure and sensitivity of water supply, wastewater, sanitation, energy supply,
transportation, telecommunication, built environment, green infrastructure, and health services
to climate stressors in urban areas. In the United States, the Third National Climate Assessment
(2014) affirms that urban infrastructures such as roads, rail lines, airport, buildings, energy and
identified water supply are damaged by sea level rise, heavy downpours, and extreme heat. At the
regional and city scale, among a number of in-depth assessments conducted, the US Gulf Coast
Study (Savonis et al. 2007) and Kirshen et al. (2008) are noteworthy as providing an overview of
possible direct and cascading impacts across urban infrastructure sectors in the Gulf Coast and
Boston region. Besides, cities such as London, New York, Seattle, Shanghai, Mumbai, Mexico
City, Tokyo, and others have conducted similar studies (Willbanks et al. 2007). Hunt and Watkiss
(2011) reviewed the state of the art in quantification and evaluation of climate impacts at the
city-scale, including city-specific built infrastructures.
According to the literature, climate change could have varying degrees of impacts on urban
critical infrastructure through urban temperature variation, sea level rise, storm surge, coastal
flooding, drought, and inland flooding caused by changes in precipitation patterns. Although
climate impacts would differ by location, there are similarities in the types of impacts for urban
areas in coastal regions, which experience the disproportionately rapid expansion of urban
growth. Table 10.1 gives an example of the type of impacts climate stressors could have on crit-
ical urban infrastructures in coastal cities.
Considering infrastructure systems are physically clustered and functionally integrated in
urban areas, the impacts of climate change could be magnified due to the interdependencies
and cascading effects between critical infrastructure systems. Among the growing literature with
respects to infrastructure interdependency, Kröger (2008) carried out an initial assessment of the
inter-and intra-dependence of electricity, gas supply, rail transport, communication, and urban
water infrastructures (i.e. water supply and wastewater treatment).Wilbanks and Fernandez (2014)
summarized the current knowledge on the importance and dependencies of electric power, nat-
ural gas, petroleum, communication, water distribution, transportation, and public health and sani-
tation infrastructures. Kirshen et al. (2008) presented the potential interactions between energy,
health, transportation, water supply, and water treatment infrastructures with the projected tem-
perature variation, changing rainfall pattern, increased river, sea level rise, and coastal flooding.
Their findings are encapsulated in the interdependency heatmap below (Figure 10.1).
118
Table 10.1 Potential impacts of climate change on critical urban infrastructures in coastal regions
Energy reduce the efficiency disrupt electricity water scarcity affects disrupt electricity
of water cooling distribution hydropower distribution
for large electricity systems due to supplies, increase systems
generation, an increase of competition
changes in storms between
hydropower and hydropower and
wind power, drinking water
changes in supply
demand for energy
consumption such
as cooling
Transportation increase the road disrupt flooded impact inland disrupt flooded
maintenance cost, transport water transport transport
reduce the comfort networks networks networks
in walking/cycling, including including
may increase the highway, rail, highway, rail,
number of auto airport, and airport, and
trips port; trip port; trip
delay and delay and
cancellation; cancellation;
disrupt the disrupts the
transport of transport of
energy and energy and
necessity supply necessity
supply; increase
incident rate
in extreme
weathers
Water impact residential increased salinity decrease water more non-
water demand, intrusion supply point source
increase in water pollution,
temperature reduce water
quality
Sewer and impact domestic corrosion due less rainwater in increase overflow
stormwater wastewater to saltwater combined sewer spills for
production intrusion, systems in drier combined
inundation of seasons sewer systems,
pump stations, increase burden
groundwater on stormwater
inundation of infrastructure
pipelines, more
septic tanks in
low-lying area
at risk
(continued)
Suwan Shen
Source: Adapted from Wilbanks and Fernandez (2014), National Research Council (US) Committee on Climate Change
and US Transportation (2008), University of Hawai’i see page 129 at Mänoa Sea Grant College Program (2014), Kirshen
et al. (2008)
Overall Criticality
Infrastructure Disrupted
Energy
Transportation
Water
Communication
Sewer and
Energy Transportation Water stormwater Communication First-Order Effect
Overall Dependence
Low High
120
Critical infrastructure and climate change
reduced to accommodate the computational complexity (Murray et al. 2008). Finally, mathemat-
ical modeling uses mathematical properties to identify the extreme case scenarios without com-
plete scenario enumeration, but the problem often needs to be simplified to ensure the solvability
of the model (Murray et al. 2008). These analytical approaches could be broadly applied to
any network infrastructure sectors. For instance, Jenelius and Mattsson (2015) summarized how
these approaches have been applied in transportation studies to estimate the impacts of network
degradations under specific scenarios in urban areas, to assess the economic costs of disruptions,
to identify the critical road segments with a complete enumeration of single link failures, to
screen the worst-case scenarios, or to select best responses.
Despite the similarity in approaches, the metrics and models that are used in different vul-
nerability studies usually differ (Jenelius and Mattsson 2012; Murray 2013). The literature could
also be categorized by the evaluation metrics or performance indicators they choose. Taking the
transportation sector as an example, the vulnerability evaluation could either focus on demand-
side performance measures such as accessibility or supply-side performance measures such as
operability (Jenelius et al. 2006).The choice of measures and assessment metrics has political and
social implications. Jenelius et al. (2006) illustrated, in road network vulnerability analysis, how
the same performance measures (i.e. increase in generalized travel cost) could be evaluated differ-
ently based on “equal opportunity” or “social efficiency” perspectives given different underlying
political judgment. There are merits and limitations in different approaches. It would be difficult
for a single evaluation measure to tell the whole story.
Referring to climate change vulnerability, in particular, there are some unique characteristics
that differentiate it from the general vulnerability studies. First, climate change impacts differ by
location and type of hazards. Vulnerabilities studies have to be customized for specific types of
hazards in different locations (Jenelius and Mattsson 2012). There are multiple climate stressors
influencing multiple infrastructure sectors. Each infrastructure sector could be affected directly
or indirectly due to the interdependencies. Second, although thanks to the development in cli-
mate modeling, science provides us some degree of predictability for climate change scenarios,
there is still considerable uncertainty in such projections. Third, infrastructure vulnerability to
climate change depends on the socio-technical context. For instance, besides the physical struc-
ture, organizational adaptability could affect infrastructure management and transformation,
which in turn determines the level of vulnerability (Rehak et al. 2018). Finally, compared to the
projection of future climatic scenarios, there is an even higher degree of uncertainty in the pro-
jection of prominent social dimensions such as economics, the political incentives to adopt new
technology, and the changes in demography (Adger et al. 2009).
Given the complexity and interconnection with the broad socio-technical systems, climate
change vulnerability and adaptation have been identified as a “wicked problem”, which by
definition is difficult to frame and “resistant to definitive and final solutions” (Moser et al. 2012;
Termeer et al. 2013). Correspondingly, Moser et al. (2012) approach the wicked problem with
an iterative, deliberately learning-oriented risk management framework. Shen et al. (2016) put
forward a framework to analyze critical infrastructure’s vulnerability to climate change with
the consideration of uncertainty, interdependency, and potential adaptive capacities. Adopted
from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)’s definition of vulnerability
(Parry et al. 2007) and Cutter’s place-based vulnerability concept (Cutter 1996), they define
the vulnerability of critical infrastructure to climate change as “the degree to which infra-
structure systems are susceptible to and unable to cope with the adverse impacts of climate
change, given the geophysical and socioeconomic conditions of a specific geographic region”
(Shen et al. 2016). Following this definition and framework, the factors contributing to critical
infrastructure’s vulnerability to climate change are categorized and outlined as in Figure 10.2.
121
Suwan Shen
type
climate frequency
change
magnitude
elevation
topographic
Exposure slope
scale area
population
development pattern Distribution
economic activity density
redundancy
connectivity
topology
capacity
reversibility
e.g. electrical pump station
supply physical in water supply
e.g. traffic management
cyber needs telecommunication
interdependency
Contributing factors geographic e.g. sewer pipeline under roads
Sensitivity
e.g. economically related
logical infrastructure sectors
protection
Physical
Adaptive capacity relocation
individual socioeconomic
conditions
Contextual capacity adaptive actions
community resilience
Figure 10.2 Factors contributing to critical urban infrastructure’s vulnerability to climate change
Source: Adapted from Shen et al. (2016)
122
Critical infrastructure and climate change
(Leichenko 2011; Meerow et al. 2016). Leichenko (2011) classified the urban resilience litera-
ture into four categories: urban ecological resilience, urban hazards resilience, urban economy
resilience, and governance resilience. Urban ecological resilience extends upon the ecosystem
resilience notion and defines resilience as the ability for an urban system to absorb disturb-
ance and sustain services including ecosystem services without fundamental changes in identity,
structure, or key processes (Leichenko 2011). Urban hazards resilience emphasize the commu-
nity resilience building and capacity enhancement for urban communities and populations to
recover from hazards in an efficient and effective way (Leichenko 2011). Economic resilience
with its roots in economic geography borrows the ecological resilience theory to study the evo-
lution of urban economic systems and emphasize the linkages between resilience and long-term
growth of cities in particular (Leichenko 2011). The spatial inequality of economic growth also
leads to the discussion of power and politics influencing the development paths and resilience
(Leichenko 2011). Governance resilience views urban governance and institutional structure as
an influential factor for urban resilience (Leichenko 2011). It discusses, for instance, how leader-
ship, polycentricity, transparency, accountability, flexibility, inclusiveness, or diversity may hinder
or promote resilience building (Tanner et al. 2009).
These resilience concepts and theories are related to each other but address the problem from
different perspectives. Depending on their emphasis, the main conceptual divergence among the
literatures is related to the “definition of urban”,“the understanding of system equilibrium”,“the
conceptualization of resilience”, “the mechanisms of system change”, the definition of “adapt-
ability”, and the “timescale of action” (Meerow et al. 2016). Meerow et al. (2016) proposed
an inclusive definition, trying to incorporate different perspectives and conceptual inconsist-
encies. They defined urban resilience as “the ability of an urban system and all its constituent
socio-ecological and socio-technical networks across temporal and spatial scales to maintain
or rapidly return to desired functions in the face of a disturbance, to adapt to change, and to
quickly transform systems that limit current or future adaptive capacity” (Meerow et al. 2016).
Leichenko (2011) summarized four key characteristics of resilient cities, namely diversity, flexi-
bility, adaptive governance, and learning capacity and innovation. Despite the lack of consensus
on the definition and measurement of urban resilience, it is broadly acknowledged that (1) cities
and urban regions need to become resilient to climate change; (2) resilience is a desired goal for
adaptation and mitigation efforts in academic and policy arenas; (3) climate change resilience
enhancement in urban regions should be in line with the efforts to achieve urban sustainability
(Leichenko 2011).
In the context of critical infrastructure, Rehak et al. (2018) define resilience as the intrinsic
ability of infrastructure systems to perform and maintain functions when negatively affected by
stresses. They classify the resilience of critical infrastructure system into technical resilience and
organizational resilience (Rehak et al. 2018). Technical resilience refers to the technological and
physical protection of infrastructure, which is determined by the technological structure, the
security measures, and the disruptive events (Rehak et al. 2018). Organizational resilience, on the
other hand, is determined by the organization management and internal processes throughout
the disaster management cycle, including organizational structure, management process in the
prevention phase, implementation of technological innovations, involvement in research and
education, as well as innovation ability and flexibility to learn from previous response and
recovery operations (Rehak et al. 2018). With regard to climate change, factors such as exposure
to climatic hazards, redundancy, capacity, infrastructure interdependency, and physical protection
all influence infrastructure technical resilience. Organizational resilience involves the institu-
tional capability and organizational management of the infrastructure system (Rehak et al. 2018).
123
Suwan Shen
In terms of climate change, it is influenced by factors such as institutional coping capacity and
corresponding demand management.
The objective of infrastructure vulnerability reduction is to perform and maintain infrastruc-
ture functions when faced with the negative impacts of climate change so that human wellbeing
could be maintained or improved, which is consistent with the objective of urban resilience
(Brown et al. 2016; Rehak et al. 2018). Despite the distinctions in disciplinary origins, concepts,
theories, methodologies, and practice, the analytical concept of vulnerability and resilience are
generally considered as complementary to each other (Miller et al. 2010). Miller et al. (2010)
explains that vulnerability research aimed at identifying causes of vulnerability and opportunities
for adaptation while resilience research aimed at identifying the ecological, biophysical, and social
factors influencing short-and long-term sustainability. Both concepts require an investigation
into the underlying socio-political and environmental processes but from different perspectives.
In this way, Miller et al. (2010) argues that vulnerability and resilience analysis could be com-
plementary in terms of integrated socio-ecological analyses, system approach, slow versus fast
changes, analysis scale, adaptation, perturbations, and different knowledge systems. Specifically,
Miller et al. (2010) identified the synergies and overlaps in vulnerability and resilience approaches
with respect to the response to stress, the interaction of changes, system and actor dynamics, the
role of diversity, and the common concern for cross-scale issues and processes. Although there
is some argument about whether vulnerability researchers address both short-term response
and long-term adjustment (Miller et al. 2010), resilience is usually perceived as the “flipside” or
“determinant” of vulnerability (Meerow et al. 2016). Vulnerable systems are considered as not
resilient and resilient systems are viewed not vulnerable (Rehak et al. 2018).
Even though resilience and vulnerability are highly related and complementary concepts,
there are several characteristics of resilience noteworthy in the context of climate change. First,
resilience serves as a boundary concept that allows the synergy between multiple knowledge
domains, such as climate change adaptation, sustainability, and disaster risk reduction (Adger et al.
2011; Meerow and Newell 2016). This is especially important when talking about the vulner-
ability and resilience of critical infrastructure to climate change. Urban infrastructure plays a vital
role in both climate change adaptation and mitigation. The exposure of urban infrastructure to
climatic stressors is partly determined by the transformation in infrastructure sectors to mitigate
climate change.The transformation for mitigation would in turn affect the urban infrastructure’s
ability to adapt to climate change. Therefore, one crucial question we need to ask is whether
the vulnerability reduction actions would contribute to long-term sustainability and vice versa,
whether actions that contribute to long-term sustainability would also reduce the vulnerability.
Second, there is emerging literature that explicitly discusses the issues of equity in urban
resilience (Leichenko 2011; Meerow and Newell 2016). It is recognized that the adverse impacts
of climate change would be experienced disproportionately by the poor, who are more likely to
locate in hazard-prone regions, suffer more direct losses, and need more resources to recover from
the losses (Freeman and Warner 2001). The disadvantaged groups are normally more dependent
on public infrastructure to maintain livelihood and require more assistance if infrastructures
fail (Freeman and Warner 2001). Further, there may be conflicts between resilience at different
regions or scales. Resilience enhancement for some regions may come at the expense of resili-
ence reduction in other regions or scales (Leichenko 2011). Consequently, it is prudent to
explicitly address the equity implications of infrastructure vulnerability and resilience to climate
change. Meerow et al. (2016) illustrated how the equity consideration could be incorporated
through a “five Ws” operational framework of urban resilience, which is “resilience for who, to
what, when, where, and why”.
124
Critical infrastructure and climate change
Decentralization
The topology of the network infrastructure affects the exposure, connectivity, and redundancy
of the infrastructure to climate change. As a result, one of the key policy questions is whether
infrastructure should be centralized or decentralized in a changing climate (Howard and Bartram
2010). Decentralized infrastructure has often been viewed as more climate resilient than the con-
ventional centralized utility because of its flexibility and spatial dispersion of the risk (Howard
and Bartram 2010). Some 350,000 people affected by the flooding of the Mythe pumping
station in Gloucester, England, 2007 demonstrated how centralized systems would suffer severe
disruption if a critical component is at risk (Howard and Bartram 2010). Distributed commu-
nity water systems, on the other hand, have shown to be more resilient, providing potable water
access for Mawlamyine village, Myanmar, during severe floods (Gallego-Lopez and Essex 2016).
Furthermore, the flexibility of decentralization could prevent the investment of vulnerable large
infrastructure that may lead to maladaptation. However, Howard and Bartram (2010) contend
that decentralized infrastructure may reduce the risks from extreme events but will come at the
expense of increased maintenance costs.
125
Suwan Shen
capacity, but the relationship between the two could be contradictory.While decentralization may
increase the end-user’s participation in infrastructure operation and maintenance, it may suffer
from a lack of access to skilled professionals. The limited access to staff with greater technical
skills may make infrastructure more susceptible to deterioration from extreme events and result
in greater risk of service failure and public health and safety hazards (Howard and Bartram 2010).
On the other hand, a centralized management framework with appropriate stakeholder
participation may result in better governance and service delivery (Howard and Bartram
2010). Lynch (2012) affirmed that a centralized management with concerted citizen action in
Peru’s water regime is more likely to address the equity issues and reduce the vulnerability of
disadvantaged communities (Lynch 2012). The choices about the management structure when
confronted with climate change need to consider stakeholder representation, equity, account-
ability, knowledge use, staff availability, service demand trends, and management skills (Engle and
Lemos 2010; Howard and Bartram 2010).
Conclusion
In the face of climate change, critical infrastructure’s vulnerability is closely interwined with
urban resilience. As discussed in this chapter, the vulnerability of critical infrastructure to climate
change is not only a technical problem but a “wicked problem” that is influenced by a variety
of socio-technical factors. A lot of these factors, as well as the infrastructure services itself, are
influential factors that determine urban resilience. Reducing critical infrastructure’s vulnerability,
therefore, plays a vital role in building urban resilience. Moving forward to adapt critical infra-
structure systems to climate change, on one hand, we need enhancement in climate modelling
tools to develop more accurate and detailed climate projection models that could be used for
engineering practice at the local level. On the other hand, given the level of uncertainty in
126
Critical infrastructure and climate change
climate models and future conditions, we need to apply the existing infrastructure system mod-
elling tools and vulnerability analysis approaches to prioritize infrastructure disruption scenarios.
To assess the impacts, we need not only to examine the weakness in physical infrastructures
but more importantly to identify the most affected populations. Furthermore, we need to
think beyond the technical protection strategies within each infrastructure silo to address broad
questions related to infrastructure interdependency and cascading effects, organizational man-
agement and adaptability, coordination with climate mitigation and long-term sustainability, and
regional inequality and potential conflict. Finally, for adaptation strategies we need to investigate
the long-term institutional and financial management feasibility in addition to their technical
feasibility, as well as answer the old question of who benefits and who pays. Thinking infrastruc-
ture vulnerability and urban resilience holistically would make sure the vulnerability reduction
in one sector in one urban area does not come at the cost of another sector, another region, or
another community.
References
Adger, W.N., Brown, K., Nelson, D.R., Berkes, F., Eakin, H., Folke, C., Galvin, K., Gunderson, L., Goulden,
M., O’Brien, K., Ruitenbeek, J., Tompkins, E.L. (2011). Resilience implications of policy responses to
climate change. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change. 2(5): 757–766.
Adger, W.N., Dessai, S., Goulden, M., Hulme, M., Lorenzoni, I., Nelson, D.R., … Wreford, A. (2009). Are
there social limits to adaptation to climate change? Climatic Change. 93(3–4): 335–354.
Arnbjerg-Nielsen, K. and Fleischer, H. (2009). Feasible adaptation strategies for increased risk of flooding in
cities due to climate change. Water Science and Technology. 60(2): 273.
Bobylev, N. (2013). Urban physical infrastructure adaptation to climate change. Global Change, Energy
Issues and Regulation Policies: Dordrecht: Springer, 77–102.
Broto, V.C. and Bulkeley, H. (2013). A survey of urban climate change experiments in 100 cities. Global
Environmental Change. 23(1): 92–102.
Brown, C., Shaker, R.R., and Das, R. (2016). A review of approaches for monitoring and evaluation of
urban climate resilience initiatives. Environment, Development And Sustainability: 1–18.
Chelleri, L., Kunath, A., Minucci, G., Olazabal, M., Waters, J.J., and Yumalogava, L. (2012). Multidisciplinary
perspectives on urban resilience. A workshop report. Basque Centre for Climate Change. Bilbao, Spain.
Cutter, S.L. (1996).Vulnerability to environmental hazards. Progress in human geography. 20(4): 529–539.
Engle, N.L. and Lemos, M.C. (2010). Unpacking governance: building adaptive capacity to climate change
of river basins in Brazil. Global Environmental Change. 20(1): 4–13.
Freeman, P. and Warner, K. (2001).Vulnerability of infrastructure to climate variability: How does this affect
infrastructure lending policies? Report Commissioned by the Disaster Management Facility of The
World Bank and the ProVention Consortium. Washington, DC: The World Bank.
Gallego-Lopez, C. and Essex, J. (2016). Designing for Infrastructure Resilience. Evidence on Demand.
London: Department for International Development.
Hamin, E.M. and Gurran, N. (2009). Urban form and climate change: Balancing adaptation and mitigation
in the US and Australia. Habitat international. 33(3): 238–245.
Holling, C.S. (1973). Resilience and stability of ecological systems.Annual review of ecology and systematics.
4(1): 1–23.
Holling, C.S. (1996). Engineering resilience versus ecological resilience. Engineering within ecological
constraints. 31(1996): 32.
Howard, G. and Bartram, J. (2010). The Resilience of Water Supply and Sanitation in the Face of Climate
Change.Vision 2030, Technical report. Geneva: World Health Organization.
Hunt, A. and Watkiss, P. (2011). Climate change impacts and adaptation in cities: a review of the literature.
Climatic Change. 104(1): 13–49.
Jenelius, E. and Mattsson, L.-G. (2012). Road network vulnerability analysis of area-covering disruptions: A
grid-based approach with case study.Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice. 46(5): 746–760.
Jenelius, E. and Mattsson, L.-G. (2015). Road network vulnerability analysis: Conceptualization, implemen-
tation and application. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems. 49: 136–147.
127
Suwan Shen
Jenelius, E., Petersen,T., and Mattsson, L.-G. (2006). Importance and exposure in road network vulnerability
analysis. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice. 40(7): 537–560.
Kim, Y., Eisenberg, D.A., Bondank, E.N., Chester, M.V., Mascaro, G., and Underwood, B.S. (2017). Fail-
safe and safe-to-fail adaptation: decision-making for urban flooding under climate change. Climatic
Change. 145(3–4): 397–412.
Kirshen, P., Ruth, M., and Anderson, W. (2008). Interdependencies of urban climate change impacts and
adaptation strategies: a case study of Metropolitan Boston USA. Climatic Change. 86(1–2): 105–122.
Koetse, M.J. and Rietveld, P. (2009). The impact of climate change and weather on transport: An overview
of empirical findings. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment. 14(3): 205–221.
Kröger, W. (2008). Critical infrastructures at risk: A need for a new conceptual approach and extended ana-
lytical tools. Reliability Engineering & System Safety. 93(12): 1781–1787.
Langeveld, J., Schilperoort, R., and Weijers, S. (2013). Climate change and urban wastewater infrastruc-
ture: there is more to explore. Journal of hydrology. 476: 112–119.
Leichenko, R. (2011). Climate change and urban resilience. Current opinion in environmental sustain-
ability. 3(3): 164–168.
Lemos, M.C. (2008). Whose water is it anyway? Water management, knowledge, and equity in NE Brazil.
In: J.M. Whiteley, H.M. Ingram, R.W. Perry, T.C. Arnold, and M. Baer (eds.): Water, Place, and Equity.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Liao, K.-H. (2012). A theory on urban resilience to floods –a basis for alternative planning practices.
Ecology and Society. 17(4).
Lynch, B.D. (2012).Vulnerabilities, competition and rights in a context of climate change toward equitable
water governance in Peru’s Rio Santa Valley. Global Environmental Change. 22(2): 364–373.
Meerow, S. and Newell, J.P. (2016). Urban resilience for whom, what, when, where, and why? Urban
Geography: 1–21.
Meerow, S., Newell, J.P., and Stults, M. (2016). Defining urban resilience: A review. Landscape and urban
planning. 147: 38–49.
Melillo, J.R., Richmond, T.C., and Yohe, GW. (2014). Climate change impacts in the United States: The
third national climate assessment. National Climate Assessment Report. Washington, DC: US Global
Change Research Program, 418–440.
Miller, F., Osbahr, H., Boyd, E.,Thomalla, F., Bharwani, S., Ziervogel, G., … Rockström, J. (2010). Resilience
and vulnerability: complementary or conflicting concepts? Ecology and Society. 15(3).
Monstadt, J. (2007). Urban governance and the transition of energy systems: Institutional change and
shifting energy and climate policies in Berlin. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research.
31(2): 326–343.
Moser, S.C., Williams, S.J., and Boesch, D.F. (2012). Wicked challenges at land’s end: Managing coastal vul-
nerability under climate change. Annual Review of Environment and Resources. 37.
Murray, A.T. (2013). An overview of network vulnerability modeling approaches. GeoJournal. 78(2):
209–221.
Murray, A.T., Matisziw, T.C., and Grubesic, T.H. (2008). A methodological overview of network vulner-
ability analysis. Growth and Change. 39(4): 573–592.
National Research Council (US). Committee on Climate Change and US Transportation. (2008). Potential
impacts of climate change on US transportation. Transportation Research Board Special Report 290.
Washington DC.
Olsson, P., Folke, C., and Berkes, F. (2004). Adaptive comanagement for building resilience in social–
ecological systems. Environmental management. 34(1): 75–90.
Parry, M., Parry, M.L., Canziani, O., Palutikof, J.,Van der Linden, P., and Hanson, C. (2007). Climate Change
2007-Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability: Working Group II Contribution to the Fourth Assessment
Report of the IPCC (Vol. 4). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Rehak, D., Senovsky, P., and Slivkova, S. (2018). Resilience of critical infrastructure elements and its main
factors. Systems. 6(2): 21.
Revi, A., Satterthwaite, D.E., Aragón- Durand, F., Corfee- Morlot, J., Kiunsi, R.B.R., Pelling, M.,
Roberts, D.C., and Solecki, W. (2014). Urban Areas. Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and
Vulnerability. Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth
Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Field, C.B.,V.R. Barros, D.J.
Dokken, K.J. Mach, M.D. Mastrandrea, T.E. Bilir, M. Chatterjee, K.L. Ebi,Y.O. Estrada, R.C. Genova,
B. Girma, E.S. Kissel, A.N. Levy, S. MacCracken, P.R. Mastrandrea, and L.L.White (eds.)] Cambridge,
United Kingdom and New York: Cambridge University Press.
128
Critical infrastructure and climate change
Rübbelke, D. and Vögele, S. (2011). Impacts of climate change on European critical infrastructures: The case
of the power sector. Environmental science & policy. 14(1): 53–63.
Ruth, M., Bernier, C., Jollands, N., and Golubiewski, N. (2007). Adaptation of urban water supply infra-
structure to impacts from climate and socioeconomic changes: the case of Hamilton, New Zealand.
Water Resources Management. 21(6): 1031–1045.
Savonis, M.J., Burkett, V.R., and Potter, J.R. (2008). Impacts of Climate Change and Variability on
Transportation Systems and Infrastructure: Gulf Coast Study, Phase I. A Report by the US Climate
Change Science Program and the Subcommittee on Global Change Research [Savonis, M. J., V.R.
Burkett, and J.R. Potter (eds.)]. Washington, DC: Department of Transportation.
Shen, S., Feng, X., and Peng, Z.R. (2016). A framework to analyze vulnerability of critical infrastructure to
climate change: the case of a coastal community in Florida. Natural Hazards. 84(1): 589–609.
Tanner, T., Mitchell, T., Polack, E., and Guenther, B. (2009). Urban governance for adaptation: assessing cli-
mate change resilience in ten Asian cities. IDS Working Papers. 2009(315), 01–47.
Termeer, C., Dewulf, A., and Breeman, G. (2013). Governance of Wicked Climate Adaptation Problems
Climate change governance (pp. 27–39): Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.
University of Hawai‘i at Mänoa Sea Grant College Program (2014). Climate Change Impacts in Hawai‘i –
A Summary of Climate Change and Its Impacts to Hawai‘i’s Ecosystems and Communities. A publica-
tion of the University of Hawai‘i at Mänoa Sea Grant College Program. Honolulu, HI.
US Census Bureau (2010). State and county quick facts. Urban, Urbanized Area, Urban Cluster, and Rural
Population, 2010 and 2000: United States. www.census.gov.
US White House Office (2003).The National Strategy for the Physical Protection of Critical Infrastructures
and Key Assets. Washington, DC: Executive office of the president.
Wilbanks, T.J. and Fernandez, S. (2014). Climate Change and Infrastructure, Urban Systems, and
Vulnerabilities: Technical Report for the US Department of Energy in Support of the National Climate
Assessment: Washington, DC: Island Press.
Wilby, R.L. and Dessai, S. (2010). Robust adaptation to climate change. Weather. 65(7): 180–185.
Willbanks,T., Lankao, P., Bao, M., Berkhout, F., Cairncross, S., Ceron, J., … Zapata-Marti, R. (2007). Industry,
settlement and society. Climate Change 2007: Impacts Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution
of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
World Bank (2018). World Urban Population Data 2018. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.URB.
TOTL.IN.ZS.
129
11
Policies and practices on urban
resilience in China
Quan Yuan
Introduction
Many developing countries are experiencing rapid urbanization and a large number of people
move from rural areas to cities to enjoy the conveniences that urban civilization has created.The
dense cities, however, are faced with increasingly tough challenges of protecting their inhabitants
from external shocks such as natural disasters. In many countries, local authorities are working
with the national government to improve the capabilities of the cities to cope with potential
damages. Urban land use planning, infrastructure improvements, public financing, and techno-
logical innovations, among others, are the major strategies implemented to minimize the impacts
of disasters on the functioning of cities, and the lives of residents. How do cities understand
urban resilience? What are the recent public policies and practices on urban resilience in cities
in developing countries? When disasters occurred, how did cities respond to the threatening
events? Have these policies and practices achieved short-term and long-term goals? A detailed
inquiry on these questions could provide us information on how cities in developing countries
can better address the growing threats from external shocks.
China has a long history of fighting against natural disasters and people in this country have
rich experience in building disaster-resilient cities and towns. Many historical cities such as
Ganzhou (in the Province of Jiangxi) built a highly comprehensive and efficient drainage system
about a thousand years ago. The traditional wisdom of developing disaster-resistant settlements
and communities –the wisdom of maintaining a harmonious relationship with nature –was
deeply embedded in the Chinese culture. Nevertheless, Chinese cities are suffering a lot from nat-
ural disasters in this era of rapid urbanization and massive urban development. In the recent two
decades, China has witnessed the most dramatic urbanization in human history.The urbanization
rate in China grew from 36 per cent in 2000 to 56 per cent in 2017 and, during this period,
310 million people became new urban dwellers. The country now has more than 100 cities of
over one million residents and the number of megacities is still steadily growing. The growth of
urban population, however, has unfortunately far outpaced the upgrade of urban infrastructure
including drainage, flood levees, and utility systems. Relevant public policies and emergency
response plans are also outdated in the face of increasing threats from all types of external shocks.
Meanwhile, disadvantaged populations who have limited knowledge and information about the
130
Urban resilience in China
threats are more vulnerable to the loss of life and property, suggesting an issue of environmental
injustice in disaster prevention. Several major natural disasters in recent years have tested the cap-
abilities of cities to recover, and, on the other hand, facilitated the introduction of a few national
and local policies and practices in promoting urban resilience. These strategies nonetheless have
very mixed results in spite of substantial institutional and financial support.
131
Quan Yuan
influence the ability of a city or a region to recover from a future unknown stress (University
of California Berkeley 2011). Xu et al. (2014) emphasized the significance of the index system
in promoting resilient development, especially in making operable plans and evaluating these
plans. This study, together with a few others (e.g. Chen et al. 2016), reviewed a list of index
systems including the 10 Essentials of City Resilience (United Nations International Strategy
for Disaster Reduction, 2012), the Resilience Capacity Index (University of California, Berkeley,
2011), the City Resilience Index (Rockefeller Foundation and ARUP, 2015) and so forth. Chen
et al. (2016) also contrasted these urban resilience index systems with index systems that were
created to assess sustainable and low-carbon development in China.The authors found that these
two groups of index systems have many shared indices, but some indicators need to be adjusted
and revised in accordance with the context of Chinese cities.
Chen et al. (2016) created an urban resilience index system based on the context of Chinese
cities by referring to the aforementioned established index systems. Three layers of indicators
were selected based on a survey of urban planners, government officials, and real estate agents
using the Analytic Hierarchy Process method. Four “criterion layer” indicators, 12 “field layer”
indicators, and a total of 35 “factor layer” indicators were included in the system (see Table 11.1).
Chen et al. (2016) emphasized the significance of urban management, a critical component
of a city’s soft power. This “criterion layer” indicator demonstrates the capability of a city to
effectively react to disasters and emergencies and organize its residents to mitigate potential
hazards. Out of the four “principal layer” indicators, the social dimension appeared to be the
most important one. This dimension in particular focuses on the socially disadvantaged popu-
lation, including low-educated population, unemployed population, and population in poverty.
The authors argued that education attainment, and access to social resources, can greatly affect
vulnerability to external shocks. The other three “principal layer” indicators, economic, infra-
structure, and urban management were assigned similar weight in the system. Innovation, social
cohesion, and resource efficiency stood out among the “field layer” indicators. The index system
also highlighted several “factor layer” indicators including public participation, and government
expenditure on education.
Liu and Zeng (2014) generated another urban resilience index system and further studied
the changes in urban resilience index using longitudinal data from Wuhan. The index system
comprised of four categories of indicators: ecological resilience, economic resilience, engin-
eering resilience, and social resilience.The selection of the indicators in the system was primarily
based on the literature review, but it also took into consideration the data availability for each
indicator. Therefore, the authors acquired longitudinal socio-economic data between 1990 and
2010 from Wuhan, China, and used the data to calculate the urban resilience index for every five
years. Figure 11.1 shows the standardized changes in the overall urban resilience index as well as
four categories of urban resilience indicators. In general, all indices increased during the period,
and the increases were more significant in 2000–2010 than in 1990–2000. The authors finally
pointed out that these indices appeared to be interrelated and therefore it would be unrealistic
to achieve some of the goals at the sacrifice of others.
Chen (2015), on the other hand, conducted a comparative study on the changes in urban
resilience index across several major Chinese cities. She adopted a similar four-category index
system to that in Liu and Zeng (2014). Five major cities in the Yangtze River Delta –Shanghai,
Suzhou, Hangzhou, Ningbo, and Nanjing –were selected as the observations in the study, and
data from 2010 and 2013 were collected to evaluate how the urban resilience in those cities
changed over time. Figure 11.2 displays the results. The author found that the overall urban
resilience indices in the five cities were moderate in spite of an increase during 2010–2013.
These cities became less resilient in terms of ecological performance, while the other resilience
132
Table 11.1 The urban resilience index system
Target layer Criterion layer Weight Field layer Weight Factor layer Weight
Urban Resilience Social resilience 0.3386 Education 0.2214 Share of population with associate degree 0.0972
Index System Teacher/student ratio 0.0517
Share of govt. expenditure on education 0.0725
Labor and poverty 0.0329 Unemployment rate 0.0176
Pct. of population in poverty 0.0153
Regional attractiveness 0.0843 # of doctors/thousand people 0.0528
# of hospital beds/thousand people 0.0225
Area of urban shelter per capita 0.0090
Economic resilience 0.2370 Economic prosperity 0.0882 Gross Domestic Products per capita 0.0285
Disposable income per capita 0.0413
Fixed asset investment 0.0184
Economic elasticity 0.0362 Share of Secondary Industry in GDP 0.0200
Share of Tertiary Industry in GDP 0.0162
Innovation 0.1126 Annual new innovations/thousand people 0.0441
Higher education degrees/thousand people 0.0426
Employment training services 0.0259
Urban infrastructure 0.2250 Key infrastructure 0.0756 Public transit mileage per capita 0.0224
resilience Coverage of mobile services 0.0061
Coverage of internet services 0.0075
Density of sewer system 0.0396
Environmental management 0.0539 # of days with excellent/good air quality 0.0194
Coverage of qualified centralized drinking water 0.0248
Coverage of urban park/green in 500m radius 0.0047
Integrated species index 0.0050
Resource efficiency 0.0955 Average commute time 0.0065
Pct. of water recycling 0.0372
Energy consumption per GDP dollars 0.0146
Pct. of green building 0.0372
Urban management 0.1994 Social cohesion 0.1003 Public participation 0.0776
resilience # of resident associations, non-profit organizations, etc. 0.0227
Emergency management 0.0532 Emergency monitoring information platform 0.0268
Natural disaster alarm platform 0.0126
Coverage of digital city management system 0.0138
Planning 0.0459 Professional consulting organizations 0.0287
Risk-oriented land use planning 0.0172
Figure 11.1 Changes in standardized urban resilience indices of Wuhan during 1990–2010
Source: Liu and Zeng (2014)
Figure 11.2 Changes in urban resilience indices in cities in the Yangzi River Delta during 2010
and 2013
Source: Chen (2015)
indicators all improved during the period. Another important finding in this study was that
urban resilience is not necessarily linked to the size of cities. Shanghai, for example, one of the
four direct-controlled municipalities and the largest city in China, has much more economic and
institutional resources than other cities. But its urban resilience indices were the lowest.
134
Urban resilience in China
According to the statistics from the Ministry of Civil Affairs of China, natural disasters including
floods, droughts, earthquakes, and typhoons caused 881 deaths and economic losses of more
than $44 billion in 2017 (Xinhuanet 2018). Given the tremendous losses, different levels of
governments have developed policies and strategies to reduce the impacts of these external
shocks on the cities and residents. Two cases, urban flooding and earthquakes, will be discussed
in this chapter to illustrate how policymakers have taken measures to strengthen the resilience of
cities and discusses whether the policies and practices have fulfilled the expectations.
Table 11.2 A summary of major urban flooding events in China in recent years
Beijing 7/21/2012 170 mm/24 hours 79 deaths; economic loss of $1.7 billion; 1.6 million
people affected; 63 flooded road segments;
cancellation of more than 500 flights
Nanchang 8/22/2012 140 mm/24 hours 1 death; 13,000 people affected; economic loss of
$1.7 million
Yan’an 7/2013 398 mm/24 hours 42 deaths; 1 million people affected
Wuhan 7/6/2013 334 mm/24 hours 49 flooded road segments
7/23/2015 161 mm/24 hours 360,000 people affected; economic loss of $9.9 million
7/2016 560 mm/7 days 730,000 people affected; economic loss of $319 million
Ningbo 10/2013 496 mm/24 hours 2.5 million people affected; economic loss of $3.3
billion
Shenzhen 5/11/2014 223 mm/24 hours 150 flooded road segments; cancellation of 5,000
bus trips
Source: Xu 2015
135
Quan Yuan
The July 2012 Beijing flood was a typical case of urban flooding and the event captured the
attention of the entire world. Within a day of the flooding, 56,933 people had been evacuated,
79 people were killed, and at least 8,200 homes were damaged or destroyed (see Table 11.2).
The flooding was primarily created by the heaviest rain in the last six decades. However,
empirical studies found that urban land use changes, the poor condition of the drainage infra-
structure, and the damage on the aquatic ecosystem also greatly led to the tragic consequences
(Chen 2013; Sun 2014). From 1993 to 2007, land area of 241 square kilometers was converted
to built-up area from other land uses in the central area of Beijing. About 80 per cent of the
land converted was agricultural land, and 6 per cent was once rivers and lakes (Sun 2014).
Such substantial land use changes have made the urban surface less permeable and less cap-
able of retaining storm water. Based on the results from the econometric models, Sun (2014)
found that the share of impermeable surface, and the share of built-up area in the central area
of Beijing were both highly significantly associated with the likelihood of urban flooding.
Meanwhile, the land use changes dramatically altered the organization of the aquatic eco-
system. The models developed by Sun (2014) showed that the places with lower river densities
suffer most from higher probability of urban flooding. The damage on the aquatic ecosystem
therefore resulted in increased vulnerability of the cities to urban flooding. Finally, Chen
(2013) stated that a significant proportion of the drainage system in the central area of Beijing
was built in the 1950s or even in the Ming Dynasty. The designed capacity was outpaced by
the explosive growth of the urban population and thus is inadequate to counteract the shocks
of heavy rain storms.
This urban flooding event not only alerted Beijing, the capital city of China, to take more
efforts on disaster prevention, but also largely contributed to the adoption of a nationwide policy,
the “Sponge City Initiative”, in 2013. On December 12, 2013, in the Central Urbanization
Work Conference, President Xi Jinping promoted the concept of “Sponge City” as a means of
mitigating the impacts of urban flooding and making the best use of rain water. The goal of the
“Sponge City” concept is to make cities work like sponges –effectively collecting, storing and
treating (excess) rainwater. Since then, flood prevention has rocketed up the state agenda and
the Sponge City initiative was launched in 2015 with 16 “Pilot Sponge Cities”, before being
extended to 30 (Roxburgh 2017). The policy has become a top-down initiative directly led by
the central government to promote urban resilience. By 2020, the government required 20 per
cent of the built-up area of each pilot city to reach the standards of sponge city, meaning at least
70 per cent of storm water runoff should be captured, reused, or absorbed into the ground. By
2030, 80 per cent of the built-up area in each city should meet these standards. The first batch
of “Pilot Sponge Cities” received an investment of more than $12.5 billion. The central govern-
ment, local governments, and the private sector shared the investment.
In response to the requirements of the central government, the municipal governments of
quite a few cities, many of which were among the “Pilot Sponge Cities”, have formulated and
adopted their own plans and policies on promoting resilience development to prevent urban
flooding. Table 11.3 lists a few local plans and policies adopted in recent years. These plans and
policies had quite a few shared strategies, such as promoting the usage of permeable pavement
and preserving the components of the aquatic ecosystem. According to the aforementioned
research findings, many of these strategies are indeed effective remedies for the severe urban
flooding problem.
Based on these documents, a large number of sponge city related projects, many of which
were led by local governments, have been launched in these cities. For instance, the city of
Wuhan has recovered 11 lakes from the built-up area and renovated 300 buildings to meet the
standards of sponge city development since 2015.
136
Urban resilience in China
Table 11.3 A summary of sponge city related plans and policies in selected cities in China
Wuhan 8/2015 Guidelines on sponge Preserving lakes, wetlands, and other components
city planning and of the aquatic ecosystem; promoting the usage of
design of Wuhan permeable pavement in both new (50%) and old
(40%) communities.
5/2016 Regulations on sponge Identifying the spots that are vulnerable to urban
city development flooding and retrofitting the spots using urban
and management of design techniques; encouraging the public–
Wuhan private partnership (PPP) in sponge city projects
Xiamen 8/2015 Technical guidelines Curbside greenbelt should be built lower than the
on sponge city road surface (sunken green space) to collect the
development of storm water
Xiamen
Qingdao 9/2016 Special plan of sponge Identifying flooding spots using simulation models;
city development of constructing a drainage tunnel and a water
Qingdao retention facility to address the potential threats
at these spots
Shanghai 11/2016 Special plan of sponge Promoting green roofs and rooftop gardens;
city development of identifying spots that are suitable to be retrofitted
Shanghai in accordance with sponge city requirements in
the short term
Guangzhou 2/2017 Regulations on sponge Municipal departments of real estate and
city development urban development, urban management,
and management transportation, water resource, and landscaping
of Guangzhou should work together to promote sponge city
development
Shenzhen 9/2017 Implementation plan Conducting a thorough spatial analysis of urban
of sponge city flooding in the entire municipal city; identifying
development of the areas with high ecological sensitivity; creating
Shenzhen a new land use plan in accordance with the
ecological sensitivity study
In spite of the ambitious Sponge City initiative led by the central government and the detailed
plans and policies adopted by local governments, the overall effects of alleviating urban flooding,
however, have still been marginal. Nineteen of the 30 “Pilot Sponge Cities” still suffered from
serious flooding in recent years, after a large amount of money was devoted to the initiative.Yu
(2016) argued the development of sponge cities would take a long time (at least 5–10 years)
and require regionwide or even nationwide collaboration to be effective in decreasing flooding.
He also encouraged the use of public–private partnerships (PPP) in financing the sponge city
projects, but he acknowledged that the PPP had not achieved much success yet. A few recent
studies summarized several major challenges and weaknesses found in the process of promoting
and developing sponge cities.
First, the development of sponge cities is a regional and system-wise task. However, many
of the current plans or policies divided the cities into pieces and treated them separately. The
functioning of the drainage system, aquatic system, and the green space system all depend on the
connectivity, compatibility, and systematic capacity of the entire ecosystem (Ying and Liu 2017).
To zone the cities into different parts and fix localized problems by urban design and landscaping
137
Quan Yuan
may not really address the regional problem of urban flooding. Second, the retrofit of the old
traditional neighborhoods not only takes time and costs money, but also encounters institutional
and political difficulties (Xinhuanet 2016). In those neighborhoods, residential density is quite
high and the competition for space is fierce. It would be difficult to allocate space for sponge-city
infrastructure at the sacrifice of existing facilities used for transportation, utilities, and housing
The newly added sunken green space, for instance, can conflict with parking space needs, so
residents complain about such projects. Finally, as a long-term initiative that incurs immediate
huge capital cost and potentially benefits the cities and citizens, the sponge city initiative has
not been well accepted by the private sector (Jiang et al. 2017). Also, the lack of reliable cost and
benefit information has become a significant barrier to developing an effective framework of
public–private partnership.
138
Urban resilience in China
Table 11.4 Building seismic damage statistics with regard to structural types
Meanwhile, among those outdated buildings, there were a large number of school buildings,
especially middle school and elementary school buildings. With poor quality and old structures,
only 18 per cent of the school buildings were operational after the earthquake (Ye et al. 2008).
Due to insufficient survival skills and limited information, adolescent students were in particular
exposed to danger (Xie 2009). It further suggested a problem of environmental justice in cre-
ating urban resilience towards disasters like earthquakes. The mechanism that provides socially
disadvantaged people extra support and assistance before or after these disasters has been quite
limited in Chinese cities.
The post- disaster recovery can be a good opportunity to rebuild earthquake- resilient
cities. Many houses and buildings collapsed and a large proportion of the transport, utility and
sewage infrastructure was damaged during the 2008 Sichuan earthquake. Rebuilding cities and
increasing their resilience to earthquakes is a major goal of the post-earthquake recovery. In
addition, millions of people were affected by the disaster and restoring social cohesion and civic
engagement is another challenge in the recovery.
The Post-Sichuan Earthquake Restoration and Reconstruction Ordinance, was approved by the State
Council of the People’s Republic of China and announced one month after the earthquake. The
ordinance included details on spatial layout, urban housing, urban construction, rural construction,
public services, infrastructure, industrial recovery, disaster prevention and reduction, ecological envir-
onments, mental health care, policy measures, reconstruction funds, and plan implementation (Guo,
2012). This document proposed some innovative approaches to enhance urban resilience, such as
democratic decision-making, participatory planning, and the screening of areas with future earth-
quake risks. Similarly, Tang et al. (2015) described the implementation of land suitability assessment
(LSA) in the reconstruction process following the 2013 Lushan earthquake.The General Plan for Post
Lushan Earthquake Reconstruction was released two months after the earthquake. The LSA, as a new
geological technique, made a significant difference in the plan by evaluating the land suitability level
for post-earthquake reconstruction. Physical geographical factors including geological conditions,
risk of disasters, water and land resources conditions, eco-environmental suitability, and the land use
status quo of the affected area were considered in the assessment. Such technique was found to be
highly important to minimizing the potential risk of future land use development to earthquakes.
139
Quan Yuan
Progress was made in enhancing urban resilience by restoring social cohesion and encour-
aging public participation in the post-earthquake recovery as well. Teets (2009) studied the
behaviors of civic organizations in the post-disaster recovery after the 2008 Sichuan earth-
quake. She discovered that many non- governmental organizations (NGOs) had effectively
helped the restoration of local civil society. For instance, the Chengdu Urban Rivers Research
Group (CURRG) developed an online platform to provide real-time information about relief
needs and resolve issues such as training and insurance. The CURRG served as an intermediary
between local governments, NGOs, volunteers, and donors. The collaboration between these
parties greatly supported the disaster relief and the local civic network gained much experience
on public organization and participation. Ying (2009) examined the participatory planning in
the reconstruction after the 2008 Sichuan earthquake and showed its significance in rebuilding
the cities in accordance with the expectation of local residents. A Reconstruction Planning Ideas
Brainstorming Meeting took place in the city of Dujiangyan, one of the most affected cities in
the earthquake, and around 20 local residents were invited to the meeting.Ying (2009) stated this
was regarded as a major improvement given that, in the past, local residents would only occa-
sionally be asked to express their opinions after the formulation of plans. Jun Qu, the Head of
Urban Planning Bureau of Dujiangyan, reported that many ideas and opinions from the public
have been adopted in the reconstruction plans. For example, one of the most common concerns
among local residents, housing tenure, was taken into consideration when policymakers made
the decision on the movement of people who lost their homes in the disaster. Participatory
planning has strengthened the mutual trust between local governments and residents.
In spite of the significant progress in rebuilding resilient cities after the earthquakes, many
researchers have raised many concerns regarding the post-disaster reconstruction process. The
local urban form and livelihoods, which were mentioned in the visions of the recovery plans,
have nonetheless hardly been implemented in the reconstruction stage (Guo 2012). Without the
consideration of the specific urban fabrics including urban form and structure, the reconstruction
is likely to end up as a duplication of certain pre-designed templates and the principles of urban
resilience are difficult to be adopted in such duplication. In addition, the top-down approaches
were dominant in the reconstruction process and need to be better integrated with bottom-up
initiatives.The collaboration between the government, the private sector, as well as the non-profit
organizations has not been well established and organized.Without effective inter-party collabor-
ation, the allocation of disaster-relief resources would hardly be efficient and timely.
Although local residents have been increasingly encouraged to participate in the reconstruc-
tion decision-making, Ying (2009) admitted that they still “had little say” in the formulation of
the reconstruction plans. In the meantime, as the post-disaster reconstruction started immedi-
ately after the earthquakes and was implemented in a very fast pace, local residents, who had not
fully recovered psychologically, “either had no passion to care about it or had not generated their
opinions thoughtfully” (Ying 2009). Teets (2009) also pointed out the trust and capacity deficit
of civil society organizations and suggested more transparency and legitimacy in post-disaster
reconstruction.
Conclusion
Chinese cities have a long history of surviving natural disasters by building resilient communities.
However, in the era of rapid urbanization and massive land development, these cities have been
suffering losses from various external shocks, in particular natural disasters. In general, neither the
theoretical understanding nor the practical experience of developing resilient cities is adequate,
140
Urban resilience in China
especially given the constantly changing urban fabrics and the less established organizational
framework in these cities.
Researchers in China have extensively reviewed the literature on the definitions and
dimensions of urban resilience and conceptualized it in the context of Chinese cities.They realize
that Chinese cities with the high population and economic activity densities tend to be highly
vulnerable to external shocks. Based on the literature review, researchers have developed a few
urban resilience index systems to help evaluate resilient development across cities and over time.
Empirical studies show that the overall resilience of Chinese cities in general increased during
the last decade. Nevertheless, recent years have witnessed a growing number of natural disaster
events that caused substantial damage to cities all over the country, regardless of size and eco-
nomic power. We have witnessed in this discussion how Chinese cities responded to two major
natural disasters –urban flooding and earthquakes –and discussed the policies and practices
adopted to improve urban resilience with regard to the disasters. The cities were physically and
socially vulnerable to the disasters due to the outdated infrastructure and limited awareness of
disaster prevention. Different levels of governments have engaged in the post-disaster recovery
and a top-down pattern of policy implementation was found to be common in both cases. In
spite of huge investment, the mismatch between growing threats from these hazards and limited
capabilities to fix the problem in a systematic way have greatly undermined the effectiveness of
recent efforts. The lack of effective collaboration between different levels of governments, and
between the public sector and private sector, may also partly explain the dilemma facing the
Chinese cities. After all, enhancing urban resilience would be a long-term endeavor, and the
commitment to continued engagement is needed to making real progress. The contribution of
this chapter is that it will assist policymakers in China to adopt more informed and appropriate
approaches to preparing for and recovering from disasters and thereby developing resilient and
just cities.
References
Alberti, M. (2000). Urban form and ecosystem dynamics: Empirical evidence and practical implications.
Achieving Sustainable Urban Form: 84–96.
Bi, G., Chen, Y., Xu, C., and Liu, Z. (2016). Sponge City Construction under Urbanization Context and
Resource-Coordinated Development. Shanghai Urban Management. 1: 24–26. (In Chinese)
Brunea, M, and Chang, S.E. (2003). A framework to quantitatively assess and enhance the seismic resilience
of communities. Earthquake Spectra. 19(4): 733–752.
Cai: J., Guo, H., and Wang D. (2012). Review on the resilient city research overseas. Progress in Geography.
31 (10): 1245–1255.
Chen, F. (2015). A comparative study on urban resilience levels among large cities in the Yangzi River Delta.
Proceedings of China Annual National Planning Conference 2015. (In Chinese).
Chen, N., Xiang, H., Ye, Q., and Zhu, X. (2016). An AHP-based approach for evaluation index system of
resilience city. Journal of Hunan University. 7: 146–150. (In Chinese).
Chen, X. (2013). A comparative study of the Beijing “7.21” and Shenzhen “6.13” urban flooding events.
Water Resources Development Research. 13(1): 39–43. (In Chinese).
Guo,Y. (2012). Urban resilience in post-disaster reconstruction: Towards a resilient development in Sichuan,
China. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science. 3(1): 45–55.
Huang, X. and Huang X. (2015). Resilient city and its planning framework. Planning Studies. 39 (2): 50–56.
Jiang,Y., Zevenbergen, C., and Fu, D. (2017). Can “sponge cities” mitigate China’s increased occurrences of
urban flooding. Aquademia Water Environ. Technol. 1(1): 3–7.
Li, X., Liu,Y., Shi, F., and Huang, M. (2016). Severe water ecology crisis in urban and rural areas in China
and comprehensive governance of water resources environment. Shanghai Urban Management. 1: 20–
23. (In Chinese).
141
Quan Yuan
Liu, J. and Zeng, Z. (2014). Development of a resilient city evaluation index system and a relevant empirical
study. E-Government. 3: 82–88. (In Chinese).
Miller, D.S. and Rivera, J.D. (eds.) (2016). Community Disaster Recovery and Resiliency: Exploring Global
Opportunities and Challenges. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
Morita, L., Yoshikiko, I. Taiichi, K., Mastsumoto, S, Takahashi, K., Suzuki, Z., and Ishio, H. (2017). Towards
a city where no major earthquakes will occur. Japanese Academic Conference, Civil Engineering and
Architecture Committee, Sub-Committee on Disaster Prevention and Mitigation of Large Earthquakes.
(In Chinese). www.scj.go.jp/ja/info/kohyo/pdf/kohyo-23-t249-1-cn.pdf.
Ouyang, H. and Ye, Q. (2016). A review on the evolution of resilient city theory: Concept, context and ten-
dency. Planning Studies. 40 (3): 34–42. (In Chinese).
Resilience Alliance. Urban Resilience Research Prospectus (2007). Australia: CSIRO. www.resalliance.org/
index.php/urban_resilience.
Rockefeller Foundation and ARUP. (2015). City Resilience Index. December. https:// assets.
rockefellerfoundation.org/app/uploads/20160201132303/CRI-Revised-Booklet1.pdf.
Roxburgh, H. (2017). China’s “sponge cities” are turning streets green to combat flooding. The Guardian.
December 28. www.theguardian.com/world/2017/dec/28/chinas-sponge-cities-are-turning-streets-
green-to-combat-flooding.
Shao Y. and Xu, J. (2015). Understanding urban resilience: A conceptual analysis based on integrated inter-
national literature Review. Urban Planning International. 2: 48–54.
Sun, Z. (2014). Causal factors of local floods in Beijing central city. Geographical research. 33(9):1668–1679.
(In Chinese).
Tang, Q., Li, Y., and Xu, Y. (2015). Land suitability assessment for post-earthquake reconstruction: A case
study of Lushan in Sichuan, China. Journal of Geographical Sciences. 25(7): 865–878.
Teets, J.C. (2009). Post-earthquake relief and reconstruction efforts: The emergence of civil society in
China? The China Quarterly. 198: 330–347.
UNISDR (2012). How to make cities more resilient: a handbook for local government leaders. A con-
tribution to the Global Campaign 2010–2015. www.unisdr.org/files/26462_handbookfinalonline
version.pdf.
University of California Berkeley, Institute of Governmental Studies. Building Resilient Regions.
Berkeley, CA: The University of California. http:// brr.berkeley.edu/rci/site/
sources. (Accessed 18
November 2018).
Xinhuanet (2016). Nearly half of the 30 Pilot Sponge Cities are suffering from urban flooding. July 26.
www.xinhuanet.com/politics/2016-07/26/c_1119283044.htm.
Xinhuanet. (2018). Natural disasters caused 881 deaths and direct economic losses of 301.87 billion RMB
in 2017. www.xinhuanet.com/gongyi/2018-02/02/c_129804162.htm.
Xie, L. (2009). Lessons learnt from Wenchuan earthquake. Journal of Nanjing University of Technology. 31
(1): 1–8. (In Chinese).
Xu, Z. (2015). Policy evolution and local practice of sponge cities with Chinese characteristics. Shanghai
Urban Management. 1: 49–54. (In Chinese).
Xu, Z.,Wang,Y., Guo, J., and Pan, L. (2014). Strategic thinking on promoting urban planning and construc-
tion of the resilience cities in China. Urban Development Studies. 21 (5): 79–84. (In Chinese).
Ye, L., Lu, X., Zhe, Q., and Peng, F. (2008). Analysis on building seismic damage in the Wenchuan earth-
quake. 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Beijing, China.
Ying, Y. and Liu, H. (2017). Collaborative and smart: path choice of sponge city based on the practice of
Shenzhen. Urbanism and Architecture. 27: 49–52. (In Chinese).
Ying, S. (2009). Post-earthquake reconstruction: towards a much more participatory planning. Theoretical
and Empirical Researches in Urban Management. 4(1S): 27–37.
Yu, K. (2016). Sponge City: Theories and Practices. Beijing: China Architecture and Building Press.
142
12
Building urban resilience
to climate change
The case of Mexico City Megalopolis
Fernando Aragón-Durand*
Introduction
Mexico is internationally known as a country that has made substantial progress in tackling
disasters. The National Civil Protection System, established in 1986, has created institutions,
financial schemes and implemented policies aimed at making regions and cities more resilient
to the impact of natural hazards such as floods and earthquakes. It can be said that the country
is well equipped to organize and carry out preparedness, emergency, and restoration actions.
Nonetheless, there is a long way to go when it comes to managing disaster risk and creating safer
and more resilient cities.
The Mexico City Megalopolis (MCM) has “performed” as an “urban laboratory” to “test”
disaster prevention measures and policies that eventually have been replicated by other Mexican
cities. Recently –September 19, 2017-a high magnitude earthquake (7.1 degrees on the Richter
scale) impacted MCM so the institutional and organizational capacities were put to the test once
again.To that respect, some claimed that thanks to the improvement of civil protection measures,
such as the enforcement of stringent building codes since the late 1980s, damages were minor
and the death toll was low. One can argue that Mexico City, despite the consequences of past and
recent earthquakes and floods, is in some degree resilient to these natural hazards.
Regarding adaptation to climate change, MCM has made modest progress because, among
other reasons, the emphasis has been placed on climate change mitigation.1 Despite the fact
that the MCM is constantly exposed to weather-related and climate hazards (heavy rainfalls,
droughts and heat waves) that may be likely amplified by climate change, adaptation policy
and responses are very few, insufficient and disarticulated from urban development planning
and policy. This might be due to the fact that climate change is conceived mainly as an
environmental issue that is being addressed at a policy level by the Mexico City Ministry of
Environment (SEDEMA).
143
Fernando Aragón-Durand
MCM has developed institutions, infrastructure, technical expertise, and finance to build
resilience to floods but the prevailing approach has focussed on technical works so socio-
ecological measures and responses are not seen as part of the solution. Besides, civil protection,
climate change and urban development agendas are isolated from each other, a situation that may
jeopardize the feasibility and efficiency of policies when it comes to building a more resilient
urban development. With this regard, it is worth noting that the government of Mexico City
has designed a number of hydraulic engineering systems and strategies to prevent disasters of
hydro-meteorological origin and it is only when floods occurred that the civil protection sector
organizes emergency and restoration actions along with the Water and Sanitation System of
Mexico City (SACMEX). It is in this policy context that climate change adaptation is being
framed.
On one hand, the Ministry of Civil Protection of Mexico City and the 16 Civil Protection
Departments of the Mexico City Alcaldías (formerly known as delegaciones2) are constantly being
urged to tackle floods in compliance to the Mexico City Civil Protection Law. On the other
hand, regarding adaptation, the Mexico City Climate Action Program (2014) and the Local
Strategy of Climatic Action (2014) propose some adaptation actions. It is worth mentioning that
very recently (since 2017) the governments of some alcaldías have finalized their local climate
action plans, of which nine out of 16 have been officially published3 whereas the rest4 of them
are not yet finalized (Estrella-López 2018). So, few local responses from within alcaldías have been
implemented such as rainwater catchment in some public government buildings (Benito Juárez
and Tlalpan) and schools (Azcapotzalco). Also, it is worth mentioning that MCM has designed
and started implementing the Resilience Strategy5 as part of the 100 Resilient Cities Initiative
sponsored by The Rockefeller Foundation in which five pillars specify the way forward to
achieving a resilient future. In particular Pillar Two promotes water resilience.6
The objective of this chapter is to analyze how resilience to the impacts of climate change
is being built at a megalopolis scale by focussing on the disaster risk management (DRM) and
climate change adaptation (CCA) policies. In particular, the chapter seeks to identify common
values and meanings between the two policies in order to propose ways of improvement. By
understanding how values and meanings are playing out at the policy level one could locate syn-
ergies between the two policies that would foster resilience.
By using the case of MMC, this chapter intends to make a contribution to the knowledge on
resilience to climate change at a megalopolitan scale from a social constructionist perspective; a
perspective rarely employed to analyze urban resilience which has been traditionally addressed
from a positivist approach emphasizing its ecological–biophysical dimension (Miller et al. 2010).
Moreover, as stated by Tanner et al. (2017:13): “there is a growing acceptance that resilience can
be determined not only by objectively determined indicators, but also by the subjective values
and perceptions of people regarding what makes them resilient”. The following questions guide
the chapter:
• How is the MMC tackling floods and climate change at policy level?
• What are the linkages between DRM and CCA at a megalopolitan scale?
• What are the shared values and meanings between CCA policy and disaster risk reduction
policy that could underpin resilience building?
The chapter is developed in six sections. Section 2 characterizes Mexico City as a megalop-
olis in urban, economic, and environmental terms. Section 3 describes the flood vulnerability
as a chronic and historical feature of Mexico City’s development. This is done with the aim of
understanding the prevailing technical approach to floods and examining current conditions and
144
The case of Mexico City Megalopolis
responses that could promote climate change adaptation. Section 4 moves on to analyzing the
impacts of climate change in the MMC, section 5 examines CRM and CCA policy that could
contribute to building resilience and section 6 proposes a way to integrate a constructionist ana-
lysis of meanings and values into urban resilience to climate change.
145
Sketchmap 1. Basin of Mexico Hidalgo Puebla
N
a
▲ utl
▲▲ ua
Valle de Tizayuca ▲▲▲ ichic
▲ Ch
e ▲▲▲
r r a d ▲▲▲
▲ Sie ▲▲▲▲
▲▲▲▲ ▲▲▲▲ ▲▲
▲▲▲▲▲ ▲▲▲ ▲
▲▲▲
▲▲
▲▲ Valle de apan
Sierr
Valle de Cuautitlan ▲▲
a de
Guad ▲▲
alupe
▲▲▲
▲▲▲
▲▲▲
▲▲▲
▲▲
Valle de México Basin of Mexico
▲▲▲
sierra
▲▲▲
de
Mexico City Metropolitan Area
▲▲▲
Tlaxcala
Mexico
Patia
▲▲▲
City States
ch
▲▲▲▲ Major mountain ranges
ique
Mexico Valleys
State
147
Fernando Aragón-Durand
centuries was nurtured mainly by two springs: Santa Fe and Chapultepec. However, these
springs were drained. In order to maintain the water distribution in the city, a new project was
implemented with new sources of water namely, the springs of La Noria, Nativitas, Santa Cruz,
and, San Luis located in the alcaldía of Xochimilco. (Espinoza and Cortés 2012) The early twen-
tieth century brought in Mexico City a new challenge with the purpose of building a system of
freshwater. In 1905, an aqueduct of concrete was constructed to distribute the waters from the
Chapultepec and Santa Fe springs to the pipelines of the city.
Floods continued occurring throughout the first half of the twentieth century even with
the Grand Canal. The second half of the twentieth century was critical for Mexico City’s vul-
nerability to floods. In the 1950s, major floods affected the city’s main downtown roads. These
floods showed the vulnerability of the drainage system to land subsidence caused by decades
of groundwater extraction. Floods, therefore, were the result of a complex interaction between
urbanization in an ex-lacustrine area, permanent ecological deterioration and ground subsid-
ence, poor sanitation, and inadequate policy responses (Aragón-Durand 2007). The excessive
extraction of underground water within the Basin of Mexico has affected the lacustrine clay and
the lower sediment layers, resulting in a progressive sinking of the terrain. Groundwater extrac-
tion damaged drainage infrastructure (Lesser et al. 1998).
Despite the hydraulic works put into place over the years to solve the flooding crises and as
Mexico City kept on expanding, the draining needs of a metropolis of such scale were not met.
Consequently, these conditions necessitated the construction of a draining system that would not
be affected by subsidence and could operate by gravity without the need for constant pumping.
This gave rise to the Sistema de Drenaje Profundo de la Ciudad de México (Deep Drainage
System of Mexico City). The first stage of this project’s development was concluded in 1975
with the development of the Emisor Central (Central Emitter), a tunnel with a diameter of 6.5
meters, a length of 50 kilometers, and a capacity of 200 m3 per second; as well as a series of vents
with a depth of 50–237 meters.The most important function of the Emisor Central is to dispose
the waters of the Sistema de Drenaje Profundo out of the Valley of Mexico (Espinoza 2012).
Currently, the drainage system of Mexico City has a primary network of 2,087 kilometers
of sewage pipes and a secondary network of 10,237 kilometers of pipes, 68 pump stations,
numerous dams, reservoirs, and regulation tanks, 111 kilometres of deep collectors (interceptors)
and tunnels. There are also 25 treatment plants in the Federal District and 45 in the munici-
palities of the state of Mexico,10 with a total installed capacity of 10.2 cubic meters per second.
Only 9 per cent of the water is treated, and evidence suggests that the untreated portion might
contaminate the sub-soil and even the aquifer system (Romero-Lankao 2010). More recently
in 2008, the city’s government began the construction of a solution, namely, the Túnel Emisor
Oriente (Eastern Tunnel). This tunnel serves as a new drainage alternative to decrease the
flood risks for the city (Tellman et al. 2018). In short the prevailing approach to floods is a
technical–engineering one.
148
The case of Mexico City Megalopolis
as water conservation are key to building resilience so the impact of climate change on water
provision and sanitation should be assessed in the context of increasing demand, deterioration of
catchment areas, degradation of water quality and reduction of recharging areas (Aragón-Durand
and Delgado-Ramos 2016).
As described in section 3, MMC has suffered from floods and climate change is expected to
amplify them. As stated by the Ministry of Environment of Mexico City, the greatest climate
change risk is associated with heavy rainfall and flooding (SEDEMA 2014b). Intense precipi-
tation events have already taken place 180 times in the last 30 years and have flooded various
vulnerable areas in Mexico City’s alcaldías, with more extreme effects for poor unserviced
settlements.The situation is expected to worsen as climate change intensifies and as deforestation
increases, especially given the inadequate management of the city’s drainage system. Moreover,
the expected decrease in precipitation during the dry season may result in a greater water ser-
vice disruption than that already experienced in certain urban areas (SEDEMA 2014b, quoted
in Aragón-Durand and Delgado-Ramos 2016).
According to the Mexico City Office of Resilience, one of the most serious circumstances
that increase vulnerability in certain sectors of Mexico City is the hydro-meteorological risk.
Some phenomena associated with this sort of risk are heavy rainfalls, which can result in floods
that seriously destabilize slopes; hailstorms; heatwaves; and strong winds that may cause infra-
structural damage, hence affecting the city (Oficina de Resiliencia CDMX 2016).
At the local level in the MCM, flood risk is being perceived and framed differently amongst
and within the alcaldías. The alcaldía of Cuajimalpa is exposed to the highest landslides risk
and to a lesser extent north of Iztapalapa and the alcaldías of Coyoacán, Gustavo A. Madero,
Cuauhtémoc, and Iztapalapa are exposed to high level of flood risk whereas Xochimilco and
Tláhuac to medium level of risk. Iztapalapa and Gustavo A. Madero have little capacities for
coping with flood impacts. According to Delgado-Ramos et al. (2015) this situation is not
recognized in the Mexico City Climate Action Program that is focussed on the sewage infra-
structure by highlighting the maintenance to the Deep Drainage System of Mexico City and the
consequences that subsidence has in water provision and sewage.
According to the National Center for Disaster Prevention of Mexico (CENAPRED),
Azcapotzalco, Benito Juárez, Coyoacán, Cuauhtémoc, Gustavo Madero, Iztacalco, Iztapalapa,
Miguel Hidalgo, Tláhuac, Venustiano Carranza, and Xochimilco have the highest level of risk
exposure (see Table 12.1) because, among other reasons, they are located in the central and
east zones of the MCM, which is characterised by a flat topography. Another indirect indicator
of bio-physical exposure to weather-related hazards is the number of contingencies reported
between 2000 and 2016. (CENAPRED 2015, 2016, 2017, quoted in Estrella-López 2018) See
Table 12.1 below.
Besides, another factor that may contribute to flood and landslides vulnerability is the topog-
raphy, which is characterized by high slopes, a condition that is found in the alcaldías located in
the southwestern zones (see Figure 12.2).
149
Fernando Aragón-Durand
Table 12.1 Flood and landslides risk in the alcaldías of the Mexico City Megalopolis
Source: National Centre for Disaster Prevention in: Estrella-López (2018: 27)
easy to identify for several reasons: (1) Different public ministries are in charge of those policies
so institutional barriers play a role, (2) Conceptualizations and meanings of hazard and risk differ
between DRM and CCA, and (3) Priority is given to DRM through the allocation of more
resources to emergency actions instead of investing in disaster risk reduction measures.
MCM has been committed to tackle extreme natural hazards through civil protection and
drainage works. At the local level, alcaldías are not well equipped –financial resources and human
capacities are limited –to assess risk and to act before a flood occurs. However, the need to adapt
to climate change will make alcaldías more aware that local and decentralized DRM actions11
could prove to be a feasible and even an efficient way of tackling climate change. This could be
done both by improving existing DRM local measures and designing and implementing adap-
tation actions.
Table 12.2 presents a set of adaptation actions at the level of the alcaldías that is being currently
put into place with the support of SEDEMA. Focus is put on those that contribute to reducing
flood risk and adaptation to climate risk.
It is worth mentioning that the local governments of alcaldías try to stick to the MCM
Climate Action Program and get support from the SEDEMA staff to design climate actions. In
this sense and in order to really foster adaptation it is important that the Alcalde (head of alcaldía)
and his high level staff are aware of the role flood risk management plays in CCA. So far, some
alcaldías have shown more interest than others in conceiving, in practical terms, at least climate
change as a flood risk reduction issue of public concern. It is foreseen that in the short term
governments of alcaldías will still rely on what the SEDEMA can do and the extent of support
SEDEMA can provide to the alcaldías and whether the elected government of Mexico City will
be committed to continue doing so in order to strengthen capacity building for resilience.
In the light of previous analysis of climate change policy of Mexico City, several obstacles
have to be overcome for the SEDEMA and the Secretary of Civil Protection to be able to make
synergies and empower local actions. For example, MCM Climate Action Program 2014–2020
addresses resilience building through updating the Hazards and Risk Atlas, implementing the
150
The case of Mexico City Megalopolis
Table 12.2 Disaster risk management and climate change adaptation action in the alcaldías of the
Mexico City Megalopolis
Axis of the Local Strategy Line of MCM Climate Actions being implemented at the level
of Climate Action MCM Action Program of the alcaldías
program of the Hydrometeorological Risk Prevention and the Environmental Fund. However,
there are some shortcomings to be addressed. No vulnerability analysis of key sectors was under-
taken, and the conceptual underpinnings for adaptation focus on identification of meteoro-
logical risks posed by extreme events with no clear distinction between the adaptation agenda
and the existing civil protection agenda. Besides, no connection is identified with climate change
scenarios, and there are no explicit linkages between the proposed resilience-building actions
and the existing and future environmental, water resources, and soil conservation and urbaniza-
tion regulation actions (Aragón-Durand and Delgado-Ramos 2016).
The rationale behind the civil protection tools and intervention is to act once flooding
has occurred, not to address the underlying causes that put people at risk. This has made for a
reactive civil protection system that is not fully integrated with the development agenda of the
city in terms of long-term climate risk reduction.This has had severe and negative manifestations
and implications in the land use planning of vulnerable areas and the lack of conservation of
surrounding ecosystems that may provide risk reduction services. Each of the 16 alcaldías has a
civil protection unit that in practice functions to only put out fires, and to assist people once an
earthquake strikes or a flood creates havoc. But, as explained above, there are indications that in
some alcaldías climate change actions are beginning to be more common.
Disaster prevention policy in the MCM has exerted a huge influence on society and policy
making. It has shaped the way policymakers, scientists, and lay people perceive weather and
climate-related events as mainly natural extreme events that can be tackled through civil engin-
eering infrastructure, education, and behavioral change. (Aragón-Durand 2011).
One way of identifying linkages between DRM and CCA to foster urban resilience is through
understanding discourses, meanings, and values. A discourse analysis is sensitive to the various
ways risk and hazard objects are socially constructed. As analyzed by Aragón-Durand (2011),
the social constructionist approach to disasters and risk provides theoretical, epistemological,
151
Fernando Aragón-Durand
and methodological bases for understanding how meanings and policy values construct floods
as disaster problems in discursive terms. In the next part, five methodological considerations are
proposed for analyzing meanings and policy values to be applied to urban resilience building.
152
The case of Mexico City Megalopolis
role when excluding blame and responsibility from human action. This was clearly seen in the
technically based claims that intended to portray the flood causes as neutral or even more clearly
in the way policymakers explain them as accidental events. Within the CCA climate change
impacts are more difficult to perceive and measure because changes in the climatic conditions
and variability take place in longer periods of time and because uncertainty prevails regarding
the spatial distribution of impacts. In addition, cause–effect relations are difficult to elucidate
when drawing climate change scenarios (years 2030, 2050, and 2100). Thomalla et al. (2006)
assert that uncertainty of socio-economic scenarios and of the global circulation models with
regards to frequency, magnitude and spatial distribution of future climate hazards is the result of
incomplete knowledge about the impacts at national, regional, and local levels. For this reason,
building populations adaptive capacities becomes necessary more than ever and in this context
the articulation of DRM and CCA is pertinent in the design and implementation of socially
sensitive disaster prevention policies in the light of a changing climate.
153
Fernando Aragón-Durand
can be established and evaluated. Floods and climate risk can be framed differently between the
two policy fields when the subject’s influence and power within the institution he/she works is
high and determine the terms of reference for the policy making process.
For instance, the image of the government differs according to the type of discourse.When a flood
disaster is discursively constructed as the result of ignorance of hazards and unsafe conditions, the
government claims to be the “expert” when assessing a flooding risky area and perceives inhabitants
as ignorant of their own social condition. Government officials are convinced that inhabitants (“risk
ignorants”) have to be taught to change their behavior and avoid hazards or “co-exist” with dis-
aster risk and in this sense educating vulnerable people is conceived as the adequate policy response.
Government officials decide which are the objectives and content of the policy instrument (such as
information campaign, practice of emergency drills, the use of early warning systems, etc) without
taking into consideration inhabitants’ knowledge, coping practices, values and local contexts. Climate
change adaptation policy in Mexico City draws, in some cases, from this type of policy formulation
when environmental government officials in the alcaldías design adaptation strategies that are meant
to capacitate people in the light of climate change as described above in Table 12.2.
Concluding remarks
Building urban resilience to climate change in the MCM involves flood risk management and
climate change adaptation. Civil protection system is the policy foundation for disaster risk man-
agement from where climate change adaptation is being designed. Information systems, institu-
tional capacities and planning tools and programs at megalopolis and alcaldía level can contribute
to climate change adaptation and thus to resilience building.
Chronic floods have tested urban systems and local communities in the MCM, which has
developed institutions, infrastructure, technical expertise and finance to build resilience to floods
but the prevailing approach has focussed on technical works. In this sense, reduction of flood
vulnerability of people employing a participatory approach to risk management is needed in all
alcaldías. Climate change adaptation policy and planning in the MCM is still in its infancy; few
adaptation actions are being implemented at the level of alcaldías which in itself is a good step
forward to resilience building.
It is expected that climate change will amplify the magnitude of extreme weather events in
the MCM. In this vein, tackling floods is a priority for Mexico City government. One way of
identifying linkages between DRM and CCA to foster urban resilience is through understanding
of how discourses, meanings, and values are playing out at the policy level. A discourse analysis
is sensitive to the various ways risk and hazard objects are socially constructed. Three consider-
ations are presented for approaching urban resilience from a social constructionist perspective
focusing on the meaning making process.
Notes
* I would like to thank Esteban Riva-Palacio Gómez for his research assistantship and enthusiasm, Julián
Estrella-López for his information on Mexico City climate change policy and the sketchmaps and Dean
Mohammed Chaim for his valuable comments.
1 According to the Mexico City Ministry of Environment (quoted in Aragón-Durand and Delgado-
Ramos 2016) between 2008 and 2012 when the Climate Change Action Plan of Mexico City was put
into place, 5.8 million tons of CO2e were mitigated and the expected increase of GHG emissions for
that period was neutralized as for direct emissions were concerned.
2 A delegación is the political and administrative territorial unit in which Mexico City is divided. Each
delegación is led by a Jefe Delegacional (Head of the Delegación), who is elected by popular and direct vote.
154
The case of Mexico City Megalopolis
The new Political Constitution of Mexico City (2017) states that delegaciones have become alcaldías.The
main difference between a delegación and an alcaldía is that the latter’s management will be supervised by
a group of 10–15 people who will form a council that will ultimately evaluate administrative actions.
Alcaldías will have autonomy in the economic administration, for there will not be a dependence of any
sorts from the budget that is currently given to the delegaciones from the Finance Ministry of Mexico
City. Nevertheless, when it comes to territory demarcation, both delegaciones and alcaldías remain exactly
the same. (Corona 2017)
3 Climate Change Action Plans at alcaldía level published as of 2018 are the following: Milpa Alta (2015),
Benito Juárez (2016), Azcapotzalco, Cuauhtémoc, Miguel Hidalgo, Magdalena Contreras, Cuajimalpa,
Tláhuac, and Tlalpan (all published in 2017)
4 Alcaldías of Alvaro Obregón, Coyoacán, Gustavo A. Madero, Iztacalco, Iztapalapa, Venustiano Carranza,
and Xochimilco.
5 According to the Head of the Resilience Office of Mexico City, as of August 2018, such strategy has
initiated its implementation (Interview on June 20, 2018)
6 The five pillars are: (1) Foster regional coordination, (2) Promote water resilience, (3) Plan for urban
and regional resilience, 4) Improve mobility and 5) Develop innovation and adaptive capacity. See
CDMX 2016.
7 Hereafter the Hydrological Basin of Mexico is referred to as the Basin of Mexico.
8 The Federal District, created in 1824 as a means to establish a permanent residence of the federal
authorities in Mexico City, has recently changed its name to Mexico City according to the new Political
Constitution of Mexico City (2017).
9 The word albarradón refers to a stone wall, or levee bridge, to prevent a place from flooding. A modern
albarradón would be a dike.
10 A project that made a remarkable progress in treated water is the Planta de Tratamiento de Aguas
Residuales Atotonilco (Residual Water Treatment Plant of Atotonilco). This plant treats the residual
water of Valley of Mezquital, Hidalgo.This location was chosen strategically because along the plant’s
surroundings one can find the outfall of the Túnel Emisor Central, the irrigation channels for agricul-
tural purposes are born there, and the flow of the Túnel Emisor Oriental reaches this area. The treated
water is used for agricultural irrigation, where approximately 700,000 people are benefited. Of these
people, 300,000 are exposed to sanitary threats that come from direct contact with the water.The Planta
de Tratamiento is considered to be the largest in Latin America, bearing a capacity to process up to
35 m3/s, and up to 47 m3/s during raining season. (SEMARNAT, n.d.)
11 Wilkinson and Aragón (2019) documented how decentralized DRM actions at local level in the State
of Yucatán, México, can promote climate change adaptation in the long run.
12 Discourse of inadvertence by “ignorance” and inadvertence by carelessness, discourse of accidental caus-
ality and structural causality.
References
Aguilar, A.G. (2000). Localización geográfica de la cuenca de México. La Ciudad de México en el fin del
segundo milenio. Mexico City: Colegio de México, AC.
Aragón-Durand, F. (2007). Urbanisation and flood vulnerability in the peri-urban interface of Mexico City.
Disasters: 477–494.
Aragón-Durand, F (2011). Disaster Discourses, Policy Values and Responses: The Social Construction of
Urban Floods in the Peri-urban Interface of Mexico City. Saarbrücken: Lambert Academic Publishing.
Aragón- Durand, F (2011a). Adaptación al cambio climático y gestión del riesgo a desastres en
México: obstáculos y posibilidades de articulación, en Cambio climático, Amenazas Naturales y Salud, cap.
IV, pp.131–158 Programa LEAD MÉXICO, El Colegio de México.
Aragón-Durand, F. and Delgado-Ramos, G. (2016). Mexico City. In: S. Bartlett and D. Satterthwaite
(eds.): Cities on a Finite Planet: Towards transformative responses to climate change. London &
New York: Routledge, 149–168.
CDMX (2016). CDMX Resilience Strategy. SEDEMA and 100 Resilient Cities.
Corona, S. (2017). CDMX, el paso de alcaldía a alcaldía. www.eleconomista.com.mx/politica/CDMX-el-
paso-de-delegacion-a-alcaldia-20170611-0020.html.
Delgado-Ramos, G,A. De Luca,V.Vázquez (2015).Adaptación y mitigación del cambio climatico en México.
Centro de Investigaciones Interdisciplinarias en Ciencias y Humanidades. Mexico City: UNAM.
155
Fernando Aragón-Durand
Espinoza, V., Collado, J., Morales, J. and Hernández, J. (2012). El gran reto del agua en la Ciudad de
México: pasado, presente y prospectivas de solución para una de las ciudades más complejas del mundo.
Mexico City: Sistema de Aguas de la Ciudad de México.
Estrella-López, J (2018). La Acción Climática de los Gobiernos Delegacionales de la Ciudad de México.
Mexico City: Tesis de Maestría en Ciencias de la Sostenibilidad. Instituto de Ecología-Universidad
Nacional Autónoma de México
GAR (2015). Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction. Geneva: United Nations.
Garza, G. (2000). Introducción. La Ciudad de México en el fin del segundo milenio. Mexico City: Colegio
de México, AC.
Garza, G. (2000a). Superconcentración, crisis y globalización del sector industrial, 1930–1998. La Ciudad de
México en el fin del segundo milenio. Mexico City: Colegio de México, AC.
IPCC (2018). Annex I: Glossary (R. Matthews (ed.)). In: V. Masson-Delmotte, P. Zhai, H.O. Pörtner, D.
Roberts, J. Skea, P.R. Shukla, A. Pirani, W. Moufouma-Okia, C. Péan, R. Pidcock, S. Connors, J.B.
R. Matthews, Y. Chen, X. Zhou, M.I. Gomis, E. Lonnoy, T. Maycock, M. Tignor, and T. Waterfield
(eds.): Global warming of 1.5°C. An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C
above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of
strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts
to eradicate poverty.
Lesser Illades, J. and Cortés, M. (1998). El hundimiento del terreno en la ciudad de México y sus implicaciones
en el sistema de drenaje. Ingeniería Hidráulica en México. XIII (3): 13–18.
Lezama, J.L. (2000). Degradación del medio ambiente. La Ciudad de México en el fin del segundo milenio.
Mexico City: Colegio de México, AC.
Meerow, S., Newell, J.P., and Stults, M. (2016). Defining urban resilience: a review. Landscape and Urban
Planning. 147: 38–49.
Miller, F., Osbahr, H., Boyd, E., Thomalla, F., Bahrwani, S., Ziervogel, G., Walker, B., Birkmann, J., van der
Leeuw, S., Rockström, J., Hinkel, J., Downing, T., Folke, C., and Nelson, D. (2010). Resilience and
vulnerability: complementary or conflicting concepts? Ecology and Society. 15(3). https://doi.org/
10.5751/ES-03378-150311.
Negrete Salas, M.E. (2016). Estructura urbana y procesos de organización del espacio metropolitano. La
Ciudad de México en el siglo XXI: realidades y retos. Ciudad de México: Miguel Ángel Porrúa.
Oficina de Resiliencia CDMX (2016). Estrategia de Resiliencia de la CDMX, transformación adaptativas,
incluyente y equitativa. Ciudad de México. www.100resilientcities.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/
CDMX-Resilience Strategy-Spanish.pdf. (Accessed June 20, 2018).
Pelling, M. (2011). Adaptation to Climate Change: From Resilience to Transformation. London &
New York: Routledge.
Pelling, M. and Manuel-Navarrete, D. (2011). From resilience to transformation: the adaptive cycle in two
Mexican urban centers. Ecology and Society. 16(2):11 www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol16/iss2/art11/
Research.
Revi, A., Satterthwaite, D.E., Aragón-Durand, F., Corfee-Morlot, J., Kiunsi, R.B.R., Pelling, M., Roberts,
D.C., and Solecki, W. (2014). Urban areas. In: Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and
Vulnerability. Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth
Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (C.B. Field, V.R. Barros, D.J.
Dokken,K.J. Mach, M.D. Mastrandrea, T.E. Bilir, M. Chatterjee, K.L. Ebi, Y.O. Estrada, R.C. Genova,
B. Girma, E.S. Kissel, A.N. Levy, S. MacCracken, P.R. Mastrandrea and L.L. White (eds.)). Cambridge,
United Kingdom and New York: Cambridge University Press, 535–612.
Romero-Lankao, P. (2010). Water in Mexico City: what will climate change bring to its history of water-
related hazards and vulnerabilities? Environment and Urbanization. 22 (1): 157–178.
SEDEMA (2014a) Estrategia Local de Acción Climática. 2014–2020. México City: Centro Mario Molina.
SEDEMA (2014b) Programa de Acción Climática, 2014–2020. Ciudad de México.
Schipper, L. and Pelling, M. (2006). Disasters risk, climate change and international development: Scope for,
and challenges to, integration. Disasters. 30 (1): 19–38.
SEMARNAT (s.f.) Planta de Tratamiento de Aguas Residuales Atotonilco. National Water Commission
(Conagua), n.d. www.conagua.gob.mx/Conagua07/Publicaciones/Publicaciones/SGAPDS-19-11.pdf.
(Accessed November,2018).
Sobrino, J. (2000). Participación económica en el siglo XX. La Ciudad de México en el fin del segundo
milenio. México City: Colegio de México, AC.
156
The case of Mexico City Megalopolis
Solecki, W., Leichenko, R., and O’Brien, K. (2011). Climate change adaptation strategies and disaster
risk reduction in cities: connections, contentions, and synergies. Current Opinion in Environmental
Sustainability. 3: 135–141. DOI 10.1016/j.cosust.2011.03.001.
Stone, D. (1989). Causal stories and the formation of policy agendas. Political Science Quarterly.
104(2): 281–300.
Tanner, T., Bahadur, A., and Moench, M. (2017). Challenges for Resilience Policy and Practice.
London: Overseas Development Institute.
Tellman, B., Bausch, J., Eakin, H., Andries, J., Mazari-Hiriat, M., Manuel-Navarrete, D,. and Redman, C.
(2018). Adaptive pathways and coupled infrastructure: seven centuries of adaptation to water risk and
the production of vulnerability in Mexico City. Ecology and Society. 23 (1).
Thomalla, F., Downing, T., Spanger-Siegfired, E., Han, G., and Rockstrom, J (2006). Reducing hazard
vulnerability: towards a common approach between disaster risk reduction and climate adaptation.
Disasters. 30(1): 39–48.
Wilkinson, E. and Aragón-Durand, F. (2019). Local level climate risk management in Mexico: Mission
impossible? LEAD Program. México City: El Colegio de México. In Press.
157
13
Resilient urban water services
Åse Johannessen, Christine Wamsler, and Sophie Peter
Introduction
The sustainable development of cities is increasingly threatened by a worldwide water crisis
including dysfunctional urban water services (drinking water, sanitation, and drainage), polluted
and depleted water resources, droughts, and floods (World Economic Forum 2017). At the same
time, the causes and impacts of the water crisis are exacerbated by climate change (IPCC 2012).
Despite a shared understanding of the importance of addressing the water crisis by inter-
national, national, and local stakeholders, there is a peculiar lack of action and even resistance
in addressing the situation (OECD 2017; World Economic Forum 2017). This hits hardest the
urban poor, who are most at risk.
Consequently, addressing inequity to foster resilience is increasingly seen as a key factor,
both in theory and in practice (Harris et al. 2017; Sovacool et al. 2015; Yarina 2018; Ziervogel
et al. 2017). At the same time, scientists and practitioners struggle to find alternatives to current
approaches, which are dominated by sectoral and engineering-based concepts in the domains of
urban risk, water, sanitation, drainage, spatial planning, and watershed management ( Koop et al.
2017; Smith et al., 2013).
Against this background, this chapter provides new knowledge on the interface between risk,
vulnerability, and the resilience of urban water services, and linkages with social equity. Based on
the analysis of the urban water system in Metro Cebu, the Philippines, it aims to contribute to
new thinking around urban water governance and management to support resilience and social
equity.
Theoretical framework
The analytical framework for this study was developed on the assumption that urban water ser-
vices can be compared to complex adaptive systems, which require the establishment of certain
feedback loops to be considered resilient (Holland 1995; Levin et al. 2013). There are two kinds
of feedback: “reinforcing” (or positive) feedback amplifies or accelerates a change from a starting
or equilibrium point; while “balancing” (or negative) feedback dampens, slows down or corrects
a change in a system that is moving away from the starting point (Meadows 2008). For example,
158
Urban water services
if water resources that are consumed and removed from the urban system are not fed back into
it, there is scarcity. Other examples include demand management or supply augmentation that
aims to renew resources. Negative feedback loops are, therefore, especially relevant for urban
resilience as they act as a balancing force against exponential growth (i.e. positive feedback) that
could occur if, for example, water use is unchecked.
The influence of feedback loops is inherently linked to the social and ecological dimension of
resilience, notably the ability of human societies to adapt to changing environmental conditions
(Adger et al. 2005), for instance, through adapting policies, plans, and practices. In turn, such
abilities are linked to, for example, economic status, political power, gender, human, and social
capital, age and disability (Morrow 2008).
Thus, here positive feedback loops are equivalent to the main risks or water crisis issues, and
the factors that create them, whilst at the same time considering the people most affected by
these risks. Conversely, negative feedback loops are considered as equivalent to the solutions put
in place to correct and balance the situation.
Methodology
This chapter presents a case study (Yin 2009) of urban water services’ resilience in Metro Cebu,
the Philippines (see Figure 13.1). The research was carried out in the context of the WASH &
RESCUE (WAter, Sanitation and Hygiene in RESilient Cities and Urban areas adapting to
Extreme waters) project. It was conducted during 2014–2017 and included a literature review,
interviews with 21 key stakeholders from different backgrounds and fields (see Table 13.1) and
field visits to two barangays1. During these field visits, walk-through analyses, as well as partici-
patory observation and group discussions during a community meeting were conducted. The
analyses involved data coding based on the analytical framework (see Section 2) as well as joint
workshops with the project team and relevant stakeholders, during which the preliminary results
were discussed, validated and revised.
Metro Cebu is an interesting case for studying resilience and social inequity in urban water
services. It is a fast-growing city in one of the most disaster-prone regions of the world.The area,
which is regularly hit by tropical cyclones, storms, and floods (UNISDR 2015), had approxi-
mately 2.8 million people in 2015 and is expected to reach 3.8 million in 2030 (OECD 2017).
It has seen rapid economic growth, mainly underpinned by business process outsourcing com-
panies, tourism, and the manufacturing industry (OECD 2017; Tholons 2016). This, in turn,
has driven expansion in the real estate industry, which was, in 2012, the fastest-g rowing sector
(Garcia-Yap 2013). At the same time, income inequality in urban areas has risen in the Philippines
since 1998 (Reyeset al. 2017).
Results
Our study revealed that Metro Cebu’s current approach to urban water services lacks important,
balancing feedback loops. This is eroding resilience in terms of the emergence of increasingly
serious water management issues. The escalating water crisis affects poor urban communities
most, increasing both their exposure and vulnerability.We identified several main risk factors that
hamper urban water resilience and illustrated them in Figure 13.2.These are the inadequate man-
agement of: (1) spatial planning (including for drainage); (2) waste; and (3) water (Figure 13.2).
The influencing factors and their interlinkages are described in the following sections. In short,
they include actions such as paving, which have reduced the permeability of the urban surface,
and that, together with inadequate waste management, contribute to the clogging of drains,
159
Å. Johannessen, C. Wamsler, and S. Peter
consequently increasing floods. Floods, in turn, lead to unsafe environments, for instance through
increased risk of contamination and disease transmission. The aim of surface water management
has thus become to channel water, as fast as possible, to the sea, at the expense of attempting to
capture it as a resource. Reduced urban surface permeability also reduces groundwater recharge
while, at the same time, existing groundwater resources are being polluted by inadequate sani-
tation practices. In addition, the overuse of groundwater leads to not only its reduction, but also
salinization from coastal aquifers. Only by looking at all of these different factors together is an
understanding of urban water resilience possible.
160
Figure 13.1 Metro Cebu is located on the eastern side of the island of Cebu in the Central Philippines
Source: Google Maps
Å. Johannessen, C. Wamsler, and S. Peter
Figure 13.2 Main risk factors that hamper urban water resilience in Metro Cebu linked to inad-
equate spatial planning/drainage, waste, and water management
Source: Authors
resources, several proposals have been put forward to ensure supply, notably a pipeline to Bohol,
but none have been deemed feasible or implemented.
Saltwater intrusion is another major challenge to Philippine water resources (OECD 2017).
Unregulated pumping of groundwater for drinking is depleting reserves, leading to salt water
infiltration from the sea, and making the extracted water increasingly unusable for human con-
sumption (Figure 13.2). Combined with the rise in sea level, it is estimated that 25 per cent of
all wells will be contaminated by 2025 (JICA and MCDCB 2015). In addition, the water supply
is susceptible to drought, an event that recurs approximately every fourth year (OECD 2017).
Consequently, calls are growing for more comprehensive approaches to improve resilience.
Better demand management and green infrastructure (more recently also called ecosystem or
nature-based solutions) are increasingly seen as a critical complement to dams and reservoirs
(OECD 2017). However, in practice, short-term thinking dominates. In the words of an inter-
viewee: “There is short term thinking about the recharge of sources of drinking water.We prefer
resilience measures that have an immediate effect. But if we really want to maintain the sources
of city water, we should take a holistic approach. Not just trying to find solutions for coping with
dirty water, and responding by boiling, treating and filtering it.”
162
Figure 13.3 Salinity map for the years 1975, 1985, and 1995 showing salt water infiltration
Source: The Water Research Center, 1995
Å. Johannessen, C. Wamsler, and S. Peter
In addition, investing in sanitation is very low on the list of political priorities. One reason for
this is thought to be the lack of opportunities for politicians to make financial gains. Another
important root cause is the lack of public awareness about the causes of diarrhoea. Although
public awareness and training are seen as key measures in tackling the sanitation crisis, related
actions are lacking.
164
Urban water services
Similarly, various large-scale developments are being built above rivers or creeks, although
this is illegal. Interviewees highlighted that power and corruption, along with the potential to
make other financial gains, encouraged the government to accept new developments in at-
risk areas. A private sector interviewee stated: “If I talk to the government, there is always this
reasoning: Ok, what can we get from that? Which is really sad.The bigger the project, the bigger
the kickback.” At the same time, in 2013, Mayor Mike Rama of Cebu City (a central part of
Metro Cebu) was perceived to be genuinely trying to address corruption by rebuilding trust in
the government. Corruption is a serious issue in the Philippines, in general.3 A study found that
seven out of ten companies were asked for a bribe when doing business with the government
(World Bank Group 2009).
In addition, sustainable planning faces several other challenges, such as a lack of political
support, outdated legislation, and a lack of knowledge and technical expertise. While the ambi-
tious “Mega Cebu” plan for integrated development has been drawn up, a lack of enforcement
means that it has not been translated into concrete action.
Strengthening Governance
Some improvements can be seen in the governance of the water crisis. For example, the creation
of the Cebu Provincial Water Resources Authority in 2016 was intended to improve governance
165
Å. Johannessen, C. Wamsler, and S. Peter
Figure 13.4 A toilet in a poor neighborhood in the upland barangay of Guadeloupe. Flies can
enter this open hole in the ground and can easily transmit diseases
Photo: Åse Johannessen
of water management and sectors at the river basin level (OECD 2017; Silva 2016).With respect
to solid waste management, some recent improvements have also been made through the decen-
tralization of power to the barangay. Nevertheless, governance is still seen as weak and local
support for the most vulnerable communities is largely provided by NGOs. Interviewees noted
that the hopes of city authorities rest with private investors, who are expected to establish water
management systems and services in marginal areas.
Capacity Building
Some examples of capacity building through cross- sectoral learning and awareness- raising
between water- related sectors (involving task forces, key institutes, and public– private
partnerships) can be found. One task force, including national agencies and local government
actors, NGOs, academia, donors, and a water provider was, for instance, a central actor in urban
166
Urban water services
Figure 13.5 The barangay of Tinago in the downtown area of Metro Cebu is an area with inse-
cure tenure. There is inadequate drainage, and jerry cans containing drinking water, which are
sold by the government, are visible in the center of the photo
Photo: Åse Johannessen
water services capacity building and helped to create the Water Research Centre (WRC), based
at the University of San Carlos in Metro Cebu. The Centre supports not only water operators
and communities, but also the civil service and government. For example, it was behind the
development of the Water Resources Management Action Plan for Central Cebu (2005–2030)
and has been involved in research and monitoring of the water situation in the city since 1975.
The WRC has contributed to starting up and supporting various projects –often on a voluntary
basis –that have been running for some 30 years and have been widely replicated. This long-
term success is based on trust and respect from communities, which the Centre often supports
long after the project has finished. Communities themselves see the health, convenience, and
livelihood benefits of the project, and this spurs them on to make further improvements.
Public–private partnerships play an important role in some barangays in Metro Cebu, for
example by engaging in capacity building in local communities. A pilot project was launched
in several urban barangays to reinvent the purok, a traditional Filipino community organization,
more often seen in rural areas. It provided a model for micro-organization around a few key
priorities, such as health, waste collection, agriculture, protection of the environment, disaster
risk reduction, and infrastructure. It also provided incentives for community participation. For
example, the private sector partner GENVI Development Corporation provided seeds for cin-
namon trees. Under Philippine law, companies such as GENVI must spend money on social
projects. Experience has shown that when small steps result in concrete achievements, the
capacity of the community increases over time. However, significant efforts must be made to
motivate the community and get their attention. Most members of purok organizations are
167
Å. Johannessen, C. Wamsler, and S. Peter
women (about 80 per cent), which is seen as one of the reasons for their success. The health
and sanitation training provided by various initiatives is thought to have improved the situation
of the urban poor by reducing epidemics due to water-borne diseases such as cholera and
diarrhoea. However, the benefits are not clear-cut as other studies illustrate that water supply
improvements have had negative effects on sanitation and hygiene behaviors in Metro Cebu
(Bennett 2007).
Risk Management
Metro Cebu has implemented both local disaster management plans and related initiatives.
However, they pay very little attention to preventive actions such as drainage and urban planning
(OECD 2017), and may even increase risk for the urban poor. For instance, the Tinago Riverside
Promenade Project to clear flood-prone zones (Reduce Danger Zone; ReDZ) in the lower
parts of the river system, is officially part of an effort to restore the area to its former glory.
This occurred when trade with China peaked in the sixteenth century –at this time the zone
contributed to the economy of old Cebu and was noted for its beauty. The project, and the
ensuing eviction of marginalized, urban poor communities, has been framed as for the residents’
own good and is mandated by law (Republic Act 386). However, the Philippines Urban Poor
Association, which provides help to people who are being forcibly evicted, tells another story.
Resettlements sites are often just as (or more) risky as former areas and deprive citizens of their
livelihoods. Consequently, many people abandon the new site and return to the city, where their
jobs, friends, and families are (Yarina 2018). Interviewees also described the political motives
behind the ReDZ project, intended to clean up the area near the “SM” mall.The SM mall is par-
ticularly influential in the political arena. As one of the interviewees noted, “This is a common
practice by politicians. If you have good friends in the business community during elections, you
get support. The issue is not about floods.”
168
Urban water services
The Metro Cebu study is not an isolated case; worldwide, a more comprehensive approach
to the water crisis is lacking (Johannessen et al. 2014). For example, international bodies such
as the United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction have identified that water
and sanitation are two of the biggest urban challenges (UNISDR 2012), whilst a comprehen-
sive analysis of water-related risks is seldom included in associated risk assessments. References
to drainage are increasing, but more insidious issues related to the water crisis or impacts on
poor communities are often omitted (Nuzir et al. 2014). Efforts that have been made so far are
siloed and contribute to the erosion of resilience and sustainability. There is therefore an urgent
need to reframe water crisis issues in order to increase the resilience of the neediest and address
equity issues. To do this, greater emphasis needs to be put on preventive measures (as opposed to
responsive and technical fixes) that address underlying risks and transparency. Our study indicates
that capacity building and transparency measures in governance and public institutions are key
in this context.
Notes
1 The barangay is the smallest administrative division in the Philippines and is the native Filipino term for
a village, district, or ward.
2 Sub-section titles correspond to the boxes in Figure 13.2.
3 Philippines ranks 111 out of a total of 180 countries, with a score of 34 out of 100 (0 is highly
corrupt, 100 is not at all corrupt) on the Corruption Perception Index 2017 prepared by Transparency
International.
References
Adger, W.N., Hughes, T.P. Folke, C., Carpenter, S.R., and Rockström, J. (2005). Social–ecological resilience
to coastal disasters. Science. 309 (5737): 1036–1039.
Ballesteros, M.M. (2010). Linking poverty and the environment: Evidence from Slums in Philippine Cities.
Discussion Paper series no. 2010–33. Makati City, Philippines: Philippine Institute for Development
Studies.
Bennett, D. (2012). Clean water makes you dirty: Water supply and sanitation behavior in the Philippines.
Journal of Human Resources. 47(1): 146–173.
Etemadi, F.U. (2000). Civil society participation in city governance in Cebu City Environment &
Urbanization. 12 (1) April.
Garcia-Yap, A. (2013). Real estate sector fastest growing industry in Cebu. Cebu Daily News. https://
newsinfo.inquirer.net/334233/real-estate-sector-fastest-growing-industry-in-cebu#ixzz5cIeJYGOe.
Harris, L.M., Chu, E.K., and Ziervogel, G. (2017). Negotiated resilience. Resilience. 1(19). http://doi.org/
cmrr.
Holland, J.H. (1995). Hidden Order: How Adaptation Builds Complexity. Reading, MA: Addison
Wesley.
Institute for Global Environmental Strategies, IGES (2017). Planning and implementation of integrated
solid waste management strategies at local level: The case of Cebu City. http://ccet.jp/sites/default/
files/2017-10/CCET%20Cebu%20Case%20Study_PrintingVer0718.pdf.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, IPCC (2012). Glossary of terms. In: C.B. Field, V. Barros,
T.F. Stocker, D. Qin, D.J. Dokken, K.L. Ebi, M.D. Mastrandrea, K.J. Mach, G.-K. Plattner, S.K. Allen,
M. Tignor, and P.M. Midgley (eds.), Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance
Climate change Adaptation.A Special Report of Working Groups I and II of the Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change (IPCC) (pp. 555–564). Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Japan International Cooperation Agency, JICA and Metro Cebu Development and Coordination Board,
MCDCB (2015).The roadmap for sustainable urban development in Metro Cebu, Cebu,The Philippines.
http://open_jicareport.jica.go.jp/pdf/12235529.pdf.
169
Å. Johannessen, C. Wamsler, and S. Peter
Johannessen, Å., Rosemarin, A., Gerger Swartling, Å., Han, G., Stenström, T-A., and Vulturius, G. (2014).
Strategies for building resilience to hazards in water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) systems: The
role of public private partnerships. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction. 10: 102–115.
doi: 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2014.07.002.
Koop, S.H.A., Koetsier, L., Doornhof, A., Reinstra, O.,Van Leeuwen, C.J., Brouwer, S., Dieperink, C., and
Driessen, P.P.J. (2017). Assessing the governance capacity of cities to address challenges of water, waste,
and climate change. Water Resource Management. 31(11): 3427–3443.
Levin, S., Xepapadeas,T., Crépin, A-S., Norberg J., de Zeeuw, A., Folke, C., Hughes,T., Arrow, K., Barrett, S.,
Daily, G., Ehrlich, P., Kautsky, N., Mäler, K-G., Polasky, S.,Troell, M.,Vincent, J.R., and Walker, B.. (2013).
Social-ecological systems as complex adaptive systems: modeling and policy implications. Environment
and Development Economics. 18(2): 111–132. doi:10.1017/S1355770X12000460.
Meadows, D.H. (2008). Thinking in Systems –A Primer. London: Earthscan.
Morrow, B.H. (2008). Community resilience: A social justice perspective. Community & Regional
Resilience Initiative (CARRI), CARRI Research Report 4. doi: 10.13140/RG.2.1.1278.9604.
Nuzir, F.N., Jagath Premakumara, D.G., and Dewancker, B.J. (2014). Planning resilient city in Cebu: Lessons
learned and practical application. Asian Institute of Low Carbon Design. Conference Paper: Proceedings
of International Workshop and Conference on Re-shaping Urban Coastal Landscapes, 207–212.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, OECD (2017). Green growth in Cebu,
Philippines. Green Growth Studies. Paris: OECD Publishing. doi: http:// dx.doi.org/10.1787/
9789264277991-en.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, OECD (2015). Water and Cities. Ensuring
Sustainable Futures. Paris: OECD Publishing.
Republic Act 386. Civil Code of the Philippines (Republic Act No. 386). www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/text.
jsp?file_id=225740.
Republic Act 9275. Philippine Clean Water Act of 2004. Section 27 (a). www.lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/
ra2004/ra_9275_2004.html.
Reyes, C.M., Mina, C.D., and Asis, R.D. (2017). Inequality of opportunities among ethnic groups in the
Philippines. Philippine Institute for Development Studies, Discussion Paper Series 2017(42). https://
pidswebs.pids.gov.ph/CDN/PUBLICATIONS/pidsdps1742.pdf.
Silva, V.A.V. (2016). Finding answers to Cebu’s water woes. Cebu Daily News. http://cebudailynews.
inquirer.net/95108/finding-answers-to-cebus-water-woes#ixzz5D7sE8mv7.
Smith, H.M., Ugarelli, R., van der Zouwen, M., Allen, R., Gormley, A.M., and Segrave, A. (2013). Risk,
Vulnerability, Resilience and Adaptive Management in the Water Sector. Report Task 21.1, TRUST.
Sovacool, B.K., Linnér, B-O., and Goodsite, M.E. (2015). The political economy of climate adaptation.
Nature Climate Change 5, July: 617–618.
Tholons (2016). Top 100 Outsourcing Destinations: Rankings and Executive Summary. www.tholons.
com/Tholonstop100/Tholons_Top_100_2016_Executive_Summary_and_Rankings.pdf.
Transparency International (2017). Corruption Perception Index: Philippines. www.transparency.org/
country/PHL.
Undurraga, E.A., Edillo, F.E., Erasmo, J.N.V., Alera, M.T.P.,Yoon, I.K., Largo, F.M., and Shepard, D.S. (2017).
Disease burden of dengue in the Philippines: Adjusting for underreporting by comparing active and
passive dengue surveillance in Punta Princesa, Cebu City. The American Journal of Tropical Medicine
and Hygiene. 96(4): 887–898. doi:10.4269/ajtmh.16–0488.
UN Habitat (2010). Solid Waste Management in the World’s Cities, London: United Nations Human
Settlements Programme. https://unhabitat.org/books/solid-waste-management-in-theworlds-cities-
water-and-sanitation-in-the-worlds-cities-2010–2/.
United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction, UNISDR. (2015). Global Assessment
Report on Disaster Risk Reduction. Making Development Sustainable: The Future of Disaster Risk
Management. www.preventionweb.net/english/hyogo/gar/2015/en/gar-pdf/GAR2015_EN.pdf.
United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction, UNISDR (2012). How To Make Cities
More Resilient –A Handbook For Local Government Leaders. Geneva, Switzerland.
Villar, M.A. (2018). Build Build Build –DPWH Strategic Infrastructure Programs and Policies. Presentation
by Director Constante A. Llanes, JR., CESO III, Planning Service. www.iro.ph/article_doc/4e2841b3_
6%20DPWH%20Presentation%20FINAL.pdf.
Voskamp, I.M. and Van de Ven, F.H.M. 2015. Planning support system for climate adaptation: Composing
effective sets of blue-green measures to reduce urban vulnerability to extreme weather events. Building
and Environment. 83: 159–167.
170
Urban water services
Wamsler, C. 2018. Mind the gap: The role of mindfulness in adapting to increasing risk and climate change.
Sustain Sci. 13: 1121. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-017-0524-3.
World Economic Forum, WEF (2017). Global Risks 2017, 12th edn. www.weforum.org/r isks.
World Bank Group. 2009. Deterring corruption and improving governance in road construction and main-
tenance. Transport Sector Board, Transport Papers, TP-September 27, 2009. Washington DC.
Yarina, L. (2018).Your sea wall won’t save you. Places Journal. https://doi.org/10.22269/180327.
Yin, R.K. (2009). Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Ziervogel, G., Pelling, M., Cartwright, A., Chu, E., Deshpande, T., Harris, L., Hyams, K. Kaunda, J. Klaus,
B. Michael, K. Pasquini, L. Pharoah, R. Rodina, L. Scott, D., and Zweig, P. (2017). Inserting rights and
justice into urban resilience: a focus on everyday risk. Environment & Urbanization. 29 (1): 123–138.
doi: 10.1177/0956247816686905.
171
14
Resilient shrinking cities
Maxwell Hartt, Austin Zwick, and Nick Revington
Introduction
Urban population loss has long been associated with failure. Within the context of the modern,
globalized political economy, growth is equated with success and anything less is stigmatized
(Beauregard 2009).Where growth is often synonymous with prosperous urban living, shrinking
is perceived “as a symptom of crisis, an undesirable side effect of failed economic and political
policy” (Rieniets 2006, p. 5). The social consequences of spatial stigma can be extremely per-
sistent; progress can be undermined and negative events propagated (Audirac, 2017). A growing
number of academics and practitioners have argued that a shift in perception is needed –
shrinking cities need to be seen for their opportunity, not for their challenges (Hartt 2016,
2019; Hollander et al. 2009). By adopting a more positive lens and discounting the long shadow
of spatial stigma, some shrinking cities may very well be more resilient than their reputation
suggests. Whether as a testing ground for urban innovations, such as vertical urban farming
(Hollander et al. 2018), or as pioneers in a shift away from consumption-centered cities (De
Flander 2013), shrinking cities offer unique opportunities to catalyze wider change. Qualities
linked directly to population loss, such as the availability of space, cheap rent, and the dis-
tance of neighbors, can in fact attract newcomers and spur innovation (Markusen 2013). Even
Detroit, the poster child of urban decline, has been hyped as a new urban bohemia. According
to Ager (2015, p. 57), “tough, cheap, and real, Detroit is cool again. With the nation’s biggest
urban bankruptcy in the rearview mirror, the Motor city is attracting investors, innovators and
young adventurers.” This begs the question of whether resilient shrinking cities have emerged
as a widespread phenomenon. Have any shrinking cities comeback? If so, what has propelled
their transformation? Is it due to the so-called back-to-the-city movement (Florida 2017), or as
Ehrenhalt (2013) calls it, the great inversion? Could resilient shrinking cities be drawing from
and even outpacing their suburbs?
In this chapter, we empirically examine the economic resilience of US shrinking cities, their
relationship with their surrounding suburbs, and explore the role of innovation and anchor
institutions. We first examine demographic trends in US Rust Belt cities to identify resilient
shrinking cities. Second, recognizing the strong link between innovation, prosperity and growth
(Glaeser and Saiz 2004), we explore the role of innovation in stabilizing population loss. Finally,
172
Resilient shrinking cities
we explore the role of anchor institutions in helping shrinking cities bounce forward instead of
being caught in the hysteresis of decline.
Shrinking US cities
Cities have been growing and shrinking since their inception. However, the global restructuring
of production, distribution and consumption in recent decades has led to the emergence of
sustained urban shrinkage (Castells 2004; Martinez-Fernandez et al. 2012). Researchers have
concluded that this emergent phenomenon is a lasting symptom of globalization, not simply a
step in an evolutionary cycle (Großmann et al. 2013; Hartt 2018b; Pallagst 2010). In addition to
globalization, shrinkage has been attributed to a wide range of causes from natural disasters to sub-
urbanization to political transformations (Oswalt and Rieniets 2006). The complex, diverse and
multidimensional nature of shrinking cities (Hartt 2018a) is reflected in the debate surrounding
its definition (Ganning and Tighe 2018). Of the multitude of defining characteristics that have
been advanced, an absolute population decline over time and symptoms of economic change are
consistently at the forefront. In the United States, shrinking cities are generally associated with
post-industrial transformations and are largely concentrated around the Great Lakes in what is
often dubbed the “Rust Belt” (Weaver et al. 2017).
When a city shrinks in population, its physical form is typically slower to adapt. This mis-
match can lead to a high number of vacancies (Wiechmann and Pallagst 2012), underused
infrastructure (Audirac et al. 2012), increased socio-economic inequality (Moraes 2009) and
the abandonment of residential areas (Hollander 2011). Furthermore, as the population shrinks
so too does the tax base, making it increasingly difficult to maintain municipal fiscal health,
let alone attract new residents. In response some scholars have called for shrinking cities to adjust
their municipal footprint by “rightsizing” (Ryan 2012), or more simply “plan for less –fewer
people, fewer buildings, fewer land uses” (Popper and Popper 2002, p. 23). Others have argued
that some of the outcomes of shrinkage, such as increased available space and low prices, may in
fact attract newcomers (Markusen 2013).
Urban resilience
The term resilience has come to mean many things, including environmental sustainability,
risk management, natural disaster recovery, among others. Yet what remains is an underlying
theme, where through strong social networks and government (re)investment, cities and
neighborhoods thrive after facing adversity whether it arrives in the form of immediate shocks
or prolonged stressors. Even within the single strain of economic resilience, there are several
definitions that subdivide the concept further. Martin and Sunley (2015, p. 4) divide economic
resilience into categories: bounce back, ability to absorb, and positive adaptability, with the
latter defined as the “capacity of a system to maintain core performances despite shocks by
adapting its structure, functions and organization… [the] idea of bouncing forward.” Hallegate
(2014) defines macroeconomic resilience as having two components: instantaneous resilience,
which is the ability to limit the magnitude of immediate production losses for a given amount
of asset losses, and dynamic resilience, which is the ability to reconstruct and recover. Similarly,
Rose and Krausmann (2013) subdivide economic resilience into static, the productive capacity
to continue operations during a shock, and dynamic, the ability to marshal resources to hasten
recovery after the shock. Even governments attempt to make similar distinctions, such as the
US Economic Development Administration’s (EDA) Comprehensive Economic Development
Strategy (CEDS) Content Guidelines that subdivide resilience into categories of (1) the ability
173
Maxwell Hartt, Austin Zwick, and Nick Revington
to recover quickly from a shock, (2) the ability to withstand a shock, and (3) the ability to avoid
the shock altogether.
As cities of the American Rust Belt were unable to withstand the stressors of deindustrializa-
tion, and considering that re-industrialization is not a realistic option, our research understands
resilience in terms of economic recovery through transformation akin to the concepts of dynamic
and adaptive resilience, with the latter being our preferred term. The question becomes: What
factors allow cities to become adaptatively resilient? As we will discuss, the process of acquiring
the necessary attributes are not a quick process, as disaster relief might be, but nor is it a foregone
conclusion that such a recovery will occur at all.
174
Resilient shrinking cities
Table 14.1 US shrinking cities with stable boundaries in single principal city metropolitan regions that
have lost 25 per cent or more of their population between 1970 and 2010
Population Change
cities. Although St Louis, MO lost almost half of its population between 1970 and 2010, its popu-
lation change has stabilized considerably over time. Between 1970 and 1980, St Louis, MO lost
37 per cent of its population. However, between 2000 and 2010, it only lost 9 per cent. Similarly,
Pittsburgh, PA and Rochester, NY have also significantly minimized their population losses over
time. And although they each had a brief lapse between 1990 and 2000, both Syracuse, NY and
Binghamton, NY have generally slowed their population losses. Figure 14.1 demonstrates the
resilient population changes of St Louis, Pittsburgh, Rochester, Syracuse, and Binghamton. At
the other end of the spectrum, the cities in Michigan (Flint and Saginaw) and Ohio (Dayton and
Cincinnati) have struggled to control population loss. In fact, population losses between 2000
and 2010 in both Flint and Saginaw were more severe than between 1970 and 1980.These cities
are clearly still continuing to battle with severe out migration and population loss. Because our
interest lies in those cities that have shown resilience, we exclude those still undergoing severe
decline from our study cases. This constrains our sample to five remaining cities.
Although local population change is an important indicator of urban shrinkage and urban
resilience, it is also important to consider wider spatial context. Shrinking cities within a shrinking
175
Maxwell Hartt, Austin Zwick, and Nick Revington
10%
0%
Local Population Change
-10%
-20%
-30%
-40%
St Louis, MO Pittsburgh, PA Rochester, NY Syracuse, NY Binghamton, NY
Figure 14.1 Decadal local population change of St Louis, MO, Pittsburgh, PA, Rochester, NY,
Syracuse, NY, and Binghamton, NY from 1970 to 2010
Source: US Census (1970, 1980, 1990, 2000, 2010)
region face different obstacles and may have different opportunities than shrinking cities within a
growing region. Figure 14.2 shows the suburban population change between 1970 and 2010 for
the five shrinking cities identified. Suburban population was calculated by subtracting the city
population from the metropolitan statistical area population. Importantly, none of the suburbs
exhibit the same drastic population losses of their core cities. Of the five suburban areas, only
the suburbs of Pittsburgh have consistently lost population. The suburbs of Binghamton have
fluctuated between slow growth and shrinkage, while the suburbs of Syracuse have experienced
sustained but diminishing growth. Lastly, the suburbs of St Louis and Rochester have consistently
grown by more than 5 per cent each decade.
Comparing Figures 14.1 and 14.2 reveals several interesting differences between shrinking
cities and their regions. –most notably, the general divergence between urban and suburban
population trends. Population change may be negative in all five cities, but it is moving in an
upwards trajectory. In contrast, suburban population change is diminishing. Although regional
population dynamics and migration are multifaceted, complex phenomenon, this trend could
point to the resilience, and potentially the “comeback” of these shrinking cities by a “return to the
city” (McCarthy and Moody 2016) of its suburban population. With this in mind, we examine
the potential role of innovation, talent, and anchor institutions in shrinking city resilience.
176
Resilient shrinking cities
10%
Suburban Population Change
0%
-10%
-20%
-30%
-40%
St Louis Suburbs Pittsburgh Suburbs Rochester Suburbs
Syracuse Suburbs Binghamton Suburbs
Figure 14.2 Decadal suburban population change of St. Louis, MO, Pittsburgh, PA, Rochester,
NY, Syracuse, NY, and Binghamton, NY from 1970 to 2010
Source: US Census (1970, 1980, 1990, 2000, 2010)
critical lacunae given that “anchor institutions have emerged as a critical component of inner-
city revitalization strategies” (Silverman et al. 2014, p. 162) in shrinking cities.
This is not to deny the economic importance of universities, or their potential role in urban
resilience. There are links between innovation and talent, institutional strength, and economic
performance. All five resilient shrinking cities have prominent universities ranked in the top 100
for quality; of the eight institutions represented, six are also among the 100 richest by endow-
ment size (Table 14.3). Five of the eight institutions are also home to graduate medical colleges.
Carnegie Mellon, Rochester Institute of Technology, and Syracuse University do not have med-
ical colleges, however the former two have strong engineering and technology programs. And
while there is no medical program at Syracuse University, the city does have a medical college
at nearby SUNY Upstate Medical University –which happens to be the largest employer in
Onondaga County.
Indeed, universities are often among the largest individual employers in their regions, with a
variety of high-and lower-skilled jobs (Birch 2014), and are major purchasers of local goods and
services, with considerable direct and indirect impacts on their wider local economy through
multiplier effects (Siegfried et al. 2007). Through their teaching, research, and –increasingly –
community outreach roles, universities can produce favorable outputs for economic develop-
ment: knowledge creation; human capital creation; transfer of existing knowledge; technological
innovation; capital investment; provision of regional leadership; production of knowledge infra-
structure; and production of a favorable regional milieu (Goldstein and Renault 2004). While
private sector companies may fulfill some of these functions as well, universities are unlikely to
relocate to other cities for competitive tax rates or generous municipal subsidies (Adams 2003).
Some evidence suggests that universities in smaller cities can even substitute for the agglomer-
ation effects offered by larger cities, effectively allowing them to punch above their economic
weight (Drucker 2016; Goldstein and Drucker 2006; Goldstein and Renault 2004).
177
Maxwell Hartt, Austin Zwick, and Nick Revington
Table 14.3 Shrinking city universities in the Top 100 Richest Universities list by endowment size (2018)
Source: National Association of College and University Business Officers US News and World Report National University
2018 Rankings.
However, there is evidence that these benefits are often modest and broadly diffused across
regions (Drucker 2016; Goldstein and Drucker 2006; Goldstein and Renault 2004). They may
also be uneven, with the costs of university-led urban development borne disproportionately by
marginalized residents, for example through segregation, displacement, or increased policing in
university-adjacent districts (Bose 2015; Ehlenz 2017; Lafer 2003; Moos et al., 2018; Silverman
et al., 2014). Moreover, the presence of a strong university alone is not enough to spur effective
economic development: supports to commercialize innovations, access to capital, talent reten-
tion, and cooperation between universities, municipalities, and the private sector are also essen-
tial (Dragicevic 2015; Kleiman 2015; Power and Malmberg 2008; Rodin 2007; Taylor and Luter
2013). Finally, depending on the university sector for economic resilience means relying on
state or federal funding models for teaching and research, which are subject to change (Adams
2003), and introduces a new facet of interurban competition in which international experience
suggests the cities that are already the best-positioned, largest, and wealthiest are most likely to
succeed (Goddard,et al. 2014; Rosen and Razin 2007). These elements must all be considered
in light of local circumstances by planners and policymakers hoping to leverage universities to
promote economic resilience.
178
Resilient shrinking cities
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Figure 14.3 Proportion of residents 25 years or above with at least some college education in
five US shrinking cities, 1970 to 2010
Source: US Census (1970, 1980, 1990, 2000) and American Community Survey (2010)
substantially in all five cities, with each over 50 per cent by 2010. Pittsburgh has seen the largest
change, growing from 15 per cent in 1970 to 57 per cent in 2010.
The unmistakable trend in Figure 14.3 gives credence to the hypothesis that the relative
resilience in these five shrinking cities may be related to the increasing density of talent. But
does talent coincide with innovation in these cities? And how has innovation changed in the
city relative to the surrounding suburbs? Are these cities experiencing a “great inversion” or
simply becoming more educated and innovative across the entire metro region? In order to
ascertain the change and movement of innovation, we examine patent data from the US Patent
and Trademark Office between 1980 and 2010. Patent data is considered an apt proxy for innov-
ation and therefore a rich source of information to investigate the knowledge production and
the economic geography of innovation (Jaffe and Trajtenberg 2002; Kogler 2015; Lamoreaux and
Sokoloff 1996). We included all patents from the time period across six categorizations: chem-
ical, computers and communications, drugs and medical, electrical and electronic, mechanical,
and other (Hall et al. 2001). However, for the purposes of this chapter, patent types will not be
differentiated.
Cross-sectional aggregate patent counts for the five cities and their surrounding suburban
areas were collected for the years 1980, 1990, 2000, and 2010. Table 14.4 presents the patent
counts as suburban-to-urban ratios. For every region in every year of the sample, the number
of patents in the suburbs exceeds the number in the cities. However, St Louis, Pittsburgh, and
Syracuse all show a shift towards more urban innovation over time. Rochester and especially
Binghamton show the opposite trend. In 1970 there were roughly twice as many suburban than
urban patents in Binghamton, but by 2010 there were almost eight times more suburban patents.
The trajectory of patent ratios in Table 14.4 moderately supports the shrinking city resili-
ence narrative, but as demonstrated in Figures 14.1 and 14.2, city and suburban populations vary
both in size and trajectory. Therefore, a relative measure is needed to fully capture the changes
in innovation between cities and their suburbs. Table 14.5 presents the ratio of suburban patents
179
Maxwell Hartt, Austin Zwick, and Nick Revington
Table 14.4 Ratio of the number of suburban patents relative to the number of urban patents in five
shrinking US cities
Table 14.5 Ratio of the number of suburban patents per capita relative to the number of urban patents
per capita in five shrinking US cities
per capita to urban patents per capita. The per capita ratio results demonstrate a clear, and much
stronger, story of resilience. First, in every city at every time period, save St Louis in 1980, there
were more urban patents per capita than suburban. Secondly, in four of the five shrinking cities,
innovation in the cities outpaced their surrounding suburbs. Only in Rochester, the most sub-
urban city of the five, did suburban innovation grow more than urban. This may be due to the
factors that both of its major universities are located on the urban fringe rather than near the
downtown core, making talented workers indifferent between living in the city proper or
the nearby suburbs.
As population of these five cities are now stabilizing, but the percentage of educated workers
is increasing while the suburban to urban patent ratio is decreasing, we conclude that there is
a “return to the city” of educated workers leading to these cities becoming resilient. However,
our research stops short of finding causality. Only a handful of Rust Belt cities have begun to
reverse the decades long trend of decline that has defined the region. The commonality among
these cities are that they have large research universities that act as anchor institutions, attracting
reinvestment into their urban cores, drawing in talented college graduates, and becoming more
innovative in the process.While our research indicates that anchor institutions are key to adaptive
resilience, clearly not all shrinking cities can rely upon such a strategy. Universities are not a silver
bullet resilience strategy that should, or can, be pursued by all shrinking cities. More research is
needed to uncover what, if any, elements of anchor institutions can be most widely applied to
aid the resilience of a wider set of cities.
180
Resilient shrinking cities
Notes
1 The US Office of Management and Budget Standards defines a principal city as the largest incorporated
place in a core-based statistical area (Office of Management and Budget 2010).
2 This is to say nothing of the narrow definitions of success typically employed in these reports.
References
Adams, C. (2003).The meds and eds in urban economic development. Journal of Urban Affairs. 25(5): 571–
588. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9906.2003.00003.x.
Ager, S. (2015). Taking back Detroit. National Geographic, May, 57–83.
Audirac, I. (2017). Shrinking cities: An unfit term for American urban policy? Cities. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.cities.2017.05.001.
Audirac, I., Cunningham-Sabot, E., Fol, S., and Moraes, S.T. (2012). Declining suburbs in Europe and Latin
America. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research. 36(2): 226–244.
Beauregard, R.A. (1993). Voices of Decline: The Postwar Fate of US Cities. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell
Publishers.
Beauregard, R.A. (2009). Urban population loss in historical perspective: United States, 1820– 2000.
Environment and Planning A. 41: 514–529. https://doi.org/10.1068/a40139a.
Birch, E.L. (2014). Anchor institutions in the northeast Megaregion: An important but not fully realized
resource. In: S.M. Wachter and K.A. Zeuli (eds.): Revitalization American Cities. Philadelphia,
PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 207–223.
Bose, S. (2015). Universities and the redevelopment politics of the neoliberal city. Urban Studies.
52(14): 2616–2632. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098014550950.
Boucher, G., Conway, C., and Van Der Meer, E. (2003).Tiers of engagement by universities in their region’s
development. Regional Studies. 37(9): 887–897. https://doi.org/10.1080/0034340032000143896.
Castells, M. (2004). The Network Society. Cheltenham: Edward Edgar Pubishing Ltd.
Cohen, W.M., Nelson, R.R., and Walsh, J.P. (2002). Links and impacts: The influence of public research
on industrial R&D. Management Science. 48(1): 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.48.1.1.14273.
De Flander, K. (2013). Resource-centered cities and the opportunity of shrinkage. In: A. Khare and
T. Beckman (eds.): Mitigating Climate Change: The Emerging Face of Modern Cities. Berlin,
Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 45–57.
Dragicevic, N. (2015). Anchor Institutions. Toronto: Mowat Centre and Atkinson Foundation.
Drucker, J. (2016). Reconsidering the regional economic development impacts of higher education
institutions in the United States. Regional Studies. 50(7): 1185– 1202. https://doi.org/10.1080/
00343404.2014.986083.
Ehlenz, M.M. (2017). Gown, town, and neighborhood change: An examination of urban neighborhoods
with university revitalization efforts. Journal of Planning Education and Research. https://doi.org/
10.1177/0739456X17739111.
Ehrenhalt, A. (2013). The Great Inversion and the Future of the American City. New York: Vintage
Books.
Farley, R., Danziger, S., and Holzer, J. (2000). Detroit Divided. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Florida (2017). The New Urban Crisis. New York: Basic Books.
Florida, R. (2002). The economic geography of talent. Annals of the Association of American Geographers.
92(4): 743–755. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467–8306.00314.
Ganning, J.P. and Tighe, J.R. (2018). Moving toward a shared understanding of the U.S . shrinking city.
Journal of Planning Education and Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X18772074.
Glaeser, E.L. (1998). Are cities dying? Journal of Economic Perspectives. 12(2), 139–160.
Glaeser, E.L., and Resseger, M.G. (2009).The Complementarity between Cities and Skills (NBER Working
Paper Series No. 15103). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
Glaeser, E.L. and Saiz, A. (2004). The rise of the skilled city. Brookings-Wharton Papers on Urban Affairs,
2004(1), 47–105.
Goddard, J., Coombes, M., Kempton, L., and Vallance, P. (2014). Universities as anchor institutions in cities in
a turbulent funding environment: Vulnerable institutions and vulnerable places in England. Cambridge
Journal of Regions, Economy and Society. 7(2), 307–325. https://doi.org/10.1093/cjres/rsu004.
181
Maxwell Hartt, Austin Zwick, and Nick Revington
Goldstein, H.A. and Drucker, J. (2006). The economic development impacts of universities on regions: Do
size and distance matter? Economic Development Quarterly. 20(1): 22–43. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0891242405283387.
Goldstein, H.A. and Renault, C.S. (2004). Contributions of universities to regional economic develop-
ment: A quasi-experimental approach. Regional Studies. 38(7): 733–746. https://doi.org/10.1080/
0034340042000265232.
Großmann, K., Bontje, M., Haase, A., and Mykhnenko, V. (2013). Shrinking cities: Notes for the further
research agenda. Cities. 35: 221–225.
Hackworth, J. (2016). Demolition as urban policy in the American Rust Belt. Environment and Planning
A. 48(11): 2201–2222. https://doi.org/10.1177/0308518X16654914.
Hall, B.H., Jaffe, A.B., and Trajtenberg, M. (2001). The NBER Patent Citations Data File: Lessons, Insights
and Methodological Tools (NBER Working Paper Series No. 8498). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau
of Economic Research.
Hallegatte, S. (2014). Economic Resilience: Definition and Measurement (Policy Research Working Paper
Series No. 6852). Washington, DC. https://doi.org/10.1596/1813-9450-6852.
Hartt, M. (2016). Act Small and Think Big: Exploring the Plurality and Complexity of Shrinking Cities.
Waterloo, ON: University of Waterloo.
Hartt, M. (2018a). How cities shrink: Complex pathways to population decline. Cities. 75(2018): 38–49.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2016.12.005.
Hartt, M. (2018b). The diversity of North American shrinking cities. Urban Studies. 55(13): 2946–2959.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098017730013.
Hartt, M. and Hackworth, J. (2018). Shrinking cities, shrinking households, or both? International Journal
of Urban and Regional Research. 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468–2427.12713.
Hollander, J.B. (2011). Sunburnt Cities. New York: Routledge.
Hollander, J.B., Hartt, M., Wiley, A., and Vavra, S. (2018). Vacancy in shrinking downtowns: a comparative
study of Québec, Ontario, and New England. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s10901-017-9587-9.
Hollander, J.B., Pallagst, K., Schwarz,T., and Popper, F. (2009). Planning shrinking cities. Progress in Planning.
72 4 (special issue: Emerging Research Areas): 223–232.
Jaffe, A.B. and Trajtenberg, M. (eds.). (2002). Patents, Citations, and Innovations: A Window on the
Knowledge Economy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Kleiman, N. (2015). Striking a (Local) Grand Bargain: How Cities and Anchor Institutions Can Work
Together to Drive Growth and Prosperity. New York: NYU Wagner and the Urban Institute.
Kogler, D.F. (2015). Intellectural property and patents: Knowledge creation and diffusion. In: J.R. Bryson,
J. Clark, and V. Vanchan (eds.): The Handbook of Manufacturing Industries in the World Economy.
Cheltenham: Edward Edgar Pubishing Ltd, 163–190.
Lafer, G. (2003). Land and labor in the post-industrial university town: Remaking social geography. Political
Geography. 22(1): 89–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0962-6298(02)00065-3.
Lamoreaux, N.R. and Sokoloff, K.L. (1996). Long-term change in the organization of inventive activity.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 93: 12686–12692.
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.93.23.12686.
Lundvall, B. (1988). Innovation as an interactive process: From user producer interaction to the national
system of innovation. In: C. Dosi, C. Freeman, R. Nelson, G. Silverberg, and L. Soete (eds.): Technical
Change and Economic Theory. London: Frances Pinter, 349–369.
Markusen, A. (2013). Artists work everywhere. Work and Occupations. 40(4): 481–495. https://doi.org/
10.1177/0730888413504418.
Martin, R. and Sunley, P. (2015). On the notion of regional economic resilience: Conceptualization and
explanation. Journal of Economic Geography. 15(1): 1–42. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbu015.
Martinez-Fernandez, C., Audirac, I., Fol, S., and Cunningham-Sabot, E. (2012). Shrinking cities: Urban
challenges of globalization. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research. 36(2): 213–225.
McCarthy, G. and Moody, S. (2016). Introduction. In: G. McMarthy, G. Ingram, and S. Moody (eds.): Land
and the City. Washington, DC: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
Moos, M., Revington, N., Wilkin, T., and Andrey, J. (2018). The knowledge economy city: Gentrification,
studentification and youthification, and their connections to universities. Urban Studies. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0042098017745235.
Moraes, S. (2009). Inequality and urban shrinkage –A close relationship in Latin America. In: K. Pallagst
(ed.): The Future of Shrinking Cities: Problems, Patterns and Strategies of Urban Transformation in
182
Resilient shrinking cities
a Global Context. Berkeley, CA: University of California: Center for Global Metropolitan Studies,
Institute of Urban and Regional Development, and the Shrinking Cities International Research
Network (pp. 49–60).
Office of Management and Budget (2010). Standards for Delineating Metrpolitan and Micropolitan
Statistical Areas. Washington, DC: Office of Management and Budget.
O’Mara, M.P. (2012). Beyond town and gown: University economic engagement and the legacy
of the urban crisis. Journal of Technology Transfer. 37(2): 234– 250. https://
doi.org/10.1007/
s10961-010-9185-4.
Oswalt, P. and Rieniets, T. (eds.). (2006). Atlas of Shrinking Cities. Ostfildern: Hatje Cantz.
Pallagst, K. (2010). Viewpoint: The planning research agenda: Shrinking cities –a challenge for planning
cultures. Town Planning Review. 81(5): i–vi.
Popper, D.E. and Popper, F.J. (2002). Small can be beautiful: coming to terms with decline. Planning.
68(7): 20–23.
Power, D. and Malmberg, A. (2008). The contribution of universities to innovation and economic devel-
opment: In what sense a regional problem. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society.
1(2): 233–245. https://doi.org/10.1093/cjres/rsn006.
Rieniets, T. (2006). Shrinking cities –Growing domain for urban planning? Cahiers Thématiques. 6 (Space
on a Large Scale): 40–49.
Rodin, J. (2007). The University and Urban Revival. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Rose, A. and Krausmann, E. (2013). An economic framework for the development of a resilience index for
business recovery. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction. 5: 73–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.ijdrr.2013.08.003.
Rosen, G. and Razin, E. (2007). The college chase: Higher education and urban entrepreneuralism in
Israel. Tijdschrift Voor Economische En Sociale Geografie. 98(1): 86–101. https://doi.org/10.1111/
j.1467-9663.2007.00378.x.
Ryan, B.D. (2012). Design After Decline: How America Rebuilds Shrinking Cities. Philadelphia,
PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Schilling, J. and Logan, J. (2008). Greening the Rust Belt: A green infrastructure model for right sizing
America’s shrinking cities. Journal of the American Planning Association. 74(4): 451–466. https://doi.
org/10.1080/01944360802354956.
Siegfried, J.J., Sanderson, A.R., and McHenry, P. (2007). The economic impact of colleges and universities.
Economics of Education Review. 26(5): 546–558. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2006.07.010.
Silverman, R.M., Lewis, J., and Patterson, K.L. (2014). William Worthy’s concept of “‘institutional rape’”
revisited: Anchor institutions and residential displacement in Buffalo, NY. Humanity & Society.
38(2): 158–181. https://doi.org/10.1177/0160597614529114.
Taylor, H.L.J. and Luter, G. (2013).Anchor Institutions: An Interpretive Review Essay. New York: Marga Inc.
Weaver, R., Bagchi-Sen, S., Knight, J., and Frazier, A.E. (2017). Shrinking Cities: Understanding Urban
Decline in the United States. New York: Routledge.
Wiechmann, T. and Pallagst, K. (2012). Urban shrinkage in Germany and the USA: A comparison of
transformation patterns and local strategies. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research.
36(2): 261–280.
Zwick, A., Revington, N., and Hartt, M. (2018). Anchors and diversity: Understanding decline and resili-
ence in Canadian mid-sized cities. Evregreen Mid-Sized Cities Research Series: 117–132.
183
15
Land bank formation
Reorganizing civic capacity for resilience
John West
Introduction
Resilience is an awkward, but useful, concept when applied to institutional responses to
shrinking cities and property abandonment. Resilience is a term taken from ecology describing
how natural systems recover from disruption and the conditions under which they return to
a state of equilibrium. By contrast, cities that shrink often do so for long periods of time and
endure fundamental, permanent change, rather than returning to a state of equilibrium. Cities
that have recently prospered after decades of post-Second World War shrinkage, including
New York, Chicago, Pittsburgh, and Boston, are radically different in terms of their demo-
graphics, politics and economic base (Mallach 2018). Therefore, when planning for cities that
continue to shrink, like Flint (Michigan),Youngstown (Ohio), and Muncie (Indiana) resilience
cannot refer to a natural process that will result in returning to a previous state of balance. For
shrinking cities, resilience refers to reorganizing the civic capacity of a city or town and using
surplus or additional material resources to maintain living and infrastructural standards in the
context of radical change.
Resilience can be a misleading metaphor because, as the case of land bank formation below
demonstrates, responses to urban decline are historically and politically contingent upon
planning, rather than part of natural or biological cycles. This examination of land bank forma-
tion in Muncie, Indiana demonstrates that coping with change requires the strategic reorgan-
ization of the capacities of shrinking cities. In addition to this reorganization, for the land bank
to flourish, it needs new material resources, especially operating capital. It also requires legal and
legislative support that streamlines the process of clearing encumbered deeds, so people can reuse
properties. This case demonstrates that, for shrinking cities, resilience is a planned, rather than a
natural, phenomenon.
How does the materiality of abandoned property and knowledge about land bank forma-
tion shape strategy for reorganizing civic capacity to make a more resilient city? What are the
possibilities and limits of reorganizing existent material resources, in the face of a shrinking tax
base? Resilience is the final product of a concerted public effort, rather than the result of nat-
uralistic and biological thinking about cities. Because resilience is a social, rather than a natural
184
Land bank formation
phenomenon, the outcomes and efforts are uncertain and contingent.The case below reflects the
materiality of building civic capacity for resilience.
185
John West
resources and combine efforts in order to achieve a goal. The chamber of commerce may
be sharing with the city a public endorsement of the mayor’s agenda and a marketing cam-
paign on behalf of the city, while the mayor may promise to pursue economic development
activities preferred by the chamber. The labor union being guaranteed a certain number of
jobs by the city may offer support of specific city council members in the next election. As
part of the negotiation between the chamber, the city, and the labor union, each institution
agrees to contribute resources to the downtown redevelopment. This schematic example of
a typical urban growth machine shows how civic actors might activate latent capacity by
creating new networks of association, with the goal of achieving a specific objective (Logan
and Molotch 1987).
Bringing the concept into abandoned property, Margaret Dewar (2013) found the lack of
“capacity” for collective action among city actors and institutions as the primary factor impeding
Detroit’s ability to manage abandoned property, in comparison with Cleveland, which had an
effective system. And there is a burgeoning literature suggesting that collective civic action is an
important factor in determining the efficacy of legacy cities in addressing decline, as exempli-
fied in the recent work of Sean Safford (2009), in Why the Garden Club Couldn’t Save Youngstown
and Dieterich-Ward in Beyond Rust (2016). Stone, Dewar and Safford’s analysis is thorough and
convincing. At the same time, it provides little in the way of suggesting how new capacity may
be built.
Actor-network theory is a useful body of literature for considering how civic capacity may
be constructed. This body of literature argues that social relationships are not predetermined,
fixed or defined by unknowable or “fundamental” forces. From this perspective “the social [is]
not a special domain, a specific realm, or a particular sort of thing, but only a very particular
movement of reassociation and reassembling” (Latour 2005, 7). Such insight suggests that
theory and theorizing might productively examine the assembly of social relations and how
they may be constructed otherwise. Crucially actor-network theory argues that relationships
among people and the ideas that they share arise because of their relationship with non-
human things. Texts, laws, and the physical deterioration of abandoned buildings are cru-
cial matter that cement the connections between planners, policymakers and residents in
distressed neighborhoods.
From a Latourian perspective, human relationships are bound together and made durable
because of their relationship with material things.To take a simple example, people come to work
because there is a physical structure, with technologies that (sometimes) make accomplishing
tasks easier; and also because of financial compensation. James DeFilippis (2001) argues convin-
cingly that concepts like civic capacity are used to excuse the absence of the material resources
that would be required to address expensive public problems.
Literature and theory on resilience and civic capacity therefore leads to other important
questions: To what extent can planners expect to rely on existent or latent capacity to build
resilient systems? To what extent are surplus or new material resources needed to build resilient
networks? What are the consequences of attempting to build civic capacity for resilience in the
context of minimal financial and institutional resources?
Methodology
This chapter is the result of “action research”, which is to say a reflective process in which
the author has acted as part of a network of city officials, students, and research organizations
to address the issue of abandonment. Of action research Andrew Sayer writes (1992, 13),
“Knowledge is primarily gained through activity both in attempting to change our environment
186
Land bank formation
(through labor or work) and through interaction with other people, using shared resources, in
particular a common language.” What follows is an account of knowledge gathered through an
18-month effort to create a land bank, change conditions in Muncie, Indiana and build a more
resilient system for addressing property abandonment.
The opportunity to conduct this action research arose when the author was contacted by
officials in the City of Muncie to help start a land bank using new enabling legislation passed by
the State of Indiana in the summer of 2016. As faculty at a local university, Ball State, the author
worked with students and staff to understand the local dynamics of property abandonment and
to gather materials on land banking practice.The author also spent considerable time interacting
with community members. First, he interviewed, met with, and strategized with local officials,
including the mayor, the city council, the county commissioners, the leadership of neighbor-
hood association presidents, the chamber of commerce, and residents in neighborhoods particu-
larly affected by property abandonment. Forty-five such meetings took place at the outset of the
project, resulting in the formation of a board for the land bank. Second, the author served as the
founding president of the board of the Muncie Land Bank, which began regular board meetings
in November of 2017 and, to date, has met on a biweekly basis for 11 months. The information
contained in the case that follows results from the process the author has undertaken and reflects
the strategic imperatives of organizational formation.
1980 76,460 –
1990 71,035 -7.1
2000 67,430 -5.1
2010 70,085 390
Total Change -8.34
Author’s Calculations, Based on Census 2010
187
John West
Number % of total
residents live within 150 feet of an abandoned property (City of Muncie Historic Preservation
and Rehabilitation Commission 2017).
A broad array of Muncie residents are concerned about the conditions of vacant, abandoned,
and blighted structures. Civic leaders, including the county commissioners, the head of the
chamber of commerce, and local philanthropic organizations tended to discuss the effects of
property abandonment on tax revenues and adjacent property revenue. For this reason, the first
report issued by the author and co-researchers focused on estimating the aggregate costs of prop-
erty abandonment for the city.
Residents of neighborhoods affected by blight and property abandonment focused on
how abandoned structures attract mosquitos, collapsing foundations imperil adjacent property
owners’ homes, and vacant lots attract dumping, resulting in mounds of trash. In Muncie, visibly
dilapidated properties are in plain view in the majority of neighborhoods. Moreover, abandoned
property is discursively situated within and linked to issues that generate significant press, espe-
cially crime and the prevalence of meth houses.
To highlight these conditions, a group of researchers including the author collected stories
of residents’ problems with abandoned property. With the goal of collecting 100 stories, the
initiators of the push for a new land bank gathered some stories of nostalgic longing for places
that have since deteriorated, stories of fear that describe a loss of sense of security, and stories of
incredible frustration, including the following.
Anna Marie is a Muncie resident and homeless advocate who lives next to an abandoned
house. The house on the other side of the fence from hers is physically deteriorated. The
north wall of its basement has caved in. “The house is basically sitting above a cavern,
which fills with water, sewage, and mosquitos,” Sara says. “It gets more dangerous every day.
I hate that I have to worry about whether [it will] come crashing into my yard and house.
I hate that I have to pick up pieces of the house from my yard every day. Broken glass, wild
animals, and moldy smells coming from the house are a daily burden and continue to get
worse.” She has called the police about trespassers at the house several times over the years.
Neighborhood children dare each other to enter.
188
Land bank formation
These stories show the ways that material conditions and discursive positioning are intertwined.
For the county treasurer, abandonment appears on a spreadsheet and is related to the issue of
revenue. For the neighborhood resident living next to a collapsing building, abandonment means
concerns with mosquito bites, smells, and the peril of living next to a precarious structure. The
materiality of abandonment has the potential to bring together individuals who are differently
situated in relation to the problem.
On the other hand, the materiality of abandonment makes the problem obdurate, or difficult
to address. Buildings, structures and lots that have been abandoned are entangled with another
material reality that determines whether and how the property can be reused. When a property
owner abandons a property, a slow and lengthy process takes place. Once a property owner is
delinquent on taxes, the county treasurer’s office is responsible for issuing warning notices. If the
property remains tax delinquent for one year, the county commissioners auction an encumbered
deed of the property at a tax sale, which occurs twice yearly. If the encumbered deed is purchased,
the new purchaser must issue public notice that they have acquired the deed within nine months.
The original owner may pay back taxes and take the property back from the new purchaser
within 12 months after this notice has been filed. After this 12-month period, the new purchaser,
often with the assistance of legal counsel, must petition the court for a clean title.The process takes
at least 20 months and requires the coordinated action of multiple parties within the city. Political
feuds and spats among the county and the city have exacerbated the tedium of this process.
The problem of abandonment is also obdurate because the monetary costs of acquiring prop-
erty are higher than the potential resale. Through interviews with local developers and analysis
of housing sales data, the proposal for the author and other members of the Muncie Land Bank
compiled the following information. The legal process of clearing a deed typically costs local
non-profits between $2,500 and $4,000 in legal fees. If the property includes a building, the pur-
chaser can expect to spend as much as $25,000 for remediation. In the context of communities
where the median sales value of a home is less than $10,000 it is no surprise that few properties
are redeemed through the tax forfeiture process, according to data gathered from the Delaware
County Assessor’s Office from 2008 to 2016.
Abandoned property is ensconced in material and discursive networks that link people, cre-
ating the opportunity to create new relationships and, in doing so, building new capacity for
action. The county treasurer and the neighborhood resident experience property abandonment
in different ways, but for both it has become a matter of concern. At the same time abandoned
property is situated within obdurate legal, procedural, and market realities that make change dif-
ficult. Legal, market, and ideological conditions in turn constrain the availability of public money
to support efforts to build a resilient system for addressing abandoned property. Catalysts for
action occurred outside of the local context. The State of Indiana passed a new law.
189
John West
The legislation gives land banks new, but limited powers. It empowers local units of govern-
ment to establish a non-profit land bank that is tightly bound with a local unit of government –
either a city or a county. The board of directors must be appointed by local officials –the mayor
appoints three people, the city council appoints three people, the county treasurer appoints three
people, and the board has the option of appointing an additional two members, making a total
of nine. Additionally, because the land bank would be established as a non-profit, rather than a
governmental agency, it was exempted from much of the red tape involved in acquiring and
disposing of property. Finally, the law put into place transparency requirements to assure good
governance.
If the new land banking legislation was a catalyst to begin the process of forming a land
bank, research and writing that has been compiled by the Center for Community Progress,
a think tank based in Washington DC, over the last ten years provided a base of knowledge
and information for deciding the strategic direction of the new organization. Board members,
staff, and students attended a three-day conference on land banking in the summer of 2017.
Additionally, we created a small research collaborative with local officials, students, and board
members, reading key reports produced by the Center for Community Progress and the strategic
plans of successful land banks.
The Center for Community Progress’s process of knowledge diffusion affects the process
of building civic capacity. In setting forth best practices and providing examples of how other
communities address abandonment it becomes possible to define proximate goals and identify
strategies. For example, Frank Alexander’s 2015 Land Banks and Land Banking provides a set of
principles for effective land banking that include the following:
We could compare these best practices with abandonment strategy in Muncie prior to the estab-
lishment of the new land bank:
This exercise of comparing local results with best practice is particularly useful for considering
underlying mechanisms that enable successful action.
Learning about successful practice led to a sustained inquiry into the factors that enabled
some land banks to succeed. For the most successful land banks in Ohio and Michigan, their
capacity at local level was made possible by state-wide legislation. The most effective land banks
are clustered in states with strong enabling legislation. Strong state legislation combined two
factors: (1) A well-organized tax lien foreclosure process that enables land banks to acquire
property quickly and at low cost, (2) A mandated funding mechanism that provides land banks
with the resources necessary to hire staff and maintain property. Many land banks operate in
places with weak enabling legislation, like Indiana, and some with a high level of success. They
190
Land bank formation
Housing market
must work through local units of government to achieve agreements as to what these state laws
mandate.
Property market conditions are second in importance to state legislative context for deriving
an effective land banking strategy. Some land banks operate in places like Genesee County
(Flint), Michigan, with uniformly weak housing markets. Others serve places like Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania, that have pockets of decline and pockets of growth. Market conditions are likely
to affect both management strategy and efficiency. For example, land banks operating in uni-
formly weak markets cannot rely on reselling property to subsidize operations. The second
important contextual factor is the state and local legal framework supporting land banks. For
example, Ohio and Michigan have created strong and comprehensive reforms that mandate
funding and make it easier and less costly to acquire property. Other states, like Indiana and
Pennsylvania, do not.
Returning to our policy knowledge-gathering process, we set out to find cases of land banks
that were able to successfully operate in similar legislative and market conditions (see Table 15.4).
Tri-COG, a land bank in Allegheny County, just outside of the city of Pittsburgh, had derived a
strategy for operating in a context of weak state policy and weak market conditions. Tri-COG
provided a strategic road map that came to inform the organizing strategy that would be adopted
in Muncie. Tri-COG had successfully negotiated intergovernmental agreements with local units
of government to streamline the property acquisition process. They were also able to negotiate
a deal that would award them 5 per cent of tax receipts on all delinquent property taxes, similar
to the arrangement that had been created in Ohio.
The process of gathering knowledge on land banking practice in other places influenced the
strategy of organizers of the Muncie Land Bank. With these models in mind, the next task was
to seek to convince local units of government, non-profits, and institutional actors to support
the new organization.
191
John West
informants explained the longer term history of machine politics in Muncie, with Democratic
and Republican parties being dominated by prominent political families, rewarding insiders with
city or county jobs.The building commissioner who was convicted was the son of the long-time
chairperson of the local Democratic party, who had also been an elected and appointed official
in city and county government. Moreover, the parties had a deep distrust of one another as well
as “outsiders” more generally. The county was controlled by Republicans, many of whom were
swept into office in the 2016 election, while the city was controlled by the Democrats. Meetings
with local politicians often led to discussions about whether the land bank would reproduce the
ineffectiveness of existent programs. Indeed, the current effort is the third iteration of a local land
bank, with the first two hampered by a lack of cooperation between local units of government.
More fortunately, the local foundation community, community-based organizations, residents,
and property owners have all expressed strong support for strategies to address abandonment and
blight. Civic institutions including the local chamber of commerce to Habitat for Humanity and
Urban Light, CDC (a community development corporation run out of the basement of an urban
missionary church) were enthusiastic about creating a strong and functional land bank. Finally,
the faculty and administrators at Ball State agreed to assist with start-up activities, including
planning, market analysis, and the creation of an interactive, public-facing website.There is much
latent civic capacity in these organizations.
The next and most significant hurdle in the creation of the land bank is to leverage the good
will and concern of residents and institutions to encourage the city and the county to enter into
an intergovernmental agreement in which each entity commits to supporting the land bank and
potentially cedes some resources and authority to each other and to the new institution. Such an
intergovernmental agreement would stabilize and regularize the relationship among the county,
the city, and the Muncie Land Bank.
Additionally, civil society players have unique kinds of latent capacity to offer the land bank.
Through a program called immersive learning, Ball State faculty organize courses that provide
clients with concrete deliverables. One faculty member organizes a course that produced a
public-facing website for the land bank. Moreover, the newly appointed president of the uni-
versity has made community engagement a top priority, arguing that it is a “moral imperative”.
The local philanthropic community is comprised of three foundations: The Ball Foundation,
the George and Francis Ball Foundation, and the Community Foundation. Members of the Ball
Foundation have already provided strategic guidance for understanding the local political con-
text. These organizations are well endowed and positioned to support with what they refer to
as “catalytic funding” i.e. funding to help with the costs of starting the organization, including
consulting, marketing, board training, and the establishment of policies and procedures.
In order to reach an accord among these disparate political and institutional actors the land
bank has adopted a strategy with two key components. First, the land bank is forming a state-
wide network of county and local governments with the hope of convincing the state legis-
lature to adopt comprehensive land banking legislation, which would mandate more efficient
relationships among local groups. Second, the land bank has contracted with an out-of-state
consultancy that will bring together municipal and county government officials, as well as pri-
vate entities with the goal of creating an enduring institution. For the land bank to be successful,
both local and state actors must act.
192
Land bank formation
dependent on context.The Muncie Land Bank has benefited from strong support from the non-
governmental sector, including local philanthropies, housing non-profits, and the university. The
local political climate of fracture, infighting and corruption in the building commissioner’s office
has dampened enthusiasm and trust in formal governmental action. In the case above, resilience
requires good governance and strong working relationships among local political factions.
Material conditions are important, but not sufficient for building civic capacity for resilience.
Shrinking industrial cities, comes from the material obduracy of problems. Shuttered, burnt-
out, and collapsing houses, crabgrass covered lots with trash and the related material concern
of a shrinking tax base are fixed in the physical and fiscal landscape of the city. However, these
conditions have existed for over a decade. Catalytic efforts, through the state legislature and in
the form of support from local foundations was necessary to begin the work of reorganizing
local interests to address the problem.
Talking and listening, what planning theorists call deliberation, matters for building civic
capacity for resilience. Political relationships in Muncie are deeply fractured. However, as schol-
arship on communicative action and collaborative planning show, an overly materialistic and
deterministic view of interests, values, or value is not entirely valid (Forester 1983, Healey
1997). Connection, mutual learning, and expressions of common concern were evident in each
meeting with local policymakers and even more apparent when meeting with the leaders of
non-governmental entities and community residents.
Finally, there are several issues that are intertwined: labor, uncertainty, and policy structure.
The case above details more than two years of labor, countless conversations, hours of adminis-
trative work, scheduling, grant writing, public events, and course preparation.This labor is neces-
sary because there is an absence of a strong policy structure for effectively addressing property
abandonment. If a similar effort was undertaken in a neighboring town in Ohio, state law would
have made much of this work unnecessary because funding for land banking is required, and
county land banks are the default recipient of tax delinquent property.The process of starting up
and managing a land bank requires less labor.
Relatedly, the weak policy structure in Muncie and Indiana creates significant uncertainty
that this effort will result in an efficient and effective institution. Though negotiations have
produced universal agreement about the need to address the problem of abandoned properties,
the land bank has yet to secure a guaranteed operational budget. Moreover, succeeding at the
fundamental goal of promoting thriving in the context of changes from deindustrialization is
a distant goal that is not immediately on the agenda of the Muncie Land Bank, as we focus on
operational stability.
Resilience, defined above as promoting human thriving in the context of disruption, is not a
natural process or a foregone conclusion. It is the result of the work of planners who labor under
conditions that they do not choose, let alone control.
References
Alexander, F. (2015). Land Banks and Land Banking. Second Edition. Flint, MI: Center for Community
Progress.
‘Anna Marie’ Interview with West, J. 2017. 100 Dreams 100 Stories.
Beauregard, R. (2009). Urban population loss in historical perspecitive: United States, 1820-2000.
Environment and Planning. A 41: 514–28.
City of Muncie Historic Preservation and Rehabilitation Commission, and Delaware County Historical
Society (2017). Scout Muncie: A Way Forward for Data-Driven Neighborhood Revitalization. Muncie,
IN: Scout Muncie.
193
John West
DeFilippis, J. (2001). The myth of social capital. Housing Policy Debate. 12: 4.
Dewar: M. (2013). Chapter 8.What helps or hinders non-profit developers in reusing vacant, abandoned, and
contaminated property. In: The City after Abandonment. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania
Press, 174–196.
Dewey, J. (1927). The Public and Its Problems. Athens, OH: Ohio University Press.
Dietrich-Ward, A. (2016). Beyond Rust: Metropolitan Pittsburgh and the Fate of Industrial America.
Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Forester, J. (1982). Planning in the Face of Power. Journal of the American Planning Association 48
(1): 67–80.
Friedmann, J. (1989). Planning in the public domain: Discourse and praxis. Journal of Planning Education
and Research. 8 (2): 128–130.
Healey,P.(1997).Collaborative Planning: Shaping Places in Fragmented Societies.First.Vancouver: UBC Press.
Latour, B. (1993). We Have Never Been Modern. Translated by Catherine Porter. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
Latour, B. (2003).The promises of constructivism. In: Matrix of Materiality. Indiana Series for the Philosophy
of Science. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 27–46.
Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the Social. New York: Oxford University Press.
Logan, J. and Molotch, H. (1987). Urban Fortunes: The Political Economy of Place. Berkeley, CA: University
of California Press.
Mallach, A. (2018). The Divided City: Poverty and Prosperity in Urban America. Washington,
DC.: Island Press.
Pelling, M, and Navarrete. M. (2015). From Resilience to Transformation. In City Resilience, III:284–99.
New York: Routledge.
Pendall, R. Forester, K., and Cowell, M. (2015). Resilience and Regions. In City Resilience, I:283–401.
New York: Routledge..
Ross, J, and Cheek, C. (2014). Indiana’s Property Tax Caps: Effects on equity, service delivery and tax com-
petitiveness. Fiscal Benchmarking for Indiana’s Local Governments. Indianapolis, IN: Indiana Public
Policy Institute.
Safford, S. (2009). Why the Garden Club Couldn’t Save Youngstown: The Transformation of the Rust Belt.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Sayer, A. (1992). Problems of explanation and the aims of social science. In Method in Social Science.
London: Routledge.
Souza Briggs, X. de (2008). Democracy as Problem Solving: Civic Capacity in Communities across the
Globe. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Stone, C.N., Henig, J., Jones, B., and Pierannunzi, C. (2001). Building Civic Capacity: The Politics of Urban
School Reform. Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas Press.
United States Census Bureau/American FactFinder (2010). Population.2010 Census.US Census Bureau,
2010.Web. January 2018. http://factfinder2.census.gov.
194
Part III
Dimensions of resilience
16
Assessing socio-ecological
resilience in cities
Marta Suárez, Erik Gómez-Baggethun, and Miren Onaindia
Introduction
Resilience is gaining growing leverage in urban planning and its importance in the context of
climate and global change is increasingly recognized in international agreements, such as the
United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the New Urban Agenda-Habitat
III. But how do we foster urban resilience in practice? How do we know if a city is resilient or
not? These questions have captured the attention of academics across diverse research fields, such
as ecology, social sciences, disasters and risk management, climate change adaptation, engineering
or urban planning. However, these fields conceptualize resilience in so different ways and for so
diverse purposes (Meerow et al. 2016), to such an extent that authors are divided between those
who wonder if the word has become meaningless and those who believe that resilience can be
a powerful bridging concept among disciplines (Davoudi 2012). This makes it difficult to move
from theory to practice (Meerow et al. 2016) and leads to different interpretations of how to
operationalize and measure urban resilience. In this research we side with those who claim that it
can be a “boundary object” allowing useful cross-fertilization across multiple knowledge (Brand
and Jax 2007), but we also claim that more efforts are needed for developing frameworks and
tools to assess and promote urban resilience at the operational level.
Cities are socio-ecological systems (Berkes and Folke 1998) “in which people live at high
densities, and where built structures and infrastructure cover much of the land surface” (Pickett
et al. 2011; 333). Disturbances and stresses, such as environmental extremes –e.g. hurricanes
or heat waves –, technological failures, water shortages or the depletion of fisheries, forests, oil,
or other essential resources for the supply of cities (Goldstein 2009), may affect their normal
functioning and, therefore, human wellbeing. Policies and strategies to build socio-ecological
resilience in cities are needed, but the way that we implement them is subject to spatial and tem-
poral trade-offs and can have implications for equity. For example, resilience to short-term specific
disturbances may be achieved at the expenses of general resilience to long-term crisis and slow
urban dynamics for the most vulnerable, perpetuating social inequalities (Chelleri, et al. 2015).
The aim of this chapter is to synthesize state-of-the-art knowledge for assessing socio-
ecological resilience in cities. Following this introduction, we review the tensions and trade-offs
in urban resilience implementation. We then conduct a systematic review and a content analysis
197
M. Suárez, E. Gómez- Baggethun, and M. Onaindia
Questions to consider
of the literature addressing methodologies to assess urban resilience. Next, we build on the results
of our review to develop a conceptual and a methodological framework to measure socio-
ecological resilience in cities. Finally, we summarize our conclusions and provide suggestions to
advance future research in this field.
Why urban resilience, of what, to what, for whom, when, and where?
Although operationalizing and measuring urban resilience is a challenging task (Vale 2014), it is
perceived to be increasingly necessary if cities are to cope with accelerating climate and global
change. But the way that we apply resilience measures in cities is subject to spatial and tem-
poral trade-offs and can have implications for equity. Taking into account trade-offs is critically
important because enhancing resilience at one specific spatial or temporal scale can diminish
resilience at another spatial or temporal scale (Chelleri et al. 2015). Equity implications are
also important as vulnerability to shocks and change can vary strongly across social groups and
because these groups can benefit very differently from given resilience strategies depending on
their purpose and design (Chelleri et al. 2015; Romero-Lankao et al. 2016).
As a first step to design and implement resilience-building policies and strategies, Meerow
and Newell (2016) propose answering the following set of questions: why resilience, for whom,
of what, to what, when, and where (Table 16.1). “These ‘five W’s’ bring the politics of resili-
ence to the forefront by encouraging the explicit recognition of politicized decisions, scalar
dimensions, and trade-offs inherent to applying resilience empirically” (Meerow and Newell
2016; 8). In this section we follow this approach to address trade-offs that are important to
account for assessing urban resilience.
Why resilience?
Resilience policies and measures are applied by those who have the power to do so (Meerow
and Newell 2016; Romero-Lankao et al. 2016), taking decisions on behalf of the rest of the
198
Assessing resilience in cities
population, and often based on their own perspectives, priorities and interests (Meerow and
Newell 2016;Vale 2014). Some authors suggest that decision-makers are mainly concerned with
maintaining their status quo (Romero-Lankao et al. 2016; Vale 2014), and this usually leads to
short-term resilience measures that compromise the long-term resilience for the most vulner-
able and perpetuate social inequalities. So it is crucial to ask why resilience measures and policies
are being introduced and which is the ultimate goal of these interventions (Meerow and Newell
2016). This is directly related with the definition of urban resilience.
Although multiple resilience definitions can be found (Meerow et al. 2016; Schiappacasse
and Müller 2018), three main interpretations dominate the literature: engineering, ecological
and socio-ecological (Davoudi 2012; Folke 2006). Engineering resilience refers to the capacity
of a system to return to equilibrium after disturbance (Pimm 1991), and it can be measured
as the recovery time. Ecological resilience is the capacity to absorb disturbance and maintain
main functions and structures while undergoing change (Folke 2006), and can be quantified
as the probability of whether a system will remain in a pre-existing state or shift to a different
one (Perz et al. 2013). Socio-ecological resilience –also known as evolutionary (Davoudi 2012;
Davoudi et al. 2013; Kim and Lim 2016; Mehmood 2016) –is the ability of complex socio-
ecological systems to change, adapt, and, crucially, transform in response to stresses and strains
(Folke et al. 2010). Measuring socio-ecological resilience is a challenging task because it is neces-
sary to take into account numerous socio-ecological variables.
Engineering and ecological resilience build up on the conception that any system can reach a
stable equilibrium.The difference between both definitions is that engineering resilience focuses
on “bouncing back”, whereas ecological resilience recognizes that there are multiple equilibrium
states and the system can flip into a new one after the disturbance occurs (Gunderson 2000).
Socio-ecological resilience stresses that complex systems are in constant change and there is no
equilibrium state that systems can return or move forward following disturbance. In this sense,
it focuses on the capacity of learning, being innovative, and being flexible, and it assumes that
human beings can make conscious interventions into the process, diminishing, sustaining, or
enhancing resilience (Davoudi et al. 2013). Table 16.2 shows the characteristics and differences
of the three resilience concepts. Resilience definitions do not usually completely fit one of these
three major concepts, but they normally include characteristics from one, two, or the three of
them (Meerow et al. 2016). Ecological and socio-ecological perspectives are the most accepted
among academics (Schiappacasse and Müller 2018), but the engineering and ecological concepts
are the most widely applied in urban planning and risk management (Davoudi et al. 2013; Folke
et al. 2010;Vale 2014).
Because decision-makers are often expected to demonstrate that they were doing well before
the disturbance happened, an engineering vision of resilience is the one that tends to dominate
in policy (Vale 2014). Efforts are made to return as fast as possible to a previous state after disturb-
ance (Kim and Lim 2016), assuming that it was a desirable state and often ignoring the existence
of social injustice and environmental problems that will persist in the baseline state (Vale 2014).
From this perspective, decision-makers tend to rely on the presumption that the future socio-
ecological state after a disturbance will be worse than the previous one (Novak et al. 2017) or
they presume that there is always an equilibrium state where “bouncing back” or “bouncing for-
ward”, under the promise of “building back better” (Vale 2014). So they often focus on recovery
and absorption capacities, but not in adaptation and transformability.
We focus on socio-ecological resilience and its non-equilibrium vision, but we integrate
elements of the three resilience perspectives. For example, we assume that a degree of recovery
and buffer capacity is required after absorbing disturbances. Not in order to “bounce back” or
“bounce forward” to an equilibrium state, but to recover and maintain critical functions for the
199
M. Suárez, E. Gómez- Baggethun, and M. Onaindia
system’s adaptive capacity. Specifically, we adopt the definition proposed by Meerow et al. (2016;
45): “the ability of an urban system and all its constituent socio-ecological and socio-technical
networks across temporal and spatial scales to maintain or rapidly return to desired functions in
the face of a disturbance, to adapt to change, and to quickly transform systems that limit current
or future adaptive capacity”. This definition also takes into account all the urban dimensions,
temporal and spatial scales that affect urban resilience and it acknowledges short-and long-term
resilience to all kind of disturbances and stresses. This approach enables dialogue and collabor-
ation among disciplines and leaves behind yet another theoretical discussion about the meaning
of urban resilience, and focuses on how to foster, assess and measure it.
200
Assessing resilience in cities
and what components compose the urban socio-ecological system (Meerow and Newell 2016;
Romero-Lankao et al. 2016).
Depending on the chosen scale of analysis, an urban socio-ecological system can be an
entire city, a town, a neighborhood, a jurisdiction encompassing some distinct municipal unit
of governance or larger polycentric city-regions (Vale 2014). There is not a consensus on
what should be the critical elements of analysis in urban systems, but the literature identifies
certain patterns and similarities about the characteristics of the urban sub-systems (Meerow
et al. 2016), components (Meerow and Newell 2016), dimensions (Gharai et al. 2018; Sharifi
and Yamagata 2016; Suárez et al. 2016) or domains (Romero-Lankao et al. 2016) that affect
urban resilience. Suárez et al. (2016) and Gharai et al. (2018) found that most urban resili-
ence indicators are composed of social, economic, institutional, and environmental/physical
dimensions. Romero-Lankao et al. (2016) define cities as socio-ecological systems with five
domains: socio-demographics, economy, technology, environment, and governance. Similarly,
Meerow et al. (2016), based on Dicken (2011), propose a conceptual model with four sub-
systems: governance networks, networked material and energy flows, urban infrastructure
and form, and socio-economic dynamics.
Once we have answered the question resilience “of what” we need to ask ourselves resili-
ence “to what” (Carpenter et al. 2001). Resilience can be enhanced for specific and known
disturbances –specified or tailored resilience –or for a broader and expected and/or unexpected
range of uncertainties –general or universal resilience (Carpenter et al. 2012; Schiappacasse and
Müller 2018; Walker and Salt 2006). Urban resilience definitions usually “stress generic adapt-
ability, flexibility or adaptive capacity” (Meerow et al. 2016; 44), which fits with the concept
of general resilience. In practice, however, most of the literature on resilience (Schiappacasse
and Müller 2018) and urban resilience assessments (Suárez et al. 2016) only address specific
disturbances related to catastrophes and natural hazards, such as earthquakes or extreme weather
events as a consequence of climate change (Novak et al. 2017; Suárez et al. 2016).
Resilience when?
Resilience to short-term specific disturbances may be achieved at the expense of general resili-
ence to long-term crisis and slow urban dynamics (Novak et al. 2017) and vice versa (Walker and
Salt 2006). Given that, there is a constant tension between resilience to short-term disruptions
and long-term stress (Chelleri et al., 2015; Meerow and Newell 2016; Novak et al. 2017; Walker
and Salt 2006), so trade-offs within temporal and spatial scales are a key feature for assessing and
applying resilience (Chelleri et al. 2015). When the focus is on the short term, the objective is
system persistence and recovery, whereas resilience for the long term focuses on transition and
transformation (Chelleri and Olazabal 2012; Chelleri et al. 2015). Trade-offs between temporal
scales need to be managed in order to guarantee that short-term resilience do not compromise
resilience in the long term, and that long-term resilience also address rapid-onset disturbances.
Resilience where?
As Gunderson and Holling (2002) pointed out in their panarchy model, resilience has to acknow-
ledge the cross-scalar dynamics of socio-ecological systems. Local resilience may be affected by
global-scale processes, whereas local-scale transformations can influence broader-scale resilience
(Meerow and Newell 2016). Moreover, adaptive capacity is often unevenly distributed across
201
M. Suárez, E. Gómez- Baggethun, and M. Onaindia
a city, so different areas or population groups may have different levels of resilience (Chelleri
et al. 2015).
Resilience measurements and assessments should therefore be spatially explicit (Meerow
and Newell 2016). In practice, the boundaries of the socio-ecosystem will be defined by the
objective of the assessment and the available data, and data sets are usually available for terri-
tories within administrative boundaries (e.g. Suárez et al. 2016). In spite of these constraints,
assessments should recognize cross-scalar interactions and how building resilience in the assessed
spatial scale may affect other scales (Chelleri et al. 2015; Meerow and Newell 2016).
202
Assessing resilience in cities
Variables Categories
literature search at the beginning of 2018 there are only four studies published that year but,
the projection suggests that the increasing trend will continue. Thirty-seven studies are papers
published in scientific journals, 14 are conference papers, three are book chapters and one is a
paper published in arXiv repository.The research field with more studies is engineering, followed
by environmental sciences and ecology, urban studies, and computer science (Figure 16.2).
Most papers (61.8 per cent) assess urban resilience for a single case study, 23.6 per cent assess
resilience for several case studies and 14.5 per cent propose methodologies to measure or assess
urban resilience without applying it to any case study.Within the studies covering more than one
case study –between two and seven –, three of them a ssess resilience for cities in one single
country (Khorasani et al. 2015; Min-SeokI et al. 2017; Tumini et al. 2017), one for three cities
in two European countries (Kuznecova et al. 2014) and one for four cities in four countries in
North America, Oceania and Asia (Collier et al. 2013). Only eight studies assess urban resilience
203
Figure 16.1 Number of studies published per year
Source: Author’s own elaboration
for a higher number of case studies in a single country (Abdrabo and Hassaan 2015; Cutter et al.
2016; Ganin et al. 2017; Qin et al. 2017; Suárez et al. 2016), in Eastern European Union cities
(Bănică and Muntele 2017) or for cities in all continents (Abbar et al. 2016; Schlör et al. 2018). It
is remarkable the assessment of urban–rural differences of disaster resilience based on more than
3,000 case studies in the United States (Cutter et al. 2016). The papers mainly use case studies
located in Europe (19 papers), North America (14) and Asia (12). South America, Oceania, and
Africa are under-represented with only six, five and three publications respectively. All the coun-
tries with case studies in the reviewed papers appear fewer than four times, except the United
STates, with 11 papers that include cities from this country.
205
M. Suárez, E. Gómez- Baggethun, and M. Onaindia
trend for this methodology, and they are applied for specific and general resilience and in different
research fields, such as environmental sciences and ecology, engineering, geology, meteorology,
atmospheric sciences, or water resources. Only two papers propose a qualitative model as a tool
to identify urban characteristics that may diminish or enhance urban resilience (Collier et al.
2013; Serre et al. 2018).
Why resilience?
To answer this question we analyzed the definitions of resilience used in the reviewed studies
and the characteristics of the three major resilience concepts (Table 16.2) that were mentioned.
Most publications mention characteristics of two (40 per cent) or three (29.1 per cent) resili-
ence concepts, whereas characteristics of a single concept were present in only 12.7 per cent of
the studies. Some 18.2 per cent of the papers provide one or more definitions of resilience but
do not choose a particular one. Ecological resilience is the most widely used (70.9 per cent),
followed by engineering (58.2 per cent) and socio-ecological (50.9 per cent). When two major
resilience concepts are included in the definition, these are engineering and ecological (20 per
cent) and ecological and socio-ecological (18.2 per cent), except in one study that includes
engineering and socio-ecological resilience but not ecological (Bastaminia et al. 2016). Socio-
ecological resilience only appears alone in one paper (Da Silva and Morer, 2014).
All the studies whose definitions include characteristics of engineering or engineering and
ecological concepts (25.5 per cent) assess specified resilience to rapid-onset disturbances, whereas
all the publications that measure general resilience (32.7 per cent) include the ecological and
socio-ecological concepts in their resilience definitions, except two papers that only define eco-
logical resilience (Brudermann, et al. 2016; Freeman et al. 2017) and one study that only includes
socio-ecological resilience (Da Silva and Morera 2014).
Resilience of what?
Almost half of the reviewed publications offer a holistic view of the urban socio-ecosystem,
including four (25.5 per cent) or the five (21.8 per cent) urban dimensions –social, economic,
206
Assessing resilience in cities
environmental, physical, and governance; whereas 21.8 per cent, 16.4 per cent and 12.7 per
cent only include one, two or three dimensions respectively. Only one paper does not specify
which part of the urban system is included in the assessment (Schwind et al. 2016). Physical
infrastructure is addressed in 89.1 per cent of the studies, the social dimension in 69.1 per cent,
the environmental dimension in 54.5 per cent, economics in 49.1 per cent, and governance in
41.8 per cent .
Studies that assess resilience of only one dimension usually apply scenario modelling to
measure the performance of physical infrastructure to deliver different services, such as energy
(Brudermann et al. 2016; Ottenburger and Münzberg 2017), and transport (Abbar et al. 2016;
Lhomme et al. 2013; Pregnolato et al. 2016) networks, or the urban configuration (Esposito
and Di Pinto 2015) after a disturbance. Some authors try to simulate population behavior after
a disturbance introducing hypothesis in the model, but without including any social indicator
(Esposito and Di Pinto 2014).Three papers apply indicators to measure the resilience of buildings
and urban networks (Balsells et al. 2013), the transportation system (Donovan and Work 2017),
or how urban design can increase resilience to traffic-related air pollution (Cariolet et al. 2017).
One paper assesses how urban and peri-urban green infrastructure and the ecosystem services
that it provides may increase urban resilience (Calderón-Contreras and Quiroz-Rosas 2017) and
another one only focuses on governance, proposing a qualitative index to assess adaptive capacity
through risk management policies at the city level (Zaidi and Pelling 2015).
Most studies that assess resilience of two dimensions add social indicators, such as population
density (Ganin et al. 2017; Khorasani et al. 2015; Miguez and Verol 2017; Tumini et al. 2017) and
size (Leu et al. 2010), to evaluate how physical infrastructure performance affect urban popula-
tion after disturbance. Owrangi et al. (2015) follow a completely different approach and measure
population vulnerability to flooding through a human health impact index that combines social
data with topography. Three papers assess how green and physical infrastructure may increase
urban resilience to flooding (Serre et al. 2018) and heat waves (Carvalho et al. 2017; Rafael
et al. 2016).
Five of the papers that include three dimensions use indicators related to social, environ-
mental, and physical dimensions (Koren et al. 2017; Lakshani and Welikanna 2016;Villagra et al.
2016) or to the social, economic, and physical (Carreño et al. 2017; Su 2017). Bozza et al. (2017)
and Franchin and Cavalieri (2013) include in their scenario models, not only population data to
measure displaced and relocated citizens after disturbance, but also how different reconstruction
measures may affect urban resilience.
Resilience to what?
Most papers assess resilience for specific disturbances (67.3 per cent) in opposition to general
resilience to any kind of disturbance or stress. Almost all the addressed disturbances are natural
disasters or extreme weather events related to climate change, with a predominance of flooding
(18.2 per cent) and earthquakes (9.1 per cent). Only one study assesses resilience to long-term
stresses such as air pollution (Cariolet et al. 2017). Some publications (18.2 per cent) propose
methodologies to measure resilience for specific disturbances but do not apply them to any in
particular.
Resilience when?
To answer the question “resilience when?”, we analyzed whether (1) the reviewed papers
carry out temporal analysis, (2) address rapid-or slow-onset disturbances, and (3) are focused
207
M. Suárez, E. Gómez- Baggethun, and M. Onaindia
in short-or long-term resilience. Only 38.2 per cent of the reviewed papers analyse resili-
ence at different times, for example to compare resilience levels before and after a disturbance
(e.g. Balsells et al. 2013; Beraud et al. 2011; Cavallaro et al. 2014) or during a year-period (e.g.
Lakshani and Welikanna 2016; Qin et al. 2017). Most studies (69.1 per cent) address rapid-onset
disturbances only, whereas 29.1 per cent propose a methodology to assess resilience for both,
and only one study for slow ones (Cariolet et al. 2017). However, although most papers assess
resilience for rapid-onset disturbances, some of them recognize that planning for the long term
is necessary (e.g. Bastaminia et al. 2016; Collier et al. 2013; Fonseca et al. 2017; Pregnolato
et al., 2016).
Resilience where?
Almost half of the reviewed studies assess resilience at one spatial scale only, mainly at city level
(e.g. Abbar et al. 2016; Fonseca et al. 2017; Ganin et al. 2017; Leu et al. 2010) and 33 per cent of
the papers address two spatial scales, such as neighborhoods within the city and the city itself (e.g.
Kontokosta and Malik 2018; Ottenburger and Münzberg 2017; Tumini et al. 2017) or a smaller
urban unit –grid-cells (Khorasani et al. 2015; Nugent et al. 2017; Rafael et al. 2016), or buildings
(Khorasani et al. 2015) –and the city. Only three papers assess resilience for three spatial scales.
These include small urban unit, neighborhood, and city (Zhao et al. 2013); city, metropolitan
area, and country (Bănică and Muntele 2017); and city, continent, and world (Schlör et al. 2018).
208
Posive effect
Negave effect Demand of
ecosystem
Components that may be transformed
services
to increase reslience
Diversity of
Self-sufficiency FEEDBACKS LENGTH
ecosystems
ENGINEERING RESILIENCE
Diversity of Capacity to provide
MODULARITY Recover capacity
species ecosystem services
(Recovering desired funcons)
Diversity of
Reorganizaon
land uses
Diversity of
DIVERSITY
people
Diversity of
economic
acvies
ECOLOGICAL RESILIENCE
Diversity of
Decentralizaon SOCIAL COHESION Buffer capacity
instuons
(Maintaining desired funcons)
Diversity of
organized
cizen
groups
Cizen
parcipaon
spaces
SOCIO-ECOLOGICAL RESILIENCE
LEARNING AND
Adapve capacity and
INNOVATION
transformability
et al. 2017) or open space sub-system (Koren et al. 2017), but we consider them separately
because they are responsible for different functions and services. For example, the ecological
infrastructure, namely, “green and blue spaces” such as parks, urban allotments, urban forests,
single trees, green roofs, or rivers and lakes (European Environmental Agency 2011), provide
critically important ecosystem services for human wellbeing (Gómez-Baggethun et al. 2013),
whereas grey infrastructure, mainly buildings, roads, and technological networks, facilitates the
delivery of some of these ecosystem services and provides other kind of services such as trans-
port, education, or health facilities. Finally, governance is constituted by all the institutions, their
interrelations, and the rules that govern the urban system.
Although the conceptual framework already identifies some of the indicators that can be
used –diversity, capacity to provide and demand of ecosystem services and citizens participa-
tion spaces –we also propose a methodological framework, in the form of a matrix that crosses
the five key resilience factors with the five urban sub-systems, to guide the process of finding
indicators to assess urban resilience (Table 16.4).We added an extra row to the matrix to include
equity indicators. We also give some examples of indicators from the review literature; some
cells are empty because we did not find any indicator matching that resilience factor and the
respective urban sub-system. Using this matrix we identify which parts of the urban socio-
ecosystems and which resilience factors we are measuring and detect the methodological gaps
in our assessments.
We offer this conceptual and methodological framework as a dynamic tool to guide the
development of methodologies to assess socio-ecological resilience to any kind of disturbances
and stresses. It can be modified if new resilience factors, indicators, and interrelations between
factors and sub-systems are found. We suggest carrying out a literature review of methodologies
to assess resilience, as the one we did for this chapter, to identify which factors or indicators are
used to improve this conceptual and methodological framework.
Conclusions
In this chapter, we carried out a literature review to discuss how temporal and spatial trade-offs
and social inequalities are being addressed by academics who propose methodological frameworks
and tools to assess urban resilience. To do so, we categorized and analyzed the reviewed studies
answering the questions why resilience, for whom, of what, to what, when, and where, proposed
by Meerow and Newell (2016). Our results show that none of the reviewed methodologies fit
with the resilience definition adopted in this chapter, that is a methodological framework that
takes into account social equity and justice, includes the five sub-systems –social, economic,
governance, and ecological and grey infrastructure –, assess resilience to any kind of disturbance,
for short-and long-term and in different spatial scales, and link engineering, ecological, and
socio-ecological resilience.
Future research on urban resilience assessment should take into account the following
considerations:
• Most studies have been carried out in Europe, North America, and Asia. Resilience assessments
in other continents would incorporate new insights from different geographic areas and cul-
tural backgrounds.
• Indicators and indexes seem to be the most accepted methodologies across research fields and
they may be applied for specified and general resilience, whereas scenario models seem to be
only useful to assess resilience to specific rapid-onset disturbances.
210
Table 16.4 Matrix to guide the process of finding urban resilience indicators with examples from literature. The positive or negative effect on resilience is indicated with
(+) and (-) respectively
Diversity – Business diversity (+)a Land use diversity (+)a Diversity of energy –
Lack of Economic Food diversity (+)a sources (+)d
Diversity (-)b Diversity of green Diversity of mobility modes
infrastructure (+)c (+)e
Modularity Social capital –number of civic Business diversity (+)a Land use diversity (+)a Share of use of centralized Jurisdictional
organizations (+)f Number of local food Food diversity (+)a energy system (-)d coordination (+)f
suppliers (+)f Evacuation routes (+)f,h Formal and informal
Infrastructure and services institutional settings
rate of provision (+)g (+)j
Medical facilities (+)i
Feedbacks length Self-sufficiency –carrying capacity Number of local food Tree density (+)b Building density (-)b Jurisdictional
excess (-)a suppliers (+)f Diversity, quantity and Capacity to decrease traffic coordination (+)f
d
Dependence on fuel import (-) quality of green related emissions (+)l Formal and informal
Energy consumption (-)d,k infrastructure (+)c institutional settings
GHG emissions (-)d,e,k Accessibility to green (+)g
Water consumption (-)k urban spaces (+)k
Local production of food
(+)k
Social cohesion Place attachment (+)f – – Percent of Vacant Housing Spaces for citizen
Social capital –number of civic Units (-)b participation (+)a
organizations (+)f Proximity index (+)h Participation (+)m
Sense of belonging (+)m
Learning and Participation (+)m – – – Spaces for citizen
innovation participation (+)a
Participation (+)m
Equity indicators Environmental equity related to residential locationn /Educational attainment equalityf /Race/ethnicity income equalityf /Gender income equalityf
/Education equityi /Gini indexb,o
References: a Suárez et al. 2016; b Kontokosta and Malik 2018; c Calderón-Contreras and Quiroz-Rosas 2017; d Kuznecova et al. 2014; e Fonseca et al. 2017; f Cutter et al. 2016; g Abdrabo and
Hassan 2015; h Tumini et al. 2017; i Qin et al. 2017; j Abdrabo and Hassan 2015; k Delgado-Ramos and Guibrunet 2017; l Cariolet et al. 2018; m Tabibian and Rezapour 2016; n Zhao et al. 2013;
o
Schlör et al. 2018.
M. Suárez, E. Gómez- Baggethun, and M. Onaindia
• Although a large amount of studies analyze spatial resilience patterns, equity indicators and
analysis for different social groups are not widely applied, but introducing them in the resili-
ence assessments should be done to include dimensions of equity and justice.
• More efforts to include the ecological infrastructure and the social and economic dimensions
to develop methodologies to assess resilience for the whole urban socio-ecological systems
would be desirable.
• Methods to assess resilience to any kind of slow-onset disturbances and stresses and which
consider recovery, buffer and adaptive capacity need to be prioritized due to their scarcity in
the literature.
• There is a lack of urban resilience assessments for different spatial and temporal scales in order
to evaluate trade-offs.
In our attempt to encourage further research in this field we proposed a conceptual and meth-
odological framework to assess urban resilience that takes into account these conclusions and
suggestions. We offer it as a dynamic tool to guide the development of new methodologies to
measure socio-ecological resilience in cities.
Note
1 The boxes are: dark grey the three major resilience concepts; light grey the resilience factors; and white
indicators of the social, economic, ecological infrastructure and governance sub-systems.
References
Abbar, S., Zanouda, T., and Borge-Holthoefer, J. (2016). Robustness and resilience of cities around the
world. ArXiv. 8.
Abdrabo, M.A. and Hassaan, M.A. (2015). An integrated framework for urban resilience to climate
change –case study: sea level rise impacts on the Nile Delta coastal urban areas. Urban Climate.
14: 554–565.
Adger,W.N. (2003). Social capital, collective action and adaptation to climate change. Economic Geography.
79: 387–404.
Amano, T., González-Varo, J.P., and Sutherland, W.J. (2016). Languages are still a major barrier to global
science. PLOS Biology. 14(12): e2000933.
Balsells, M., Becue,V., Barroca, B., Diab,Y., and Serre, D. (2013). Flood resilience assessment of New Orleans
neighborhood over time. In: Resilience and Urban Risk management –Proceedings of the Conference
‘How the Concept of Resilience Is Able to Improve Urban Risk Management? A Temporal and a
Spatial Analysis, 151–166.
Bănică, A. and Muntele, I. (2017). Urban transitions and resilience of Eastern European Union cities. Eastern
Journal of European Studies. 8(2): 45–69.
Bastaminia, A., Rezaie, M.R., Tazesh, Y., and Dastoorpoor, M. (2016). Evaluation of urban resilience
to earthquake a case study: Dehdasht City. International Journal of Ecology & Development.
31(4): 46–56.
Beraud, H., Barroca, B., Serre, D., and Hubert, G. (2011). Making urban territories more resilient to
flooding by improving the resilience of their waste management network. A methodology for analysing
dysfunctions in waste management networks during and after flooding. In: Vulnerability, Uncertainty,
and Risk: Analysis, Modeling, and Management –Proceedings of the ICVRAM 2011 and ISUMA
2011 Conferences, 425–432.
Berkes, F. and Folke, C. (eds.) (1998). Linking Social and Ecological Systems. Management Practices and
Social Mechanisms for Building Resilience. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Bozza, A., Asprone, D., Parisi, F., and Manfredi, G. (2017). Alternative resilience indices for city
ecosystems subjected to natural hazards. Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering.
32(7): 527–545.
212
Assessing resilience in cities
Brand, F. and Jax, K. (2007). Focusing the meaning(s) of resilience: resilience as a descriptive concept and a
boundary object. Ecology and Society. 12(1).
Brudermann, T., Hofer, C., and Yamagata, Y. (2016). Agent-based modeling a tool for urban resilience
research? In: Y.Yamagata and H. Maruyama (eds.): Urban Resilience: A Transformative Approach, 135–
151. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
Calderón-Contreras, R. and Quiroz-Rosas, L.E. (2017). Analysing scale, quality and diversity of green infra-
structure and the provision of urban ecosystem services: A case from Mexico City. Ecosystem Services.
23: 127–137.
Cariolet, J.-M., Colombert, M., Vuillet, M., and Diab, Y. (2017). Assessing the resilience of urban areas
to traffic-related air pollution: Application in Greater Paris. The Science of the Total Environment.
615: 588–596.
Carpenter, S., Arrow, K., Barrett, S., Biggs, R., Brock, W., Crépin, A.-S., … Zeeuw, A. (2012). General resili-
ence to cope with extreme events. Sustainability. 4(12): 3248–3259.
Carpenter, S., Walker, B., Anderies, J.M., and Abel, N. (2001). From metaphor to measurement: Resilience
of what to what? Ecosystems. 4(8): 765–781.
Carreño, M.L., Cardona, O.-D., Barbat, A.H., Suárez, D.C., Pérez, M. del P., and Narváez, L. (2017). Holistic
disaster risk evaluation for the urban risk management plan of Manizales, Colombia. International
Journal of Disaster Risk Science. 8(3): 258–269.
Carvalho, D., Martins, H., Marta-Almeida, M., Rocha, A., and Borrego, C. (2017). Urban resilience to future
urban heatwaves under a climate change scenario: A case study for Porto urban area (Portugal). Urban
Climate. 19: 1–27.
Cato, M.S. (2013). The BIoregional Economy: Land, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.
Abingdon: Routledge.
Cavallaro, M., Asprone, D., Latora, V., Manfredi, G., and Nicosia, V. (2014). Assessment of urban ecosystem
resilience through hybrid social-physical complex networks. Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure
Engineering. 29(8): 608–625.
Chelleri, L. and Olazabal, M. (2012). Multidisciplinary Perspectives on Urban Resilience. Bilbao: Basque
Centre for Climate Change.
Chelleri, L., Waters, J.J., Olazabal, M., and Minucci, G. (2015). Resilience trade-offs: addressing multiple
scales and temporal aspects of urban resilience. Environment and Urbanization. 27(1): 181–198.
Collier, F., Hambling, J., Kernaghan, S., Kovacevic, B., Miller, R., Pérez, A.P., … Macmillan, S. (2013).
Tomorrow’s cities: A framework to assess urban resilience. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil
Engineers: Urban Design and Planning. 167(2): 79–91.
Cutter, S.L., Ash, K.D., and Emrich, C.T. (2016). Urban-rural differences in disaster resilience. Annals of the
American Association of Geographers. 106(6): 1236–1252.
Da Silva, J. and Morera, B.E. (2014). City resilience framework: A holistic evidence-based framework for
understanding city resilience. In: M. Stal, D. Sigrist, and W. Ammann (eds.): Proceedings of the 5th
International Disaster and Risk Conference: Integrative Risk Management –The Role of Science,
Technology and Practice, IDRC Davos 2014. Global Risk Forum (GRF), 188–191.
Davoudi, S. (2012). Resilience: A bridging concept or a dead end? Planning Theory & Practice.
13(2): 299–307.
Davoudi, S., Brooks, E., and Mehmood, A. (2013). Evolutionary resilience and strategies for climate adapta-
tion. Planning Practice and Research. 28(3): 307–322.
Carlo Delgado-Ramos, G., and Guibrunet, L. (2017). Assessing the ecological dimension of urban resilience
and sustainability. International Journal of Urban Sustainable Development. 9(2): 151–169.
Dicken, P. (2011). Global Shift: Mapping the Changing Contours of the World Economy.
New York: Guilford Press.
Donovan, B. and Work, D.B. (2017). Empirically quantifying city-scale transportation system resilience to
extreme events. Transportation Research Part C-Emerging Technologies. 79: 333–346.
Esposito, A. and Di Pinto, V. (2014). Urban Resilience and Risk Assessment: How Urban Layout Affects
Flood Risk in the City. 14th International Conference on Computational Science and Its Applications,
Guimaraes: 204–207 .
Esposito,A. and Di Pinto,V. (2015). Calm after the storm: The configurational approach to manage flood risk
in river-cities. In: K. Karimi, G. Palaiologou, L.Vaughan, T. Bolton, and K. Sailer (eds.): SSS 2015 –10th
International Space Syntax Symposium. Space Syntax Laboratory, The Bartlett School of Architecture,
University College London.
213
M. Suárez, E. Gómez- Baggethun, and M. Onaindia
European Environmental Agency. (2011). Green Infrastructure and Territorial Cohesion. The Concept of
Green Infrastructure and its Integration into Policies Using Monitoring Systems. Luxembourg: European
Environmental Agency.
Field, C., Look, R., and Lindsay, T. (2017). A comprehensive approach to city and building resilience. Aei
2017: Resilience of the Integrated Building: 745–757.
Folke, C. (2006). Resilience: The emergence of a perspective for social–ecological systems analyses. Global
Environmental Change. 16(3): 253–267.
Folke, C., Carpenter, S.R., Walker, B., Scheffer, M., Chapin, T., and Rockstrom, J. (2010). Resilience
thinking: integrating resilience, adaptability and transformability. Ecology and Society. 15(4): 20.
Fonseca, J.A., Estevez-Mauriz, L., Forgaci, C., and Bjorling, N. (2017). Spatial heterogeneity for envir-
onmental performance and resilient behavior in energy and transportation systems. Computers
Environment and Urban Systems. 62: 136–145.
Franchin, P. and Cavalieri, F. (2013).A framework for physical simulation of critical infrastructures, accounting
for interdependencies and uncertainty. In: Safety, Reliability, Risk and Life-Cycle Performance of
Structures and Infrastructures –Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Structural Safety
and Reliability, ICOSSAR 2013, 749–756.
Freeman, R., McMahon, C., and Godfrey, P. (2017). An exploration of the potential for re-distributed manu-
facturing to contribute to a sustainable, resilient city. International Journal of Sustainable Engineering.
10(4–5): 260–271.
Ganin, A.A., Kitsak, M., Marchese, D., Keisler, J.M., Seager, T., and Linkov, I. (2017). Resilience and effi-
ciency in transportation networks. Science Advances. 3(12): e1701079–e1701079.
Gharai, F., Masnavi, M.R., and Hajibandeh, M. (2018). Urban local spatial resilience: Developing the key
indicators and measures, a brief review of literature. BAGH-E NAZAR. 14(57): 19–32.
Goldstein, B. (2009). Resilience to surprises through communicative planning. Ecology and Society. 14(2).
Gómez-Baggethun, E., Gren, Å., Barton, D.N., Langemeyer, J., McPhearson, T., O’Farrell, P., … Kremer, P.
(2013). Urban ecosystem services. In: T. Elmqvist, M. Fragkias, J. Goodness, B. Güneralp, P.J. Marcotullio,
R.I. McDonald, … C. Wilkinson (eds.): Urbanization, Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services: Challenges
and Opportunities. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 175–251.
Grinberger, A.Y. and Felsenstein, D. (2016). Dynamic agent based simulation of welfare effects of urban
disasters. Computers Environment and Urban Systems. 59: 129–141.
Gunderson, L.H. (2000). Ecological resilience –In theory and application. Annual Review of Ecology and
Systematics. 31(1): 425–439.
Gunderson, L.H. and Holling, C.S. (eds.) (2002). Panarchy: Understanding Transformations in Human and
Natural Systems. Washington, DC: Island Press.
Hopkins, R. (2008). The Transition Handbook. From Oil Dependency to Local Resilience, 1st edn.
Totnes: Green Books.
Khorasani, N.E., Gernay,T., and Garlock, M. (2015).Tools for measuring a city’s resilience in a fire following
earthquake scenario. In: IABSE Conference, Geneva 2015: Structural Engineering: Providing Solutions
to Global Challenges –Report. International Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering
(IABSE), 886–889.
Kim, D. and Lim, U. (2016). Urban Resilience in Climate Change Adaptation: A Conceptual Framework.
Sustainability. 8(5): 405.
Kontokosta, C.E. and Malik, A. (2018).The resilience to emergencies and disasters index: Applying big data
to benchmark and validate neighborhood resilience capacity. Sustainable Cities and Society. 36: 272–285.
Koren, D., Kilar,V., and Rus, K. (2017). Proposal for holistic assessment of urban system resilience to natural
disasters. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering. 245: 062011.
Kuznecova, T., Romagnoli, F., and Rochas, C. (2014). Energy metabolism for resilient urban environ-
ment: a methodological approach. In: D. Amaratunga and R. Haigh (eds.): 4th International Conference
on Building Resilience, Incorporating the 3rd Annual Conference of the Android Disaster Resilience
Network,Vol. 18, 780–788.
Lakshani, P.A.K.R. and Welikanna, D.R. (2016). A time series spatial analysis on urban resilience. In: 37th
Asian Conference on Remote Sensing, ACRS 2016,Vol. 1, 1–9. Asian Association on Remote Sensing.
Leu, G., Abbass, H., and Curtis, N. (2010). Resilience of ground transportation networks: A case study on
Melbourne. In: ATRF 2010: 33rd Australasian Transport Research Forum.
Lhomme, S., Serre, D., Diab,Y., and Laganier, R. (2010). GIS development for urban flood resilience. WIT
Transactions on Ecology and the Environment. 129: 661–671.
214
Assessing resilience in cities
Lhomme, S., Serre, D., Diab, Y., and Laganier, R. (2013). Analyzing resilience of urban networks: A
preliminary step towards more flood resilient cities. Natural Hazards and Earth System Science. 13(2):
221–230.
McPhearson, T., Andersson, E., Elmqvist, T., and Frantzeskaki, N. (2015). Resilience of and through urban
ecosystem services. Ecosystem Services. 12: 152–156.
Meerow, S. and Newell, J.P. (2016). Urban resilience for whom, what, when, where, and why? Urban
Geography: 1–21.
Meerow, S., Newell, J.P. and Stults, M. (2016). Defining urban resilience: A review. Landscape and Urban
Planning. 147: 38–49.
Mehmood, A. (2016). Of resilient places: planning for urban resilience. European Planning Studies.
24(2): 407–419.
Miguez, M.G. and Verol, A.P. (2017). A catchment scale integrated flood resilience index to support decision
making in urban flood control design. Environment and Planning B-Urban Analytics and City Science.
44(5): 925–946.
Min-Seok, K., Jeon,Y.-M., and Lee, J.-S. (2017). A comparative analysis of the level of urban resilience in the
city comprehensive plan. WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment. 223: 517–526.
Novak,V.M., Fernandez-Anez, N., and Shiraishi, K. (2017). Rethinking resilience planning: from problems
to potential. International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment. 8(4): 412–424.
Nugent, P.J., Omitaomu, O.A., Parish, E.S., Mei, R., Ernst, K.M., Absar, M., and Sylvester, L. (2017). A web-
based geographic information platform to support urban adaptation to climate change. In: D.A. Griffith,
Y. Chun, and D.J. Dean (eds.): Advances in Geographic Information Science. Heidelberg: Springer,
371–381.
Ottenburger, S. and Münzberg, T. (2017). An approach for analyzing the impacts of smart grid topologies
on critical infrastructure resilience. In: F. Benaben, M. Lauras, T. Comes, A. Montarnal, and C. Hanachi
(eds.): Proceedings of the International ISCRAM Conference,Vol. 2017 (May), 400–411. Information
Systems for Crisis Response and Management, ISCRAM.
Owrangi, A.M., Lannigan, R., and Simonovic, S.P. (2015). Mapping climate change-caused health risk for
integrated city resilience modeling. Natural Hazards. 77(1): 67–88.
Perz, S.G., Muñoz-Carpena, R., Kiker, G., and Holt, R.D. (2013). Evaluating ecological resilience with
global sensitivity and uncertainty analysis. Ecological Modelling. 263: 174–186.
Pickett, S.T.A., Cadenasso, M.L., Grove, J.M., Boone, C.G., Groffman, P.M., Irwin, E., … Warren, P. (2011).
Urban ecological systems: Scientific foundations and a decade of progress. Journal of Environmental
Management. 92(3): 331–362.
Pimm, S.L. (1991).The Balance of nature? Ecological Issues in the Conservation of Species and Communities.
Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Pregnolato, M., Ford, A., Robson, C., Glenis,V., Barr, S., and Dawson, R. (2016). Assessing urban strategies
for reducing the impacts of extreme weather on infrastructure networks. Royal Society Open Science.
3(5): 160023.
Qin, W., Lin, A., Fang, J., Wang, L., and Li, M. (2017). Spatial and temporal evolution of community resili-
ence to natural hazards in the coastal areas of China. Natural Hazards. 89(1): 331–349.
Rafael, S., Martins, H., Sa, E., Carvalho, D., Borrego, C., and Lopes, M. (2016). Influence of urban resilience
measures in the magnitude and behaviour of energy fluxes in the city of Porto (Portugal) under a cli-
mate change scenario. Science of the Total Environment. 566: 1500–1510.
Romero-Lankao, P., Gnatz, D., Wilhelmi, O., and Hayden, M. (2016). Urban sustainability and resili-
ence: From theory to Practice. Sustainability. 8(12): 1224.
Schiappacasse, P. and Müller, B. (2018). One fits all?: Resilience as a multipurpose concept in regional and
environmental development. Raumforschung Und Raumordnung –Spatial Research and Planning.
76(1): 51–64.
Schlör, H., Venghaus, S., and Hake, J.-F. (2018). The FEW-Nexus city index –Measuring urban resilience.
Applied Energy. 210: 382–392.
Schwind, N., Minami, K., Maruyama, H., Ilmola, L., and Inoue, K. (2016). Computational framework of
resilience. In: Y. Yamagata and H. Maruyama (eds.): Urban Resilience: A Transformative Approach,
239–257. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
Serre, D., Barroca, B., Balsells, M., and Becue, V. (2018). Contributing to urban resilience to floods with
neighbourhood design: the case of Am Sandtorkai/Dalmannkai in Hamburg. Journal of Flood Risk
Management. 11: S69–S83.
215
M. Suárez, E. Gómez- Baggethun, and M. Onaindia
Sharifi, A. and Yamagata,Y. (2016). Urban resilience assessment: Multiple dimensions, criteria, and Indicators.
In: Y. Yamagata and H. Maruyama (eds.): Urban Resilience: A Transformative Approach , 259–276.
Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
Su, Y.-S. (2017). Rebuild, retreat or resilience: urban flood vulnerability analysis and simulation in Taipei.
International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment. 8(2): 110–122.
Suárez, M., Gómez-Baggethun, E., Benayas, J., and Tilbury, D. (2016).Towards an Urban Resilience Index: A
case study in 50 Spanish cities. Sustainability. 8(8): 774.
Tabibian, M., and Rezapour, M. (2016). Assessment of urban resilience; a case study of Region 8 of Tehran
city, Iran. Scientia Iranica. 23(4): 1699–1707.
Tumini, I.,Villagra-Islas, P., and Herrmann-Lunecke, G. (2017). Evaluating reconstruction effects on urban
resilience: a comparison between two Chilean tsunami-prone cities. Natural Hazards. 85(3): 1363–1392.
Vale, L.J. (2014). The politics of resilient cities: Whose resilience and whose city? Building Research &
Information. 42(2): 191–201.
Villagra, P., Herrmann, G., Quintana, C., and Sepulveda, R.D. (2016). Resilience thinking and urban
planning in a coastal environment at risks of tsunamis: the case study of Mehuin, Chile. Revista De
Geografia Norte Grande. 64: 63–82.
Walker, B. and Salt, D. (2006). Resilience Thinking. Sustaining Ecosystems and People in a Changing World,
1st edn. Washington, DC: Island Press.
Zaidi, R.Z. and Pelling, M. (2015). Institutionally configured risk: Assessing urban resilience and disaster
risk reduction to heat wave risk in London. Urban Studies. 52(7): 1218–1233.
Zhao, P., Chapman, R., Randal, E., and Howden-Chapman, P. (2013). Understanding resilient urban
futures: A systemic modelling approach. Sustainability. 5(7): 3202–3223.
216
17
Disaster volunteerism as a
contributor to resilience
Samantha Montano
Introduction
Emergency management has become increasingly formalized over the past few decades with an
increase in plans, procedures (Rubin 2012), and an emerging profession (Cwiak 2009) and dis-
cipline (Jensen 2011). In addition to those working within the formal emergency management
system, people with all manner of job titles, in all professions, and in all parts of life contribute to
emergency management in various ways throughout the disaster life cycle (i.e. response, recovery,
mitigation, preparedness) (Canton 2007; McEntire 2006). Many of the people who do the work
of emergency management are in fact volunteers.
Disaster volunteerism can be understood to be the act of “‘engaging in helping behavior’
related to preparing for, responding to, recovering from, or mitigating a disaster, ‘in which time
is given freely to benefit another person, group’, or overall effort (Vigo 1996; Wilson 2000,
p. 215 cited in Richardson et al. 2008; Michel 2007)” (Montano 2017, p. 20). Some volunteers
operate within the formal emergency management system and are highly skilled like volunteer
firefighters (Perkins 1989) and medical professionals (Arbon et al. 2006; Rudden 2011) and
trained volunteers that work with non-governmental disaster organizations such as the Red
Cross (Neal 1991; Steerman and Cole 2009). Other volunteers work within the informal system
with non-disaster organizations or operate outside the confines of a formal organization (Barsky
et al. 2007; Fernandez et al. 2006; Kendra and Wachtendorf 2001).
The emergency management, and disaster literature more broadly, is filled with examples
of volunteerism before, during, and after disasters (Helsloot and Reuitenberg 2004; McLennan
et al. 2016; Quarantelli and Dynes 1980). Volunteers engage in a wide range of activities from
implementing disaster preparedness programs, lobbying government for mitigation funds,
assisting with search and rescue, rebuilding homes post-disaster, and more. In fact, there seem to
be few, if any, tasks that occur throughout the disaster life cycle that do not include the work of
volunteers in some way.
Considering the ubiquitous nature of a disaster volunteerism it is useful for those that study
disasters, emergency management practitioners, and anyone else involved in the management
of disasters to understand this phenomenon. This chapter will review the findings of the litera-
ture related to volunteer engagement during two of the four phases –response and recovery.
217
Samantha Montano
Specifically, it will consider who volunteers, when they volunteer, how they volunteer, and what
they do while they volunteer. Secondarily, it will consider how understanding volunteer engage-
ment relates to community resilience during disaster.
218
Disaster volunteerism
they volunteer, and what they do when they volunteer; information that can be a value for those
in emergency management.
219
Samantha Montano
the extent they are overwhelmed, others from outside the community come to help (Quarantelli
and Dynes 1977).
Response volunteers engage in all manner of tasks that arise during response related to saving
lives, property, and/or the environment. Volunteers are involved in sharing warnings (Helsloot
and Ruitenberg 2004), sheltering (Helsloot and Ruitenberg 2004; Michel 2007), evacuations
(Helsloot and Ruitenberg, 2004), search and rescue (Barsky et al. 2007; Dynes et al. 1988), emer-
gency debris removal (Dynes et al. 1988), distributing emergency supplies (Dynes et al. 1988;
Vigo 1996), and providing emergency health care (Hodge et al. 2007; Sloand et al. 2012) among
other response tasks.
Survivors of the disaster are often the first to help and are, in fact, often the only assistance
available until outside help arrives (Helsloot and Ruitenber 2004; Scanlon et al. 2014). Not only
are volunteers helpful but they may be the only ones at the site depending on the length of
the response and the logistics of the situation. A frequently cited example of this are search and
rescue efforts. Aguirre et al. 1995 found that victims of the Guadalajara Gas Explosion were more
likely to be rescued by a family member or neighbor than trained first responders and, in fact,
most people were rescued within the first two hours. While it may be ideal for highly trained
first responders to conduct search and rescue, often the logistics of the disaster do not allow for
their prompt arrival.
During response, some volunteers integrate into the formal response teams. Some of these
volunteers may have training, experience, understand response procedures and even, in some
cases, are expected to be a central contributor to the response (Phillips 2015). Other volunteers
that arrive to help are unable or unwilling to integrate into the formal response organizations
(Lowe and Fothergill 2003). Researchers have found that individuals volunteering on their own,
or absent an organization, tend to create their own method of coordinating themselves. An
organizing structure emerges and volunteers form their own procedures that allow them to par-
ticipate in the response (Montano 2017; Strandh and Eklund 2017).These emergent groups may
work in tandem with the formal response or they may not (Dynes et al. 1988).
Volunteers vary in terms of training, their experience, timing, partnerships, and coordinating
mechanism. Regardless of these differences, they are a prominent feature of communities in
duress.Volunteer efforts continue into the recovery.
Volunteerism in recovery
As the response moves into the recovery phase, the focus shifts from addressing life-saving needs
to tasks related to restoring, rebuilding, and reshaping the community. Recovery is “the differ-
ential process of restoring, rebuilding, and reshaping the social, physical, economic, and natural
environments through pre-and post-event action” (Smith and Wenger 2006, p. 237). Anyone
who voluntarily contributes to tasks related to restoring, rebuilding, and reshaping an affected
community can be considered a recovery volunteer. Although relatively little research has been
done on recovery volunteers, researchers have acknowledged their importance (e.g. Helsloot
and Ruitenberg 2004) and have gone so far as to call them the “backbone of disaster recovery”
(Phillips 2015, p. 445).
As is the case during response, the number of recovery volunteers varies widely across
disasters. Given the fluctuating length of recovery and the dispersed nature of where they work,
it is difficult to quantify the number of people involved in recovery. There are few records that
encapsulate a full accounting of the number of recovery volunteers. Researchers have attempted
to produce estimates. In 2006, a year after Hurricane Katrina and the levee failure, the city
of New Orleans averaged 10,000 non-local recovery volunteers a week (Pezzullo 2009). In
220
Disaster volunteerism
Australia 22,000 volunteers were registered in 2009 following severe bushfires (Twigg and Mosel
2017).While there generally seems to be a high number of response volunteers, there is evidence
to suggest that volunteer numbers begin to drop off as the urgency of the immediate crisis ends
and the recovery progresses (Argothy 2003; Dynes and Quarantelli 1977; Taylor et al. 1970).
However, because recovery can last weeks, months, or years (which is generally much longer
than the phase of response (Auf der Heide 1989)) it may be the case that in total there are actu-
ally more recovery volunteers than response volunteers while simultaneously not being enough
volunteers to address the recovery needs of the affected community (Montano 2017).
Ultimately, as is the case in response, the length of time individuals volunteer during recovery
varies. Some volunteers are involved over the entirety of the recovery while other volunteers
come and go at various points throughout the recovery. Some volunteers help for a few hours
at a time throughout the course of the recovery while others help for days, weeks, months, or
longer (Gardner 2008; Montano 2017).
As is the case in response, recovery volunteers engage in a number of different tasks and
activities related to restoring, rebuilding, and reshaping what was destroyed. This includes tasks
related to providing long-term mental health care (Gelkopf at al. 2008; Kono and Shinew 2015;
Vijayakumar and Kumar 2008), debris removal (Nelan and Grineski 2013; Phillips 1986; 2015),
rebuilding (Kono and Shinew 2015; Nelan and Grineski 2013), conducting damage assessments
(Phillips 1986; 2015) and distribution of donations and supplies (Rigg et al. 2005) among
other tasks.
Research suggests many recovery volunteers are untrained (Lowe and Fothergill 2003) and
yet many recovery tasks require some level of training, experience, or education. Some have a
certain skillset that they find useful during their time volunteering. For example, previous con-
struction experience may be useful for rebuilding a home. Though there is minimal research,
some affiliated volunteers receive specialized training to conduct specific tasks but it seems more
often the case that volunteers learn from other volunteers and/or the organization they are
working with (Montano 2017).
Volunteers during recovery tend to work through established organizations, unlike during
response when many, if not the majority, of volunteers are unaffiliated. Volunteers work with a
variety of organizations, some of which have disaster-specific missions (Gardner 2008). Research
suggests that during recovery volunteers are managed by volunteer coordinators or some other
people in a position of authority and are integrated into the coordinating structure of existing
organizations (Montano 2017).
While some who volunteer during recovery are local, volunteers may come from outside
the affected community. Volunteers may arrive to help with their church group (Gardner
2008), school group (Plummer et al. 2008), corporate group (Aitken et al. 2012; Sloand et al.
2012), or other social group (Nelan and Grineski 2013; Simons et al., 2005). National and
international disaster recovery organizations, both for-profit and non-profit, may organize
volunteer trips for groups from outside the community. Some individuals travel to the com-
munity with the primary purpose of volunteering while others go for the dual purpose of
helping and tourism (Wearing 2001). Research on the occurrence of “voluntourism” related
to disaster is in its early stages (e.g. Smithson 2014) but the general phenomenon is a growing
occurrence around the world (Corti, Marola, Castro 2010) and should be of interest to those
involved in disaster recovery.
Understanding how volunteers engage during response and recovery is a first step in
understanding how they can be a resource for the affected community. A broad understanding
of disaster volunteerism during these time periods can be beneficial to emergency manage-
ment practitioners, volunteer managers, and others who are involved in managing response and
221
Samantha Montano
recovery. This is particularly true in the context of considering the increased role of volunteers
in creating resilient communities (McLennan et al. 2016).
222
Disaster volunteerism
Volunteerism may not be beneficial to everyone, in every community, during every disaster.
The literature speculates a few possible issues related to volunteer involvement. Volunteers may
cause logistical challenges at the scene of the disaster (e.g. Dynes 1994; Kendra and Watchtendorf
2001; Neal 1994). Spontaneous volunteers in particular lack training and are likely unfamiliar
with emergency procedures which may hinder first responders and emergency personnel (e.g.,
Auf der Heide 1989; Drabek 1985; Fernandez et al. 2006). At times there is a sentiment among
some in practice that volunteers are a burden (Argothy 2003; Fernandez et al. 2006).
Twigg and Mosel (2017) reviewed the challenges related to disaster volunteerism in more
depth and concluded that many of the issues were related to tensions between the highly trained
formal emergency management system and the often untrained, more spontaneous informal
emergency management system. Specifically, “spontaneous volunteering can present significant
coordination, integration, communication, logistical, and health and safety challenges to emer-
gency managers” (Twigg and Mosel 2017 p. 9).There have certainly been examples from around
the world of instances of volunteers complicating the response (e.g. Helsloot and Ruitenber
2004; Barsky et al. 2007) but there has not been an attempt to systematically study the prevalence
of these issues. Ultimately, there are fewer examples of volunteers hindering response efforts
compared to the mounting evidence of their positive contributions (Gonzalez 2005; Irvine 2006;
Strandh and Eklund 2017).
In fact, tension between these two systems –one of which uses more of a hierarchical
approach compared to a horizontal organizing structure –is to be expected (Helsloot and
Ruitenberg 2004). It would also seem though that at least some of this tension arises from a
misunderstanding among the practitioner community, in particular, about volunteers and their
engagement. Developing an understanding of volunteer engagement should be a priority among
practitioners and others involved in emergency management to help ease these tensions. Rather
than volunteers being a hindrance to the response and recovery, they can be a valuable resource
that contributes over the length of the response and recovery. As others have noted, the failure
to recognize their value have made volunteers a wasted resource (Lowe and Fothergill 2003;
Scanlon et al. 2014; Souza 2009).
This suggests the observations from the literature presented here about how disaster volunteers
engage can be beneficial to those who work with disaster volunteers and in emergency man-
agement by providing a framework within which to consider disaster volunteerism. Although
understanding how volunteers engage, as outlined in this chapter, is an important first step, there
remain many questions about their involvement particularly related to what factors drive their
engagement.
The next frontier of disaster volunteerism research is determining the factors that influ-
ence volunteer engagement. What accounts for who volunteers, what they do, who they work
with, and how they volunteer? Efforts to determine explanatory variables have mostly centered
on demographic variables (e.g. sex/gender, race, education, age, income) as predictors of who
volunteers during disasters (e.g. Aitken et al. 2012; Arbon et al. 2006; Nelan and Grineski 2013;
Ocak et al. 2013; Plummer et al. 2008; Rotolo and Berg 2011; Sargisson et al., 2012).The findings
from these efforts have been relatively inconclusive. While certain disasters seem to attract more
people of one demographic than another and certain tasks seem more associated with one demo-
graphic than another, there are no generalizations that can be made across disasters from this body
of work except that people of all demographics volunteer during disasters (Montano 2017).
An initial attempt to look for factors outside demographics that influence each compo-
nent of volunteer engagement was made by Montano (2017) during response and recovery to
the 2016 Tax Day Flood in Houston, Texas. The study found a number of factors at individual,
organizational, and community levels that influenced engagement during and after the disaster.
223
Samantha Montano
Individuals who volunteered were influenced by their pre-disaster skillset, latent knowledge of
the community, their integration into the community, logistical factors like being able to phys-
ically get to a volunteer site, their availability, awareness of the disaster and needs, and more
(Montano 2017).
Additional support for these factors can be found dispersed throughout the disaster vol-
unteerism literature. Some factors that find support in the literature include: having previous
volunteer experience (Brand et al. 2008; Fothergill et al. 2005; Gardner 2008), being motivated
to help (Carlile et al. 2014; Fothergill et al. 2005; Irvine 2006; Lowe and Fothergill 2003), media
coverage (Phillips 1986), the scale of the event (Dynes et al. 1988; Gardner 2008; Lowe and
Fothergill 2003), a perceived lack of a formal response (Brzozowski 2013), among others. While
there is a growing list of factors, more research like the Houston study is urgently required to
compile a generalizable list of factors that influence volunteer engagement during these time
periods.
Understanding these factors can help practitioners, volunteer managers, and others to pro-
mote and facilitate volunteerism during and after disaster. When researchers isolate the factors
that lead to each component of volunteer engagement, practitioners may find that at least some of
those factors may be manipulated. If various aspects of how volunteers engage can be influenced
not only could the issues practitioners have identified be addressed but volunteer efforts could
become even more effective and efficient than they would be otherwise. Knowing these factors
could determine what can be done in advance to prepare for the response and recovery efforts of
volunteers. Offering this information to practitioners and volunteer managers would be valuable
and act as a roadmap for how to influence volunteer engagement during response and recovery
to more effectively, efficiently, and justly benefit those who have been impacted by disaster. This
in turn, has the potential to increase community resilience.
While there is still much more to study related to disaster volunteerism, the existing literature
offers a number of implications for practice. It is important that those involved in response and
recovery, and also those preparing for response and recovery, have a clear understanding of how
volunteers engage in each phase. Practitioners should be aware of volunteer efforts and how
they vary between response and recovery. It is useful for practitioners to understand who will be
volunteering in their communities, when they can be expected to arrive, how long they will stay,
what they will do, and how they will organize themselves. In general, having an understanding
of how volunteers engage can help practitioners expect and plan for volunteer efforts that are
likely to occur in their communities. It also affords practitioners an opportunity to influence this
volunteer engagement by providing support for volunteers to encourage their involvement or
redirecting their efforts when their assistance is not needed.
Conclusion
As we continue down the path of changing risk, from development decisions and climate change,
it would be useful to utilize the labor of volunteers effectively and efficiently during response and
recovery and increase community resilience.This chapter has considered what the existing litera-
ture on disaster volunteerism during response and recovery reveals about volunteer engagement
specifically who volunteers, what they do, when they volunteer, and how they volunteer. While
this chapter has focused on volunteerism during response and recovery it is equally the case that
volunteerism that occurs during the phases of mitigation and preparedness may contribute to a
community’s resilience. It has also situated the findings of the disaster volunteer literature in the
context of disaster resilience arguing that volunteerism works in service to the resiliency of a
community before, during, and after disaster. Emergency management practitioners and others
224
Disaster volunteerism
involved in disaster response and recovery should be aware of volunteer engagement during
these different periods. In the future they may be in a position to make informed decisions to
influence that engagement. Further research in this area is needed to yield strategies for effect-
ively and efficiently utilizing volunteer labor and talents to promote community resilience.
References
Aguirre, B.E., Wenger, D.E., Glass, T.A., Diaz-Murillo, M., and Vigo, G. (1995). The social organization of
search and rescue: Evidence from the Guadalajara gasoline explosion. International Journal of Mass
Emergencies and Disasters. 13: 67–92.
Aitken, P., Leggat, P., Harley, H., Speare, R., and Leclercq, M. (2012). Human resources issues and Australian
Disaster Medical Assistance Teams: Results of a national survey of team members. Emerging Health
Threats. 5: 1–7.
Arbon, P., Bobrowski, C., Zeitz, K., Hooper, C., Williams, J., and Thitchener, J. (2006). Australian nurses
volunteering for the Sumatra-Andaman earthquake and tsunami of 2004: A review of experience and
analysis of data collected by the Tsunami Volunteer Hotline. Australasian Emergency Nursing Journal.
9(4): 171–178.
Argothy, V. (2003). Framing Volunteerism in a Consensus Crisis: Mass Media Coverage of Volunteers in
the 9/11 Response (Preliminary paper #335). Newark, DE: Disaster Research Center, University of
Delaware.
Auf der Heide, E. (1989). Disaster response: Principles and Preparation and Coordination. St Louis,
MO: The CV Mosby Company.
Barsky, L.E., Trainor, J.E., Torres, M.R., and Aguirre, B.E. (2007). Managing volunteers: FEMA’s Urban
Search and Rescue programme and interactions with unaffiliated responders in disaster response.
Disasters. 31(4): 495–507.
Beyerlein, K. and Sikkink, D. (2008). Sorrow and solidarity: Why Americans volunteered for 9/11 relief
efforts. Social Problems. 55(2): 190–215.
Brand, M.W., Kerby, D., Elledge, B., Burton, T., Coles, D., and Dunn, A. (2008). Public health’s
response: Citizens’ thoughts on volunteering. Disaster Prevention and Management. 17(1): 54–61.
Brzozowski, J.C. (2013). From paid work to volunteerism during one case of natural disaster: Interacting
micro and macro level transitions. Work. 44(1): 85–88.
Canton, L.G. (2007). Emergency Management: Concepts and Strategies for Effective Programs. Hoboken,
NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Carlile, J.A., Mauseth, K., Clark, N.E., Cruz, J.L., and Thoburn, J.W. (2014). Local volunteerism and resili-
ence following large-scale disaster: Outcomes for health support team volunteers in Haiti. International
Journal of Disaster Risk Science. 5(3): 206–213.
Corti, I.N., Marola, P.N., and Castro, M.B. (2010). Social inclusion and local development through European
voluntourism: A case study of the project realized in a neighborhood of morocco. American Journal of
Economics and Business Administration. 2(3): 221.
Coryell, J.E., Stewart,T.,Wubbena, Z.C.,Valverde-Poenie,T.C., and Spencer, B.J. (2016). International service-
learning: Study abroad and global citizenship development in a post-disaster locale. In: Handbook of
Research on Study Abroad Programs and Outbound Mobility (pp. 420–445). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
Cwiak, C.L. (2009). Strategies for Success: The Role of Power and Dependence in the Emergency
Management Professionalization Process. Dissertation North Dakota State University.
Drabek, T.E. (1985). Managing the emergency response. Public Administration Review. 45: 85–92.
Dynes, R.R. (1994). Situational altruism: Toward an explanation of pathologies in disaster assistance
(Preliminary paper #201). Newark, DE: Disaster Research Center, University of Delaware.
Dynes, R.R. and Quarantelli, E.L. (1980). Helping behavior in large-scale disasters. In: D.H. Smith and J.
Macaulay (eds.): Participation in Social and Political Activities. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers,
339–354.
Dynes, R.R., Quarantelli, E.L., and Wenger, D. (1988). The Organizational and Public Response to
the September 1985 Earthquake in Mexico City, Mexico. Final Report #35. Newark, DE: Disaster
Research Center, University of Delaware.
Etkin, D. and Stefanovic, I.L. (2005). Mitigating natural disasters: The role of eco-ethics. In: Mitigation of
Natural Hazards and Disasters: International Perspectives. Dordrecht: Springer, 135–158.
225
Samantha Montano
Federal Emergency Management Agency. (2016). National Disaster Recovery Framework. Washington,
DC: Department of Homeland Security.
Fernandez, L., Barbera, J., and van Dorp, J. (2006). Spontaneous volunteer response to disasters: The benefits
and consequences of good intentions. Journal of Emergency Management. 4(5): 57–68.
Fothergill, A., Palumbo, M.V., Rambur, B., Reinier, K., and McIntosh, B. (2005). The volunteer potential of
inactive nurses for disaster preparedness. Public Health Nursing. 22(5): 414–421.
Fritz, C. and Mathewson, J.H. (1957). Convergence Behavior in Disasters: A Problem in Social Control.
Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.
Gardner, R.O. (2008). The Role of Grassroots Organizations and Volunteers in Southeast Texas After
Hurricane Ike. Natural Hazards Center Quick Response Report. Boulder, CO: Natural Hazards Center.
Gelkopf, M., Ryan, P., Cotton, S.J., and Berger, R. (2008). The impact of “training the trainers” course for
helping tsunami-survivor children on Sri Lankan disaster volunteer workers. International Journal of
Stress Management. 15(2): 117.
Gonzalez, M.M. (2005). Citizen involvement in disaster management. (Master’s thesis). Monterey, CA: Naval
Postgraduate School.
Green, K.E. and Ireland, E. (1982). A case study of disaster-related emergent citizen groups: An examination
of “vested interests” as a generating condition. (Preliminary paper #77). Newark, DE: Disaster Research
Center, University of Delaware.
Haas, J. and Drabek, T. (1970). Community disaster and system stress: A sociological perspective. In: J.
McGrath (ed.): Social and Psychological Factors in Stress. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, and
Co, 264–286.
Hall, P.D. (2006). A historical overview of philanthropy, voluntary associations, and nonprofit organizations
in the United States, 1600–2000. The nonprofit sector: A research handbook. 2: 32–65.
Helsloot, I. and Ruitenberg, A. (2004). Citizen response to disasters: a survey of literature and some practical
implications. Journal of contingencies and crisis management. 12(3): 98–111.
Hodge, J.G., Pepe, R.P., and Henning, W.H. (2007). Voluntarism in the wake of Hurricane Katrina: The
uniform emergency volunteer health practitioners Act. Disaster medicine and public health prepared-
ness. 1(01): 44–50.
Illinois Terrorism Task Force. (nd). Community Guidelines for Developing a Spontaneous Volunteer Plan
(February 2005). www.illinois.gov/security/preparedness/volunteer.htm.
Irvine, L. (2006). Providing for pets during disasters, part II: Animal response volunteers in Gonzales,
Louisiana. Natural Hazards Center Quick Response Report: 187.
Jensen, J. (2011). The argument for a disciplinary approach to emergency management higher education.
In: J. Hubbard (ed.): Challenges of Emergency Management in Higher Education. Fairfax, VA: Public
Entity Risk Institute, 18–47.
Kendra, J.M. and Wachtendorf, T. (2001). Rebel food… renegade supplies: Convergence after the World
Trade Center attack. DRC Preliminary Paper No. 316. Newark, DE: Disaster Research Center,
University of Delaware.
Klein, R.J., Nicholls, R.J., and Thomalla, F. (2003). Resilience to natural hazards: How useful is this con-
cept?. Global Environmental Change Part B: Environmental Hazards. 5(1): 35–45.
Kono, S., and Shinew, K.J. (2015). Roles of leisure in the post-disaster psychological recovery after the Great
East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami. Leisure Sciences. 37(1): 1–19.
Lowe, S. and Fothergill, A. (2003). A need to help: Emergent volunteer behavior after September 11. In
Natural Hazards Research and Applications Information Center, Public Entity Risk Institute, and
Institute for Civil Infrastructure Systems (Ed.), Beyond September 11: An account of post-disaster
research (pp. 293–314). Boulder, CO: Natural Hazards Research and Application Information Center,
University of Colorado.
McEntire, D.A. (ed.). (2006). Disciplines, Disasters, and Emergency Management: The Convergence and
Divergence of Concepts, Issues and Trends from the Research Literature. Emmitsburg, MD: Federal
Emergency Management Agency.
McLennan, B.,Whittaker, J., and Handmer, J. (2016).The changing landscape of disaster volunteering: oppor-
tunities, responses and gaps in Australia. Natural Hazards. 84(3): 2031–2048.
Michel, L.M. (2007). Personal responsibility and volunteering after a natural disaster: The case of Hurricane
Katrina. Sociological Spectrum. 27(6): 633–652.
Montano, S. (2017). A Foundation for Factors that Explain Volunteer Engagement in Response and
Recovery: The Case of Flooding in East Texas 2016. Doctoral dissertation. Fargo, ND: North Dakota
State University.
226
Disaster volunteerism
Neal, D. (1991). The local Red Cross in time of disaster: characteristics and conditions of organizational
effectiveness during the Loma Prieta earthquake and central Texas floods. The Journal of volunteer
administration. 11(2): 6–16.
Neal, D. (1994). The consequences of excessive unrequested donations: The case of Hurricane Andrew.
Disaster Management. 6(1): 23–28.
Nelan, M. and Grineski, S.E. (2013). Responding to Haiti’s Earthquake: International Volunteers’ health
behaviors and community relationships. International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters.
31(2): 293–314.
Ocak,T., Duran, A., Özdeş,T., Hocagil, C., and Küçükbayrak, A. (2013). Problems encountered by volunteers
assisting the relief efforts in Van, Turkey and the surrounding earthquake area. Journal of Academic
Emergency Medicine. 12(2): 66–70.
Perkins, K.B. (1989).Volunteer firefighters in the United States: A descriptive study. Nonprofit and Voluntary
Sector Quarterly. 18(3): 269–277.
Pezzullo, P.C. (2009). “This is the only tour that sells”: tourism, disaster, and national identity in New
Orleans. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change. 7(2): 99–114.
Plummer, C.A., Ai, A.L., Lemieux, C.M., Richardson, R., Dey, S., Taylor, P., and Hyun-Jun, K. (2008).
Volunteerism among social work students during Hurricanes Katrina and Rita: A report from the dis-
aster area. Journal of Social Service Research. 34(3): 55–71.
Phillips, B. (1986). The media in disaster threat situations: Some possible relationships between mass media
reporting and voluntarism. International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters. 4(3): 7–26.
Phillips, B. (2015). Disaster Recovery, 2nd edn. New York: Taylor & Francis.
Quarantelli, E.L. and Dynes, R.R. (1977). Response to social crisis and disaster. Annual review of sociology.
3(1): 23–49.
Rigg, J., Law, L.,Tan-Mullins, M., and Grundy-Warr, C. (2005).The Indian Ocean Tsunami: Socioeconomic
impacts in Thailand. The Geographical Journal 171(4), 374–379.
Rotolo, T. and Berg, J.A. (2011). In times of need: An examination of emergency preparedness and disaster
relief service volunteers. Nonprofit & Voluntary Sector Quarterly. 40(4): 740–750.
Rubin, C.B. (2012). Emergency Management: The American Experience: 1900– 2010. Boca Raton,
FL: CRC Press.
Rudden, P. (2011).Volunteering for service: the role of emergency nurses. Emergency Nurse. 19(4): 18–19.
Sargisson, R.J., Hunt, S., Hanlen, P., Smith, K., and Hamerton, H. (2012). Volunteering: A community
response to the Rena oil spill in New Zealand. Journal of Contingencies & Crisis Management.
20(4): 208–218.
Scanlon, J. (1999). Emergent groups in established frameworks: Ottawa Carleton’s response to the 1998 ice
disaster. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management. 7(1): 30–37.
Scanlon, J., Helsloot, I., and Groenendaal, J. (2014). Putting it all together: Integrating ordinary people into
emergency response. International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters. 32(1): 43–63.
Simons, J., Gaher, R., Jacobs, G., Meyer, D., and Johnson-Jimenez, E. (2005). Associations between alcohol
use and PTSD symptoms among American Red Cross disaster relief workers responding to the 9/11/
2001 attacks. American Journal of Drug & Alcohol Abuse. 31(2): 285–304.
Sloand, E., Ho, G., Klimmek, R., Pho, A., and Kub, J. (2012). Nursing children after a disaster: A qualitative
study of nurse volunteers and children after the Haiti earthquake. Journal for Specialists in Pediatric
Nursing. 17(3): 242–253.
Smith, G. and Wenger, D. (2006). Sustainable disaster recovery: Operationalizing an existing agenda. In: H.
Rodriguez, E.L. Quarantelli, and R. Dynes (eds.): Handbook of Disaster Research. New York: Springer
Verlag, 234–257.
Smithson, M.E. (2014). Disaster, Displacement, and Voluntourism. Doctoral dissertation. Oxford,
MS: University of Mississippi.
Souza, A.A. (2009). Wasted Resources Volunteers and Disasters. Doctoral dissertation. Monterey, CA: Naval
Postgraduate School.
Steerman, C. and Cole, V. (2009). Recruitment and retention of red cross disaster volunteers. Australasian
Journal of Disaster and Trauma Studies: 1.
Strandh, V. and Eklund, N. (2017). Emergent groups in disaster research: Varieties of scientific observation
over time and across studies of nine natural disasters. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management.
26(3): 329–333.
Taylor, J.B., Zurcher, L.A., and Key, W.H. (1970). Tornado: A Community Responds to Disaster. Seattle,
WA: University of Washington Press.
227
Samantha Montano
Timmerman, P. (1981).Vulnerability Resilience and Collapse of Society: A Review of Models and Possible
Climatic Applications. Toronto: Institute for Environmental Studies, University of Toronto.
Twigg, J. and Mosel, I. (2017). Emergent groups and spontaneous volunteers in urban disaster response.
Environment and Urbanization. 29(2): 443–458.
Vigo, G.N. (1996). Emergent behavior in the immediate response to two disasters: The 1985 Mexico
City Earthquake and the 1994 Northridge Earthquake in Los Angeles. (Doctoral dissertation). College
Station, TX: Texas A&M University.
Vijayakumar, L. and Kumar, M.S. (2008). Trained volunteer-delivered mental health support to those
bereaved by Asian Tsunami an evaluation. International Journal of Social Psychiatry. 54(4), 293–302.
Wearing, S. (2001).Volunteer Tourism: Experiences That Make a Difference.Wallingford: CAB International.
Wenger, D.E. and James, T.F. (1994). The convergence of volunteers in a consensus crisis: The case of
the 1985 Mexico City Earthquake. In: R. Dynes Russell and K.J. Tierney (eds.): Disasters, Collective
Behavior, and Social Organization. Newark, NJ: Associated University Presses.
Wilson, J. (2000).Volunteering. Annual Review of Sociology. 26(1): 215–240.
Wolensky, R.P. (1979). Toward a broader conceptualization of volunteerism in disaster. Journal of Voluntary
Action Research. 8(3–4): 33–42.
228
18
Green infrastructure and resilience
David Rouse
An adaptable term used to describe an array of products, technologies, and practices that
use natural systems –or engineered systems that mimic natural processes –to enhance
overall environmental quality and provide utility services. As a general principle, Green
Infrastructure techniques use soils and vegetation to infiltrate, evapotranspirate, and/
or recycle stormwater runoff. When used as components of a stormwater management
system, Green Infrastructure practices such as green roofs, porous pavement, rain gardens,
and vegetated swales can produce a variety of environmental benefits. In addition to effect-
ively retaining and infiltrating rainfall, these technologies can simultaneously help filter air
pollutants, reduce energy demands, mitigate urban heat islands, and sequester carbon while
also providing communities with aesthetic and natural resource benefits.
(US Environmental Protection Agency n.d.)
These two definitions have two key characteristics in common. The first is the notion that
green infrastructure is spatially manifested on the landscape, at scales ranging from the region
229
David Rouse
absorb stormwater, reducing runoff and associated impacts such as …to benefit the environment.
flooding and erosion
improve environmental quality by removing harmful pollutants from
the air and water
moderate the local climate and lessens the urban heat island effect,
contributing to energy conservation
preserve and restore natural ecosystems and provide habitats for
native fauna and flora
mitigate climate change by reducing fossil fuel emissions from
vehicles, lessening energy consumption by buildings, and
sequestering and storing carbon
create job and business opportunities in fields such as landscape …to benefit the economy.
management, recreation, and tourism
stimulate retail sales and other economic activity in local business
districts
increase property values
attract visitors, residents, and businesses to a community
reduce energy, health care, and gray infrastructure costs, making
more funds available for other purposes
promote healthy lifestyles by providing outdoor recreation opportunities …to benefit the community.
and enabling people to walk or bike as part of their daily routines
improve environmental conditions (e.g., air and water quality) and
their effects on public health
promote environmental justice, equity, and access for underserved
populations
provide places for people to socialize, and build community spirit
improve the aesthetic quality of urban and suburban development
provide opportunities for public art and expression of cultural values
connect people to nature. Studies have shown that better health
outcomes, improved educational performance, and reduced
violence can be among the resulting benefits
yield locally produced resources (food, fiber, and water)
Source: Rouse and Bunster-Ossa 2013, pp. 12–13. Published by the American Planning Association, this report cites
studies documenting benefits green infrastructure can provide.
(per Benedict and McMahon’s definition) to city, neighborhood, and site (the focus of the EPA
definition, which refers to smaller-scale, human-made landscape features, predominantly used
in urban areas). The second is the notion that, regardless of scale, green infrastructure provides
ecosystem services and benefits for people. The triple bottom line of sustainability –envir-
onment, economy, and equity/society –can be used to organize the multiple and synergistic
benefits that green infrastructure can provide, which are often termed co-benefits (Table 18.1).
Resilience definitions
The National Academy of Sciences, in a report of the Committee on Increasing National
Resilience to Hazards and Disasters, defined resilience as “the ability to prepare and plan for,
230
Green infrastructure and resilience
absorb, recover from, and more successfully adapt to adverse events” (National Academy of
Sciences 2012). Emphasizing the role played by planning in improving community resilience, the
report states that “enhanced resilience allows better anticipation of disasters and better planning
to reduce disaster losses –rather than waiting for an event to occur and paying for it after-
ward”. To build community resilience, the report recommends engaging the whole commu-
nity, including cooperation between the public and private sectors, in disaster policy making,
planning, and implementation of a risk management strategy.
The City Resilience Framework developed by The Rockefeller Foundation and Arup defines
city resilience as “the capacity of cities to function, so that the people living and working in
cities –particularly the poor and vulnerable –survive and thrive no matter what stresses or
shocks they encounter” (Rockefeller Foundation and Arup 2015). This definition goes beyond
the National Academy of Sciences’ definition to address both acute natural and human-caused
disasters (shocks) and chronic challenges to natural and human systems (stresses). Both the City
Resilience Framework and the National Academy of Sciences report stress the importance of
addressing the special challenges and needs of poor and vulnerable populations based on factors
such as race/ethnicity, mobility, and health status.
231
David Rouse
promote stormwater infiltration into soils, thus reducing flooding. On the other hand, wind-
blown trees can be significant hazards during a storm, causing property damage, utility outages,
and blocking evacuation routes.
The California wildfires of 2017 brought national attention to the risks posed by green infra-
structure at the landscape scale. According to the Washington Post, approximately 9,000 wildfires
occurred across the state, burning 1.2 million acres of land (an area the size of Delaware), destroying
more than 10,800 structures, and killing at least 46 people. Some media outlets estimated the
total cost of these disasters, from fire suppression to insurance and recovery expenditures, at $180
billion. Given development trends in the wildland–urban interface and the effects of climate
change (see below), wildfire risk is likely to increase in the future.4
Three points deserve emphasis when considering the relationship of green infrastructure to
hazard risk and resilience. First, natural hazards have complex interrelationships; impacts from
one event can have cascading effects, increasing the likelihood and severity of other hazard
events (American Planning Association 2018). For example, drought creates dry conditions that
facilitate wildfires, which can be spread faster and farther by windstorms. Severe rainfall events
can lead to landslides, which in turn can be facilitated by the loss of vegetative cover due to
wildfire.
Second, climate change is exacerbating hazard risks. For example, changes in temperature
and moisture availability are increasing the susceptibility of urban trees to insect and disease
infestations, including accidentally introduced non-native pests and pathogens (Tubby and
Webber 2010). Tree mortality in forests in the western United States is projected to rise as
a result of increased temperatures associated with climate change (Adams et al. 2017). This
in turn will increase the susceptibility of such forests to wildfires and landslides, another
example of cascading effects. The National Climate Assessment found that the intensity and
frequency of extreme weather events (e.g. extreme heat and heavy precipitation) has increased
in the United States and is projected to increase in the future (US Global Climate Research
Program 2017).
Third, inequality, social stratification, and poverty are key factors that increase a population’s
vulnerability to natural disasters (Rodríguez and Russell 2006). A CNN/USA Today/Gallup
survey conducted six weeks after Hurricane Katrina struck the Gulf Coast in 2005 found that
black victims were significantly more likely than white victims to have experienced seven of ten
hurricane-related hardships (e.g. feared for their lives, went without food or drinking water for at
least a day, spent at least one night in an emergency shelter). Similarly, low-income victims were
more likely to suffer hardships than high-income victims.5
These disproportionate impacts call for policymakers to prioritize the needs of low-income
and minority populations in building resilience not only to hurricanes and other acute nat-
ural disasters, but also to long-term stresses such as rising temperatures and increased flooding
associated with climate change. This will require action to address the underlying conditions
(poverty, substandard housing and infrastructure, health disparities, etc.) that increase social
vulnerability. As noted, green infrastructure has an important role to play in building commu-
nity resilience through the environmental, economic, and social benefits it provides. Alexandra
Dapolita Dunn posited that green infrastructure could provide “exceptional benefits for the
urban poor which are not frequently highlighted or discussed” (Dunn 2010). These benefits
go beyond “water management and natural resource protection” to include better air and
water quality, improved public health, enhanced safety and aesthetics, green job opportunities,
and increased food security. However, the evidence shows that low-income and minority
communities have less access to green infrastructure than their more affluent neighbors
(Rigolon 2016).
232
Green infrastructure and resilience
(1) Use the framework to address multiple types of natural hazards and the
interrelationships between them. Interrelationships between hazards include the poten-
tial cascading impacts previously noted, where one hazard event may lead to or exacerbate
other hazard events. For example, Florida is subject to both hurricanes and wildfire due to
its geography and climate. Hurricanes may benefit a natural forest by thinning weak or prob-
lematic trees, but the resulting debris can increase the risk of wildfire. Similarly, preventa-
tive measures to reduce hurricane risk may increase wildfire risk, and vice versa (American
Planning Association 2017). Thus it is important to evaluate the range and impacts of hazards
that may affect a community, in order to develop an approach that most effectively balances
potential risks.
(2) Use the framework to address multiple scales of concern, from site to neighbor-
hood, municipality, and region. For example, installation of green stormwater infrastruc-
ture and preservation of natural lands within a watershed are site/neighborhood and regional
scale interventions, respectively, to reduce flooding. In another example, risk from earthquakes
or wildfires can be reduced by limiting development in vulnerable zones at the regional/land-
scape scale and enacting building codes and landscape design standards at the site scale.
(3) Use the framework to address both acute natural disasters (shocks) and chronic
stresses on natural and human systems. Effectively addressing shocks requires both
hazard mitigation planning (to reduce or eliminate risk to life and property from a natural
disaster) and post-disaster recovery planning (to enhance a community’s ability to recover
from the disaster). Addressing stresses requires a longer-term perspective and focus on envir-
onmental, economic, and social conditions and trends that increase vulnerability to hazards
(e.g. climate change and sea level rise).
The framework is structured around five strategic points of intervention identified by the
American Planning Association (Klein 2011):
These points are key planning activities through which planners work with local officials, com-
munity stakeholders, and the public to generate ideas for the future, translate ideas into intentions,
and define and carry out actions to implement intentions. Points 1 and 2 involve development
of long-range plans (comprehensive/community-wide plans, functional plans, and subarea plans).
Points 3, 4, and 5 address how long-range plans are implemented. Individually and collectively,
they provide opportunities for advancing green infrastructure as an approach to building com-
munity resilience while reducing risks from natural hazards.
233
David Rouse
• Enhance economic engines by protecting key economic assets such as the downtown and
Naval Station Norfolk;
• Adapt to rising waters in existing residential areas that are experiencing more frequent
flooding;
• Establish the neighborhoods of the future in existing residential areas of less risk of
coastal flooding; and
• Design new urban centers in areas that are at low risk of coastal flooding and have potential
for higher density development.
Vision 2100 complements the more specific direction for implementation provided by the city’s
comprehensive plan. It identifies green infrastructure as a supplement to hard infrastructure (e.g.
flood walls) in protecting Norfolk’s economic engines by reducing stormwater runoff during
heavy rainfall events. Green infrastructure techniques such as living shorelines, rain gardens, and
green roofs are also proposed as a strategy to slow sea level rise and absorb water into the land-
scape in areas that are experiencing more frequent flooding (Figure 18.1).
Plan Making
Comprehensive plans, functional plans, and subarea plans translate the overall direction and goals
for the future established through a community visioning process into specific policies and
implementing actions. Public officials use these plans to inform decisions that influence physical,
social, and economic change within the community or region. Each type of plan offers oppor-
tunities to address the role green infrastructure can play in building community resilience.
Comprehensive Plans
The comprehensive plan is the leading policy document guiding the long-range development
of municipalities and counties in the United States.6 Conventional comprehensive plans are
typically organized into elements such as land use, transportation, and natural resources, each
234
Figure 18.1 Norfolk 2010 vision map
David Rouse
with its own set of goals and policies. Contemporary comprehensive plans increasingly address
these topics not as standalone elements, but as complex systems whose interactions are key to
achieving the community vision and goals (Godschalk and Rouse 2015). The comprehensive
planning process can advance the use of green infrastructure to build community resilience by:
• Defining hazards and mapping areas and assets susceptible to hazard risks during the existing
conditions and trends analysis;
• Exploring green infrastructure as an approach to mitigating hazard risk and increasing resili-
ence during community visioning and goal-setting;
• Accounting for hazard risks, including projections of trends such as sea level rise and increasing
temperatures, in scenarios for the future; and
• Developing actions to use green infrastructure to reduce hazard risk in the implementation
component of the plan (e.g. by designating vulnerable areas for open space or limited devel-
opment on the Future Land Use Map).
Comprehensive plans set the framework for and promote consistency among other types of plans
(i.e. functional and subarea plans) and implementation mechanisms (e.g. development regulations
and capital improvement programs). Natural hazards and green infrastructure can be addressed
as separate elements in the comprehensive plan (conventional model) or as cross-cutting themes
throughout the plan (contemporary model).7 The former approach provides a focus on these
topics but should be linked to other plan elements such as land use and transportation to ensure
an integrated approach. The latter approach is an effective way to integrate green infrastructure
with other community systems that contribute to resilience, particularly if explicitly identified
as one of the cross-cutting themes.
Functional Plans
While comprehensive plans cover a range of topics at the communitywide scale, functional plans
focus on one community system such as transportation or parks and open space. Examples of
functional plans that can address the connection between green infrastructure and resilience
include green infrastructure, climate action, hazard mitigation,8 and community wildfire protec-
tion plans.9 Growth management plans focus on the location, type, and timing of new develop-
ment as they relate to multiple systems (land use, infrastructure, natural resources, etc.) and thus
can be considered hybrids between functional and comprehensive plans. Growth management
plans can be used to direct development away from hazardous areas (e.g. areas with signifi-
cant wildfire risk within the wildland–urban interface) and protect areas of environmental or
ecological value.
Climate Ready Boston is an example of a functional plan that addresses the increasing vul-
nerability of Boston, MA to four climate factors: extreme temperatures, sea level rise, extreme
precipitation, and storms. Projections indicate that Boston will experience increasing average
temperatures and increasing frequency, duration, and intensity of heat waves as a result of climate
change (City of Boston 2016). The plan proposes “expand(ing) the use of green infrastructure
and other natural systems to manage stormwater, mitigate heat, and provide additional benefits”
as a strategy to increase climate resilience.
Regional Plans
Comprehensive plans and functional plans are typically conducted by local jurisdictions. However,
regional planning can be an effective scale at which to address issues related to hazard risks, resili-
ence, and green infrastructure that transcend jurisdictional boundaries. Regional-scale plans are
236
Green infrastructure and resilience
typically conducted by an MPO or other regional planning agency. Since such agencies are not
authorized to enact land use regulations, capital improvement programs, and other implementing
actions that are the purview of local governments, it is important to engage local jurisdictions
in the regional planning process. In addition to engagement in regional planning processes, an
effective regional approach also requires collaboration among local jurisdictions and between
jurisdictions and the regional planning agency in local planning processes, for example to coord-
inate local and regional green infrastructure plans.
Developed by the Southeast Florida Regional Climate Compact, the Regional Climate
Action Plan is the result of a collaborative effort by Broward, Miami-Dade, Monroe, and Palm
Beach Counties to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and build climate resilience in Southeast
Florida (SFRCC 2017). Focus areas include, among others: Natural Systems, Risk Reduction
and Emergency Management, Sustainable Communities and Transportation, and Water. Natural
Systems recommendations range from “promote collaborative federal, state, and local govern-
ment conservation land acquisition and easement programs” to “maintain, create, and/or restore
urban tree canopy”.
Subarea Plans
Subarea plans (referred to as specific plans in California) address smaller geographic areas within
a single jurisdiction, such as a neighborhood, district, or corridor. They can cover a range of
topics (similar to a comprehensive plan) or focus on a single topic (similar to a functional plan).
Subarea plans provide more detailed recommendations on how comprehensive or functional
plans are to be implemented within a specific geographic area. For example, Climate Ready Boston
identifies eight focus areas for resilience initiatives within the city. Two of these focus areas are
addressed in Coastal Resilience Solutions for East Boston and Charleston (City of Boston 2017). This
plan provides a detailed analysis of coastal flooding risks in the subarea based on sea level rise
scenarios and proposes strategies to reduce the risks. The strategies integrate flood protection
systems with open space and green infrastructure, including elevated waterfront parks, plazas, and
pathways, as well as nature-based features such as living shorelines, created marshes, and wetland
terraces.
237
David Rouse
FEMA maps are based on historic data and thus do not account for the projected effects of sea
level rise, more intense storms resulting from climate change, and urbanization that increases
stormwater runoff from impervious surfaces within the watershed.
The International Wildland–Urban Interface (WUI) Code is a model overlay district designed
to reduce risk from wildfire within a WUI zone designated by a local jurisdiction (International
Code Council 2015). It establishes requirements for ignition-resistant construction, maintenance
of defensible space and vegetation management around buildings, and provision of emergency
vehicle access and water supply for new subdivisions. Managing development within the WUI
is a prime example of balancing the benefits and risks of green infrastructure (in this case, the
forested landscape). Ideally, a WUI code would be combined with other measures (e.g., zoning,
transfer of development rights, land acquisition, and controls on public infrastructure extensions)
to limit development in areas with the highest potential for wildfire.
Subdivision regulations control the division of a parcel of land into lots for development
of houses or other buildings. While the overall density of new development is typically set by
zoning, subdivision regulations address considerations such as street access and design, water and
sewer infrastructure, and open space. Typically enabled by a separate ordinance, cluster or con-
servation subdivisions maintain a significant portion of the property as open space by locating
the houses on smaller lots. This approach can be used to preserve high-hazard and ecologically
valuable areas, which in turn can contribute to developing a green infrastructure network at the
communitywide or regional scale.
Transfer of development rights (TDR) is a voluntary program that allows a landowner to
sell development rights from land within a designated “sending area” for use by a developer
to increase the density of development on land within a designated “receiving area”. TDR
programs are typically used to protect open space and ecologically sensitive lands, including
landscape-scale green infrastructure and areas of high hazard risk.
Regulatory mechanisms such as a WUI Code, conservation subdivision ordinance, or TDR
program are most suitable for use in rural and urbanizing areas to reduce hazard risk and maintain
the benefits of landscape-scale green infrastructure.Tree conservation ordinances are a mechanism
commonly used by cities to protect and manage the urban tree canopy, which provides multiple
benefits such as improving air quality, managing stormwater, and reducing the urban heat island
effect –all of which contribute to building community resilience. Tree conservation ordinances
can be designed to regulate various aspects of tree planting, removal, and maintenance on public
and private property, including replanting or monetary compensation for trees removed.
A zoning ordinance adopted by the City of Norfolk, VA in 2018 incorporates provisions to
enhance flood resilience and direct higher density development to higher elevations, thus helping
to implement the guidance set by Vision 2100 (City of Norfolk 2018). These provisions include
Coastal and Upland Resilience Overlay Districts and a Resilience Quotient System that awards
points to developments for measures that promote flood risk reduction, stormwater manage-
ment, and energy resilience. Examples of green infrastructure measures include preserving onsite
trees, installing green roofs, and using vegetation to shade HVAC units. The ordinance requires
additional elevation of the first floors of buildings inside and outside of FEMA-designated flood
hazard areas to account for projections of more extreme flooding and sea level rise.
238
Green infrastructure and resilience
increase resilience. A strong and consistent planning framework that includes plans, regulations,
and incentives like the examples provided above is required to realize this potential. With this
framework in place, agencies can encourage the use of green infrastructure in development
projects through education (e.g. by providing information on how green infrastructure can
reduce costs and increase value for developments) and assistance during the development review
and approval process (e.g. through streamlined permitting and site plan review checklists incorp-
orating green infrastructure).
As an example of how the outcomes of such a planning framework are reflected in site-
scale development, drought impacts result from an imbalance between water supply and water
consumption, which is the consequence of human usage and the form of urban development
(Schwab 2013). Land use and infrastructure policies and regulations can encourage compact
development, which is typically more water-efficient than large lots with lawns that encourage
summertime irrigation. Landscaping ordinances can specify native and other plant species that
are adapted to local conditions and require less watering, particularly in arid climates. Building,
plumbing, and landscape codes can reduce potable water demand, increase groundwater recharge,
and encourage rainwater harvesting that can be used to irrigate plantings that provide benefits
such as stormwater management and reduction of the heat island effect.
A prime opportunity to reduce flooding risk and provide additional benefits that increase
community resilience is through the incorporation of green stormwater infrastructure that
retains stormwater onsite into development projects. Examples of site-scale green infrastructure
include bioswales, rain gardens, stormwater planters, green roofs, tree plantings, and vegetated
open space. Green streets incorporating such features can be used in district-scale development
or redevelopment projects. Green stormwater infrastructure can provide numerous benefits
beyond reduced runoff, such as improved air and water quality, groundwater recharge, lessening
of the urban heat island effect, “green” job creation, increased property values, and improved
public health (Table 18.1).10
Public Investments
Public investment in infrastructure, facilities, and purchase of land or development rights, typic-
ally through a local capital improvements program (CIP), is the fifth and final strategic point of
intervention. Similar to land use and development regulations, the comprehensive plan should
set the policy basis for the CIP. Individual projects should be evaluated and prioritized based on
their consistency with and role in implementing the comprehensive plan goals and objectives
(Godschalk and Rouse 2015).
Purchase of land or development rights is a particularly effective to way to reduce risk in
floodplains or other areas vulnerable to natural hazards. Jurisdictions such as Lancaster County,
PA and Lexington-Fayette, KY have utilized PDR programs to protect farmland at the land-
scape scale. Conversely, extensions or capacity expansions of roads, water and sewer lines, and
other public utilities can increase risk at the landscape scale by leading to development in natural
resource areas that provide environmental services such as groundwater recharge and flood con-
trol. Capital improvement programming should be aligned with land use and growth management
policies and regulations to, for example, limit utility extensions into areas of the wildland-urban
interface identified as having high potential for wildfire. This requires coordination with agencies
that operate independently of municipal governments, for example water and sewer authorities
and MPOs that are responsible for regional transportation improvement programming.
Capital investments in public parks, a primary component of green infrastructure networks at
the local (neighborhood), citywide, and regional scales, can reduce hazard risk while providing
239
David Rouse
multiple benefits that increase community resilience. A 2017 National Recreation and Park
Association (NRPA) survey completed by 377 park and recreation agencies found that 51 per
cent were reducing stormwater runoff and flooding through green infrastructure practices such
as rain gardens, bioswales, created wetlands, and green roofs (NRPA 2017). Preserving/increasing
tree canopy for purposes such as air quality improvement was another commonly used practice.
A relatively low 17 per cent of survey respondents indicated they were implementing adaptation
strategies or mitigation activities for climate change, indicating the potential for an expanded
role for parks.
New York City has become a national leader in resilient planning and design since the dev-
astating impacts of Hurricane Sandy in 2013. Drawing on the lessons learned from Sandy and
Hurricane Irene in 2011, NYC Parks published Design and Planning for Flood Resiliency: Guidelines
for NYC Parks in 2017 (City of New York Parks & Recreation 2017). NYC Parks maintains
approximately 160 miles of public coastline, providing a natural line of defense against coastal
storms and the long-term effects of sea level rise. The guidelines address the role of “parks and
open space as part of a citywide network of urban coastal protection” and recommend resilient
practices for different types of sites, facilities, materials, and other components of waterfront
parks.They exemplify how investment in public facilities and infrastructure can set a community
standard for resilient design. Rating systems such as Leadership in Environmental Energy and
Design (LEED), RELi (which focuses on project resiliency), and the Sustainable Sites Initiative
include green infrastructure practices that can be used in the design of public sites and buildings.
Conclusion
The planning profession and planning practitioners are uniquely positioned to effectuate change
at the local governmental level through their long-range perspective and role as influencers of
policy and decision-making. Due to the increasing number and severity of natural disasters and
long-term projections regarding the effects of climate change, resilience has emerged as a leading
concern of planners, allied professionals, and policymakers in the twenty-first century. Green
infrastructure –defined both as a landscape-scale network of natural lands and resources and a
nature-based approach to managing stormwater runoff –has great potential to increase resilience
to hazards (including acute shocks and chronic stresses) and provide an array of environmental,
economic, and social benefits. Planners can accelerate the deployment of green infrastructure to
increase community resilience through their involvement in five key planning activities –com-
munity visioning and goal setting, plan making, land use and development regulations, site design
and development, and public investment –that shape the built environment.
Planners and policymakers should prioritize the needs of low-income and minority commu-
nities, which are particularly vulnerable to the effects of hazards and typically have less access to
green infrastructure resources than more affluent populations, in developing and implementing
strategies to increase resilience. In doing so, it is important to engage the community in identi-
fying local needs and priorities, developing solutions, and addressing concerns such as environ-
mental gentrification (Rouse 2018). Looking towards the future, adaptive planning and design
approaches (e.g. scenario planning) will be needed to address the uncertain but disruptive effects
of climate change, new technologies, and other emergent trends. Widespread deployment of
autonomous vehicles, for example, is expected to free up significant amounts of land currently
occupied by parking and rights-of-way for other uses (Crute et al. 2018), providing a new oppor-
tunity to integrate green infrastructure into the urban fabric.The above planning framework can
be used to help realize this opportunity in a way that builds community resilience and reduces
risks from natural hazards.
240
Green infrastructure and resilience
Notes
1 Nature-based solutions are defined by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)
as “actions to protect, sustainably manage, and restore natural or modified ecosystems, that address
societal challenges effectively and adaptively, simultaneously providing human well-being and bio-
diversity benefits.” www.iucn.org/commissions/commission-ecosystem-management/our-work/
nature-based-solutions
2 A study of the Greater Manchester (UK) urbanized area found that increasing the amount of greenspace
in high-density areas would reduce surface temperatures below projected levels due to climate change
if no changes are made to surface cover. For example, under the High Emissions scenario, adding 10 per
cent green cover would reduce 2080 surface temperatures in high-density residential areas by 2.50 C. for
the ninet-eighth percentile summer day. Adding green roofs to all buildings would have a significantly
greater impact (Gill et. al. 2007).
3 The wildland– urban interface is defined as the area in which human development borders or
intermingles with forests or other wildlands (e.g. grasslands).While the wildland–urban interface can be
spatially defined in terms of the relationship of developed lands to wildlands, it can also be thought of
as a set of conditions where the relationship between development and wildlands increase the risk of or
exposure to wildfire (American Planning Association 2017).
4 A study published in 2018 found that the wildland–urban interface in the United States grew rapidly
from 1990 to 2010 in terms of both number of new houses (from 30.8 to 43.4 million; 41% growth)
and land area (from 581,000 to 770,000 km2; 33% growth), making it the fastest-growing land use type
in the conterminous United States. The vast majority of new wildland–urban interface areas were the
result of new housing (97%), not related to an increase in wildland vegetation (Radeloff et al. 2018).
5 Available at https://news.gallup.com/poll/19405/katrina-hurt-blacks-poor-victims-most.aspx.
6 The comprehensive plan is referred to as the general plan in California and some other places and as the
community master plan in New Jersey.
7 The Comprehensive Plan Standards for Sustaining Places developed by the American Planning
Association provide guidance for incorporating green infrastructure and resilience into the compre-
hensive plan (Godschalk and Rouse 2015). Relevant best practices include, among others, restoring,
connecting, and protecting natural habitats and sensitive lands; planning for the provision and protec-
tion of green infrastructure; and protecting vulnerable populations from natural hazards. The standards
identify Interwoven Equity –ensuring equity and fairness in providing for the housing, services, health,
safety and livelihood needs of all citizens and groups –as one of six plan principles.
8 Hazard Mitigation Plans are authorized by the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA), which amended
the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act of 1988. The DMA requires state
and local governments to prepare multihazard mitigation plans a a precondition of receiving federal
hazard mitigation funding, with the goal of reducing disaster losses and increasing the effectiveness of
federal funding through planning.
9 The Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003 encourages communities to develop Community Wildfire
Protection Plans (CWPPs), outlines their contents, and uses them to prioritize funding for fuel-
reduction projects on both federal and non-federal lands. Adopting a CWPP enables a community to
define the boundaries of the wildland–urban interface to define the boundaries of the wildland–urban
interface within its jurisdiction.
10 The US Environmental Protection Agency has many resources available on its website on the use of
green stormwater infrastructure. These resources can be found at www.epa.gov/green-infrastructure/
policy-guides.
References
Adams, H.D., Barron-Gafford, G.A., Minor, R.L., Gardea, A.A., Bentley, L.P., Law, D.J., Breshears, D.D.,
McDowell, N.G., and Huxman, T.E. (2017). Temperature response surfaces for mortality risk of tree
species with future drought. Environmental Research Letters. 12: 115014.
American Planning Association (2017). Regional Green Infrastructure at the Landscape Scale. www.
planning.org/publications/document/9119763/.
American Planning Association (2018). Multi- Hazard Planning Framework for Communities in the
Wildland-Urban Interface. www.planning.org/publications/document/9155699/.
241
David Rouse
Barnett, J. and Blaesser, B.A. (2017). Reinventing Development Regulations. Cambridge, MA: Lincoln
Institute of Land Policy.
Benedict, M.A. and McMahon, E.T. (2006). Green Infrastructure: Linking Landscapes and Communities.
Washington, DC: Island Press.
City of Boston (2016). Climate Ready Boston. www.boston.gov/ departments/
environment/
climate-ready-boston#report.
City of Boston (2017). Coastal Resilience Solutions for East Boston and Charleston: Final Report. www.
boston.gov/sites/default/files/climatereadyeastbostoncharlestown_finalreport_web.pdf.
City of New York Parks and Recreation (2017). Design and Planning for Flood Resiliency: Guidelines
for NYC Parks. www.nycgovparks.org/pagefiles/128/NYCP-Design-and-Planning-Flood-Zone__
5b0f0f5da8144.pdf.
City of Norfolk (2017).Vision 2100. www.norfolk.gov/DocumentCenter/View/27768.
City of Norfolk (2018). Zoning Ordinance. www.norfolk.gov/index.aspx?nid=3910.
Crute, J., Riggs, W., Chapin, T., and Stevens, L. (2018). Planning for Autonomous Mobility. Planning
Advisory Service Report 592. Chicago: American Planning Association.
Dunn, A.D. (2010). Siting Green Infrastructure: Legal and Policy Solutions to Alleviate Urban Poverty
and Promote Healthy Communities. Pace University Law Faculty Publications Paper no. 559.
New York: Pace University.
Gill, S.E., Handley, J.F. Ennos, A.R., and Paulette, S. (2007). Adapting cities for climate change: The role of
green infrastructure. Built Environment. 33:1: 115–133.
Godschalk, D.R. and Rouse, D.C. (2015). Sustaining Places: Best Practices for Comprehensive Plans. PAS
Report 578. Chicago: American Planning Association.
Hurricane Sandy Task Force (2013). Hurricane Sandy Rebuilding Strategy. www.hud.gov/sites/documents/
hsrebuildingstrategy.pdf.
International Code Council (2015). International Wildland-Urban Interface Code. https://codes.iccsafe.
org/public/document/toc/556/.
Klein, W. (2011). The Five Strategic Points of Intervention. PAS Quicknotes No. 31. Chicago: American
Planning Association.
National Academy of Sciences (2012). Disaster Resilience: A National Imperative. Washington, DC: The
National Academies Press.
National Recreation and Park Association (NRPA). (2017. Park and Recreation Sustainability Practices: A
Summary of Results from an NRPA Member Survey. www.nrpa.org/contentassets/f768428a39aa4035
ae55b2aaff372617/sustainability-survey-report.pdf.
Radeloff, V.C., Helmers, D.P., Kramer, H.A., Mockrin, M.H., Alexandre, P.M., Bar-Massada, A., Butsic,
V., Hawbaker, T.J., Martinuzzi, S., Syphard, A.D., and Stewart, S.I. (2018). Rapid growth of the US
wildland- urban interface raises wildfire risk. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
115(13): 3314–3319.
Rigolon, A. (2016). A complex landscape of inequity in access to urban parks. Landscape and Urban
Planning. 153: 160–169.
Rockefeller Foundation and Arup. (2015). City Resilience Framework. https://assets.rockefellerfoundation.
org/app/uploads/20160105134829/100RC-City-Resilience-Framework.pdf.
Rodríguez, H. and Russell, C. (2006). Understanding disasters: Vulnerability, sustainable development, and
resiliency. In: J. Blau and K. Iyall-Smith (eds.): Public Sociologies Reader. New York: Rowman &
Littlefield, 193–211.
Rouse, D. (2018). Social equity, parks and gentrification. Parks & Recreation Magazine. July: 38–39.
Rouse, D.C. and Bunster-Ossam, I.F. (2013). Green Infrastructure: A Landscape Approach. PAS Report 571.
Chicago, IL: American Planning Association.
Schwab, J.C. (ed.) (2013). Planning for Drought. PAS Report 574. Chicago: American Planning Association.
Southeast Florida Regional Climate Change Compact (SFRCCP). Regional Climate Action Plan. (2017).
www.southeastfloridaclimatecompact.org/.
Tubby, K.V. and Webber, J.F. (2010). Pests and diseases threatening urban trees under a changing climate.
Forestry. 83 (4).
US Environmental Protection Agency. (n.d. ) Green Infrastructure Glossary. https:// ofmpub.
epa.gov/ s or_ i nternet/ registry/ t ermreg/ s earchandretrieve/ g lossariesandkeywordlists/ s earch.
do?details=&glossaryName=Green%20Infrastructure%20Glossary.
US Global Climate Research Program (USGCRP). (2017). Climate Science Special Report: Fourth
National Climate Assessment,Vol. I (D.J.Wuebbles, D.W. Fahey, K.A. Hibbard, D.J. Dokken, B.C. Stewart,
and T.K. Maycock (eds.)). Washington, DC: USGCRP.
242
19
Latino revitalization as “blight”
Generative placemaking and ethnic cultural
resiliency in Woodburn, Oregon
Introduction
Demographic changes coupled with Latino population growth have revitalized many small, eco-
nomically struggling rural towns across the United States. In fact, from 2000 to 2006, 221 non-
metro counties would have experienced overall population decline if not for Latino population
growth (Johnson and Lichter 2008). As Latinos continue to migrate from traditional immigrant
gateways to newly emerging destinations (a trend fueled by the restructuring of the agricultural
industry, mass immigration, natural increase, and increased employment opportunities), increased
cultural conflicts will emerge as Latinos challenge the cultural homogeny of these rural towns. In
Woodburn, OR, approximately 90 per cent of the small businesses in the historic downtown are
Latino-owned, which provide a diverse set of goods and services to the town’s majority-Latino
population. For example, downtown Woodburn’s Latino-owned businesses include Oaxacan
restaurants, legal services that provide information on immigration issues, a tortilla factory with
a statewide market, clothing stores, miquero1 informal businesses, small grocery markets, and
other retail services (see Table 19.1).
Latinos in Woodburn are transforming the downtown area via their generative placemaking
efforts. They have saved the historic Main Street by investing in small businesses, helping to
establish a Latino-themed downtown public plaza, and adding a multicultural flair to the town.
The generative placemaking that has transpired in Woodburn is also currently occurring in
other Latino new growth destinations around the country (Sandoval and Maldonado 2012;
Trabalzi and Sandoval 2010). We argue that Latino business owners in downtown Woodburn
have relied on generative placemaking strategies, which strengthen cultural resiliency, to over-
come the town’s racialized climate and challenge the towns’ regulative planning institutions that
have characterized their downtown Latino business community as “blighted”.
We draw on 40 in-depth interviews, an analysis of US Census data, and a spatial analysis of
Latino small businesses as our methods. We apply the Community Capitals Framework (CCF)
to contextualize how generative revitalization is built upon various forms of capital such as
financial, political, economic, and cultural (Flora and Flora 2013). The CCF is a model that
views community assets as key forms of capital that can help in community development efforts.
The model helps uncover the assets present in a community. We analyze: (1) how Latino small
243
Gerardo Sandoval and Roanel Herrera
Table 19.1 Retail and services opportunities identified in updated Woodburn Urban Renewal Plan
Business/merchandise opportunities
businesses are transforming downtown via their generative placemaking practices; (2) critique
the views of blight via historic preservation versus Latino placemaking; and (3) uncover how the
town’s racialized context hampers Latino small business owner’s revitalization efforts. We find
that in Woodburn there is much conflict over cultural capital, and that the lack of Latino political
representation in formal community development and governance institutions plays a significant
role in how local institutions define Latino placemaking as blight. This case illustrates, however,
that in spite of the obstructionist efforts of Woodburn’s formal community planning institutions,
Latino small business owners have transformed a downtown area that was once lined with
vacant storefronts into a successful Latino business community. Their ethnic resilience has been
key in this effort. Hence, ethnic resiliency can play an important role in challenging traditional
power dynamics by helping to decontextualize and legitimize difference in cultural capital and
encouraged inclusive participation efforts that create more equitable democratic outcomes. In
Woodburn, this translates into an active Latino business community, which in turn is helping to
amplify the voice of the town’s Latino-majority population.
244
Latino revitalization as “blight”
245
Gerardo Sandoval and Roanel Herrera
process associated with legally constituted institutions, and that generative planning is engaged
generally by the marginalized who “may or may not be associated with any institution at all”
(Uzzell 1990: 116). In other words, “regulative planning” refers to the style employed by the
government and “generative planning” refers to either informal planning strategies or the kind
of planning used by informal sectors (Uzzell 1987).
Making a distinction between generative and regulative planning processes is useful in
understanding how Latino small businesses are revitalizing Woodburn’s downtown area.
Regulative planning styles rely on power, new systems, large-scale plans, standardization of infor-
mation, and no feedback (Uzzell 1987: 117). Generative planning processes rely on information,
accommodate existing systems, implement by increments, allow for idiosyncratic and context-
sensitive design, and incorporate feedback (Uzzell 1987: 117). Scholars have also termed this
type of generative ethnic placemaking as Latino placemaking (Rios and Vasquez 2012).We argue
that Latino communities commonly rely on their everyday placemaking practices, which can
also be viewed as a form of generative planning, to effectively push back against structural racism
and other forms of inequality. The revitalization efforts of Latino entrepreneurs in downtown
Woodburn are consistent with Uzzell’s generative planning framework and represent a form of
ethnic resilience that is exerted via Latino placemaking. Although Latino business owners are
operating within a conflicted and racialized context over cultural capital, their everyday business
practices are transforming the downtown area and represent a form of placemaking grounded
in cultural resiliency.
It is also important to note how Latino small businesses have leveraged their financial, cul-
tural, and political capital to transform and revitalize downtown Woodburn from a bottom-up
or generative fashion (Flora and Flora 2013). CCF helps us understand why even though the
generative placemaking efforts of Latinos are being suppressed by regulative renewal plans and a
racialized context, Latinos are still transforming downtown Woodburn into a cultural milieu for
the city. First, financial capital is the monetary resource invested in community capacity building
as Latinos finance (without the help of government or formal banks) their small businesses. This
form of financial capital also contributes to the financial viability of the downtown area since
most spaces would be vacant without this type of Latino investment. Secondly, cultural capital
includes the heritages, values, generations, and ethnicities in a community, which in Woodburn are
being challenged by white residents’ conflicting set of cultural capitals. Historic preservationists,
for example, are contesting the cultural capital Latinos are exercising in transforming the his-
toric downtown because they view cultural capital as a Rockwell painting of the 1930s.3 Finally,
political capital is the influence on the distribution of resources, power, voice, and connections
that exist in a community. In Woodburn, the lack of formal Latino political capital is a key struc-
ture that impedes Latino placemaking efforts (Harwood 2012, Irazábal and Farhat 2008; Rios
and Vasquez 2012). Latino business owners, however, are beginning to organize and assert their
dissenting voice in city hall’s decision-making process. For instance, the Woodburn Downtown
Association (WDA), a Latino business advocacy organization, successfully pressured the city to
reverse its decision regarding their Mother’s Day celebration music permit, and had two hours
added to their 7:00 pm music permit since city code allows public events to host music enter-
tainment until 9:00 pm.
246
Latino revitalization as “blight”
clothing stores, and small agricultural farms, for example, are rapidly emerging in areas that
were (or are) experiencing economic difficulties. Latino businesses are also revitalizing declining
neighborhoods through local economic investment and activity –building upon their cultural
and financial capital (Sandoval 2010).
Within the academic literature on Latino self- employment and entrepreneurship (i.e.
Latino small business), scholars have focused on comparing immigrant versus non-immigrant
entrepreneurs and also understanding how self-employment serves as an immigrant adapta-
tion strategy (Flota and Mora 2001; Mora and Davila 2006; Robles and Cordero-Guzman
2007). Other academics have focused on the access immigrant-owned firms have to capital
(Cavalluzzo and Wolken 2005; Craig et al. 2006). Another strand of academic work regarding
self-employed, Latino-owned businesses focuses on the organizational, strategic, and tactical
aspects of these businesses (e.g. how they make decisions, and target their markets). Other studies
have emphasized how these businesses function as important parts of ethnic enclaves and niche
markets (Aldich and Waldinger 1990; Portes et al. 2002). However, very little research has focused
on how such Latino-owned businesses impact revitalization efforts or how these efforts are a
form of cultural resilience. After an extensive review of Latino small business literature, Robles
and Cordero-Guzman argue that future research is needed that “uncovers the facets of the social
and community links between the micro-entrepreneur and self-employed sector with the eco-
nomic realities of community revitalization, gentrification, sustainable urbanism, transnational
migration, ethnic biculturalism, and the permeable boundaries of the ethnic enclave [which]
would provide us with a deeper understanding of the role of these smallest entrepreneurs in
Latino communities and mainstream markets” (Robles and Cordero-Guzman 2007: 29). This
chapter contributes towards this literature by analyzing how Latino entrepreneurs’ various forms
of capital have been assets or resources for ethnic resilience, which in turn have also revitalized
Woodburn’s historic downtown.
247
Gerardo Sandoval and Roanel Herrera
Figure 19.1 Non-Latino vs. Latino population in Woodburn, Oregon (in percentages)
Source: Minnesota Population Center. National Historical Geographic Information System: Version 2.0.
Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota 2011
population has increased from 18 per cent in 1980 to approximately 60 per cent in 2010 (see
Figure 19.1).
Woodburn’s recent transformation as a community, as is the case throughout rural America,
has been fueled by immigration. Latino settlement patterns in Woodburn have changed over
the last several decades as agricultural and forest industries have restructured and demanded less
of a migratory labor force and Latinos have expanded to work in low-wage service industries
(Sandoval 2012).These changes have led to both a higher demand for unauthorized Latino labor
and a diversification of Latinos as more educated Latinos have come to Oregon to provide ser-
vices for the high percentage of low-income Latinos throughout the state. According to a 2007
Survey of Business Owners, the number of Latino-owned businesses in Oregon increased 78 per
cent between 2002 and 2007.4 This increase placed Oregon in the top ten states with the highest
Latino business growth, at nearly double the national growth rate. Hence, Latinos are now
settling more permanently in Oregon communities (such as Woodburn, Medford, Hillsboro,
Hermiston, and Ontario) and building a more permanent sense of community through their
different placemaking efforts for inclusion and acceptance. These Latino placemaking efforts,
however, have led to cultural and political conflicts as hegemonic white communities have been
forced to redefine cultural milieus.
Woodburn was selected as an exemplary case study since it contains similar dynamics that are
present in other Latino new growth destination states such as rapid Latino population growth, a
context of racial conflict, and a historic downtown that has seen disinvestments and experienced
struggles over redefining cultural changes. The author led a study during the 2012–2015 aca-
demic school years working closely with a group of five University of Oregon graduate students
and two staff researchers from the University of Oregon’s Economic Development Research
Center.The researchers analyzed both the contributions Latino business owners were making to
downtown Woodburn and the challenges they faced as entrepreneurs.We conducted 40 in-depth
248
Latino revitalization as “blight”
interviews that included downtown business owners (who were majority Latino but also some
non-Latino business owners), statewide small business support service non-profit organizations,
Woodburn city staff, political officials, historic preservation advocates, and other community
members. This was supplemented with a quantitative analysis of US Census and economic data
and ten site visits to Woodburn. Lastly, since the research team spent an extensive amount of time
in downtown Woodburn documenting observations, it also had the opportunity to speak infor-
mally to many of the local business owners who were not formally interviewed.
249
Gerardo Sandoval and Roanel Herrera
common in Latin America, they are seen as a new way of doing business in rural Oregon towns.
Individuals also operate informal businesses out of their homes to supplement their income by
selling food to neighbors and friends or providing childcare services. It is important to note,
however, that without Latinos’ informal approach to business development and cultural resili-
ence, the downtown would be a long way from what it is today since Latino business owners
have been investing heavily in the downtown area’s revitalization efforts (see Figure 19.2). One
city leader acknowledged the transformation and contributions Latino entrepreneurs have made
in downtown Woodburn, stating: “If Latino businesses hadn’t moved in, the downtown would
be vacant” (Personal communication, Spring 2012).
These generative forms of financial capital also intermix with cultural forms of capital, which
help to reinforce one another. Several Latino entrepreneurs believe that community events
designed to celebrate Woodburn’s Latino culture help sustain their economic development
efforts, especially in the downtown area where approximately 90 per cent of small businesses are
Latino-owned. Another Latino business owner, who is also involved with the WDA, said that in
the past he has collaborated with city officials to organize the Woodburn Fiesta Mexicana fes-
tival (which celebrated its fiftieth anniversary in 2012 and annually brings thousands of people
to Woodburn) because it is a great way to promote Woodburn and help increase local tourism.
As one of the area’s key Latino business leaders, he also attended UNIDOS board meetings for
approximately a year to help organize community events, but left because, according to him, it
was not an inclusive environment.
Community Capitals Framework provides an excellent lens for understanding why Latino
business owners’ generative revitalization in Woodburn has been successful as a form of cultural.
resilience. This is in light of the resistance from the town’s planning institutions as they challenge the
role these businesses play in revitalizing the town. Flora and Flora (2013) argue that, “every com-
munity, however rural, isolated, or poor, has resources within it. When those resources are invested
to create new resources, they become capital” (17). Case study interviews in Woodburn revealed,
for example, that many Latino business owners asked family members and friends (i.e. relied on
250
Latino revitalization as “blight”
social capital) for loans (financial capital) to either open or expand their businesses. In turn, these
capital investments helped to build other community assets, such as cultural capital, since down-
town Woodburn now has a central plaza resembling a Mexican plaza in the Latino business district.
The Latino businesses are also quite diverse in terms of the cultural niches they cater towards
as some restaurants serve El Salvadoran, Guatemalan, or Mexican food. The Mexican restaurants
also offer foods from different regions of Mexico.There are leather goods and dress shops, as well
as sports clothing stores and vintage clothing shops. Shoppers can buy gold jewelry or furniture,
get their taxes done, hair styled, mail a package to Mexico or Guatemala (via Latino carrier ser-
vices), cash a check (without needing a bank account), or even get their car fixed.You can even
buy false identification documents from the miqueros who wait in the plaza and cater to the
large unauthorized workforce in the Willamette Valley. This is an important service, not only to
Latinos but the agricultural growers who depend on the unauthorized labor (Sandoval 2013).
This illegal activity is done in plain sight of the police and Woodburn has decided not to regu-
late the criminal activity.
The mix of retail is reminiscent of a small Mexican town where Latino customers can find
stores for almost all their needs. In short, Latinos in Woodburn have slowly been developing
“community capitals” over several decades as a form of cultural resilience. And because of this,
they now have enough resources and experience to participate in economic development
practices that historically belonged exclusively to white residents. However, even though Latinos
are remaking downtown Woodburn via their generative placemaking efforts, the regulatory
institutions in town are making their efforts difficult.
The vision for downtown Woodburn is to be the thriving, safe, and vital center of the
community. It projects a positive image of prosperity and progress. Improvements and new
development should respect and contribute to the historic character of the City. A vibrant
hub of activity, many permanent residents living in downtown, and a wide variety of active
and unique businesses serve the community and visitors.
(Renewal Plan 2010: 7)
By establishing an Urban Renewal Agency, which will provide plans, strategies and funding
for changing “blighted” areas into “healthy” communities in the downtown, the city has ultim-
ately labeled the downtown as “blighted”, even though the Latino business district is a healthy
commercial area with a lot of cultural capital. The plan’s economic rationale for intervention
claims retail linkage losses in the downtown due to the mixture of current businesses. But the
Latino businesses are keeping the historic downtown afloat.
The racial demographic characterization of blight was eliminated nearly 40 years ago.
However, Woodburn has a racist history of restricting Latino mobility into their downtown
251
Gerardo Sandoval and Roanel Herrera
(Nelson 2008). In the past, Latinos lived in migrant farm camps outside the city limits. This
was the case for decades until Pineros y Campesinos Unidos del Noroeste (PCUN) fought
to bring affordable housing into Woodburn’s downtown. The fight was a difficult one as the
city tried to block the affordable housing units using what Nelson terms “racialized” codes
to hide the racist planning policies being implemented by the town’s leadership (Nelson
2008). The regulative planning practices that characterize Latino placemaking as contributing
to blight helps to explain why a Latino business district that serves the needs of a diverse
Latino population is characterized as “run down”. Ultimately, by contesting Latinos’ gen-
erative revitalization efforts, town planning and development institutions can have the same
damaging effects on Woodburn’s healthy Latino business district that urban renewal policies
had on minorities who lived in neighborhoods that provided local opportunities for eco-
nomic development and growth.
The conflicted vision of downtown’s renewal between white historic preservationists and
that of Latinos’ placemaking efforts are evident in the urban renewal plan. The 2010 Urban
Renewal plan mentions Latino businesses in their Strategic Business Plan section: “Downtown
Woodburn’s existing retail base includes approximately twenty-five Latino businesses [there
are actually more, as we counted at least thirty-five], firmly establishing it as a destination for
the local and regional Latino community. Within the City of Woodburn, 55 percent of the
population is Hispanic (2008) with growth of this market projected to continue” (Updated
Urban Renewal Plan 2010: 45). Hence, the Latino community is mentioned in the plan.
But the plan does not highlight the economic development contributions Latino businesses
are engaged in or suggest specific strategies that would support these businesses. The plan
privileges the white historic preservationists’ perspective. For example, it views the downtown
as run-down.
“Historic Old Town has a pedestrian-friendly scale and a charming, albeit ‘run-down’ char-
acter” (Updated Urban Renewal Plan 2010: 45). The key question is “run-down” for whom?
Not Latino business owners, who say their beautification efforts (including maintaining the
fronts of their businesses clean by sweeping and replanting flowers they purchase for city-owned
planters to beautify the area) have made the downtown much nicer and safer than it was ten
years ago when many of the buildings were vacant.The Updated Urban Renewal plan continues
establishing the “blighted” character of the historic downtown: “The concern for personal safety
was a theme when discussing the study area in general and Historic Old Town and Plaza area,
specifically. Loitering, drug use, and prostitution were the primary areas of concern heard during
stakeholder interviews” (Updated Urban Renewal Plan 2010: 46). These are classic community
characterizations identified when community planners want to designate an area as blighted.The
research team spent a lot of time in the downtown and we were not able to validate the claims
of drug dealers and prostitutes hanging out and doing business in the downtown. There were
miqueros, but we could only verify that they sold illegal identification documents. If miqueros
did sell drugs, the police would be forced to intervene, which they do not. The point here is
that regulatory institutions will emphasize the negative and supposedly degenerate aspects of a
community if they want to designate the area as blighted. That gives the green light and power
to urban renewal agencies to change regulatory structures, enabling them to intervene in these
neighborhoods. And since historic preservationists have power, and Latinos do not, their views
are privileged in the urban renewal plans.
Another example of this disparity within the renewal plan is exemplified by how Latino
businesses are characterized in a negative fashion within the Urban Renewal Plan: “There is
currently a lack of diversity in retail and entertainment choices, particularly in Historic Old
Town. Latino-oriented retailers are well-represented, but there are few businesses that sell goods
252
Latino revitalization as “blight”
and services to a broader market. Increasing the variety of retail, service, and entertainment
options would potentially reduce retail leakage in the study area” (Updated Urban Renewal
Plan 2010: 46). Hence, according to the renewal plan, Latino businesses are “well-represented”
in Woodburn’s downtown. Using the same racialized rationale, one can say that white businesses
are “well-represented” in mostly every other town in Oregon. By “lack of diversity” the plan
is referring to the lack of retail diversity for white residents. The plan even provides specific
recommendations for increasing this diversity (see Table 19.1). But the ironic part is that Latino
businesses are already providing these services. The table clearly demonstrates that, based on the
types of retail businesses the renewal efforts aim to attract, Woodburn’s current downtown is
already successful and diverse. Since the retail is already “diverse” according to its own criteria,
why does the urban renewal plan characterize downtown as “run-down” and “over-represented”
by Latino businesses? Our explanation is that the prism of redevelopment is being viewed from a
white privilege point of view that is linked to the structural racism historically present in town.
And hence, Latino businesses are not worthy of a healthy or prosperous designation and instead
are characterized as blighted.
Other examples of the difficulties Latinos face regarding conflicts over the legitimacy of their
cultural capital relate to permit acquisitions for cultural events. For example, the WDA, a newly
formed association of Latino business owners, decided to organize a Mother’s Day event in May
2012. The WDA applied for a music permit, but city officials only approved the music permit
until 7:00 pm, even though city code allows public music until 9:00 pm.The WDA appealed the
decision, and eventually the city council ruled in its favor.This incident created a strong backlash
against city officials and highlighted much of the tension WDA committee members associate
with the city. Ernesto, one of the community’s informal leaders, discussed the frustration he
shares with his colleagues:
The city needs to respect its own laws and regulations. For example, the city will pass a law,
but then decide not to give us a permit even though our requests lie within these laws and
regulations. So, they’re not adhering to their own laws. We want to help increase tourism.
So, we would like for them not to close down doors or deny us when we make requests
for permits. Their favoritism is geared towards the Historic Woodburn Neighborhood
Association.The city reacts and responds to whatever the Historic Woodburn Neighborhood
Association says. And what’s disturbing is that as Latino business owners, we’re providing
support because we’re paying taxes and the Historic Woodburn Neighborhood Association
is only receiving funds from the government. So, the situation is unbalanced.
(Author Interview with “Ernesto”, Spring 2012)
This type of frustration by Latino business owners is attributed to the conflict around whose
cultural capital is legitimized by the regulative interventions taking place in Woodburn’s his-
toric downtown. The Urban Renewal Plan aims to change the social character of downtown
Woodburn via economic development practices that do not recognize the contributions Latinos
are making to the downtown. Woodburn’s Urban Renewal Plan does not create opportunities
for building upon the financial and cultural forms of capital that exist because of the Latino
community’s small business, generative commercial activities.
253
Gerardo Sandoval and Roanel Herrera
“blighted”. While there is a real desire for diverse community members to work together,
and at times the city has responded to Latino needs (like building the Plaza with some phys-
ical characteristics resembling Mexican public spaces), there are strongly ingrained conflicting
views of whose cultural capital will be represented in the downtown. The 2010 Downtown
Development Plan Update emphasizes how “new development should respect and contribute
to the historic character of the City”. This statement is ultimately a contested one if viewed
in a racialized environment. Whose history and cultural capital should be represented? Latinos
have been providing the agricultural labor force in Woodburn for more than 70 years and have
revitalized the dying historic downtown, yet the Latino history is not celebrated in the down-
town. In fact, Woodburn’s Historical Museum located in downtown has no mention of Latinos
in their formal exhibits.
After suffering a long period of disinvestment and abandonment, downtown Woodburn has
been adopted by Latinos as a place to do business, socialize, and participate in community
life. Latino placemaking efforts, however, are made more difficult due to the racialized con-
text and focus on historic preservation efforts downtown. In 2006, the city’s Urban Renewal
Plan was updated and this process activated the Historic Downtown Neighborhood Association
(HDNA) because members believed that their input during the plan’s outreach process would
help them address some of their downtown concerns. As a result, HDNA members, planning
commissioners, and city council members were involved in heated discussions during the devel-
opment of the plan update. In the end, many of the historic neighborhood residents’ concerns
were addressed and included in the urban renewal plan update.
The 2010 Downtown Development Plan Update, for example, states that preserving the his-
toric character of Woodburn’s downtown is a “priority expressed by city leaders and the public”
(46). The plan also documents how business and property owners are “emotionally invested in
making Historic Old Town a success once again” (45). But the questions here are, who is the
public in this case, and how are Latino small business interests being represented in various
forms of public engagement? Photographs taken during community workshops illustrate that an
overwhelming majority of participants were white, which explains why many of the goals in the
plan are also shared by white residents who feel threatened by the influx of Latino immigrants.
A Woodburn leader, Vicki, who is white and is involved with the Woodburn Independent,
a weekly newspaper, explained how the community’s overt and covert racialized context
contributes to placemaking conflict:
There is an undercurrent of racism every time you talk about downtown. It is hard to get
over it.You’ve got people who envision a nice downtown and what they really mean is to
see a “white” downtown. Some of these people would rather see these buildings empty, but
pretty.They don’t see that there is a successful Latino business in them. Woodburn Independent
newspaper does not thrive on empty storefronts. A healthy downtown cannot be made up
of empty buildings, no matter how attractive they are.
(Author Interview with “Vicki”, Spring 2012)
Growing tensions between new Latino immigrants and established community residents
often rise to the surface when the established group’s sense of place and cultural heritage is
threatened by the new immigrants. John, a community resident, highlights this point:
I would say Latino businesses started showing themselves vibrantly in the mid to late 1990s,
and that kind of caused an undercurrent of resentment among non-Latinos. Our little PIX
Theater became a furniture store with placards all over the front. You know, that’s a piece
254
Latino revitalization as “blight”
of our own little history. We want to go see movies. Well, the theater ran for a while but
just Mexican movies. Then it closed and became a furniture store. That was kind of a focal
point for a lot of the non-Latinos. Then [non-Latinos] started waking up and seeing that
this migration’s taking place and they’re going ‘Oh my God,’ and that’s where we’ve been
going ever since.
(Author Interview with “John”, Spring 2012)
They want to preserve all the buildings in the downtown, so they don’t allow us to make
any upgrades to building facades.They don’t want Spanish advertising.They also don’t allow
large advertisements and signs. In their eyes, large signs interrupt the natural scenery. They
have different concepts. They want to preserve their ideas, but we can’t continue going
down that same “idea” road. We have to adapt to the times, to new technology. They want
to preserve their museum, for example, which has a bunch of old metal pieces. Who’s going
to really visit that type of museum?
(Author Interview with “Evelyn”, Spring 2012)
The lack of Latino public participation during the Urban Renewal Plan’s community out-
reach process (e.g. workshops and stakeholder interviews that helped identify key design and
development themes to improve downtown Woodburn), indicates current redevelopment goals
are not representative of the community’s diverse needs and interests. Preservation issues and
goals, for example, were developed through formal channels and tied to events or community
workshops that were attended primarily by white residents. Consequently, urban renewal pol-
icies will have a disproportionately negative impact on Latinos because their generative eco-
nomic development and placemaking efforts have been determined as contributing to “blight”.
255
Gerardo Sandoval and Roanel Herrera
For Latinos, their lack of political representation, or formal political capital, influences the
distribution of resources, power, voice, and connections (Flora and Flora 2013). This lack of
political capital has further polarized the Latino community’s placemaking efforts, which ultim-
ately leads to higher levels of social and cultural conflict and lack of representation in the regu-
lative structures around placemaking. As of 2019, there is only one Latino city council member
Kissam adds to the complexity of this issue by explaining that the diversity among Latinos in
Woodburn, in terms of nativity and immigration, contributes to the slow pace of socio-political
change since many Latino immigrants have few ways of impacting the political agenda (Kissam
2006). Many of Woodburn’s Latinos are also unauthorized immigrants, and this serves as a struc-
tural barrier towards participating in public events, participatory outreach efforts, and other
forms of democratic practice. As a result, formal planning and government institutions face little
opposition when they define Latino generative economic revitalization as “blight”. However,
the continued effort of Latino small businesses to revitalize their downtown builds community
capital, which in turn increases the Latino community’s ethnic cultural resilience to Woodburn’s
racialized climate.
Discussion
As Latinos continue to migrate from traditional immigrant gateways to newly growing
destinations, such as Oregon, the cultural hegemony of these rural towns will continue to diver-
sify. In the Woodburn case, although Latinos represent 60 per cent of the population, they are
mostly left out of the democratic process and the halls of power. Conflicts over cultural capital
and the lack of Latino political representation in governance institutions play a significant role in
how local institutions define Latino placemaking as “blight”.The Woodburn case illustrates how,
even though formal community planning institutions contest and hinder Latino placemaking
efforts within a racialized context that favors a white historic preservation perspective, those
Latino small businesses demonstrate ethnic resiliency as they transform Woodburn’s historic
town center via Latino placemaking. Ethnic resiliency challenges traditional power dynamics,
helps decontextualize and legitimize ‘difference’ in rural towns, and provides a voice for the
Latino majority population in Woodburn.
It is evident that Latinos are revitalizing Woodburn via their business investments and con-
tributing to the economic vitality of the town. Besides serving as economic contributors in
the town, Latinos provide an example of ethnic cultural resilience by serving as social hubs
where people congregate to gain important community information. They serve as hubs of
information related to both formal and informal employment opportunities. For example,
Manuel, a Latino business owner in Woodburn’s downtown, describes how “people ask [him]
where they can find a job or questions about employment conditions. That’s probably the
most common question because most of these people are new to the area and are looking
for work.”
Other examples of the ethnic cultural resilience manifested by Latino small business owners
include their role as informal community advisers and community leaders that create opportunities
for entrepreneurship and civic participation.At times, Latino small business owners have pressured
local government via their business organizations to make physical town design investments
that have a Latino cultural flare, such as the construction of the plaza and various streetscape
improvements. Finally, Latino small businesses help provide a place of belonging for new Latino
immigrants in a racialized context of illegality (Nelson 2008). They get involved in organizing
cultural festivals, sometimes work with social service agencies to inform Latinos of their services,
support Latino ethnic radio stations via their advertising, and provide food, supplies, or funding
256
Latino revitalization as “blight”
for community or religious events.Yet another example of their ethnic cultural resiliency is the
translocal services these businesses provide. Part of their function is to serve as transnational
spaces where immigrants can wire money back to their home countries, buy foods that come
from their regions of origin, and even take a bus directly back to their towns of origin on
Mexican-owned bus companies (like Fronteras Del Norte) that stop at these local businesses and
travel all along the Pacific Northwest to Mexico. These roles demonstrate the important part
Latino small businesses serve in sustaining ethnic cultural resiliency by building upon their forms
of financial, social, cultural, and political capitals.
By analyzing Woodburn’s contested development via the community capitals framework
(CCF) and identifying the various roles Latino small businesses are playing in sustaining forms
of ethnic cultural resiliency, we directly contribute to Robles’ and Cordero-Guzman’s call to
understand the role Latino small businesses are playing in “community revitalization” (Robles
and Cordero-Guzman 2007: 29). We also contribute toward the urban renewal/redevelopment
literature by demonstrating that racism influences the conceptualization of blight and that cul-
tural capital (although contested) is formally represented in renewal plans via the established
visions and goals of those that maintain power (Anderson 1964; Gans 1968; Krumholz and
Forrester 1991; Weiss 1980).
Finally, we help shed light on the important role ethnic cultural resiliency plays in transforming
racialized structural barriers in a context of illegality. For instance, Erica, a Woodburn business
owner, describes how she gains access to capital even with strong barriers placed on her business.
“If I need money, I’ll borrow from an individual in the Latino community. Loans are usually for
three or four months. I usually rely on these types of loans because a bank isn’t going to provide
me with a three-month loan. A bank wants me to sign a sixty-month contract…and you can’t
break the contract.” Hence reliance on ethnic networks for access to capital is a common way of
relying on ethnic cultural resiliency.
Yet another example of how Latino small businesses rely on ethnic networks to increase their
agency can be seen in the WDA’s efforts to resist city regulatory efforts in trying to exclude
their cultural activities from the historic downtown. The WDA determination to overturn the
city’s decision regarding their Mother’s Day celebration music permit illustrates that their col-
lective cultural values gave them power to negotiate as a group. Two of the graduate researchers
on the research project were invited by WDA members to attend a special meeting the WDA
scheduled with city officials regarding their music permit. As passive participants, they observed
this act of political protest firsthand. City officials entered the meeting willing to negotiate and
add an additional hour to their music permit, from 7:00 pm to 8:00 pm. But WDA committee
members demanded that their permit be extended until 9:00 pm because city code allows public
events to host music entertainment until 9:00 pm. The WDA was motivated to act because they
felt the city’s initial response was a direct attack on their identity and cultural celebration. They
understood this as a race-driven conflict in which the Latino community was being deprived
of its cultural rights. In this case, organizing a Mother’s Day celebration was an issue of cultural
citizenship, of the “right to have cultural rights and the right to contribute to society through
cultural strength” (Flores and Benmayor 1997: 194).
The cultural struggles over Latino placemaking in Woodburn are being experienced in small
towns across the United States. Even though Latino small businesses’ generative placemaking
efforts are not being supported and are in a way impeded by a racialized climate, Latinos are
moving ahead, resisting, building a sense of community, and demonstrating ethnic cultural resili-
ence in Woodburn. They are changing the social, cultural, and even physical characteristics of
Woodburn’s downtown. Latino small businesses are creating a sense of community and belonging,
which might be their most important role in Woodburn’s transformation.
257
Gerardo Sandoval and Roanel Herrera
Notes
1 Miqueros sell illegal identification papers such as social security cards, driver’s licenses, etc.
2 The Fillmore District, PBS Documentary, Copyright 2000-2001 KQED, Inc. www.pbs.org/kqed/fill-
more/index.html.
3 The closest rural town, about ten miles southeast, is Silverton, a majority white town (without a Latino
population) that has four Rockwell “Freedom” Murals aligning its historic downtown. The murals are
telling because they represent 1940s Americana propaganda that helped sell war bonds for the Second
World War. In Woodburn, there is conflict around the proposed murals that Pineros y Campesinos
Unidos del Noroeste (PCUN, the largest Latino farmworkers organization in Oregon) will paint on
their new Latino youth center near the downtown.
4 Latinos in Oregon: Trends and Opportunities in a Changing State, The Oregon Community
Foundations, August 2016.
5 According to our research, about 20 per cent of buildings are actually owned by Latinos.
6 There is another more formal business association called UNIDOS. It is a community association of
volunteers interested in promoting downtown economic redevelopment. According to Latino business
owners, a large majority of its members are non-Latino business owners. Many of its volunteers are
also members of the Historic Woodburn Neighborhood Association, the Chamber of Commerce, and
the City.
7 2010 Downtown Development Plan Update, City of Woodburn.
References
Aldrich, H.E. and Waldinger, R. (1990). Ethnicity and entrepreneurship. Annual Review of Sociology.
16: 111–35.
Anderson, M. (1964).The Federal Bulldozer: A Critical Analysis of Urban Renewal, 1949–1962. Cambridge,
MA: MIT Press.
Beauregard, R.A. (1991). Capital restructuring and the new built environment of global cities: New York
and Los Angeles. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research. 15(1): 90–105.
Cavalluzzo, K. and Wolken, J. (2005). Small business loan turndowns, personal wealth, and discrimination.
Journal of Business. 78(6): 2153–77.
Craig, B., Jackson, W., and Thomson, J. (2006). Small-firm credit markets, SBA-guaranteed lending and
economic performance in low-income areas. Working Paper no. 0601. Cleveland, OH: Federal Reserve
Bank of Cleveland.
Flora, C.B. and Flora, J.L. (2013). Rural Communities: Legacy and Change, 4th edn.. Boulder,
CO: Westview Press.
Flores, W.V. (2003). New citizens, new rights: Undocumented immigrants and latino cultural citizenship.
Latin American Perspectives. 30(2): 87–100.
Flores, W.V. and Benmayor, R. (1997). Latino Cultural Citizenship: Claiming Identity, Space, and Rights.
Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
Flota, C. and Mora, M. (2001). The earnings of self-employed Mexican-Americans along the US-Mexico
Border. Annals of Regional Science. 35: 483–99.
Fogelson, R. (2001). Downtown: Its Rise and Fall, 1880–1950. New Haven, CT: Yale UP.
Gans, H.J. (1968). People and Plans: Essays on Urban Problems and Solutions. New York: Basic Books.
Gans, H.J. (1982).The UrbanVillagers: Group and Class in the Life of Italian-Americans. New York: Free Press.
Gold, M. and Sagalyn, L. (2010). The use and abuse of blight in eminent domain. Fordham Urban Law
Journal. 38(4): 1119–1173.
Gonzalez-Berry, E. and Mendoza, M. (2010). Mexicanos in Oregon: Their Stories, Their Lives. Corvallis,
OR: Oregon State University Press.
Gordon, C. (2004). Blighting the way: urban renewal, economic development, and the elusive definition of
blight. Fordham Urban Law Journal. 31(2): 305–337.
Harwood, S. (2012). Planning in the face of anti-immigrant sentiment: Latino immigrants and land use
conflicts in Orange County, California. In: M. Rios and L. Vasquez (eds.): Dialogos: Placemaking in
Latino Communities. New York: Routledge Press.
Irazábal, C. and Farhat, R. (2008). Latino communities in the United States: Place making in the pre World
War II, post World War, and contemporary city. Journal of Planning Literature. 22(3): 207–228.
258
Latino revitalization as “blight”
Jacobson, M.F. (1998). Whiteness of a Different Color: European Immigrants and the Alchemy of Race.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Johnson, K.M. and Lichter, D.T. (2008). Natural increase: A new source of population growth in emerging
Hispanic destinations in the United States. Population and Development Review. 34(2): 327–346.
Jolin, M., Legenza, S., and McDermott, M. (1998). Tax-increment financing: Urban renewal of the 1990s.
Clearinghouse Review. 32(3): 81–99.
Kissam, E. (2007). Migration networks and processes of community transformation: Arvin, California and
Woodburn, Oregon. Journal of Latino-Latin American Studies. 2(4): 87–116.
Kissam, E., Garcia, A., and Mullenax, N. (2000). No longer children: Case studies of the living and working
conditions of the youth who harvest America’s crops. Final Report to Office of the Assistant Secretary
for Policy, US Department of Labor, October.
Krumholz, N. and Forrester, J. (1991). Making Equity Planning Work: Leadership in the Public Sector.
Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Lipsitz, G. (2006). The Possessive Investment in Whiteness: How White People Profit from Identity Politics.
Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
Logan, J.R. and Molotch, H.L. (1987). Urban Fortunes: The Political Economy of Place. Berkeley,
CA: University of California Press.
Mohl, R.A. (1993). Race and space in the modern city: Interstate-95 and the black community in Miami.
In: A.R. Hirsch and R.A. Mohl (eds.): Urban Policy in Twentieth-Century America. New Brunswick,
NJ: Rutgers University Press.
Mora, M. and Davila, A. (2006). Mexican immigrant self-employment along the US-Mexico border: An
analysis of 2000 census data. Social Science Quarterly. 87(1): 91–109.
Nelson, L. (2008). Racialized landscapes: Whiteness and the struggle over farmworker housing in Woodburn,
Oregon. Cultural Geographies. 15(1): 41–62.
Portes, A., Haller, W., and Guarnizo, L.E. (2002). Transnational entrepreneurs: The emergence and
determinants of an alternative form of immigrant economic adaptation. American Sociological Review.
67(2): 278–298.
Robles, B. and Cordera-Guzman, H. (2007). Latino self-employment and entrepreneurship in the United
States: An overview of the literature and data sources. The Annals of the American Academy of Political
and Social Science. (613): 18–31.
Rios, M. andVasquez L. (2012). Dialogos: Placemaking in Latino Communities. New York: Routledge Press.
Roediger, D. (2007). The Wages of Whiteness: Race and the Making of the American Working Class.
London: Verso.
Sandoval, G. (2010a). Immigrants and the Revitalization of Los Angeles: Development and Change in
MacArthur Park. New York: Cambria Press.
Sandoval, G. (2010b) Transnational placemaking in small- town America. In: M. Rios and L.Vasquez
(eds.): Dialogos: Placemaking in Latino Communities. New York: Routledge Press.
Sandoval, G. (2013). Shadow transnationalism: Cross-border networks and planning challenges of trans-
national unauthorized immigrant communities. Journal of Planning Education and Research.
33(2): 176–193.
Sandoval, G. and Maldonado, M. (2012). Latino urbanism revisited: Placemaking in new gateways and the
urban-rural interface. Journal of Urbanism. 5(2–3): 193–218.
Trabalzi, F. and Sandoval, G. (2010). The exotic other: Latinos and the remaking of community identity in
Perry, Iowa. Community Development. 41(1): 76–91.
Uzzell, D. (1987). A homegrown mass transit system in Lima, Peru: A case of generative planning. City and
Society. 1(1): 6–34.
Uzzell, D. (1990). Dissonance of formal and informal planning styles, or can formal planners do bricolage?
City & Society. 4(2): 114–130.
Valle,V.M. and Torres, R.D. (2000). Latino Metropolis. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Weiss, M.A. (1980). The origins and legacy of urban renewal. In: P.Clavel, J. Forester, and W. Goldsmith
(eds.): Urban and Regional Planning in an Age of Austerity. New York: Pergamon Press.
259
20
Gendered invisible urban resilience
Hanna A. Ruszczyk
Introduction
Cities are where the world’s population lives and future growth will be in sites that have less than
one million people (United Nations 2018). These cities are called regional cities, medium-sized
cities, even ordinary cities (Robinson 2006). But no matter how they are described, they are not
understood; thus limiting how we understand the governance dynamics in the urban Global
South. Peake and Rieker, paraphrasing Simone (2004), argue “the urban, now more than ever,
is a political stake that opens up and close off new possibilities and constraints” (2013, 12). This
statement continues to resonate in places such as Nepal. When considering the everyday urban
landscape in Nepal, the individual does not have much power and control, especially if the indi-
vidual is a woman. The vital yet invisible (Escobar 2012) role of women’s groups who serve as
providers of social, environmental, and economic resilience in cities of the urban South warrants
consideration. Women provide for those who are unable to manage on their own.
The conceptual framework for this chapter’s exploration of resilience and reworking follows
Cindi Katz’s (2004) understanding of resilience and reworking. Katz explores the concepts of
resilience, reworking, and resistance on politics of social reproduction and everyday life in Sudan
and Harlem. Katz (2010, 318) distinguishes: “Between practices of resilience, reworking, and
resistance so as to better understand the subtleties of people’s oppositional practices and [to] not
overestimate their counter-hegemonic effects (Katz 2004)”. Using a case study based on one of
the largest cities in Nepal, a conceptual space is created to showcase the invisible and vital role
of women. Women not only provide essential resilience in the city through social reproductive
services, but also provide economic resilience through the financial provision of funds in times of
crisis to those in need.The urban risk governance landscape allows women to be resilient and yet
invisible. Rather, they are not allowed to rework the urban to suit the needs of themselves, their
families and their networks. In this chapter, through the intersection of invisibility and gender,
considerations of resilience and reworking the urban are furthered. The chapter is structured in
the following manner: a brief description of urban Nepal, the conceptual framing of resilience
and reworking, overview of women’s groups, and how they provide social, environmental, and
financial urban resilience, a description of neighborhood groups and how they rework the urban,
followed by a discussion of power and invisibility and, lastly, the conclusion.
260
Gendered invisible urban resilience
261
Hanna A. Ruszczyk
the city) (Figure 20.2). The research also took a multiscale perspective, exploring how different
scales impact each other and how power and influence flows between the scales (individual,
community level, local authority, national, and international level). Over 100 people from the
different scales were interviewed.
Reworking travels a different register. With more explicit recognition of the social relations
that produce the difficult conditions of everyday life, the practices of reworking are intended
262
Gendered invisible urban resilience
to alter if not remake them entirely.The practices and strategies of reworking tend to be prag-
matic and focused, staged in the realms and at the scale in which a problem is encountered,
although their effects may be much more far-reaching in time, space, and consciousness-
building. Their intent is to recalibrate power relations and respond to injustices more so
than to challenge the grounds and social relations upon which they are built and sustained.
Katz continues by suggesting there are two interconnected aspects to the material social practices
of reworking (2010, 247): “One is associated with redirecting and in some cases reconstituting
available resources, and the other is associated with people’s retooling themselves as political
subjects and social actors.” Social forms of engaging in the city can be witnessed in the form of
localised, geographically based community groups: women’s groups and neighborhood groups.
Through this chapter, the collective acts of managing perceived everyday risks are described.The
women’s groups and the neighborhood groups strive to bring resilience and or reworking to
their communities to mitigate against everyday risks.The male dominated neighborhood groups
are engaging in practices of reworking the urban political context in a way that the women’s
groups are not allowed to. This will be discussed below.
263
Hanna A. Ruszczyk
groups (or mother’s groups in the Nepalese language) with 60–100 members, on a geographic
basis that appear to overlap with neighborhood groups if they exist. The groups are between
one and ten years old (mostly around two years old as of 2015 when this particular data was
collected) and for the most part, have been established without international donor intervention.
Rocheleau et al. (1996, 18) highlight women have “visions of their rights, roles, and responsi-
bilities and they are aided by participation in groups and organisations”. Unanimously, women
interviewed explained that they established groups because they worried about social and eco-
nomic issues that were not being addressed by the local authority and or by the neighborhood
group (if one existed in the area).
The Little Flower Women’s group is an example of a women’s group in Bharatpur which
contains many features of the women’s groups interviewed. The members of the Little Flower
Women’s Group located in the city center (ward 4) include housewives, teachers, and are “job
holders” (the respondents’ term); many of their husbands are absent –they are abroad working.
These women are primarily high-caste Brahmin and Chettri and are newcomers (arrived in the
past five years) who have built homes in the center of town that is rapidly transforming into a
middle class area. Through participation in the Little Flower Women’s Group, they interact with
other women. Otherwise, they are restricted to their houses if they are not employed. Through
engagement in a women’s group, they can learn about diverse subjects such as health care and
earthquake awareness, they build relationships with others, and make networks that can support
them in a time of need. This is especially important for those wives whose husbands are abroad
working and away for long stretches of time.
Dilu is a recent newcomer, with a secondary education, from the Newar ethnic group and
a self identified social activist who helps people in the community. Dilu explains how the Little
Flower Women’s Group serves as environmental and social resilience in the city:
The women’s group cleans the roads and during religious festivals we coordinate with other
organisations.We work for empowerment of women.We solve problems in the community
and resolve disputes.Women have great power in the community.We do a lot of work but it
is unseen [by the local authorities].The major issue is that the municipality does not want to
communicate with the women’s groups. We are working for them, the government, [doing
their work] but they still not seeing it.
Dilu continues by explaining that women solve problems in the community and that women’s
groups offer a range of social services: they support children who cannot access schools due to
lack of money, they intervene in domestic disputes as well as attempt to address alcohol and drug
abuse in the community. In the city center (ward 4), the women’s groups are noticeable and
serve a vital role in the city. The women’s groups are leaders in many areas associated with urban
society in the mixed usage commercial and residential part of the city. This is due to an absence
of neighborhood groups in the city center. Businessmen’s clubs are visible but neighborhood
groups are not. It is not clear why this is the case, but the outward migration of many men for
remittances may be part of the explanation.
In the rural, rapidly urbanizing area of the city (such as ward 11), there are few women’s
groups and more neighborhood groups. Some of the women’s groups have been established with
the support of a donor-funded project targeting economically poor and socially marginalized
residents of Bharatpur.The goal of the project was to create a link between residents and the local
authority. From discussions with one such newly created women’s group on “Jungle Road”, the
members explained that they have learnt the value of participation in a community group. The
women’s group has changed the way they (as women) interact with the newly established (by
264
Gendered invisible urban resilience
the donor project) neighborhood groups and the local government. They value the opportunity
to share their household and family problems with other women and also to learn about health
programmes. The leader explains that by participating in the women’s group:
It has made us aware; we did not know how to speak before, now we are confident… We
are proud of our cleanliness campaign [to pick up litter] and also the fact that we are more
aware. We save money and distribute to each other in a time of need. Controlling this
money, this gives us grounds to participate, we can now speak to the men, and we have
a voice.
From a gender perspective, in Nepal financial security can be addressed not through jobs, but
through a safety net in the form of group lending.Women value the guaranteed financial support
in case of a crisis or an emergency. The savings and credit schemes are critical to all women’s
groups. Both the Jungle Road Women’s Group in urbanizing Bharatpur and the Little Flower
Women’s Group in the city center explain that all members contribute 200 NPR monthly
(equivalent of $2) and, each month, one woman can access the funds (if necessary) –up to
30,000 NPR (equivalent of $300) with minimal interest.The most common uses for the money
include medical treatment, private school tuition fees and materials and, less frequently, construc-
tion of a house.
Through the provision of informal financial resilience in the form of the group saving
and credit schemes, they are addressing economic security through the financial schemes. The
schemes are a safety net if a family faces extreme difficulty in their livelihood’s strategy, if health
deteriorates, in case of death or other everyday crises. It is valuable to note, in Bharatpur, the
women’s saving and credit schemes do not provide income-generating loans; rather the group
approach enables women to ensure household subsistence and survival, and, less frequently,
planning for the future.Through the management of funds, the women are empowered to “have
a voice” and power to support themselves and other women in a time of need without needing
to ask for approval from husbands.
In the Global South, Chant (2013, 1–2) argues: “Women make significant contributions to
urban prosperity through a wide range of paid and unpaid labor, including building and consoli-
dating shelter and strategizing around shortfalls in essential services” that should be provided by
government. This can be seen in various ways in Bharatpur. For example, women’s groups are
essential in the organization and implementation of environmental and cleanliness campaigns
in their neighborhoods, as well as the regular and ongoing collection of rubbish at pre-defined
municipal collection points in their neighborhoods. The women’s groups effectively provide
unpaid governmental services related to the maintenance of streets. In some cases, this is done
willingly and, in some cases, the neighborhood groups require the respective women’s group to
serve as environmental resilience for the city. More often in urbanizing ward 11 where there are
strongly managed neighborhood groups and few women’s groups, the wives of neighborhood
group members provide the same environmental cleanliness services that women’s groups pro-
vide in other parts of the city.
Miraftab (2007) suggests that in third-world cities, women’s informal labor is not only
within the family but also in the community through the provision of neighborhood care and
municipal services such as those mentioned above. These forms of urban resilience provide a
mechanism to consider the significant role women enact in the urban. Men in neighborhood
groups in both wards of comparison view pollution and environmental cleanliness as a con-
cern. The municipality also is interested in maintaining the cleanliness of streets. Rather than
employing municipal workers, the local authority and the neighborhood groups pressure the
265
Hanna A. Ruszczyk
wives and women’s groups’ members to serve as environmental resilience in the city in the form
of unpaid labor.
Of critical importance for all women interviewed in the city was participation in women’s
groups. Women value participation in the women’s groups more so than participation in neigh-
borhood groups because their voice is heard –their opinions matter more in the women’s
groups rather than in groups where men dominate discussion and action. Mohanty argues,
“Women are central to the life of the neighborhood and communities [and] they assume lead-
ership positions in these struggles” (2003, 515). This can be seen not only in Mohanty’s research
site of India but also in different ways in Nepal. The women’s groups provide a range of ser-
vices: social support to each other as well as to vulnerable individuals in the neighborhood who
are not members, organization of festivals and, lastly, environmental cleanliness campaigns in
the neighborhood. The groups also attempt to influence ward-level decision-making although
with minimal success (Ruszczyk 2017).The local authority does not want to communicate with
women’s groups. They do not see a reason why they should, according to interviews with the
local authority. The local authority interacts with those who it deems important. Women, irre-
spective of caste and ethnicity, affluence or even location in the city are deemed not worthy of
engagement. It is this aspect of gender that is of significance in the understanding of resilience.
Katz (2010) proposes that resilience is a means of getting by, surviving utilizing the resources at
hand in the face of oppressive dominant social forces. Resilience is comprised of everyday acts
of neighboring, giving of care to others, staying alive with dignity if possible. This is what was
made visible in Bharatpur.
266
Gendered invisible urban resilience
of Spring 2015). These new neighborhood groups are able to address in a collective manner
some of their perceived urban everyday risk in relation to poor physical infrastructure. They
appear to have the social connections with formal government to bring infrastructure to their
neighborhoods faster than the older neighborhood groups established by the ethnic or poorer
high caste groups. For example, the newly created neighborhood groups in ward 11 are more
powerful than the older groups. Narayan, a high-caste Brahmin shopkeeper who recently moved
to urbanizing Bharatpur ward 11 with his wife and family states: “Our TLO (neighborhood
group) is two years old. There are 100 households in the TLO. It was started in order to make
a link to the ward secretary and municipality. People group themselves so they could talk to
the municipality about physical infrastructure. The TLO also works for [environmental] clean-
liness.” Overwhelmingly, the male-dominated neighborhood groups are working to address a
specific, perceived everyday risk –the poor condition of dirt roads. The groups have aspirations
for modernity in their neighborhoods through the provision of paved roads. The municipal
government is also concerned with providing visible forms of physical infrastructure in the
city. The municipality has informally declared that it will bring modernity in the form of paved
roads to parts of the city. The caveat is that there must be an informal neighborhood group that
can provide 25–30 per cent co-financing for the construction of the tarmacked road. The local
authority does not communicate directly with all neighborhood groups; rather, information is
communicated informally in a managed, gray space (Yiftachel 2009) only to some neighbor-
hood groups according to interviews conducted with neighborhood groups and with the local
authorities.
Based on their research in Nepal, Nightingale and Rankin (2015, 169) propose that people’s
ability to make “claims on the ‘everyday state’” depend on social position and articulation with
broader political economic currents.This can be seen through the influence of the different caste
groups, length of time in Bharatpur, their geographic location in the city, and affluence. The
Brahmins and Chettris who have lived in Bharatpur all of their lives, those who migrated into
Bharatpur during the past 20 years and also the poorer newcomer Brahmins do not have the
same political influence as the affluent high-caste Brahmin newcomers who have recently settled
in Bharatpur. The long-term residents are watching, learning, and enthusiastically embracing the
methods and links to the government brought by these newcomers who live in their area and
who are willing to engage with them.
This collective “we” ness (Simone 2015, 2) of the neighborhood groups cannot be
underestimated because it is allowing for unexpected actions by groups of people who might
not be expected to work together due to their social and cultural histories.This is how the urban
disrupts some relationships and allows new workings or manoeuvrings to transpire and at times
creating new spaces for collective forms of “reworking” (Katz 2004) to address perceived risks.
It is this weaving of diverse people with multiple identities as urban reworking that is useful as
a conceptual tool to understanding the empirical setting of Bharatpur, Nepal. On the subject
of reworking, Katz argues (2010) that reworking travels a different register than resilience. The
practices and strategies of reworking tend to be pragmatic and focused, staged in the realms and
at the scale in which a problem is encountered and at the scale in which it can be addressed or
solved.
All neighborhood group representatives interviewed speak of the benefits of being in a group
(as did the women’s groups’ members). Only by working together, as a collective or group, can
they “rework” (Katz 2004) the urban reality, to address their risk perceptions in their everyday
life. For example, the indigenous group, the Kumals, have learnt how to engage with others, how
to work in a social environment that is unfamiliar.The ethnic Tamangs who live in the same area
have more money to invest in physical infrastructure projects (paved roads and street lighting)
267
Hanna A. Ruszczyk
through the financial contribution of the Kumals. People are learning how to plan for the future,
to make collective decisions that will impact and benefit their wider communities. They are
acutely aware of the financial limitations of the local authority. The neighborhood groups are
skilled at managing the women’s groups to support their community resilience activities while
simultaneously not allowing women to change the urban radically. The neighborhood groups
are not only exhibiting resilient behavior but they are actively reworking their urban context.
They are making vertical connections to the local authority that is allowing the groups to
enhance their environment. The neighborhood groups are not trying to challenge the munici-
pality and the political powers; they are instead attempting to “undermine its inequities on the
very grounds on which they are cast” (Katz 2004, 247).
The neighborhood groups have retooled themselves as political subjects that the local authority
can work with.They organize themselves into units informally acknowledged by the government
and with the financial contribution expected by the government to provide physical resilience.
Katz (2004, 239) utilizes the phrase “negotiating the recent future”. This is an apt phrase for the
rapidly changing urban reality in which people function, but the reality can change very quickly
due to events that are occurring on scales that are beyond the control of residents. People’s
aspirations are bounded by their experiences with government, society, and due to their eco-
nomic resources, location in the city, and other intersecting, identifying factors. The time-scale
for reworking is also relatively short. People comprehend that their area of influence is limited in
time, space and place; they can negotiate and rework only the recent material future.
268
Gendered invisible urban resilience
Power dynamics between neighborhood groups and women’s groups force women’s groups
to be (only) invisible resilience in the urban. Relationships are negotiated, often to the benefit
of the male-dominated groups. In the rural areas of the city, the tole-level organizations are
powerful and influential (partly due to the affluent newcomers’ high-caste status). They do not
generally support the establishment of women’s organizations suggesting that women do not
need their own groups since “Neighborhood groups take care of everything” according to a
president of a neighborhood group in rural Bharatpur.This same president continued: “The tole
level organization looks at the overall problems of the community but women’s groups –they
are only confined with women’s problems.” This translates into concerns perceived by women
in relation to social issues, children’s education, health for the family, and other everyday issues.
A member of the women’s group on “Jungle Road” in rural ward 11 (created through an inter-
national aid project) comments on the one-way relationship with the neighborhood group and
the municipality: “Lines of communication flow from muni[cipality] –to –ward –to –TLO
[neighborhood group] –to –women’s group.This is the process.We work on how to implement
it [what others decide is important].” Stronger, more influential neighborhood groups are effect-
ively silencing women and their significant power through collective action.Women’s groups are
allowed to be resilient but are not allowed to do more, not allowed to rework the city in their
vision. Dilu, the strategic advisor to a women’s group in the city center, explains that women’s
groups are “working but we are in the ‘shade’, not in the sun” of the local authority.They wish to
be seen, acknowledged and engaged with by the government. Chant (2013, 1) argues that there
is a “stark contrast between women’s input to and benefits from the accumulation of wealth in
cities” [of the Global South]. Chant continues (2013, 2): “Women often reap limited reward
in terms of equitable access to ‘decent’ work, human capital acquisition, physical and financial
assets, intra-urban mobility, personal safety and security, and representation in formal structures
of urban governance.” Chant’s description of the Global South and this empirically-driven work
based in Nepal augment each other. Escobar (2012) discusses how discourse, visuality and power
are interconnected. He suggests if people are brought into conversation, then it “consign[s]them
to fields of vision” (2012, 156). Urban residents want to be “seen” by the government. Peake and
Rieker (2013) explain that women’s organizations in the Global South have argued for women’s
engagement with social and collective rights and issues above those of the individual.They argue
that “women are an important node in the constellations of power, and thus in the production
of centers and margins, in imaginaries of the urban” (2013, 2). Existing governance practices in
Bharatpur, Nepal and the ensuing negotiation for governance space have created multifaceted
sites of contestation between the community groups and the government and also between
the two forms of collective action (neighborhood groups and women’s groups). We can see in
Bharatpur some of the “contested, dynamic processes through which social inequalities in Nepal
are produced and entrenched” (Nightingale 2011, 161) but also how some boundaries are being
reworked and are shifting in the urban.
The government and groups such as political parties and neighborhood groups influence
whose resilience and whose reworking matters in the city. In the city center, where there are
few neighborhood groups, there is no mechanism in place for the voices of women’s groups to
be heard outside of the neighborhood level. They are effectively silenced as islands of collective
governance with minimal opportunities to change the urban.Women’s perceptions of urban risk
are not as important as men’s perceptions of risk. Women’s invisibility is enforced not just by the
government but also by a multitude of subordinating layers in the patriarchal society.Women are
informed by the actions of the patriarchal hegemony that they are viewed as forms of gendered,
invisible, urban resilience. Only the neighborhood groups can rework the urban.
269
Hanna A. Ruszczyk
Conclusion
The opening paragraph of the chapter states that the urban is a political stake that opens and closes
new possibilities and constraints.This is the reality in the urban spaces of the Global South whereby
residents are influencing the urban setting and are simultaneously being changed by it. The empir-
ical evidence suggests both resilience and reworking (Katz 2004, 2010) can be found in the rapidly
urbanizing and changing setting of Bharatpur, Nepal. Women’s groups showcase forms of gen-
dered, invisible, social, environmental, and financial resilience, but they are not allowed to rework the
urban to their benefit. In an atmosphere where local government provision is absent or organized
according to factors including caste, affluence and geographical location, some residents are allowed
by government to attempt to rework the urban through their collective efforts.The male-dominated
neighborhood groups are enabled to rework the urban to achieve changes in physical infrastruc-
ture (paved roads) thus impacting the changing of ethnic and caste boundaries on a local level.
Unfortunately, gender roles and norms appear unchanged throughout these processes.
Groups aspire for more than they have in the everyday; they desire a link with local authority
in order to create a better future. The government is ambivalent towards women’s groups,
rendering them and their urban resilience activities invisible, but does engage with some neigh-
borhood groups who have similar social and economic characteristics to those in power. The
government decides who will be visible and the government manages the gray space of infor-
mality to suit its agenda rather than addressing the full range of risks as perceived by all residents.
If agendas overlap, as in the case of physical infrastructure provision and preferably in locations
where high-caste and affluent residents live, the local authorities engage.
Sustainable development goals number 5 (gender equity) and 11 (sustainable cities and com-
munities) are intertwined and require understanding and debate because they are fundamental
to our collective future world. It is in this context where existing forms of social mobilization
need to be made visible, understood, and strengthened in the most appropriate ways. There are
opportunities for intervention to foster progressive change and sustainable development by tack-
ling the root causes of structural inequality that keep women marginalized in the city.This could
involve prodding local authorities to create a policy space where informal groups including
groups created by urban female residents can contribute to social and economic discourse as
well as by supporting women’s groups to advocate for change (in a way they view appropriate).
Given the current context in Asian cities where the local level is the site where risk governance
is increasingly decided, socially just futures can be gained by making visible, listening to, and
engaging with women more substantively.
References
Bharatpur Municipality, Nepal (2014). Bharatpur Municipal Profile. (Accessed May 15, 2016).
Chant, S. (2013). Cities through a ‘gender lens’: A golden ‘urban age’ for women in the global South?
Environment and Urbanization. 25 (1): 9–29. doi:10.1177/0956247813477809.
Escobar, A. (2012). Encountering Development: The Making and Unmaking of the Third World. Princeton,
NJ: Princeton University Press.
Government of Nepal, Ministry of Home Affairs, ICIMOD and ESRI (2015). Nepal Earthquake
2015: Disaster Recovery and Reconstruction Information Platform (NDRRIP). http://apps.geoportal.
icimod.org/ndrrip/profile?id=Municipality&Lang=en. (Accessed: April 17, 2017).
Gramsci, A. (1971). Selections from the Prison Notebooks (Q. Hoare (ed.)). New York: International
Publishers.
Katz, C. (2004). Growing Up Global: Economic Restructuring and Children’s Everyday Lives. Minneapolis,
MN: University of Minnesota Press.
270
Gendered invisible urban resilience
Katz, C. (2010). Making change in the space of injury time. Urban Geography. 31 (3): 315–320. doi:10.2747/
0272-3638.31.3.315.
McFarlane, C. (2010).The comparative city: knowledge, learning, urbanism. International Journal of Urban
and Regional Research. 34 (4): 725–742. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2427.2010.00917.x.
McFarlane, C., Silver, J., and Truelove, Y. (2016). Cities within cities: Intra-urban comparison of resilience
in Mumbai, Delhi and Cape Town. Urban Geography. 1–25. doi:10.1080/02723638.2016.1243386.
Miraftab, F. (2007). Planning and gender as seen from the Global South. Journal of the American Planning
Association. 73 (1): 115–116.
Mohanty, C.T. (2003). “Under western eyes” revisited: Feminist solidarity through anticapitalist struggles.
Signs. 28 (2): 499–535.
Nightingale, A.J. (2011). Bounding difference: Intersectionality and the material production of
gender, caste, class and environment in Nepal. Geoforum. 42 (2): 153– 162. doi:10.1016/
j.geoforum.2010.03.004.
Nightingale, A.J., Bhatterai A., Ojha H.R., Sigdel T., and Rankin, K.N. (2018). Fragmented public authority
and state un/making in the “new” republic of Nepal. Modern Asian Studies. 52 (3): 849–882.
Nightingale, A.J. and Rankin K.N. (2015). Political transformations: Collaborative feminist scholarship in
Nepal. In: S. Gururani and K. Berry: Gender in the Himalaya: Feminist Explorations of Identity, Place,
and Positionality, 1st edn. Himalaya series in Nepal studies. Kathmandu: Himal Books for Association
for Nepal and Himalayan Studies and Social Science Baha, 159–185.
Peake, L. and Rieker, M. (2013). Rethinking feminist interventions into the urban. In: L. Peake and M.
Rieker (eds.): Rethinking Feminist Interventions into the Urban. London, New York: Routledge,
Taylor & Francis Group, 1–22.
Robinson, J. (2006). Ordinary Cities: Between Modernity and Development. London;
New York: Routledge.
Rocheleau, D.E., Thomas-Slayter, B.P., and Wangari, E. (eds.) (1996). Gender and environment, a fem-
inist political ecology perspective. In: Feminist Political Ecology: Global Issues and Local Experiences.
London, New York: Routledge, 3–23.
Ruszczyk, H.A. (2017). The Everyday and Events, Understanding risk perceptions and resilience in urban
Nepal. PhD Thesis. Durham: Durham University.
Ruszczyk, H.A. (2018a). Chapter 8: The earthquake and ideas lying around. In: L.J. Bracken, H.A. Ruszczyk,
and T. Robinson (eds.): Evolving Narratives of Hazard and Risk: The Gorkha Earthquake, Nepal, 2015.
London: Palgrave Pivot, 125–139.
Ruszczyk, H.A. (2018b). A continuum of perceived urban risk –from the Gorkha earthquake to economic
insecurity. Environment and Urbanization. 95624781774492. doi:10.1177/0956247817744927.
Simone, A.M. (2004). People as resilience: Intersecting fragments in Johannesburg. Public Culture. 16
(3): 407–429.
Simone, A.M. (2015). It’s just the city after all!: Debates & developments. International Journal of Urban and
Regional Research. doi:10.1111/1468–2427.12275.
Tanaka, M. (2009). From confrontation to collaboration: a decade in the work of the squatters’ movement
in Nepal. Environment and Urbanization. 21 (1): 143–159. doi:10.1177/0956247809103011.
United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs and Population Division (2018). 2018 Revision
of World Urbanization Prospects. www.un.org/development/desa/publications/2018-revision-of-
world-urbanization-prospects.html. (Accessed November 12, 2018).
Yiftachel, O. (2009). Critical theory and “gray space”: Mobilization of the colonized. City. 13 (2–3): 246–
263. doi:10.1080/13604810902982227.
271
21
Pathways for resilience
in legacy cities
Eva Lema, Matthew Liesch, and Marcello Graziano
Introduction
The ability of regions and cities to cope with economic downturns and transitions has gained
new prominence in the aftermath of the financial crisis of 2008–2012. Within this renovated
interest, the concept of “resilience” has attracted attention, and its meaning has been expanded to
incorporate complex life mechanisms of creative problem solving (Chandler 2014). Utilizing the
concept of resilience offers an alternative framework for illuminating regional economic change,
analyzing the causes and effects of uneven development, and understanding growth pathways of
regional economies (Martin 2012; Simmie and Martin 2010). Challenges and opportunities of
US “legacy cities” are often viewed through the lens of resilience.
Legacy cities are categorized through their regional position and prominence in manufac-
turing and ancillary economic opportunities. The term is used to describe industrial urban areas
that have experienced significant population and job loss, resulting in high residential vacancy and
diminished service capacity and resources (Mallach 2010). Challenges center on the rocky trans-
formation from manufacturing employment to the ongoing striving for well-paying jobs of any
sector, set in the shadows of industrial heritage (Liesch 2016). Other challenges in legacy cities
are flights of human capital (suburbanization, regional outmigration, and particularly of skilled
workers) and of economic capital (declining property assessments, incomes, and tax base). These
challenges are compounded by the general lack of cooperation across municipal boundaries.
As civic leaders seek to improve the perception and the material realities of legacy cities, they
increasingly turn to the concept of resilience in thinking through the path to more sustainable
futures, thus making this a commonly-researched topic in legacy cities (Carter 2016; Longworth
2017; Mallach and Brachman 2013; Thomas 2012).
Legacy cities in the United States are mainly located within the northeast and Great Lakes,
as the US “Rust Belt” (Hollingsworth and Goebel 2017; Longworth 2017). Accordingly, this
chapter investigates how four cities and their metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs) of the US
Great Lakes Region (GLR) have coped with the aftermath of the great recession of 2007–2009,
focusing on the type of resilience, if any, these cities have implemented and the results emer-
ging almost a decade after the crisis started. These cities are: Duluth (MN), Grand Rapids (MI),
Racine (WI), and South Bend (IN) (Figure 21.1).
272
Figure 21.1 Map of selected counties by Metropolitan Statistical Area
Source: Based on US Census
Eva Lema, Matthew Liesch, and Marcello Graziano
Located in the heart of what is usually referred to as the US “Rust Belt”, these MSAs have
been severely hit by the great recession (Pagano 2013), and all have an economic fabric long
rooted in manufacturing.
The great recession in 2007–2009 shocked the GLR, and intensified an already existing
industrial crisis, which had been affecting the region for nearly a decade eradicating one million
manufacturing jobs (Atkins et al. 2011). However, cities in the GLR have displayed different
recovery pathways after the great recession, recording newly positive economic and/or popu-
lation growth. Today, nearly a decade after the recession, there is a great opportunity to analyze
what kind of resilience, if any, these cities have displayed.
Building upon the conceptual differences in defining resilience described by Chandler (2014),
this chapter investigates what kind of resilience these four cities have displayed, that is, whether
they have initiated an adaptive transition towards new economic sectors, or they have success-
fully “bounced back” within the same economic structure.
274
Pathways for resilience in legacy cities
external world, a process through which the world is being reshaped and an ongoing adapta-
tion is taking place.
Following Chandler (2014) and Simmie and Martin (2010), this chapter will not privilege
one definition of resilience over another. Rather, the focus will be on understanding in what
ways resilience has expressed itself in the case studies, that is, whether cities in the GLR have
bounced back, or transformed their economic profile after the great recession of 2007–2009.
The “resilience” expressed by a city (if any) can therefore occur either “bouncing back” to the
original, pre-crisis state, or through the ability of a city to transition to a new economic para-
digm, that is, to adapt. In the former case, the ability to restore pre-crisis levels may actually be
limited to some clusters, leading parts of the regions’ economy to either shrink, or to transform
itself, thus leading to a hybrid result.
275
Eva Lema, Matthew Liesch, and Marcello Graziano
advances ascendant during the late 1800s, in tandem with a growing workforce and accessibility
of natural resources, led cities in the GLR to develop and expand (Cronon 1991). Southern
portions of the GLR developed greater access to markets, including Grand Rapids, Racine, and
South Bend, exhibited more growth of cities and of manufacturing. Each GLR industrial cluster
has been part of integrated supply chains. Agriculture, forestry, and mining activities were also
part of these networks, supplying raw materials to be transformed in urban centers for either
local consumption or export (Liesch 2008).
The four MSAs have experienced either a certain level of demographic stability or slight
increase since 2010 (Table 21.1). They represent different sizes in terms of MSAs and play
different roles within each MSA’s broader context. For example, the Duluth MSA is the most
populated area within northern Minnesota and Wisconsin, whereas Grand Rapids is closer to
the larger Chicago MSA to the southwest. In this section, we treat each MSA separately, com-
paring it to the others, and focusing on the type of resilience it has displayed in selected industrial
clusters.
Over the past 15 years, total and cluster-based employment in the four MSAs have displayed
different dynamics in relation to macroeconomic shocks (Figure 21.2). For example, Duluth has
increased in overall employment, further expanding its service base. During the same period,
Grand Rapids has undergone a more marked decline in both types of clusters until 2009–2010
and has since then surpassed its 2001 employment levels. In contrast, Racine has seen its employ-
ment levels decline since 2001, although recently its mix of service and manufacturing clusters
appeared to have been changing more markedly.
276
Table 21.1 Population in the four MSAs, 2010–2017
Geography 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 % Change,
2010–2
017
Duluth, MN-WI Metro Area 279,677 279,753 279,339 279,439 279,651 279,197 278,954 278,782 -0.32%
Grand Rapids-Wyoming, MI Metro 989,416 997,100 1,007,613 1,019,146 1,029,762 1,039,064 1,048,826 1,059,113 7.4%
Area
Racine, WI Metro Area 195,406 194,931 194,645 194,753 194,908 194,763 195,010 196,071 -0.34%
South Bend-Mishawaka, IN-MI Metro 319,022 318,854 318,160 318,498 319,267 319,651 320,822 321,815 0.875%
Area
Economic Dynamics
Since the city’s 1880–1920 boom years, Duluth was an industrial port city whose skyline was
dominated by its steep hillside with gargantuan manufacturing spaces between the hillside and
Lake Superior. Numerous grain elevators, a cement plant, a steel mill, wire mills, and the Duluth
Works plant were icons of the city. Many of these plants, including Duluth Works, shut down
in the 1980s bringing unemployment up to 20 per cent (Ruff 2014). Globalization in the steel
manufacturing industry has meant that some of the city’s legacy employers, such as US Steel,
have moved manufacturing elsewhere. Despite these losses, manufacturing clusters in Duluth still
pay above the median yearly income of $43,937 (Table 21.2).
The decline in manufacturing employment has continued in recent decades. Between 2001
and 2016 the MSA’s manufacturing clusters lost approximately 20 per cent of their employees.
As shown in Table 21.2 only a few manufacturing clusters flourished between 2001 and
2016: Aerospace, Plastics and Production Technology, and Heavy Machinery were some of
the clusters with the highest growth in employment. After 2007–2008, Automotive and Food
Processing and most of the other large manufacturing clusters declined and have never reached
the same levels of employment. Others, such as Paper, and Aerospace, traditionally important to
279
Eva Lema, Matthew Liesch, and Marcello Graziano
the MSA, went through troubled times up to the first decade of the 2000s, and then started a
remarkable recovery.
Paper manufacturing has had a long presence in the city, and it provides a further example
of the city’s efforts to retain the strongest and most competitive clusters. During the 2001–2016
period, the cluster had a very high location quotient as well as a high rise in employment, which
were unaffected by the most recent financial crisis. At the industry level, firms are looking to
remain competitive: as an example, the largest paper mill in Duluth is looking to modify their
equipment in order to make a higher-margin product, and private–public partnership in the
manufacturing industries are common today (see e.g.Verso 2018).
Employment-wise, service-related clusters (Table 21.3) have shown a remarkable degree of
steadiness (and even slight increase) before, during, and after the crisis. Overall, between 2001
and 2016 the service clusters under study gained jobs at a rate of 17 per cent, although only 1.8
per cent was during 2007–2016. These clusters are composed by a variety of industry groups,
stemming from Education to Business Services, reflecting the evolving role of the city as a hub
for the region.
Among these clusters, tourism has always played an important part in Duluth’s economic
portfolio, although the MSA’s Hospitality and Recreation cluster experienced some losses in the
period under study. The share of employment in this cluster fell overall 7.75 per cent in abso-
lute terms during 2001–2016, but rebounded within the most recent five years. As is typical for
tourism and hospitality employment, salaries are very low: the average annual salary of $21,710
is less than half of the median for all occupations.
As part of their strategy to enhance this cluster, and the overall quality of life for its citi-
zens, municipalities and states often partner to improve infrastructure and other public services.
Federal or state funding is also common, e.g. the city’s projects for evolving traffic patterns and
land use (Brownfield Grants). For instance, in 2009 the State of Minnesota awarded the Duluth
Port Authority a $50,000 investigative grant to determine the feasibility of redeveloping 123
acres (0.50 km2) of the former steel plant site as a warehouse and light industrial park for storage
of energy-creating windmills. These initiatives have been further supported by federal programs,
such as the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI), which contributed about $63 million
(EPA 2018) for restoration projects across the MSA.
Education and Knowledge Creation is another leading service cluster. Duluth’s higher edu-
cational institutions (e.g. the University of Minnesota –Duluth) are an economic and cultural
asset to the city. The university has extended collaborations with small businesses through the
Natural Resources Research Institute and the Center for Economic Development that also
offers entrepreneurial support. Through these initiatives, employment in universities, colleges,
and other institutions in this cluster has been expanded by 24 per cent in 2001–2016, and
they only had a very small decline in employment during 2012–2016. This second bandwidth
focuses on the post-recession years, starting with the first full two years of continuous GDP
growth and the year in which Real Median Household Income started its recovery (2012),
and ending with the most recent data (2016) (FRED 2018; FRED 2019). These activities also
bolstered other services clusters, such as Business Services and Insurance which also grew over
this period.
Duluth’s Local Health cluster experienced the largest gains of any cluster in the MSA
(Table 21.3). It is also Duluth’s largest sector as measured by jobs employment and pays well
(36.92 per cent above the median). Collaboration with University of Minnesota Duluth
Medical School gives the area a competitive advantage to attract and retain physicians and
other health professionals through the pool of medical students and residents (Halaas 2005,
Zink et al. 2010).
280
Pathways for resilience in legacy cities
281
Eva Lema, Matthew Liesch, and Marcello Graziano
Looking ahead, the MSA has uncommon features in relatively stable industries such the
Water Transportation Cluster through shipping (Martin Associates 2011) and the Electric Energy
Generation and Transmission clusters through notable power plants that have long served the
region’s manufacturing, especially in the energy-intensive iron ore manufacturing process.These
clusters are expected to play a major role in the MSA’s future development. Unlike other cities
with expanded service sectors, the relatively diverse economy, higher salaries, the region’s out-
door amenities and other quality of life factors, give the MSA a competitive advantage, in terms
of attracting much-needed talent, especially in the Health Services cluster.
The MSA shows an evolutionary resilience deeply rooted in its manufacturing base, yet
capable of transitioning towards services and building upon its role as a regional hub. Duluth’s
service sector experienced most transformative resilience through adapting and developing the
right clusters that could serve the local and regional economy. The MSA is fortunate to have
a strong research university, which, in collaboration with other agencies, assisted in the restor-
ation and brought much needed funds to the MSA. It also assisted the Local Health cluster.
Beyond their fast growth in employment these clusters acted as a growth engine for the whole
MSA. Grants and external funding brought adapting ways in which water is utilized. Duluth’s
economy has always been water-intensive, whether it was used in manufacturing, its transpor-
tation advantages, or in services. Through funding (GLRI grants; see Austin et al. 2007), espe-
cially after the crisis, dredging activities and other Environmental Services flourished. Tourism,
Business Services, and Water Transportation followed, bringing Duluth back to what it is good at.
With Duluth, it is unknown precisely how and if the emergence of coastal-and water-related
regional economic paradigms (e.g. Maritime Clusters or Blue Economy)1 will play a role in
regional resiliency. Evidences from traditional marine sectors are not univocal: as the Fishing
industry employment declines, water transportation booms, while other industries associated with
these paradigms are still in their infancy in the region. If part of resiliency is the evolutionary pro-
cess of finding innovations in pre-existing knowledge bases, that is, having industries rebound in
different ways, then Duluth may very well be suited, due to shifts in how water is used.
282
Pathways for resilience in legacy cities
safety nets (Pagano 2013). These strategies include the government adopting the role of “con-
nector” as in the case of Duluth and the role of “system builder”, meaning it built networking
relationships among diverse public and private organizations (Weir 2010; Pagano 2013). In the
case of Grand Rapids both these strategies were implemented and resulted in a more diverse
economy (Atkins et al. 2012).
In the Grand Rapids MSA, all the largest (by employment) manufacturing clusters were
hard hit and most of them experienced a steep decrease in employment during 2001–2016
(Table 21.4). However, most of these losses occurred in the early 2000s, and the post-2007
period has seen rapid gains in employment.
Automotive is the leading cluster in the region (20,861 jobs in 2016) and generates high
average salaries ($73,461). The cluster suffered significant losses during 2001–2016 (25.09 per
cent) and it slowly gained back some of the jobs in 2012, thanks to efforts aimed at linking local
manufacturers to a broader regional system across western Michigan (Nowlan 2007), further
increasing the specialization of the MSA.
Grand Rapids has been specialized in office furniture craftsmanship, design, and innovation
for more than a century and the MSA managed to maintain a strong specialization by focusing
on the design and production of office furniture. Employment in the Grand Rapids Furniture
cluster was declining well before the crisis (Atkins et al. 2011) reaching its lowest point in 2012.
This cluster had even more marked losses than Automotive in 2001–2016, losing about 41 per
283
Eva Lema, Matthew Liesch, and Marcello Graziano
cent of its jobs. With a lag time between the 2008 crisis and changes to office furniture orders,
the trend has slowly, reversed, and, since 2012, employment has started growing again, mainly
thanks to new investments in production processes (Gupta and Subramanian 2008).
Medical Devices is another important cluster, assisted by the “MiDevice” consortium. It is
comprised of 20 leading medical device manufacturers and suppliers in the Grand Rapids MSA
and many others located within the western Michigan region. The MiDevice collaboration
involves meetings in order to identify industry trends, share best practices, and collaborate on
projects (Atkins et al. 2011). This increased the concentration of medical device manufacturers
in the region and subsequently employment which grew by 29 per cent during 2001–2016. As
health services is one of the fastest growing clusters in the midwest, the medical devices cluster
certainly has a market to serve.
Finally, it is worth pointing out the Food Processing cluster as a successful example of indus-
tries that adapted and grew stronger during and after the 2007–2009 crisis. The region had long
ago attracted major food processing and manufacturing companies such as Kellogg Co., Frito-
Lay, and Coca Cola, and has gained further prominence as one of the .. hubs for beer making
(Feeney 2017; Jones 2018; Lorr 2018).
The transformation among the manufacturing clusters is embodied by the growth of Food
Processing (driven by beer making), and is mirrored among the service clusters by the emer-
gence of Health Services (Table 21.5) Employment in this cluster had been continuously rising
in 2001–2016, and in 2016 it employed 68,853 people. During the past two decades, colleges in
Michigan have opened medical facilities in the “Medical Mile” (Valade 2017;Van Andel 2018), a
hub of health care facilities uncommon to a city of Grand Rapids’ size and scope. The Medical
Mile is aptly named for the research institutes and health care training facilities just outside of the
central business district. Salaries in this cluster are not very high, with the average being $55,442,
just a little below the annual median earnings.This characteristic is worrying in light of the losses
suffered by service and manufacturing clusters combined since 2001.
284
Pathways for resilience in legacy cities
Later, SC Johnson evolved into a global leader in cleaning products, storage solutions, pest con-
trol, and shoe and auto care. SC Johnson’s global headquarters are still in Racine. Other manufac-
turing firms made automobiles, heat exchangers, drills, kitchen appliances, and garbage disposals,
making the city known for its metallurgy.
Racine was hit hard by deindustrialization and the 2008 economic crisis. Over these
years, businesses left the city, and the population continued its long and gradual decline. Real
estate values in the city stagnated and poverty level is higher than in adjacent communities
(Johnson Foundation 2017). The median income in 2016 was $49,868 but obscures small-scale
municipality-to-municipality differences whereby the city lags behind its suburbs.
285
Eva Lema, Matthew Liesch, and Marcello Graziano
employment declined significantly (20.18 per cent), especially during the 2007–2016 period
when it lost about 500 jobs or 15.8 per cent of its employees.
As with Johnson Wax, CNH Global is Racine’s other iconic manufacturing firm. Through
mergers and global integration of the manufacturing process, the former J.I. Case Tractor com-
pany provides six continents with farming and construction equipment. This firm is the largest
reason why Table 21.6’s PTHM cluster has a significantly high Location Quotient. This cluster
and other manufacturing clusters faced challenges of employment decline. Today they also have
a skill mismatch problem as they have trouble finding properly trained employees for their highly
digitized manufacturing process (Engel and Longworth 2012).
Service employment was also hit by the 2008 crisis (Table 21.7). Noticeably, compared to
the other cities (Duluth and Grand Rapids), most of the service clusters declined after the crisis.
Local Health is the leading cluster with the highest employment, plus above-median salaries,
and is relatively stable. Rather than a manufacturing firm, Wheaton Franciscan Healthcare is
the MSA’s largest employer (see Racine County Economic Development Corp.). Distribution
and E-commerce Industries, Environmental Services, and Transportation and Logistics clusters
are performing fine. Finally, the city had an increase in low-paying (43 per cent below the
median) Hospitality and Tourism jobs, although the city is underdeveloped as a tourism
attraction.
286
Pathways for resilience in legacy cities
Overall between 2001–2016, Racine’s manufacturing legacy and path dependence continued
(Martin and Sunley 2006). Meanwhile, the sector employed a lower percentage of residents as time
progressed. This reflects what Walker (2000, p.126) described as path dependency: “choices made
in the past, technologies embodied in machinery and product design, firm assets, gained patents,
or specific competencies or labor skills acquired through learning, influence subsequent choices
of methods, designs and practices […] This logic applies to regional location as well”. Today, many
manufacturing plants have relocated from Racine to the south or abroad. One example is Hamilton
Beach, a pioneering kitchen appliance company which left Racine in 1968. Other manufacturing
employers do not create as many jobs due to digitalization and productivity gains (Acemoglu 2017).
More specific, Racine is facing unprecedented workforce challenges: despite the highest
unemployment in the state, employers are finding it difficult to find workers with appropriate
skillsets (Racine County Economic Development report). This is mostly due to differences
between the skillsets businesses require and the skillsets of many local residents (Engel and
Longworth 2012).
Overall, only a few manufacturing industries have grown; these firms are located outside of
the city proper. Disparities between the downtown area and the city’s suburbs make development
and income opportunities even harder for the disadvantaged populations. Transit opportunities
287
Eva Lema, Matthew Liesch, and Marcello Graziano
are problematic: although there is a bus system, the lack of mobility to commute between home
and well-paying employment options appears to be a challenge, as is a perception of sub-par
training for skilled labor (Johnson 2014).
As with other Great Lakes coastal communities, new manufacturing plants are dispropor-
tionately smaller niche firms in suburban locations outside of the central city, which shrinks the
city’s tax base. The city started the “Build up Racine” initiative to provide business tools and
financial and technical assistance with available properties or any other help that new businesses
might need.The “Visioning a Greater Racine” group seeks to galvanize an identity and coherent
visioning for the urban and suburban areas of the MSA. As legacy cities benefit from philan-
thropic groups, the Johnson Foundation’s “Resilient Communities” Forum generates dialogue
about how the City of Racine and nearby communities can work together to achieve greater
resiliency, concluding that more effective cross-municipal governance would make the City of
Racine and surrounding areas more resilient to economic stress.
Although Racine has transportation opportunities and challenges typical of a Great Lakes
legacy urban area, nearby communities are slightly more locationally advantageous. Racine sits
in the shadow of Milwaukee County to the north and Chicago to the south. Within heavily
urbanized southeastern Wisconsin, Racine’s relative distance to airports, the interstate, and nearby
more affluent communities diminishes Racine’s locational benefits. While the MSA is situated
between Milwaukee and Chicago, the location of Interstate 94 eight miles west of the city center
attracts well-paying service sector jobs in logistics and supply chain management there rather
than to the City. For instance, the Interstate 94 corridor of the Racine MSA has a variety of fac-
tories and transportation jobs and are included in Racine MSA employment statistics, but those
employees do not necessarily live or spend money in the legacy city itself.
Southeastern Wisconsin as a whole is doing well. Immediately outside the MSA boundary,
recent growth of well-paying service sector jobs has outpaced Racine. Across the county line
from the Racine MSA, Kenosha County’s stretch of Interstate 94 is home to the corporate head-
quarters of ULINE shipping supplies, plus their 1.1 million square foot logistics and distribution
facility. Jelly Belly candy corporation, and Amazon also are some of the companies who chose
Kenosha’s Interstate 94 corridor for transportation benefits, large parcels of land, tax incentives,
and legal access to the Lake Michigan watershed. For instance, Kenosha’s part of the Interstate
94 corridor is home to roughly 1.6 million square feet of Amazon distribution and fulfill-
ment center. Like Kenosha, Amazon is planning a 2.5 million square foot facility in Oak Creek
(Hess 2018), plus Oak Creek has regional distribution centers for the US Postal Service, global
shipping company UPS and Aldi. Oak Creek has locational advantages over Racine in that it
is just south of Mitchell International Airport, a medium-sized aviation hub. Over the years,
regional transportation planning authorities have recommended building a freeway connecting
the City of Racine to other urban markets, but lack of local and state cooperation held those
back.There are heavily used rail lines for freight, and an Amtrak intercity train route, but no light
rail currently exists.
Racine’s reliance on manufacturing served the area exceptionally well when manufacturing
was not nearly as globally integrated. Given that well-paying jobs in the Racine MSA have been
reliant upon manufacturing, high-end management jobs for manufacturing, and local govern-
ment, lack of cooperation with nearby municipalities, transportation, and lack of skilled workers,
the area struggles to keep up in its contemporary transition to a service-oriented economy.
In this case, the Racine MSA shows little resilience, possibly arising from the lack of broader
coordinated policies within the region, and emerging competition, rather than cooperation
among communities in eastern Wisconsin.
288
Pathways for resilience in legacy cities
289
Eva Lema, Matthew Liesch, and Marcello Graziano
Responding to Crisis
Like other cities in the study, South Bend’s manufacturing was hard-hit during 2007–2008.
Between 2001 and 2016 the MSA lost 26.4 per cent of its manufacturing jobs. Despite the overall
lower employment however, some specific manufacturing clusters bounced back in 2012–2016.
Their strategy for growth includes creating a vibe around high-tech and innovation industries,
trying to imitate the Silicon Valley, and Research Triangle paradigms. South Bend’s Innovation Park
at Notre Dame and the Ignition Park that the city promoted as a high-tech hub are examples of
these strategy. Given the focus on innovation, Information Technology and Production Technology
and Heavy Machinery clusters have shown some growth, although the former has experienced a
major decline in employment in 2012–2016. Although higher than the local median income, sal-
aries in these clusters are lower than all other MSAs examined, possibly signaling the lower-level
positions available in the area. Biopharmaceuticals manufacturing and medical device manufac-
turing, both related to the high-tech sector have experienced similar employment dynamics, with
slowed growth (or even employment decline) in the most recent years after the crisis. The clusters
have a good location quotient and very high average salaries, which indicates that adaptation efforts
for new specializations and growth is focused on the right industries.
Automotive, the largest and most devastated manufacturing cluster, declined in employment
for the whole 2001–2016 period and lost more than 3,000 employees or 46 per cent of its
employment. Plastics, Aerospace and Upstream Metals cluster had a good response to the crisis
in the 2008–2016 period, and managed to attract some new businesses. Similarly, Upstream
Chemicals, Trailers, and Medical Devices cluster also had a rise in employment during 2007–
2016, a high location quotient and high salaries. Similar to the case of Duluth MSA, collabor-
ation with the University of Notre Dame assisted many local industries. The Midwest Institute
for Nanotechnology, Turbomachinery Research Facility, and life sciences innovator companies
such as Zimmer, OrthoPediatrics, and Biomet, are some examples of industries that benefit from
the related collaboration.
South Bend serves as a regional center for service sector jobs. The city proper, the University
of Notre Dame campus, and adjacent Mishawaka are the physical locations containing all of
the top ten employers in St Joseph County (Hoosiers 2018). During 2001–2016 (Table 21.9)
service clusters gained about 8,000 jobs, an 18.6 per cent increase. The leading employer is the
University of Notre Dame, the preeminent Catholic, global research university whose perennial
pull factors of talent and money make other sectors of South Bend’s economy more resilient
than they otherwise would have been (see Economic Impact of Notre Dame Report 2017).
High-end service sector jobs are also found through finance and insurance. Financial employ-
ment today is through the kinds of jobs typically found in markets of this size. The headquar-
ters for AM General (2018), a major defense and transportation contractor, and Liberty Mutual
Insurance contributes importantly to high- end service sector jobs through its downtown
Mishawaka office, making that cluster one of Table 21.9’s highest-paying. Although declining in
terms of absolute employment, the presence of these actors has supported the Insurance cluster
in expanding its relative specialization.
Transportation and Logistics and Distribution and E-commerce appears to be some promising
clusters as companies in the MSA seek to capitalize upon its premier location. Both clusters had
a small decline in employment during 2001–2016. The Distribution and E-commerce cluster is
a major employer with 4,456 jobs in 2016, while Transportation and Logistics had about 1,568
jobs in 2016. Due to its proximity to Chicago MSA the availability and connectivity between
different modes of transport and the easy access to 70 per cent of US market and Canada by
Short Sea Shipping, South Bend is promoting itself as a potential hub center. The nearby city of
290
Pathways for resilience in legacy cities
Elkhart and its growing manufacturing sector offers a great market to serve. As a whole, these
service positions pay wages lower than the median household income in the MSA, thus once
more signaling a worrying path shifting from higher-paying positions in manufacturing towards
lower-paying positions in services. The lost jobs and the lower location quotient however indi-
cate that South Bend has a long way to go if service income is to serve as a replacement for lost
manufacturing earnings.
291
Eva Lema, Matthew Liesch, and Marcello Graziano
local university, Notre Dame, as well as collaboration with nearby cities, boosted results in sev-
eral clusters and seems to be the economy’s main asset. Other Service clusters experienced an
increase in employment but later lost employment, especially in better paying clusters.
Overall, South Bend’s economy is not one of the most well-adapted MSAs in our study.
Although the city’s leadership tried to attract high-end, well-paying industries they did not
develop them enough or improve the current salary levels, which are the lowest between the
MSAs in our study. At the end of 2016, the city had lost both manufacturing and service jobs and
failed to face the challenges associated with economic restructuring and the population’s educa-
tional level changes. And while South Bend was trying to shake off the remnants of the recession,
nearby Elkhart County has emerged as perhaps northern Indiana’s best economic engine, by
developing their manufacturing clusters. South Bend leaders seem to know their MSA mostly
offers lower-end employment but through some of their Services clusters (Business, Insurance,
Transportation etc.) they are trying to offer a healthier and more diverse marketplace.
The University of Notre Dame gives South Bend some resiliency in terms of employment,
property values, and other multiplier effects that many Great Lakes legacy cities do not have.
292
Pathways for resilience in legacy cities
Notre Dame is increasingly participating with the city; outside the university’s original mission
but viewed largely as mutually beneficial. Abandoned properties such as the former Studebaker
plant are increasingly priorities for government. The Studebaker plant has recently become
Ignition Park, whose name refers to automotive heritage while focusing on cultivating spin-offs
from Notre Dame and small businesses.
The region’s ability to develop, attract, and keep talent here is the root factor that will deter-
mine whether the South Bend area can develop greater economic resiliency. Similar to other
legacy cities, the region is still struggling to evolve its manufacturing legacy, retrain its work-
force and find skilled workers. Manufacturing industries can still offer better jobs, but business
owners have long ago expressed their struggle to find people who can work with computerized
machinery (Center of Workforce Innovations 2004).
South Bend’s strategies to accelerate growth in these clusters include talent retention and
attraction, a culture of entrepreneurship, start-up funding, collaborative efforts with nearby muni-
cipalities in the region, and a goal to improve educational attainment rates. Proclamations from
current South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg and other leaders make claims of targeted, place-based
strategies to incubate homegrown manufacturing firms.Tax increment financing is a tool used in
South Bend and other Great Lakes legacy cities to serve as a catalyst for developing underutilized
spaces (Wiles 2013). Local policies also emphasize incubation of preexisting small businesses
rather than the oft-criticized method of incentivizing corporations to relocate to a community,
such as efforts by the State of Wisconsin and local municipalities to lure Foxconn to eastern
Racine County (Minter 2012;Wiles 2013). Future scholars will chronicle the extent of success of
recent approaches to cultivate manufacturing in South Bend and other Great Lakes legacy cities.
Conclusions
In this chapter, we presented how four MSAs from the US Great Lakes region have fared and
responded to long-term decline and recent financial and economic shocks. Although oper-
ating under a diverse range of jurisdictional arrangements, three of the four MSAs in this study
share a common narrative of crisis and recovery, challenged sometimes by path dependencies,
but bolstered by a spirit of resilience and civic pride common among legacy cities (Longworth
2017). This chapter hopes to inform scholars and policymakers about challenges in Great Lakes
urban areas in the 2001–2016 period. While each resilience case is unique, the following themes
unite these cases and can inform a framework for understanding what works to turnaround cities
and the kind of resilience one can expect from legacy cities.
Overall, we observed more adaptation and transformation in the regional economy than
forms of “recovery”. This conclusion is in line with recent findings on the fast-paced transform-
ation of the US manufacturing sector, which requires fewer and fewer labor inputs (Accemoglu
and Restrepo 2017, Muro et al. 2017, Hicks and Devaraj 2015). Even the MSA with the greatest
ability to recover from the recent financial crisis, Grand Rapids, has coped with its recovery
through a combination of emerging manufacturing sectors (with lower overall employment),
and expansion of services (often with lower-paying jobs). The MSA’s strategy included many
collaborative efforts by several group of business leaders from both large firms in the area’s major
industries (such as furniture) and smaller, start-up firms in other industries. At the other end
of the spectrum, Racine has showed a more limited ability to cope with the long and short-
term negative economic shocks that affected the region. Competition from surrounding MSAs,
and a lack of strategic leadership capable of initiating the adaptive transformation necessary to
cope with global changes have left the city employment landscape almost equally split into two
declining groups of clusters.
293
Eva Lema, Matthew Liesch, and Marcello Graziano
The story of Racine MSA, and its comparison with the other three MSAs, provides us with
a few lessons for policymakers and researchers. Firstly, diversification, whether within manu-
facturing or as part of a shift towards services, has paid off in terms of overall employment,
partly reducing the risks that MSAs have been exposed to by national and global negative eco-
nomic shocks. Furthermore, local leadership (at county and city level) and regional leadership (at
state and regional level) matter. The examples of Grand Rapids and Duluth, with their efforts to
improve the local economy through a mix of public–private partnerships, and state funding (par-
ticularly in Duluth) has initiated and sustained a transition process within these cities. Similarly, in
South Bend, the role of a large private university has supported the expansion of innovation parks,
although it is unclear how much local “buy-in” and state support has been implemented. Finally,
a worrying sign emerges from the overall lower wages paid by consumer service clusters, even
when excluding tourism-related industries.These characteristics signal to policymakers what they
should consider carefully, and researchers should observe more closely. If transformative resilience
means a new economic landscape where the jobs created pay lower wages, the result will still hurt
local economies, resulting in a non-desirable transition towards a new economic reality.
To conclude, regarding the kind of resilience that these MSAs exhibited, it is now possible to
say that, except for Racine MSA, the other MSAs followed an adaptive resilience, diversifying
their economic profile by enhancing service clusters when manufacturing jobs moved away or
ceased to exist. This confirms previous findings (Atkins et al. 2012) and contributes additional
evidence that the resilience framework can strengthen some basic known arguments derived
from evolutionary economics, such as related and unrelated variety, the advantages of diversity
for a regional economy, coevolution and the importance of seeing regional economies as path-
dependent systems (Martin 2012).
Note
1 For a review of the concept of maritime clusters, see: Dolreaux (2017). For the Blue economy,
see: Eikeset et al. (2018) and Ketels and Protsiv (2016).
References
Acemoglu, D. and Restrepo, P. (2017). Robots and jobs: Evidence from US labor markets. (No. w23285).
Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
Alanen, A.R. (2007). Morgan Park: Duluth, US Steel, and the Forging of a Company Town. Minneapolis,
MN: University of Minnesota Press.
AM General (2018). Our Story. www.amgeneral.com/our-story. (Accessed August 29, 2018).
Annarelli, A. and Nonino, F. (2016). Strategic and operational management of organizational resili-
ence: Current state of research and future directions. Omega. 62: 1–18.
Atkins, P., Blumenthal, P., Edisis, A., Friedhoff, A., Curran, L., Lowry, L., St Clair T., Wial H., and Wolman,
H. (2011). Responding to Manufacturing Job Loss: What Can Economic Development Policy Do?
Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.
Austin, J.C., Anderson, S., Courant, P.N., and Litan, R.E. (2007). Healthy Waters, Strong Economy: The
Benefits of Restoring the Great Lakes Ecosystem, Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution and the
Great Lakes Economic Initiative.
Bartik, T.J. (2018). Helping manufacturing-intensive communities: What works?. Prepared for Center
on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP). http://research.upjohn.org/reports/232. (Accessed August
29, 2018).
Berkes, F., Folke, C., and Colding, J. (eds.) (2000). Linking Social and Ecological Systems: Management
Practices and Social Mechanisms for Building Resilience. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Carter, D.K., (2016). Remaking Post- Industrial Cities: Lessons from North America and Europe.
New York: Routledge.
294
Pathways for resilience in legacy cities
295
Eva Lema, Matthew Liesch, and Marcello Graziano
Johnson Foundation (2017). June 2017 Resilient Communities Briefing Series Executive Summary. www.
johnsonfdn.org/sites/default/files/1-TJF%20Resilient%20Communities%20Series%20-%20Exec%20
Summary_DJ_0.pdf. (Accessed January 8, 2019).
Jones, E. (2018). Brewing green: Sustainability in the craft beer movement. In: Craft Beverages and Tourism,
Vol. 2 (pp. 9–26). Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
Kelly J.F. (2016). Turnaround towns: International evidence Carnegie UK Trust, Case Study 3: Duluth,
Minnesota. https://d1ssu070pg2v9i.cloudfront.net/pex/carnegie_uk_trust/2016/11/Turnaround-
Towns-Case-Study-3-Duluth-Minnesota.pdf. (Accessed January 8, 2019).
Ketels, C. (2015). Clusters and regional economies: implications for the Great Lakes- St. Lawrence
Region, prepared for the Conference of the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Governors and Premiers
2015 Leadership Summit. www.gsgp.org/ media/ 1604/ clustersregecoreport.pdf. (Accessed on 24
August, 2018).
Ketels, C. and Protsiv, S. (2016). Priority Sector Report: Blue Economy, European Cluster Observatory
Report. Brussel, Belgium: European Commission.
Knorr-Brems (2018). More than 110 years of experience in Braking Technologies www.bendix.com/en/
aboutus/g roup/history/historyii_group.jsp. (Accessed on August 29, 2018).
Lang, B. (2018). Potential state and other assistance to Foxconn Memo. www.wisconsinbudgetproject.org/wp-
content/uploads/2018/01/2018-1-LFB-memo-on-total-Foxconn-costs.pdf. (Accessed August 29, 2018).
Lema E., Gunther P., and Graziano M. (2017). Productivity in the Great Lakes & St. Lawrence region: Status and
trends, report prepared for the Conference for Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Governors and Premiers. www.
gsgp.org/media/2015/productivity-in-the-glsl-region-status-and-trends.pdf. (Accessed August 31, 2018).
Liesch, M. (2008). A region of hope, a region of despair: Print Media, geographical imagination, and the
gogebic iron range mining boom. Historical Geography. 31(1): 182–207.
Liesch, M. (2016). Creating Keweenaw: Parkmaking as response to post- mining economic decline.
Extractive Industries and Society. 3(2): 527–538.
Longworth, S. (2017). Looking for progress in America’s smaller legacy cities: A Report for place-based
funders. Profitwise. (3): 21–28.
Lorr, M.J. (2018). Pure Michigan beer? Tourism, craft breweries, and sustainability. In: Craft Beverages and
Tourism,Vol. 2. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 49–64.
Mallach, A. (2010). Rebuilding America’s Legacy Cities: New Directions for the Industrial Heartland.
American Assembly: New York: Columbia University.
Mallach, A. and Brachman, L. (2013). Regenerating America’s legacy cities. Lincoln institute of land policy.
www.lincolninst.edu/sites/default/files/pubfiles/regenerating-legacy-cities-full_0.pdf (Accessed
September 7, 2019).
Marquette University Law School Poll (2018). https://law.marquette.edu/poll/2018/03/05/new-
marquette- l aw- s chool- p oll- f inds- w isconsin- voters- d ivided- o n- b enefits- o f- f oxconn- d eal- but-
together-in-support-of-background-checks-for-gun-sales/. (Accessed August 29, 2018).
Martin Associates (2011).The economic impacts of the Great Lakes–St. Lawrence Seaway System. Lancaster,
PA: The St. Lawrence Seaway Management Corporation and The St. Lawrence Seaway Development
Corporation. www.greatlakes-seaway.com/en/pdf/eco_impact_full.pdf. (Accessed August 29, 2018).
Martin, R. (2012). Regional economic resilience, hysteresis and recessionary shocks. Journal of economic
geography. 12(1): 1–32.
Martin, R. and Sunley, P. (2006). Path dependence and regional economic evolution. Journal of economic
geography. 6(4): 395–437.
Martin, R. and Sunley, P. (2015). On the notion of regional economic resilience: conceptualization and
explanation. Journal of Economic Geography. 15(1): 1–42.
Miller-Adams, M., Denny G., Behrens T., and Moody M. (2017). Understanding the Philanthropic Character
of Communities: Insights from Two West Michigan Communities. Report. Grand Rapids, MI: Grand
Valley State University, Johnson Center for Philanthropy.
Minter J. (2012). Economic gardening: Mapping fertile gardens (advisors William Drummond). https://
smartech.gatech.edu/ b itstream/ h andle/ 1 853/ 4 3471/ JohnMinter_ E conomic%20Gardening.
pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y.
Monk, A. (2008). The knot of contracts: The corporate geography of legacy costs. Economic Geography.
84(2): 211–235. www.jstor.org/stable/30033173.
Muro, M., Liu, S., Whiton, J., and Kulkarni, S. (2017). Digitalization and the American workforce.
New York: Brookings Institute.
Nelson, D.R., Adger, W.N., and Brown, K. (2007). Adaptation to environmental change: Contributions of a
resilience framework. Annual review of Environment and Resources, 32.
296
Pathways for resilience in legacy cities
Notre Dame Office of Public affairs (2017) .The economic impact of the University of Notre Dame.
https://publicaffairs.nd.edu/assets/243633/2016_economic_impact_report.pdf. (Accessed August
31, 2018).
Nowlan, J. (2007). No automotive business, no problem. Industrial Distribution. 96(9): 30.
OMB (2017). Executive Office of the President-Office of Management and Budget North American
Industry Classification System. www.census.gov/eos/www/naics/2017NAICS/2017_NAICS_
Manual.pdf (Accessed September 7).
Pagano, M.A. (ed.). (2013). Metropolitan Resilience in a Time of Economic Turmoil. Chicago: University
of Illinois Press.
Porter, M.E. (2000). Location, competition, and economic development: Local clusters in a global economy.
Economic development quarterly. 14(1): 15–34.
Pratt, A.C. (2008). Creative cities: the cultural industries and the creative class. Geografiska annaler: series
B, human geography. 90(2): 107–117.
Racine County Economic Development Corp. https://rcedc.org/data-center/leading-employers.
(Accessed August 29, 2018).
Racine Area Manufacturing and Commerce Report (2016). Racine County Labor Market Analysis.
https://higherexpectationsracinecounty.org/uploads/ckeditor/attachments/112/2016_Racine_Labor_
Force_Study.pdf. (Accessed August 29, 2018).
Right Place (2018). Manufacturing in West Michigan, Furniture 2018. www.rightplace.org/ industry-
sectors/smart-manufacturing. (Accessed August 29, 2018).
Romel, R. (2018). Foxconn water deal could further boost growth in Mount Pleasant. www.jsonline.
com/story/money/business/2018/08/17/foxconn-water-deal-could-further-boost-g rowth-mount-
pleasant/1018177002/. (Last accessed August 29, 2018).
Ruff, M (2014). Once A troubled rust-belt city, Duluth turns its finances around, Government Finance
Review, Dec 2014
Schaefer, A., Mattingly, M., and Gagnon, D.J. (2017). A demographic and economic profile of Duluth,
Minnesota, and Superior, Wisconsin. Carsey Research 125(2). https:// scholars.unh.edu/ cgi/
viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=1312&context=carsey. (Accessed August 31, 2018).
Simmie, J. and Martin, R. 2010. The economic resilience of regions: Towards an evolutionary approach.
Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society. 3 (1): 27–43.
South Bend Chamber of Commerce (2004). www.in.gov/dwd/files/shortages_reports2.pdf. (Accessed
August 29, 2018).
Thomas, J.M. (2012). Addressing the racial, ethnic, and class implications of legacy cities. Rebuilding
America’s Legacy Cities: New Directions for the Industrial Heartland, 223–242.
Valade, C. (2017). Meijer, health care, research among GR’s economic catalysts Grand Rapids Business
Journal. 35(53): 4.
Van Andel, D. (2018). Medical Mile: A vision for change in Grand Rapids. Grand Rapids Business Journal.
36(1): 8.
Verso (2018), The Duluth Mill at a glance. www.versoco.com/wps/wcm/connect/0fde4ac2-e700-456e-
95c2- 2 e38806b2455/ D uluth+Mill+Fact+Sheet+April+2018.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CVID=
mar1FC-. (Accessed August 31, 2018).
Walker, R.A. (2000). The geography of production. In: E.S. Sheppard and T.J. Barnes (eds.): A Companion
to Economic Geography (pp. 113–132). Oxford: Blackwell.
Walker, B., Gunderson, L., Kinzig, A., Folke, C., Carpenter, S., and Schultz, L. (2006). A handful of
heuristics and some propositions for understanding resilience in social-ecological systems. Ecology and
society. 11(1).
Weir, M., Pindus, N., Wial, H., and Wolman, H. (eds.). (2012). Urban and Regional Policy and its
Effects: Building Resilient Regions,Vol. 4. New York: Brookings Institution Press.
Wiles (2013). Planning for economic prosperity: A guide for preparing and implementing economic develop-
ment plans in Hoosier communities.Thesis submitted to Ball State University. http://cardinalscholar.bsu.
edu/bitstream/handle/123456789/197219/WilesA_2013-2_BODY.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y.
(Accessed August 30, 2018).
Wisconsin Budget Project (2017). www.wisconsinbudgetproject.org/push-by-lawmakers-to-break-up-
racine-school-district-could-segregate-students-by-race-income. (Accessed August 29, 2018).
Zink, T., Center, B., Finstad, D., Boulger, J.G., Repesh, L.A., Westra, R., and Brooks, K.D. (2010). Efforts
to graduate more primary care physicians and physicians who will practice in rural areas: Examining
outcomes from the University of Minnesota–Duluth and the Rural Physician Associate Program.
Academic Medicine. 85(4). 599–604.
297
22
Energy dimensions of
urban resilience
Antti Silvast
Introduction
Over the past years, the concept of resilience has attracted increasing interest from various
perspectives. While the urban dimension of resilience has been of considerable interest to these
discussions, one type of resilience has received relatively little attention in urban studies: the
resilience of urban energy systems and infrastructures. This chapter provides an overview on
this intersection of urban life and energy resilience, complementing emergent urban litera-
ture on the subject (see e.g. Graham 2006, 2009; Luque-Ayala and Marvin 2016; Sharifi and
Yamagata 2016).
Energy systems and infrastructures –including electricity supplies, gas networks, and heating –
are vital systems that enable the functioning of modern societies (Collier and Lakoff, 2008;
Edwards 2003). These infrastructures ensure, for the most part, smoothly functioning political
decision-making at all levels, including military defence, products and services, security, health,
the movement of people, a functioning economy, and the welfare of populations. Infrastructures
like universal electricity provision have been also directly relevant to the maintenance of urban
life. In particular, these systems greatly enhanced the expansion of cities and became their under-
pinning support system in so doing. As urbanists Stephen Graham and Simon Marvin (2001)
showed poignantly, infrastructural networks supported and increased security, health, and welfare,
integrated people into cities, and cities into nation-states.
These considerations on the vitality of infrastructures almost immediately suggest issues
about resilience and risk. Firstly, large infrastructures are used to mitigate risks, increase collective
security, and create conditions for economic activities. Secondly, hence, when infrastructures fail,
this poses a risk to the economy, government, the population, and the continuity of everyday
practices (Silvast 2017, 2018).
In this chapter, I examine these topics concerning energy resilience, with a particular focus on
advancing the study of urban energy resilience. It addresses three main questions: (1) What does
the resilience of energy systems and infrastructures mean? 2) What do these meanings imply
in the urban resilience context? 3) How has such resilience manifested, or not, during major
failures of the energy infrastructure? Each of the questions is addressed in a dedicated order in
what follows.
298
Energy dimensions of urban resilience
These infrastructure networks and systems become critical infrastructures when their “incapacity
or destruction […] would have a debilitating impact on security, national economic security,
national public health or safety, or any combination of those matters” (US Department of
Homeland Security 2013: p. 29). The European Council in its turn defines a critical infrastruc-
ture as follows:
An asset, system or part thereof located in Member States which is essential for the main-
tenance of vital societal functions, health, safety, security, economic or social well-being of
people, and the disruption or destruction of which would have a significant impact in a
Member State as a result of the failure to maintain those functions.
(European Council 2008: Article 2(a))
While the two definitions are clearly very different, they also share an underpinning goal: to des-
ignate the interdependent networks, systems, capabilities, and assets whose reliable functioning
ensures a number of public goals, such as security, health, a functioning economy, and the well-
being of people. Official policies for protecting critical infrastructure exist in more than 20
advanced industrial and developing states including the United States, the United Kingdom,
Germany, Switzerland, Finland, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Indonesia, and India (Brunner
and Suter 2009).
As the definitions above show, critical infrastructure protection has frequently operated at one
particular scale, i.e. the sovereign national state (Silvast et al. 2018). Many of the policies toward
this protection have been designed by national governments, such as individual states or EU
members, working with infrastructure providers and focused on homeland security (Sims 2011)
or as a UK civil emergency management programme of infrastructures explained it, on “keeping
the country running” (UK Cabinet Office, 2011).
299
Antti Silvast
Nevertheless, the typical critical infrastructures –from functioning electricity and energy
systems to water supply and centralized governments –are also clearly vital systems for the
maintenance of urban life (e.g. Graham and Marvin 2001). As Graham (2006) observes,
the city depends on “vast complexes of infrastructure, public works, and hazard mitigation
systems” that range from “the sourcing of distant food, water, commodities, and energy” to
“their delivery to cities” and “their consumption and the resulting production of wastes”.
The critical role of these systems has been particularly significant in disaster situations. In
New York City, the impacts of Hurricane Sandy in 2012 brought the region’s infrastructure
to scrutiny –including utilities like electricity, transportation systems, and public housing.
Redesigning these complex infrastructures to become more resilient was the key aim for the
official post-disaster redevelopment process (Collier et al. 2016). In New Orleans, Hurricane
Katrina in 2005 led to the loss of critical electricity, water, and communications infrastructures,
which affected the functioning of the city. Preparedness in these areas received increasing
attention in the US following Katrina, concerned with the sites of “critical infrastructure that
guarantees the continuity of political and economic order”, such as “the condition of the elec-
trical grid” (Lakoff 2006). All in all, the collective risks that infrastructure breakdowns pose
also to cities and the political efforts to create interventions against them makes the topic of
critical infrastructures, and energy systems in particular, important topics for understanding
urban resilience.
300
Energy dimensions of urban resilience
calculations, social and private insurance, and simulated scenarios –that are used to accomplish
these forms of governance.
The protection of critical infrastructures has also frequently been framed by the terminology
and practices of risk. Risk management frameworks are used to anticipate what events might
threaten infrastructures and their functioning (e.g. European Council 2008; US Department of
Homeland Security 2013; US National Infrastructure Council 2009). One essay has summarized
the concept of critical infrastructure risk as “a function of the likelihood that a given threat
source will attempt to exploit a given vulnerability and the magnitude of the impact, should
a threat source successfully exploit the vulnerability” (Dunn 2006: p.48). This understanding
centers on the measured and quantitative aspects of infrastructure risk such as likelihoods
and threat magnitudes. But risk in critical infrastructures also opens to the broader ways of
social science interrogation. Society’s vulnerability to infrastructure breakdowns may be an unin-
tended consequence of the very success of modern infrastructure expansion. These risks can be
interpreted differently in various situations and contexts, and when they are anticipated and
managed, this is done by different governing tools whose construction and use by experts is of
specific interest to their analysis.
301
Antti Silvast
Another explanation of energy system resilience in particular is given by the UK’s network of
academics, UK Energy Research Centre (UKERC):
Here, energy system is resilient only when it can provide affordable energy services according to
the needs and everyday demands of its users (see also Silvast and Kaplinsky 2007).
The tools to govern resilience and make the relevant actors –such as infrastructure owners,
operators, but also emergency responders, industry groups, end- users, and government
departments –responsible for ensuring it differ substantively in these exemplars. The UKERC
(2011) report centers on quantitative computer models.These models simulate the energy system
in different operating conditions and unpack its interdependencies and interactions in doing so.
The output of these models has suggested indicators for resilience in energy systems, concerning
their different subcomponents. For example, in primary energy supply, the diversity of energy
resources increases energy system resilience, while backup power sources and other redundancies
may grow resilience in the energy networks and also among the energy end-users (UKERC
2011: pp.14–15). The UK Cabinet Office’s (2011: p.34) approach is more qualitative, suggesting
organizational resilience strategies to be developed in detail. For the US National Infrastructure
Council (2009: p.11), resilience is premised upon a higher scale of improving policy frameworks
and public–private partnerships, considering that “(c)urrent market mechanisms may be inad-
equate to achieve the level of resilience needed to ensure public health, safety, and security”
(2009: p.10). In this case, resilience hence forefronts policy interventions to the operation and
planning activities by infrastructure owners and managers, which are not seen as resilient enough
without such interventions.
Where conceptual definitions of infrastructure resilience might be clear cut, as these examples
show, its practical uses and governance are shaped by different interpretations and embed varying
goals. These, most likely, relate to how the producers of these concepts view the purpose of
the infrastructure and are shaped by the tools that they use to analyze and govern its resili-
ence, ranging from quantitative computer models to organizational strategies and public–private
partnerships. These practical differences and varieties of perspectives find their corollary in the
urban level, as I show next.
302
Energy dimensions of urban resilience
Table 22.1 Select planning and design criteria for a resilient urban energy system
academic literatures. A recent review drew together the emerging literature on urban energy
resilience and suggested the following framework for analyzing resilience in urban energy:
The review combines a total of 196 planning and design criteria for such resilient urban
energy systems, ranging from infrastructure and land use to changing social practices and
behavior (summarised in Table 22.1). As the authors aptly note, this urban energy resilience
happens at multiple scales from the household to city parts, city planning, and electricity
companies. They call for “the managerial capacity to effectively coordinate preparatory and
recovery actions between various sectors and organizations at different scales” (Sharifi and
Yamagata 2016: p.1665).
These energy-related planning and design practices and variety of scales demonstrate that
urban energy resilience is a complex problem, cutting across jurisdictional, organizational,
and system boundaries. It ranges from relatively technical goals such as backup installations to
concerns of wide-ranging policy such as reduction of urban sprawl and energy poverty. But
in spite of this complexity, at its root, the definition of resilience in the above is not at odds
with the energy policy, critical infrastructure protection, and emergency management terms
that were introduced earlier. Again, resilience merges the practices of anticipation, absorbing,
adaptation, and recovery. Also, this framework again sets a purpose for resilience –including not
only providing affordable energy services to the final users, but adding availability, accessibility,
303
Antti Silvast
and public acceptability of energy systems. These are now understood as the desired end states
of society’s energy provisions among many national governments and commentators on energy
(see World Energy Council 2017). The authors also consider sustainability, which they see as a
broader concept than resilience. In a similar way, science and technology policy scholar Andrew
Stirling (2014, p.318) argues that resilience is one of four cornerstones of sustainability in energy
systems –others being their stability, durability, and robustness.
Altogether, the concept of resilience, also in the urban setting, shows considerable capability
for expanding and latching onto other concepts such as preparedness, physical security, equity
concerns, and sustainability. Making the concept more inclusive and qualitatively rich is an
important aim, but confronts a critique once the concept expands, namely “What isn’t resili-
ence?” as two organization scholars argue (Roe and Schulman 2008: p.120). To move beyond
this discussion on the “correct” use of the concept, I will now introduce select case studies and
interrogate those practices through which people and organizations have “bounced back” from
infrastructure disruptions. Earlier disaster and crisis scholarship on infrastructure breakdowns
provides a highly suitable resource to this aim.
304
Energy dimensions of urban resilience
stressed preparedness to the power company as well as legislators, introduced a new potential
contingency to the rescue services, and there was an increased attention to communication and
information-sharing during these kinds of events among the involved stakeholders.
This study on Buenos Aires draws parallels to another major and long blackout in Auckland,
New Zealand, which occurred a year earlier and has been documented by disaster and crisis
scholars (Stern et al. 2005). In 1998, a five-week power outage confronted the Central Business
District of Auckland, affecting thousands of residents and a number of offices, shops, and govern-
ment buildings. Where the most immediate technical effects were on elevators, air conditioning,
and traffic signals, there were sustained difficulties for businesses such as restaurants and other
commercial and financial services to operate. The trigger for these blackouts was four critical
power cables failing in sequence over several weeks. This concurred with hot and dry weather,
leading to the conclusion of this potentially being a cascading failure where multiple contin-
gencies interact to trigger a systems accident (Stern et al. 2005: pp.108–110; see Perrow 1984).
Again, as the power cut prolonged, the interpretation of the breakdown shifted toward greater
political attention and toward the economic harms that the cut was causing. The successful
repairs included enacting temporary overhead cables, but this event also led to greater official
scrutiny than the Buenos Aires blackout. This included an independent official report, which
criticized the power company for their management practices of underground power cables.
As these two example cases show, there are several shared impacts that the blackouts triggered
in cities. Urban scholars (Byrd and Mattherman 2014) collected the social effects of blackouts
in cities all over the world and underscore some of these same patterns: power failures cause
direct and measurable economic damage due to lost productive activity, significant impacts on
food safety, sometimes increase in crime rates as well as growing policing, and major impacts on
transportation systems, while further issues are caused by the increasing deployment of backup
diesel generators. As they sum, the causes of urban power failures vary considerably from systems
failures to weather events, sabotage, and lacking energy resources. But one of the contexts of
these infrastructure failures that is discussed in both of the case studies above, is the marketiza-
tion and partial privatization of energy systems that has been increasingly popular all over the
world for the past decades. Byrd and Matthewman (2014) flag increasing complexity, hampering
communication, and intensifying competition and conclude that in “a competitive environment,
reliability and profits may be at cross-purposes” (p. 87).
This impact is also suggested by various disaster studies of blackouts. Blackouts, as these
studies have found, demonstrate the difficulty of coordinating among market-based utilities and
public stakeholders on many different levels of administration (Höst et al. 2010; Ullberg 2005).
To many of these earlier studies, energy-providing companies and decision-making bodies tend
not to immediately focused on worst-case scenarios when the power goes out –which might
have been indicated by the inclusive and widest frameworks of resilience. Instead, they seek
short-term operational goals –in other words, short-term resilience, i.e. “bouncing back” to
the normal state as fast as possible –which does not systematically address longer-term crisis
management perspectives (Stern et al. 2005; Ullberg 2005). Because resilience also concerns
very rare events and is not easy to attach with a market price or another economic harm,
some academics recommend attaining resilience “in the public interest for strategic reasons”
(UKERC 2011: p.51). Indeed, in all of the case studies, the blackout showed how important
such public interests may be, and a crisis of public credibility was experienced when the power
failures prolonged. The lack of resilience encountered public and political critique and protests,
suggesting that energy providers had not been prepared enough.
A further commonality, which many studies of power failures have shown, is how groups and
organizations not directly concerned with electricity networks began to manage the disaster,
305
Antti Silvast
including rescue services (Ullberg 2005), self-organized municipal resource groups, and a feder-
ation of farmers (Höst et al. 2010).The blackouts called for actors to circumvent prior prepared-
ness plans, and even questioned which actors should have been involved as “first responders”
(Boin and McConnell, 2007). In these ways, a failure of an infrastructure and infrastructure
resilience does not mean just bouncing back to “normal conditions” but can partly change
perceptions about what that infrastructural “normality” consists of.
The case of the Finnish and Scandinavian electricity resilience was studied across different
sites of the infrastructure, considering not only specific disasters but how actors in the energy
supply anticipate interruptions in their everyday work and lives (Silvast 2017). This study
shows that building prior robustness against power failures receives significant attention at
various levels –whether through stockpiling resources such as oil, organizational risk man-
agement frameworks, or the preparedness activities now expected in households by power
companies and national governments. Yet, energy suppliers, people, and organizations seem
also to be capable of handling disturbances after they have occurred and often must circum-
vent prior plans in so doing. Different actors addressed this problem in their own distinct
manners –on the national scale, by imaginative threat scenario tools prepared by the gov-
ernment; in a studied municipal electricity company, by staying alert to electricity systems,
transnational energy markets, and their volatile environments through operator skills tailored
to the city’s particular conditions and critical infrastructures; and in energy-using households
and communities, by overall resourcefulness and drawing upon normally hidden skills as the
power failed (see also Heidenstrøm and Kvarnlöf 2017; Rinkinen 2013; Trentmann 2009).
Similarly to particular blackout events documented in disaster studies, these varieties of
practices are used to bounce back from the often partially unthinkable situations where the
electricity infrastructure fails.
306
Energy dimensions of urban resilience
References
Beck, U. (1992). Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. London: Sage.
Berner, B. and Summerton, J. (eds.) (2003). Constructing Risk and Safety in Technological Practice.
London: Routledge.
Boin, A. and McConnell, A. (2007). Preparing for critical infrastructure breakdowns: the limits of crisis man-
agement and the need for resilience. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management. 15(1): 50–59.
Brunner, E. and Suter, M. (2009). International CIIP Handbook 2008/2009: An Inventory of 25 National
and 7 International Critical Information Infrastructure Protection Policies. Zürich: Center for Security
Studies.
Burgess, A. (2016). Introduction. In: A. Burgess, A. Alemanno and J. Zinn (eds). Routledge Handbook of
Risk Studies. London: Routledge: 1–14.
Byrd, H. and Matthewman, S. (2014). Exergy and the city: The technology and sociology of power (failure).
Journal of Urban Technology. 21(3): 85–102.
Centeno, M.A., Nag, M., Patterson, T.S., Shaver, A., and Windawi, A.J. (2015). The emergence of global sys-
temic risk. Annual Review of Sociology. 41: 65–85.
Collier, S.J. (2008). Enacting catastrophe: Preparedness, insurance, budgetary rationalization. Economy and
Society. 37(2): 224–250.
Collier, S.J. (2011). Post- Soviet Social: Neoliberalism, Social Modernity, Biopolitics: Princeton,
NJ: Princeton Univeresity Press.
Collier, S.J., Cox, S., and Grove, K. (2016). Rebuilding by design in post Sandy New York. Limn. 5(7).
Collier, S.J. and Lakoff, A. (2008). The vulnerability of vital systems: How “critical infrastructure” became
a security problem. In: M. Dunn Cavelty (ed.): The Politics of Securing the Homeland: Critical
Infrastructure, Risk and Securitisation. London: Routledge, pp.40–62.
Copeland, C. and Brown, D. (2017). D-Day for UK Energy Policy: Is there a plan? Sussex Energy Group
at SPRU. http://blogs.sussex.ac.uk/sussexenergygroup/2017/10/26/beis-uk-energy-policy-plan/.
(Accessed August 31, 2018).
Dent, C. (2016). What is an electricity blackout? Durham Energy Institute. www.dur.ac.uk/dei/resources/
briefings/blackouts/. (Accessed July 20, 2018).
307
Antti Silvast
Douglas, M. and Wildavsky, A. (1982). Risk and Culture: An Essay on the Selection of Technological and
Environmental Dangers. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Dunn, M. (2006). Understanding critical information infrastructures: An elusive quest. In: M. Dunn
and V. Mauer (eds.): International CIIP Handbook 2008/2009: An Inventory of 25 National and 7
International Critical Information Infrastructure Protection Policies. Zürich: Center for Security
Studies, 27–53.
Edwards, P.N. (2003). Infrastructure and modernity: Force, time, and social organization in the history
of sociotechnical systems. In: P.Brey, A. Feenberg, and T. Misa (eds.): Modernity and Technology.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 185–226.
European Council (2008). On the identification and designation of European critical infrastructures and
the Assessment of the need to improve their protection. Directive 2008/114/EC.
Graham, S. (2006). Cities Under Siege: Katrina and the Politics of Metropolitan America. Understanding
Katrina: Perspectives from the Social Sciences web site. http://understandingkatrina.ssrc.org/Graham/
. (Accessed December 12, 2018).
Graham, S. (ed.) (2009). Disrupted Cities: When Infrastructure Fails. London: Routledge.
Graham, S. and Marvin, S. (2001). Splintering Urbanism: Networked Infrastructures Technological
Mobilities and the Urban Condition. London: Routledge.
Heidenstrøm, N. and Kvarnlöf, L. (2018). Coping with blackouts: A practice theory approach to household
preparedness. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management. 26(2): 272–282.
Höst, M.; Kristofersson Nieminen,T.; Petersen, K., and Tehler, H. (eds.) (2010). FRIVA –risk, sårbarhet och
förmåga samverkan inom krishantering [FRIVA –Risk,Vulnerability and Capability to Co-operate in
Crisis Management]. Lund: MediaTryck.
Jenkins, K., McCauley, D., Heffron, R., Stephan, H., and Rehner, R. (2016). Energy justice: A conceptual
review. Energy Research & Social Science. 11: 174–182.
Lakoff,A. (2006). From disaster to catastrophe: The limits of preparedness. Understanding Katrina: Perspectives
from the social sciences web site. http://understandingkatrina.ssrc.org/Lakoff/. (Accessed December
12, 2018).
Luque-Ayala, A. and Marvin, S. (2016).The maintenance of urban circulation: An operational logic of infra-
structural control. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space. 34(2): 191–208.
Manyena, S.B. (2006). The concept of resilience revisited. Disasters. 30(4): 434–450.
O’Malley, P. (2004). Risk, Uncertainty and Government. London: Routledge.
Perrow, C. (1984). Normal Accidents: Living with High Risk Technologies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press.
Rinkinen, J. (2013). Electricity blackouts and hybrid systems of provision: users and the “reflective practice”.
Energy, Sustainability and Society. 3(1): 25.
Roe, E. and Schulman, P.R. (2008). High Reliability Management: Operating on the Edge. Stanford,
CA: Stanford University Press.
Scanlon, J. (1999). Emergent groups in established frameworks: Ottawa Carleton’s response to the 1998 ice
disaster. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management. 7(1): 30–37.
Sharifi, A. and Yamagata,Y. (2016). Principles and criteria for assessing urban energy resilience: A literature
review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 60: 1654–1677.
Silvast, A. (2017). Making Electricity Resilient: Risk and Security in a Liberalized Infrastructure.
London: Routledge.
Silvast, A. (2018). Co-constituting supply and demand: Managing electricity in two neighbouring control
rooms. In: E. Shove and F. Trentmann (eds.): Infrastructures in Practice: The Evolution of Demand in
Networked Societies. London: Routledge, pp.171–183.
Silvast, A., Bolton R., Lagendijk,V., and Szulecki, K. (2018). Crossing borders: Social sciences and human-
ities perspectives on European energy systems integration. In: C. Foulds and R. Robison (eds.): Social
Sciences and Humanities for Advancing Policy in European Energy. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 97–110.
Silvast, A. and Kaplinsky, J. (2007). White Paper on Security of European Electricity Distribution. Project
UNDERSTAND, Leonardo da Vinci, EU Education and Culture.
Sims, B. (2011). Resilience and homeland security: Patriotism, anxiety, and complex system dynamics.
Limn. 1(1).
Stern, E.; Newlove, L., and Svedin, L. (2005). Auckland Unplugged: Coping with Critical Infrastructure
Failure. Lanham: Lexington Books.
Stirling, A. (2014). From sustainability to transformation: Dynamics and diversity in reflexive govern-
ance of vulnerability. In: A. Hommels, J. Mesman, and W. Bijker (eds.): Vulnerability in Technological
Cultures: New Directions in Research and Governance. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 305–332.
308
Energy dimensions of urban resilience
Trentmann, F. (2009). Disruption is normal: Blackouts, breakdowns and the elasticity of everyday life. In: E.
Shove, F. Trentmann, and R. Wilk (eds.): Time, Consumption, and Everyday Life. Oxford: Berg, 67–84.
UK Cabinet Office (2011). Keeping the Country Running: Natural Hazards and Infrastructure: A
Guide to Improving the Resilience of Critical Infrastructure and Essential Services. London: Cabinet
Office. www.gov.uk/government/publications/keeping-the-country-running-natural-hazards-and-
infrastructure. (Accessed November 9, 2016).
UKERC (UK Energy Research Centre) (2011). Building a Resilient UK Energy System. Written by
Modassar Chaudry, Paul Ekins, Kannan Ramachandran, Anser Shakoor, Jim Skea, Goran Strbac, Xinxin
Wang, and Jeanette Whitaker. London: UKERC. www.ukerc.ac.uk/asset/C01431B1-F1A5-4275-
833D969F89E5B7AE/. (Accessed August 31, 2018).
Ullberg, S. (2005). The Buenos Aires Blackout: Argentine Crisis Management across the Public–Private
Divide. Stockholm: CRISMART/Swedish National Defence College.
US Department of Homeland Security (2013). National Infrastructure Protection Plan 2013: Partnering
for Critical Infrastructure Security and Resilience.Washington, DC: Department of Homeland Security.
www.dhs.gov/sites/default/fi les/publications/National-Infrastructure-Protection-Plan-2013–508.pdf.
(Accessed October 10, 2016).
US National Infrastructure Council (2009). Critical Infrastructure Resilience Final Report and
Recommendations. Washington: Department of Homeland Security. www.dhs.gov/ xlibrary/
assets/
niac/niac_critical_infrastructure_resilience.pdf. (Accessed October 10, 2016).
Warner, F. (1992). Introduction. In: Royal Society Study Group (ed.): Risk: Analysis, Perception and
Management. London: The Royal Society, pp.1–12.
World Energy Council (2017). World Energy Trilemma Index 2017: Monitoring the Sustainability of
National Energy Systems. www.worldenergy.org/publications/2017/world-energy-trilemma-index-
2017-monitoring-the-sustainability-of-national-energy-systems/. (Accessed July 20, 2018).
Further Reading
Boin, A. and McConnell, A. (2007). Preparing for critical infrastructure breakdowns: the limits of crisis man-
agement and the need for resilience. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management. 15(1), pp.50–59.
Graham, S. (ed.) (2009). Disrupted Cities: When Infrastructure Fails. London: Routledge.
Roe, E. and Schulman, P.R. (2008). High Reliability Management: Operating on the Edge. Stanford,
CA: Stanford University Press.
Silvast, A. (2017). Making Electricity Resilient: Risk and Security in a Liberalized Infrastructure.
London: Routledge.
Sims, B. (2011). Resilience and homeland security: Patriotism, anxiety, and complex system dynamics.
Limn. 1(1).
Ullberg, S. (2005). The Buenos Aires Blackout: Argentine Crisis Management across the Public–Private
Divide. Stockholm: CRISMART/Swedish National Defence College.
309
23
Climate resilience, mitigation,
and adaptation strategy
Case studies from the
Middle East and West Africa
Adenrele Awotona
Introduction
Iraq and Nigeria are two of the most vulnerable countries with regard to the effects of climate
change on environmental degradation, on their fragile economies, on various aspects of national
development, on the livelihoods of their citizens (especially the low-income, the poor, and slum
dwellers), on social order, and on national security. While Iraq has not yet developed a com-
prehensive climate change adaptation strategy in spite of considerable assistance from various
multilateral international agencies, Nigeria has recently developed one that is clearly doomed
to fail. This chapter examines vulnerabilities to climate change in Iraq and Nigeria and their
implications for human development and national security.
• UNDP and UNEP have jointly supported the Ministry of Environment on the development
of a National Environmental Strategy and Action Plan;
• UNDP has worked to strengthen the capacity of the Ministry of Water Resources and support
the development of a National Water Council;
310
Resilience, mitigation, adaptation strategy
• UNDP, UNIDO and UNEP have joint initiatives for the development of mitigation
approaches, clean development mechanisms and renewable energy;
• UNDP has assisted the Ministry of Water Resources (MoWR) in developing local water
committees to improve water governance at the sub-regional level, ensuring that the water
supply and quality issues specific to each sub-region could be properly tackled by the full
range of water users;
• UNESCO has led the UN Country Team and UNAMI’s efforts to draw up an integrated
strategy for supporting the restoration of the Marshlands;
• UNESCO has launched a scientific survey of Iraq’s groundwater to improve government cap-
acity to address water scarcity and improve agricultural planning; and,
• FAO has supported the Ministry of Water Resources and the Governorate of Erbil in the
rehabilitation of infrastructure to enhance water supply and drainage across eight governorates.
Furthermore, UNDP invested $6.5 million in developing disaster risk management capaci-
ties from 2013 to 2016; the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) funded,
with $1.5 million from 2010 to 2014, the improvement of food security and climate change
adaptability of rain-fed barley farmers in Iraq and Jordan; UNDP and partner agencies invested
$58.7 million, from 2014 to 2017 in the Iraq Crisis Response and Resilience Program (ICRRP);
and, the International Bank For Reconstruction and Development/ World Bank invested
$1,200 million in the Iraq Emergency Fiscal Stabilization and Energy Sustainability program
from 2015–2016 (USAID 2017, p.6).
In addition to the international technical and financial support for Iraq, the country also
has several sectoral policies, which include the National Development Plan and the National
Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan. So, why has Iraq not developed an all-inclusive climate
change adaptation strategy? The following are some of the reasons (Awotona 2008; Awotona and
Donlan 2008; Dobbins et al. 2009; IRIN 2010):
• The funding for climate change mitigation is tight due to security needs, a lethargic economy,
and the fact that the majority of Iraq’s state budget is devoted to security needs by the Iraqi
National Police and the Army.1
• There is a widespread belief that things cannot get worse for the country than it has been
during war, insurgency and occupation. This impulse is not helped by the cautious nature of
Iraq’s policy-making process and its divided structure that cultivates an atmosphere of risk
aversion, small steps, and a focus on providing for sectarian interests.
• There is a lack of capacity for the effective administration of natural resources and stability of
the ecosystem.
• The country has a divided political system, spread along sectarian lines that fails to address
long-term issues.
• The government’s capability to formulate and implement the required adaptation and mitiga-
tion policies is undermined by scarce resources due to rapid demographic growth; water scar-
city (which is based on two declining rivers, the Tigris and Euphrates, that supply more than
half of Iraq’s freshwater resources and is intimately tied to two neighbors, Turkey and Syria);
desertification; climate variability; rising temperatures (projected to rise by 2°C by 2050, with
more frequent heat waves); intense droughts; declining precipitation (with a projected decrease
in average annual rainfall of 9 per cent by 2050); salinization; the increasing prevalence of sand
and dust storms (causing more respiratory infections); and, various socio-economic conditions
including intensified food insecurity leading to increased and severe malnutrition (mostly
in children) (UNDP, UNEP and UNICEF 2012; USAID 2017). Iraq’s three major climate
311
Adenrele Awotona
zones are predominantly demarcated by rainfall quantities. They are (USAID 2017): a largely
uninhabited and extremely arid lowland desert, a semi-arid steppe, and a moist Mediterranean
region in the sub-humid upland and mountainous north and northeast.
• The escape from the desert, mainly due to poverty, crop failures, and loss of livelihoods, has
increased Iraq’s urbanization. The Iraqi cities are swelling with former countryside citizens
pushing the central government’s ability to provide services (USAID 2017).
Indeed, the only major initiative that attempts to address climate change adaptation was
announced by the Government of Iraq in June 2018, which, in partnership with the United
Nations Development Program (UNDP), established a National Designated Authority “to help
mobilize global climate funding in support of dealing with pressures imposed by a range of
environmental and climate change-related issues” (UNDP 2018). Supported by a two-year grant
assistance (2018–2019) from the Green Climate Fund (GCF), the Government of Iraq aims to
develop national readiness programs that will “strengthen the national capacities to effectively
access and efficiently manage, track and guide climate financing”.
There are four major unintended consequences inherent in Iraq’s lack of a climate change
mitigation strategy. These are: increased urbanization, increased emigration and regional migra-
tion, decreased economic output, and increased political instability. This instability is somewhat
inherent in the current Iraqi government composition but the increase due to a failure to
mitigate climate change will heighten these tensions (Mallat 1998; Sowers and Weinthal, 2010;
Sirkeci 2005).
As noted by the BBC’s Iraq country profile, the mainly Shia-led governments that have held
power since the US-led ouster of President Saddam Hussein in 2003 have struggled to main-
tain order, and the country “has enjoyed only brief periods of respite from high levels of sect-
arian violence. Instability and sabotage have hindered efforts to rebuild an economy shattered
by decades of conflict and sanctions, even though Iraq has the world’s second largest reserves of
crude oil” (BBC 2018).
Iraq’s five largest cities, Baghdad (7,216,000), Basrah (2,600,000), Al Mawsil al Jadidah
(2,065,597), Al Basrah al Qadimah (2,015,483), and Mosul (1,739,800) (World Population
Review 2018) are already incredibly diverse and are under strain to provide for their current
populations. As the urbanization of Iraq increases, these five cities will serve as templates of
instability.There are major problems in housing, water supplies and food production throughout
Iraq.With regards to political instability, as basic services are cut in Iraqi cities and municipalities,
and as the infrastructure is taxed beyond its means, there will be many political actors that will
try to assume power.
In order to understand how the failure to mitigate climate change effects will result in polit-
ical instability, it is necessary to understand the current composition of the Iraqi political system
and society. The two major sects in Iraq are the Sunni and Shia. The two ethnic nationalities
are Arabs and Kurds. They are all facing difficult political choices and the specter and increasing
reality of climate change has made some of these problems more difficult. The Sunnis comprise
about 20 per cent of the country’s population and are primarily located in the western and
central regions. This is the area hardest hit by desertification. The Sunnis do not currently hold
a foremost national office and this is a major source of friction. The Shia are the largest ethnic
component of Iraq and they are concentrated in the center and south of the state. The Shia
comprises roughly 60 per cent of the population but they are far poorer and less well educated
than the Sunnis. The Shia were oppressed throughout the rule of Saddam Hussein. They now
have control of the central government. With their political clout and demographic advantage,
the Shia are in the enviable position of controlling the flow of resources to the harder hit Sunnis
312
Resilience, mitigation, adaptation strategy
in the arid and urban areas of Iraq. Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi and Moqtada al-Sadr –the
Shia cleric whose political bloc won most votes in the May 2018 parliamentary election –have
agreed to work together to form a new government.
The Kurds are located in the most northern portion of Iraq and they constitute about 15–
20 per cent of Iraq’s population. Improved relations between Baghdad and the autonomous
Kurdistan Regional Government has allowed them to share the country’s oil wealth and military
resources. However, democracy and representative governance is no guaranteed protection from
popular protest or sectarian instability as demonstrated by the recent unsuccessful effort by the
Kurdish Regional Government to negotiate an independent Kurdistan.
The most likely pathway from the present government to internal instability is a continued
decrease in economic output and failure of the political system to provide for the needs of the
citizens even after the armed Islamic State group, which emerged in 2014 as a major force in the
region that seized large parts of Iraq, was driven out in 2017 by a government offensive.
Also, BBC (2018) has noted that although there are “hundreds of publications and scores of
radio and TV stations in the country, political and security crises have resulted in an increasingly
fractured media scene; […] (while) television is the main medium for news, many media outlets
have political or religious affiliations.”
313
Adenrele Awotona
• The reduction of arable lands due to sea incursion in the coastal plains and desert encroachment
with its associated sand dunes in the north, depriving farmers of their agricultural farmlands
and grazing lands. Official studies have concluded that sand dunes and desert encroachment
have covered from 25,000 hectares to more than 30,000 hectares with its attendant negative
impact on food and livestock production;
• The fishing activities in the various eco zones of the Nigerian coastal regions have drastically
reduced due to the rise in sea level and heavy rainfall, which have caused a great decline in the
fish production business in these areas;
• Increases in the severity of storms have resulted in the flooding of fish ponds, especially those
sited in wetlands and farmlands nationwide;
• The viability of inland fisheries is threatened by increased salinity and shrinking rivers and lakes;
• Lower rainfall and drought have shrunk Lake Chad, which provides a lifeline to nearly
30 million people in four countries (Nigeria, Cameroon, Chad, and Niger), to about 36 per
cent of its original size; and,
• The estimated rise in sea level by up to 1.9 feet by 2100 will see several of Nigerian coastal
states being submerged in water, resulting in the disruption of the life and activities of the
inhabitants as well as wreaking great havoc on the ecological balance. It will also negatively
affect the following: beach-based tourism as the beaches and lagoons will be submerged by the
sea; the country’s transport systems will require costly changes to ports, coastal roads, railways
and inland navigation; the destruction of other infrastructure such as oil well plants and indus-
trial layouts that can hamper productivity and efficiency in the sector; oil production wells in
the coastal regions will be submerged by sea level rise of 1–3 meters, which will cut down oil
production and other commercial activities, costing Nigeria $43 billion in GDP over 30 years.
Until recently, Nigeria did not have a climate change adaptation strategy. She now has a
National Adaptation Strategy and Plan of Action on Climate Change, which was published in 2011.
Additionally, the Nigerian Government has developed a governance structure to manage the
national response to climate change (BNRCC 2011). This includes the following:
• The creation of a national focal point –the Special Climate Change Unit (SCCU) within the
Federal Ministry of Environment;
• The establishment of an Inter-ministerial Coordinating Committee on Climate Change;
• The development of a National Climate Change Policy and Response Strategy;
• The development of a Strategic Framework for Voluntary Nationally Appropriate Mitigation
Action (NAMA) program; and,
• The involvement of several other government agencies in climate change adaptation issues.
They include the Nigerian Meteorological Agency (NIMET), the National Emergency
Management Authority (NEMA), and the National Planning Commission (NPC).
314
Resilience, mitigation, adaptation strategy
• The exclusion of the vast majority of the stakeholders, especially the low-income, the poor
and vulnerable populations, in the policy formulation and implementation processes;
• A national adaptation strategy that fails to address the differential impacts of climate change on
women and men, on youth and ethnic communities (Moran 2011).
• A failed political system that is incapable of addressing long-term national issues; and
• A massively corrupt state bureaucracy.
• The federal and state governments are inept and incapable to deliver basic social service;
• Corruption is widespread and deep-rooted at all the levels of government bureaucracy;
• The legal system is dysfunctional;
• Government institutions are so exceedingly weak and insubstantial that they are unable to
address a multitude of security threats to the country such as the growth of criminal violence,
widespread civil conflicts and environmental degradation.
• In short, Nigeria is “unable or unwilling to provide essential public services, which include
fostering equitable and sustainable economic growth, governing legitimately, ensuring physical
security, and delivering basic services” (Rice and Patrick 2008, p. 5)
Fund for Peace’s Failed State Index, in ranking Nigeria as 14th in 2011, noted that Nigeria’s
worst-scoring indicators were Group Grievance (9.6), Uneven Development (9.0), Legitimacy
of the State (9.0), Public Services (9.0), Security Apparatus (9.1), and Factionalized Elites (9.5).
The country’s deep grievances along religious and communal lines have resulted in violence in
the Niger Delta region, the Middle Belt, and the north. There is also endemic corruption and
deep distrust of the state, inadequate public services, and security forces that often operate with
impunity. The country is also subject to campaigns of violence by a number of militant and mil-
itia groups. Finally, there are deep divisions among the political elite.
Similarly, Nwabueze (2018) used Google’s Failed State Index in his analysis of Nigeria
and concluded that the country “is now qualified as a failed state”. Google’s 12 indicators
that measure a state’s vulnerability to collapse are (Nwabueze 2018): demographic pressures
resulting from drought, crop failure; incidence of massive movement of refugees and intern-
ally displaced persons; civil disorders caused by ethnic, racial or religious conflicts; chronic
and sustained human flight; uneven economic development along group lines as manifested
in group-based inequality in opportunities for education, jobs, and economic advancement,
and as measured by group-based poverty levels, infant mortality rates; sharp and/or severe eco-
nomic decline as measured by a progressive economic decline of the society as a whole (using
per capita income, GNP, debt, child mortality rate, poverty levels, business failures); endemic
corruption or profiteering by ruling elites and resistance to transparency, accountability and
free elections; widespread loss of popular confidence in state institutions and processes; pro-
gressive deterioration of public services particularly basic state functions that serve the people,
including failure to protect citizens from terrorism and violence and to provide essential ser-
vices, such as health, education, sanitation, public transportation; widespread violation of human
rights; private security apparatuses, and “praetorian” guards operating with impunity more or
315
Adenrele Awotona
316
Resilience, mitigation, adaptation strategy
Conclusion
In the short term, nothing at this stage will slow or reverse the desertification of northern
Nigeria and Iraq or coastal erosion in southern Nigeria due to rising sea levels. Nevertheless,
there are several excellent proposals for mitigating Nigeria and Iraq’s climate change problem.
The difficulty, however, is not a lack of good ideas. It is one of implementation, funding and
political will. Without a plan to fund projects that will create more efficient electricity grids,
water projects, and food programs, Nigeria and Iraq will continue to descend into political
instability and, with it, their respective regions. According to Moran (2011), although Nigeria
was the top recipient of foreign aid in Africa between 2005 and 2008 (11.64 per cent), inter-
national aid for climate change adaptation “makes up a small percentage of total development
aid” dedicated to the country. Consequently, just as in Iraq, the way to increase Nigeria’s
climate change resilience is to provide an influx of money and expertise (both planning and
technical), the management of which must be closely monitored by the donor countries in
order to ensure transparency.
Specifically, the new international resources should be invested in the following areas, amongst
others (Ijeoma 2012):
• A comprehensive and affordable health care system (to eliminate infectious and food-borne
diseases; to engage in widespread information campaigns to help people adapt before any dis-
aster, and after it, by aiding recovery from harm);
• Suitable water management policies;
• Insurance programs to mitigate risk;
• Weather indexed agriculture (so that farmers could adapt their crops to a climate rife with
both drought and flooding; and, use seeds that can withstand higher temperatures, more or less
water, and fluctuating crop seasons);
• Climate resilient housing projects (which use sustainable and efficient building practices);
• Improved weather prediction technology; and,
• The development of a resilient, localized economy.
Political stability and the smooth functioning of sectarian relations are basic requirements for an
effective governance and crucial for climate change mitigation strategies to succeed in both Iraq
and Nigeria. Therefore, these need to be integrated into national and local development plans.
317
Adenrele Awotona
Note
1 The costs of defense, policing, and courts continue to be quite high. In 2014, the World Bank estimated
that defense, public order, and safety (including police, courts, and prisons) together accounted for 16
per cent of Iraq’s total expenditure or 9.2 per cent of GDP (Bisca 2017).
References
Awotona, A. (ed.) (2008). Rebuilding Sustainable Communities in Iraq: Policies, Programs and International
Perspectives. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing,.
Awotona, A. and Donlan, M. (2008). Reconstructing Iraq: Massive investment, little sustainable results.
In: A. Awotona (ed.): Rebuilding Sustainable Communities in Iraq: Policies, Programs and international
perspectives. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Bala-Gbogbo, E. (2011). Nigeria’s oil revenue rose 46% to $59 billion in 2010 on improved security.
Bloomberg. April 14. www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-04-14/nigeria-s-oil-revenue-rose-46-to-59-
billion-in-2010-on-improved-security.html. (Accessed March 15, 2012).
BBC (2018). Iraq country profile, May. www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-14542954. May 21.
Bisca, P.M. (2017). Stabilizing Iraq: A job for soldiers, diplomats, and economists. Brookings, October
30. www.brookings.edu/blog/future-development/2017/10/30/stabilizing-iraq-a-job-for-soldiers-
diplomats-and-economists/. (Accessed August 16, 2018).
Building Nigeria’s Response to Climate Change (BNRCC) (2011). National Adaptation Strategy and Plan
of Action on Climate Change For Nigeria (NASPA –CCN). November. www.naspanigeria.org/docs/
2011/october/naspa-ccn.pdf.
Business & Human Rights Resource Center website (2018). Human rights impacts of oil pollution: Nigeria.
www.business-humanrights.org/en/human-r ights-impacts-of-oil-pollution-nigeria-40. (Accessed
December 5, 2018).
Daramola, C.O., Amali, I.O.O., Yusuf, A., and Bello, M.B.. (2014). Factors hindering retention of basic
school teachers in border areas as perceived by educational stakeholder in Katsina State, Nigeria.
Public Policy and Administration Research. 4 (10). www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/PPAR/article/
viewFile/16419/16910. (Accessed August 15, 2018).
Dobbins, J.F., Laipson, E., Cobban, H., and Korb, L.J. (2009) US Withdrawal from Iraq: What are the
regional implications?. Rand Corporation Middle East Policy. 16 (3): 1–27
Ebele, N.E. and Emodi, N.V. (2016). Climate change and its impact in Nigerian economy. Journal of
Scientific Research & Reports. 10(6): 1–13. www.journalrepository.org/media/journals/JSRR_22/
2016/Apr/Emodi1062016JSRR25162.pdf. (Accessed August 22, 2018).
Folami, A.O. and Karimu, O.O. (2010). Climate change and cross border crime in Nigeria. Paper presented
at the 250th Anniversary Conference Organized for the Royal Norwegian Society of Sciences and
Letter on Climate Change and Security in Trondhiem, Norway.
Fund for Peace (2011). The Failed States Index 2011. www.fundforpeace.org/global/?q=fsi.
Ifowodo, Ogaga (2009). Debate: Is Nigeria a Failed State? BBC, July 7. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/
8112800.stm. (Accessed August 16, 2018).
Ijeoma, S. (2012). Nigeria and climate change adaptation. Journal of the International Society for
Sustainability Professionals. May. www.sustainabilityprofessionals.org/sites/default/files/May%202012-
Nigeria%20and%20Climate%20Change%20Adaptation.pdf. (Accessed December 5, 2018).
Ikhide, E. (2018). At last President Buhari admits Nigeria is a failed state. Sahara Reporters. May 23. http://
saharareporters.com/2018/05/23/last-president-buhari-admits-nigeria-f ailed-state-erasmus-ikhide.
(Accessed August 29, 2018).
IRIN News (2010).Climate change: adaptation strategy hit parade. August 9. www.irinnews.org/Report.
aspx?ReportId=90104. (Accessed February 5, 2011).
Johnson, T. (2011). Boko Haram, The Council on Foreign Relations, Washington, DC. December 27.
www.cfr.org/africa/boko-haram/p25739?cid=ppc-Google-boko_haram-122711&gclid=CP6zker9z6
4CFYbe4AodTzQYQA. (Accessed March 5, 2012).
Moran, A. (ed.) (2011). Climate change adaptation in Nigeria: Key considerations for decision makers.
March 8. Working Paper. www.files.ethz.ch/isn/133060/2011-03.pdf. (Accessed March 5, 2012).
Mallat, C. (1998). Religious militancy in contemporary Iraq: Muhammad Baqer as-Sadr and the Sunni-Shia
paradigm. Third World Quarterly. 10 (2): 699–729
318
Resilience, mitigation, adaptation strategy
Nwabueze, B. (2018). Why “NIGERIA” is now qualified as a failed state. Vanguard. February 3. www.
vanguardngr.com/2018/02/nigeria-now-qualified-failed-state/. (Accessed August 29, 2018).
Obayelu, A.E. (2007). Effects of corruption and economic reforms on economic growth and develop-
ment Lessons from Nigeria. Paper presented at the African Economic Conference. www.uneca.org/
aec/documents/Abiodun%20Elijah%20OBAYELU.pdf. (Accessed February 16, 2012).
PwC (2017). Impact of Corruption on Nigeria’s Economy www.pwc.com/ng/en/publications/impact-of-
corruption-on-nigerias-economy.html. (Accessed August 17, 2018).
Rice, S.E. and Patrick, S. (2008). Index of State Weakness in the developing world. Washington, DC: The
Brookings Institution. www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/rc/reports/2008/02_weak_states_index/
02_weak_states_index.pdf.
Sayne, A. (2011). Climate Change Adaptation and Conflict in Nigeria, United States Institute of Peace.
www.usip.org/files/resources/Climate_Change_Nigeria.pdf. (Accessed February 8, 2012).
Sirkeci, I. (2005). War in Iraq: Environment of insecurity and international migration. International
Migration. 43 (4): 197–214.
Sowers, J. and Weinthal, E. (2010). Climate change adaptation in the Middle East and North Africa: Challenges
and opportunities. The Dubai Initiative (A joint venture between the Dubai School of Government
(DSG) and the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University). September.
UNDP (2018). Iraq sets up national authority to mobilize global climate finance, manage environment
and climate change challenges. www.iq.undp.org/content/iraq/en/home/presscenter/pressreleases/
2018/06/27/iraq-sets-up-national-authority-to-mobilize-global-climate-finan.html. (Accessed August
13, 2018).
UNDP, UNEP and UNICEF (2012). Climate change in Iraq fact sheet, June https://reliefweb.int/sites/
reliefweb.int/files/resources/Climate%20change%20In%20Iraq%20Fact%20sheet%20-%20English.pdf.
(Accessed August 13, 2018).
USAID (2017). Climate risk profile – Iraq. www.climatelinks.org/sites/default/files/asset/document/
2017Mar3_GEMS_Climate%20Risk%20Profile_Iraq_FINAL.pdf. (Accessed August 14, 2018).
World Population Review (2018). http://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/iraq-population/.
(Accessed August 16, 2018).
319
24
Resilience, reconstruction, and
sustainable development in Chile
Elizabeth Wagemann and Margarita Greene
320
Sustainable development in Chile
where the objective is not to return to “normality” but to evolve. The Chilean Commission for
Resilience to Disasters of Natural Origin has defined resilience as the capacity to “absorb, adapt
and recover” from the effects of a threat, to achieve “the preservation, restoration and improve-
ment of its structures, basic functions and identity” (CNID-CREDEN 2016; González et al.
2018). Although this definition is seen as conservative, based on its reactive scope, it still considers
the improvement and transformation of the initial status. From this perspective, the transforma-
tive potential of resilience can be linked to the idea of sustainable development.
To achieve sustainable development, the context of vulnerability and the risks that affect
communities need to be understood. This requires observing, assessing, and understanding
risks, strengthening coordination, investing in resilience, and improving preparedness, response,
recovery, rehabilitation, and reconstruction (UNISDR 2015). Moreover, the integration of pre-
and post-disaster processes in a simultaneous and multisectorial manner has been identified as a
way of improving the response and enabling future development, both in the international con-
text by the Sendai Framework for Action (UNISDR 2015) and in the Chilean national context
by the National Platform for Disaster Risk Reduction (ONEMI, n.d.-b).
Chilean context
Chile is located in the south-western part of South America, and its geological and geomor-
phological evolution is defined by the subduction of the Nazca and Antarctic plates beneath
the South American Plate at the Chile-Peru Trench (Cecioni and Pineda 2009). Due to this
situation, Chile faces many hazards, such as earthquakes and tsunamis, which affect vulnerable
populations located in high-risk zones. In addition, Chile is recurrently exposed to wildfires,
volcanic eruptions, and hydro-climatological events such as floods and mudslides. Consequently,
Chile is a natural laboratory for learning on disaster management, risk reduction, and on the
transformative potential of natural disasters, thus contributing to the contemporary discussion
on resilience and sustainable development. Past experiences have influenced and improved urban
development policies, especially regarding construction codes and response to disasters, but still
have to incorporate the evolutionary aspect of resilience.
On the one hand, several appraisals have been conducted both quantitatively and qualita-
tively, regarding emergency and reconstruction processes, and the country’s capacity to respond
to emergencies in an effective way has been praised. In this line, the normative and institu-
tional framework to respond to and prepare for disasters in Chile has been developed after
major catastrophes.The country building codes have been revised after big seismic events leading
to a safer behavior of buildings, especially in urban areas, and have significantly reduced the
number of casualties. The Law of Urbanism and Constructions was created after the earth-
quake of 1928; the 1960 earthquake and tsunami gave rise to the National Emergency Office
(ONEMI); and recently the consequences of the earthquake and tsunami of 2010 has motivated
the proposal of the new National Emergency and Civil Protection System and the National
Civil Protection Agency (DIPECHO 2012). Chile has been working towards a national policy
on disaster risk reduction (DRR) that should include the phases of prevention, preparation,
response, and recovery (ONEMI 2014). On the other hand, despite these efforts, recent events
still cause large-scale destruction, especially to the housing stock, and the emergency and recon-
struction processes have focused excessively on housing, without achieving an integral urban
perspective. Reconstruction has been addressed with a market-driven approach, where the state
distributes a series of subsidies and incentives among the affected population. Although this has
proven successful in terms of attracting the private sector to the reconstruction process, and
thus producing large numbers of dwellings, it has generated other problems, such as poor spatial
321
Elizabeth Wagemann and Margarita Greene
quality (housing and neighborhoods), lack of a global urban vision and displacement of affected
residents due to speculators targeting their sites –now “available” after the disaster –with higher
prices.
What is the transformative potential of reconstruction programs in Chile that can enable sus-
tainable development and resilience? To address this question, this chapter presents two cases: the
earthquake and tsunami of 2010 and the Valparaiso fire of 2014. Both cases are selected due
to their scale and impact in terms of destruction of housing caused by two different hazards.
Through these cases, the mechanisms of reaction and adaptation carried out by the institutions
in charge and the affected population after the disaster are discussed.These cases allow discussing
the effectiveness of reconstruction processes from the perspective of resilience as an opportunity
for transformation that allows sustainable development.
322
Sustainable development in Chile
323
Elizabeth Wagemann and Margarita Greene
Shelters, emergency housing, and subsidies were arranged by the government, but the process
presented many challenges such as construction of shelters on irregular land and poor quality
of the temporary houses. Also, the central location of the event meant than the number of
volunteers surpassed the capacity of the state to coordinate them and to accommodate them in
the area, providing basic shelter and food. To control this situation, the authorities restricted the
volunteers, who could only provide support after registration and vaccination against tetanus,
influenza, and meningitis (ONEMI et al. 2018). The municipality provided communal shelters
for the affected population, although most chose to stay in their plots, since they feared eradica-
tion given that they had no formal tenure and it was mainly informal housing.
The Ministry of the Interior was ready to deliver 1,600 temporary shelters to the affected
families (ONEMI et al. 2018).The coordination and selection of the beneficiaries was organized
by the municipality, and was due to be carried out in accordance to the location and requirements
of the Local Authority Masterplan (Plan Regulador Comunal). However, as much of the affected
area corresponded to informal land occupation, and the state cannot build on informal land or
in risk areas, this approach could not be implemented. Due to the lack of land for temporary
housing, the government provided temporary lease and host subsidies. The temporary lease is
a subsidy provided to those affected to rent a dwelling while a permanent housing solution is
being built, and the host subsidy is a financial aid provided to families that host those affected
during the reconstruction process. However, affected families were reluctant to accept these
subsidies because they had to abandon their land, risking losing their “occupation rights”. The
scarcity of available land within the urban area to relocate affected families, whether for transi-
tional or for permanent housing on the one hand, and the speed of the families in rebuilding
with lightweight materials on their informal plots to avoid other occupants to settle on them,
made the process more difficult to coordinate (ONEMI et al. 2018).
Another issue was the quality of the shelters. Similar to the ones built after the 2010 earthquake,
the government was forced to provide elements to improve them, such as insulation equipment,
electrical kits, paint, and sanitary solutions (ONEMI et al. 2018). Although the response capacity
of the government offices was celebrated, the complementary kits were not good enough to pro-
vide minimum standards, since in most cases the sum of parts did not result in a good quality tran-
sitional house. Therefore, the quality of the houses was widely questioned due to their minimum
size, material conditions (little insulation, poor durability, not adequate for the level of develop-
ment of the country), and the lack of involvement of communities in the decisions (Wagemann
and Moris 2018). For example, a month after the disaster many of the emergency houses leaked
with the first rain. The results and critique led to its redesign by civil society organizations, such
as TECHO, Fundación Vivienda, and private organizations, such as Térmica, CINTAC, and
PREVIRED, who focused on building better quality temporary housing. However, many of
these houses were built on plots with irregular tenure and in risk areas, creating other problems.
Consequently, the government introduced a new requirement, which included an authorization
signed by the plot owner to allow his or her relatives to build a temporary house.
324
Sustainable development in Chile
(1) Non- structural measures: Alert and early communication systems. Failures in
communication after the 2010 earthquake led the government to improve the communica-
tion systems. The Hydrographic and Oceanographic Service of the Armed Forces (SHOA),
the National Geology and Mining Service (Sernageomin), and Regional Development
Undersecretaries (SUBDERE), have coordinated the installation of signage, early warning, and
alarm systems, information systems, and education of communities. Also, ONEMI has used
their website and social media to inform the population about hazards and how to be prepared
for future events (ONEMI, n.d.-a).These systems were applied during the 2015 earthquake,
when around one million Chileans were efficiently evacuated from the tsunami risk zone after
receiving text alerts in their mobile phones and hearing evacuation sirens (CFE-DM 2017).
(2) Structural measures: Tsunami resilience. Promenades and elevated housing were
developed in coastal communities after the 2010 tsunami, with mixed results.The promenades
increased awareness, boosted economic resilience (due to tourist-related food businesses),
and reinforced a culture of preparedness, although residents do not feel they provide sub-
stantial physical protection due to their insufficient height (Khew et al. 2015). On the other
hand, elevated housing was seen to separate large family units, due to its small size, and
increasing conflict among citizens.
(3) Temporary housing standards. Encouraged by the experience from 2010 and 2014, a
working group called “Transitional Habitability” was created including representatives from
ONEMI, MINVU, and MDS, researchers from academic institutions, stakeholders from
NGOs, and private companies (Wagemann and Moris 2018). The group aimed to update
the standards of emergency housing, to define criteria for the location, administration, and
operation of emergency settlements, and to provide guidelines for the process that goes from
emergency to reconstruction (Wagemann and Moris 2018).The concept of “transitional hab-
itability” was defined as adequate shelter provided to serve between the emergency and the
permanent reconstruction, allowing time to face a sustainable development through better
planning (Garay et al. 2016; Moris et al. 2015;Wagemann and Moris 2018).As a result, ONEMI
defined a new standard that was applied after floods and mudslides that affected the country
in 2015, and since then has been revised and improved. The new houses are bigger (24 m2),
with new materials (structural insulated panels), and sanitary modules. The new requirements
were made mandatory, therefore all government’s providers improved the quality of the tran-
sitional houses. The new model proved to be of better quality and faster to build, but it also
presented some problems, which are currently being addressed, such as the need to include a
holistic perspective including the design of the temporary settlements and the definition of
roles, responsibilities, and management of them (Wagemann and Moris 2018).
(4) Planning in the reconstruction phase. MINVU is the national institution in charge of
planning and providing permanent housing; nevertheless, since the 1980s the main social
housing programs implemented by the government consists of the delivery of vouchers
to the selected applicants, who then buy houses in the open market. This system has been
described as “subsidy to the demand” and has been successful in terms of the number of
houses built and delivered, but not so in terms of housing quality and urban impact, with
an unequal provision of services and equipment and a general lack of urban planning. This
weakness has persisted in the process of reconstruction (Moris 2016; Wagemann and Moris
2018).Therefore, an overall planning framework at the local level including the participation
of residents is still needed (Comerio 2014). Nevertheless, after the 2010 earthquake and tsu-
nami, efforts were made to develop planning instruments, such as the Sustainable Strategic
Reconstruction Plans (PRES), the Urban Regeneration Plans for Inner Cities (PRU), the
Coastal Border Reconstruction Plans (PRBC), and emergency plans for each region and
325
Elizabeth Wagemann and Margarita Greene
municipality (Wagemann and Moris 2018). The aim of these plans was to develop urban
guides for the recovery of cities, although they were not part of the official structure of ter-
ritorial planning instruments (Moris and Walker 2015).
(5) Participation process during emergency. Although the government made an effort in
including public opinion and participation in the reconstruction process, quick decisions
based on limited information were made, especially regarding private residential housing,
conflicting with resident’s aspirations, such as the size of the houses (Khew et al. 2015), or
the desire to stay in their location versus reconstructing on another place. The difficulty to
coordinate the large number of institutions involved in the process, and the need to define a
macro-scale plan, made it difficult, for example, to include small-scale details, such as custom-
izing evacuation routes (Khew et al. 2015; MINVU 2010a; Platt 2012). Also, disaster mitiga-
tion in new construction was carried out with limited knowledge, such as minimum height
and materials (Khew et al. 2015). The experience showed insufficient institutional capacity,
scarce resources, lack of influence of local authorities in decision making and the reliance on
the private sector (Khew et al. 2015). This meant that, during the emergency, coordination
was undertaken by the regional or national level, generating discontinuity in the process of
local learning and transfer, not supporting decentralization, a major problem in Chile.
Experience from the cases presented here suggests that key elements to improve the institu-
tional response and overall spatial result after a disaster include articulating the various phases of
the post-catastrophe process and incorporating inhabitants’ needs from the first days of the dis-
aster. Nevertheless, without underestimating the value of these lessons and improvements in the
systems, they still correspond to a reactive approach to disaster, rather than a proposal for future
sustainable development.To see these events as an opportunity to create more resilient landscapes
and urban settlements in Chile should not only allow for better use of time and resources but for
improving previous problematic situations. This means using the catastrophe as an opportunity
for development beyond baseline conditions. An appropriate framework for emergency and
reconstruction strategies, including the transformative opportunity of these events, design should
be the next step for the Chilean context.
References
American Red Cross Multi-Disciplinary Team (2011). Report on the 2010 Chilean Earthqueake and
Tsunami Response (Open-file report No. 2011–1053, 1.1). Reston, Virginia: US Geological Survey.
https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2011/1053/.
Berkes, F. and Folke, C. (1998). Linking Social and Ecological Systems: Management Practices and Social
Mechanisms for Building Resilience. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Bluth, A. (2010). Reconstrucción Post Terremoto ¿Por qué fallaron las mediaguas? LIGNUM. Bosque,
Madera, Tecnología (Techno Press, Fundación Chile): 32–40.
Cárdenas-Jirón, L.A. (ed.). (2013). The Chilean Earthquake and Tsunami 2010: A Multidisciplinary Study
of Mw8.8, Maule. Southampton ; Boston, MA: WIT Press.
Cecioni, A. and Pineda, V. (2009). Geology and geomorphology of natural hazards and human-induced
disasters in Chile. Developments in Earth Surface Processes. 13: 379–413. https://doi.org/10.1016/
S0928-2025(08)10018–9.
CFE-DM (2017). Chile: Disaster Management Reference Handbook. Hawaii: Center for Excellence in
Disaster Management and Humanitarian Assistance.
CNID-CREDEN (2016). Hacia un Chile Resiliente frente a Desastres. Una Oportunidad. Estrategia
Nacional de Investigación, Desarrollo e Innovación para un Chile resiliente frente a desastres de origen
natural. Santiago, Chile: Consejo Nacional de Innovación para el Desarrollo (CNID). www.cnid.cl/
wp-content/uploads/2016/12/INFORME-DESASTRES-NATURALES.pdf.
326
Sustainable development in Chile
Comerio, M.C. (2014). Housing recovery lessons from Chile. Journal of the American Planning Association.
80(4): 340–350. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944363.2014.968188.
Davoudi, S. (2012). Resilience: A bridging concept or a dead end? Planning Theory & Practice. 13(2): 299–
307. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649357.2012.677124.
Davoudi, S. (2014). Deconstructing resilience. Scroope: The Cambridge Architecture Journal. 23.
DIPECHO (2012).Analisis de Riesgos de Desastres en Chile.VII Plan de Acción DIPECHO en Sudamérica
2011–2012-Departamento de Ayuda Humanitaria de la Comisión Europea. Santiago: Unesco. www.
unesco.org/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/FIELD/Santiago/pdf/Analisis-de-r iesgos-de-desastres-en-
Chile.pdf.
EERI (2010). Learning from Earthquakes. The Mw 8.8 Chile Earthquake of February 27, 2010. Special
Earthquake Report. Oakland, CA: Earthquake Engineering Research Institute (EERI). Retrieved from
www.eeri.org/site/images/eeri_newsletter/2010_pdf/Chile10_insert.pdf.
FOSIS (2010). Manual de recomendaciones técnicas para la vivienda de emergencia post-terremoto.
Habitabildad FOSIS 2010. Santiago: Ministerio de Planificacion, Gobierno de Chile. www.
plataformaarquitectura.cl/cl/02-53543/manual-de-recomendaciones-tecnicas-para-la-vivienda-de-
emergencia-post-terremoto.
Garay, R.M., Pfenniger, F., Tapia, R., and Larenas, J. (2016). Viviendas de emergencia; criterios técnicos y
reglamento para estándares de calidad de viviendas y conjuntos de viviendas en asentamientos provisorios
(pp. 120–140). Santiago: Fundación Vivienda. http://repositorio.uchile.cl/handle/2250/141931.
Glantz, M. and Jamieson, D. (2000). Societal response to hurricane mitch and intra-versus intergenerational
equity issues: Whose norms should apply? Risk Analysis. 20: 869– 882. https://
doi.org/ 10.1111/
0272-4332.206080.
Gobierno de Chile (2010). Plan de Reconstrucción Terremoto y Maremoto del 27 de febrero de 2010.
Chile: Gobierno de Chile. www.preventionweb.net/files/28726_plandereconstruccinagosto2010.pdf.
Gobierno de Chile (2012). Reporte de Cumplimiento de la Reconstruccion del Terremoto del 27 de
Febrero de 2010. Santiago: Ministerio Secretaria General de la Presidencia. www.preventionweb.net/
files/28726_reportecumplimientoreconstruccionen.pdf.
Gobierno de Chile (2013). Reporte de Cumplimiento de la Reconstruccion del Terremoto del 27 de
Febrero de 2010. Santiago: Ministerio Secretaria General de la Presidencia. http:// issuu.com/
gobiernodechile/docs/130226_reporte_cumplimiento_reconstrucci_n_27f2010.
González, D.P., Monsalve, M., Moris, R., and Herrera, C. (2018). Risk and resilience monitor: Development
of multiscale and multilevel indicators for disaster risk management for the communes and urban areas
of Chile. Applied Geography. 94: 262–271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2018.03.004.
Granadillo, M. (2010). Chile Terremoto. Informe de Situacion n.18, 17–23 de Mayo (No. 18). Chile: United
Nations, Oficina del Coordinador Residente. http://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/
9BE9F3C7BD2F009B4925772F0000AC68-informe_completo.pdf.
Holling, C.S. (1973). Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annual Review of Ecology and
Systematics. 4: 1–23.
Holling, C.S. (1986). The resilience of terrestrial ecosystems: Local surprise and global change. In: W. Clark
and R. Munn (eds.): Sustainable Development of the Biosphere. London: Cambridge University Press,
292–317.
Jünemann, R., de la Llera, J.C., Hube, M.A., Cifuentes, L.A., and Kausel, E. (2015). A statistical analysis of
reinforced concrete wall buildings damaged during the 2010, Chile earthquake. Engineering Structures.
82: 168–185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2014.10.014.
Khew,Y.T. J., Jarzebski, M.P., Dyah, F., San Carlos, R., Gu, J., Esteban, M., … Akiyama, T. (2015). Assessment
of social perception on the contribution of hard-infrastructure for tsunami mitigation to coastal com-
munity resilience after the 2010 tsunami: Greater Concepcion area, Chile. International Journal of
Disaster Risk Reduction. 13: 324–333. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2015.07.013.
Lewontin, R.C. (1969).The meaning of stability. Diversity and stability of ecological systems. In: Brookhaven
Symposia in Biology N. 22. New York: Brookhaven.
Ministerio de Desarrollo Social, Gobierno de Chile (2010, March 21). Ministro Kast informa sobre la
construcción de viviendas de emergencia en Penco. www.ministeriodesarrollosocial.gob.cl/noticias/
2010/03/21/ministro-kast-informa-sobre-la-construccion-de-viviendas-de-emergencia-en-penco.
MINVU (2010a). Planes Maestros de Borde Costero (PRES y PRBC18), PRES/PRBC18 §. www.minvu.
cl/opensite_20101207165334.aspx.
327
Elizabeth Wagemann and Margarita Greene
MINVU. (2010b, March). Lineamientos Basicos para Asentamientos de Emergencia. MINVU, Division
Desarrollo Urbano. www.plataformaurbana.cl/archive/2010/03/12/lineamientos-basicos-para-
asentamientos-de-emergencia/.
MINVU (2011a). Programa de Reconstruccion de Vivienda. Guia de Alternativas de Solucion y Pasos a
Seguir para Obtener un Subsidio Habitacional. Ministerio de Vivienda y Urbanismo, Gobierno de Chile
(Third). Santiago: MINVU.
MINVU. (2011b). Reconstrucción Nacional. Programa Aldeas. Secretaria Ejecutiva Desarrollo de Barrios.
www.minvu.cl/opensite_20100813175824.aspx.
MINVU (2017). Reconstruccion [Institutional]. www.minvu.cl/opensite_20150401161345.aspx.
Moris, R. (2016). From government-led to market-based housing programs. In: Slum Upgrading and Housing
in Latin America. New York: Inter-American Development Bank, 13–23. https://publications.iadb.org/
bitstream/handle/11319/7879/Slum-Upgrading-and-Housing-in-Latin-America.pdf?sequence=1.
Moris, R., Pacheco, C., and Ketels, F. (2015). Sistema integrado de respuesta para la provisión de habitabilidad
transitoria. Santiago: Centro Nacional de Investigación para la Gestión Integrada del Riesgo de Desastres
Naturales (CIGIDEN).
Moris, R. and Walker, R. (2015). Pelluhue. Reconstrucción de territorios vulnerables en un escenario
de reconstrucción inequitativa. El caso de Pelluhue, Chile. In: Learning from 27F. A Comparative
Assessment Of Urban Reconstruction Processes after the 2010 Eathquake in Chile. Santiago: Latin Lab,
GSAPP Columbia University & Santiago Research Cell, 103–122.
ONEMI (2014). Política Nacional para la Gestión de Riesgo de Desastre. Santiago, Chile. www.onemi.gov.
cl/plataforma-de-reduccion-de-r iesgos-de-desastres/.
ONEMI (n.d.-a). Familia Preparada [Institutional]. http://familiapreparada.cl/.
ONEMI (n.d.-b). Plataforma Nacional para la Reducción del Riesgo de Desastres –PNRRD. www.
onemi.gov.cl/plataforma-de-reduccion-de-r iesgos-de-desastres/.
ONEMI, MINVU, MINDES, CIGIDEN, CITRID, Fundación Vivienda, … TECHO- Chile (2018).
Habitabilidad Transitoria en Desastres. Santiago: ONEMI.
Platt, S. (2012). Reconstruction in Chile Post 2010 Earthquake. ReBuilDD Field Trip September 2011.
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Architectural Research Ltd. www.carltd.com/ sites/
carwebsite/files/
Reconstruction%20in%20Chile%20Post%202010%20Earthquake_0.pdf.
PNUD (2017). Recuperación Resiliente. www.undp.org/content/undp/es/home/ourwork/climate-and-
disaster-resilience/resilient-recovery.html.
Simmie, J. and Martin, R. (2010). The economic resilience of regions: towards an evolutionary approach.
Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society. 3(1): 27–43. https://doi.org/10.1093/cjres/
rsp029.
Tobin, G.A., (1999). Sustainability and community resilience: the holy grail of hazards planning?
Global Environment Change Part B Environment Hazards. 1: 13– 25. https:// doi.org/10.1016/
S1464-2867(99)00002-9.
UNISDR (2015). Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030. Geneva: United Nations.
http://gndr.org/images/newsite/PDFs/SFDRR.pdf.
Verdugo, R. and González, J. (2015). Liquefaction- induced ground damages during the 2010 Chile
earthquake. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering. 79: 280– 295. https:// doi.org/10.1016/
j.soildyn.2015.04.016.
Wagemann, E. (2017). Need for adaptation. Transformation of temporary houses. Disasters. 41(4). http://
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/disa.12228/full.
Wagemann, E. and Moris, R. (2018). Transitional habitability: Solutions for post- catastrophe in
Chile. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction. 31: 514– 525. https:// doi.org/10.1016/
j.ijdrr.2018.06.007.
328
Part IV
Resilience building in practice
25
Urban risk readdressed
Bridging resilience-seeking
practices in African cities
331
A. Allen, B. Koroma, M. Manda, E. Osuteye, and R. Lambert
is thus a necessary step towards the disruption of risk traps.This requires engendering grassroots-
led processes to assess not only how, where, why, and with what consequences risk accumulates
but also what and whose responses are adopted. We therefore argue that it is not enough to look
at the question of resilience of what and whom, but also by whom.
The discussion focuses on what and whose capacities to act are embedded in resilience-seeking
practices and explores the processes and relations that expand or constrain the political space
to bridge the resilience-seeking practices adopted collectively and individually by those most
vulnerable to risk with those of the state and external support agencies. Over time, the notion
of “political space” has been developed by different scholars with different but interconnected
meanings and aims. Webster and Engberg-Petersen (2002) define political spaces as the institu-
tional channels, political discourses, and social and political practices through which the poor and
their supporting organizations can pursue poverty reduction. McGee (2004) takes this notion
as a means to examine specific moments or junctures where citizens and policymakers come
together, and the opportunities arising from such moments to abridge actions and interactions
“sometimes signifying transformative potential” (p. 16). Cornwall and Coehlo (2006) concep-
tualize such spaces as opportunities that might advance democratizing effects, enabling ordinary
women and men to claim citizenship and affect governance processes. Building upon these
conceptualizations, we use the notion of “political space” to explore the whereabouts of the
nexus between power, space, and the networked boundaries that delineate fields of possible
action (Hayward 2000). This entails an interrogation of how the resilience-seeking discoursive
and material practices adopted by national and local governments, external support agencies
(ESAs) and local communities converge into specific geographies and the social, political, and
material resources deployed in the process by different actors.
Where risk accumulation cycles manifest and where actions are taken to mitigate, reduce,
or prevent such cycles has significant consequences for who is effectively reached by DRM
practices. Interrogating such practices at different scales unveils the real scope of decentralized
approaches to DRM not only to reach those most vulnerable to risk but also to include their
experience, learning, voice, and capacity to act. This involves travelling across the scales that
delineate (1) the policy “boundaries” of decentralized DRM bodies; (2) the actual “bound-
aries” under which DRM practices take place and articulate collective and individual resilience-
seeking practices; and (3) the micro scale at which risk is experienced. Travelling across these
three scales enables an understanding of why certain risk-accumulation processes remain more
invisible than others –both socially and spatially –and therefore restrict the capacity of localized
resilience-seeking efforts to tackle urban risk traps.
Another key consideration in the analysis is that of time, or, in other words, the need to
understand both risk trajectories and resilience-seeking practices in historical perspective. Doing
so allows capturing not only who tends to become trapped in risk accumulation cycles but
also what factors and processes shape their mobility in and out of risk trajectories. Such an
approach also enables the understanding of how risk is perceived and experienced, what learning
is acquired and applied to act upon risk, and how such learning travels or not from individual
to collective and city-wide resilience-seeking practices. Furthermore, a historical perspective
also allows us to understand the socially constructed processes that often result in the produc-
tion and reproduction of risk. Such processes might be connected, for instance, with the way
in which low-lying areas or steep slopes are built up, or man-made infrastructure developed
in a way that disrupts the ecological infrastructure of the city resulting in multiple hazards of
frequent occurrence such as localized floods, landslides and mudslides. Examining the way in
which specific risk-prone areas have been intervened over time reveals the actual drivers of risk
accumulation and the way in which ongoing resilience-seeking practices need to be reworked.
332
Resilience-seeking practices in Africa
The chapter reflects on the approach adopted to co-produce actionable knowledge on how
risk traps work and can be disrupted in collaboration with local communities in Freetown (Sierra
Leone) and Karonga (Malawi). The experience was part of the Urban Africa Risk Knowledge
(Urban ARK) project, and led by a team from the Bartlett Development Planning Unit (DPU),
University College London, the Sierra Leone Urban Research Centre (SLURC) and the Mzuzu
University in Malawi, in collaboration with a city-wide network of collectives of the urban
poor, NGOs, and local authorities. A similar methodological approach has been adopted in Lima
(Peru) (Allen et al. 2017).
The next section examines how risk accumulation works in the two contexts under study.
This is followed by a discussion of policy trajectories seeking to decentralize DRM. The section
that follows offers a critical examination of the junctures and disjunctures for transformative
change emerging along the process.There are then some final reflections on the challenges faced
to widen the political space of DRM governance and resilience-seeking practices in a relational
and inclusive way.
333
A. Allen, B. Koroma, M. Manda, E. Osuteye, and R. Lambert
In December 2009, four large Richter magnitude earthquakes experienced within two weeks
caused fatalities and significant damage to housing and infrastructure. The earthquakes also
compromised the integrity of the dyke, which over time become further damaged by soil mining
for brickmaking and via erosion, thus increasing flood risk. Considering the full spectrum of
risks facing Karonga’s inhabitants, Manda and Wanda (2017) contend that everyday risks may be
causing more premature deaths than disaster events; and that the cumulative impact of small-scale
events is larger than that of major disasters. A household survey by these authors revealed that,
despite the widespread impact of preventable diseases such as diarrhoea, cholera, and malaria, 56
per cent of households interviewed consider floods as the most serious hazard in Karonga, with
the majority living in flood-prone areas along the river where flooding is annual. Another key
problem is the location of social infrastructure and facilities in flood risk areas. Furthermore, there
is also evidence of a lack of awareness of the scale of risks to which inhabitants expose themselves
when settling in areas that are attractive because of ease of accessing land and fertile soil.
Although the whole of Karonga is exposed to many various hazards, risk accumulation is
most prevalent in three specific areas: the informal settlements, the areas along the river, and the
town center. Informal settlements house the largest proportion of the population, and are mainly
settled on customary land on the flood plain along the North Rukuru River, the lakeshore, and
encroachments in the artificial flood-control drainage channels constructed in the late 1970s.
Their inhabitants are highly vulnerable due to a combination of factors including insecure
tenure, poor housing quality, lack of or blocked drainage, and limited access to statal infrastruc-
ture and service provision because they are informal. Many of these challenges are associated
with urban development policy and practice that condemn the poor to occupy hazards-prone
areas in high density permanent and traditional housing.
The city of Freetown has experienced rapid urbanization and a significant population growth
rate of about 3 per cent per anum since 1985, in a country with the highest annual rainfall in
Africa. The origins of the city towards the end of the eighteenth century are well-documented
as the outcome of British philanthropists, abolitionists, and entrepreneurs to establish a slave-
free settlement in Africa (Adderley 2006; Banton 1969). Throughout the nineteenth century,
Freetown grew through the settlement of released slaves from all across West Africa by the Royal
British Navy’s West African Squadron.This explains the foundations of today’s largest segment of
the Christian Creole population. After Sierra Leone’s independence in 1961, Freetown received
further migrants from all the region, most of whom were Muslim. In 1991 a civil war that lasted
11 years destroyed much of Freetown’s infrastructure and economy, while ethnic violence in the
countryside forced mass migration into the city.
Freetown currently has a population of just over one million residents, making it the most
populous and densely settled city in Sierra Leone. Its rapid urbanization has contributed to the
proliferation and expansion of pockets of informal settlements.Today, this process is underpinned
by other factors than migration, notably, by a growing demand for proximal living to business
centers and markets, coupled with unaffordable land and housing in formalized areas.
The topography of Freetown, a peninsula constrained between the sea and the hills, limits
the spatial expansion of the city, forcing low-income groups to settle mostly on marginal lands.
The city has developed in three geographic areas: coastal settlements along rocky beaches of the
Atlantic Ocean; sprawling inland settlements along the Sierra Leone river estuary; and, thirdly,
hillside settlements in the steep peninsula hills of the city, which are rapidly encroaching into
the vital forestland towards the eastern end of the city. In these settlements, flooding, rock-falls,
building collapse, and landslides are common phenomena, which result in significant economic
and social losses.The incidence of disease epidemics, especially those that are water borne, is also
significantly high. The geographic location and spatial distribution of informal settlements (on
334
Resilience-seeking practices in Africa
hillsides, coastal or inland) present unique sets of challenges. Only four out of the 34 recognized
informal settlements in Freetown have been studied in-depth (Macarthy and Koroma 2016),
although Shack/Slum Dwellers International (SDI) estimates that the city is home to at least
61 informal settlements, many of which are perched on the last vestiges of land and articifically
banked land along the sea, while others sprawl over the hillsides of the city.
Irrespective of the obvious difference in scale between these two urban centers, the com-
monality of risk occurrence and accumulation makes it clear that both small and medium
urban centers in Africa equally need urgent attention to make them resilient. And within these
contexts, the non-uniform distribution of the burdens on the urban poor and informal settle-
ment dwellers places a critical lens on who is most at risk and why.
335
A. Allen, B. Koroma, M. Manda, E. Osuteye, and R. Lambert
Local Government Act has been adopted and relies on the National Disaster Preparedness and
Relief Committee (NDPRC). NDPRC calls upon a national disaster risk management platform
(DRM Platform) every two years to deliberate on selected themes and agreed recommendations
and demands to NDPRC. Platform members are drawn from government, NGOs, media, aca-
demia, private sector, and local, UN, and donor agencies.
The DRM Committee also establishes several technical subcommittees referred to as
“clusters”. However, despite the apparent flexibility, these technical subcommittees have become
almost permanent and no new ones have been accepted. Calls for the creation of an urban
DRM subcommittee have not been implemented with the usual argument being inadequacy
of resources. So far, the focus of the policy and its implementation has been on rural areas. Only
in recent times have steps been taken to include issues on urban DRM and there are strong
demands from the DRM Platform to revise the policy.The debate is probably one of the reasons
for the delay to finalize the DRM bill.
Another challenge is that, in general, Malawi relies heavily on external support to imple-
ment its policies and the functioning of the National Platform. In the absence of a supportive
and updated legal framework, DRM projects are merely squeezed through to appease external
organizations that provide the funding. In this process the DoDMA plays only a coordinating
role and, as disasters escalate countrywide, the institution gets overstretched. At the lower level,
DRM structures have been established only in rural areas up to village level but their function-
ality is negatively impacted by limited resources, knowledge, and capacity. In urban areas attempts
have been made to establish disaster committees, but only at city level. Little progress has been
made in establishing DRM structures at the ward, neighborhood, and block level, despite the fact
that it is at this level, especially in informal settlements, that disasters tend to have more serious
impacts. In Karonga, a different approach has been pioneered. Despite the fact that the town
still lacks a local government, “village” or neighborhood disaster risk management committees
(NDRMCs) have been established as an initiative of projects such as Urban ARK, an experience
that has also been replicated in Mzuzu City.
A similar process characterizes DRM governance in Sierra Leone, where resilience building
has been institutionalized as a national security issue. The legal instrument dealing with dis-
aster management is the 2002 National Security and Central Intelligence Act No. 10, which
established the Office of National Security (ONS), mandated to coordinate the management
of all national emergencies. In 2004 the Disaster Management Department (DMD) was created
within ONS to coordinate actions in response to natural and man-made disasters to build “safe
and resilient societies”. Thus, the DMD is meant to play a pivotal role, supporting the develop-
ment of DRM national policies and coordinating the implementation of local activities.
At the strategic level, the country drafted a national disaster management policy (NDPM) in
2006, which gives strategic directives on the steps to be taken before, during and after disasters
and recognizes community participation as a good practice.This policy is further supported by a
national disaster preparedness and response plan that maps out the roles of different stakeholders.
According to these documents, community leaders should play a key role in coordinating local
responses prior, during, and after disaster events. However, these instruments are not fully oper-
ational, and therefore lack official status despite the country’s commitment to the resilience-
building agenda. At present, there is no comprehensive policy or legal framework to enable
government agencies to mainstream resilience-seeking activities into their cross-sectoral devel-
opment strategies, plans, and programs. In addition, local government councils do not have legal
responsibility and budget allocation for disaster risk reduction.
As in Malawi, DRM governance also relies on multisectorial platforms. A National Platform
(NPF) for DRM and Climate Change Adaptation was launched in 2011, with the aim to bring
336
Resilience-seeking practices in Africa
337
A. Allen, B. Koroma, M. Manda, E. Osuteye, and R. Lambert
settings. While CBDMCs or local DRM networks –which include customary authorities –are
acknowledged in the urban DRM structure, they are considered “volunteer groups” and thus
ad hoc of mainstream DRM structures. However in reality, local communities account for the
bulk of resilient-seeking efforts and investments in Freetown. The latter are often in the form of
non-financial contributions (labor and manpower) and one-off investments to meet identified
shared needs, frequently pooling together household contributions, in addition to project-based
resources from ESAs.
CBDMCs are vital for communicating information and knowledge on DRM, reporting
disasters to relevant authorities and helping to build coherent localized responses; however, they
operate without legal acknowledgement and support by the government coordinating agency.
Local resilience-seeking practices in informal settlements are also supported by organizations
such as Young Men’s Christian Association (YMCA), Red Cross,World Food Programme (WFP),
and the Centre of Dialogue on Human Settlement and Poverty Alleviation (CODOHSAPA),
which aer often involved in coordinating disaster relief efforts. They are engaged in develop-
ment aid in shaping both the national adoption and ground implementation of DRM policy
models and ideals. Informal networks established by ESAs mostly operate in response to dis-
aster events but also play an important role in assessing damages and conducting scoping activ-
ities, feeding their findings through to ONS and other NGOs to guide relief/recovery efforts.
A preventative approach would require the development of an enabling legislative framework
and procedures for action endorsed by the DRM National Platform to support interfacing
organizations working with local communities.
The previous discussion shows that policy efforts to mount the governance of resilience-
seeking practices in both countries have been typically framed within the DRM sector as
national security issues. A number of further similarities can be observed through the above
policy trajectories. First, we can see emerging frameworks adopted to enhance resilience against
those hazards that are frequently documented and monitored –such as large-scale floods –but
without sufficient attention to the combined impacts of everyday risks and small-scale episodic
disasters that result in obdurate risk trajectories. Second, there is prevailing concentration of
state efforts on rural areas. To a large extent, urban local authorities remain the missing link in
resilience-seeking and sectoral approaches still prevail, limiting the scope of interventions to
reactive responses to large-scale disasters.
However, in the two contexts under analysis, it is possible to observe a number of processes
that are starting to disrupt these policy trajectories. While this process can be characterized in
Karonga as a policy-driven attempt to decentralize DRM through the creation of neighborhood
disaster risk management committees (NDRMC); in Freetown, the search for more agile and
effective DRM arrangements appears to be grounded on community-based disaster manage-
ment committees (CBDMC), which in informal settlements are driven by the Federation of the
Urban Poor (FEDURP). These grassroots structures fill the critical gap left by the local govern-
ment authorites at the lowest level and, more importantly, straddle the formalized–informalized
spaces that challenge the current operation of DRM. Even without the necessary formal recog-
nition and allocation of resources to these community-based structures, the growing evidence of
their capacity to mobilize action at city-wide scale demands recognition and futher study.
338
Resilience-seeking practices in Africa
scrutinize specific moments or junctures when discoursive and material practices have changed,
expanding or limiting the political space to tackle risk traps. Such moments could be seen as
what Capoccia and Keleman (2007) define as “critical junctures”2 encompassing accelerated
moments of decision making with potential impacts for transformative change.
The action-research work conducted by the authors in Karonga and Freetown sought to
expand the room for manouvre opened by policy commitments at the national level towards the
decentralization of DRM and a shift from risk mitigation to resilience-building. The rest of this
section reflects on key moments along this process.
339
A. Allen, B. Koroma, M. Manda, E. Osuteye, and R. Lambert
organizations and government departments. In Freetown, the strategic action plans developed
through these structures led to their recognition by the mayor of Freetown City Council. As a
result, four of the settlements entered an unprecedented agreement to develop settlement-wide
strategic action plans as part of the updated Freetown Structural Plan. This and other outcomes
are discussed later in this section.
340
Resilience-seeking practices in Africa
vulnerabilities and capacities to act were captured using co-designed surveys through open
source mobile phone applications such as Survey 123, which community dwellers were trained
to use (see Figures 25.3 and 25.4) (Allen et al, 2018a, 2018b).
As an opened risk assessment tool, ReMapRisk eliminates the temporal constraints of data
that only provides a snapshot of events or, at best, an archive of historical entries. The user-
friendly interface of the web-based tool “tells the story” of the community risk profile in different
formats and allows the visualization of multivariable enquiries through maps. For instance, users
can explore why certain areas are more vulnerable to specific hazards than others. ReMapRisk
further enables interactive assessment of the capacity to act of local residents, authorities, and
341
Figure 25.3 An online platform created to document and monitor how risk accumulation
cycles materialize over time, where, and why
Source: Authors
Figure 25.4 Community dwellers capturing hazards, vulnerabilities, and capacities to act using
open source mobile phone applications
Source: Authors
Resilience-seeking practices in Africa
support organizations in relation to specific or multiple hazards and vulnerabilities and records
the type of interventions implemented to reduce risk threats and their spatial distribution.
Figure 25.5 shows the mistmatch between the location and density of disaster events and miti-
gating interventions in Karonga.This indicates that resilience-seeking efforts tend to concentrate
on those areas where local communities have higher political capacity to attract investments
rather than on those areas where risk accumulation is higher.
The mapping process was also essential to visibilize the ongoing internalization of various
hazards that over time consolidate risk traps. As previously discussed, while shock events are
tackled through the different means available within existing DRM structures, slow-burn risks
tend to be invisible even to local dwellers. As explained by a female dweller from Susan’s Bay, a
coastal informal settlement in Freetown: “We live with these events as part of our everyday life,
they are so common and frequent that one tends to think that they are individual problems.”The
community-led mapping process in Susan’s Bay revealed that although fires were perceived by
local residents as a low occurrent threat, localized fire outbreaks are in fact a regular event, with
devastating consequences.Typically triggered by a combination of factors associated with energy
poverty and exacerbated by overcrowding and housing materials, fire outbreaks are associated
with common coping practices that rely on the use of inflammable fuels for cooking and pre-
carious and overcharged electricity connections.
343
Figure 25.5 Mistmatch between the location and density of disaster events and mitigating
interventions in Karonga
Source: Authors
Resilience-seeking practices in Africa
set up valuable precedents for collective interventions across more than one settlement and
raised awareness of the wider actions required at the city level, for instance identifying hot spots
outside the settlements where poor waste disposal or infrastructural works obstruct the flow of
water into the sea.
Some initiatives focused on developing “soft” embedded collective actions to address
multiple critical challenges. The residents from many of the coastal informal settlements in
Freetown faced long-standing threats of eviction due to the designation of these areas as
“risk prone” (mainly due to floods and disease outbreaks), but also because of the ongoing
encroachment of ecological conservation areas through the practice of land banking. The
latter is practised as a speculative strategy by those settled along the coast, but also represents
the only option for young tenants to free themselves from overcrowded housing conditions
and high rents in central locations.
Over the years, some community leaders in the coastal settlement of Cockle Bay attempted
to limit further expansion to avoid confrontation with the National Protected Area Authority
(NPAA), whose responsibility is to promote conservation and management of wetland resources.
However, this practice was conflictive and difficult to enforce by community leaders alone.
Through the strategic action planning process, the Cockle Bay community developed an
innovative mechanism to control the ongoing encroachment of the wetlands and the conse-
quent risk of flooding and eviction threat. A co-management committee was established with
representatives from the community, FEDURP, and NPAA, and tasked with the responsibility of
enforcing community by-laws for the protection/wise use of the wetland ecosystem. To achieve
this, all structure owners settled along the coast were enumerated and demarcating pillars built
along the coast to keep track of any further embankment. A zero growth pact was endorsed
by those already settled along the coastline, with fines to be levied from further land banking
earmarked to implement collectively identified projects to consolidate the settlement.
The above initiative and further actions supported by SLURC opened a juncture for the
local community to sign a memorandum of understanding (MoU) with the NPAA in October
2018. The MoU actively endorsed the zero growth pact activated by the local community of
Cockle Bay and has expanded this practice to include all coastal informal settlements across the
municipality of Freetown. However, this strategy will block the land banking practices under-
taken by newcomers –typically tenants –to free themselves from insecure tenancy agreements
elsewhere in the city. This raises the need for wider strategies to secure access to safe land and
housing in proximity to trading areas. While not free of challenges, this is just one example in
which a juncture has been productively exploited by linking local practices and community by-
laws with governmental bodies to articulate social and environmental objectives and ultimately
the reproduction of risk accumulation along the coast.
The action planning process has paved the way for SLURC and PSPP to play a key role in a
new city-wide initiative led by the Office of the Mayor, dubbed Transform Freetown (Macarthy
et al. 2019). This expanded the political space for collectives of the urban poor to strategically
engage with urban resilience planning, highlighting the value and potential of participatory
processes and community generated data. The outcome of such an engagement promises to
deliver more inclusive and sensitive interventions to tackle risk accumulation at scale and marks
a significant juncture in urban governance and planning discourse in the city.
Both in Karonga and Freetown, the process examined above has enabled not only concerted
action but also the emergence of expanded political spaces to articulate informed local demands,
shifting the status of many from being passive beneficiaries to become recognized as entitled
citizens.
345
A. Allen, B. Koroma, M. Manda, E. Osuteye, and R. Lambert
346
Resilience-seeking practices in Africa
DRM rely on highly centralized bureaucratic agencies, while bypassing local government
authorities. Some of the assumptions embedded in DRM governance are that technically
well-functioning bureaucratic arrangements need to be in place to deliver resilient outcomes.
However, such arrangements often have little relation to the lived practices of DRM adopted
on the ground by state actors, ESAs, and ordinary citizens. This points to the need to further
understand the disjuncture between Western idealizations of what states should be and do, and
take into account the multiple histories, trajectories, and practices through which state actors go
about DRM practices in relation with other actors of civil society –particularly those deemed
to be more vulnerable to risk. It also points to the need to acknowledge that statutory and cus-
tomary systems are deeply ingrained in the running of everyday affairs in African cities –DRM
included –and the influence of external support agencies engaged in development aid in shaping
both the national adoption and ground implementation of DRM policy models and ideals.
To conclude, the analysis suggests that the ability of emerging decentralized DRM structures
to tackle risk accumulation is shaped by their evolving political space to enable inclusive,
abridged, and strategic resilience-seeking practices in a relational way and across multiple scales.
Notes
1 Before the colonial era, there were 217 chiefdoms and 13 districts in Sierra Leone. Owing to the amal-
gamation process by the colonial regime, the chiefdoms were reduced to 147 and later increased to 149.
Post-independence de-amalgamation efforts have reinstated a total of 190 chiefdoms with 16 districts.
2 For a detailed discussion of this notion, see Chapter 33 by Wesely in this volume.
3 ReMapRisk Freetown and Karonga and accompanying demo video can be accessed at www.urbanark.
org/remaprisk.
References
Adderley, R.M. (2006) “New Negroes from Africa” Slave Trade Abolition and Free African Settlement in
the Nineteenth-Century Caribbean. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Allen, A., Belkow, T., de los Rios, S., Escalante Estrada, C., Lambert, R., Poblet, R., and Zilbert Zoto, L.
(2015). Urban Risk: In Search of New Perspectives. cLIMA sin Riesgo, Policy Brief No 1. www.
climasinriesgo.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/CSR_Policy_Doc_August-2015_ENG_WEB.pdf.
Allen, A., Koroma, B., Lambert, R., and Osuteye, E. in collaboration with Hamilton, A. (technical plat-
form assemblage) and Kamara, Macarthy, J., Sellu, S., and Stone, A. (coordination community-led data
collection) (2018a). ReMapRisk Freetown. Online platform produced for Urban ARK. www.urbanark.
org/tools.
Allen, A., Lambert, R., Manda, M., and Osuteye, E. in collaboration with Hamilton, A. (technical platform
assemblage) and Bwanali, B, Manda, F., Gondwe, J., and Gondwe, M. (coordination community-led data
collection) (2018b). ReMapRisk Karonga. Online platform produced for Urban ARK. www.urbanark.
org/tools.
Allen, A., Osuteye, E., Koroma, B., and Lambert, R. (forthcoming 2019). Unlocking urban risk trajec-
tories in Freetown’s informal settlements. In: M. Pelling (ed.): Urban Africa Risk Knowledge.
Nairobi: UN-Habitat.
Allen, A., Zilbert Soto, L., Wesely, J., in collaboration with Belkow, T., Ferro, V., Lambert, R., Langdown,
I., and Samanamú, A. (2017). From state agencies to ordinary citizens: Reframing risk-mitigation
investments and their impact to disrupt urban risk traps in Lima, Peru, Environment and Urbanization.
29 (2): 477–502. http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0956247817706061.
Banton, M. (1969). A Western African City: A Study of Tribal Life in Freetown. London: Oxford
University Press.
Bull-Kamanga, L., Diagne, K., Lavell, A., Leon, E., Lerise, F., MacGregor, H., Maskrey, A., Meshack, M.,
Pelling, M., Reid, H., Satterthwaite, D., Songsore, J., Westgate, K. , and Yitambe, A. (2003). From
everyday hazards to disasters: The accumulation of risk in urban areas. Environment and Urbanization.
15(1): 193–204.
347
A. Allen, B. Koroma, M. Manda, E. Osuteye, and R. Lambert
Capoccia, G. and Kelemen, R.D. (2007).The study of critical junctures: Theory, narrative, and counterfactuals
in historical institutionalism. World Politics. 59(3): 341–369. Project MUSE. muse.jhu.edu/article/
222749.
Coaffee, J. and Lee, P. (2016). Urban Resilience: Planning for Risk, Crisis and Uncertainty. London: Palgrave.
Cornwall, A. and Coehlo, V.S. (2006). Spaces for Change? The Politics of Citizen Participation in New
Democratic Arenas. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Dodman,D.,Leck,H.,Rusca,M.,and Colenbrander,S.(2017).African urbanisation and urbanism: Implications
for risk accumulation and reduction. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction. 26: 7–15.
Hayward, C.R. (2000). De-Facing Power. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Jaglin, S. (2014). Regulating service delivery in southern cities: Rethinking urban heterogeneity. In: S. Parnell
and S. Oldfield (eds.): A Routledge Handbook on Cities of the Global South. New York: Routledge.
Jaglin, S., Repussard, C., and Belbéoc'h, A. (2011). Decentralisation and governance of drinking water ser-
vices in small West African towns and villages (Benin, Mali, Senegal): The arduous process of building
local governments. Canadian Journal of Development Studies /Revue canadienne d'études du
développement. 32(2): 119–138.
Macarthy, J.M. and Koroma, B. (2016). Towards Meeting the Knowledge and Capacity Building Gaps for
Equitable Urban Development in Freetown. Freetown: SLURC Publication.
Macarthy, J.M., Frediani, A.A., and Kamara, S.F. (2019). Report on the Role of Community Action
Area Planning in Expanding the Participatory Capabilities of the Urban Poor . Freetown: SLURC
Publication.
Manda, M., Kamlomo, D., Mphande, C., Wanda, E., Msiska, O., Kaunda, J., and Kushe, J. (2016). Karonga
town: Growth and risk profile. Urban KNOW Working paper # 9 (May).
Manda, M. and Wanda, E. (2017). Understanding the nature and scale of risks in Karonga Town, Malawi.
Environment and Urbanization. 29(1). http://journals.sagepub. com/home/eau.
McGee, R. (2004). Unpacking policy: Actors, knowledge and spaces. In: K. Brock, R. McGee, and J. Gaventa
(eds.): Unpacking Policy: Actors, Knowledge and Spaces in Poverty Reduction. Kampala: Fountain
Press: 1–26.
Myers, G. (2011). African Cities. Alternative Visions of Urban Theory and Practice. London: Zed Books.
Osuteye, E., Johnson, C., and Brown, D. (2016). The data gap: An analysis of data availability on disaster
losses in sub-Saharan African Cities, Urban Africa Risk Knowledge Working Paper No. 11.
Parnell, S. (2016). Defining a Global Urban Development Agenda. World Development. 78: 529–540.
Pieterse, E., Parnell, S., and Haysom, G. (2018). African dreams: locating urban infrastructure in the 2030
sustainable developmental agenda, Area Development and Policy. 3(2): 149–169.
Resnick, D. (2014). Urban governance and service delivery in African cities: The role of politics and pol-
icies. Development Policy Review. 32: s3–s17.
Satterthwaite, D. (2016). Background Paper: Small and Intermediate Urban Centres in sub-Saharan Africa.
Urban ARK Working Paper No 6. London: IIED.
Simone, A.M. and Abouhani, A. (eds.) (2005). Urban Africa: Changing Contours of Survival in the
City. London: Zed Books.
Webster, N. and Engberg-Petersen, L. (2002). In the Name of the Poor: Contesting Political Space for
Poverty. London: Zed Books.
348
26
Closing the urban infrastructure
gap for sustainable urban
development in Sub Saharan Africa
Moving to scale in building urban resilience
Shuaib Lwasa
Introduction
This chapter focuses on water and sanitation utilities to analyze resilience building through
heterogeneous infrastructure systems in the Global South using Kampala as a case study. Water
supply and sanitation services are two of the basic municipally provided utilities on the basis
of which public accountability is scrutinized (Buyana and Lwasa 2016; Mayanja and Mayengo
2007;Vanier and Danylo 1998). Both of these types of urban infrastructure are provided through
large-scale installations that are centralized with a treatment plan and networks running through
the serviced areas to collect and transport water or collect sludge to and or from the treatment
plant (Angelo and Hentschel 2015; Silver 2014). These infrastructures are also often used as the
basis for urban value capture for municipalities to mobilize finances from service charges that
are reinvested in the infrastructure or other services. But these types of infrastructure have social,
economic, and environmental consequences.
Water resources are arguably considered to be the most misused and abused resource at
various levels from extraction, use, and disposal as wastewater (Porto et al. 2008). At the global
level, water is a resource that has been commercialized for decades first with centralized
systems of water distribution that involve large infrastructure installations for water purifica-
tion, pumping, and distribution (Dugard 2010; Patsiaouras 2015). The abstraction has depleted
aquifers, changed stream flow with knock-on effects on health, biodiversity, and environment
(Porto et al. 2008). On the other hand, wastewater from point of disposal such as house or
commercial establishments often is laden with contaminants that end up in water sources with
serious environmental consequences (Songsore 2017). With the emergence of bottled drinking
water, which can be transported distances through land-based distribution systems, a secondary
problem has been created that is linked to the indiscriminate disposal of plastic bottles, many
of which are single use, with the majority ending in water aquifers and oceans. On the supply
side, despite the advanced systems of water treatment and distribution as well as investments in
urban Africa, many people are still unable to access water due to affordability, yet many municipal
349
Shuaib Lwasa
utility companies report leakages, damage to the networks, and illegal connections leading to
commercial losses.
Coverage of networked supply systems is to a limited number of households and as a result,
alternative systems have emerged to close the gap in access and coverage of water supply in cities.
These alternative systems include a wide range of technologies of different sizes such as nat-
ural systems of springs, underground wells, and open surface water bodies but also systems that
link to the centralized, networked systems to create some form of hybridity (Kooy and Bakker
2008). In regard to sanitation, this infrastructure is considered a determinant of modern urbanism
shaping urban systems, their layout, and physical imprint. Like water systems, sanitation networks
that are centralized for treatment of sludge. These systems are characterized by large-scale con-
struction and engineering works to separate sludge from grey water and other materials, then
sanitized through physical–chemical–biological treatment processes (NWSC 2002). Sanitation
networks are accessed by a limited number of urban dwellers across cities of the Global South
due to limited coverage and high costs, which is unaffordable by many of the urban dwellers
including some middle-income groups. Coverage, affordability and access challenges notwith-
standing, the environmental, social, and economic costs of centralized sanitation systems is yet to
be fully estimated but the literature shows serious environmental damage of ecosystems, water
systems, and now increased greenhouse gases through pollution and chemical processes of the
treatment (Barles 2007).
The challenges of coverage and accessibility by modern sanitation systems have also led to a
multitude of alternative technologies, ranging from single-user technologies, nutrient recovery
technologies, to decentralized and hybrid systems in many cities (Kooy and Bakker 2008).These
alternative systems are also heavily dependent on the involvement of people in their oper-
ation and is shaped by power relations. Both sanitation and water from the municipal point
of view are also highly commercialized utilities involving billions of dollars in the installation,
operationalization, and management of the service connections (Satterthwaite 2017).With com-
mercialization, the motivation for appropriating service products manifests in all cities, but this
has also penetrated the alternative systems that commercialization tends to obscure the basic
human requirement for proper hygiene and clean water provision by emphasizing the economic
reward associated with appropriating and commercialization of the services (De Albuquerque
and Winkler 2010; Patsiaouras 2015). This commercialization, whether for the centralized or
alternative systems, undermines the resilience of urban social systems, especially when faced with
multiple risks of economic, climate risks, and natural hazards (Parnell 2017).The knock-on effect
of undermined resilience are trade-offs on health, living environment, ecosystems damage, and
economic loss of the human resource. This chapter assesses these trade-offs but also highlights
the co-benefits of alternative systems and illustrates how enhancing the co-benefits while min-
imizing the adverse effects can contribute to resilience building in cities.
350
Sustainable urban development in Sub Sahara
is the strict definition of engineering resilience (Powell et al. 2014). Limited literature par-
ticularly that related to climate change adaptation defines urban resilience from a social per-
spective (Chelleri et al. 2012). Social resilience is multidimensional to include economic, social
networking, functioning of critical social services during a disaster, and institutional systems
designed to respond appropriately to risks (Waters 2013).
According to Collier and Cust (2015), Africa faces a critical shortfall in public infrastructure.
An estimated 600 million people still have no electricity connection, more than 80 per cent
of the road network remains unpaved, and only 56 per cent of the population have access to
an improved water source. In view of the huge deficit in infrastructure that is critical to social
resilience, this chapter frames alternative infrastructure systems as a mechanism for sustained
and continued functioning of urban systems during times of disasters. This chapter postulates
that the informal sector is a large segment of African cities and urban resilience in the South
will be framed and shaped by the quality of this sector including the alternative infrastructure
systems (Goodfellow 2010). Over 60 per cent of urban dwellers live in informal settlements in
many African cities. This comprises over 70 per cent of the urban labor force and contributes
considerably to the housing of urban dwellers. Hence, the informal sector is the city. While
large-scale infrastructure development is expected to continue in African cities, this is unlikely
to match the exponential growth in demand for services especially in the informal settlements.
In cities, infrastructure is provided for the return it provides on investment and so this infra-
structure is provided through commercial ventures (Oppenheimer 1942). It is also important
to understanding the role power relations play in closing the urban infrastructure gap in cities
(Swyngedouw 2009).
In urban political ecology, a commodity has two values: use-value and exchange value
(Swyngedouw and Kaika 2014). Like all resources, whether natural or otherwise, politics
of control and management are informed by the intrinsic value of such resources and the
products therein, which are commoditized and commercialized. Political ecology theorizes
that politics in a place is shaped by the resources and how people relate in regard to the
resources to produce capital. The power structures shaped by materialism of water and sani-
tation service products in urban areas are constructed to maintain the urban metabolism
but also dominance of control over the resource. Water is an indispensable resource and
commodity for the functioning of social relations between people in urban areas. The pol-
itical economy theory of materialism, production of capital, and the structure of power
relations inform how urban sanitation and water regimes have emerged in Kampala through
a process of appropriation, alienation, and control of the water supply chain to close the
infrastructure gap.
Often described as “self-provisioning”, the social structures involved in providing infrastruc-
ture at a scale that increases coverage is impacted by centralized infrastructure systems. Around
these innovations of diverse micro-to meso-scale infrastructures is an alternative system, which
is not yet recognized by mainstream urban development strategies. The persistence of these
diverse infrastructures and social systems of managing the infrastructure illustrates the signifi-
cance of the informal sector in African cities (Richmond et al. 2018). What is less understood
is the realization of the potential of the informal sector and how this potential can be leveraged
to leapfrog cities to urban sustainability for resilience building. Thus moving to scale is both a
research and policy question that has to be explored to identify pathways for increasing infra-
structure coverage in cities like Kampala. Alternative pathways are emerging in various forms
including; decentralization infrastructure, self-organization, participation, self-help, and public–
private partnerships to fill the gap. Deep scaling and up scaling also require innovative models to
fill the gaps and build resilience.
351
Shuaib Lwasa
Methodology
The analysis in this chapter draws on key informant interviews, site visits, and review of secondary
literature. Interviews and site visits were conducted in Kampala in 2017 as part of a wider project
on urban transformation through water and sanitation. The research plan focused on water and
sanitation sectors through key actors, enablers of change, and the institutional governance system.
The key informants were selected purposively from critical institutional actors at public agencies
including Kampala Capital City Authority (KCCA) and the National Water and Sewerage Company
(NWSC), as well as community groups such as ACTogether and Water-for-People.Thus, seven indi-
viduals from these key institutions were interviewed in depth. Focus groups were also conducted
at KCCA and NWSC. Supplementary interviews were also conducted at a workshop involving 17
individuals focusing on innovations in water and sanitation.
The analysis also draws on research work on the intersection of urban development and
environmental change in Kampala that was conducted over the last 15 years to draw on previous
analysis, interviews, and data. The research was undertaken under the Urban Action Innovation
Lab at Makerere University in Kampala. This provided additional information about the actors
and technologies under implementation in the city. Site visits to KCCA, ACTogether and com-
munities documented experiences of the pre-paid meter technologies. The analysis of the trans-
formation in the water sector also draws on secondary data from online databases about the
water markets, project documents, strategic plans and government policy. Data and documents
were collected from the Uganda Bureau of Statistics,World Bank, UN-Habitat Observatory and
other donor websites to get insight into the sanitation systems, water market conditions and pro-
gress on improving access to water in Kampala (Calderón et al. 2011; UBOS 2017).
352
Sustainable urban development in Sub Sahara
In regard to sanitation, less than 12 pe rcent of the households in Kampala are connected to the
sewer network.
In an effort to close the water infrastructure gap in Kampala, a pro-poor unit was established
as part of the NWSC in 2006 after internal reviews indicated that the urban poor were paying
higher rates for water and sanitation service than the non-poor (Buyana and Lwasa 2016). The
pro-poor unit encouraged the NWSC to re-examine the technological mix of solutions it
was providing to citizens to both increase coverage and reduce the service charge. But this
accentuated spatial inequality by reinforcing the differential access, pricing, and distribution
systems as discussed later in this chapter (Buyana and Lwasa 2016). The NWSC developed
strategies to improve water service in informal neighborhoods that eventually expanded to sani-
tation with the introduction of decentralization of sewerage treatment plants. The NWSC also
implemented a pre-paid water metering system in some poor neighborhoods of Kampala and is
currently in the process of rolling this out to all the poor neighborhoods in the city. This geo-
graphically and socially targeted supply particularly to the urban poor is illustrative of inequality
but also reinforces spatial differentiation of centralized water supply systems.
A number of sanitation improvement initiatives have been implemented particularly with
toilet blocks, which are also connected to the water supply system. Landlords offered land for
the toilet blocks with pre-paid water metered token equivalent to an amount of credit on the
pre-paid chip, which enables households to draw water from the standpipe. A consortium of
donors, including the World Bank, the Belgian Technical Cooperation, and KfW Development
Bank, provided funding and technical support. The pro-poor unit began providing communal
water standpipes and sanitation blocks in partnership with KCCA. The combination of these
technologies is believed to provide a formal solution that is accessible to poor households. But
the alternative solutions have over time gained political momentum through support from the
national government and the international community to become a larger scale pro-poor ser-
vice provision strategy. The pro-poor strategy has created differentiated water and sanitation
service markets with different actors who control and manage the water markets (Buyana et al.
2014). As will be discussed in the subsequent sections, the simultaneous water markets have actu-
ally deepened the inequality with power and control at the center of these markets. There is a
seamless flow of power from the utility company to the landlords and managers of the standpipes
that is influenced by the distribution of chips for pre-paid meters.
In the context of urban resilience and invoking the political ecology theory, Angelo and
Waschmuth (2015) provide a discussion of urban focused political ecology analysis, citing Harvey,
who argues that “urbanization must be understood not in terms of some socio-organizational
entity called ‘the city’ (the theoretical object that so many geographers, demographers and
sociologists erroneously presume) but as the production of specific and quite heterogeneous
spatio-temporal forms embedded within different kinds of social action” (Harvey 1996: 52).
From this understanding, social action can take different forms but the politics of materialism
and the emergence of power centers that tend to cascade through the hierarchies is a relevant
point of reference in closing the infrastructure gap through heterogeneous systems.
Looking at the utility company and the multiple actors, the power flows from different
actors in a hierarchical format, for example chip owners and end-users on the one hand and
from NWSC to truckers and end-users on the other. This also illustrates how social processes
and action shape a politicized commodity. Likewise, power also flows through a set of actors in
the sanitation sector who have appropriated and control the materiality of sludge through civil
organizations in conjunction with Kampala Capital City Authority (Lwasa and Owens 2018).
Urban scholars have used network-based theory to analyze how urban infrastructure systems
are configured to enable a flow of materials, money, and power to sustain the urban metabolism
353
Shuaib Lwasa
(Arboleda 2016; Kooy and Bakker 2008; Law 2007). These infrastructures are understood as
hierarchical but a critique of the nature of urbanism that is emerging is increasingly pointing to
a splintered or heterogeneous nature of urban infrastructure (Silver 2014). The splintered nature
of urban infrastructure like the water supply chain and sanitation services is not only understood
from the physical components of the infrastructure but the social heterogeneity of actors.
In the context of the centralized systems, the physical infrastructure is used as the material
objects around which power is exercised to control the commercialized markets of water and
sanitation services. The materiality of emerging alternatives is discussed in the proceeding
section, but what is important to discern from the centralized systems is that power structures
exist to control water provision as well as sanitation services (Nilsson 2006). It is on the basis
of this analysis that this chapter argues that centralized systems undermine urban resilience in
view of the majority not being able to access the water and sanitation services in the city. By
reinforcing the highly segmented and segregated market for water and sanitation, it is incon-
ceivable that further expansion of the centralized infrastructure even with pro-poor initiatives
will actually build urban resilience. This creates space for the alternative systems that also have
limits in regard to building resilience but can play a significant role in resilience building
(Ernstson et al. 2010).
354
Sustainable urban development in Sub Sahara
as shown in Table 26.1 (Lawhon et al. 2018). These can be described as hybrid, heterogeneous
systems and off-g rid systems.
In respect to the hybrid systems, these extend the centralized systems by bringing new actors
into the water market. The source of water remains the central water supply system, but the
suppliers to users are different. The most common in Kampala are the water truckers, who stay
close to the NWSC appurtenances and or offices, and are charged a fee to draw water from the
system that they then supply to the users, often middle-income residents. This system of supply
also takes advantage of up to eight hours of water flow in the network system, which leaves many
households without water for most of the day, particularly the houses located on hilltops where
pressure is low due to elevation. The truckers have created an association that controls who
enters the market and the entitlements to the members. During the interviews, it was established
that a sub-market of this hybrid system involving large consumers like industrial establishments
located close to areas of high-pressure systems, offer the truckers a higher fee to draw water from
their connections than they would have to pay to NWSC. The truckers then sell the water to
the residents.
At the end-user, a truck of 10,000 litres is sold at UGX 400,000, an equivalent of $110 at a
rate of $1.1 per cubic meter, although the NWSC charge is UGX 2,698 or the equivalent of
$0.65 for a cubic meter. The differences at each of these market segments illustrates the eco-
nomic benefit for each actor but also explains why truckers have an association to control who
enters the business and who is kept out. We interviewed a representative of the truckers’ associ-
ation, who explained that the association’s aim is to ensure that their interests and views are heard
by the NWSC and any other government body that regulates water supply. Although not to
the same character or degree, the truckers’ sub-market is also seen in other cities such as Dhaka,
Guayaquil, and Hargeisa (Nenova 2004; Roy 2009).
The second emergent system is the multiple supply arrangements with multiple technologies
that are operating at a micro scale to bring water to the end-user. The multiple technologies
include the pro-poor pre-paid systems and public standpipes. Although the latter relates to the
355
Shuaib Lwasa
hybrid system, which speaks to its complexity, it is the scale of operation, amount of water and
nature of the end-users that distinguishes it from the hybrid systems. A mix of technologies,
supply systems, and scale of operation provides the basis for describing these systems as hetero-
geneous systems. These are also heterogeneous because the operators and users are less linked
to the conventional centralized networked systems like that of the NWSC. The complexity of
these systems can be discerned from a number of factors. First, some of the private connections
may actually be illegal connections. According to the NWSC, about 34 per cent of the water
produced is lost, non-metered and can hardly be traced (NWSC 2015).
With the pro-poor pre-paid water meters, there has emerged a sub-market controlled largely
by the owners of chips and indirectly by NWSC, which determines the total number of chips
on the market. NWSC’s policy to distribute chips (understandably to ensure systematic manage-
ment) has created two extra layers of controllers of the sub-market. Chip owners have report-
edly charged an extra fee to residents who may wish to use the chips to buy water, creating a
complex set of relations at the community level. NWSC’s pre-paid meters recommended tariff
is 867 UGX per cubic meter, which is 65 per cent of the standard residential tariff, and similar
to a “social tariff ” that is applied to public standpipes. With this charge, politicization of pre-
paid meters at local level through the water kiosks of the NWSC is by control of chips, whose
acquisition is influenced (either directly or indirectly) by the staff at the kiosks that control the
number of chips in a neighborhood. Through the set of relations, there are different charges that
depend on social relations between the chip owner and end-user. Likewise some individuals in
the neighborhoods with pre-paid meters have specific relations with the NWSC staff that also
ensure the periodic maintenance of the pre-paid meters.
The third set of alternative water supply systems are the off-g rid supply systems that rely on
the natural systems of water supply. Many households (up to 85 per cent, though statistics are
disputed), either solely rely on natural springs and surface water in the city or turn to the natural
springs when supply through the network systems falls well below the number of hours that
water flows through the network (Lwasa and Owens 2018). Scoop wells, natural springs, streams,
rain water harvesting, and the lake are all sources of this system. A sub-market is also associated
with this system when individuals provide a service to collect water for households at a fee from
these sources. For example, in this sub-market, 20 litres of water cost UGX 200 at standpipes and,
when delivered by an individual, it costs UGX 500, yet the price of NWSC-provided water is
38 UGX. This is an illustration of the commercialization and social power of the water vendors.
The sub-market is largely free entry and exit but there is some control over the customers by
the vendors, based on personal relations (AbdouMaliq 2004). In the operations of all these
systems, the official price for the same quantity of water to the end-user differs, which illustrates
the different water markets in urban areas like Kampala (NWSC 2015; Otero et al. 2011). The
emergent water supply systems may be thought of as gap filling, but they also accentuate water
inequality if looked at from the perspective of different neighborhoods. In all these sub-markets,
of water vendors, stand pipe kiosks, and water tankers, there is a degree of restricted access to the
supply chain either through associations or personal relations (Satterthwaite 2017).
Sanitation systems
Sanitation systems have also evolved and are influenced by affordability and costs of installation
(Satterthwaite, 2017). The pit latrine is the most common and dominant alternative sanitation
system. This technology and sanitation system has been in use even before the modern city
developed in Uganda. It is a simple technology –a hole dug into the ground with dimensions of
3 by 6 feet and up to 40 feet deep. A concrete or metal slab is erected in the hole and walls using
356
Sustainable urban development in Sub Sahara
locally available materials. It can have from one to six stances, all of which are usually squatting
stances. The other alternative is the improved pit latrine which is similar to the previous system,
but the depth of the hole is up to 6 feet and the walls are lined with bricks and cement to make
it easy for emptying. Households in the middle-and high-income range also construct septic
tanks connected to the flush toilets in their houses. This technology also involves a soakaway pit
for the sludge. Septic tanks also vary, but minimally measure 6 by 10 feet and up to 10 feet deep
with a soakaway connected to it for overflow of sludge. The soakaway pit can be as deep as 50
feet with layered aggregate stones of different sizes and sand for filtering that mimics natural
treatment systems (Revi et al. 2014).
There has also emerged communal sanitation blocks that are promoted and constructed
by civil society organizations. The blocks combine the septic tank technology and are some-
times connected to the centralized sewerage network. According to ACTogether, the block
design includes a community hall at the elevated level and toilets and bath places at the lower
level (Richmond et al. 2018). This model is used to improve sanitation in densely populated
settlements where digging a new hole is constrained by lack of space (Lwasa and Owens 2018).
Open releases in some settlements is used to make pit latrines reusable. Timing is when it rains
and the latrines are constructed strategically close to a drain with a plug that can be opened to
release the untreated sludge into the drain.This is common in densely populated settlements and
+ moderately builds resilience, ++ strongly builds resilience, +++ very strong in resilience building, -negatively erodes
resilience, -- strongly erodes resilience, --- cancels resilience
357
Shuaib Lwasa
in areas that are low lying where the water table is high. The newest of options is the combin-
ation of sludge management technology and mobile transfer systems of the sludge (Semiyaga
et al. 2015). This is used in relation to other technologies, but the sludge is moved not through
an underground network but sludge containers after being removed by gulper vacuum pumps
(Radford et al. 2015). These different systems illustrate the multitude of options that have
emerged to close the infrastructure gap and are helping to build resilience in Kampala as shown
in Table 26.2.
358
Sustainable urban development in Sub Sahara
studies that consider how much income a household can reasonably spend on utilities have
reached varying conclusions on affordability (Davis 2005; Surridge 2013). What emerges is that
the alternative systems have had two effects on affordability. The first is that splitting utility costs
into smaller payments that are made over time enables low income and middle income groups
to access these services. For example, a pit latrine with a capacity of 10 m3 of sludge would be
emptied at UGX 180,000, while a gulper company would charge UGX 20,000 for every 1 m3
of sludge-emptying container.This implies that the gulper user ends up paying 20,000 more than
the cesspool emptier, which they may not afford at one payment but may be able to afford it if
they are making smaller payments over time. In a similar vein, water vended to a user in small
quantities of 20-litre jerrycans costs 200 UGX, but would cost UGX 10,000 per 1 m3, which,
if one has a connection, would cost UGX 1,200 in direct costs. But due to connection fees and
installation, the low-income users find it affordable through a split service than with a one-time
connection service (NWSC 2015).Thus, affordability needs further integration into the existing
systems and one way to create resilience is to consider economic proportionality of equitable
charges. The pro-poor pre-paid meter service for water uses such as concept but a simple esti-
mate also shows that the pre-paid water costs 110 per cent of the cost for a direct service per 1
m3. Social resilience is undermined but it can be enhanced if proportional charges are considered.
This may be achieved if radical change in commercialization and marketization of water and
sanitation is implemented at a city-wide level.
359
Shuaib Lwasa
the split service model and ease of technology use, which is associated with minimal investment
requirements but is of most importance in a relational model that enhance the interactions of
these actors. Institutional and regulatory support is also necessary for scalability, which would
require transformation of the urban governance systems and adopt a multisystems approach,
involving as many of these actors in a strategic manner to increase coverage. Building social
resilience through infrastructure hinges on continuity of services and functioning of the utilities
during and after disasters, including during times of economic hardship.
Conclusion
From the discussion, it is evident that the urban water sanitation systems are complex, with
diverse actors and set of relations. Beyond the emergent systems that are triggered by failure of
the centralized system, urban water and sanitation systems exhibit challenges but also opportun-
ities for improving water access in cities like Kampala. The mix of different technologies and
approaches has created inequities, but the solution for infrastructure delivery also lies in these
diverse systems. There is inadequate mobilization, private finance, and inadequate understanding
of water and sanitation access dynamics, and how to deal with differentiated communities. The
polycentric nature of power structures in urban water and now sanitation is an illustration of
capital-formation processes and the politicization of water resources in the city. Coupled with
the traditional models of project-based or agency-based provision, urban infrastructure remains
inadequate for many communities due the hegemonies over water. A combination of approaches
360
Sustainable urban development in Sub Sahara
is required to build resilient urban communities. A transformation of both the emergent and
public agencies is necessary for urban infrastructure provision. Among the many alternative
models for urban service and infrastructure delivery, some have shown spin-offs, which could
be improved for everyone including the poor and provide the potential for resilience building.
References
AbdouMaliq, S. (2004). People as infrastructure: Public Culture. 16(3): 407–429. https://doi.org/10.1215/
08992363-16-3-407.
Angelo, H. and Hentschel, C. (2015). Interactions with infrastructure as windows into social worlds: A
method for critical urban studies: Introduction. City. 19(2–3): 306–312. https://doi.org/10.1080/
13604813.2015.1015275.
Angelo, H., and Wachsmuth, D. (2015). Urbanizing urban political ecology: A critique of methodological
cityism. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research. 39(1): 16–27. https://doi.org/10.1111/
1468–2427.12105.
Arboleda, M. (2016). In the nature of the non-city: Expanded infrastructural networks and the political
ecology of planetary urbanisation. Antipode. 48(2): 233–251. https://doi.org/10.1111/anti.12175.
Barles, S. (2007). Urban metabolism and river systems: an historical perspective –Paris and the Seine,
1790–1970. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 11: 1757–1769. www.hydrol-earth-syst-sci.net/11/1757/2007/
hess-11-1757-2007.pdf.
Butlin, F. (1895). Das Kapital. Progress in Human Geography. 5(18): 249. https://doi.org/10.2307/2955771.
Buyana, K. and Lwasa, S. (2016). Infrastructure governance at sub-national level: The case of Kampala City
in Uganda. Handbook of Research on Sub-National Governance and Development, 324. https://doi.
org/10.4018/978-1-5225-1645-3.ch015.
Buyana, K., Lwasa, S., and Schiebinger, L. (2014). Closing Africa’s infrastructure deficit: The role of gender
responsiveness in urban planning. International Journal of Social, Management, Economics and Business
Engineering. 8(3): 882–890.
Calderón, C., Moral-Benito, E., and Servén, L. (2011). Is infrastructure capital productive? A dynamic heter-
ogenous approach. Journal of Applied Econometrics. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_
id=1871578.
Chelleri, L., Kunath, A., Minucci, G., Olazabal, M., Waters, J.J., and Yumalogava, L. (2012). Multidisciplinary
Perspectives on Urban Resilience. https://doi.org/ISBN 978-84-695-6025-9.
Collier, P. and Cust, J. (2015). Investing in Africa’s infrastructure: Financing and policy options. SSRN (Vol.
7). Annual Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-resource-100814–124926.
Cook, I.R. and Swyngedouw, E. (2012). Cities, social cohesion and the environment: Towards a future
research agenda. Urban Studies. 49(9): 1959–1979. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098012444887.
Crane, W. and Swilling, M. (2008). Environment, sustainable resource use and the Cape Town Functional
Region – An overview. Urban Forum. 19(3): 263–287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12132-008-9032-y.
Davis, J. (2005). Private- sector participation in the water and sanitation sector. Annual Review of
Environment and Resources. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.energy.30.050504.144635.
De Albuquerque, C. and Winkler, I.T. (2010). Neither friend nor foe: Why the commercialization of water
and sanitation services is not the main issue in the realization on human rights. Brown Journal of
World Affairs. 17: 167–179. https://heinonline.org/hol-cgi-bin/get_pdf.cgi?handle=hein.journals/
brownjwa17§ion=16.
Dugard, J. (2010). Can human rights transcend the commercialization of water in South Africa? Soweto’s
legal fight for an equitable water policy. Review of Radical Political Economics. 42(2): 175–194. https://
doi.org/10.1177/0486613410368495.
Ernstson, H., Leeuw, S.E., Redman, C.L., Meffert, D.J., Davis, G., Alfsen, C., and Elmqvist, T. (2010). Urban
transitions: On urban resilience and human-dominated ecosystems. AMBIO. 39(8): 531–545. www.
springerlink.com/index/10.1007/s13280-010-0081-9.
Fraser, A., Leck, H., Parnell, S., Pelling, M., Brown, D., and Lwasa, S. (2017). Meeting the challenge of risk-
sensitive and resilient urban development in sub-Saharan Africa: Directions for future research and prac-
tice. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2017.10.001.
Goodfellow, T. (2010, February). “The bastard child of nobody”?: Anti-planning and the institutional
crisis in contemporary Kampala. www2.lse.ac.uk/ internationalDevelopment/ research/crisisStates/
Publications/publications.aspx.
361
Shuaib Lwasa
362
Sustainable urban development in Sub Sahara
Roy, M. (2009). Planning for sustainable urbanisation in fast growing cities: Mitigation and adaptation
issues addressed in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Habitat International. 33(3): 276–286. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.habitatint.2008.10.022.
Satterthwaite, D. (2017). The impact of urban development on risk in sub-Saharan Africa’s cities with
a focus on small and intermediate urban centres. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction.
26: 16–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2017.09.025.
Semiyaga, S., Okure, M.A. E., Niwagaba, C.B., Katukiza, A.Y., and Kansiime, F. (2015). Decentralized
options for faecal sludge management in urban slum areas of Sub-Saharan Africa: A review of tech-
nologies, practices and end-uses. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.resconrec.2015.09.001.
Silver, J. (2014). Incremental infrastructures: material improvisation and social collaboration across post-
colonial Accra. Urban Geography, 3638 (November 2015). http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/. https://doi.
org/10.1080/02723638.2014.933605.
Songsore, J. (2017). The complex interplay between everyday risks and disaster risks: The case of the
2014 cholera pandemic and 2015 flood disaster in Accra, Ghana. International Journal of Disaster Risk
Reduction. 26: 43–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2017.09.043.
Surridge, T. (2013). Sustainable sanitation. Appropriate Technology. https://doi.org/WAS-05.
Swyngedouw, E. (2009). The political economy and political ecology of the hydro- social cycle.
Journal of Contemporary Water Research & Education. 142(1): 56– 60. https://
doi.org/
10.1111/
j.1936-704X.2009.00054.x.
Swyngedouw, E. and Kaika, M. (2014). Urban political ecology. Great promises, deadlock… and new
beginnings? Documents d’Analisi Geografica. 60(3): 459–481. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/dag.155.
UBOS (2017). The National Population and Housing Census 2014 –Area Specific Profile Series.
Kampala: UBOS, 1–37.
Vanier, D.J. and Danylo, N.H. (1998). Municipal infrastructure investment planning: asset management
(p. 39). Las Vegas. http://archive.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/obj/irc/doc/pubs/nrcc42665.pdf.
Waters, J.J.J. (2013). The Role of Ecosystem Services and Adaptive Capacity in the Resilience of Poor
Urban Areas. Thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy to the School of Environmental
Sciences. Norwich: University of East Anglia.
363
27
Municipal resilience in Chile
From willingness to implementation
Claudia González-Muzzio and Claudia Cárdenas Becerra
364
Municipal resilience in Chile
Disaster type (natural event) Disaster subtype Events Total Total affected Total
count deaths damage
($000)
Source: EM-DAT: The Emergency Events Database –Universite Catholique de Louvain (UCL) –CRED, D. Guha-Sapir –
www.emdat.be, Brussels, Belgium. Retrieved online on July 8, 2018.
Recent disasters have shown that most municipalities are not able to respond effectively
during emergencies. Furthermore, in many cases lack of technical capacities or financial resources
makes it difficult for municipalities to respond even to minor events, such as structural fires and
local floods, so they must appeal to higher administrative levels for assistance (provincial, regional,
or national), all of which greatly affect their development possibilities.
According to the report “Towards a resilient Chile in the face of disasters: an opportunity”
(CNID 2016), between 1980 and 2011 Chile registered annual losses close to 1.2 per cent of its
GDP on average due to disasters triggered by natural events, which is why it is necessary to take
action to manage risks at different territorial and administrative levels to reduce said expenses
and the vulnerability of the population, their livelihoods, and infrastructures.
365
González-Muzzio and Cárdenas Becerra
366
Municipal resilience in Chile
of a hazard in a timely and efficient manner, including through the preservation and restoration
of its essential basic structures and functions through risk management” (United Nations 2016).
Municipal resilience will be approached in two ways: one related to the territorial scope
(the commune) and the other to the institutional and administrative scope (municipality), both
associated with the local level of government and territorial administration.
In relation to resilience of the commune as a territory, initiatives developed after the earth-
quake occurred in February 2010 are reviewed, specifically those oriented to produce a sustain-
able reconstruction or to improve municipal capacities regarding DRM. Most of the initiatives
do not arise from the municipalities but from other levels of the public administration or are
promoted by international organizations. It will be acknowledged here that efforts developed
have had mixed results, mainly due to the lack of capacity and resources of municipalities as
institutions for influencing proposals, to manage risks, and to take charge of local development,
in addition to the lack of internalization of the objectives and potential effects of such initiatives.
Regarding resilience of the municipality as an institution, governance and institutional cap-
abilities are examined. The institutional structure of the municipality is considered as well as
technical and financial capacities existing within said institution, and its associative capacity with
other institutions or actors in order to improve risk management at the communal level.
To address the situation of municipal resilience in Chile, various sources were considered: for
the initiatives, available documents and institutional websites were reviewed together with semi-
structured interviews conducted with representatives of ONEMI, the Sub-secretariat of Regional
and Administrative Development (SUBDERE), UNDP and the Association of Municipalities of
Chile (AMUCH). In addition, interviews were carried out with emergency or risk management
officials of municipalities in different sectors of the country, including rural, urban, and metro-
politan districts, aimed to identify the specific structure of those municipalities regarding DRM
and their current capacities.
An important input was the Survey of Underlying Risk Conditions,1 an instrument developed
by ONEMI based on the work of the National Platform for Disaster Risk Management that began
to be applied in 2017, with full results available of a sample of 60 communes (FULCRUM Ingeniería
Ltda. 2018; González Correa 2017), and preliminary results of 56 more by mid-2018, representing
all the provinces of the country. This instrument addresses four dimensions: governance, territorial
planning and human settlements, socio-economic and demographic conditions, and climate change
and natural resources, considering ten underlying factors that are disaggregated into 36 variables and
five sub-variables belonging to governance dimension, each one with a specific weight to define a
Communal Index of Underlying Risk Factors (ICFSR) (ONEMI, 2017) (Figure 27.1).
Similarly, it was important to consider a study developed in 2017 by AMUCH from a survey
answered by 182 municipalities (out of 3452), which consulted on technical and financial cap-
acities regarding risk management and emergencies, although not all the municipalities partici-
pating in the study provided the information requested.
Both studies evaluated the communes considering a typological classification established
by SUBDERE from demographic, social and economic variables, as indicated in Table 27.2
(SUBDERE 2017).
367
Territorial planning
1.1.1. Territorial planning instruments
tools
Figure 27.1 Underlying factors, variables, and sub-variables proposed by ONEMI to define the
Communal Index of Underlying Risk Factors (ICFSR)
Source: Authors based on ONEMI (2017, pp. 15–18)
Municipal resilience in Chile
organizations have been promoted. The main initiatives aimed to foster disaster resilience at
communal level are: reconstruction and regeneration plans for urban areas affected by the 2010
earthquake; Making Cities Resilient campaign by UNISDR, 100 Resilient Cities (Rockefeller
Foundation), and PREMIR (Programme for Prevention and Mitigation of Risks) developed by
SUBDERE and UNDP, which are briefly discussed here.
After the 2010 earthquake, several strategic planning initiatives (recognized as master plans)
were carried out, the main ones being the sustainable reconstruction plans (PRES) and the urban
regeneration plans (PRU). These plans drew upon specific project proposals for reconstruction,
although PRES also aimed to guide decisions regarding allocation of housing subsidies (Imilán
et al. 2015). A total of six PRESs were developed by public–private partnerships as well as 18
recovery plans for the coastal area of Biobío Region (PRBC18) led by the regional govern-
ment (also considered PRES), and 112 PRU for smaller localities were funded by the Ministry
of Housing and Urbanism (Gobierno de Chile 2014). Moris (2014) points out that “a door was
opened to strategic planning” but these plans were not transformed into multisectoral portfolios
of programmed investments, stating also that it has not been possible to comprehensively follow-
up the reconstruction of areas with PRES, emphasising that these plans were developed by stra-
tegic actors who wanted to contribute where they decided to do it (focusing on places where
they have interests). Likewise, Cuadros and Serra (2015) indicate that the way to link these PRES
to binding territorial planning instruments would be to update current plans. However, in many
cases territorial planning instruments have not been updated yet, hindering the implementation
of projects in areas where modification of regulations is required for their completion.
Those PRES funded by private companies had a board of directors that included them as
well as several public institutions (ministries in charge of reconstruction), universities, and muni-
cipalities. The latter had different degrees of involvement, although they were not leading actors
in the reconstruction plans of their territories, as they had little power and minimal management
capacity (Imilán et al. 2015). Furthermore, reconstruction through these initiatives –both private
and public funded –focused on the communal capitals and localities of the coastal area, leaving
behind rural areas with high levels of vulnerabilities.
Making Cities Resilient was launched in May 2010. “The Campaign is led by the UNISDR
but is self-motivating, partnership and city-driven with an aim to raise the profile of resili-
ence and disaster risk reduction among local governments and urban communities worldwide”
(UNISDR n.d.). It is based on “10 essentials” that local governments should consider, including
to raise awareness and to know more about risks at local level, allocate resources for DRM, and
implement measures to reduce disaster risk. By July 2018, 3,883 local governments around the
world had participated in the program, 34 of them Chilean. Of these, only six have uploaded
documents and only Lampa maintains updated information on the campaign website; its mayor
has been an active promoter of the campaign. However, lack of active engagement of local
governments seems not to be an exception at the global level, thus currently the campaign is
focused on implementation rather than inclusion of new members.
369
González-Muzzio and Cárdenas Becerra
Another international initiative is the 100 Resilient Cities Programme promoted by the
Rockefeller Foundation with the aim of making cities more resilient to the “physical, social
and economic challenges of the 21st century” (100 Resilient Cities n.d.). The program also
considers a vision of resilience to the impacts of dangerous natural events and other factors that
weaken the structure of the city. It highlights the need for collaborative work of society, including
public and private sectors, academia, social organizations and unions, among others. The Santiago
Metropolitan Area joined the programme in 2014. During 2017, the “Resilience Strategy for the
Metropolitan Region of Santiago” was drawn up, which includes the following aspects: urban
mobility, the environment, human security, risk management, economic development, and com-
petitiveness and social equity (Intendencia Región Metropolitana 2017). Funding sources are now
being explored to implement proposals. However, as this initiative is coordinated by the regional
government, the process has involved little participation of the municipalities that make up the
metropolitan area of Santiago (37 in total), especially those from more peripheral communes.
Through the collaboration between UNDP and SUBDERE, the creation of a budget item
(approximately $800,000 per year) called the Risk Prevention and Mitigation Programme
(PREMIR) was added to the annual national budget on a permanent basis. Its purpose is to
“strengthen the municipality to fulfill its civil protection role at the communal level, delivering
tools that allow it to reduce risk, prepare for response and support the process of recovery from
an emergency and/or catastrophe” (SUBDERE n.d.), by means of the incorporation of DRM
in municipalities through planning, strengthening local capacities for prevention and disaster
response, and the production of local risk studies, among others. The aim is to change the
prevailing reactive attitude towards emergencies to one where prevention, mitigation, prepar-
ation, and recovery from emergencies and disasters are priority actions of work over time.
UNDP and SUBDERE have worked together in DRM at the municipal level since 2014,
following the identification of a gap existing in the municipalities of the country regarding this
matter. Between 2014 and 2016, 154 municipalities were invited to participate in the devel-
opment of communal investment plans for disaster risk reduction, of which 90 successfully
completed the entire process in nine regions. In 2018, the developed plans are being followed up,
in order to measure their degree of implementation and updating needs due to the occurrence
of disasters in some of the communes after the plans were prepared.
In parallel, UNDP and SUBDERE opened an information and collaboration platform on the
internet called Municipal GRD (UNDP and SUBDERE 2018), related to the PREMIR pro-
gramme, where webinars and other capacity-development initiatives are carried out at a regular
basis. UNDP developed a methodology for preparing the investment plans on disaster risk reduc-
tion and has also produced several guidelines for mainstreaming disaster risk reduction at the local
level. Municipalities can apply for financing initiatives throughout the year and, recently, in August
2018, SUBDERE published an operational guide to assist municipalities in requesting such funds.
Regarding the PREMIR initiative, a sample of nine investment plans for disaster risk reduc-
tion of communes located in six regions were reviewed (Table 27.3). These plans were produced
by municipal officials from different areas of each municipality supported by UNDP consultants.
Communes of the sample are exposed to more than one hazard and also most of them were
affected by an event from 2010 onwards. However, not all of them selected the same hazard to
define the risk scenario(s) for proposing initiatives. In a few cases, more than one scenario was
analyzed, and most of the reviewed plans do not consider cascading events or multihazard scenarios.
Initiatives vary from dissemination of hazards information, hazards and risks studies (local and inter-
communal), and specific mitigation actions. Similarly, there is a wide range of costs from around
$10,000, for cleaning a local river basin to remove debris, to $1 million for a study of a sub-regional
river basin. Most initiatives will require consultancy services because municipalities recognized
370
Table 27.3 Main contents of communal plans of investments in disaster risk reduction for nine communes in Chile
Commune Region Hazards Vulnerabilities Risk scenario Initiatives Estimated cost Estimated cost Who should Comments
(physic, economic, selected CLP USD do it?
environmental,
socio-cultural,
administrative
Cobquecura Biobío Riverine flood; Ancient buildings, Earthquake Risk assessment of 45,000,000 69,230.77 Consultancy Affected
earthquake, low economic and earthquake and office by 2010
tsunami capacity, wetland tsunami tsunami earthquake
destruction, low and
risk awareness tsunami
(tourists), lack
of resources for
DRM
Quellón Los Lagos Nocive algae Populated areas Tsunami; Cleaning of the river 7,000,000 10,769.23 Municipality Affected by
(“red tide”); exposed, low landslide basin (rivers Flojo “red tide”
riverine recovery capacity, in urban and Matadero) in 2016
flood, inadequated land area (Flojo
tsunami; use of hazardous river); Red
landslides in areas, chaotic tide
urban areas behavior of
people if landslide
occurrs, low DRM
capacity
Ránquil Biobío Forest fires, Rural areas with Forest fires DRM plan regarding 20,000,000 30,769.23 Consultancy Affected by
floods, low standard forest fires office earthquake
landslides of habitability, 2010 and
(mass precariousness forest
movements) of agriculture, fires in
conditions December
favorable to fire, 2011
(continued)
Table 27.3 (Cont.)
Commune Region Hazards Vulnerabilities Risk scenario Initiatives Estimated cost Estimated cost Who should Comments
(physic, economic, selected CLP USD do it?
environmental,
socio-cultural,
administrative
Caldera Atacama Earthquake, Buildings in Earthquake Study of the structural 90,000,000 138,461.54 Consultancy Affected by
tsunami hazardous and condition of housing office earthquake
areas, road tsunami of the commune of and
infrastructure Caldera considering tsunami in
exposed to flood, zoning approach 2015,
unsafe behavior regarding different
of people if types of soil in the
tsunami hits face of seismic
hazard; study for the
construction of a
system of evacuation
corridors for tsunami
and meeting areas
Iquique Tarapaca Earthquake, South sector of Landslide Dissemination of 16,600,000 25,538.46 Municipality Affected by
landslide, Iquique exposed triggered hydrometerologic earthquake
tsunami to landslides, by extreme risks in the and minor
conectivity not rain event commune of tsunami
robust Iquique in 2012,
and local
landslide
triggered by
the breakage
of a drinking
water
pipeline.
Located in.
Very dry
area
Risk scenario Initiatives Estimated cost Estimated cost Who should Comments
selected CLP USD do it?
cultural,
administrative
La Serena Coquimbo Earthquake, Rural population, Extreme rain Study on the streams 693,000,000 1,066,153.85 Regional Affected by
tsunami, Diego de Almagro (ravines) of the funding. Three earthquake
extreme rain, street and pampa commune of La municipalities and minor
desertification exposed; tourism Serena, the basin involved. tsunami in
and droughts, loses due to of the Elqui river Consultancy 2015
collapse bad weather and its tributaries, office
of mining conditions, due to the risk
landfill, schools still used generated by
structural fires as shelters during hydrometeorological
disasters, polution hazard related to
when dust gets extraordinary rains
dry
Loncoche Araucanía Riverine flood, Low conectivity Drought Study of efficient 90,000,000 138,461.54 Consultancy
droughts in to some rural solutions for office
rural areas sectors, lack of collection /
drinking water accumulation of
networks to serve drinking water in
people in isolated rural sectors of
areas, unstable difficult access.
flow of streams,
population highly
dependant from
public assistance.
Paihuano Coquimbo Earthquake, Urban area exposed Flash floods Study on the streams 693,000,000 1,066,153.85 Regional
extreme inadequate and (ravines) of the funding. Three
rain, intervention of landslides commune of La municipalities
doughts ravines, Serena, the basin involved.
of the Elqui river Consultancy
and its tributaries, office
due to the risk
generated by
hydrometeorological
hazard related to
extraordinary rains
(continued)
Table 27.3 (Cont.)
Commune Region Hazards Vulnerabilities Risk scenario Initiatives Estimated cost Estimated cost Who should Comments
(physic, economic, selected CLP USD do it?
environmental,
socio-cultural,
administrative
Villarrica Araucanía Earthquake, Housing and vital Volcanic Early warning system 109,080,000 167,815.39 External Villarrica
volcanic infrastructure eruption to prevent casualties contractors volcano
hazard, exposed, in case of volcanic is one of
flood, tourism and eruption (Villarrica the most
forest fires, agriculture are volcano) active
droughts main economic in the
activities, lack country,
of equipment last
for bad weather eruption in
conditions in 2015
evacuation zones,
low capacity to
respond
Source: Authors, from the analysis of nine communal investment plans for disaster risk reduction supported by UNDP
Municipal resilience in Chile
they do not have the technical competences required for formulating the studies nor for reviewing
them. It is worth noting that by mid 2018 none of the initiatives reviewed had been implemented.
375
González-Muzzio and Cárdenas Becerra
The factor 4.1 “Institutional framework” is directly related to municipal DRM, although
4.2 “Social cohesion” and 4.3. “Sectoral commitment” are also relevant since they consider the
involvement of the community and the private sector in risk management (Figure 27.2).
Regarding “Institutional framework” (see Figure 27.2, variables 4.1.1–4.1.7), the variable of
Governance Dimension with the best evaluation is “Coverage of social programmes” focalized
on the most vulnerable local population, with 66 per cent of the sample evaluated with no risk
and only 5 per cent of municipalities assessed with medium or high level of risk. “Accountability
mechanisms” also has a good performance. It refers to the existence of transparency mechanisms
and that neighbors are informed regularly, which is done by 66 per cent of the communes
while 14 per cent inform sometimes and with no regular mechanism or do not count with
accountability mechanisms. With respect to the sub-variables regarding Communal Capacities
for DRM (4.1.4.1–4.1.4.5 in Figure 27.2), the worst evaluated in the sample of 116 communes
was “Financial autonomy and decision making” due to the absence of funds oriented to risk
management or municipal dependence on other levels of public administration. Almost 20 per
cent of the municipalities do not have instruments oriented to disaster risk reduction and in
47 per cent of the sample there is no specifically defined area for DRM, and emergency man-
agement depends on other sectors of the municipality such as “operations” or “environment”.
The best evaluated sub-variables are “Communal training” according to which 64 per cent of
the municipalities offer their employees access to training on DRM or related topics, and “Civil
protection committee”, although 22 per cent of the sample has not constituted that committee,
which is mandatory for every municipality in the country. However, in most cases, emergency
officials have a secondary role at the municipality during normal times, with a low degree of
influence to promote DRM actions, while in emergencies they have an operative role, being the
mayor and their closest team –those who make decisions together with the operative committee
of emergencies (composed by the same members than the civil protection committee). In add-
ition, especially in the rural and/or poorest municipalities, there is a high level of rotation among
professionals in all areas, who stay a couple of years, get trained, and then move to other munici-
palities or the private sector seeking better job opportunities and income.
Concerning “Social cohesion” (variables 4.2.1–4.2.3 in Figure 27.2), it has a low evaluation in
general as the three variables composing this factor present high or very high risk levels.Thus, in 64
per cent of the communes in the sample there are no projects associated with DRM promoted by
civil society organizations or there are very few, with little or no articulation with the municipality
(variable 4.2.4); 59 per cent of the communes have not formed a council of civil society aimed to
represent the local community at the municipality or its sessions in a non-regular manner (variable
4.2.2). Half of assessed municipalities do not have information about risk or their methodologies
are excessively technical and do not consider public participation (variable 4.2.1). Although “Social
belonging” is the one with the best evaluation, only 7 per cent of the sample considers inclusive
and multicultural policies or strategies. The disaffection of the community by politics and partici-
pation in social organizations has been relevant since the 1970s, recovering slowly during the pre-
sent century.This could explain the low degree of involvement of civil society in actions related to
DRM, although after the earthquake of 2010 several NGOs emerged with the aim of promoting
community resilience, in most cases without a specific territorial framework.
Finally, with respect to “Sectoral commitment”, variable 4.3.1 “Private investment respon-
sibility” considers the existence of public–private partnerships that result in corporate social
responsibility initiatives or actions of collaboration of private companies in different stages of the
risk cycle. This occurs in only 14 per cent of the municipalities while in 77 municipalities no
initiatives have been reported so far. With regard to risk transfer, only 9 per cent of the sample
has mechanisms to transfer risk or has been able to find funding to help the local population
376
Municipal resilience in Chile
in case of disaster. Private sector participation in the reconstruction process was crucial in some
communes such as Constitución and Santa Cruz after 2010, and the same has happened after
the floods that occurred in 2015 in Atacama where Codelco and other mining companies have
contributed by funding plans and projects for sustainable reconstruction of affected areas. The
involvement of municipalities in these initiatives has been increasing over time, although they
sometimes lack technical and management capacities for negotiation with private companies.
Although the survey applied by ONEMI could be improved in terms of its contents and
description of variables, it is the first systematic attempt to assess underlying factors of risk in Chile.
In addition, the results are consistent among the first sample of 60 communes evaluated in 2017 and
the ones added up to mid 2018, representing together 33 per cent of Chilean municipalities, thus
being very valuable to focalize public policies to promote DRM at communal level. In this sense,
ONEMI is proposing recommendations to each assessed municipality to improve its performance.
In relation to specific disaster risk reduction instruments, the minimum currently required
is the communal plan of civil protection and emergencies. According to a study carried out by
AMUCH (2017), on a sample of 128 municipalities regarding DRM capacities at the muni-
cipal level, 60.4 per cent of municipalities have plans prepared in 2016 or 2017 and 8.6 per cent
indicated that they do not have a plan. This instrument is usually focused on emergencies over
risk management. Although it should be updated annually, it is not mandatory in the current
legal framework.
With respect to financial and technical capacities related to DRM, the same study found that
those with the lowest capacities are communes belonging to Group 4 or Group 5 (semi-urban
or rural communes with medium or low development) (AMUCH 2017). This is consistent
with the ONEMI survey, where those communes with greatest financial dependence on the
Municipal Common Fund (a redistributive mechanism of resources among all Chilean munici-
palities) have the highest ICFSR.
According to AMUCH (2017), the budget for emergency response and/or DRM in 2016
varied from $0 in ten communes to $207,700 in Maipú, from a sample of 107 communes, with
an average close to $32,000 (Figure 27.3). Again, the communes with the lowest budget assigned
to these items belong to Group 4 and Group 5.
As previously stated, the same conclusion emerges from the study of ONEMI (González
Correa 2017), where the communes worst evaluated in relation to community training,
3%
Municipalities with budget for risks and emergencies
8% lower than US$ 15,000
Figure 27.3 Budget intended for risk and emergencies at the municipal level (2016)
Source: Authors translation from AMUCH (2017)
377
González-Muzzio and Cárdenas Becerra
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Low Moderate High Very high
instruments oriented to DRM, and financial capacities are also from Group 4 and Group 5.
These variables contribute to a large extent to the fact that communes belonging to Group 4
and 5 have a higher Index of Underlying Factors of Risk (ICFSR) (Figure 27.4).
With respect to technical capacities of emergency or DRM officials, of 104 municipalities
that responded to the AMUCH study, 59 per cent are professionals, 28 per cent are technicians,
9 per cent reached secondary education, and 4 per cent had a career in Carabineros or in the
Army (institutions highly related to “security and safety”). Although most of the communes
have more professionals than technicians in those positions, in municipalities of Group 5 educa-
tional qualification is lower, which is probably related to less availability of resources for salaries.
Training received by officials also decreases in Groups 4 and 5 as well as the number of people
who participate in them.
Although more than 80 per cent of the municipalities that answered the AMUCH survey
indicated they had an instrument that accounts for the risks in the municipality, this does
not translate into the updating of territorial planning instruments nor in the generation of
instruments directly associated with DRM, with a few exceptions.
Furthermore, the interviews carried out for this study represent two types of municipalities,
those that have initiated a process to consider DRM in a more integrated manner and those
where the focus remains on emergency prevention and response.The latter have one emergency
official, normally in charge of other activities also, who implements seasonal activities only (a
“winter plan” for flood prevention and response and a plan regarding forest fires every summer).
Officials from San Pedro de la Paz and Talcahuano (both belonging to Group 1 according
to the SUBDERE typology) highlighted that it is not only a matter of resources but also of
administrative proficiency. Both of them have managed to get support from private companies
to produce educational material and to increase their capacity to reach the community, for
example by training employees of large companies. Similarly, the “multiplier effect” of children
in their homes has been taken advantage of by integrating information on hazards, disaster
378
Municipal resilience in Chile
preparedness, first response, etc. inside schools, with educational resources focused on children
of different ages.
In the case of Lampa (Group 2), work has focused on improving institutional management
in the face of hazards, increasing technical capacities of municipal teams, promoting interdepart-
mental coordination and enhancing integration between risk management and environmental
topics, although community participation in DRM is almost non-existent there. A significant
portion of the resources has been allocated to the prevention of and first response to forest fires,
creating a municipal brigade. In addition, a process of exchange and collaboration with other
municipalities with less development regarding these topics has been initiated.
It was observed that those successful cases have been personally led by the municipal authority
(mayor) who has empowered professionals with specific training and whose interest in DRM has
been triggered by events such as the 2010 earthquake.
With few exceptions, community participation in municipal risk management activities is
only informative. In the commune of Til Til (Group 4) a more active participation of citizens and
organizations was observed, triggered by a greater risk perception regarding environmental contam-
ination and water scarcity as well as the potential dangers derived from mining activities (presence
of tailings) and landfills. The mayor recently created the office of DRM at the municipality, having
realized the annual increase in emergency expenditure and the effects that the aforementioned
hazards and others related to climate change could mean for the Til Til population and territory.
379
González-Muzzio and Cárdenas Becerra
Notes
1 Encuesta de Factores Subyacentes del Riesgo de Desastres in Spanish.
2 Municipality of Cabo de Hornos has to administer two communes: Cabo de Hornos and Antártica.
References
100 Resilient Cities. (n.d.). About us. www.100resilientcities.org.
AMUCH (Asociación Chilena de Municipalidades) (2017). Municipios en la gestión de riesgo y
emergencias. Santiago: Dirección de Estudios Asociación de Municipalidades de Chile.
Bündnis Entwicklung Hilft (2017). WorldRiskIndex Analysis and Prospects 2017. Berlin: Bündnis
Entwicklung Hilft.
CNID (Consejo Nacional de Innovación para el Desarrollo) (2016). Hacia un Chile resiliente frente a
desastres: una oportunidad. Santiago: Consejo Nacional de Innovación para el Desarrollo.
CONAF (Corporación Nacional Forestal) (2017). Descripción y efectos “Tormenta de fuego” 18 de enero
al 5 de febrero de 2017, regiones de O’Higgins, el Maule y Biobío, Santiago. www.conaf.cl/tormenta_
de_fuego-2017/DESCRIPCION-Y-EFECTOS-TORMENTA-DE-FUEGO-18-ENERO-AL-5-
FEBRERO-2017.pdf. (Accessed July 13, 2018).
380
Municipal resilience in Chile
Cuadros, G. and Serra, I. (2015). Curicó [case study], in C. Irazabal and M. Marchant (eds.), Learning From
27F: A Comparative Assessment of Urban Reconstruction Processes After the 2010 Earthquake in
Chile. Santiago: Santiago Research Cell, pp. 23–58.
FULCRUM Ingeniería Ltda. (2018). Análisis cuantitativo y cualitativo de los resultados obtenidos
de la aplicación de encuesta de factores subyacentes del riesgo de desastres en el nivel communal.
Santiago: ONEMI, Ministerio del Interior y Seguridad Pública.
Gobierno de Chile (2010). Plan de Reconstrucción Terremoto y Maremoto del 27 de febrero de 2010.
Santiago: Gobierno de Chile.
Gobierno de Chile (2014). Diagnóstico estado de la reconstrucción.Terremoto y Tsunami 27 de febrero de
2010. Santiago: Delegación presidencial para la reconstrucción.
González Correa, R. (2017). Análisis de los resultados preliminares de la encuesta “Identificación Factores
Subyacentes del Riesgo de Desastres” 2017, muestra de 60 municipios a nivel país, Report of proffesional
internship. Santiago: ONEMI, Ministerio del Interior y Seguridad Pública.
Ilustre Municipalidad de Valparaíso (2014). Diagnóstico municipal para la reconstrucción.Valparaíso: Ilustre
Municipalidad de Valparaíso.
Imilán,W., Pino, F., Fuster, X., González, L.E., and Larenas, J. (2015). Constitución [case study]. In: C. Irazabal
and M. Marchant (eds): Learning From 27F: A Comparative Assessment of Urban Reconstruction
Processes After the 2010 Earthquake in Chile. Santiago: Santiago Research Cell, 59–80.
Intendencia Región Metropolitana (2017). Santiago humano y resiliente. Estrategia de resiliencia Región
Metropolitana de Santiago, C. Robertson, (ed.). Santiago: Feiser impresores.
Moris (2014). Notas respecto a los aprendizajes del proceso de reconstrucción en Chile después del 27 de
febrero de 2010. CIGIDEN report.
ONEMI (Oficina Nacional de Emergencias) (2017). Identificación Factores Subyacentes del Riesgo de
Desastres: instructivo equipo communal. Santiago: Ministerio del Interior y Seguridad Pública.
Rovira, A., Rojas, C., and Díez, S (2013). Efectos de una erupción volcánica Andina. El caso del Cordón
Caulle, Sur de Chile (2011). In: A. Borsdorf (ed.): Forschen im Gebirge. Investigating the Mountains,
IGF-Forschungsberichte, Band 5. Vienna: Verlag der Ôsterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften,
288–304.
SUBDERE. (n.d.). Programa Prevención y Mitigación de Riesgos (PREMIR). www.subdere.gov.cl/
programas/división-municipalidades/programa-prevención-y-mitigación-de-r iesgos-premir.
SUBDERE (Subsecretaría de Desarrollo Regional y Administrativo) (2017). Resolución n°125, 2017.
Determina grupos de municipalidades de acuerdo a su tipología y recursos correspondientes a las
municipalidades beneficiadas por el Fondo de Incentivo al Mejoramiento de la gestión Municipal, en
cumplimiento de la ley de presupuestos del sector público para el año 2017. SUBDERE: Ministerio del
Interior y Seguridad Pública, July 29, 2017, Diario Oficial de la República de Chile, Santiago.
UNDP and SUBDERE. (2018). www.grdmunicipal.cl.
UNISDR. (n.d.). www.unisdr.org/campaign/resilientcities/home/about.
United Nations (2016) A/71/644, Report of the Open-Ended Intergovernmental Expert Working Group
on Indicators and Terminology Relating to Disaster Risk Reduction. Geneva: General Assembly.
Legislation
Constitución Política de la República de Chile (1980). Ministerio de Justicia.
Decreto 38 (2011). Modifica Decreto N° 156, de 2002, y determina constitución de los Comités de
Operaciones de Emergencia, Ministerio del Interior y Seguridad Pública.
Decreto Nº 156 (2002). aprueba Plan Nacional de Proteccion civil, y deroga Decreto Nº 155, de 1977, que
aprobó el Plan Nacional de Emergencia, Ministerio del Interior y Seguridad Pública.
Ley Nº 16,282 (1965). Fija disposiciones para casos de sismos o catastrofes, establece normas para la
reconstrucción de la zona afectada por el sismo de 28 de marzo de 1965 y modifica la Ley N° 16.250.
Law 18.695 (2007). Ley Orgánica Constitucional de Municipalidades, Ministerio del Interior y Seguridad
Pública.
381
28
Understanding the fabric of
large urban areas to improve
disaster planning and recovery
Charles John Kelly
Introduction
This chapter considers the linkages between the urban fabric of social and physical infrastructure
and disasters in large urban areas. The purpose of the chapter is to help guide disaster and urban
planners, at-r isk populations, and other stakeholders in planning for and addressing the impact of
disaster on large urban areas after the initial lifesaving response.
The focus on the period after immediate lifesaving assistance recognizes that life-sustaining
support (e.g. adequate water, shelter, protection, etc.) and concurrent recovery take consider-
ably more time and effort, are more complex, and cost more, than lifesaving efforts immediately
after a disaster. As most relief and recovery is done by disaster survivors, an extended period of
recovery poses significant demands on individual disaster survivors, disaster-affected families, and
society.
Anticipating where and what post-disaster aid is needed is important to the overall recovery
process as capacities to deliver aid following a major disaster in a large urban area will be
constrained by damage to the physical infrastructure and commercial systems. Yet, with a few
exceptions, these life-sustaining and recovery1 requirements are not planned through before
a disaster and can be subject to haphazard and poorly coordinated efforts following a disaster.
The result is that disaster survivors face additional, avoidable, hardship following a disaster and a
slower than possible recovery process.
Large urban areas have more human and physical resources than smaller urban or rural areas
simply because of their size. This leads to an inherent complexity of urban areas that challenges
the management of recovery when the urban fabric of social and physical infrastructure is
damaged or disrupted by a disaster.
This said, it is also true that large urban areas have an inherent resiliency. This resilience may
not be uniform across the area affected by a disaster and may be more demonstrated by one
segment of the urban society than another (Kelly 1995). Improved planning for recovery in large
urban areas needs to identify how and where the urban fabric is resilient, or not, and which
segments of society may need more, or less, support following a disaster.
Further, the inherent resilience of large urban areas means that, for practical purposes, some
elements of the fabric can be expected to self-heal from damage. Understanding this potential
382
Understanding fabric of large urban areas
for self-healing (and what support may be needed for self-healing) allows knowing where to
direct external assistance to the best effect.
The following section of this chapter discusses the nature of the terrain in large urban areas.
The discussion covers the sizing of a large urban area, urban, and social resilience, and the
overarching concept of resilient social and physical infrastructure.
This is followed by a section that considers the nature of damage to social and physical
infrastructure in large urban areas. The final section provides recommendations on how to
improve disaster planning and preparedness to reduce the time and resources needed for recovery
following a disaster in large urban areas.
• “A disaster event with a small area of physical impact can directly affect a significant number
of people” because of its cascading effects.
• “Economic and social system damage can have an immediate ‘knock-on’ effect on large
numbers of people beyond the site of the physical event.”
• “The impacts of a disaster are quickly evident to those who are not affected.”
• “The level of assistance immediately available for response is significant.”
• “Part of an urban area can suffer major damage while other parts of the same urban area con-
tinue normal activities.”
More recent interest, reflecting the response to the 2010 Haiti earthquake and identification of
significant risks in places like Dhaka and other very large cities, contributed to the establishment
of the Urban Response Community of Practice,2 and the Urban Crises Learning Partnership.3
These efforts have resulted in a range of research, including Boano and Martén (2017), English
et al. (2017), Haque et al. (2017), Maynard et al. (2007), Meaux and Osofisan (2016), Mohiddin
et al. (2017), and Smith et al. (2017). Additional research on large urban area disasters can be
found in Fenton et al. (2018). The Urban Crises Learning Partnership also sponsored a large
earthquake urban disaster simulation in Dhaka in 2017, an event that contributed to the devel-
opment of this chapter.4
The use of the term “large urban area” as the focus of disaster research addresses two defin-
itional challenges. The first is what constitutes the lower population number of the urban entity
that is the focus of attention.
Earlier work had focused on cities with more than one million inhabitants (Mitchel 1994).
Megacities are clearly large urban areas, but the use of one million residents as a cut-off is arbi-
trary and presumes that managing disasters in a city of one million is significantly different than
in a city of 900,000 residents, a position for which limited evidence exists.
383
Charles John Kelly
A second reason to use the term large urban area is that the population of an urban area may
change quickly, particularly, but not only, after conflict-induced displacement. Thus, while a city
may have a legally bounded census population of 500,000 persons, an influx of displaced per-
sons may add 50 per cent to this population, with another 200,000 persons residing in legally
unincorporated settlements surrounding the city but socially and economically linked to the
city. The resulting combination of the legally bounded city holding an additional resident popu-
lation and neighboring unincorporated settlements constitute a large urban area created by the
displacement.
An analysis of the impacts of the displacement, and planning to address these impacts, needs
to consider the affected population as a whole, and not the one based on official census data or
legal boundaries. Thus, the author’s use of the term large urban areas allows for pragmatic inclu-
sion, or exclusion, of urban areas that may not meet a specific population figure, where disaster
management capacities may differ considerably, or where realistic population numbers are not
available but visible conditions indicate a large number of people residing in one place.
Urban Resilience
Resilience to disaster comes from the social and economic fabric of those affected. However,
this fabric is complex, multifaceted, and not consistent across locations or social strata. As a result,
resilience can vary from place to place and between residents of the same place. Knowing the
nature of the resilience fabric is critical to identifying where and by whom disaster damage may
be felt most severely, where extended life-sustaining and recovery support will be needed, and
where resilience building is most critical.
Keck and Sakdapolrak (2013) identify three approaches to social resilience:
• Coping, a reactive process to the impact of an event after the event has occurred.
• Adaptive, an anticipation of the impacts of an event, and taking measures to reduce these
impacts.
• Transformative, taking measures so that the anticipated impacts do not occur.
Coping is generally short term, although it can be based on longer-term experience –for
example, the reuse of past coping strategies.The transformative approach is generally a long-term
process but may occur quickly following a shock. The adaptive approach fits between, keeping
ahead of impacts if possible, but not avoiding them totally.
Meerow et al. (2016) take up the question of defining urban resilience. Their definition
of urban resilience is “the ability of an urban system-and all its constituent socio-ecological
and socio-technical networks across temporal and spatial scales-to maintain or rapidly return
to desired functions in the face of a disturbance, to adapt to change, and to quickly transform
systems that limit current or future adaptive capacity” (Meerow et al. 2016:45).
This definition overlaps with the characteristic set out by Keck and Sakdapolrak (2013).
However, in the context of understanding disaster risks and recovery options in large urban
systems, the Meerow et al. (2016) definition calls attention to the social and physical systems and
networks that operate in urban areas and on which urban areas rely to survive.
The complexity and integration of these systems in large urban areas can make these areas
resilient. That is, damage to one part of a system is compensated by capacities of other parts of a
system, or by a separate system taking on unanticipated tasks.
But the resiliency of a complex and integrated system only exists up to a point. Where a dis-
aster causes significant disruption to these interconnected systems, the ability of the large urban
384
Understanding fabric of large urban areas
area to operate and provide for even the basic needs of the dependent urban population can be
compromised, particularly because urban residents are totally reliant on the urban systems for
basic and other needs. Re-establishing or replacing these urban systems after a disaster, and when
system services need to continue to meet basic needs, is complicated, time consuming and may
involve actions far outside the experience of governments and humanitarian assistance providers.
• “Robustness –building infrastructure that can withstand prescribed levels of stress and demand
in the event of an adverse natural event.”
• “Redundancy –requiring the inclusion of a measure of in-built sustainability that can with-
stand repeated adverse events and keep infrastructure functional during an event.”
• “Resourcefulness (innovation) –developing institutional capacity to mobilize recovery and
mitigation resources in the event of a major adverse weather event.”
• “Rapidity –introducing measures that enhance the capacity to contain losses or prevent fur-
ther degradation of infrastructure in a timely and efficient manner before, during, and after an
adverse natural event.”
This definition includes the social systems that use the physical infrastructure leading to a single
system of resilience in a large urban area.
The presence of hazards, whether natural, political, or technological, are necessary but not
sufficient for a disaster. While large-scale (e.g. massive flooding) or intense (e.g. earthquakes)
hazard events may occur, the robustness and resilience of the social and physical infrastructure (as
defined by Bruneau et al. 2003) are key in determining the level of damage done and thus the
scale of a disaster. Basically, the key consideration is not the level of damage done, but the resili-
ence of the overall social and physical infrastructure to absorb this damage.
Resilience in physical systems can come from
Resilience of social infrastructure to a hazard event is more complicated but is largely based on
the ability to cope and adapt, often in a decentralized and distributed way.
At times, the resilience of elements of the overall social and physical infrastructure can occur
in a single combined system, based on pre-disaster systems that are adapted to the needs created
by the hazard event or disaster. Kendra and Wachtendorf ’s (2016) description of the response of
ferries and other ships to a need to evacuate people from lower Manhattan during the events of
9/11 is an example of this adaptation of social and physical systems during a disaster.
In this case, rules were stretched (e.g. more people were carried than officially authorized),
non-passenger vessels were used to transport passengers, ad hoc loading areas were established,
and other non-authorized actions taken to move as many people from lower Manhattan as
quickly as possible. These actions were not taken on the orders of the authorities overseeing the
385
Charles John Kelly
evacuation but on the initiative of vessel operators, at times in coordination with other operators
or by simply following the lead of other vessels. The normal social and physical infrastructure
used to transport passengers was adapted by vessel operators, and those wanting passage, to
respond to the disaster.
Disasters are generally rated based on the number of people affected, lives lost, and
the physical damage done. A better understanding of a disaster’s impact can be gained
by understanding how well or poorly the social and physical infrastructure functions in
delivering goods, services and other benefits to the disaster-affected. Considering the social
and physical infrastructure as a whole helps identify ways the system is or can be used to
address the impacts of the disaster. The ability to continue to provide needed services and
supplies despite the impact of a disaster is at the heart of understanding how social and phys-
ical infrastructure can be resilient to disasters.
Twigg and Mosel (2017) discuss in more detail the nature of informal emergency groups, which
can be most difficult to identify and understand given that they did not exist before a disaster.
However, Quatantelli’s groups 2 to 7 are also doing things differently than before a disaster.They
need to be considered in understanding how the post-disaster social and physical infrastructure
is used, adapted, or altered after a disaster.
386
Understanding fabric of large urban areas
• Capitals, drawing from DFID (2001) and covering human, social, financial, natural, physical
capitals, and with the addition of political capital. These capitals are used to break down the
elements of the urban fabric.
• Significance to large urban places, summarizing the broad roles each capital plays in a large
urban area.
• Links to other capitals, summarizing how each capital is linked to others in a disaster context.
• Formal and informal systems, summarizing the degree to which the capital is defined by formal
and informal systems.
• Nature of damage from a large event, summarizing the general type of damage which could be
expected from a natural hazard, particularly flood, earthquake, storm or other natural hazard.9
While not comprehensive, Table 28.1 provides a broadly useful identification of the social and
physical infrastructure fabric of large urban areas as it relates to possible disasters. This informa-
tion can be used to better understand expected disaster impacts and thus identify possible man-
agement options that support recovery by disaster survivors, as discussed further below.
387
Table 28.1 Livelihood capitals and disaster impacts in large urban areas
Capital Significance to a large urban area Links to other capitals Formal and informal components Nature of damage from a large
event
Human: “skills, knowledge, Significant competencies and a Human capacities are core Most human capital is formal, as Loss of skilled personnel due
ability to labor and diverse range of human skills are to effectively managing all in degree-level engineers, but to fatalities, injuries or out-
good health” (DFID needed to effectively manage other capitals and hazards. some may be experience-based. migration, offset by human
2001:Section 2.3.1) large urban areas. However, most complicated capital being redeployed to fix
physical infrastructure requires damage or develop alternative
high levels of formal education physical infrastructure options.
and experience.
Social: “the social resources Higher levels of social capita may be Social capital can be used Most social capital is likely to be Dislocation during and following
upon which people limited for many urban residents to access other forms of informal in large urban areas, a disaster may reduce social
draw in due to a lack of time and space capital, e.g. knowing an but social structures such as connections and make them
pursuit of their” livelihoods to develop person-to-person engineer who can aid clubs, teams, and neighborhood harder to maintain and use.
(DFID 2001:Section contacts. Social capital may be getting a building permit. organizations may be formal or
2.3.2) more extensive at a lower level, semi-formal.
e.g., knowing more people, but
not that well.
Natural: “the natural Most access to natural resources Physical (e.g. roads) and Most access is likely through A cut-off or severe reduction of
resource stocks from in a large urban area is through financial (e.g. purchasing formal (markets) or semi-formal access to natural capital will
which resource flows and physical infrastructure or socio- power) capital are (trader) networks, while informal likely increase informal and
services economic systems, with a number important to access to access may be illegal (although illegal access to local sources of
(e.g. nutrient cycling, of intermediaries involved. natural capital. tolerated) and subject to formal natural capital (e.g. parks, lakes,
erosion protection) restrictions. rivers, etc.), and include water,
useful for livelihoods heating and electrical supplies.
are derived” (DFID
2001:Section 2.3.3).
“basic The physical backbone of the large Physical capital is the Most physical capital is formal (e.g. Strong, severe hazard events
infrastructure and urban area: all lifeline systems means by which natural toll roads), but some may be can cause significant damage
producer goods needed and physical production and and financial capital are informal (e.g. unlicensed ferry to physical capital, although
to support livelihoods” processing systems of a large delivered, where most operators crossing a river). the damage may be uneven
(DFID 2001:Section urban area are part of the physical human capital operates, (e.g. some roads damage,
2.3.4). capital of the area. This includes how social capital is others not), or affect only part
roads, rails, rivers and ports, maintained and provides of a large urban area (e.g.,
energy deliver systems, factories, the physical presence liquefaction in only one part of
processing and distribution and basis for intervention the large urban area).
centers, communications systems, for most political
and housing and other facilities. capital activities (e.g.
taxation, infrastructure
construction).
Financial: “the financial Financial transactions, as opposed Access to most other capitals Large urban areas likely have Damage to physical capital,
resources that people to barter, are a significant part in a large urban area distinct formal and informal particularly communications
use to achieve their of livelihood systems in large require some form of financial systems available to and electricity, may limit
livelihood objectives” urban areas. Most residents financial capital. residents, with both having a function of financial capital
(DFID 2001:Section of large urban areas can be process to transfer funds within systems. Limitations to financial
2.3.5). expected to have cash-in-the- and to or from outside (e.g. capital transactions can
pocket, and access to some remittances) the area. inhibit trade, access to natural
additional financial capital, resources, the availability of
through bank accounts or phone funds to pay for goods and
credit transfers or social capital services and overall limitations
(e.g. loans and gifts). Financial to reestablishing the physical
capital systems are particularly capital (e.g. no funds to pay
reliant on communications and wages or purchase services).
energy (electricity, generator fuel)
physical capital systems.
Political: the legal and Formal political capital may not The political capital system Formal political capital may have Apart from damage causing
regulatory systems be effective in large urban areas regulates, to a lesser or limited effectiveness in large losses of human, physical and
needed to assure where officials have limited time greater degree, the other urban areas where parallel financial capital, an inability
adequate livelihoods. and opportunity to engage with capitals and defines what informal systems have been of the formal political capital
(Kelly et al. 2010:14). residents. Access to formal political is permissible and what developed to address gaps in the system to deliver aid may lead
capital may also be limited by is not from a governance delivery of government services. to discontent on the part of
complex bureaucratic procedures (but not necessarily social) disaster survivors and (further)
and regulations spread across perspective. development of parallel
several offices or locations. informal systems.
Charles John Kelly
The nature of this mapping can vary. An obvious approach is a spatial map of the affected area
on which annotations about impacts on the social and physical fabric are made, supplemented
by additional explanatory text where necessary. The mapping process should clearly identify the
objective of the mapping, develop a common terminology and standard procedures for the initial
map development, and reviews and updating.
This type of mapping can be an effective way to record and confirm information from diverse
sources and formulate consensus-based results over short periods of time, for instance during a
field consultation or working group meetings.The map can be shared for comments and as a way
to collect additional input into the mapping process.
While the map itself provides usable information, it should also be continually updated to
document new information and track how the information collected has changed over time.
Given the increasing ubiquity of geographic information systems (GIS) in disaster response, the
initial map and updates could be integrated into a GIS and provide inputs into other aspects of
the disaster response.
As an example, the spatial mapping process could focus on emergent groups and their role in
providing shelter assistance after a disaster. An initial map would identify shelter needs on a street-
level grid, with the formal organizations identified for each part of the disaster affected area.
The map would then be shared with people on the ground and questions asked about how
the disaster-affected were rebuilding and where they were getting support for this process. This
process could be done on a house-by-house basis. But this level of effort would likely be too
demanding of time and resources post-disaster, making a focus group or key informant approach
more appropriate.
Several iterations of this process would identify emergent and other groups as identified by
Quarantelli involved in the rehousing process.This information in turn would help guide formal
organizations involved in rehousing to adjust what assistance they provide and how they provide
it to better match the disaster survivors’ own efforts and those of informal and emergent groups.
A second approach to mapping uses flow-charts and explanatory text to identify and present
the link between the parties involved in a specific sector or process. An example would be to
begin to understand food security in a large urban area after a major earthquake by mapping
out the normal (pre-disaster) system for delivering rice to a consumer and how this system was
affected by the disaster. A typical tool used in the market mapping process is the Emergency
Market Mapping and Analysis Toolkit (EMMA).10
Mapping using EMMA would follow the supply process of commercial production, produc-
tion purchasers, processors, wholesale, semi-wholesale, and retail sales, and include the transport
infrastructure, the financial capital systems needed to sustain the flow of funds though purchases,
and to what extent social, political, or human capacity influence operation of the delivery system.
This mapping can then be adjusted by attributing damage to specific elements of the mapped
system to specific results from an earthquake. This would lead to a mapping of disaster damage
to the rice supply system.
The damage identified in the mapping then becomes the focus of planning on how to avoid
or manage the damage, including developing alternate options to supply rice to the consumer.
These alternatives can be timeframed, as in delivering rice free of charge for one month, rice at
discounted process from government shops for the following five months under the assumption
that the commercial supply system would be operational in six months, based on the damage
done and recovery capacities.
Mapping the whole social and physical infrastructure of a large urban area is likely imprac-
tical, at least over the short term. A disaster-mapping process for large urban areas can develop a
plan to work through different systems within the urban fabric to progressively, using different
390
Understanding fabric of large urban areas
mapping approaches where appropriate, define impacts, linkages, and measures to address these
impacts. This process is different from the current general practice of disaster planning, where
plans are developed separately for specific physical sectors (e.g. water, energy, shelter) with min-
imal if any cross-links and rare consideration of the social infrastructure, and yield a broader
understanding of disasters and the urban fabric.
The quality, timeliness, and utility of mapping urban social and physical infrastructure after
a disaster can be significantly improved if the infrastructure, or critical parts, are mapped before
a disaster. This pre-disaster mapping provides a baseline for the post-disaster effort, including
details on the infrastructure system that may not be easily available after a disaster.
The pre-disaster mapping can also be used in scenarios to anticipate damage from specific
types and intensities of events. This scenario-based analysis of actual conditions can use the
information in Table 28.1 to delve into the deeper nature of disaster impacts, including the
role of informal groups and systems and how an urban social and infrastructure system could
be impacted in unanticipated ways by a disaster. The mapping results are not critical to the
scenario-based projection of results but could be expected to improve the detail and breadth
of the results.
Conclusions
This chapter discussed how planning for post-disaster life-supporting and recovery in large urban
areas can be improved by considering the nature of the urban social and physical infrastructure
fabric. The chapter provided a summary of the nature of large urban areas and the social and
physical infrastructure found in these areas.
391
Charles John Kelly
The chapter proposed that the human, social, natural, financial, and physical capital, identified
in the Sustainable Livelihoods Framework, together with political capital, be used to define key
characteristics of disaster impacts in large urban areas. This process would identify the nature of
the impact on each type of capital, the links between these capitals, and how formal or informal
elements of these capitals may interact after a disaster.
The results of identifying disaster impacts provide the basis for mapping these impacts along
systems embedded in each type of capital and mapping the links between these impacts and other
types of capital. The process proposed can be used to progressively build an understanding of
disaster impact on the urban fabric and its residents and identify measures to improve recovery as
well as define risk reduction and resilience-building measures for the locations and populations
at risk.
The mapping process to better understand impacts of disasters on the fabric of large urban
areas differs from the classical disaster planning approach, which focuses on the assessment of
risk or vulnerability. While the classical approaches remain viable for disaster planning, their use
in the more complex large urban areas may not yield information on the scope, scale, and inter-
connectedness that would result from the approach outlined in this chapter.The most significant
limitation to the approach described in this chapter is the lack of actual field use. It is hoped that
readers will consider the approach in planning for disaster risk management in large urban areas.
Notes
1 Hereafter, jointly referred to as “recovery” requirements as both are linked where the greater the
recovery the less need for direct life-supporting support.
2 See www.urban-response.org/. The Urban Response Community of Practice is managed with the
support of ALNAP, the Active Learning Network for Accountability and Performance.
3 www.iied.org/stronger-cities-initiative.
4 See Kelly (2017) and (2018) for more details.
5 From Sustainable Development Knowledge Platform, https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/sdg9.
6 Stallings and Quarantelli (1985) discuss emergent groups before and after a disaster.
7 Hereafter DFID.
8 See Kelly et al. 2010.
9 Experience suggests that the natural hazards that can result in significant damage to large urban areas
are floods (e.g. Bangkok 2011), earthquakes (e.g. Port au Prince 2010), winter storms (e.g. New York
2018) or cyclonic events, including hurricanes and typhoons (e.g. New York 2012).
10 Kamara (2013) compares EMMA and two other market-mapping approaches.
References
Boano, C. and Martén, R. (2017). Think Urban and Learn from the City: Exploring Urban Dimensions of
Humanitarianism. Summary Report. Urban Crises Learning Partnership. https://pubs.iied.org/pdfs/
G04286.pdf. (Accessed September 8, 2019).
Bruneau, M., Chang, S., Eguchi, R., Lee, G., O’Rourke, T., Reinhorn, A., Shinozuka, M., Tierney, K.,
Wallace, W., and Winterfeldt, D. (2003). A framework to quantitatively assess and enhance the seismic
resilience of communities. Earthquake Spectra. 19.
Department for International Development (2001). Sustainable Livelihoods Guidance Sheets.
London: Department for International Development.
English, G., Campos, L.C., and Parkinson, J. (2017).Water Market Actors in Dhaka: Strengthening Earthquake
Resilience and Preparedness. Summary Report. Urban Crises Learning Partnership. https://pubs.iied.
org/G04287/. (Accessed September 8, 2019).
Fenton, W., Foley, M., Twigg, J., and Mose, I. (2018). Special Feature: Humanitarian Response in Urban
Areas. Humanitarian Exchange, Humanitarian Practice Network. Overseas Development Institute.
Number 71.
392
Understanding fabric of large urban areas
Haque, A, Maksud Kamal, A., and Kamrul Hassan, S. (2017). Partnership, Coordination, and Accountability
in Urban Disaster Management: A Review of Policies in Bangladesh. Summary Report. Urban Crises
Learning Partnership. https://pubs.iied.org/pdfs/G04286.pdf. (Accessed September 8, 2019)..
Kamara N. (2013). Comparative Review of Market Assessments Methods, Tools, Approaches and Findings.
World Food Program. https://documents.wfp.org/stellent/groups/public/documents/manual_guide_
proced/wfp259756.pdf. (Accessed September 8, 2019).
Keck, M. and Sakdapolrak, P. (2013). What is social resilience? Lessons learned and ways forward. Erdkunde.
67: 5–18.
Kelly, C. (1994). Assessing Disaster Needs in Megacities: Perspectives from Work in Megacities. Developing
Countries, Changing Context of Megacity Disasters,Thematic Session D42, International Geographical
Union, Regional Conference, Prague, August 22–26, 1994.
Kelly, C. (1995). Assessing disaster needs in megacities: Perspectives from developing countries. GeoJournal.
37(3): 381–385.
Kelly, C. (1996). Megacities and disasters: Research concepts and practical actions, Proceedings, International
Conference on Natural Disaster Management, October 11–14, 1996, Merida,Venezuela.
Kelly, C. (2017). Dhaka City Earthquake Simulation. Working Paper. Urban Crises Learning Partnership.
International Institute for Environment and Development.
Kelly, C. (2018). The Dhaka earthquake simulation: Lessons for planning for large-scale urban disasters.
In: W. Fenton, M. Foley, J. Twigg, and I. Mose (eds.): Special Feature: Humanitarian Response in Urban
Areas. Humanitarian Exchange, Humanitarian Practice Network. Overseas Development Institute.
Number 71.
Kelly, C., Biyalieva, C., Dolgikh, S., Erokhin S., Fedorenko, A., Gareeva, A., Garcin,Y., Ibraimova, A., Iliasov,
I., Mastre, M., Podrezov, A.,Volovik,Y., Uzakbaeva,Y., and Sidorin, A. (2010). Climate Risk Assessment
Guide –Central Asia. Bishkek: CAMP Alatoo, UNDP and Climate and Development Knowledge
Network.
Kendra, J. and Wachtendorf,T. (2016). American Dunkirk: The Waterborne Evacuation of Manhattan on 9/
11. Philadelphia, PN: Temple University Press.
Kreimer, A., Arnold, M., and Carlin A. (eds.) (1999). Building Safer Cities: The Future of Disaster Risk.
Disaster Risk Management Series No. 3. Washington, DC: The International Bank for Reconstruction
and Development /The World Bank.
Maynard, M., Parker, E.,Yoseph-Paulus, R., and Garcia, D. (2017). Thinking Bigger: Area-Based and Urban
Planning Approaches to Humanitarian Crises. London: International Institute for Environment and
Development.
Meaux, A. and Osofisan, W. (2016). Review of Context Analysis: Tools for Urban Humanitarian Response.
IIED Working Paper. London: International Institute for Environment and Development.
Meerow, S., Newell, J., and Stults, M. (2016). Defining urban resilience: A review. Landscape and Urban
Planning. 147: 38–49.
Mitchell, J.K. (1994). Personal communication.
Mitchell, J.K. (1995a). Coping with natural hazards and disasters in US megacities: Perspectives on the
Twenty-first century. GeoJournal. 37(3): 303–312.
Mitchell, J.K. (ed.) (1995b). Megacities and Natural Disasters. Tokyo: United Nations University Press.
Mitchell, J.K. (1998). Hazards in changing cities. Applied Geography. 18(1): 1–6.
Mitchell, J.K. (ed.) (1999). Crucibles of Hazard: Mega-Cities and Disasters in Transition. New York: United
Nations Press.
Mohiddin, L., Smith, G., and Phelps, L. (2017). Urban Response Analysis Framework (URAF). Guidance
Note for Humanitarian Practitioners. London: International Institute for Environment and Development.
Quarantelli, E. (1995). Emergent Behaviors and Groups in the Crisis Time of Disasters. Preliminary Paper
226. Disaster Research Center. Newark: University of Delaware.
Smith, G., Mohiddin, L., and Phelps, L. (2017).Targeting in Urban Displacement Contexts. Guidance Note
for Humanitarian Practitioners. London: International Institute for Environment and Development.
Stallings, R. and Quarantelli, E. (1985). Emergent citizen groups and emergency management. Public
Administration Review. Special Issue 1985: 93–100.
Twigg, J. and Mosel, I. (2017). Emergent groups and spontaneous volunteers in urban disaster response.
Environment & Urbanization. 29(2): 443–458.
Twigg, J. and Model, I. (2018). Informality in Urban Crisis Response. Working paper 532. Overseas
Development Institute.
393
29
The helping hand in increasing
Nepal’s urban seismic resilience
Amod Mani Dixit, Ranjan Dhungel, Manish Raj Gouli,
Ramesh Guragain, Surya Narayan Shrestha, Suman Pradhan,
Surya Bhakta Sangachhe, Sujan Raj Adhikari, Nisha Shrestha,
Kapil Bhattarai, Pramod Khatiwada, Bishnu Hadkhale,
Ayush Baskota, Rita Thakuri, and Hanna Ruszczyk
Introduction
Nepal’s efforts towards enhancing urban seismic resilience began over two decades ago. Startled
by the devastation of the M6.6 Udaypur earthquake of 1988, Nepal developed a systematic
strategy based on understanding of earthquake hazard and risk, formulating a national building
code, raising awareness amongst stakeholders, and gradually building the capacity of personnel
involved directly with building construction. The policy and legal environment also improved
gradually. The international strategies and frameworks for disaster risk management and also
international development assistance helped Nepal to contextualize global knowledge and
experience as well as learn lessons by piloting and scaling up disaster risk reduction efforts.
The 2015 M7.8 Gorkha earthquake served as a litmus test for the empirical methodologies
used to address the dynamic dichotomy of urban vulnerability and resilience; the community
of practitioners and policymakers in disaster risk reduction have been impressed with the posi-
tive outcome and are enthusiastic about incorporating the lessons learned for enhancing seismic
resilience in the rapidly urbanizing settlements in Nepal. This chapter presents a story of the
difficult path that Nepal, a low-income country marred with a series of socio-economic and
political upheavals, undertook to successfully create opportunities for enhancing urban resilience.
394
Nepal’s urban seismic resilience
1935). The M7.8 Gorkha earthquake of 2015 killed over 9,000 people and damaged nearly a
million buildings, leaving several million homeless (Dixit et al. 2018; MOHA 2016; NPC 2015;
NRA 2016; Ruszczyk and Robinson 2018; Sharma 2016). Earlier, the M6.6 Udaypur earth-
quake of 1988 shook 22 eastern districts of Nepal, seriously damaged several urban centers, and
was the turning point for Nepal’s disaster mitigation programs (Thapa 1989).
Nepal started seismic monitoring in the late 1970s (Dixit 1993). The national seismology
center records, analyzes, and researches seismic parameters to define an earthquake model (Dixit
and Maksey 1992; Pandey et al. 2002). Studies revealed that the whole country faces high risk
levels of tremors (Adhikari 2013; Bhattarai et al. 2011). Nepal’s mountainous parts are highly
susceptible to co-seismic hazards such as earthquake-induced landslides (Williams et al. 2017),
landslide dams, earthquake breeching of glacier-dammed lakes, and earthquake-induced debris
flow. The southern plains of the country are susceptible to liquefaction and lateral spread (Dixit
and Maskey 1992). High levels of seismic hazard combined with other natural hazards such as
floods, debris flows, landslides, cloud bursts make Nepal, a least developed country, one of the
most disaster-prone countries in the world (MOHA 2018).
Urbanization in Nepal
Nepal has one of the highest rates of urbanization in Asia since 1970 (Manandhar and Parajuli
2015), mainly due to population migration from rural areas, especially during the leftist insur-
gency between 1996 and 2006 (see Table 29.1).
Nepal has 293 urban municipalities and 460 rural municipalities as units of governance (GoN
2017).The urban municipalities include four metropolitan cities (population more than 200,000),
13 sub-metropolitan cities (population between 150,000 and 200,000) and 246 municipalities
(population between 10,000 and 200,000). The rural municipalities are the clusters of erstwhile
village development committees. The metropolitan, sub-metropolitan cities, and the municipal-
ities that host administrative centers have the highest urbanization pressure and are commonly
considered as urban, although parts of their territory may still bear rural characteristics.
Extrapolation of the 2011 census data using the reported growth rate of 1.35 per cent per
annum (CBS 2012), and considering the recent administrative division, the total population of
Census year Urban centers, Urban population Rural population Total population,
Number Number
Number % Number %
Source: (CBS 2014; NPC 2017), Population figures for 2017 derived using 1.35 per cent population growth per annum
urban and rural population percentage derived from actual counting of rural and urban population (CBS 2017; 2018),
and designation of municipalities by the government (GoN 2017).
395
A. Dixit et al.
Nepal is estimated currently at 29,101,948 with more than 17 million (60 per cent) residing
in urban and almost 12 million living in rural settlements. Kathmandu valley is urbanizing the
fastest (Muzzini and Aparicio 2013). The following pair of satellite images of the same area,
15 years apart, show high density dwelling units cropping up, rapidly replacing paddy fields (see
Figure 29.1a–b). Figure 29.1b shows fast growth of urban built-up areas.
396
Figure 29.1a–b Satellite images of Kathmandu Valley show the rice fields being replaced by
urban houses
(1) State of the art buildings: Modern, large, commercial or corporate buildings that use modern
construction techniques and materials. The code allows use of any international code of a
standard higher than the NBC demands;
(2) Professionally designed and contractor- executed engineered constructions mainly in
urban areas;
(3) Owner-built two to three storey high non-engineered buildings with a limited footprint
area. Pre-engineered “rules-of-thumb (MRT)” were developed and made mandatory; and
(4) NBC addressed the traditional, rural buildings, in timber, bricks and adobe, by prescribing, in
a self-explanatory way, possible improvements in the construction materials and qualities.
Such a differential approach made the code easy to understand for different stakeholders and
home-owners. However, implementation of the code was difficult initially due to two hindering
factors, notably, (1) NBC education is not mandatory in engineering institutes, and (2) the
central and municipal governments did not have policies or mechanisms for its effective imple-
mentation. This resulted in a lack of understanding of the code in society, including municipal
governments that issue the building permits. Some municipalities, for example Lalitpur, tried to
enforce the NBC, but found it extremely difficult because of lack of awareness and inadequate
municipal capacity including the absence of appropriate policies (Dixit 2004). For example,
the existing building permit system was geared towards generating more revenues but did not
incorporate any incentives for building code compliance. Incentives were in place for enhan-
cing the historic character of the building facades but not for making the buildings earthquake
resistant.
398
Nepal’s urban seismic resilience
of the programs related to earthquake risk management in the country. Between 2000 and 2011,
NSET continued collaboration with several leading municipalities that were interested in NBC
implementation (NSET 2009a; 2009b; 2010). While the ultimate goal was improving seismic
performance of new building construction, the initial work was to help enhance understanding
of earthquake hazards, risks, vulnerabilities, and collectively explore and implement possible dis-
aster risk reduction solutions for risk reduction.
Hindrances to the implementation of NSET included a prevailing fatalistic mindset, low
disaster awareness, and the lack of suitable policy and legislations. With a well-defined mission,
vision, and strategic objectives, NSET became strong enough to continue earthquake risk man-
agement activities and provide technical assistance to other institutions in Nepal. Over time,
NSET was invited internationally to share knowledge and experiences with others, for example
in Gujarat and Pakistan after the earthquakes, and in Banda Aceh after the 2004 Tsunami (NSET
2009c).
(1) First National Conference and an Action Plan for Disaster Management, 1993, (Dixit
1993). This was the first systematic and comprehensive national discourse on disaster risk
management in Nepal. Accompanied by a training program followed by a planning of pri-
orities, the conference formulated a disaster risk management (DRM) national program,
which, unfortunately, was never implemented. But it did create an opportunity for good
brainstorming, which resulted in a meeting of the minds.
(2) Nepal Action Plan for Disaster Management (NAP). The national report to the UN
Yokohama Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction in 1994 (IDNDR 1994) was based on
the deliberations of four national workshops devoted each to emergency response, recovery,
reconstruction, and mitigation and preparedness respectively. A final workshop consolidated
the national understanding of hazards and risk and the consensus goal and priorities of
actions for a national action plan. In 1996, the Government of Nepal modified this docu-
ment as the National Action Plan (NAP) for Disaster Management (HMG 1996). NAP
guided all disaster-related initiatives in Nepal during 1994–2005.
(3) Kathmandu Valley Earthquake Risk Management Project. The seismic hazard
evaluation that was undertaken during the formulation of NBC made it clear that a large
earthquake near Kathmandu Valley could cause significantly greater human casualty, phys-
ical damage, and economic loss than caused by past earthquakes. The Kathmandu Valley
Earthquake Risk Management Project (KVERMP) aimed to start a process towards man-
aging earthquake risk in Kathmandu Valley (NSET 1998; Shrestha and Dixit 2004). NSET
implemented KVERMP as part of the Asian Urban Disaster Mitigation Program (AUDMP)
from September 1997 to December 1999 in collaboration with GeoHazards International
(GHI) and the Asian Disaster Preparedness Center (ADPC) under a core funding support
399
A. Dixit et al.
The KVERMP methodology and SESP (NSET 2011) were replicated in nine cities in the
world by the RADIUS project (Okazaki et al. 2000) of UN IDNDR. Thus the innovative
approaches employed by NSET were recognized beyond Nepal’s border.
(1) Community involvement is a must for effective disaster risk reduction. It became obvious
that the approach of implementing disaster risk reduction should include the postulation
400
Nepal’s urban seismic resilience
that what is accepted as doable by the community is more important than what is normally
considered as necessary to do by the planners or the academicians.
(2) Mason training programs are the basis for earthquake vulnerability reduction in a built envir-
onment with a dominance of non-engineered construction.
(3) Earthquake awareness and policy advocacy are the key initial activities for bringing about
improvements in DRM policy and legislation.
The APIP and NERMP projects, implemented during 1999–2012, brought about significant
changes in social understanding and internalization of earthquake hazard and risk, helped reduce
fatalistic approaches and developed confidence in the feasibility of earthquake risk reduction and
the long-term benefits of disaster preparedness (Shrestha et al. 2017; Upreti et al. 2012). This led
gradually towards ever-increasing demand for earthquake safety that was evidenced by steady
and smooth implementation of the building code by the early-adopter municipalities –Dharan,
Vyas, and Lalitpur –and a wave of enthusiasm that influenced municipalities to make NBC man-
datory in their annual programs during 2010–2011.
The experience gathered during the process helped in continuous modification and refine-
ment of postulations, approaches, and methodologies as well as the corresponding training strat-
egies and curricula. This helped further in the process of contextualizing global scientific and
technological advancements into the Nepalese conditions.These works also helped to dispel sev-
eral myths such as the unaffordability of seismic resistance vis-à-vis poor economic conditions in
Nepal, the lack of Nepalese capacity to lead earthquake risk reduction efforts, and the prevailing
notion in the larger public that considered earthquakes as punishment inflicted by God for
wrongdoings.
Slowly, the demand for and the desire to implement the NBC grew in all quarters. Several
government agencies continually worked to improve the pertinent policy and strategies for
DRM: NSDRM, Act, NDRF and other policies (GoN 2009; 2011a; 2011b), especially after
being influenced by the global movements for disaster risk management such as the International
Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction (IDNDR), the International Strategy for Disaster
Reduction (ISDR), and Nepal’s commitments to such frameworks. Major development partners
of Nepal incorporated disaster risk reduction into their development assistance strategies (MoFA
2017; USAID 2011). There was an increase in the number of agencies and critical facilities that
became interested in improving seismic performance of structural as well as non-structural elem-
ents in their facilities (NRRC 2015; UNDP 2018). Demand grew for mandatory enforcement
of the NBC by the municipalities by incorporating it into the building permits process. Trust
towards NSET was increased and confidence in national capability in implementing urban dis-
aster resiliency efforts was significantly enhanced.
401
A. Dixit et al.
professionals and other stakeholders to promote earthquake safe design and construction, and
(3) help develop policy recommendations to improve enforcement of and compliance with
the building code. The program has a three-pronged strategy of (1) earthquake awareness using
different media and methods for raising public demand and commitments for earthquake safety,
(2) a system of training and capacity enhancement of all stakeholders involved in the building
production process, and (3) evidence-based suggestions for improvements in policies, organiza-
tional structure, and the building permit process.
The program has exercised flexibility in responding to specific emerging needs and requests.
For example, it helped prepare a local disaster risk management plan (LDRMP) for Vyas
Municipality (Dharan 2012; Vyas 2016); an urban regeneration plan for Dwalkha Bhimeshwor
Area, Dolakha (NSET 2016b); developed building by-laws for Karyabinayak and Bhimeshwor
municipalities, and model designs of residential houses for Bharatpur Municipality. Likewise,
building permit system (BPS) software and supporting forms were developed targeting all
municipalities of Nepal. Furthermore, BCIPN was also involved in assisting the government
and the people in the aftermath of the 2015 Gorkha earthquake sequence –based on identi-
fied demand, NSET conducted rapid visual damage assessment (RVDA) (NSET 2015a; 2015b)
including orientation, training, assessment, and update of training curricula in the immediate
aftermath of the 2015 Gorkha earthquake.Thus, the program was dynamic and introduced mid-
course corrections as experiences were gathered, lessons learned, and challenges overcome. It
also emphasized fostering dialog and communication among stakeholders and local champions,
respecting and use of local capacity, and a continued focus on elements of institutionalization
and scaling up. This made the program very successful and accepted by the government as well
as the people.
402
Nepal’s urban seismic resilience
Figure 29.2a Progression of building code compliance in BCI municipalities during 2012–2016
(compliance checked at site)
Source: NSET 2018b
shows that 42 per cent of the new buildings are actually built safe to withstand future earthquake
to life-safety standards. If one adds another 20 per cent “close to compliance” buildings, one can
conclude that 62 out of 100 new buildings constructed in the municipalities have seriously tried
to avoid unaccepted death due to future earthquakes. In several municipalities, the building code
compliance rates are much higher than the above average figures. However, several problems still
remain to be solved for the compliance to be 100 per cent.
The following summarizes the technical problems needing to be addressed in the future:
• Improve symmetry in column layout, avoid beam discontinuity, limit cantilever projections,
avoid short columns and torsional susceptibility etc.
• Enhance ductility by appropriate detailing to improve column bar splices, column stirrups
spacing, beam splices, beam stirrups, joint reinforcement, etc.
• Enhance strength of the building by paying attention to the concrete quality.
More details on this ongoing program can be obtained from the NSET website www.nset.
org.np.
Although there has been significant progress in risk reduction through the development of
improved policy and legislation at the central, provincial, and municipality levels, there are still
problem areas that demand attention and efforts to make the process sustainable and irreversible.
There is a need to link building code compliance with urban planning by-laws, risk-sensitive
land use planning, disaster risk reduction, and emergency response planning and implementation.
403
A. Dixit et al.
Figure 29.2b Progression of building code compliance in BCI municipalities during 2012–2016
(compliance checked in building plans submitted for building permits)
Note: The category “close to compliance” means that non-compliant elements of construction
were of “non-lethal” nature such as minor mistakes in dimensions or spacings or amount of
steel etc.
Source: NSET 2018b
Similarly, the social aspects of urban risk reduction and risk spread through incentives and
disincentives are yet to be appropriately incorporated into pertinent policies. For example, there
is an urgent need to utilize the potential of improving insurance and bank loans for housing
development. This calls for yet more intensified collaboration and coordination among different
stakeholders, traditional as well as non-traditional, such as the insurance and reinsurance com-
panies and the banks disbursing housing loans. One of the ways of achieving collaboration and
synergy among various stakeholders and influencing institutions could be through enunciation
of a national earthquake resilience program, which would spell out priority actions and assign
roles and responsibilities to national, provincial, and local governments and also to the private
sector businesses, academic institutions, and the civil society organizations.
404
Nepal’s urban seismic resilience
much less than what could have been anticipated for a M7.8 earthquake in Gorkha. Hence
the reconstruction efforts, including the policy development and modus operandi, were geared
mainly to address apparently “the more urgent” rural reconstruction issues, and urban recon-
struction appears to have been pushed into the shadow (MoHA 2016; NPC 2015).
In practice, urban reconstruction is actually slow compared to rural reconstruction, which
currently stands at 70 per cent “either started or completed” according to the website of Nepal
National Recponstruction Authority (NRA) (NRA 2018). As reported in the recent meeting
on “Progress and Challenges of Urban Reconstruction” in Kathmandu, organized by the gov-
ernment on August 6, 2018, the current progress of reconstruction of damaged private houses
stand at 18 per cent of houses receiving third tranche (certified compliance to code for recon-
struction up to second storey) and 29 per cent have received second tranche of the earthquake
grant (second tranche is granted at certified compliance of construction of foundation). Figures
for Bhaktapur district stand at 24 per cent for second tranche and 20 per cent of third tranche
respectively. The meeting, aimed at identifying issues and challenges of urban reconstruction for
“scaling up the pace of urban reconstruction”, concluded the following as the adverse factors
and conditions for slower pace of urban earthquake reconstruction:
(1) Slow process of building permits due the lack of capacity in newly promulgated municipalities
(2) Related engineers, especially the freshly recruited by the government for compliance
monitoring and building permits checking, are not trained in low-strength MRT type
of buildings because engineering curricula teaches only modern building design and
construction.
(3) Urban areas have a variety of complex issues on land entitlement including (a) errors in past
surveys, (b) conflict in land ownership, (c) high occupancy in small buildings resulting in a
pressure to increase building height beyond the prescribed norm, illegally, (d) issuance of
valid building permits for non-code-compliant buildings prior to the earthquake, (e) tech-
nical –issues of design and mismatch between design and actual construction, (f) conflicting
and multiple usage of the buildings, (g) historical character of several buildings that require
clearance from the archaeological department for reconstruction, adding more complexity
to the process, (h) undue political pressure from newly elected local representatives to pro-
vide reconstruction loans expeditiously, even by relaxing the prerequisites for such loans,
and so on.
Many of these problems demand political and policy-level decisions, resulting in delay in the
reconstruction process.There are still many unaddressed problems related to recovery and recon-
struction of historical buildings and cultural heritage structures: use of modern construction
materials and styles versus those used prior to the earthquake, the conflict between the formal
procurement of construction services versus the traditional process by local “guthi”1 using local
craftspersons. Capacity gap in terms of masons, contractors, and even supervising personnel
trained in earthquake-resistant technology is another problem. Many damaged settlements are of
cultural, archaeologic, and heritage importance. There is a trend and desire to opt for rebuilding
in modern materials, which would inflict irreparable loss to the heritage. Several historical
settlements with traditional adobe constructions are yet to develop a consensus on the correct
model for reconstruction and how to build back better.The buildings in the historical core areas
of Kathmandu Valley cities are fast losing the traditional architectiural facades and also becoming
more vulnerable due to many different social and economic factors, including, among others, the
vertical division of buildings by inheriting brothers, lack of maintenance due to absentee land-
lordism, and the disruption of the traditional social and family bonds as new landowners come
405
A. Dixit et al.
from all over Nepal. Urban regeneration by cooperatives of owners with assistance from the
government, by pooling the land and reconstructing the buildings as multiapartment structures
with the preservation of traditional facades, cultural and religious monuments and temples and
the traditions, and mixed commercial and residential usage with the aim of exploiting the tour-
istic importance of the settlements has found wide support in the country. The government has
already accepted this method and has developed the required policy. However, efforts are still
ongoing for implementing urban regeneration by this method in the very first case –there is
obvious reluctance due to the lack of previous experience.
There is a trend of vertical growth in urban areas using concrete frame structures. Nepal’s
experience and capacity to supervise and construct earthquake-resistant high-rise buildings is
still limited. Another trend is the growing demand for clustered settlements in urbanizing rural
areas or in areas surrounding urban settlements in the hilly regions. In addition, lack of effective
policies and frequent changes in organizational responsibilities for reconstruction are additional
problems hampering the reconstruction process. Handing over authority of DRM to the local
government level, as warranted by the 2015 Constitution, should be done smoothly.The process
is ongoing but not yet settled in every aspect –the lack of local capacity at local levels is one of
the visible problems.
There is a conspicuous gap in scientific technical research that could assist in reconstruction
decision-making and also to document and learn lessons from this great earthquake, which
should have been considered as “nature’s experimental laboratory” offering the possibility
for undertaking scientific research to evidence and validate empirical methods in the non-
engineered buildings. The 2015 earthquake has challenged Nepal to develop a comprehensive
strategy that could address the above-mentioned questions and concerns, and to develop sound
capacity to tackle the fundamental issue of enhancing urban resilience. The Gorkha earthquake
should be considered an opportunity to learn to enhance urban resiliency to natural hazards.The
lessons of the Gorkha earthquake are tremendously important for the entire country and also for
the entire Himalayan region, which is highly seismic.
Conclusions
Seismic resilience building in Nepal between the two earthquakes of 1988 and 2015 has been
successful, considering Nepal witnessed political upheavals and economic stagnation in the same
period. Development of a unique building code that envisioned enhancing seismic performance
of even non-engineered buildings, successful piloting of building code implementation in a
few municipalities, and incorporating lessons on the need for understanding risk by raising risk
awareness, educating the stakeholders including masons and small-scale contractors, installation
of building code or earthquake safety sections in municipal organizational structures, incorpor-
ation of code compliance into the building permit system, and helping policy development at
municipal and central levels, are some of the major steps that have positively helped to enhance
building code compliance from the estimated 9 per cent in 2012 to over 62 per cent in 30 muni-
cipalities and urbanizing areas of Nepal.
A success in building code enforcement is an indication of urban seismic resilience as poorly
constructed buildings are the main source of earthquake risk in Nepal. Achievement of this
remarkable progress was due to the comprehensiveness of the building code implementation
strategy, and the appropriateness of the municipal earthquake risk reduction approaches, including
the engagement of communities and home-owners, local authorities and champions including
women’s groups. Development and use of awareness materials targeting various stakeholders,
use of innovative awareness tools such as the observance of the annual earthquake safety day on
406
Nepal’s urban seismic resilience
January 15, the use of specially developed training strategy, and a set of more than 20 training
curricula for masons, technicians, social mobilizers, local municipal officials, and the use of
innovative methodologies for assisting the municipalities in building code implementation were
the main reasons behind such success. Rich lessons have been learned and challenges have been
identified in this process. These lessons are in the process of being incorporated into pertinent
national development strategies, such as the national urban development strategy (GoN 2015).
Most importantly, the main players responsible for enhancing urban resilience have developed
a level of confidence to improve upon the efforts and to proliferate the success by scaling up
building code implementation in other urban, urbanizing and even rural municipalities of Nepal.
The 2015 Gorkha earthquake has proven the benefits of earthquake risk reduction efforts and
the appropriateness of risk reduction initiatives and methodologies.
Nepal’s very rapid urbanization and its unique dynamics are now better understood in terms
of its relation to physical and social vulnerabilities. The experiences gathered in the past are
instrumental to understand the opportunity of enhancing urban resilience, especially after the
recent promulgation of 753 municipalities, in which the urban population rose to 60 per cent.
This transformation of rural areas into urban ones, especially those in the areas affected by the
Gorkha earthquake of 2015, demands development of knowledge, capacity, and new policies to
comprehensively handle challenges of reconstruction, seismic retrofitting, repair and mainten-
ance of heritage structures, historical settlements, and urban regeneration. The experience of the
past two decades has made Nepal confident about making its cities resilient.
Note
1 “Guthi” is a social organization that historically has maintained the socio-economic and religious order
in Kathmandu Valley.
References
Adhikari, S.R. (2013). Earthquake risk assessment for the municipalities of Nepal. Paper presented at
the Regional cooperation in Seismology and Earthquake Engineering in South and Central Asia,
Nagarkot, Nepal.
Basnet, S.S., Dixit, A.M., Samant, L.D., Nakarmi, M., Pradhanang, S.B., and Tucker, B. (2004). Earthquake
scenario of Kathmandu Valley: National Society for Earthquake Technology Nepal (NSET).
Bhattarai, G.K., Chamlagain, D., and Rajaure, S. (2011). Seismic hazard assessment for eastern Nepal using
1934 and 1988 earthquakes. Journal of Nepal Geological Society. 42: 11.
CBS (2012). National Population and Housing Census 2011: National Report. Kathmandu: Government
of Nepal, National Planning Commission Secretariat, Central Bureau of Statistics. https://unstats.
un.org/unsd/demographic-social/census/documents/Nepal/Nepal-Census-2011-Vol1.pdf.
CBS (2014). Population Atlas of Nepal. Ramshah Path, Kathmandu, Nepal: National Planning Commission
Secretariat.
CBS (2017). Population of 753 Local Units. Government of Nepal. http://cbs.gov.np/sectoral_statistics/
population/Population%20of%20753%20Local%20Units.
CBS (2018). Nepal In Figures 2018. http://cbs.gov.np/image/data/2018/Nepal%20in%20Figures%20
2018.pdf.
Deng, J.S., Wang, K., Hong, Y., and Qi, J.G. (2009). Spatio-temporal dynamics and evolution of land use
change and landscape pattern in response to rapid urbanization. Landscape and Urban Planning.
92(3): 187–198. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2009.05.001.
Dharan (2012). Local Disaster Risk Management Planning (LDRMP)-Dharan: Dharan Municipality. www.
nset.org.np.
Dixit, A.M. (1993). Nepal –Status of seismic hazard and risk management in Nepal. Paper presented at the
WSSI Bangkok Workshop on Seismic Risk Management. Bangkok.
407
A. Dixit et al.
Dixit, A.M. (2004, August 1–6). Promoting safer building construction in Nepal. Paper presented at the
Thirteen World Conference on Earthquake Engineering,Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Dixit, A.M. and Maskey, N. (1992). Landslide studies in Nepal. Paper presented at the First South Asia
Geological Congress (GEOSAS-I), Islamabad, Pakistan
Dixit, A.M., Shrestha, S.N., Guragain, R., Jimee, G.K., Dhungel, R., Pradhan, S., Shrestha, N., Acharya, S.P.,
Adhikari, S.A., Bhattarai, and Ruszczyk, H.A. (2018). Earthquake risk reduction efforts in Nepal: NSET’s
Experience. In: L. Bracken, Hanna A. Ruszczyk, and T. Robinson (eds.): Evolving Narratives of Hazard
and Risk: The Gorkha Earthquake, Nepal 2015. Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan.
GESI (2001). Global Earthquake Safety Initiative (GESI) Pilot Project. www.preventionweb.net/
publications/view/5573.
GoN (1994). Nepal National Building Code (NBC) 105: 1994. Government of Nepal, Department of
Urban Development and Building Construction. Kathmandu. www.dudbc.gov.np/uploads/default/
files/c25f315ba97fe50b056e7803296704b5.pdf.
GoN (2009). National Strategy for Disaster Risk Management, 2009. Government of Nepal, Ministry of
Home Affairs.
GoN (2011a). Disaster Preparedness and Response Plan Framework Guideline 2067. Government of
Nepal, Ministry of Home Affairs.
GoN (2011b). Local Disaster Risk Management Planning (LDRMP) Guideline. Government of Nepal,
Ministry of Local Development.
GoN (2015). National Urban Development Strategy 2015. Government of Nepal, Ministry of Urban
Development.
GoN (2017). Nepal Gazette: Notice of Ministry of Federal Affairs and Local Development.
Kathmandu: Government of Nepal. http://mofaga.gov.np/en.
Guragain, R., Parajuli, Y.K., and Dixit, A.M. (2004). Promoting safer building construction in
Nepal: Experiences of NSET. In: A.M. Dixit (ed.): Proceedings of the Symposium on Seismology,
Earthquake Hazard Assessment and Risk Management held in conjunction with the Fourth
General Assembly of the Asian Seismological Commission, 24 –26 November 2002, Kathmandu.
Kathmandu: National Society for Earthquake Technology, Nepal (NSET), 123–128.
HMG (1996). National Action Plan on Disaster Management in Nepal. Kathmandu: His Majesty’s
Government, Ministry of Home. www.preventionweb.net/files/30532_nepalnationalactionplandisaste
rmana.pdf.
IDNDR (1994).Yokohama strategy and plan of action for a safer world: Guidelines for natural disaster pre-
vention, preparedness and mitigation-UNISDR, International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction.
UNISDR. www.preventionweb.net/go/8241.
Ishtiaque, A., Shrestha, M., and Chhetri, N. (2017). Rapid urban growth in the Kathmandu Valley,
Nepal: Monitoring land use land cover dynamics of a Himalayan city with Landsat imageries.
Environments. 4(4): 72.
Manandhar, H. and Parajuli,Y.K. (2015). Urban safety through the eyes of cultural heritage. Paper presented
at the 14th International Symposium on Urban Safety of Mega Cities in Asia Kathmandu.
MoFA. (2017). Country Strategy for Development Cooperation Nepal 2016– 2019. https:// um.fi/
documents/ 3 5732/ 4 8132/ c ountry_ s trategy_ f or_ d evelopment_ c ooperation_ n epal_ 2 016_ 2 019/
bb247b65-4ecc-df47-006d-363567ed0faa?t=1528711373905.
MOHA (2016). Nepal Gorkha 2015 Earthquake Lessons Learnings (in Nepali Language). Government of
Nepal, Ministry of Home Affairs. Kathmandu.
MOHA (2018). Nepal Disaster Report, 2017: The Road to Sendai, Kathmandu: Government of Nepal.
http://drrportal.gov.np/uploads/document/1321.pdf.
Muzzini, E. and Aparicio, G. (2013). Urban Growth and Spatial Transition in Nepal: An Initial Assessment.
Washington, DC: International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank.
NPC (2015). Nepal Earthquake 2015: Post Disaster Needs Assessment (Key Findings) (Vol. A). Singha
Durbar, Kathmandu: National Planning Commission, GoN.
NRA (2016). Reconstruction Policy 2072 (in Nepali Language). Government of Nepal, National
Reconstruction Authority. Kahtmandu. www.nepalhousingreconstruction.org/sites/nuh/files/2017-
03/wVafwe9j5J160412073708.pdf.
NPC (2017). Demographic Changes of Nepal: Trends and Policy Implications. In: National Planning
Commission (Ed.).
NRA (2018). Reconstruction Update. Government of Nepal, National Reconstruction Authority. www.
nra.gov.np/np/mapdistrict/datavisualization
408
Nepal’s urban seismic resilience
NRRC (2015). Nepal Risk Reduction Consortium. United Nations. Kathmandu. www.un.org.np/
coordinationmechanism/nrrc.
NSET (1998). The Kathmandu Valley Earthquake Management Action Plan. Nepal: National Society for
Earthquake Technology –Nepal (NSET). Kathmandu.
NSET (2009a). Final Project Report on Pilot Implementation of Municipal Disaster Risk Reduction
Program (MDRIP) in Ilam and Panauti Municipalities of Nepal. (Unpublished in-house Report).
NSET (2009b). Municipal Disaster Risk Reduction Program in Nepal (MDRIP). www.nset.org.np.
NSET (2009c). Safer Society NSET Report 2009. National Society for Earthquake Technology-Nepal.
Kathmandu. www.nset.org.np.
NSET (2010). Project Completion Report on Nepal Earthquake Risk Management Program (NERMP).
(Unpublished in-house Report).
NSET (2011). School Earthquake Safety Program (SESP) Books, Guidelines and Reports. National Society
for Earthquake Technology-Nepal. Kathmandu. www.nset.org.np/nset2012/images/publicationfile/
20111220133242.pdf.
NSET (2014). Safer Society NSET Report 2014. National Society for Earthquake Technology-Nepal.
Kathmandu. www.nset.org.np.
NSET (2015a). NSET Efforts on Post Earthquake Situation. National Society for Earthquake Technology-
Nepal. Kathmandu. www.nset.org.np/eq2015/nset_effort.php#damage.
NSET (2015b). Rapid Visual Damage Assessment. National Society for Earthquake Technology-Nepal.
Kathmandu. (Unpublished in-house Report).
NSET (2016a). The Building Compliance Survey Report. National Society for Earthquake Technology-
Nepal. Kathmandu. (Unpublished in-house Report).
NSET (2016b). Urban Regeneration Plan for Dwalkha: Building Code Implementation Program in
Municipalitites of Nepal (BCIPN). National Society for Earthquake Technology-Nepal. Kathmandu.
www.nset.org.np.
NSET (2017a). Program Performance Final Report: Building Code Implementation Program in
Municipalities of Nepal (BCIPN). Program Report. National Society for Earthquake Technology-
Nepal. Kathmandu. (Unpublished in-house Report).
NSET (2017b). Safer Society Annual Report 2017 (Vol. NSET-116–2017): National Society for Earthquake
Technology-Nepal (NSET). Kathmandu.
NSET (2017c). Technical Support for Building Code Implementation in Nepal (TSBCIN). National
Society for Earthquake Technology- Nepal. Kathmandu. www.nset.org.np/ nset2012/index.php/
programs/programdetail/programid-97.
NSET (2018a). BCIPN Success Stories: Building Code Implementation Program in Municipalitites of
Nepal (BCIPN). National Society for Earthquake Technology-Nepal, Kathmandu. Unpublished in-
house Report.
NSET (2018b). Building Code Compliance Survey: Building Code Implementation Program in
Municipalitites of Nepal (BCIPN). Report. National Society for Earthquake Technology- Nepal.
Kathmandu. (Unpublished in-house Report).
NSET (2018c). Municipality Status on Building Code Implementation. National Society for Earthquake
Technology-Nepal. Kathmandu. (Unpublished in-house Report).
NSET (2018d). Safer Society Annual Report 2018. National Society for Earthquake Technology-Nepal.
Kathmandu. (Unpublished in-house Report).
Okazaki, K., Villacis, C., Cardona, C., Kaneko, F., Shaw, R., Sun, J., Davidson, R. (2000). RADIUS –Risk
assessment tools for diagnosis of urban areas against seismic disasters. UN. International Strategy for
Disaster Reduction (ISDR).
Pandey, M.R., Chitrakar, G.R., Kafle, B., Sapkota, S., Rajaure, S., and Gautam, U.P. (2002). Seismic Hazard
Map of Nepal. Kathmandu: Government of Nepal, Department of Mines and Geology.
Parajuli, Y.K., Bothara, J.K., Dixit, A.M., Pradhan, J.P., and Sharpe, R.D. (2000, January). Nepal Building
Code-Need, Development Philosophy and Means of Implementation. Paper presented at the 12th
World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Auckland, New Zealand.
Petal, M., Green, R., Kelman, I., Shaw, R., and Dixit, A. (2008). Community-based construction for disaster
risk reduction. In: Hazards and the Built Environment: Attaining Built-in Resilience, 191–217.
Pradhanang, S.B., Dixit, A.M., Parajuli, Y.K., Pradhan, M., Basnet, S.S., Shrestha, V.P., and Sharma, T.
(2009). Safer Society NSET’s decade-long efforts to make communities earthquake-safe And Annual
Report 2008 (B. Bhattarai and N. Shrestha (eds.)): National Society for Earthquake Technology-
Nepal (NSET).
409
A. Dixit et al.
Rana, B.S.J.B. (1935). The Great Earthquake in Nepal 1934 A.D. (K. Lal, Trans.). Kathmandu: Ratna Pustak
Bhandar.
Ruszczyk, H.A. and Robinson, T. (2018). Introduction to the Gorkha Earthquake. In: L. Bracken, H.A.
Ruszczyk, and T. Robinson (eds.): Evolving Narratives of Hazard and Risk: The Gorkha Earthquake,
Nepal 2015. Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan, 3–43.
Sapkota, S.N., Bollinger, L., Klinger, Y., Tapponnier, P., Gaudemer, Y., and Tiwari, D. (2012). Primary sur-
face ruptures of the great Himalayan earthquakes in 1934 and 1255. Nature Geoscience. 6(1): 71–76.
doi:10.1038/ngeo1669.
Sharma, R.K. (2016). Bhukampa 2072 ko Brihangam Dristi (in Nepali Language). Kathmandu: Bina
Sharma.
Shrestha, A.B., Bajracharya, S.R., Kargel, J.S., and Khanal, N.R. (2016).The Impact of Nepal’s 2015 Gorkha
Earthquake-Induced Geohazards. Kathmandu, ICIMOD: International Centre for Integrated Mountain
Development.
Shrestha, S.N. and Dixit, A.M. (2004). Earthquake risk management in rapidly urbanizing areas of Nepal.
Paper presented at the 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering,Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Shrestha, N., Dixit, A.M., Shrestha, S.N., and Pradhan, S. (2017). Changing risk perception of people: A key
for enhancing building code compliance. Paper presented at the 16th World Conference on Earthquake,
Santiago Chile.
Tandingan, M.R. and Dixit, A.M. (2012). Experiences on Implementing Program for Enhancement of
Emergency Response (PEER) in Six Countries of South East Asia. Paper presented at the 15th World
Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Lisbon, Portugal.
Thapa, N. (1989). Bhadau Pachko Bhukampa (Earthquake of Bhadra 5) 2045. Kathmandu: Central Natural
Calamity Response Committee.
UNDP (2010). Urban Risk Management. www.undp.org/content/dam/undp/library/crisis%20preven-
tion/disaster/6Disaster%20Risk%20Reduction%20-%20Urban%20Risk%20Management.pdf.
UNDP (2018). Comprehensive Disaster Risk Management Programme. www.np.undp.org/ content/
nepal/en/home/projects/cdrmp.html.
UNOHA (1993). Nepal Floods/Landslides Jul 1993 UN DHA Situation Reports. https://reliefweb.int/
report/nepal/nepal-floodslandslides-jul-1993-un-dha-situation-reports-1–8
Upreti, N., Dixit, A.M., and Shrestha, S.N. (2012). Raising Earthquake Awareness in Kathmandu Valley: A
Comparative Analysis of Achievements during 1999– 2009. Paper presented at the 15th World
Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Lisbon, Portugal.
USAID (2011). US Disaster Risk Reduction Strategic Framework –Nepal, FY2012-2016. http://usaid.
gov/sites/default/files/documents/1861/DRR%20Strategic%20Framework.pdf.
Vyas (2016). Vyas Municipal Disaster Risk Management Plan. Local Disaster Risk Management Planning.
Vyas Municipality. (Unpublished in-house Report).
Williams, J.G., Rosser, N.J., Kincey, M.E., Benjamin, J., Oven, K.J., Densmore, A.L., Robinson, T.R. (2017).
Satellite-
based emergency mapping: Landslides triggered by the 2015 Nepal earthquake. Natural
Hazards and Earth System Sciences. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-18-185-2018.
Zhu, J., Manandhar, B., Truong, J., Ganapati, N.E., Pradhanang, N., Davidson, R.A., and Mostafavi, A.
(2017). Assessment of infrastructure resilience in the 2015 Gorkha, Nepal, Earthquake. Earthquake
Spectra. 33: S147-S165.
410
30
Roof gardens as alternative
urban green spaces
A three-part study on their restorative
quality in Seoul, South Korea
Narae Lee
Introduction
Urbanization has isolated people from natural environments and subjected them to artificial
environments, which could induce psychological and physiological stress (Moore et al. 2003).
Living in an environment with access to green spaces, such as parks and forests, brings many
benefits to people; it enhances physical and psychological health, strengthens social ties, and
increases self-control (Hartig et al. 2003; Kuo et al. 1998; Ulrich et al. 1991). However, a limited
number and an unequal distribution of urban green spaces in dense urban environments prevent
many people from enjoying beneficial green spaces in their daily lives (Oh and Jeong 2007).
Indeed, access to urban green spaces may vary by race, ethnicity, and socio-economic status (Dai
2011; Zhou and Kim 2013). Therefore, not every urban resident has the equal opportunity to
enjoy desirable open green spaces near their home or workplace.
As viable alternatives to urban green spaces, roof gardens –that is, green spaces built on
rooftops –would allow urban residents to enjoy the benefits of green spaces with relative ease.
Thus, cities facing difficulties in securing enough green spaces due to dense development and
high land prices can adopt roof gardens to increase access to green spaces. For example, Seoul,
South Korea, one of the largest cities in the world, has been experiencing this issue; according to
a Seoul government report, Seoul’s 2010 population density (16,181/km2) is higher than that of
New York (10,430/km2),Tokyo (14,386/km2), and London (5,199/km2) (Seoul Institute 2015).
Therefore, the city government has been adopting roof gardens to expand green spaces. Seoul’s
municipal government has been implementing an annual project with a governmental subsidy
to promote the installation of roof gardens in both public and private buildings. The project has
been successful, installing a total of 715 roof gardens (around 33,469m2) from 2002 to 2017
(Choi 2018). With the recognition of roof gardens’ importance, especially in densely built envir-
onments, their benefits –such as retaining and detaining rainwater, mitigating microclimates,
reducing the energy consumption of buildings, and improving psychophysiological health –
have also been widely studied (Clark et al. 2008; Gregoire and Clausen 2011; Susca et al. 2011).
411
Narae Lee
Therefore, to take stock of roof gardens’ potential as alternative urban green spaces, this chapter
proceeds in the following steps. First, it begins with a discussion of what roof gardens are and
discusses the efforts in South Korea to promote their large-scale installation. Then, it will move
on to a discussion of how roof gardens can contribute to urban resilience from a psychological
perspective. And, finally, it will introduce an empirical study that examined the psychological
benefits that roof gardens provide.
Roof gardens
Roof gardens are green spaces built on the rooftops of buildings. The design of roof gardens may
vary according to the purpose of use: a space for rest, farming and/or gardening, plant educa-
tion, therapy, enhancing the urban landscape, and pursuing environmental benefits (e.g. mitigating
urban heat island effects and retaining rainwater). Above all, roof gardens provide a resting place.
Due to a sedentary lifestyle and shortage of accessible urban parks, contemporary urban residents
have a limited opportunity to enjoy greenery in their daily lives.Therefore, roof gardens placed on
the buildings in which office workers spend a majority of their daytime will conveniently allow
them to enjoy greenery while taking a break from work. Second, roof gardens can be used for
urban agriculture. Given people’s increasing interest in food safety, agriculture, plant education,
and getting pleasure from raising and harvesting plants, their interest in urban agriculture has risen.
Introducing agricultural land in urban environments requires land for public use; however, there
are both physical and financial limitations to securing public land for urban agriculture in dense
urban environments. Therefore, we can secure enough agricultural land within walking distance
by using neglected rooftops. Third, roof gardens built on the rooftops of hospitals, as therapy gar-
dens, provide a place for patients and workers to recover and rest.They are advantageous especially
for patients with restricted mobility given that roof gardens can be accessed safely from a patients’
room regardless of time and day. Fourth, roof gardens enhance urban landscape. Neglected rooftops
impair urban landscapes when they are visible from adjacent or higher buildings. Therefore, we
can improve the urban landscape by greening rooftops and properly maintaining them. Lastly, roof
gardens have environmental benefits.These benefits have been identified by empirical studies: roof
gardens provide ecological spaces for small animals, mitigate urban heat island effects, improve air
quality, reduce energy consumption of buildings, and prevent floods by retaining rainwater (Clark
et al. 2008; Dvorak and Volder 2010; Kumar and Kaushik 2005;VanWoert 2005;Wong et al. 2003).
These environmental benefits, in turn, bring about economic benefits.
Recognizing the benefits of roof gardens, the city government of Seoul has been subsidizing
the installation of roof gardens since 2002. The city government accepts applications from both
the public and private sector every year while pursuing these goals: (1) introducing ecological
diversity with various vegetation; (2) increasing urban green spaces; (3) enhancing aesthetic
beauty; (4) facilitating usability; and (5) ensuring easy maintenance (Choi 2018). The govern-
ment reviews applications, conducts field observations, and tests the structural safety to select
funding recipients. The government also reviews the design submitted by the selected applicants
in order to allocate construction costs.
Roof gardens can be classified into three types: intensive, extensive, and semi-intensive.
Intensive roof gardens are designed mainly for people’s use (see Figures 30.1, 30.2, and 30.3).
These roof gardens are comprised of various types of vegetation, from grass to large trees, with
enough soil depth and landscape furniture –such as benches, pergola, and water fountains –
to support diverse uses. Therefore, this type of roof garden most resembles urban parks and
requires high maintenance efforts. Extensive roof gardens are usually vegetated by grass, moss,
and flowering plants, which require low maintenance efforts. This type of roof garden is used
412
Alternative urban green spaces
mainly for environmental purposes: mitigating microclimates, retaining rainwater, and reducing
energy consumption from heating and cooling buildings. Therefore, we can refer to this type of
roof garden as an ecotype roof garden. Semi-intensive roof gardens, which share characteristics
of both intensive and extensive roof gardens, are vegetated with low and medium growing plants
such as grass, shrubs, flowers, and short trees. Thus, they require moderate maintenance efforts.
Given that roof gardens are built on rooftops, for the building’s safety, the load effect of vege-
tation and garden furniture on the rooftops need to be considered before installing them. For
this reason, the City of Seoul specified minimum design loads according to the different types
of roof gardens in “Green Roof System Architectural Graphic Standard” (see Table 30.1) (Seoul
Metropolitan Government 2013).
413
Narae Lee
to severe ones, such as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (Berry et al. 2010). Sharp variations
in temperature can even generate behavioral disorders, such as suicide and violent criminality
(Cohn et al. 2004; Maes et al. 1994). Moreover, the urban environment is vulnerable to various
natural disasters and has lost the ability to recover from these disturbances as well. For example,
frequent earthquakes in Asian countries have caused many casualties, and Hurricane Katrina is
recorded as the worst natural disaster in the United States (Galea et al. 2007; Kokai et al. 2004).
These disasters engender not only massive casualties, destruction of amenities and facilities, and
economic loss, but also serious mental issues for survivors. People who have experienced life-
threatening events are prone to experiencing mental disorders such as depression, anxiety, and
PTSD (Mueser et al. 2002). Some may recover from the psychological trauma, but others may
experience chronic mental issues (Galea et al. 2007; Kokai et al. 2004). Therefore, supporting
recovery from psychological stress and disorder from natural disasters is an important issue.
Given that the natural environment’s psychological benefits have been widely recognized
(Grahn and Stigsdotter 2010), there has been much interest in research on ecotherapy or nature-
based therapy (NBT). NBT refers to therapeutic activities in natural settings that help restore
psychological health and well-being (Milton and Corbett 2011). The activities vary from medi-
tation to physical activities, such as walking in natural settings, planting trees, gardening, and
preserving nature (Annerstedt and Währborg 2011; Farmer 2014). In addition, there can be
interaction with a psychiatrist and counselor for better results.
European countries are leading the way in NBT research by yielding promising results. For
example, the Healing Garden in Alarp, which is in Sweden, has led to improvements in patients’
psychological and physical health; and Denmark launched the Healing Forest Garden Nacadia
(NACADIA) in 2007 based on the Healing Garden in Alarp. The effect of NBT on PTSD
414
Alternative urban green spaces
has shown fruitful results. People who took part in the therapy showed recovery from mental
disorders such as anxiety and depression (Milton and Corbett 2011). Furthermore, their life
quality also improved by adopting a healthy lifestyle and improving their social skills (Farmer
2014). Moreover, refugees with psychological stress after being displaced to a new commu-
nity showed improvement in their mental health after participating in ecotherapy (Tristan and
Nguyen-Hong-Nhiem 1989). NBT has also been successful in treating the PTSD of veterans,
who recovered from depression and anxiety and showed improvements in wellbeing, hope, and
social ability (Gelkopf et al. 2013; Poulsen et al. 2018;Varning Poulsen 2017).
Likewise, people who live in neighborhoods with green space within walking distance are
more likely to have better psychological health compared to those who do not have ready access
to green space (Alcock et al. 2014; Maas et al. 2009; Nutsford et al. 2013; van den Berg et al.
2010). This can be due to the ease and frequent interaction with nature in their daily lives. The
benefit of green spaces on mental health is widely accepted: walking in green spaces improves
affective well-being (Hartig et al. 2003), well-maintained vegetation provides one with a sense
of safety and preference (Kuo et al. 1998), and interacting with green spaces reduces stress and
415
Narae Lee
provides emotional stability while enhancing vitality (Nutsford et al. 2013; Ulrich et al. 1991;
van den Berg et al. 2016). Therefore, people who live near usable green spaces will receive these
benefits. This may provide urban planners with a keen insight: designing residential areas with
accessible green spaces is crucial for boosting mental health of urbanites.
416
Alternative urban green spaces
can be a viable alternative to urban parks, this study assesses whether the psychological benefits
of roof gardens are comparable to that of urban parks and then discusses their potential con-
tribution to urban resilience. This study examines the restorative quality of roof gardens; in this
study, restorative quality refers to a quality of urban environments that reduces mental fatigue
and improves psychological well-being. Therefore, it assesses whether the restorative quality of
roof gardens resembles the restorative quality of urban parks. This paper is a three-part empirical
study that addresses the following questions: (1) Are roof gardens restorative? (2) Are roof gar-
dens a viable alternative to urban parks? and (3) If roof gardens are a viable alternative to urban
parks, what makes them so?
417
Narae Lee
Mean SD SE t df p
418
Alternative urban green spaces
Mean SD SE t df p
Methods
A total of 38 participants was recruited among the participants in the first study. Multiple choice
and open-ended questions were sent via email to inquire into the restorative and non-restorative
factors in each landscape type (roof garden, urban park, and city street). While taking the survey,
participants were allowed to refer to the photographs used in the first study.
419
Narae Lee
Table 30.6 Selected restorative factors in cities, roof gardens, and urban parks
Table 30.7 Selected non-restorative components in cities, roof gardens, and urban parks
carefully interpreted. Nordh et al. (2009) argued that people in parks have a restorative role and
this may be tied to an increase in perceived safety. Therefore, people, as a non-restorative element
of environments, implies a crowdedness that hinders comfort in one’s activities.
Methods
The experiment was conducted in a laboratory in Seoul National University from January to
February 2013. Ten participants were recruited to the laboratory (six females and four males),
420
Alternative urban green spaces
Materials Quantity
ranging in age from 23 to 39. Participants were recruited from those who participated in the first
study through a convenient sampling. The participants satisfied the sight measurement score of
over 1.0 (including people who wear contact lenses).
This study used photo simulation. Three photographs of roof gardens, urban parks, and city
streets, respectively, were selected among the 20 photographs used in the first study. Therefore,
a total of nine photographs were selected for the third study. For roof gardens and urban parks,
three photographs that were identified as the most restorative in the first study were selected.
Given that city streets were identified as non-restorative in the first study, three photographs of
city streets that received the lowest scores were selected. As such, we can see whether involuntary
attention varies according to the restorative quality of environments.
To measure involuntary attention, a low-cost eye-tracking system was manufactured by refer-
ring to Kowalik and Mantiuk (2011)’s study. Table 30.8 shows a list of the materials used to
make the low-cost eye-tracking system in this study. The reliability of the low-cost eye-tracker
has been established by previous studies (Kowalik and Mantiuk 2011; Mantiuk et al. 2012).
This study used two software packages: (1) ITU Gaze Tracker v2.0b was used to capture eye
movement; and (2) Open Gaze and Mouse Analyzer (OGAMA) 4.2 was used to analyze the
captured data. OGAMA provides different modules to analyze gaze data, and this study utilized
the Attention Map and Scan Path modules. This study defined fixation as a gaze with at least 200
milliseconds within an omnidirectional 50 pixels area to obtain only meaningful gaze data.
The laboratory was equipped with a computer and the low-cost eye-tracker. The invited
participants took part in the experiment individually. The selected nine photographs were shown
consecutively with PowerPoint slides. Eye movement was measured for every photograph while
the participants were wearing the eye-tracking system. Participants were asked to observe the
photos with an assumption that “they are resting at these places during their break from work”.
Each photo was shown for 20 seconds, and calibration was conducted prior to every measurement.
In the course of the experiment, participants fixed their head around 75 centimeters from the
monitor (with no head movement).
421
Narae Lee
Roof Gardens
For roof gardens, much attention was concentrated on landscape furniture, such as per-
gola and benches (see Figures 30.4 and 30.5). In addition, viewing patterns tended to scan
through trees, grass, flowers, and vegetation planted along the edges of the roof gardens.
Although a small portion of participants’ attention focused on the sky and buildings out-
side of the roof gardens, objects within the roof gardens (i.e. plants, landscape furniture, and
people) received most of their attention. This result shows that most attention is focused
on the objects inside the roof gardens; this is similar to Nordh et al.’s (2009) finding that
people tend to focus on the inner parts of urban parks surrounded by vegetation rather than
422
Alternative urban green spaces
Figure 30.5a View pattern in the roof garden by aggregating all participants’ view patterns
Source: Tong-Mahn Ahn, 2012e
Figure 30.5b View pattern in the roof garden by aggregating all participants’ view patterns
Source: Korea Urban Forestation Co., Ltd, 2009
on the objects outside of them. This suggests that roof gardens provide a restorative climate
for people by preventing their attention from being diffused to non-restorative elements
outside of the roof gardens. Concerning the elements within the roof gardens, people, as an
object within the photographs, tended to receive high attention; this mirrors the experi-
mental results of Nordh et al. (2009) and De Lucio et al. (1996), which showed that people
are an element of environments that usually draws much attention. Hence, this attentional
characteristic needs careful interpretation, and it will be discussed in the final discussion
section. Lastly, this study found that most of participants’ attention concentrated on objects
with soft fascination in the roof gardens.
423
Narae Lee
Figure 30.6b View pattern in the park by aggregating all participants’ view patterns
Source: Author
Parks
The results indicated that although some attention did reach outside the parks, the better part
of participants’ attention focused on plants, grass, and landscape furniture such as benches and
pergolas, which is consistent with results from Nordh et al. (2009)’s study as mentioned earlier
(see Figures 30.6a and 30.6b). Thus, we also found participants focused attention on the objects
with soft fascination in the urban parks.
424
Alternative urban green spaces
Figure 30.7b View pattern in the city street by aggregating all participants’ view patterns
Source: Author
Cities
For cities, most of participants’ attention concentrated on outdoor signs, cars, pedestrians,
and street signs, which were all identified as non-restorative elements in the first study (see
Figures 30.7a and 30.7b). Although trees attracted some of participants’ attention, the degree of
attention on trees was not significant compared to the attention on non-restorative components.
The fact that much of the participants’ attention was fixated on non-restorative elements, though
they were instructed to assume that their intention is to rest in the settings, suggesting that it
425
Narae Lee
requires relatively much more effort to maintain one’s attention on restorative components in
city environments compared to roof gardens and urban parks.
426
Alternative urban green spaces
It follows that roof gardens should be used as an ancillary way to expand green space in areas
with a scarcity of land to build more urban parks. In other words, city planners should maintain
their efforts in expanding urban parks; but, at the same time, they should maximize the utility
of roof gardens by installing them in areas lacking parks and where they are easily accessible by
the public (Ahn 2011).
References
Ahn, T.M. (2011). (ed.) Green roofs in Seoul to make the metropolis healthier: A critical discussion.
Proceedings from 4th Healthy Cities: Making Cities Liveable Conference. Noosa: AST Management
Pty Ltd.
Ahn, T.M. (2012a). Extensive roof garden, Utilized with permission from author through personal
communication.
Ahn, T.M. (2012b). Intensive roof garden, Utilized with permission from author through personal
communication.
Ahn, T.M. (2012c). Scanpath of a single participant in roof garden, Utilized with permission from author
through personal communication.
Ahn, T.M. (2012d). Semi-intensive roof garden, Utilized with permission from author through personal
communication.
Ahn, T.M. (2012e). View pattern of all participants in roof garden, Utilized with permission from author
through personal communication.
Alcock, I., White, M.P., Wheeler, B.W., Fleming, L.E., and Depledge, M.H. (2014). Longitudinal effects on
mental health of moving to greener and less green urban areas. Environmental Science & Technology.
48(2): 1247–1255. https://doi.org/10.1021/es403688w.
Anguluri, R. and Narayanan, P. (2017). Role of green space in urban planning: Outlook towards smart cities.
Urban Forestry & Urban Greening. 25: 58–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2017.04.007.
Annerstedt, M. and Währborg, P. (2011). Nature-assisted therapy: Systematic review of controlled and
observational studies. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health. 39(4): 371–388. https://doi.org/10.1177/
1403494810396400.
Berry, H.L., Bowen, K., and Kjellstrom, T. (2010). Climate change and mental health: a causal pathways
framework. International Journal of Public Health. 55(2): 123– 132. https://doi.org/
10.1007/
s00038-009-0112-0.
Choi, J.S. (2018). 2018년 옥상녹화 텃밭 조성사업 추진계획. Seoul, South Korea: Parks & Landscape
Policy Division. https://opengov.seoul.go.kr/sanction/14495449?fileIdx=2#pdfview.
Clark, C., Adriaens, P., and Talbot, F.B. (2008). Green roof valuation: A probabilistic economic analysis
of environmental benefits. Environmental Science & Technology. 42(6): 2155–2161. https://doi.org/
10.1021/es0706652.
Cohn, E.G., Rotton, J., Peterson, A.G., and Tarr, D.B. (2004). Temperature, city size, and the southern sub-
culture of violence: Support for Social Escape/Avoidance (SEA) Theory1. Journal of Applied Social
Psychology. 34(8): 1652–1674. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559–1816.2004.tb02792.x.
Dai, D. (2011). Racial/ethnic and socioeconomic disparities in urban green space accessibility: Where
to intervene? Landscape and Urban Planning. 102(4): 234– 244. https:// doi.org/10.1016/
j.landurbplan.2011.05.002.
De Lucio, J.V., Mohamadian, M., Ruiz, J.P., Banayas, J., and Bernaldez, F.G. (1996).Visual landscape explor-
ation as revealed by eye movement tracking. Landscape and Urban Planning. 34(2): 135–142. https://
doi.org/10.1016/0169-2046(95)00208-1.
Deubel, H. and Schneider, W.X. (1996). Saccade target selection and object recognition: Evidence for
a common attentional mechanism. Vision Research. 36(12): 1827– 1837. https://doi.org/10.1016/
0042-6989(95)00294-4.
Dvorak, B. and Volder, A. (2010). Green roof vegetation for North American ecoregions: A literature review.
Landscape and Urban Planning. 96(4): 197–213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2010.04.009.
Farmer, P. (2014). Ecotherapy for mental health. Journal of Holistic Healthcare. 11(1).
Galea, S., Brewin, C.R., Gruber, M., Jones, R.T., King, D.W., King, L.A., McNally, R.J., Ursano, R.J.,
Petukhova, M., Kessler, R.C. (2007). Exposure to hurricane- related stressors and mental illness
after Hurricane Katrina. Archives of General Psychiatry. 64(12): 1427. https:// doi.org/10.1001/
archpsyc.64.12.1427.
427
Narae Lee
Gelkopf, M., Hasson-Ohayon, I., Bikman, M., and Kravetz, S. (2013). Nature adventure rehabilitation for
combat-related posttraumatic chronic stress disorder: A randomized control trial. Psychiatry Research.
209(3): 485–493. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2013.01.026.
Gill, S.E., Handley, J.F., Ennos, A.R., and Pauleit, S. (2007). Adapting cities for climate change: The role of
the green infrastructure. Built Environment. 33(1): 115–133. https://doi.org/10.2148/benv.33.1.115.
Grahn, P. and Stigsdotter, U.K. (2010). The relation between perceived sensory dimensions of urban green
space and stress restoration. Landscape and Urban Planning. 94(3–4): 264–275. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.landurbplan.2009.10.012.
Gregoire, B.G. and Clausen, J.C. (2011). Effect of a modular extensive green roof on stormwater runoff and
water quality. Ecological Engineering. 37(6): 963–969. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2011.02.004.
Hartig, T., Korpela, K., Evans, G.W., and Gärling, T. (1996). Validation of a Measure of Perceived
Environmental Restorativeness. Göteborg: University of Göteborg, Department of Psychology.
Hartig, T., Evans, G.W., Jamner, L.D., Davis, D.S., and Gärling, T. (2003). Tracking restoration in natural and
urban field settings. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 23(2): 109–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/
S0272-4944(02)00109-3.
Heynen, N., Perkins, H.A., and Roy, P. (2006). The political ecology of uneven urban green space: The
impact of political economy on race and ethnicity in producing environmental inequality in Milwaukee.
Urban Affairs Review. 42(1): 3–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/1078087406290729.
Kaplan, S. (1992). The restorative environment: Nature and human experience. The Role of Horticulture
in Human Well-Being and Social Development, 134–142. Portland, OR: Timber
Kim, J.H., Yang, J., and Yoon, Y.H. (2013). Psychological Relaxation Effects of User Based upon the Types
of Rooftop Garden. Journal of Environmental Science International. 22(4), 435–442. https://doi.org/
10.5322/JESI.2013.22.4.435
Korea Urban Forestation Co., Ltd. (2009). www.biotope.co.kr/example/example_view.asp?page=1
&idx=242
Kokai, M., Fujii, S., Shinfuku, N., and Edwards, G. (2004). Natural disaster and mental health in Asia. Psychiatry
and Clinical Neurosciences. 58(2), 110–116. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1440-1819.2003.01203.x
Kowalik, M. and Mantiuk, S.R. (2011). Do-it-yourself eye tracker: impact of the viewing angle on the eye
tracking accuracy. Proceedings of CESCG, 1–7.
Kumar, R. and Kaushik, S.C. (2005). Performance evaluation of green roof and shading for thermal
protection of buildings. Building and Environment. 40(11): 1505– 1511. https://
doi.org/ 10.1016/
j.buildenv.2004.11.015.
Kuo, F.E., Bacaicoa, M., and Sullivan,W.C. (1998).Transforming inner-city landscapes: Trees, sense of safety,
and preference. Environment and Behavior. 30(1): 28–59. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916598301002.
Maas, J., Verheij, R.A., de Vries, S., Spreeuwenberg, P., Schellevis, F.G., and Groenewegen, P.P. (2009).
Morbidity is related to a green living environment. Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health.
63(12): 967–973. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech.2008.079038.
Maes, M., Meyer, F., Thompson, P., Peeters, D., and Cosyns, P. (1994). Synchronized annual rhythms in
violent suicide rate, ambient temperature and the light-dark span. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica.
90(5): 391–396. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0447.1994.tb01612.x.
Mantiuk, R., Kowalik, M., Nowosielski, A., and Bazyluk, B. (2012). Do-it-yourself eye tracker: Low-cost
pupil-based eye tracker for computer graphics applications. In: Advances in Multimedia Modeling.
Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, 115–125. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-27355-1_13.
Milton, M. and Corbett, L. (2011). Ecopsychology: A perspective on trauma. European Journal of
Ecopsychology. 2: 28–47.
Moore, M., Gould, P., and Keary, B.S. (2003). Global urbanization and impact on health. International Journal
of Hygiene and Environmental Health. 206(4): 269–278. https://doi.org/10.1078/1438-4639-00223.
Mueser, K.T., Rosenberg, S.D., Goodman, L.A., and Trumbetta, S.L. (2002). Trauma, PTSD, and the course
of severe mental illness: an interactive model. Schizophrenia Research. 53(1–2): 123–143. https://doi.
org/10.1016/S0920-9964(01)00173-6.
Nordh, H., Hartig,T., Hagerhall, C.M., and Fry, G. (2009). Components of small urban parks that predict the
possibility for restoration. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening. 8(4): 225–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.ufug.2009.06.003.
Nutsford, D., Pearson, A.L., and Kingham, S. (2013). An ecological study investigating the association
between access to urban green space and mental health. Public Health. 127(11): 1005–1011. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2013.08.016.
428
Alternative urban green spaces
Oh, K. and Jeong, S. (2007). Assessing the spatial distribution of urban parks using GIS. Landscape and
Urban Planning. 82(1): 25–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2007.01.014.
Poulsen, D., Stigsdotter, U., and Davidsen, A. (2018). “That guy, is he really sick at all?” An analysis of how
veterans with PTSD experience nature-based therapy. Healthcare. 6(2): 64. https://doi.org/10.3390/
healthcare6020064.
Seoul Institute (2015). Population Household Housing. https://seoulsolution.kr/ko/seoul-and-world-cities.
Seoul Metropolitan Government (2013). Green Roof System Architectural Graphic Standards. http://
news.seoul.go.kr/env/material_main#view/102?tr_code=m_sweb.
Susca,T., Gaffin, S.R., and Dell’Osso, G.R. (2011). Positive effects of vegetation: Urban heat island and green
roofs. Environmental Pollution. 159(8): 2119–2126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2011.03.007.
Tong-Mahn Ahn (2012a to 2012e), Images provided to author through personal communication.
Tristan, J. and Nguyen-Hong-Nhiem, L. (1989). Horticultural therapy and Asian refugee resettlement.
Journal of Therapeutic Horticulture. 4: 15–20.
Ulrich, R.S., Simons, R.F., Losito, B.D., Fiorito, E., Miles, M.A., and Zelson, M. (1991). Stress recovery
during exposure to natural and urban environments. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 11(3): 201–
230. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-4944(05)80184–7.
van den Berg, A.E., Maas, J.,Verheij, R.A., and Groenewegen, P.P. (2010). Green space as a buffer between
stressful life events and health. Social Science & Medicine. 70(8): 1203–1210. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.socscimed.2010.01.002.
van den Berg, M., van Poppel, M., van Kamp, I., Andrusaityte, S., Balseviciene, B., Cirach, M., Danileviciute,
A., Ellis, N., Hurst, G., Masterson, D., Smith, G., Triguero-Mas, M., Uzdanaviciute, I., de Wit, P., van
Mechelen,W., Gidlow, C., Grazuleviciene, R., Nieuwenhuijsen, M.J., Kruize, H., Maas, J. (2016).Visiting
green space is associated with mental health and vitality: A cross-sectional study in four european cities.
Health & Place. 38: 8–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2016.01.003.
VanWoert, N.D. (2005). Green roof stormwater retention. Journal of Environmental Quality. 34(3): 1036–
1044. https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2004.0364.
Varning Poulsen, D. (2017). Nature-based therapy as a treatment for veterans with PTSD: what do we
know? Journal of Public Mental Health. 16(1): 15–20. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPMH-08-2016-0039.
Wolch, J.R., Byrne, J., and Newell, J.P. (2014). Urban green space, public health, and environmental
justice: The challenge of making cities ‘just green enough.’ Landscape and Urban Planning. 125: 234–
244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.01.017.
Wong, N.H., Cheong, D.K. W.,Yan, H., Soh, J., Ong, C.L., and Sia, A. (2003). The effects of rooftop garden
on energy consumption of a commercial building in Singapore. Energy and Buildings. 35(4): 353–364.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7788(02)00108-1.
Zhou, X. and Kim, J. (2013). Social disparities in tree canopy and park accessibility: A case study of six cities
in Illinois using GIS and remote sensing. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening. 12(1): 88–97. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.ufug.2012.11.004.
429
31
Resilience through
nature-based solutions
Governance and implementation
430
Nature-based solutions
infrastructure elements that can be easily recovered or replaced can be used as recovery prepared-
ness measures with multiple benefits, especially when combined with socio-economic measures
(Wamsler et al. 2017). There is also evidence that NBS can be designed to enhance biodiversity
and improve environmental quality, while contributing to economic activities and supporting
social wellbeing (e.g. Kabisch et al. 2016; Nesshöver et al. 2017).
Despite the recognized potential benefits of NBS, its use still remains limited, partly due
to a scarce and fragmented knowledge base around adequate governance and implementation
(Droste et al. 2017; Kabisch et al. 2016; O’Donnell et al. 2017). Accordingly, the local imple-
mentation of resilience-boosting NBS interventions still faces challenges and it is only slowly
being integrated into conventional governance and urban planning practices (Brink et al. 2016;
Wamsler and Pauleit 2016). Case studies on NBS governance practices are scarce, hindering
local government capacity to understand and apply learnings on potential institutional settings,
including partnerships and functioning financial arrangements for enhanced urban resilience. To
better understand the local implementation of NBS in urban planning, it is important to iden-
tify and investigate successful governance practices, public participation schemes and financial
approaches, enabling or limiting the development and implementation of NBS interventions in
cities.
Against this background, in this chapter we present case studies on how selected NBS have
been implemented in Malmö (Sweden), Melbourne (Australia), and Munich (Germany). Each
of these cities has enhanced urban resilience through NBS to overcome some of the most preva-
lent urban sustainability challenges they face. These include densification, sparse or unevenly
distributed green areas, weak social integration, lack of biodiversity, and more frequent extreme
weather (heavy rainfall and heat waves) and its consequences, like flooding and drought. These
challenges are closely interlinked with and often undermine the quality of health and wellbeing
of citizens, with particular impact on marginalized groups. Hence, the specific aim of this chapter
is to provide examples of the implementation of NBS through co-governance practices that
involve citizens under innovative institutional arrangements.
431
B. Kiss, K. McCormick, and C. Wamsler
432
Nature-based solutions
The Urban Forest Strategy (UFS), as a central part of an innovative policy framework, is a response
to longstanding climate extremes and increasing community concerns about unhealthy trees in
the City of Melbourne. The strategy’s main aims are to adapt the city to climate change, miti-
gate the urban heat island effect, create healthier ecosystems, become a water-sensitive city,
and engage the community in these endeavors (Oke, C. Councilor, City of Melbourne. Personal
Communication 2017). The UFS also seeks to protect against future vulnerability focusing on
community wellbeing and urban landscape resilience (Gulsrud et al. 2018, p. 162.). The Urban
Landscapes Department of the City of Melbourne is responsible for its implementation. The main
physical measures include tree planting in public spaces in combination with grey structures,
permeable surfaces, and underground water tanks (see Figure 31.2). Accordingly, the strategy
supports activities related to tree planting, management, and care through municipally employed
urban foresters, citizens’ training and involvment in green streetscape design and implementa-
tion through different means of public participation. These activities are either financed through
separate budget posts or as a part of the annual plan and budget. The total costs allocated for
park renewal and tree planting is AUS$ 8.57 million (2017–2018), while there is also dedicated
capital budget for managing urban forest health and a minor operational budget to support the
433
B. Kiss, K. McCormick, and C. Wamsler
team of six urban foresters who directly implement the outcomes of the strategy (Council Liaison
Officer, Email Communication 2018). Separate budget post have been created for planting 3,000
trees/year (Capital Tree Planting Program, AUS$ 1.569 million in 2017–2018). In the time since
the strategy was published, many of the priority actions have been implemented, reflecting the
provision of significant funding and resources, the high profile of the strategy within and beyond
council, and the “championing” of the strategy by both policymakers and councilors, as well as
community members (Bush 2017). The strategy has received widespread support from citizens
including a vote of confidence to secure council funding for the next ten years by the City of
Melbourne People’s Panel (CoM 2015).
Box 31.3 The Isar Plan for Urban Resilience to Flooding in Munich
The Isar Plan, as the basis for the restoration of the Isar river, provides an excellent example of
how diverse organizations and citizens can work together for agreed multibeneficial outcomes,
such as the recovery of a close-to-nature riverside with improved ecological and water quality,
which also provides recreational areas for the community as well as exceptional flood manage-
ment solutions (Wamsler and Pauliet 2016; WSC 2012). Since the 1800s, the Isar river has been
heavily used for different commercial activities, which strongly modified its riverscape resulting in
434
Nature-based solutions
the loss of its natural character. Flood risk and legal requirements for flood protection necessitated
its redesign. In 1995, the Bavarian Regional Office for Water Management and the City of Munich
initiated the Isar Plan to restore the riverscape (Arzet and Joven, n.d.). The multidisciplinary
planning group included water engineers, landscape architects, city planners, and biologists from
a planning engineering office, the City Planning Department, the Construction Department, the
Environment and Health Department, and the Historical Monument Protection Office of the City
of Munich. The planning steps included meeting with citizen groups (e.g. through the Munich
Forum) and members of different NGOs, such as nature conservation, fishing and kayak groups,
which were represented by the Isar Alliance. The river restoration consisted of the combination
of green and grey measures and the area extended along an 8-kilometer river corridor in the city.
The cost of the Isar Plan (2000–2011) was €35 million, out of which €28 million was construction
and €7 million was the remediation of contaminated sites; the cost was shared between the Free
State of Bavaria (55 per cent) and the City of Munich (45 per cent). Physical measures included the
elevation of river dams, widening the riverbed into surrounding flood plains, raising and reinfor-
cing dikes, removing existing sediments and embankments, rebuilding riverbanks, installing small
gravel islands for slowing water flows, replacing in-stream energy dissipation ground sills with
more natural rock ramps or slides with riffles and pools to allow better passage for fish and other
river organisms and thus to create more natural habitat (Oppermann 2005; Pauleit 2005; Pauleit
and Kollmann 2015; WSC 2012). As a result, the mostly concrete channeled riverbed received
more space to move and the river became able to reshape itself with its original natural features
Figure 31.3 The Isar River getting back its natural riverscape
Photo credit: Bernadett Kiss, 2018
435
B. Kiss, K. McCormick, and C. Wamsler
(see Figure 31.2). The diverse riverscape became a major year-round attraction for residents, who
actively contributed to its design and qualities, and a frequently visited site by professionals from
around the world, being used as a base case for multiple river restoration and flood protection and
management projects (Binder, Personal Communication 2014).
436
Nature-based solutions
The third case, the Isar Plan in Munich, is another illustrative and ahead of its time NBS
example (Box 31.3). Its multidisciplinary and multiorganizational planning group integrated the
technical knowledge of water engineers, ecologists, architects, and urban planners to share the
different framings of different stakeholders interactively and negotiate them mutually to enhance
urban resilience. The restoration of natural river banks and the widening of its channel reduced
exposure to flood risk, the flood plains created buffer zones within the city that reduced vulner-
ability, and the water quality has been improved so that it is now possible to swim in the river.
Improved water quality was achieved by involving upstream municipalities in modernizing their
sewage treatment plants.
The co-governance practices of the three case studies brought about more resilient solutions
in the respective cities, which is linked to (1) the involved actors and institutional arrangements,
(2) supporting policies, (3) partnerships and public participation, and (4) financial schemes, as
well as the underlying conditions facilitating related changes and innovations. These factors are
described in more detail in the following sub-sections.
437
B. Kiss, K. McCormick, and C. Wamsler
as competing departmental interests and responsibilities still create barriers for successful NBS
trajectories.
Policy Arena
Complex sustainability challenges call for comprehensive and integrated responses, and
interlinkages among local policies. Our case studies show that the lack of integration, and
conflicting or contradictory objectives, have been weakening the role of policies in implementing
NBS.The policy landscape, however, shows slow changes from previous lack of integration across
different policy domains towards the recognition of the importance of policy interlinkages.
Local policies, such as Melbourne’s Urban Forest Strategy, Malmö’s Tree Strategy, and Munich’s
Climate Adaptation Strategy increasingly support multilevel and collaborative approaches to
urban renaturing, linking biodiversity with socio-ecological resilience.
Despite the lack of local policy integration in the 1990s, the Augustenborg EcoCity bene-
fited from the emergence of the sustainability principles of the 1992 Rio Conference, the
development of national environmental goals, the Local Agenda 21s, and related financial
incentives (Local Investment Program). These policy events coincided with the trial and error
projects of the municipal waterworks experimenting with nature-based solutions to manage
flooding, creating a supportive policy landscape for the implementation of the EcoCity project.
In turn, experience from the EcoCity project was fed into the development of the Stormwater
policy of Malmö City (Dagvattenpolicy 2000), which was also based on general sustainability
principles. This policy created the basis for the later Stormwater Strategy (Dagvattenstrategi
2008), which described the roles and responsibilities of all actors involved in the planning and
design of open storm water management systems with the goal to actively involve different
municipal departments in creating additional values to parks, recreational areas, and other open
urban spaces (Stahre 2008).
The Isar Plan respected and, where possible, incorporated existing global, national and
local policies across different sectors, notably flood protection, nature conservation, and urban
planning but also other user rights. In terms of nature protection, the Natura 2000 with its spe-
cial protected areas and the Flora–Fauna–Habitat Directive and the related local nature protec-
tion legislation had to be considered. In terms of flood protection, the Isar Plan started before the
relevant European water-related directives came into effect, i.e. the European Water Framework
Directive (2002) and the Flood Risk Management Directive (2007); thus requirements of these
were incorporated continuously in the project, further pushing issues of ecological water engin-
eering, flood protection, and climate change adaptation measures.
A related policy challenge of the Isar Plan is that the state is responsible for the water man-
agement of bigger rivers (like the Isar River), while the city is responsible for integrating flood
considerations, for instance the flood risk maps, into their planning frameworks, such as the com-
prehensive plans. Furthermore, the city is also responsible for the maintenance of the Isar. This
results in a complex governance constellation making it necessary to consider and link different
regulations and governmental bodies at different levels.
As a more recent policy, the Urban Forest Strategy (2012) has explicitly been developed
in parallel and in line with other city-level policies, such as the Climate Change Adaptation
Strategy (2009), the Zero Net Emissions Strategy (2002, 2008, 2014), Total Watermark City as
a Catchment (2014), Nature in the City Strategy (2017), and the Open Space Strategy (2012)
potentially linking together the policies’ associated officers, the underlying objectives, and
implementation actions across policy domains. As the UFS states, “planning, development and
implementation of urban tree policy takes place at two levels: long term (strategic and spatial
438
Nature-based solutions
Public Participation
Resilience of urban systems depends heavily on the ability of urban actors to interact and collab-
orate (Adger 2000; Kim and Lim 2016; Lorenz 2010). Citizen involvement in this development
is a key ingredient in managing complex sustainability challenges. Our case studies show that
public participation in NBS is emerging and the means of involvement differ greatly. However,
public participation practices are not yet mainstreamed, especially not when NBS interventions
are linked to local governmental strategies.
Melbourne’s Urban Forest Strategy is a positive exception with its long- term, reliable,
flexible, and forward-thinking citizen engagement ensuring the creation of adaptive capacity
networks. Citizens have been increasingly involved since 2010 in contributing visions and con-
crete suggestions for the city’s green future in co-governance forums both face-to-face and
online, such as the online Participate Melbourne forum, pop- up face- to-face-engagement
sessions across the city, stakeholder workshops, and target discussion groups (CoM 2016).
The municipality has viewed citizens as experts, or “citizen foresters,” facilitating the training
of interested citizens in urban tree care (CoM 2017). Citizens were engaged at the local level
to update neighborhood-scale strategies (precinct plans) for Melbourne’s urban forest based
on their own indicators, such as sense of place, future hopes, aesthetic preferences, streetscape
design, canopy cover, tree planting, and removal strategies (CoM 2013).Working at a site-specific
level allowed local authorities to engage with voices often silenced (e.g. children, the elderly,
and socio-economically diverse populations) by dominant groups, engendering environmental
learning and a greater sense of place (Bendt et al. 2013).
The Urban Forest Visual was developed as part of the Urban Forest Strategy including the
municipality’s individually mapped tree data. This allowed residents to “email” individual trees
and thus facilitated a shift from a complaints-based narrative to a supportive one (Bush 2017).
The Visual supports citizen co-management of urban green space by giving them a platform for
social learning and engagement with challenging discussions regarding the impact of climate
change on the management of tree diversity (Gulsrud et al. 2018). Citizen involvement also plays
an important role in other NBS in Melbourne, such as the Greening Your Laneway, whereby the
identification of laneways in the city for greening has been carried out through a public consult-
ation and selection process, in the form of individual meetings and workshops with the whole
laneway community.
Citizen involvement has also, from the beginning, been one of the main objectives in the
Augustenborg EcoCity project in Malmö; the aims of the governmental project funding based
on the Rio principles and the Local Agenda21 included public participation as an objective of
any projects funded under this umbrella. Accordingly, residents and people working in the area
have been involved throughout the project. Local knowledge and capacities were considered and
some local residents worked in the project either through amateur expertise, which later grew
439
B. Kiss, K. McCormick, and C. Wamsler
into a consulting firm or through maintenance contractors offering jobs to local unemployed
young adults.
The public participation in the Isar Plan was also ahead of its time, with citizens strongly
involved in the planning stages from the beginning. Communication with residents included
project benefits, flood prevention, environmental protection, urban qualities, and quality of life
(WSC 2012). However, it is important to mention that the engagement of citizens in the Isar
Plan was strongly driven by European policies, such as the European Landscape Convention
(2004) requiring public participation in landscape planning and management.
Financial Mechanisms
Financing NBS is often based on European, national, or regional additional sources to the
earmarked municipal budgets. The Augustenborg EcoCity and the Isar Plan are demonstrative
examples for this type of multilevel project funding. Melbourne’s Urban Forest Fund, a com-
plementary mechanism to the Urban Forest Strategy, sticks out with its innovative financial
approach among these cases. This case illustrates the involvement of the private sector in NBS
interventions and green infrastructure development in the city, which otherwise is difficult and
not yet a common practice.
Involving the private sector is especially important in cities where the majority of land
within the municipal area is private, as in Melbourne, where 75 per cent of the municipal
land is privately owned or managed. The Urban Forest Fund aims to increase the amount of
green infrastructure across the city area by fund-matching greening projects dollar for dollar,
and thus offers two ways to participate: as a partner or as a supporter. Private partners investing
in urban greenery are 50 per cent co-funded through the fund. Applications for partnership
grants must fulfill a list of eligibility criteria and are assessed against their ability to deliver eco-
system service benefits and public benefits.The partnership grants range between AUS$50,000
and AUS$500,000 for both new buildings and retrofits, where greening is to be integrated into
the design of a new property or onto an existing property. Among eligible applicants, owner
corporations and residential strata groups are also included. Supporter contributions on the
other hand are from organizations or individuals wanting to help create a greener and more
livable city.
To date, the Urban Forest Fund has received AUS$1 million in seed funding from the City of
Melbourne, and a further AUS$215,000 contribution from VicRoads, which plans, develops and
manages the arterial road network and delivers road safety initiatives and customer-focused regis-
tration and licensing services. Contributions are used to provide matched funding to greening
projects that provide community benefit, such as green roofs or walls, green spaces and gardens,
or tree planting. All contributions are allocated towards creating new greening projects that
would otherwise not be able to go ahead. The Urban Forest Fund contributions are recognized
through a variety of tailor-made ways, including logo placement, special events, and dedicated
marketing opportunities (UFF 2017).
The Augustenborg EcoCity project enjoyed multisource funding amongst others from the
EU LIFE program, the national local investment program (LIP), two municipal departments, and
Malmö’s biggest housing company.When project funding is not available, policy goals and activ-
ities need to be linked to specific budget lines. This is the aim of Malmö’s Tree Strategy to make
the strategy more concrete, transparent, and interpretable for different actors. It also attempts to
create continuity in implementation and maintenance, which is otherwise challenging when
NBS are funded and implemented on a project basis.
440
Nature-based solutions
The Isar Plan in Munich largely benefited from the financial support of the historically
well-funded water management and water engineering sector in Bavaria. In addition, due
to recent floods (e.g. 1999, 2005, 2013), water management financing was further increased
through flood management (e.g. Hochwasserprogramm 2002–2020 for €2 billion) and flood
protection programs (e.g. Landesamt für Umweltschutz 2005– 2020 €2 million), which
not only includes 100-year flood protection measures, but also climate change adaptation
approaches in planning.
441
B. Kiss, K. McCormick, and C. Wamsler
Notes
1 The City Resilience Index is intended to serve as a planning and decision-making tool to help guide
urban investments toward results that facilitate urban resilience and the wellbeing of citizens. It includes
12 universal factors that contribute to city resilience. They are organized into four core dimensions
of the urban resilience framework: (1) Leadership and strategy: Effective leadership and manage-
ment, Empowered stakeholders, Integrated development planning, (2) Health and wellbeing: Minimal
human vulnerability, Diverse livelihoods and employment, Effective safeguards to human health and
life, (3) Economy and society: Sustainable economy, Comprehensive security and rule of law, Collective
identity and community support, (4) Infrastructure and environment: Reduced exposure and fragility,
Effective provision of critical services, Reliable mobility and communications (Rockefeller Foundation
and Arup 2015).
2 In the frame of the Naturvation project (www.naturvation.eu), in-depth case studies have been carried
out in close collaboration with practitioners in a variety of research themes covering NBS governance,
structural conditions, public participation, NBS impacts, contestations and contradictions, and NBS
innovation trajectories, as well as drivers and barriers to NBS design, implementation and maintenance.
The case study research was based on a rigorous case study protocol available at: www.naturvation.eu.
References
Adger,W.N. (2000). Social and ecological resilience: Are they related? Prog. Human Geography. 24: 347–364.
Anguelovski, I. (2013). From environmental trauma to safe haven: Place attachment and place remaking
in three marginalized neighborhoods of Barcelona, Boston, and Havana. City & Community.
12(3): 211–237.
Brink, E., Aalders, J.T., Ádám, D., Feller, R., Henselek,Y., Hoffmann, A., Ibe, K,. Matthey-Doret, A,. Meyer,
M., Negrut, N.L., Rau, A-L., Riewerts, B., von Schuckmann, L., Törnros, S., von Wehrden, H., Abson,
D.J., and Wamsler, C. (2016). Cascades of green: A review of ecosystem-based adaptation in urban areas.
Global Environmental Change. 36: 111–123. DOI: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.11.003.
Arzet, K. and Joven, S. (n.d.). The Isar experience, urban river restoration in Munich. www.wwa-m.bayern.
de/uesse_seen/massnahmen/isarplan/doc/the_isar_experience.pdf. (Accessed July 31, 2018).
Beck, U., Giddens, A., and Lash, S. (1994). Reflexive Modernization: Politics,Tradition and Aesthetics in the
Modern Social Order. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Bendt, P., Barthel, S., and Colding, J. (2013). Civic greening and environmental learning in public-access
community gardens in Berlin. Landscape Urban Planning. 109: 18–30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.landurbplan.2012.10.003.
Berkes, F. (2009). Evolution of co-management: Role of knowledge generation, bridging organizations and
social learning. J. Environ. Manag. 90: 1692–1702.
Bush, J.M. (2017). Cooling cities with green space: policy perspectives. PhD Thesis. Melbourne: University
of Melbourne.
CoM (2012). Urban Forest Strategy. Making a Great City Greener. 2012–2032. Melbourne: City of
Melbourne.
CoM (2013). East Melbourne & Jolimont Urban Forest Precinct Plan 2013 –2023. https://participate.
melbourne.vic.gov.au/application/files/8314/1273/8265/East_Melbourne_Urban_Forest_Precinct_
Plan.PDF. (Accessed November 1, 2017).
CoM (2015). 10-year Financial Plan 2015–2025. www.melbourne.vic.gov.au/SiteCollectionDocuments/
10-year-financial-plan.pdf. (Accessed February 1, 2018).
CoM (2016). Future Melbourne 2026. www.melbourne.vic.gov.au/SiteCollectionDocuments/future-
melbourne-2026-plan.pdf. (Accessed February 1, 2018).
CoM (2017). Nature in the City: Thriving Biodiversity and Healthy Ecosystems. Melbourne: City of
Melbourne.
Cote, M. and Nightingale, A.J. (2012). Resilience thinking meets social theory Situating social change in
socio-ecological systems (SES) research. Prog. Hum. Geogr. 36: 475–489. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/
0309132511425708.
Dagvattenpolicy (2000). Dagvattenpolicy för Malmö [Stormwater Policy for the City of Malmö]. www.
projektering.nu/files/Dagvattenpolicy.pdf. (Accessed June 1, 2018).
442
Nature-based solutions
Dagvattenstrategi (2008). Dagvattenstrategi för Malmö. [Stormwater Strategy for the City of Malmö].
Available at: https://malmo.se/download/18.7de6400c149d2490efb1062/1491298352353/
Dagvattenstrategi_2008.pdf. (Accessed June 1, 2018).
Demuzere, M., Orru, K., Heidrich, O., Olazabal, E., Geneletti, D., Orru, H., Bhave, A.G., Mittal, N., Feliu,
E., and Faehnle, M. (2014). Mitigating and adapting to climate change: Multi-functional and multiscale
assessment of green urban infrastructure. Journal of Environmental Management. 146: 107– 115.
doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2014.07.025.
Droste, N., Schröter-Schlaack, C., Hansjürgens, B., and Zimmermann, H. (2017). Implementing nature-
based solutions in urban areas: financing and governance aspects. In: N. Kabisch, H. Korn, J. Stadler,
A. Bonn (eds.), Nature-Based Solutions to Climate Change Adaptation in Urban Areas. Theory and
Practice of Urban Sustainability Transitions. Cambridge: Springer.
Ekostaden Augustenborg (2017). EcoCity Augustenborg on Malmö City’s official website.Available at: http://
malmo.se/Nice-to-know-about-Malmo/Sustainable-Malmo-/Sustainable-Urban-Development/
Augustenborg-Eco-City.html. (Accessed June 1, 2017).
European Commission (2015). Towards an EU Research and Innovation policy agenda for Nature-Based
Solutions & Re-Naturing Cities. doi: 10.2777/765301.
European Commission (2018a). Nature- Based Solutions. https:// ec.europa.eu/research/ environment/
index.cfm?pg=nbs. (Accessed July 31, 2018).
European Commission (2018b). Nature-Based Solutions are helping to address urban challenges. https://
ec.europa.eu/easme/en/news/nature-based-solutions-are-helping-address-urban-challenges. (Accessed
July 31, 2018).
Feindt, P.H. and Weiland, S. (2018). Reflexive governance: Exploring the concept and assessing its crit-
ical potential for sustainable development. Introduction to the special issue. Environmental Policy &
Planning. 20 6: 661–674, DOI: 10.1080/1523908X.2018.1532562.
Frantzeskaki, N., Kabisch, N., and McPhearson, T. (2016). Advancing urban environmental govern-
ance: Understanding theories, practices and processes shaping urban sustainability and resilience.
Environmental Science Policy. 62: 1–6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2016.05.008.
Gulsrud, N.M., Hertzog, K., and Shears, I. (2018). Innovative urban forestry governance in
Melbourne?: Investigating “green placemaking” as a nature-based solution. Environmental Research.
161: 158–167.
Haase, D., Kabisch, S., Haase, A., Andersson, E., Banzhaf, E., Baró, F., Brenck, M., Fischer, L., Frantzeskaki, N.,
Kabisch, N., Krellenberg, K., Kremer, P., Kronenberg, J., Larondelle, N., Mathey, J., Pauleit, S., Ring, I.,
Rink, D., Schwarz, N., and Wolff, M. (2017). Greening cities –to be socially inclusive? About the alleged
paradox of society and ecology in cities. Habitat International. 64: 41–48.
Jennings,V., Johnson-Gaither, C., and Gragg, R.S. (2012). Promoting environmental justice through urban
green space access: A synopsis. Environmental Justice. 5(1): 1–7.
Kabisch, N. and Dagmar, H. (2014). Green justice or just green? Provision of urban green spaces in Berlin,
Germany. Landscape and Urban Planning. 122: 129–139.
Kabisch, N., Frantzeskaki, N., Pauleit, S., Artmann, M., Davis, M., Haase, D., Knapp, S., Korn, H., Stadler, J.,
Zaunberger, K., and Bonn, A. (2016). Nature-based solutions to climate change mitigation and adapta-
tion in urban areas –perspectives on indicators, knowledge gaps, opportunities and barriers for action.
Ecology and Society. 21(2): 39. doi: 10.5751/ES-08373-210239.
Kim, D. and Lim, U. (2016). Urban resilience in climate change adaptation: A conceptual framework.
Sustainability. 8: 405.
Lorenz, D.F. (2010). The diversity of resilience: Contributions from a social science perspective. Nat. Hazar.
67: 7–24.
Nature Editorials (2017). Natural language: The latest attempt to brand green practices is better than it
sounds. Nature. 541: 133–134.
Naturvation (2018a).What are nature-based solutions? Available at: https://naturvation.eu/about. (Accessed
July 31, 2018).
Naturvation (2018b). WP4: Malmö Case Study. Internal report on the internal homepage. Available
at: https://naturvation.eu. (Accessed 31 July 2018).
Nesshöver, C., Assmuth,T., Irvine, K.N., Rusch, G.M.,Waylen, K.A., Delbaere, B., Haase, D., Jones-Walters,
L., Keune, H., Kovacs, E., Krauze, K., Külvik, M., Rey, F., van Dijk, J., Inge Vistad, O., Wilkinson, M.E.,
and Wittmer, H. (2017).The science, policy and practice of nature-based solutions: An interdisciplinary
perspective. Science of the Total Environment. 579: 1215–1227. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.11.106.
443
B. Kiss, K. McCormick, and C. Wamsler
Newig, J.,Voß, J.-P., and Monstadt, J. (2007). Editorial: Governance for sustainable development in the face
of ambivalence, uncertainty and distributed power: An introduction. Environmental Policy & Planning.
9(3–4): 185–192. doi:10.1080/15239080701622832.
O’Donnell, E.C., Lamond, J.E., and Thorne, C.R. (2017). Recognising barriers to implementation of Blue–
Green Infrastructure: a Newcastle case study. Urban Water Journal: 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/
1573062X.2017.1279190.
Oppermann, B. (2005). Redesign of the River Isar in Munich, Germany. Getting coherent quality for
green structures through competitive process design? In: A.C. Werquin, B. Duhem, G. Lindholm, B.
Oppermann, S. Pauleit, and S.Tjallingii (eds.): Green Structure and Urban Planning. Luxembourg: Office
for Official Publications of the European Communities.
Pauleit, S. (2005). Munich. In: A.C. Werquin, B. Duhem, G. Lindholm, B. Oppermann, S. Pauleit, and S.
Tjallingii (eds), Green Structure and Urban Planning –Report of COST Action C11. Luxembourg: Office
for Official Publications of the European Communities.
Pauleit, S. and Kollmann, J. (2015). Die Isarrenaturierung in München. Hochwasserschutz, Ökologie und
Erholung integrativ? [Renaturing of the Isar in Munich. Integrating flood protection, ecology and rec-
reation?] In: DGGL Jahrbuch 2015, 34–39.
Rockefeller Foundation and Arup (2015). City Resilience Index. https://assets.rockefellerfoundation.org/
app/uploads/20160201132303/CRI-Revised-Booklet1.pdf. (Accessed July 31, 2018).
Stahre, P. (2008). Blue– Green Fingerprints in the City of Malmö, Sweden: Malmö’s Way Towards a
Sustainable Urban Drainage. Malmö: VaSyd.
Stahre, P. and Geldof, G.D. (2003). New approach to sustainable stormwater planning. http://greenroof.se/
wp-g r/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/005-new-approach-to-sustainable-stormwater-planning1.pdf.
(Accessed June 1, 2017).
Stirling, A. (2006). Precaution, foresight and sustainability: Reflection and reflexivity in the governance
of science and technology. In: J.-P. Voß, D. Bauknecht, and R. Kemp (eds.): Reflexive Governance for
Sustainable Development. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 225–272.
UFF (2017). Urban Forest Fund. www.melbourne.vic.gov.au/community/parks-open-spaces/urban-
forest-fund/Pages/urban-forest-fund.aspx. (Accessed February 1, 2018).
Voß, J.-P., Bauknecht, D., and Kemp, R. (2006). Reflexive Governance for Sustainable Development.
Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Wamsler, C. (2014). Cities, Disaster Risk and Adaptation. London and New York: Routledge.
Wamsler, C., Niven, L., Beery, T.H., Bramryd, T., Ekelund, N., Jönsson, K.I., Osmani, A., Palo, T., and
Stålhammar, S. (2016). Operationalizing ecosystem-based adaptation: Harnessing ecosystem services to
buffer communities against climate change. Ecology and Society. 21(1): 31. http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/
ES-08266-210131.
Wamsler, C. and Pauleit, S. (2016). Making headway in climate policy mainstreaming and ecosystem-based
adaptation: Two pioneering countries, different pathways, one goal. Climatic Change. 137 1–2: 71–87.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-016-1660-y.
Wamsler, C., Pauleit, S., Zölsch, T., Schuppe, S., and Mascharenas, A. (2017). Mainstreaming nature-based
solutions for climate change adaptation in urban governance and planning. In: N. Kabisch, H. Korn,
J. Stadler, and A. Bonn (eds.): Nature-Based Solutions to Climate Change Adaptation in Urban Areas.
Theory and Practice of Urban Sustainability Transitions. Cham: Springer.
Wolch, J.R., Byrne, J., and Newell, J.P. (2014). Urban green space, public health, and environmental justice: The
challenge of making cities “just green enough.” Landscape and Urban Planning. 125: 234–244.
WSC (2012). Water sensitive cities –Case Study 17: Isar Plan, Germany. http://wscstudytour.com/user-
data/Case%20Studies/Case%20Study%2017%20-%20Isar%20River%20Plan%20-%20Germany.pdf.
(Accessed July 31, 2018).
Zölch, T., Wamsler, C., and Pauleit, S. (2018). Integrating the ecosystem-based approach into municipal cli-
mate adaptation strategies: The case of Germany. Journal of Cleaner Production. 170: 966–977.
444
32
Social resilience and
capacity building
A case study of a granting agency
Laura Tate
Introduction
In fostering resilience, it is critical to address, and better understand, its social dimension (social
resilience). This is increasingly important in the planning domain (Beatley 2009; Bernier and
Meinzen-Dick 2014; Bostick et al. 2017; Cowell, 2013). For local social groups significantly
impact community resistance and resilience –according to the degree of trusting and action-
focused relationships among them, and by virtue of their relative ability levels for harnessing
resources from outside the community (Di Gregorio et al. 2012). Likewise, the degree of social
connectedness within a community –or not –can impact broader resilience in the face of acute
threat, as suggested in the study of war-torn Kosovo by Agani et al.l (2010). The importance of
connectedness in disaster response has also been analyzed in the case of the Tohoku tsunami and
subsequent Fukushima nuclear crisis in Japan. Findings there further affirm the importance of
local connectedness and horizontal collaboration, both for its own value and to enhance collabor-
ation with national level actors, once the latter are in a position to assist (Aoki 2015).This chapter
contributes to our understanding of social resilience by examining selected microprocesses at
work in a project designed to foster social resilience, social innovation, and capacity-building in
British Columbia, Canada. By better appreciating the microprocesses at work in social resilience,
as well as planning in general (see Fainstein 2010; Fischler 2000; Flyvbjerg 1998; 2000; Huxley
and Yiftachel 2000; McGuirk 2001), proponents of social and other forms of resilience may be
able to structure more effective resilience programs and projects. Learning from such analysis
may be of particular benefit to efforts particularly in the preparedness, response, and recovery
phases of concerted disaster response.
Resilience is one of several constructs that cities use to position specific policy initiatives; and such
concepts can and do often overlap (Hatuka et al, 2018). It has particular value in the context of disaster
management approaches, whose four stages consist of mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery
(Altay et al. 2006).While the mitigation phase of such approaches may emphasize more formal gov-
ernance and institution-led responses, the other three phases lend themselves well to, and may in
fact depend upon, the involvement of civil society, including non-profit and volunteer groups. As
Altay et al. observe, disasters are multifaceted events that engender “a complex set of rapidly evolving
problems” (2006:251) and disrupt standard decision-making arrangements and processes. Successful
445
Laura Tate
disaster management efforts, then, require backup plans and resources that can prevail during such
disruptions, and where local capacities for contributing to all four stages are integrated and effective.
When unpacking the more targeted notion of social resilience, studies of this construct can
(and should) overlap with other constructs, including the notion of social innovation. The case
study at hand thus includes the complementary and overlapping concept of social innovation,
while considering the influences of local context and microprocesses. It uses an Actor Network
Theory (ANT) lens to unpack the successes and challenges in a collaboratively funded capacity-
building project. The chapter first explains the rationale for this methodology, then reviews and
analyzes the granting and capacity-building case. It concludes with preliminary recommendations
for those working to better understand and enhance social resilience.
446
Case study of a granting agency
Multiple channels and power flow directions. Focus Doak and Karadimitriou (2007); Latour (2007);
on multiple channels and directions in which Nimmo (2016); Rydin and Tate (2016):
power flows (distributive agency). Power does 10–13; Rutland and Aylett (2008)
not always move in a direct, linear manner; nor is
it always top-down.
Objects matter. Interest in role of objects /material Beauregard (2012b); Latour (2007); Rydin
items in influencing other network members. (2012); Rydin and Natarajan (2015); Vilches
These can include abstract items like laws, plans, and Tate (2016)
policies, programs, agreements, and service
coordination routines
Unending effort needed in distributed agency. ANT Brownill (2016); Farias (2010); Latour (2007);
recognizes need for continuous effort to stabilize Murdoch (1998); Nimmo (2016); Ruming
agreement around goals. (2008) Tate (2013)
Translation matters. Network benefits must be Beauregard (2015:131–132); Goulden (2016);
translated to prospective members to secure their Latour (2007); Rydin (2014);
participation in network activities. Translation can Ruming et al. (2016); Tate (2013)
involve equivalencies, where translations are not
literal but put things into terms relevant to each
individual or case.
Reality is (and networks are) performed. Networks, Ackland (2014); Brown and Capdevila (1999);
network relationships, and objects are created Law and Singleton (1999); Mol (1999);
by members through process of performativity. Muller (2015); Weber (2015)
This happens as members essentially “will” the
networks into being and then work out the
details, through often repetitive and refining
action(s) critical to network definition.
Source: Author
Case study
We turn now to the case study, involving a granting and capacity-building project for non-profit
agencies in British Columbia (a form of “social innovation boot camp”), led by a collaborating
group of funders. Prior to collaborating, participating funders all gave grants to enhance social
resilience.Those grants included (but were not limited to) funds benefitting those marginalized by
mental illness and/or addiction.The project began when two funders, the Vancouver Foundation
and City of Vancouver, came together seeking: more shared outcomes; a higher calibre of projects
to fund; and possible economies of scale. In April 2014, the Community Action Initiative (CAI)
also joined the discussions, eventually followed by the First Nations Health Authority (FNHA)
and the Vancouver Coastal Health Authority (Author; and LOA 2014).
The author’s role in the project was participatory, as lead staff with one funder in the project.
In this role, the author attended meetings with the staff of the other funding agencies and with
her agency’s board of directors.
Despite the risk for research bias, the author’s role provided potential for interpretive
insights. An interpretive lens values experience in revealing the significance of social events
(see Richardson and Fowers 1998; Smith and Larkin 2009; Weegmann and Piwowoz-Hjort
2009; Yanow 2000). That said, interpretive researchers advocate triangulation to prevent bias
(Lather 1991; Smith 1997).The author thus triangulated with a formal developmental evaluation
447
Laura Tate
report by an independent local evaluation consultant, the HoweGroup. All five funding agencies
commissioned the HoweGroup, acknowledging the value of independent help in assessing,
reflecting upon, and adjusting the project throughout. The final HoweGroup report also contained
excerpts, including critical comments, from anonymous interviews with: staff from each funder,
the training facilitator, and project participants. Documentation by The HoweGroup is thus
summarized here to counterbalance any bias. Further triangulation was done by circulating and
presenting a draft of this article to two leading members of the collaborative for critical feedback.
While all five agencies consented to the scholarly work of the author on this topic, only staff
from the two other leading agencies commented on the article. Unfortunately, the remaining
two agencies faced staffing constraints (including an employment change for one representative)
that prevented post-project research involvement.
Summary of events
In Altay et al.’s (2006) review unpacking the types of activities linked with each disaster response
phase, developing mutual aid agreements and memoranda of understanding is an ideal task for
the preparedness phase. By better understanding the origins of such agreements, scholars and
practitioners concerned with resilience could improve their recommendations for enhancing
disaster preparedness. In the case studied here, this type of agreement played a prominent role.
While the project significantly evolved, including midstream adjustments, it embodied three
components, articulated in a formal letter of agreement (LOA).The LOA in fact became an important
project touchstone and reference. Critical project components included advanced workshops with
selected non-profit groups; and a related grant competition. Both required lead non-profits to col-
laborate with other agencies in their communities.This collaborative project thus evolved in a flex-
ible way, with concrete goals and milestones. See Figure 32.1 for more detailed components.
Analysis
As noted earlier, ANT can reveal microprocesses that either help or hinder social resilience and
social innovation. This section considers the five categories of ANT contribution listed earlier
in Table 32.1. It drew from the author’s interpretive perspective, counterbalanced by the inde-
pendent evaluation and by testing preliminary findings through a presentation and conference
call with staff from the other two largest funders.
448
Case study of a granting agency
independent evaluation by the HoweGroup did find that training participants were satisfied in
this regard, with the majority very or somewhat satisfied, as shown in Figure 32.2.
Distributed agency was evident in the smaller funders’ network, through adaptations to pro-
ject parameters to respect each granting agency’s different budgets, mandates, and constituencies
(also discussed in the next two subsections).This suggests there may be value in conscious efforts
to structure other social resilience efforts, including disaster management, in ways that maximize
distributed agency. Such efforts should draw from further study of how distributed agency can
unfold in empowering and robust ways.
449
Laura Tate
Assessing a system’s
48% 33% 19%
readiness for change
Taking a designer’s 5
52% 29% 14%
mindset for next steps %
Social inclusion as 5 5
57% 33%
a shared goal % %
Introduction to system
67% 24% 9%
thinking and mapping
It was refreshing to talk about failure, taking risks, the importance of timing with innovation
projects and acknowledging that there are so many unknowns where you are truly doing
participatory work with diverse stakeholders… it is both exciting and scary, and I appreciate
that there is room for [these unknowns] when talking about systems change.
(Project team member, HoweGroup 2015: 31–32)
In one instance, however, these efforts were unsuccessful for a non-profit coalition, where tran-
sition in the lead agency’s senior staff led to dissolution of shared goals and withdrawal by that
lead agency from the training and final granting opportunity. While other coalition members
were still allowed to participate in the training, they were unable to compete in the final granting
opportunity without a lead agency. This then caused them to question the training model:
I think the whole idea of [funders] needing a lead agency [for non- profit led grant
applications] was a challenge for our group as our lead agency bowed out. It didn’t work
because there was no alternate from the lead agency, and no one could be sent in their place,
so we missed out.
(Project team member, HoweGroup 2015: 28)
450
Case study of a granting agency
Translation matters
As noted above, the LOA became a key network object. It also helped translate, or to explain,
benefits to funders’ network members, in terms that resonated with their mandates. One such
benefit was the very concept of social innovation, implicitly linked with social resilience. The
project promoted social innovation and aimed to reward participants whose grant proposals
demonstrated the greatest social innovation potential.Yet it became tricky to structure a shared
project meeting all funders’ interests. For example, one funder adamantly opposed any kind of
quota in granting, since the focus of the project was on social innovation. This posed an ini-
tial challenge, for individual funders with distinct mandates focused around specific cohorts.
While all funders wanted to address indigenous people’s needs, doing so had particular man-
date relevance to the FNHA and to CAI. In the end, other than quotas for Vancouver-based
agencies, the final LOA structure responded with contingent language about aboriginal1 agency
selection, tying FNHA’s training contribution only to any aboriginal agency actually funded
(LOA 2014:7). Three aboriginal agencies were eventually selected, bringing the total FNHA
contribution to just under $25,000. This episode also showed how the LOA as an object
continued to influence funders network members. In the author’s presentation to triangulate
this research with staff of the other two large funders, both representatives did believe that trans-
lation had occurred. One affirmed that he was glad translation had enabled the collaboration
(Transcript 2016).
The [funders] uncovered key factors of success toward increasing [social] innovation… [that
enabled funders] to be more innovative and work in a partnership model and allowed for
the [funders] to take risks with the uncertainty of innovative work. The [funders] felt early
on in the project that this model (including the defined value of innovation) allowed them
to move forward on projects that were riskier or had more uncertainty than if the organ-
ization was funding alone.
(Howegroup 2015: 17)
The incremental learning approach seemed to spark early successes. It began with including
the capacity-building facilitator in meetings to discuss the overall partnership as well as the
curriculum and expanded to funder staff attendance at the initial regional workshops. At these
workshops, funder representatives enjoyed more focused learning about social innovation, and
developed a shared understanding and vocabulary for this concept, reducing the need for con-
tinuous new translations when using this term (Author; see also Rose 2014).
451
Laura Tate
An initiative, product, process or program that profoundly changes any social system by
changing one or more of:
• The basic routines (how we act; what we do)
• The basic resource flows (money, knowledge, people)
• Authority flows (laws, policies, rules)
• Beliefs (what we believe is true, right/wrong).
(Rose 2014)
Having the increased understanding of social innovation, the language and principles, has
allowed the collaborative members to understand the process and have the rationale to
“make the case” for why the group is operating in this way. This is the “permission granter”
that allows the Collaborative to talk about the work in a concrete way, increases confidence
and allows the [funders] to communicate.
(Funder representative, Howegroup 2015)
Through this project funders and community groups have come to a common definition of
social innovation. Before this process we all had a different understanding of what innovation
was.We have been able to develop a more consistent understanding of what we’re talking about.
(Funder representative, Howegroup 2015:28–29)
Both larger funder representatives appreciated multiple exposures to the social innovation con-
cept. One agency representative recalled his own difficulty absorbing it the first time: “[F]or me,
it was not hearing the exact same messages about social innovation. It was also about hearing
the messages expressed differently as they were repeated” (Respondent 1 in Transcript 2016).
Respondent 2 agreed, noting that each exposure explored the definition at a slightly different
angle. She thought multiple iterations allowed the group to deeply explore, and ultimately
embrace, the concept:
At times when one partner described a concept, they would challenge each other. The
repetitions of the concept highlighted minute differences that we could then note, and work
through, and bring the partners to a common place. There had been a lot of work on the
back end –the need to keep checking in on the shared understanding. It was time-con-
suming, but also interesting
(Respondent 2 in Transcript 2016)
452
Case study of a granting agency
In addition to common staff level understanding, the project also built common board
decision-making understanding. At an early stage, the funders agreed that final choice of
capacity-building recipients could be made through the board of just one funder agency
with a province-wide scope. The agreement required that the staff from other funders would
participate in those discussions. To further enhance this process, the funders arranged for
the board members to get similar training in social innovation; and the training facilitator
attended a board meeting two months before the key decision meeting (CAI Leadership
Council Minutes, November 2014).
The capacity building for the 12 chosen project teams occurred in February and April, 2015.
It was generally successful (Howegroup 2015: 5), although interim evaluation described some
mid-course correction, as not all non-profit agencies were as ready to embrace the concepts as
others. Some found that the lecture style format did not work for them, for example, and so
supplementary one-on-one telephone team coaching sessions ensured they received help that
was appropriate to the stage teams were at with their own projects, and their understanding of
the social innovation concepts (Howegroup 2015: 17). These changes seemed to confirm the
positive and responsive relationships built among the funders, as well as successful performativity
and translation of at least some interests.
Capacity building helped participants refine final project ideas and present these to the pro-
ject funders, followed by formal submission of grant applications as appropriate.Where there was
a clear social inclusion or mental wellness focus, proponents were encouraged to submit their
applications to the joint City of Vancouver and CAI competition. Proponents could also con-
currently participate in the Vancouver Foundation’s competition, if desired. Where there was no
social inclusion focus, proponents might apply solely to the Vancouver Foundation. A total of ten
out of the 12 project teams applied through the social inclusion/mental wellness competition,
and four grants were awarded to allow two-year projects to promote social inclusion for vulner-
able populations. Initially there had been hope that a fourth collaborative funder might join the
granting opportunity. For varied reasons, roughly a month before the application forms were
being created, the mental wellness collaborators learned this would not work out. This meant
a reduced total number of grant opportunities and some delays in advising participants on key
proposal submission details.
According to the independent evaluation, the proposals submitted through the final com-
petitive process were generally of a higher caliber because of the training enabled through the
initiative.
The project plans that have come forward are more innovative, robust and have more
sophisticated goals… the applicants actually talked about the systems in which they are
operating within and they have indicated how they intend to influence the system. So often
behaviour change is confused with systems change.The projects that came through the pro-
cess did a good job of distinguishing between the root causes within the system they were
intending to address and the intended behavioural changes they were hoping to see among
the vulnerable populations with which they work.
(Funder representative, Howegroup 2015: 30)
The independent evaluation concluded that, while procedural improvements might help the
venture, overall its first iteration was successful and would be worth repeating.
453
Laura Tate
Conclusion
Social resilience plays an important role in broader forms of resilience, but it is not as well
understood. And yet, the potential for greater understanding to boost the effectiveness of disaster
management work at all phases of response –especially in preparedness, response, and recovery –
is strong. This is because social resilience enhances the skills and capacities of local agencies to
reassess and respond more effectively in a context where information and resource flows may
be disrupted in short and medium terms. This case study sought to advance scholarship on
social resilience, including resilience applied in disaster management, by considering some of the
microprocesses involved in fostering it through a collaborative granting project. It used ANT
to delve into these things in a systematic way, with the goal of fostering deeper learning for
scholars and practitioners interested in resilience generally, and specifically interested in better
understanding of its social dimension.
For example, the focus on multiple channels and power flow directions in this case, as well
as the need for unending effort to stabilize goals, and to translate benefits to network members,
showed several ways the project fostered distributed agency. As noted at the start of this chapter,
action-focused relationships between local agencies are critical to resilience (Di Gregorio et al.
2012). Such relationships implicitly need distributed agency –especially in the event of a disaster
which temporarily distances a community from broader networks and resources. In this context,
there may be benefit in further studying how distributed agency can and does benefit resilience-
focused projects and programs.
As also discussed at the outset, the ability to create social cohesion is another important com-
ponent of social resilience (Agani et al. 2010). The case study in this chapter unpacked several
microprocesses that helped to foster greater cohesion, understanding that social cohesion has
parallels with network formation and stabilization.The case revealed the efforts needed to enable
successful collaboration of agencies that might have otherwise operated in silos. Collaboration is
generally an important theme in planning literature (e.g. Healey 1997; and Innes 1996). It is also
important in resilience work that acknowledges the potential for a destabilizing crisis to occur –
a crisis that might result in significant ruptures with a community’s business as usual. In a related
vein, the case has added to a nascent body of work addressing translation and equivalencies in
planning (Goulden 2016; Ruming et al. 2016; and Rydin and Tate 2016). As Ruming et al. and
Rydin and Tate remind us, equivalencies lie at the heart of planning practice and merit further
elaboration.
Finally, this chapter has explored performativity in a planning context –again a notion which
should be of interest to resilience and disaster management scholars as well as planners more
broadly. This notion has benefitted from preliminary exploration in a broader planning and
urban studies context through Weber’s work (2015).The documents that are core to the planning
craft –community plans –while not considered in this chapter, are other objects that one could
examine through ANT’s performativity dimension. For the process of creating plans in today’s
society is also a recursive one, in which not only are residents and stakeholders consulted, but
technical feasibility is examined. Frequently the plan is then breathed into life during imple-
mentation by a host of network actors who must engage with, and embrace, the plan, frequently
adjusting it in the process of implementing it as contexts shift.There may thus be merit in further
appreciating the ways in which performativity can enhance agreement, cohesion and resilience.
As with all studies, inevitably some knowledge remains hidden to researchers, whether or
not they view the arena through a participatory lens. While I have attempted to triangulate
by supplementing my own outlook with data from an independent report by a credentialed
454
Case study of a granting agency
evaluator, outside experts also have biases and data gaps. I sought to rectify some of these gaps by
exposing fellow funders to the ideas in my draft paper and asking them for further comments.
I incorporated these into the article, but even these will still give an incomplete view. Rather
than having the final word on any of these themes, the paper invites other scholars to continue
the conversation through further exploration.
Note
1 While the preferred term is Indigenous, at the time of the project aboriginal was used more frequently
among key local agencies. It is used here for continuity purposes.
References
Ackland, A. (2014). Lost in translation: Tracing the erasure of the critical dimension of a radical educational
discourse. Studies in the Education of Adults. 46(2): 192–210.
Agani, F., Landau, J., and Agani, N. (2010). Community- building before, during, and after times of
trauma: The application of the LINC model of community resilience in Kosovo. American Journal of
Orthopsychiatry. 80(1): 143–149.
Altay, N., Green, W., and Lapetina, J. (2006). Improving Disaster Response Efforts with Decision Support
Systems. Richmond, VA: Management Faculty Publications, University of Richmond, Robins
School of Business. https://scholarship.richmond.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1034&contex
t=management-faculty-publications.
Aoki, N. (2015). Wide-area collaboration in the aftermath of the March 11 disasters in Japan: Implications
for responsible disaster management. International Review of Administrative Sciences. 81(1):196–213.
Beatley, T. (2009). Introduction. Planning for Coastal Resilience: Best Practices for Calamitous Times.
Washington, DC: Island Press, xi–xvi.
Beauregard, R (2012a) In search of assemblages. Crios. 4: 9–16.
Beauregard, R (2012b) Planning with things. Journal of Planning Education and Research. 32: 182–190.
Beauregard, R. (2015).Truths and realities. In: Planning Matter. Acting With Things. Chicago, IL: University
of Chicago Press, 113–132.
Bernier, Q. and Meinzen- Dick, R. (2014). Resilience and social capital. Paper presented at 2020
Vision: Building resilience for food and nutrition security. Conference held May 2014 by the
International Food Policy Research Institute.
Bostick, T., Holzer, T., and Sarkani, E. (2017). Enabling stakeholder involvement in coastal disaster resilience
planning. Risk Analysis. 37(6): 1181–1200.
CAI Community Action Initiative (2014). Minutes of the meeting of the CAI Leadership Council,
November 2014.
Cowell, M. (2013). Bounce back or move on: Regional resilience and economic development planning.
Cities. 30: 212–222.
Di Gregorio, M., Hagedorn, K., Kiri, M., Korf B., McCarthy, N., Meinzen-Dick, R., Swallow, B., Mwangi,
E., and Markelova, H. (2012). Property rights and collective action for poverty reduction: A framework
for analysis, 25–48. In: E. Mwangi, H. Markelova, and R. Meinzen-Dick (eds.): Collective Action and
Property Rights for Poverty Reduction: Insights from Africa and Asia. Philadelphia, PA: Penn Press for
International Food Policy Research Institute.
Doak, J. and Karadimitriou, N. (2007). (Re)development, complexity and networks: a framework for
research. Urban Studies. 4: 209–229.
Fainstein, S. (2010). The Just City. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Farias, I. (2010). Introduction. In: I. Farias and T. Bender (eds): Urban Assemblages: How ANT Changes
Urban Studies (139–159). Abingdon and New York: Routledge.
Fischler, R. (2000). Communicative planning theory: a Foucauldian assessment. Journal of Planning
Education and Research. 19(4): 358–368.
Flyvbjerg, B. (1998). Rationality and Power. S. Sampson (trans.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
FNHA First Nations Health Authority (2013). A Path Forward. British Columbia First Nations and
Aboriginal People’s Mental Wellness and Substance Use 10 Year Plan. A Provincial Approach to Facilitate
Regional and Local Planning and Action.
455
Laura Tate
Goulden, S. (2016). Constructing “green building”: Heterogeneous networks and the translation of sustain-
ability into planning in Israel. In: Y. Rydin and L. Tate (eds.): Actor Networks of Planning. Exploring
the Influence of Actor Network Theory. London: Routledge, 27–43.
Hatuka, T., Rosen-zvhi, I., Birnhack, M., Toch, E., and Zur, H. (2018). The political premises of contem-
porary urban concepts: The global city, the sustainable city, the resilient city, the creative city, and the
smart city. Planning Theory and Practice. 19(2): 160–179.
Healey, P. (1997). Collaborative Planning. Shaping Places in Fragmented Societies.Vancouver: University of
British Columbia Press.
Howegroup (2015). Promoting Social Inclusion in Vulnerable Populations: Final Evaluation-Final Report
to the Collaborative. August 14, 2015.Vancouver, British Columbia.
Huxley, M. and Yiftachel, O. (2000). New paradigm or old myopia? Unsettling the communicative turn in
planning theory. Journal of Planning Education and Research. 19: 333–342.
Innes, J. (1996). Planning through consensus building: A new view of the comprehensive planning ideal.
Journal of the American Planning Association. 62(4): 460–472.
Lather, P. (1991). Getting Smart: Feminist Research And Pedagogy Within The Postmodern.
New York: Routledge.
Latour, B. (2007). Reassembling the Social. An Introduction to Actor-Network Theory. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Law, J. and Singleton,V. (2013). Actor network theory and politics: Working in and on the world. Qualitative
Sociology. 36, 485–502.
LOA –Letter of Agreement (2014).Vancouver, British Columbia: Vancouver Foundation, City ofVancouver,
Community Action Initiative, First Nations Health Authority,Vancouver Coastal Health Authority.
McGuirk, P. (2001). Situating communicative planning theory: Context, power and knowledge. Environment
and Planning. 33: 195–217.
Moulaert, F., Martinelli, F., Swyngedouw, E., and Gonzalez, S. (2005). Towards alternative model(s) of local
innovation. Urban Studies, 42(11): 1969–1990.
Nimmo, R. (2016). Editor’s introduction: From generalised symmetry to ontological policits and after-
tracing actor-network theory. In: Actor Network Theory Research.Volume 1: Emergence, Development,
and Transformation. London: Sage Publications, xxi–xlv.
Richardson, F.C. and Fowers, B.J. (1998). Interpretive social science: an overview. American Behavioral
Scientist. 41(4): 465–495.
Rose, C. (2014). Social innovation in complex systems. Presentation given at multiple regional workshops
in British Columbia, Canada. Fall, 2014.
Ruming, K. (2008). Negotiating development control: Using actor- network theory to explore
the creation of residential building policy. City Futures Research Centre, University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia. www.fbe.unsw.edu.au/cityfutures/publications/othercfresearch/
negotiatingdevelopmentcontrol.pdf.
Ruming, K., Mee, K., and McGuirk, P. (2016). Planned derailment for new urban futures? An Actant Network
Analysis of the “great [light] rail debate” in Newcastle, Australia. In: Y. Rydin and L. Tate (eds.): Actor
Networks of Planning. Exploring the Influence of Actor Network Theory. London: Routledge, 44–61.
Rutland, T. and Aylett, A. (2008). The work of policy: Actor networks, governmentality, and local action on
climate change in Portland, Oregon. Environment and Planning D. 26: 627–646.
Rydin, Y. and Tate, L. (2016). Exploring the influence of actor network theory. In: Y. Rydin and L.
Tate (eds.): Actor Networks of Planning. Exploring the Influence of Actor Network Theory.
London: Routledge, 3–24.
Smith, S.J. (1997). The phenomenology of educating physically. In D. Vandenburg (ed.): Phenomenology
and Educational Discourse. Durban: Heinemann: 119–144.
Smith, J., Flowers, P., and Larkin, M. (2009). Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis: Theory, Method,
and Research. London: Sage Publications.
Tate, L. (2013). Growth-management implementation in metropolitan Vancouver: Lessons from actor-
network theory. Environment and Planning B. 40: 783 – 800.
Transcript (2016). Transcript of presentation by Author and discussion among representatives of all three
major funding agencies, April 5, 2016.
Van Wezemael, J. and Silberberger, J. (2016).’Emergent places’. Innovative practices in Zurich, Switzerland.
In: Y. Rydin and L.Tate (eds.): Actor Networks of Planning. Exploring the Influence of Actor Network
Theory. London: Routledge: 175–185.
456
Case study of a granting agency
Vilches, S. and Tate, L. (2016). Grants as significant objects in community engagement networks: Kelowna,
British Columbia. In: Y. Rydin and L.Tate (eds.): Actor Networks of Planning. Exploring the Influence
of Actor Network Theory. London: Routledge, 62–78.
Weber, R (2015). Performing building cycles: How real estate professionals turn booms into bubbles.
Unpublished paper presented at the Association of Collegiate Schools of Planning annual conference in
Houston, Texas, October 2015.
Weegman, M. and Piwowoz Hjurt, E. (2009). Naught but a story’: Narratives of successful AA recovery.
Health Sociology Review. 18(3): 273–283.
Yanow, D. (2000). Conducting Interpretive Policy Analysis. London: Sage
457
33
Critical junctures in land
use planning for disaster
risk management
The case of Manizales, Colombia
Julia Wesely
Introduction
Urban dwellers are increasingly at risk of large-scale, infrequent disasters, such as earthquakes and
tsunamis, as well as small-scale but frequent events like fires, landslides, and localized flooding.
This is due to the high density of exposed people who live in hazard-prone areas, as well as the
failures of many cities to provide the urban poor, in particular, with adequate living conditions
to reduce their vulnerabilities (Bull-Kamanga et al. 2003; Dodman et al. 2013; Jabeen 2015).
Nevertheless, urban areas also offer many favorable conditions to manage disasters, mitigate
existing risk, and avoid the creation of new risk due to their institutional capacities as well as
human, financial, and technical resources. Campaigns like UNISDR’s “Making Cities Resilient”
bring to the forefront how cities develop capacities to anticipate and respond to risk, which
makes them central actors in disaster risk management (Johnson and Blackburn 2014).
Climate change and urbanization are widely considered contributing and driving factors for
global increases in levels of risk as well as frequency and severity of disasters, but urban risk accu-
mulation processes are more complex. They comprise dynamic interactions between the social,
economic, and ecologic factors that condition people’s vulnerability to specific hazards across
the city (Bull-Kamanga et al. 2003). Hereby, the built environment and land use planning, which
shape the quality, quantity, and distribution of housing and infrastructure, strongly influence the
exposure of urban dwellers to different kinds of risk and their response capacity (Johnson 2011).
This chapter approaches this complexity of interactions for urban disaster risk manage-
ment (DRM) in land use planning through investigating a widely-recognized case study in the
field: the city of Manizales in Colombia. It draws from resilience-thinking, which postulates that
social–ecological interactions like those between natural hazards, social vulnerability and cap-
acity to act, can be understood within the framework of complex adaptive systems.These systems
are characterized by non-linear behavior, cross-scale dynamics, high levels of uncertainty and
path dependencies, as well as capacities to adapt to changing conditions (Dennis et al. 2016; Nel
et al. 2018). The dynamics of many urban areas make adaptability and the capacity to innovate
458
Critical junctures in land use planning
• The antecedent baseline conditions against which the change can be evaluated;
• The cleavage or crisis, which generates accumulating tensions that eventually trigger the crit-
ical juncture;
• The critical juncture itself; and
• Its legacies.
This approach can be illustrated along a hypothetical example for DRM. An antecedent con-
dition for a critical juncture might be a neighborhood located in a flood-prone area. Once
a flood occurs, inhabitants have to evacuate and lose their properties, which triggers a crisis.
The critical juncture then refers to a moment of decision making: is it possible to improve
the building standards and living conditions in situ, or would the community have to relocate?
What decision-making factors are considered, who is excluded from the decision-making pro-
cess and who champions it? The result and its implementation will have a legacy not only for the
inhabitants and their livelihoods but can potentially also serve as precedent for future decisions
about relocations from flood-prone areas.
The chapter draws on primary data from 30 semi- structured interviews and partici-
pant observations as well as secondary data gathered by the author during fieldwork between
September and December 2015. As part of this research, a wide range of critical junctures in
the thematic areas of hazard and disaster events, norms and strategic frameworks, as well as land
use planning and the built environment have been identified (see Figure 33.1). They captured
the interviewees’ experiences in their professional lives, and thereby reflected key moments for
Manizales’ DRM1 over the past 35 years.
459
Figure 33.1 Critical junctures for DRM in Manizales
Source: Author
Critical junctures in land use planning
Analyzed over time and in relation to each other, the critical junctures help to reveal com-
plex path dependencies in Manizales, and the capacities to reduce, manage and avoid risk, which
institutional actors have created and consolidated. This chapter focuses on two critical junctures
related to land use planning in Manizales.
• The land use planning Law 388 of 1997 and the first municipal land use plan of 2001;
• The revision of the land use plan 2017–2029.
These two were selected for their power to illustrate the complex challenges of adaptability in
disaster risk mitigation, as well as the strategic role for urban development in Manizales.
461
Julia Wesely
Figure 33.2 View from the center towards the east of Manizales. High- rise buildings are
constructed on the plateau of the city, while small residential houses remain invisible from this
perspective
Photo credit: Author, December 2014
Second, in economic terms, Manizales is considered a relatively wealthy city within Colombia.
It scored highest on the 2016 social prosperity index and shows the fourth lowest poverty levels
of Colombian cities. Nevertheless, this still means that 28 per cent (58,000) of the inhabitants
are considered to live in poverty with less than COP 265,000/person/household and 5 per cent
(3,200) in extreme poverty with less than COP119.000/person/household. Although the data
have to be viewed cautiously, the survey by Manizales Cómo Vamos, which consolidates sev-
eral official government sources, shows that Manizales has the lowest overall housing deficit in
Colombia. About 3,000 new housing units are required to cover the quantitative deficit, because
2,900 units are currently located in non-mitigable high risk zones and about 100 are needed for
new migrants to the city. According to the same survey, public service providers claim to provide
100 per cent service coverage of water, sewerage, and electricity as well as 79 per cent coverage
for gas supply. Moreover, health services claim that 98.2 per cent of the population have some
sort of health insurance (Manizales Cómo Vamos 2017).
Additional to the aforementioned landslide risk on the slopes, environmental challenges stem
from the lack of residual water treatment resulting in very poor water quality of its rivers, air
pollution in the city center and the lack of publicly accessible green space. The latter serves as
an example to demonstrate that environmental burdens are unequally distributed, as the low-
income district San José only counts on 0.25 m2 green space per inhabitant compared to an
average 6.77m2 in Manizales.The environmental inequalities are exacerbated by socio-economic
ones, as the city is also characterized as highly unequal with a Gini co-efficient of 0.48 (Manizales
462
Critical junctures in land use planning
Cómo Vamos 2017). However, although many low-income urban dwellers live in precarious and
hazardous situations on the slopes, it would be overly simplistic to draw direct correlations. It is
key to point out that middle and high-income inhabitants also live at risk, thereby making risk an
inclusive and city-wide issue. Thus, DRM in Manizales is not only a matter of addressing what
is typically framed along discourses of vulnerability, hazard exposure, and development; it also
requires a critical examination of people’s diverse capacities to act.
Third, many publications from and about Manizales highlight its highly institutionalized
DRM and Figure 33.3 outlines the main entities contributing to it, according to the municipal
DRM plan (Alcaldía de Manizales 2016) and complemented by fieldwork observations.
Manizales’ innovative approach to DRM has been partly attributed to strong inter-institutional
collaboration (CAPRADE 2005; Hardoy and Velasquez Barrero 2014; Romero-Lankao and
Gnatz 2013). Particularly the alliance between the municipal government, the Environmental
Studies Institute (IDEA-UNAL) at the National University of Colombia, and the environmental
authority of the Department of Caldas (CORPOCALDAS) has developed and consolidated
since the 1980s into a championing network for advancing DRM. The inter-institutional and
inter-sectorial approach to DRM has become one of the pillars enabling Manizales to develop
its land use plans in a way that was widely recognized as spearheading and innovative by the
national government.
Law 388 of 1997 and the Municipal Land Use Plan, 2001
Figure 33.4 summarizes the analytical components of the critical juncture of the first land
use plan.
Antecedent Conditions
Three key laws and policies prepared the space for the first national Land Use Law 388 of
1997 in the decade before its establishment. First, Law 9 of 1989 defined the social function of
property and the public and private forms of using land. Second, the Constitution of 1991, and
particularly Article 39, provided an important landmark for manifesting land use planning as a
framework for action through the establishment of decentralized land use planning councils at
463
Figure 33.3 DRM institutions related to Manizales
Source: Author
Critical junctures in land use planning
the municipal level (Arbouin-Gomez 2012; Hernández Peña 2010). Third, municipal develop-
ment plans (according to Law 152 of 1994) were established as key urban planning instruments,
guiding the mayor’s implementation programfor achieving specific socio- economic goals,
defining the budget, and prioritizing interventions for the government for four years (Garcia
Ferrari et al. 2018). Importantly, DRM forms a mandatory component of these plans. Compared
to municipal development plans, land use plans are often described as the more technical instru-
ment for guiding private development and public works (Ortiz 2018). The emergence of these
urban planning policies was embedded into the wider political–economic situation of Colombia
during the 1990s. It followed the urgency to regulate land speculation by the private sector and
to strengthen the administrative and technical capacities of the state in urban planning (Garcia
Ferrari et al. 2018; Ortiz 2018).
In Manizales, the lack of land use planning was particularly manifest in land speculation on
scarce low-r isk land and the expansion of (informal) settlements on the steep southern and nor-
thern slopes. Increased rural–urban migration to the city since the 1970s due to conflicts and
agricultural crises changed the land uses and exacerbated landslide risks. Frequent landslides led
to deaths, damage to infrastructure and housing, and put pressure on the municipal government
to act. Additionally, Manizales experienced several large-scale disasters near the city, including the
eruption of the Nevado del Ruiz in 1985 and earthquakes in 1979 and 1999 (Romero-Lankao
and Gnatz 2013). These devastating events brought to the forefront the importance of inter-
institutional coordination especially in information systems, early warning and recovery phases
and were drivers for the development of the DRM systems and plans on municipal and national
levels (Davidson et al. 2007).
465
Julia Wesely
Cleavage/Crisis
The national Law 388 of 1997 has been widely acknowledged by policymakers as the cul-
mination of the aforementioned policies in the 1990s to provide a framework for Colombian
urbanism. It builds upon decentralized institutions and provides a long-term (12-year) perspec-
tive on urban development (Congreso de Colombia 1997).
It provided a cleavage for a critical juncture for DRM for two main reasons. Law 388 demands
municipalities to include risk management into land use planning, and particularly to define and
implement non-mitigable areas. These refer to those areas where structural risk reduction was
technically not deemed to be possible because of the slope conditions. In already occupied areas,
a non-mitigable area would bring about the necessity for relocation programmes, while non-
occupied areas would apply building restrictions. Through this obligation, risk legally became a
conditioning element of land use planning in Colombia and merits a closer look at how munici-
palities deal with this conditionality and the complex knowledge and decision-making processes
underlying it.
Moreover, besides regulating the outcomes (the plan itself), Law 388 also provided a nor-
mative framework for the planning process. It includes deadlines for presenting draft and final
documents, responsibilities of the regional environmental authorities, territorial planning
councils, and municipal government, as well as the implementation of the public consultation
process. Hence, the law raises important issues regarding governance and participation to define
the “desired order” for land use planning (Hernández Peña 2010).
Thus, Law 388 considers land use planning as an urbanistic concept for physically planning
land use through zoning and other instruments, as well as a political– administrative pro-
cess of implementing the structures, roles and responsibilities of territorial authorities
(Arbouin-Gomez 2012).
Critical Juncture
The municipality of Manizales adopted its first land use plan through Agreement 508 in 2001.
The roles of the land use plan have been defined and widely communicated by the muni-
cipal government along three lines (Senior official, Secretariat of Planning, public presentation
9 January, 2015):
Several interviewees from the local government proudly claimed that the plan in Manizales’
was the first adopted land use plan in Latin America, which included configured risk in already
occupied areas and implicit, future risk in unoccupied ones as determining factors for physical
planning.
Further, several publications highlighted that the land use plan of Manizales coincided with
national and international environmental sustainability agendas such as the UN Local Agenda
21 and its local environmental action plans and Colombia’s Green Municipalities programme
(Romero-Lankao and Gnatz 2013). It was therefore a critical juncture to thematically linking
466
Critical junctures in land use planning
the environmental and urban planning agendas of the municipality (see Hardoy and Velasquez
Barrero 2014; Velazquez 1997 for a detailed examination of sustainability agendas and muni-
cipal development plans) as well as bridging multiple governance levels.
Legacy
By 2001, Manizales already had a strong local government and consolidated its institutional
cooperation in DRM across government sectors, academia, the private sector, and civil society
organizations. Interviewees commented that this critical juncture translated into additional
resources for these alliances to implement inter-institutional plans in fields such as transporta-
tion, ecological infrastructure and residential development with implications on risk levels across
the city. For example, the declaration of ecological set-aside areas supported the stabilization of
slopes to reduce landslide risk (Romero-Lankao and Gnatz 2013)
The land use planning process formally provided scope for expanding alliances beyond
formal institutions through public participation in consultations and debates at different stages
of the process. However, these spaces were recognized as an opportunity for engagement only
by a few civil society organizations. On the one hand, government interviewees lamented the
limited public reach of their activities, but on the other, these participatory spaces have been
critiqued by interviewees from civil society organizations as a formality rather than genuine
invitation to publicly debate the land use plan. Many inhabitants were either unaware of
the land use planning process and/or did not see how their participation –often in sessions
with lengthy technical presentations conducted during work hours –made a difference to
their lives.
Interviewees from the municipal government highlighted that the land use planning pro-
cess mobilized resources for advancing knowledge on DRM, and that accurate baseline data to
allow for evidence-based decision-making became one of the central legacies: “For us, it is very
important to have a land use plan, because it allows us to have the knowledge of the territory
and to know where one can give (building) licenses or under which conditions determined
licenses can be given to inhibit new areas of risk, new settlements” (Senior Official, Secretariat
of Planning, November 5, 2015). Interviewees also emphasized that disaster risk studies were
more advanced in Manizales compared to other Colombian cities and other thematic areas in
Manizales, because risk has been on the political and research agenda in the municipality since
the 1970s. The land use plan assessed risk through a series of studies including the geology,
geo-morphology, erosion processes, and current land use. Maps were produced for earthquake,
land and mudslide, flooding and fire hazards (CAPRADE 2005). Through overlaying and
weighting the different elements of risk, a baseline document called “The physical characterisa-
tion and a preliminary determination of the hazards and natural and anthropic risks in the city
of Manizales”2 was created, which served as a technical guideline to include risk into the land
use plan (González Largo 2012).
Based on these studies, a critical legacy challenging the management of complex adaptive
systems, comes from the definition of non-mitigable zones, which –at least on paper –manifested
the precautionary principle of DRM for the 12 years of the land use plan. Potential direct
consequences were relocation and resettlement in already occupied areas as well as the prohib-
ition of new buildings on vacant sites. From the perspective of urban development and problems
with the increasing land speculation, strictly protected areas were a desirable instrument to regu-
late otherwise loose land use permits. Some interviewees from academia mentioned that DRM
was one of the thematic areas that provided a window for contesting land speculation, because
it gave the state the power to inhibit construction on high-risk plots. This aligned with the
467
Julia Wesely
aforementioned antecedent conditions that the land use planning was expected to be a powerful
instrument to frame and guide private development.
In practice, however, many interviewees particularly from academia and civil society pointed
to the failures of enforcing non-mitigable risk zones. On the one hand, this manifested in the
construction of a large shopping mall after developers found a study that helped in contesting
the non-mitigable status of the plot in the land use plan. While the mall was built and mitigated
risk in the precise location, it has been highly controversial due to exacerbating the risk of
the surrounding, low-income neighborhoods through increasing pressure on the soil. On the
other hand, implementation failures became visible in the continuous construction of precarious,
informal housing on the high-r isk northern and southern slopes of the city (see Figure 33.5).
Furthermore, the distinction between mitigable and non-mitigable zones also revealed the
dominant deterministic understanding of risk, which was prevalent in Colombia at that time
(Allen et al. 2015).The land use plan accounted for levels of hazard and vulnerability, but did not
provide the adaptability to manage changing levels of risk.
The problem of this stagnant view was exacerbated in conjuncture with other limited
understandings. For example, costs of relocation programs were calculated solely based on the
construction costs for housing and basic infrastructure and ignored related social processes,
such as living costs and livelihood opportunities. It has been widely documented that these
social factors, however, shape people’s preference of living sometimes informally in a declared
high-r isk zone rather than in a low-r isk one with more costs and other, social risk (Chardon
Figure 33.5 Informal housing constructed on the southern slopes around 2010
Photo credit: Author, 2015
468
Critical junctures in land use planning
2010; Kelman and Mather 2008). Hence, relocation programmes from non- mitigable
high risk areas brought about potential adverse effects on the actual risk that inhabitants
faced; they paradoxically increased due to lack of available infrastructure, broken social ties,
lack of employment opportunities, and insufficient educational and recreational facilities
(Chardon 2010).
In sum, this first municipal land use plan became a critical juncture in its confluence of sev-
eral urban policies in the 1990s. It particularly highlights the need for transversal planning across
government sectors and particularly the environmental and risk agendas. Further, it revealed the
need for a critical interrogation of the implications of knowledge production and adaptability for
defining and implementing mitigable and non-mitigable areas. This need becomes exacerbated
in the following critical juncture.
Antecedent Conditions
The land use plan of 2001 was updated in 2003 and 2007 to reflect changes in the city and to
correct errors from planning documents. In the period of the first land use plan between 2001
469
Julia Wesely
and 2013, Manizales was confronted with a series of heavy rains, particularly in 2003, 2005,
2008, and 2011. They triggered multiple heavy landslides, which in their accumulation caused
severe damage to buildings and infrastructure, cost the lives of many inhabitants and exacerbated
institutional resource deployment.
These events had several repercussions on land use planning. Particularly, they changed the
understanding of infrastructure in the city from “fixing the hazard” through stabilizing the slopes,
towards emphasizing that its functionality requires consistent maintenance and a recognition of
interactions between structural and non-structural forces. Interviewees from CORPOCALDAS
lamented that landslides were triggered because drainage channels were blocked with rubbish,
or because people used terraced slopes for agriculture. One of the most recognized examples
that emerged to reframe the understanding between the built environment and social develop-
ment, is the “Guardians of the Slope” (Guardianas de la Ladera). This program employs women,
who are heads of their households, on a part-time basis and builds their capacities to maintain
the slope stabilization infrastructure across the city. Their tasks go beyond mechanic labor and
include awareness raising, education programs, and communication about the importance of risk
mitigation (Prieto et al. 2006).
Moreover, evaluations of DRM after the hazard events revealed a series of research needs,
which required further funding. For example, there was a need to better understand the relations
between risk and critical infrastructure (Bernal et al. 2017) and to improve early warning systems
in the watersheds.The inter-institutional alliance consisting of CORPOCALDAS, the municipal
and regional government and the National University of Colombia decided to develop a pro-
posal for a holistic project to address the accumulated gaps and challenges.
Cleavage/Crisis
The emergence of the proposal coincided with the La Niña phenomenon, which led to heavy
winter rains in 2010. At the end of December 2010, the national government declared a state
of economic, social, and ecological emergency, which enabled it rapidly to issue a decree
concerning the reform of the National Calamity Fund. As a consequence of this reform, the
Adaptation Fund was created and the Colombia Humanitaria campaign was rolled out with the
intention to finance large-scale risk mitigation programmes as well as recovery and reconstruc-
tion in response to La Niña (Presidencia de la República de Colombia 2010).
Due to the previous development of the inter-institutional project proposal, Manizales was
the first applicant for Colombia Humanitaria and won COP 64,600 million funding for the
inter-institutional project “Integrated Risk Management”.3 An additional COP 20,000 million
was acquired through a credit from the Colombian Development Bank, which was paid back
between 2009–2019 through raising the municipal environmental surcharge on properties by
0.05 per cent to 0.2 per cent. The tax income was transferred to CORPOCALDAS, which was
responsible for its management and implementation. The majority of the funding was dedicated
to structural and non-structural risk mitigation, education, and communication, and 10 per cent
was dedicated to research. The detailed knowledge underlying the land use plan 2017–2029
is strongly based methods, data, monitoring, and knowledge developed through this project.
Beyond contributions of the project outputs to land use planning, the emergence of this project
demonstrates the strength of the inter-institutional alliance in adapting to, and taking advantage
of, changing policy conditions.
A second cleavage emerged from legal changes. The national disaster risk management Law
1523 of 2012 redefined the roles and responsibilities for DRM. Importantly, it allocates the
responsibility for DRM to all Colombian citizens and obliges institutions to implement risk
470
Critical junctures in land use planning
(rather than disaster) management strategies in a transversal manner within their competences
and jurisdiction. The management of risk dynamics was further shaken up by Decree 1077 of
2015, which induced a potential paradigm shift from deterministic to probabilistic understandings
of risk in long-term land use planning.
Critical Juncture
The most significant momentum of the new land use plan in terms of risk management emerged
from a resolution by the regional environmental agency CORPOCALDAS, which backed up
the establishment of so-called conditional land use, which challenges previous definitions of land
as mitigable or non-mitigable. Rather, the concept proposes an analysis of the costs and benefits
of risk management considering the particular capacities, such as available financial capital for
mitigation measures, which are available in a certain area at a defined time.
In practice, this implies that “detailed studies” are required whenever a land use change is
planned in a high and medium hazard area. Beyond classifying the land, these studies outline the
types and costs of actions to reduce risk and capacities to implement them. Detailed studies are
conducted in accordance with the program of the municipal development plan (see Bernal et al.
2017 for a detailed outline of the process).
The methodology for probabilistic assessments of multihazard risk that enable this shift
away from deterministic understandings of risk in land use planning has been widely published
(Bernal et al. 2017; Carreño et al. 2017; Salgado-Gálvez et al. 2017). Interviewed government
officials highlighted that Manizales is uniquely positioned to apply this methodology and draw
upon timely and spatially accurate data, particularly through acceleration of research emerging
from the “Integrated Risk Management” project. They anticipated that the land use plan and
its process of assessing risk in a holistic manner would enable the city to deal with uncertainty
through providing enhanced adaptability to changing conditions.
Evolving legacy
Interviewees from the local government and academia showed that the establishment of a condi-
tional land use category is an innovation from a risk management perspective as it departs from
the previous deterministic understanding of mitigability. From a conceptual perspective, they
argue that it clearly demonstrates how risk rather than disaster is managed, because the land use
plan accounts for current as well as future risk in relation to the different capacities to mitigate
it. Further, it shows that scientific uncertainty does not justify inaction while also highlighting
that scientific “certainty” (i.e. an accurate risk assessment of the situation of today) does not auto-
matically justify deterministic action for the 12-year period of the land use plan. Instead, levels
of interventions are identified based on probability levels of events and their expected effects.
Interventions include protection works, early warning systems, resettlement, restriction of land
use, amongst others (Salgado-Gálvez et al. 2017).
Where technical capacities for mitigation exist, the question then turns to the evaluation of
costs and benefits of relocation as opposed to in situ upgrading. Several interviewees from the
government stated that there is now a broader view on the social and economic costs of relocation
compared to the static view, which has been critiqued in the previous land use plan. This implies
that planners account not only for the immediate construction of the new housing, but the social
challenges, employment opportunities, transportation, and other infrastructure related to it.
However, the change undoubtedly triggers a variety of implementation challenges. For
example, assessments are currently linked to property ownership, which risks mis-and
471
Julia Wesely
mal-recognizing the most marginalized, informal settlers, and other kinds of vulnerable tenants,
who live in high-r isk areas that are mostly constructed on municipal property. The change then
fundamentally brings the following questions to the forefront: whose capacities, whose know-
ledge, and whose decisions count?
Interviewed urban researchers see a danger in this more flexible land use plan, because the
market can buy its way out of what used to be –at least on paper –a conditioning factor
for urban planning, namely risk management. They see an increasing role particularly for civil
society organizations to contest the trajectory towards a more market-based approach that
exacerbates the social–spatial fragmentation of the city. One of the most active groups to address
this demand is the Subámonos al bus del POT collective, which presents an important legacy of
the land use planning process from the perspective of civil society. It was founded in July 2013
as an umbrella organization of academics, community leaders, social organizations, and citi-
zens to function as a bridge to municipal planning institutions (Civil society leader, September
30, 2015). Amongst others, the collective facilitated weekly meetings and a so-called Cabildo
Abierto, an open council meeting in October 2015, where they voiced their concerns about the
draft plan and alternative ideas.
In sum, the emergence of the critical juncture demonstrated the innovative capacity of the
inter-institutional alliance through the “Integrated Risk Management” project. The second land
use plan shows a move towards a dynamic understanding of the creation and management of
risk, rather than disasters, with a consideration of the changing capacities of private and public
actors to reduce and avoid risk. However, this increased flexibility further opens up risk man-
agement to market forces at the expense of marginalized populations. It makes regulatory and
strategic instruments like municipal development plans increasingly important and calls for a
stronger civil society to contest developments at the expense of marginalized inhabitants.
Conclusions
This chapter analyzed two critical junctures in land use planning that contributed to config-
uring Manizales’ current approach to DRM. This analysis looked at various characteristics of
the framework of complex adaptive systems, such as planning uncertainties, inter-institutional
collaboration, and discourses about capacities to adapt to changing conditions, among others.
Revealing the historical trajectories of land use planning through these characteristics provided
an understanding of underlying processes and challenges for adaptable and innovative forms
of DRM.
The critical junctures illustrated that the built environment holds particular challenges in the
dynamics between deterministic and probabilistic understandings of risk. Although deterministic
perspectives are not coherent with the notion of the social construction of risk and complex
risk accumulation processes, they supported that risk management was –at least on paper –at
the margin of a market logic in Manizales. The recent introduction of conditional land use in
the 2017–2029 land use plan is a more accurate representation of the existing potential for miti-
gating risk. It highlights that municipal actors are increasingly considering the role of capacities
to mitigate risk in a specific area in addition to vulnerability and hazards when defining levels of
risk. However, there is a caveat that property owners with more technical and financial capaci-
ties find a more supportive environment than those who are already highly vulnerable and have
fewer available resources.
In sum, the implementation of the new land use plan will demand critical interrogation of
the probabilistic multihazard risk assessment from a decision-making perspective, asking: Who
472
Critical junctures in land use planning
has the capacity to contribute to, use, critically examine, contest, and appropriate the “detailed
studies”? On the one hand, the case of the “Integrated Risk Management” project showed
the strength of inter-institutional expert alliances and their contribution to creating spaces and
championing innovation, which today distinguish Manizales from other cities. On the other
hand, one has to be cautious that these systems are susceptible to being undemocratic and top-
down. Civil society organizations are increasingly seeing participatory processes like land use
planning as a window for demanding more bottom-up processes and holding the government
to account for their rights to safe and dignified living conditions. Reducing and avoiding risk
through land use planning will require bringing both approaches together as well as making
visible and strengthening the capacities and knowledges of marginalized inhabitants living on
hazardous terrain.
Acknowledgements
This work is part of a PhD project, which was supervised by Dr Cassidy Johnson and supported
by the Economic and Social Science Research Council and the Natural Environment Research
Council (ES/J500185/1).
Notes
1 In Colombia, DRM is organized around the following three phases that guide public policy on national,
regional, and municipal levels: Risk knowledge and information, risk reduction, disaster management
(Congreso de Colombia 2012). In some municipalities like Manizales, risk transfer is considered a
fourth component (Cardona 2007) while others consider it part of risk reduction.
2 A detailed document archive can be accessed from www.gestiondelriesgomanizales.com/ index.
php?option=com_content&view=article&id=12%3Aplan-de-ordenamiento-territorial&catid=4
0%3Areduccion-del-r iesgo&Itemid=197 (October 28, 2018).
3 See www.gestiondelriesgomanizales.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=124&It
emid=228.
References
Alcaldía de Manizales (2016) Decreto No. 0415 de 2016. Por medio del cual se adopta el Plan Municipal
Gestión del Riesgo de Desastres del municipio de Manizales. Manizales: Secretaría Jurídica.
Allen, A., Lambert, R., Apsan Frediani, A., and Ome, T. (2015) Can participatory mapping activate spatial
and political practices? Mapping popular resistance and dwelling practices in Bogotá eastern hills. Area.
47(3): 261–271. doi: 10.1111/area.12187.
Arbouin-Gomez, F. (2012) Derecho urbanístico y desarrollo territorial colombiano. Evolución desde la
colonia hasta nuestros días. Universitas. 124: 17–42.
Beilin, R. and Wilkinson, C. (2015) Governing for urban resilience. Urban Studies. 52(7): 1205–1217.
doi: 10.1177/0042098015574955.
Bernal, G.A., Salgado-Gálvez, M.A., Zuloaga, D., Tristancho, J., González, D., and Cardona, O.D. (2017)
Integration of probabilistic and multihazard risk assessment within urban development planning and
emergency preparedness and response: Application to Manizales, Colombia. International Journal of
Disaster Risk Science. 8: 270–283.
Birkmann, J., Chang Send, D., and Suarez, D. (2011) Adaptive Disaster Risk Reduction Enhancing Methods
and Tools of Disaster Risk Reduction in the Light of Climate Change Adaptive Disaster Risk Reduction
Enhancing Methods and Tools of Disaster Risk Reduction. 43. Bonn: DKKV Publication.
Bull-
Kamanga, L., Diagne, K., Lavell, A., Leon, E., Lerise, F., MacGregor, H., Maskrey, A., Meshack,
M., Pelling, M., Reid, H., Satterthwaite, D., Songsore, J., Westgate, K., and Yitambe, A. (2003) From
everyday hazards to disasters: The accumulation of risk in urban areas. Environment and Urbanization.
15(1): 193–204.
473
Julia Wesely
Campos., A., Holm-Nielsen, N., Díaz, C., Rubiano, D.M., Costa, C.R., Fernando Ramírez, C., and Dickson,
E. (2012) Analysis of Disaster Risk Management in Colombia. A Contribution to the Creation of Public
Policies. Executive Summary. Bogotá: The World Bank Colombia and GFDRR.
Capoccia, G. (2016) Critical junctures. In: O. Fioretos, T. Falleti, A. Sheingate, and G. Capoccia (eds.): The
Oxford Handbook of Historical Institutionalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1–22.
Capoccia, G. and Kelemen, R.D. (2007) The study of critical junctures: Theory, narrative, and counterfactuals
in historical institutionalism. World Politics. 59(3): 341–369.
CAPRADE (2005) La gestión local del riesgo en una ciudad andina: Manizales, un caso integral, ilustrativo
y evaluado. Manizales: Comunidad Andina.
Cardona, O.D. (2007). La gestión del riesgo colectivo. Un marco conceptual que encuentra susteno en una
ciudad laboratorio. Manizales:: LA RED.
Cardona, O.D., Pérez, M. del P., and Suarez, D.C. (2014). Perfil Ambiental Participativo en la Cuenca Urbana
Cervantes. Manizales: Instituto de Estudios Ambientales -Universidad Nacional de Colombia Sede
Manizales.
Carreño, M.L., Cardona, O.D., Barbat, A.H., Suarez, D.C., Perez M.d.P., Narvaez, L. (2017). Holistic disaster
risk evaluation for the urban risk management plan of Manizales, Colombia. International Journal of
Disaster Risk Science. 8: 258–269.
Castán Broto,V. and Bulkeley, H. (2013). Maintaining climate change experiments: Urban political ecology
and the everyday reconfiguration of urban infrastructure. International Journal of Urban and Regional
Research. 37(6): 1934–1948.
Chardon, A.-C. (1999). A geographic approach of the global vulnerability in urban area: Case of Manizales,
Colombian Andes. GeoJournal. 49(2): 197–212.
Chardon, A.-C. (2000). Manizales Expuesta a Situaciones de Riesgo: Un Crecimiento Urbano Incontrolado
en un Contexto Andino. Manizales: Universidad Nacional de Colombia, pp. 13–29.
Chardon, A.-C. (2010). Reasentar un hábitat vulnerable. Teoría versus praxis. revista invi. 25(70): 17–75.
Collier, R.B. and Collier, D. (1991). Shaping the Political Arena: Critical Junctures, the Labor Movement,
and Regime Dynamics in Latin America. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Congreso de Colombia (1997). Ley 388 de 1997. Por la cual se modifica la Ley 9, y la Ley 3 de 1991 y se
dictan otras disposiciones.
Davidson, C.H., Johnson, C., Lizarralde, G., Dikmen, N., and Sliwinski, A. (2007). Truths and myths about
community participation in post-disaster housing projects. Habitat International. 31(1): 100–115.
Dennis, M., Armitage, R.P., and James, P. (2016). Social-ecological innovation: adaptive responses to urban
environmental conditions. Urban Ecosystems. Urban Ecosystems. 19(3): 1063–1082. doi: 10.1007/
s11252-016-0551-3.
Dodman, D., Brown, D., Francis, K., Hardoy, J., Johnson, C., and Satterthwaite, D. (2013). Understanding
the Nature and Scale of Urban Risk in Low-and Middle-Income Countries and Its Implications for
Humanitarian Preparedness, Planning and Response. 4. London: International Institute for Environmnet
and Development.
Garcia Ferrari, S., Smith, H., and Calderon, E. (2018). Contemporary tendencies in Colombian urban
planning: the case of the “Planes Parciales” in Medellín. International Planning Studies. 23(4): 355–375.
doi: 10.1080/13563475.2018.1500276.
González Largo, C.C. (2012). Evaluación del Riesgo con Técnicas Probabilistas y su Incorporación en los
Planes de Ordenamiento Territorial. El caso de Manizales. Boletín ambiental 107. Manizales: Instituto
de Estudios Ambientales -Universidad Nacional de Colombia Sede Manizales.
Hardoy, J. and Velasquez Barrero, L.S. (2014). Re-thinking “Biomanizales”: Addressing climate change adap-
tation in Manizales, Colombia. Environment and Urbanization. 26(1): 1–16.
Hernández Peña, Y.T. (2010). El ordenamiento territorial y su construcción social en Colombia: ¿Un
instrumento para el desarrollo sustentable?. Cuadernos de Geografía: Revista Colombiana de Geografía.
19: 97–109.
Jabeen, H. (2015). Adapting the assets of urban low-income households with climate extremes: experience
from Dhaka. International Journal of Urban Sustainable Development. 7(1): 72–88.
Johnson, C. (2011). Creating an Enabling Environment for Reducing Disaster Risk: Recent Experience
of Regulatory Frameworks for Land, Planning and Building in Low and Middle-Income Countries,
Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction. London: UNISDR.
Johnson, C. and Blackburn, S. (2014). Advocacy for urban resilience: UNISDR’s Making Cities Resilient
Campaign. Environment and Urbanization. 26(1): 29–52.
474
Critical junctures in land use planning
Kelman, I. and Mather, T. (2008). Living with volcanoes: The sustainable livelihoods approach for volcano-
related opportunities. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research. 172(3–4): 189–198.
Lavell, A. (2009). Local Disaster Risk Reduction: Lessons from the Andes. Lima: LA RED.
Manizales Cómo Vamos (2017). Informe calidad de vida Manizales. Manizales: Universidad Nacional de
Colombia –Sede Manizales.
Mejía Prieto, B., GiraldoValencia, G.I., and Trujillo Galvez, L.M. (2006) Guardianas de la ladera: Un programa
de cultura ciudadana en la prevención del riesgo. Manizales: Universidad Nacional de Colombia – Sede
Manizales.
Nel, D., du Plessis, C., and Landman, K. (2018). Planning for dynamic cities: introducing a framework to
understand urban change from a complex adaptive systems approach. International Planning Studies.
23(3): 250–263. doi: 10.1080/13563475.2018.1439370.
Ortiz, C. (2018). Colombia, disP –The Planning Review. 54(1): 35–37.
Presidencia de la República de Colombia (2010). Decreto 4819 de 2010. Por el cual se crea el Fondo
Adaptación. Bogotá: Ministerio de Hacienda y Crédito Público.
Romero-Lankao, P. and Gnatz, D.M. (2013). Exploring urban transformations in Latin America. Current
Opinion in Environmental Sustainability. 5(3–4), pp. 358–367. doi: 10.1016/j.cosust.2013.07.008.
Salgado-Gálvez, M.A., Bernal, G.A., Zuloaga, D., Marulanda, M.C., Cardona, O.D., and Henao, S. (2017).
Probabilistic seismic risk assessment in Manizales, Colombia: Quantifying losses for insurance purposes.
International Journal of Disaster Risk Science. 8(3): 1–12.
Steinmo, S. (2008). What is historical institutionalism?. In: D. Della Porta and M. Keating (eds.): Politics.
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 150–178.
Sutanta, H., Rajabifard, A., and Bishop, I.D. (2013). Disaster risk reduction using acceptable risk measures for
spatial planning. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management. 56(6): 761–785.
Velasquez Barrero, L.S. (2010). Biociudad: Alternativa para la Sostenibilidad de Pequeñas Ciudades. El Caso
de Manizales en Colombia. Revista Internacional Sostenibilidad, Tecnología y Humanismo. 5: 57–82.
Velazquez, L.E. (1997). Monitoreo del Plan de Desarrollo: Manizales.
475
34
Urban resilience
State of the art and future prospects
476
State of the art and future prospects
Thus, it is not surprising that urban resilience is currently received with equal support and criti-
cism. While firmly endorsed as an international goal, many are also talking about resilience as a
notion of the past and inviting us to think ‘beyond urban resilience’ (Davoudi and Porter 2012;
Lhomme et al. 2013; Mykhnenko 2016; Shaw 2012;Vale 2014)
Different geographical contexts have formed and influenced the urban resilience concept.
As noted by Yuan in Chapter 11, in China and other countries, “[t]he theoretical discussion on
urban resilience […] has been largely limited to the literature review of existing theories from
developed countries” (p. 131) and directly translated into policy and planning prescriptions.
While Chinese cities have a long history of surviving disasters by building resilient communi-
ties, the term has not been featured to describe such practices. The same could be said about
many other geographical contexts across the Global South or, more precisely, “outside” the
epicenters of resilience thinking and theorization.Yet, urban resilience is posed internationally as
an imperative, which often neglects the fact that it is highly context specific.
Is the power and usefulness of the concept of urban resilience now at risk of getting lost in
translation? Is it forcing ways of thinking and acting upon cities that reinforce Western hegem-
onies and naturalizing them as “universal”? Are we witnessing increased communication across
fields of urban thinking and action at the expense of substantial meaning? If not, what is the
actual scope of urban resilience for opening new ways of understanding and acting upon urban
change?
The chapters in this volume explored such questions and the intellectual, methodological,
axiological, and practical productivity of urban resilience from a wide range of angles and in a
wide set of contexts. Adhering to Meerow and Newell’s (2016) proposal, we offer here a cross-
reading of the contributions featured in this volume to scrutinize resilience in relation to the
following set of questions: why resilience, resilience of what, to what, resilience where and when,
and resilience for whom? In addition to these “five W’s”, we add the question of resilience by
whom, as a means to bring to the fore a critical and political reproblematization of current
debates and practices.
Resilience of what?
The question of what is made to be made resilient to what has received significant attention over
the last decade (Chelleri et al. 2015).This has been inspired by a search for clarifying the meaning,
target, and scope of resilience-seeking analyses and practices. In broad terms, the current debate
is somehow polarized between those who endorse a general understanding of resilience as the
generic adaptability, flexibility, or adaptive capacity of urban systems to unspecified disturbances
(Miller et al. 2010) and those who argue for specificity (Carpenter et al. 2001, see also Chapter 3
by Thorén in this volume). For the former, adhering to a general and open framing enhances the
communicative power of resilience as a boundary-spanning notion, malleable enough to travel
across disciplinary and policymaking domains and to expand the scope of resilience to respond
not only to expected disturbances, but also to those currently unforeseen.This is widely the pos-
ition adopted by the City Resilience Framework developed by the Rockefeller Foundation and
Arup, which defines city resilience as “the capacity of cities to function, so that the people living
and working in cities –particularly the poor and vulnerable –survive and thrive no matter what
stresses or shocks they encounter” (Rockefeller Foundation and Arup 2015: 11).
In their meta-analysis of the scientific literature on methodologies and indicators to assess
urban resilience, Suarez, Gómez-Baggethun, and Onaindia (Chapter 16) found that almost
half of the publications reviewed adhere to a holistic definition of resilience by referring to
urban socio-economic systems in general. Unsurprisingly, the emphasis in most cases is on the
477
A. Allen, J. Twigg, M. A. Burayidi, and C. Wamsler
biophysical dimensions of urban systems including both physical infrastructure and environ-
mental conditions. However, when looking at the question of resilience to what, the bulk (over
two-thirds) of the papers analyzed refer to specific disturbances –predominantly in relation to
disasters triggered by natural hazards or extreme weather events related to climate change –as
opposed to resilience to any kind of disturbance or stress.
As contended by Pizzo (2015) and elaborated by Adil and Audirac in Chapter 4,
distinguishing “whether the perturbation in question is a sudden shock, like Hurricane
Katrina or Harvey, or a slow burn, like sustained urban depopulation like in Detroit or
Youngstown, post-disaster roadmaps anticipate and operationalize the notion of resilience
quite differently”. The authors go on to argue that “when the perturbation is a slow-burn
process, like lake eutrophication, long term droughts, or urban shrinkage, post-disaster revi-
talization roadmaps emphasize renewal and reconstruction. In this case, the perturbation itself
is conceived not as a shock or unexpected aberration, but rather as an expected function
(i.e. feedback processes) of system dynamics.” Construing these processes as gradual or slow-
burn social and natural stresses helps us to capture the simultaneous existence of multiple
interlocking systems as regular socio-ecological features in urban development. For instance,
in his examination of open spaces as multifunctional infrastructure, LaGro (Chapter 7) argues
that urban open spaces “have the capacity to markedly increase urban sustainability, livability,
and resilience”. Though this performative function of cities is often impeded by limited local
governance capacity, obsolete policies and siloed approaches propagated through professional
education and practice. Taking a wider look at critical infrastructures such as functioning
electricity and energy systems to water supply, Silvast in Chapter 22 builds upon the work
of Graham and Marvin (2001) to highlight the role and obduracy of such systems in regu-
lating everyday life and disaster situations, while consolidating path dependency and lock-in
trajectories.
What is evident through the different chapters in this volume and the wider literature is that,
under the banner of urban resilience, “very different events (a flood, a war, a social upheaval) [are
treated] as essentially equal, without distinguishing what is unexpected from what is contentious
or unwanted” (Pizzo 2015, p. 134). How urban crises are construed and responded to, under
varying circumstances, provides insights into different favored lens, from engineering, ecological,
evolutionary, or feminist, among many other hegemonic and counter-hegemonic framings. In
this sense, Barbara (2015), reminds us that while “we need to correctly and specifically narrow
the concept and its use […] this is not the primary problem. Instead […] its political meaning
[is] of the utmost importance” (p. 134).
Thus, how urban resilience is being translated into urban planning and practice demands a
critical examination of how the presumed uncontroversial mobilization of metaphors from the
physical and natural sciences is impacting upon the real world. (Carpenter et al. 2001; Pickett
et al. 2004).
Applying the notion of resilience to understand institutional responses to shrinking cities and
property abandonment in the US city of Muncie, West (Chapter 15) demonstrates the scope of
the notion to rethink how cities respond to a broad spectrum of issues beyond climate change. In
doing so, he argues that to retain and expand its usefulness, urban resilience “must be deracinated
from biology and replanted in the field of contemporary social theory”. (p. 185) In other words,
he reminds us that resilience is a social process of construction and reconstruction of the city
rather than a natural phenomenon. Thus to “understand how cities can best respond to trauma,
degradation and shock, we should not look towards the law-like regularities of the natural
sciences. Instead, we should focus our attention on the haphazard and idiographic networks of
association that create stasis and change in social relationships.”
478
State of the art and future prospects
In the same vein, Lema, Liesch and and Graziano (Chapter 21) apply a resilience lens to study
the growth pathways of several American “legacy cities” following the 2008–2012 financial crisis.
They argue for an understanding of resilience that encompasses non-linear dynamics and an itera-
tive process of “relational adaptation”, a “process through which the world is being reshaped and
an ongoing adaptation is taking place” ( pp. 274–275).The notion of relational adaptation resonates
with David Chandler’s invitation to think about resilience as a means to govern complexity
(Chandler 2014). Adhering to this argument implies acknowledging that “[c]omplex life is govern-
able, but on a very different basis than ‘liberal’ life” (Chandler 2014, p. 20). This takes us to explore
how urban resilience is socially constructed and governed, a topic to which we return below.
Aragón-Durand (Chapter 12) advocates the adoption of a social constructionist perspective
to move beyond positivist approaches that emphasize biophysical conditions, obscuring how
discourses, meanings and values are playing out at the policy level, and with what consequences,
for what, and who is included and excluded. In the following section we explore the “when and
where” of urban resilience or, in other words, how temporal and spatial considerations play out
in the way in which the notion is conceived analytically and in planning practice.
479
A. Allen, J. Twigg, M. A. Burayidi, and C. Wamsler
capacities to bounce back or forward from discrete events, to deal instead with risk accumulation
or urban “risk traps”. Such traps are defined “as the vicious cycle through which various envir-
onmental hazards and episodic but repetitive and often unrecorded disasters not only accumulate
in particular localities, but tend to grow exponentially over time” (p. 331) (Allen et al., 2017). In a
similar vein, West (Chapter 15) argues convincingly against the fallacies of ignoring the fact that
cities never do reach equilibrium: instead, permanent and cumulative change is the norm. Thus,
as he demonstrates through his analysis of institutional responses to shrinking cities and prop-
erty abandonment, “responses to urban decline are historically and politically contingent upon
planning, rather than part of natural or biological cycles” (p. 184).
In her longitudinal analysis of resilience planning in Manizalez, Colombia,Wesely (Chapter 33)
advocates examining the critical junctures that “help to reveal complex path dependencies [in
the city], and the capacities to reduce, manage and avoid risk, which institutional actors have
created and consolidated”. This approach allows for a critical examination of “the dynamics
between deterministic and probabilistic understandings of risk” (p. 472) revealing not just what
capacities for resilience might operate in a city but how and why risk management might be
marginalized or confined to a market planning logic. Through working with complexity, rather
than simplifying it, the critical juncture approach aligns with calls to investigate and reconnect
the dynamic interactions of social, economic, and ecological urban systems. Critical junctures
often lead to accelerated moments of decision making with long-lasting impacts. Nevertheless,
urban resilience governance is often based on learning by doing, “trial and error” processes, and
pilot projects (Berkes 2009; Wamsler et al. 2016).
Suarez et al. (Chapter 16) found that in a literature survey on urban resilience, almost half
of the reviewed studies capture resilience only at the city scale, while others focus on the scale
of the neighborhood, the block or individual buildings, but rarely simultaneously. While some
contributors in this volume raise the importance of spatial and cross-scalar analysis to expand
the capacity of urban resilience to capture the full dynamics of urban socio-ecological systems,
such analyses are still rare. Urban resilience is complex and challenging, so arguably looking
across scales is a step too far for most researchers –but the effort must be made. As pointed
out by Suarez et al., “[l]ocal resilience may be affected by global-scale processes, whereas local-
scale transformations can influence broader-scale resilience.” (p. 201) Kuhlicke et al. (Chapter 2)
observe that urban resilience encompasses what Anderson (2010) defines as a “paradoxical pro-
cess”, where actions in the “now and here” are justified by anticipated outcomes while shaping
future and elsewhere conditions. Thus, analytically and practically, resilience debates and strat-
egies need to make explicit their embedded assumptions and actual and potential trade-offs
across time and space.
480
State of the art and future prospects
(Walker and Salt 2012). Both interpretations have been criticized for normalizing a discourse
on development as a global imperative regardless of the political economy and ecology context.
In their literature review, Suárez et al. (Chapter 16) observe three prevailing approaches
adopted to operationalize the question of resilience for whom. The first and second concern
the use of spatial analytical methods within a particular locality, or a focus on particular social
groups to identify the differential impacts of threats and hazards and also the distribution of
positive effects prompted by actual and/or potential resilience-seeking strategies. Distributional
assessments of “good and bad” are often conducted in relation to a single variable presumed to
explain what makes certain social groups more vulnerable than others, such as income, gender,
or age. Intersectional readings of vulnerability and resilience are still rare, and those that simul-
taneously engage with questions of where and who are even less common (Chaplin et al. 2019).
The third approach adopts equity indicators often under the generic assumption that some social
inequalities can diminish or enhance resilience to specific disturbances.
Several chapters throughout the book invite a more critical exploration of the question of
resilience for whom. Johannessen et al. (Chapter 13) explore the interface between risk, vul-
nerabilities, social equity, and the resilience of urban water services in the context of Metro
Cebu, the fastest-growing urban area outside of Manila in the Philippines. They conclude that
preventive measures to tackle gaps in access to and control over critical infrastructures are essen-
tial to build the resilience of the most disadvantaged in Metro Cebu, a message that is largely
applicable to most cities across the Global South, where peri-urbanization without infrastructure
is largely the norm (Allen 2014).
In Chapter 20, Ruszczyk reminds us about the still predominantly invisible and invisibilized
role of women in the city and, more widely, of gender dynamics in hegemonic urban gov-
ernance systems. Examining the intersection of invisibility and gender in Bharatpur –one of
the largest cities in Nepal –she explores how Cindi Katz’s (2010) understanding of resilience,
reworking and resistance to patriarchal notions of social reproduction can help us “to better
understand the subtleties of people’s oppositional practices and not overestimate their counter-
hegemonic effects” (p. 318). In a context where the influence of the state is skewed by factors
such as gender, caste, affluence, and geographical location, some urban dwellers might have
more leverage than others to rework their resilience-seeking strategies through collective efforts.
A similar point is raised by Sandoval (Chapter 19) in his analysis of the place-making strat-
egies adopted by stigmatized Latino business owners in downtown Woodburn in the United
States. Here, Sandoval reveals the extent to which ethnic resilience strategies challenge traditional
power dynamics and operate as a means to confront a racialized planning context biased towards
a white historic preservation perspective.
As argued by Rouse in Chapter 18, “inequality, social stratification, and poverty are key
factors that increase a population’s vulnerability to natural disasters”, but also shape exposure
and vulnerability to a wide range of socially constructed threats, including many often labeled as
“natural” events. An ample body of literature has raised attention to the disproportionate impacts
affecting poor, impoverished and marginalized social groups. However, generic engagements
with the notion that some citizens are more vulnerable than others do not lead automatically to
greater engagement with issues of social equity and inclusion relating to risk exposure, depend-
ence on systems and governance structures. Klinenberg (2002) reminds us that in any given
context, there is a “geography of vulnerability” that is linked to class, race, place, age, and so on,
which explains the disproportional impact of various threats and crises. This point is also clearly
demonstrated by Yoo (Chapter 9), in her assessment of who is most vulnerable to extreme heat-
weather events in American cities.Yet there is a tendency in much of the resilience literature to
pay lip service to a long list of those most at risk, but without engaging with the sources of their
481
A. Allen, J. Twigg, M. A. Burayidi, and C. Wamsler
482
State of the art and future prospects
Resilience by whom
The question of resilience by whom is much less explored than others in the current literature.
As argued by some scholars, debates on urban resilience tend to be acritical about the presumed
distribution of roles and responsibilities (Allen et al.2017; Bahadur and Tanner 2014; Harris et al.
2017; Welsh 2014). In Chapter 2, Kuhlicke et al. note that, “[i]n resilience-based governance
settings, governmental bodies and administrations tend to devolve responsibility to local actors,
including citizens, by communicating the limits of their ability to protect citizens and, as a result,
make citizens individually and ‘morally’ responsible for future disturbances and risks.” (p. 21).This,
they notice, is in high contrast with debates on urban sustainability, where the responsibilities
of public actors and international organizations are clearly recognized and specified. Restricting
the role of local authorities to enabling and/or supporting the self-organizing efforts of local
communities and individuals often means in practice that resilience-seeking efforts remain out of
funding and regulatory governmental frameworks (Cannon and Müller-Mahn 2010).
Resilience governance is best by complexity: it involves multiple actors and new or altered
relationships. Institutional problems and blockages to effective resilience building are a thread
running through several chapters, but a stronger understanding of how governance institutions
function on an everyday basis is needed if those institutions are to be transformed. Suarez et al.
(Chapter 16) observe that although ecological and socio-ecological perspectives of resilience
are widely accepted among academics, an engineering vision dominates in policy. This is pos-
sibly because such an approach makes it easier to communicate, measure and demonstrate
success.
In Chapter 25, Allen et al. point out that a more critical stance to the governance of resili-
ence demands avoiding the tendency to either ignore or romanticize and homogenize the role
of local communities. In their view, this requires engendering grassroots-led processes to assess
the heterogeneity of local capacities in light of wider governance relations that often hinder such
capacities through various forms of misrecognition –i.e. those perpetuated by insecure tenure,
eviction threats and more generally a punitive treatment of informality across the urban Global
South. On the other hand, approaches to making cities resilient across the so-called Global
North tend to present this as a managerial task that simply requires adapting existing planning
approaches.
As highlighted by Adil and Audirac (Chapter 4), “translating resilience thinking into urban
planning carries the possibility not only of eschewing progressive transformation in favor of the
dominant and highly institutionalized social order but also enjoins greater liberties for unre-
stricted market-oriented mechanisms (Davoudi and Porter 2012; MacKinnon and Derickson
2012; Vale 2014).” Across different contexts, urban resilience strategies seem to be implicitly
aligned with the rolling back of the state (Davoudi and Porter 2012). For Adil and Audirac,
this implies that “underlying this malleability is a fundamental inadequacy of the resilience
lens to grasp society in all its complexity –often ignoring or glossing over critical issues of
socio-economic disenfranchisement and disempowerment –owing not only to its function-
alist systems ontology but also to Hollings’ preferential conceptualization of self-organization
dynamics through market mechanisms” (p. 41).
Adil and Audirac go on to argue that the concept of resilience inadvertently reinforces the
status quo maintained by incumbent institutions and undermines popular struggles and conflict
that may arise in response. Operationalizing resilience in urban planning can potentially sanction
the marginalization of subaltern voices and undermine accountability. Tate (Chapter 32) shows
how analytical tools such as ANT can help researchers and planners to understand “distributed
agency” –the various groups, networks, channels, and microprocesses that generate resilience and
483
A. Allen, J. Twigg, M. A. Burayidi, and C. Wamsler
social innovation –thereby revealing the co-existence of multiple local realities and approaches,
and drawing attention to the continuous networked efforts needed to build social cohesion in
resilience-focused projects and programs.
Resilience theory and practice are evolving alongside other newly emerging approaches,
such as ecosystem and nature-based solutions and associated understanding of governance.
Knowledge co-production processes can legitimize diverse and contested citizen knowledge of
urban ecosystems.
484
State of the art and future prospects
interrelations. For now, resilience has been too often depoliticized and objectified, resting in a
safe zone of contention. We argue that to be effective, resilience thinking, and practice must also
consider the distributional and relational aspects of urban development to adequately consider
societal and nature considerations.
Thus far, less attention has been placed in discussions on who and for whom of resilience, that
is both the target groups and the actors who should lead and prepare cities for resilience. Linking
personal, practical and political spheres of transformation is in this context key, as highlighted
by Wamsler et al. (Chapter 5). Furthermore, the spatial and cross-scalar impacts of resilience
building also have to be considered, but have so far received scant discussion in the literature and
by practitioners of the field. As the authors in this volume have shown, the fortification of resili-
ence in one area may displace this to other areas or increase other regions and locales to greater
vulnerability either in time or in space. Further research is needed to show the inter-linkages and
cross-scalar impacts of urban resilience building.
The role of the private sector in urban resilience is also a significant factor that deserves fur-
ther investigation, although it is often mentioned in passing in discussions on resilience. Civic
leaders must move beyond the market logic of current thinking on resilience where responsi-
bility is devolved to self-organizing actors at the local level with little public sector involvement.
Sustaining urban resilience requires the involvement of the public, private, and non-governmental
sectors, acting in collaboration and together to achieve lasting impacts.
Finally, we should not forget that at the center of resilience building is people’s welfare and
ensuring sustainable development of today’s and future generations. This requires further work
to better link the resilience concept and related operationalization to the sustainable develop-
ment goals, UN-Habitat New Urban Agenda, and climate change adaptation and climate change
mitigation agendas. Greater weight should therefore be placed in developing not only people’s
emotional, cognitive, and relational capacities but also entitlements to withstand threats and build
resilience. In fact, while current focus is on practical and political spheres of transformation, the
socio-environmental rights dimension of resilience and their linkages to practical and political
spheres have so far been vastly overlooked.This is an area that is still very much in its infancy and
for which more exploration is needed.
References
Ahern, J. (2011). From fail-safe to safe-to-fail: Sustainability and resilience in the new urban world.
Landscape and Urban Planning. 100: 341–343.
Allen, A. (2014) Peri-urbanization and the political ecology of differential sustainability. In: S. Parnell
and S. Oldfield (eds.): A Routledge Handbook on Cities of the Global South. London: Routledge,
522–538.
Allen, A., Griffin, L., and Johnson, C. (2017). Environmental Justice and Urban Resilience in the Global
South. London: MacMillan Press.
Allen, A., Zilbert Soto, L., Wesely, J., in collaboration with Belkow, T., Ferro, V., Lambert, R., Langdown,
I., and Samanamú, A. (2017). From state agencies to ordinary citizens: reframing risk- mitigation
investments and their impact to disrupt urban risk traps in Lima, Peru. Environment and Urbanization.
29 (2): 477–502. http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0956247817706061.
Anderson, B. (2010). Preemption, precaution, preparedness: anticipatory action and future geographies.
Progress in Human Geography. 34: 777–789.
Bahadur, A. and Tanner,T. (2014).Transformational resilience thinking: putting people, power and politics at
the heart of urban climate resilience. Environment & Urbanization. 26(1): 200–214.
Bankoff, G. (2007). Dangers to going it alone: social capital and the origins of community resilience in the
Philippines. Continuity and Change. 22: 327–355.
Berkes, F. (2009). Evolution of co-management: Role of knowledge generation, bridging organizations and
social learning. Journal of Environmental Management. 90: 1692–1702.
485
A. Allen, J. Twigg, M. A. Burayidi, and C. Wamsler
Brink, E. and Wamsler, C. (2019). Citizen engagement in climate adaptation surveyed: The role of values,
worldviews, gender and place. Journal of Cleaner Production. 209: 1342–1353.
Cannon, T. and Müller-Mahn, D. (2010).Vulnerability, resilience and development discourses in context of
climate change. Natural hazards. 55(3): 621–635.
Carpenter, S., Walker, B., Anderies, J., and Abel, N. (2001). From metaphor to measurement: Resilience of
what to what? Ecosystems. 4(8): 765–781.
Chandler, D. (2014). Resilience –The Governance of Complexity. New York: Routledge.
Chaplin D., Twigg J., and Lovell E. (2019). Intersectional Approaches to Vulnerability and Resilience
Building. London: Overseas Development Institute. www.braced.org/ resources/i/
intersectional-
approaches-vulnerability-reduction/.
Chelleri, L., Waters, J.J., Olazabal, M., and Minucci, G. (2015). Resilience trade-offs: addressing multiple
scales and temporal aspects of urban resilience. Environment and Urbanization. 27(1): 181–198.
Coaffee, J. and Lee, P. (2016). Urban Resilience: Planning for Risk, Crisis and Uncertainty. London: Palgrave.
Cote, M. and Nightingale, A.J. (2011). Resilience thinking meets social theory: Situating 550 social change
in socio-ecological systems (SES) research. Progress in Human 551 Geography. 36(4): 475–489.
Cretney, R. (2014). Resilience for whom? Emerging critical geographies of socio-ecological resilience.
Geography Compass. 8/9 (2014): 627–640.
Davoudi, S. and Porter, L. (2012). Resilience: A bridging concept or a dead end? Planning Theory Practice.
13(2), 299–333. http://doi.org/10.1080/14649357.2012.677124.
Graham, S. and Marvin, S. (2001). 2001: Splintering Urbanism: Networked Infrastructures, Technological
Mobilities and the Urban Condition. London: Routledge.
Harris, L.M., Chu, E.K., and Ziervogel, G. (2017). Negotiated resilience. Resilience. 1(19). http://doi.org/
cmrr.
Katz, C. (2004). Growing Up Global: Economic Restructuring and Children’s Everyday Lives. Minneapolis,
MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Klinenberg, E. (2002). Heat Wave: A Social Autopsy of Disaster in Chicago. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
Lhomme, S., Serre, D., Diab,Y., and Laganier, R. (2013). Analyzing resilience of urban networks: A prelim-
inary step towards more flood resilient cities. Natural hazards and earth system sciences. 13(2): 221–230.
MacKinnon, D., and Derickson, K.D. (2012). From resilience to resourcefulness: A critique of resili-
ence policy and activism. Progress in Human Geography. 37(2): 253–270. http://doi.org/10.1177/
0309132512454775.
Meerow, S. and Newell, J.P. (2016). Urban resilience for whom, what, when, where, and why? Urban
Geography: 1–21.
Miller, F., Osbahr, H.; Boyd, E.; Thomalla, F.; Bharwani, S.; Ziervogel, G.; Walker, B.; Birkmann, J.; Van
der Leeuw, S.; Rockström, J.; Hinkel, J.; Downing, T.; Folke, C., and Nelson, D. (2010). Resilience
and vulnerability: Complementary or conflicting concepts? Ecology and Society. 15(3): 11. www.
ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss3/art11/.
Mykhnenko,V. (2016). A right-wingers’ ploy?. In: S. Springer, K. Birch, and J. MacLeavy (eds.): Handbook
of Neoliberalism. London & New York: Routledge, 190–206.
Pelling, M. and Manuel-Navarrete, D. (2011). From resilience to transformation: the adaptive cycle in two
Mexican urban centres. Ecology and Society. 16, article 11.
Pickett, S.T., Cadenasso, M.L., and Grove, J.M. (2004). Resilient cities: meaning, models, and metaphor
for integrating the ecological, socio-economic, and planning realms. Landscape and urban planning.
69(4): 369–384.
Pizzo, B. (2015). Problematizing resilience: Implications for planning theory and practice. Cities. 43: 133–
140. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2014.11.015.
Rockefeller Foundation and Arup (2015). The City Resilience Index: understanding and meas-
uring city resilience. London: Arup. www.arup.com/perspectives/publications/research/section/
city-resilience-index.
Shaw, J. (2012). Interrogating the gap between the ideals and practice reality of participatory video.
Handbook of Participatory Video, 225–241.
Twigg, J. and Mosel, I. (2017). Emergent groups and spontaneous volunteers in urban disaster response.
Environment and Urbanization. 29(2): 443–458.
Vale, L. (2014). Architecture, Power and National Identity. London: Routledge.
Walker, B. and Salt, D. (2012). Resilience Practice: Building Capacity to Absorb Disturbance 725 and
Maintain Function. Washington DC: Island Press.
486
State of the art and future prospects
Wamsler, C., L. Niven, T.H. Beery, T. Bramryd, N. Ekelund, K.I. Jönsson, A. Osmani, T. Palo., and S.
Stålhammar (2016). Operationalizing ecosystem-based adaptation: harnessing ecosystem services to
buffer communities against climate change. Ecology and Society. 21(1):31.
Wamsler C. and Raggers, S. (2018). Principles for supporting city-citizen commoning for climate adap-
tation: from adaptation governance to sustainable transformation. Environmental Science and Policy.
85: 81–89.
Welsh, M. (2014). Resilience and responsibility: governing uncertainty in a complex world. The
Geographical Journal. 180(1): 15–26.
487
Index
Note: Tables are shown in bold type and figures in italic. Footnotes are indicated by an “n” and the
footnote number after the page number e.g., 241n1 refers to footnote 1 on page 241.
100 Resilient Cities Programme 42, 144, 369 technological 86; and urban resilience planning
2030 agenda (United Nations Agenda for 36, 39, 40
Sustainable Development) 197, 380 adaptive cycle, Holling’s 37
adaptive governance 123
abandonment, of property 8, 184, 186, 187–189, adaptive resilience 9, 112, 113, 174, 281, 284, 294;
187, 188, 190, 192, 193 and universities 176–180, 177, 178, 179
aboriginal agency 451 administrative boundaries 68, 202, 236, 346–347,
access to alternative water and sanitation systems 384, 436
358–359 administrative proficiency 378
accountability 40, 60, 123, 126, 315, 349, 483; adversity 41, 49, 50, 53, 71, 173
municipal resilience in Chile 368, 375, 376 affordability, to alternative water and sanitation
Action at the Frontline (AFL) 61, 65 systems 358–359
Action Plan Implementation Project (APIP) AFL see Action at the Frontline
400, 401 agency 257, 274, 360, 480, 482; aboriginal 451;
action research 66, 186–187 distributed 11–12, 446, 447, 449, 450, 454,
action-planning, strategic 67, 340, 343, 345 483–484; and urban resilience planning 37, 39,
Actor Network Theory (ANT) 446–447, 447, 454 40, 42, 43
acute shocks 3, 240 agency collaboration, components of 448, 449
adaptability 18, 23, 27, 32, 52, 85–86, 173, 482; Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
and critical infrastructure 117, 121, 122, 123, (ATSDR) 102–103, 103
127; generic 20, 201, 477; and land use planning Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease
458–459, 461, 468, 469, 471; positive 36, 40 Registry Social Vulnerability Index (ATSDR
adaptation xxix, xxx, 291, 293, 303, 320–321, 322, SVI) 102–103, 103
482; and agency 40; climate 5, 40–41, 42, 50, air pollution 2, 59, 75–76, 97, 207, 350, 419, 462
335, 438, 439; and collapse 28, 29, 30, 31; to alcaldías, of Mexico City 147
global sustainability challenges 78; immigrant alert systems 325
247; positive 49–50; relational 479; to a shock Alexander, Frank 190
274–275; see also climate change adaptation alternative resilience discourses 43, 43
(CCA) alternative water supply systems 351, 352, 354–356,
adaptation policy 7, 143, 154, 317 355, 358–360
adaptation strategy 10, 109, 247, 310–315, American Planning Association 233, 241n7
438, 439 American Rust Belt 174
adaptedness 26 AMUCH see Association of Municipalities
adaptive capacity 20, 71, 384, 439, 477, 480; of Chile
and climate change 153, 155n6; and climate Analytic Hierarchy Process 132
justicescape 85, 86, 91, 95; and critical anchor institutions 7–8, 172–173, 176–178, 177,
infrastructure 121, 122, 123, 125; and extreme 178; see also universities, and adaptive resilience
heat-related weather events 106, 109, 111; and ANT see Actor Network Theory
general resilience 27, 32; and socio-ecological antecedent conditions 12, 111–113, 112, 463–465,
resilience 200, 200, 201–202, 207, 212; 465, 468, 469–470, 469
488
Index
489
Index
490
Index
Detroit Strategic Framework 39 disturbances 477, 478, 479, 481, 482, 483; and
developed countries 3, 131, 477 climate justicescape 85; and energy resilience
development: land 74, 140; low-impact (LID) 306; and general resilience 26, 27, 29, 31, 32;
74–75; re- see redevelopment; suburban 3–4, and planning discourses 39; rapid-onset 198,
230; sustainable see sustainable development; 203, 207–208, 210; and roof gardens 414; slow-
uneven 315; urban see urban development onset 203, 207–208, 212; and socio-ecological
DHS see Department of Homeland Security resilience 197, 199, 200, 201, 205, 206, 207, 210;
digitalization 9, 287, 306 and urban resilience and sustainability 17, 18,
disadvantaged groups 124 19–20, 21, 23
disaster exposure 110 diversification 248, 294
disaster governance 152 diversity 8, 20, 302, 482, 484; ecological 412;
disaster impacts 49, 52, 387–391, 388–389, 392 economic 9; and effects of climate change on
disaster life cycle 8, 217, 222 critical infrastructure 123, 124; and Latino
disaster management 10, 47, 52, 152, 321, 336; revitalization 252–253, 256; and pathways
capacities for 384; cycle of 123, 127; formula for resilience 276, 281–282, 294; and socio-
for 100–101; planning for 168, 399; and social ecological resilience 208, 209, 210, 211
resilience 445–446, 449, 454 DMD see Disaster Management Department,
disaster management committees 337, 338 Sierra Leone
Disaster Management Department, Sierra Leone DoDMA see Department of Disaster Management
(DMD) 336 Affairs, Malawi
disaster mortality 99, 99 Downstream Chemicals cluster 279, 283, 285,
disaster preparedness 7, 37, 102, 217, 378, 448; 286, 291
community-based 37–38; and urban risk 335, Downtown Development Plan Update 254
336; and urban seismic resilience 399–400, 401 drainage 357, 357, 470; and climate change 148,
Disaster Preparedness and Relief Act 335 149, 150; and open space systems 72, 74; and
disaster prevention 7, 62, 143, 151, 153; and urban urban resilience in China 130, 135, 136, 137;
resilience in China 131, 136, 139, 141 and urban risk 334, 343; and urban water
disaster resilience of place (DROP) model 111, services 158, 159–160, 162, 162, 164, 167, 168,
112, 113 169
disaster risk management (DRM) 7, 12, 18, DRM see disaster risk management
59, 67, 104, 311; in African cities 336, 338, DRM risk wheel 340, 341
339–340; in Chile 366, 367; and climate change DROP model (disaster resilience of place model)
adaptation 144, 151, 153, 154; decentralization 111, 112, 113
of 337, 337; institutionalization of 461–463, Duluth, Minnesota 275–282, 277, 278, 279, 281
462; and intensive risks 331; land use planning
for 458–473, 460, 462, 464, 465, 468, 469; in early communication systems 325
large urban areas 383, 392; in the Mexico City earthquake, Chilean (2010) 322–323, 364, 365,
Megalopolis 151; in Nepal 394, 399, 401, 402 367, 368–369, 380
disaster risk management governance 333, earthquake risk 4, 139, 398, 399–401, 406, 407
336–337, 339, 347 earthquake-resilient cities 138–140, 139
disaster risk management risk wheel 340, 341 eco-gentrification 76
disaster risk reduction 48, 50–51, 59, 67, 104, 124; ecological resilience 8, 27, 35–36, 123, 131, 132;
in African cities 335, 336; and climate change see also socio-ecological resilience
adaptation 144, 149, 150; in Chile 321, 365–366, ecological systems/ecosystems 17–18, 30, 178, 209,
369, 370, 371–374, 376, 377, 379; and nature- 350, 357, 364, 484; and climate change 145, 151;
based solutions 430; in Nepal 394, 398–399, in equilibrium 76–77; green 230, 231, 241n1,
400–401, 403 433, 436, 441; and open space systems 73, 74;
disaster survivors 219, 382, 386, 387, 389, 390, and planning 35–36, 37, 74; trauma 185, 478;
391, 482 vulnerabilities of 86, 87; see also socio-ecological
disaster volunteerism 217–225 systems
disaster vulnerabilities 147–148 Ecological Vulnerability Index (EVI) 6, 87–88, 92
disaster-resistant settlements 130 economic crisis (2008–2012) 20, 274, 280, 285,
disempowerment 41, 483 293, 479
disinvestment 248, 249, 250, 254 economic dynamics 201, 279–280, 279
distributed agency 11–12, 446, 447, 449, 450, 454, economic growth 39, 123, 145, 159, 178, 315, 316
483–484 economic loss, and hazard events 90
Distribution and E-commerce cluster 281, 285, Economic Modelling Statistic International
286, 287, 288, 290, 292 (EMSI) 275
491
Index
492
Index
Freetown Urban Slum Initiative 339, 343, 345 great recession (2007–2009) 272, 274, 275,
Frontline methodology 65 282–283
fuel poverty 2 green infrastructure: and adaptation 86, 95; and
functional plans 234, 236, 237 resilience 8–9, 42, 74, 75, 78, 229–241, 230, 235;
functionalism 39, 41, 43 and technological vulnerability 6, 87
Furniture cluster 283 Green Roof System Architectural Graphic
Standard 413
gendered resilience 260–270, 262, 263 green spaces 411–427, 413, 414, 415, 415, 418,
general adaptive capacity 26, 27 419, 420, 421, 422, 423, 424, 425
General Plan for Post Lushan Earthquake group lending 265
Reconstruction 139 growth machine 186
general resilience 26–33
generative placemaking 243, 244; Latino 245–246, Haima, typhoon 1–2
247, 249–251, 250 hard surfaces 3, 164–165
generative planning 246 Harvard Clusters 275
generative revitalization 9, 243, 250, 252 hazard analysis 60
gentrification 76, 247 hazard risk exposure 18, 41, 72, 85, 90, 240n3,
geographic context 86, 101 339, 364, 481; and effects of climate change on
geographic information systems (GIS) 74, 87, 203, critical infrastructure 118, 122, 123, 124, 125;
205, 206, 390 and data gaps and resilience metrics 60, 61, 64;
geologic hazards 72, 74 and individual wellbeing 48–50; and land use 72,
GIS see geographic information systems 458, 463; and nature-based solutions 430, 437;
Global Network of Civil Society Organisations for flood 135; and urban resilience 49, 50; weather-
Disaster Reduction (GNDR) 65 related 99, 107, 108, 109, 110, 149, 159
Global North 289, 483 hazard risks 101, 101, 232, 236, 394–395; geologic
Global South 6, 9, 349, 350, 477, 481, 483; and 72, 74
gendered invisible urban resilience 260, 262, hazard vulnerabilities 72
265, 269, 270 hazards, natural see earthquake risk; fire risk; flood
global warming 49, 476 risk; landslide risk; seismic hazard risks
globalization 173, 279 Hazards & Vulnerability Research Institute, The
GLR see Great Lakes Region 102, 104, 106, 113; see also Social Vulnerability
GNDR see Global Network of Civil Society Index (SoVI)
Organisations for Disaster Reduction hazards-of-place model, of vulnerability 101
goal setting 233, 234, 240 healing gardens 414
“good enough” data 67 health services/Health Services cluster 118, 282,
good governance 77–78, 190, 193 284, 285, 299, 462
Gorkha earthquake, Nepal (2015) 261, 394, 395, heat vulnerability 100–102, 101, 106–111, 107,
402, 404–406, 407 108, 110, 110
governance 4, 5, 7, 9, 10, 12, 303, 335, 445, 466; heat waves 97–114, 98, 99, 101, 103, 104, 105,
adaptive 123; and climate resilience 313, 314, 106, 107, 108, 110, 110, 112
316, 317; decentralized 335; disaster 152; heterogeneous water supply systems 349, 357, 360
disaster risk management 333, 336–337, 339, higher education 78
347; and future of urban resilience 478, 480, high-rise buildings 406, 462
481, 483, 484; and gendered invisible urban historic preservation 9, 481; and Latino
resilience 260, 266, 268, 269; good 77–78, 190, revitalization 244, 246, 249, 251–253, 254,
193; institutional 352, 375, 375; and municipal 255, 256
resilience 367, 368; and nature-based solutions homo economicus 41
431, 436, 437, 441; new forms of 125–126; Hospitality and Recreation cluster 275, 280, 281,
networks of 201; representative 313; of resilience 285, 286, 287, 292
338; risk 68, 300, 340; self- 31; and socio- Hot Spot Analysis 87
ecological resilience 201, 207, 208, 210, 211; household composition and disability 102, 103
water 158, 165–166, 168, 311 housing and transportation 103
governance resilience 123 human–nature interdependencies 37
Grand Rapids, Michigan 9, 272, 273, 275–282, 100 Resilient Cities Programme 42, 144, 369, 369
277, 278, 279, 281 Hurricane Katrina xxx, 1, 38, 87, 117, 300, 414;
granting agency case study 445–455, 447, 449, 450 and climate injustice 85, 232, 241n5
Great Lakes legacy cities 9, 90, 272–294, 273, 277, Hurricane Sandy 87, 231, 240, 300
278, 279, 281, 283, 285, 286, 287, 291, 292 hybrid water supply systems 357
493
Index
494
Index
landslide risk 149, 150, 462, 465, 467 measurement, of risk 6, 60–61, 61, 63–64, 123; and
large urban areas, understanding the fabric of socio-ecological resilience 198, 200, 202–208,
382–392, 388–389 203, 204, 205
large-scale disaster events 59, 60 Medical Devices cluster 284, 290
Latino culture 9, 244, 245–246, 247, 251, 253, 254, Melbourne, Australia 431, 433–434, 434, 436,
255, 256, 257 437–438, 439, 440
Latino placemaking/Latino revitalization 243–258, mental stress 52, 413–416, 414, 415, 415
244, 248, 250 mental well-being/mental wellness 47, 48, 49, 50,
leadership 123, 177, 187, 240, 252, 266, 366, 449, 453
442n1; and pathways for resilience 282–283, methodology: action research 66, 187; Actor
292, 293, 294 Network Theory 446–447, 447, 454; AFL
legacy cities 3, 8, 186, 272; see also Great Lakes 65; case study 431–436, 433, 434, 435;
legacy cities DesInventar 61–63, 61, 65, 68n3; Frontline
legislation 7, 125, 165, 187, 251, 365, 438; land 65; integrated spatial vulnerability assessment
banking 190–191, 192; and urban seismic 86–87; multihazard risk probabilistic assessment
resilience 399, 401, 403 471; ReMapRisk 65, 66, 68n10, 340–343, 342;
LID see low-impact development social constructionist approach 151–154; urban
Little Flower Women’s group 264, 265 resilience assessment 205–210, 205, 209
livable cities 71 methods, risk measurement see measurement,
livelihood capitals 387, 388–389 of risk
local decision-making 68 Metro Cebu, Philippines, urban water system in
Local Health cluster 280, 281, 282, 285, 285, 158, 159–169, 160, 161, 162, 163, 166, 167
287, 292 Metro Cebu Water District (MCWD) 160
local resilience 11, 201, 338 Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) 234,
local sustainability 22, 78 237, 239
long-term resilience 126, 198, 199, 200, 201, 203, metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs) 174, 176, 272,
208, 234, 479 273, 275
low-impact development (LID) 74–75 Mexico City Megalopolis (MCM) 143–155, 146,
low-income countries 59, 62, 394 147, 150, 151
low-income groups 232, 240, 245, 248, migration 3, 18, 28–29, 272, 312, 334, 465; and
316, 334, 359; and land use planning gendered invisible urban resilience 261, 263,
462–463, 468 264; and Latino revitalization 243, 247, 248, 255,
low-income vulnerability 42 256; and shrinking cities 175, 176; and urban
seismic resilience 395, 396
mainstream resilience discourse 43 Mindful Risk Reduction/mindfulness 6, 48, 49,
Making Cities Resilient campaign (UNISDR) 18, 50–54
63–64, 369, 369, 458 Ministry of Housing (MINVU) 323, 325, 326, 369
Malmö, Sweden 11, 431, 432, 433, 436, 437–438, minority communities/minority populations 232,
439, 440 240; see also Latino revitalization
management framework, centralized 126 minority status and language 102, 103
Manizales, Colombia 458–473, 460, 462, 464, 465, MINVU see Ministry of Housing
468, 469 mitigation, risk 101, 339, 375, 461, 470
“man-over-nature” paradigm 74 modernization risks 300
MANDISA 61, 63 monism 29
manufacturing clusters 276, 279, 279, 282–286, Monitoring, Mapping and Analysis of Disaster
283, 286, 290–292, 291 Incidents in Southern Africa 61, 63
manufacturing legacy 282, 287, 289–293, MPO see Metropolitan Planning Organization
291, 292 MSAs see metropolitan statistical areas
mapping: community-led 65, 340, 343; damage multifunctional infrastructure 71–78
387, 391; spatial 390 multihazard risk, probabilistic assessments of 471
market mechanisms 40, 41, 43, 274, 302, 483 Muncie, Indiana 8, 184, 187–193, 187, 188, 191
mathematical modelling vulnerability analysis Muncie Land Bank 187, 189, 190, 191, 192, 193
120, 121 municipal boundaries 174, 175, 272, 449
MCM see Mexico City Megalopolis Municipal Land Use Plan (2001) 461, 463–471,
MCWD see Metro Cebu Water District 464, 465, 468, 469
meaning making process, in policy discourses 152, Munich, Germany 11, 431, 434–436, 435,
153, 154 438, 439
495
Index
496
Index
physical infrastructure 9, 38, 111, 126, 207, PRES see sustainable reconstruction plans
331, 354; and disaster planning and recovery principal components analysis (PCA) 103,
382–383, 385–387, 388–389, 391; and resilience 104–106; see also Social Vulnerability Index
267–268, 270, 385–386 probabilistic assessments, of multihazard risk 471
physical security 303, 304, 315 Production Technology and Heavy Machinery
Pineros y Campesinos Unidos del Noroeste (PTHM) 279, 283, 285, 286, 286, 291
(PCUN) 252, 258n3 Programme for Prevention and Mitigation of
place inequality 101 Risks (PREMIR) 369, 370
place vulnerability 101–102, 101, 121 property abandonment 8, 184, 186, 187–189, 187,
placemaking, Latino 243–258, 244, 248, 250 188, 190, 192, 193
PLADECO see communal plan of development property market conditions, and land banking 191
plan making 233, 234–237 PRS see Perceived Restorativeness Scale
planning: action 67, 340, 343, 345; ecological 74; PRU see Urban Regeneration Plans for Inner
equity 85, 95; generative 246; land 74–75; land Cities
use 458–473, 460, 462, 464, 465, 468, 469; PSPP see Pull Slum Pan Pipul
post-disaster 37; reconstruction 140, 325–326; psychological benefits, of green spaces 11, 412,
recovery 233, 320; regulative 243, 245–246, 252, 416–417, 418
255; spatial 86, 158, 159, 162, 164–165, 463 psychological trauma 2, 20, 29, 102, 414; and urban
planning discourses 35–44, 43 resilience 49, 50, 52, 53, 54
pluralism 29, 30, 31, 32, 33n4 PTHM see Production Technology and Heavy
policy discourses 153–154 Machinery
policy trajectories 333, 335–338 PTSD see post-traumatic stress disorder
political capacity 191–192 public accountability 349
political capital 246, 249, 256, 257, 387, 389, 392 public infrastructure 73, 124, 238, 351
political ecology 351, 353 public investments 233, 239–240
political instabilities 10, 310, 312, 313, 317 public participation 40, 138, 140, 255, 326, 376,
political spaces 332, 333, 339–340, 345–347 431, 439–440, 467
political transformations 173 public risk reduction 53
political violence 313 Pull Slum Pan Pipul (PSPP) 339, 343, 345
political will 91, 317, 380
pollution 265, 416; air 2, 59, 75e76, 97, 207, 350, QCEW see Quarterly Census of Employment and
419, 462; oil 313; water 162, 165 Wages
polycentricity 123 qualitative data 63, 108
poor, urban see urban poverty qualitative research 65, 205, 206, 261, 302,
population change 91, 108, 174–176, 175, 176, 304, 321
177, 185, 187 qualitative scenario models 205
population decline 172, 173, 174, 175, 175, 176, quantitative data 67, 108, 109
243; and land bank formation 184, 185, 187 quantitative research 65, 205, 249, 301–302
positive adaptation 36, 40, 49, 173 quantitative scenario models 205
post-disaster aid 382 Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages
post-disaster life-supporting and recovery 391 (QCEW) 275
post-disaster planning 37
post-disaster reconstruction process 140, 326 racial conflict 246, 247, 248, 253, 254, 257
post-disaster recovery 37, 38–40, 42, 139, 140, 141, Racine, Wisconsin 284–289, 285, 286, 287
233, 478 racism 246, 247, 248, 253, 254, 257
Post-Sichuan Earthquake Restoration and radical surprises 20
Reconstruction Ordinance rapidity 385
post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) 11, 414 rapid-onset disturbances 198, 203, 207–208, 210
poverty, urban see urban poverty reconstruction programmes 140, 320–326
power outages 304–306, 323 recovery planning 233, 320
power dynamics 152, 244, 256, 269, 346, 481 Red Cross 8, 50, 54, 217, 218, 219, 322,
power grid 117, 300, 301, 304, 317 338, 366
power relations 263, 350, 351, 441, 484 redevelopment 38, 186, 238–239, 291, 300, 432;
predictability of failure 20 and Latino revitalization 245, 253, 255, 257; and
PREMIR see Programme for Prevention and open space systems 73, 77
Mitigation of Risks redundancy 20, 122, 123, 125, 301, 385, 484
preparedness, disaster see disaster preparedness reflexivity 52
497
Index
Regional Development Undersecretaries resilient cities 7, 18, 42, 71, 95, 123; in China 130,
(SUBDERE) 325, 367, 369, 370, 375, 138–140, 139, 143; see also 100 Resilient Cities
378, 378 Programme; resilient shrinking cities
regional economic change 272 resilient communities 29, 138, 140, 222, 288, 477
regional plans 8, 236–237 resilient shrinking cities 172–181, 175, 176, 177,
regulative planning 243, 245–246, 252, 255 178, 179, 180
regulatory regimes 335, 366 resistance 18, 35, 49, 122, 260, 262, 301, 401
reindustrialization 174 ReSource Project 52
ReMapRisk 65, 66, 68n10, 340–343, 342 resourcefulness 385, 482
representative governance 313 resources, application of 49, 50
research and development 7, 289–293, 291, 292 restorative landscape factors 419–420, 420
research methods, for measuring risk see restorative quality: and attention 420–426, 421,
measurement, of risk 422, 423, 424, 425; of roof gardens/urban
rescue services 299, 304, 305 parks/city streets 417–418, 418, 419
resilience: of alternative sanitation and water “return to the city” 176, 180
systems 359; as boundary concept 124; revitalization: generative 9, 243, 250, 252; Latino
bridged 346–347; civic capacity for 39, 243–258, 244, 248, 250
184–193, 187, 188, 191; climate 117, 236, reworking 9, 260, 262–263, 267, 268, 269, 270, 481
237, 310–318, 331, 432; communal level “right-sizing” 38, 42, 173
367–369; context 131; environmental 265, rising sea levels 72, 75, 317
266, 268; definitions of xxxi, 19–20, 26, 131, risk: earthquake 4, 139, 398, 399–400, 406;
206, 416; energy system 9, 238, 298–307, everyday 10, 59, 60, 64, 68, 263, 267, 334,
303; engineering 27, 35, 131, 132, 199, 209, 338; extensive 331, 337; flood 150; hazard 72,
350–351; financial 265, 268, 270; gendered 74, 232, 236, 394–395; hydro-meteorological
260–270, 262, 263; genealogy of 35–36; 149; intensive 68, 331; landslide 149, 150, 462,
general 26–33; governance 123; and green 465, 467; measurement of 60; seismic hazard
infrastructure 8–9, 42, 74, 75, 78, 229–241, 394–395; social construction of 60;see also
230, 235; and hazards 48; individual 49, 50, urban risk
52, 54, 332; of infrastructures 301; invisible risk accumulation 10, 65, 458, 472, 479–480, 482;
urban 260–270, 262, 263; long-term 126, 198, and urban risk 331–332, 333, 334, 338–339, 340,
199, 200, 201, 203, 208, 234, 479; through 343, 345, 346, 347
nature-based solutions 430–442, 433, 434, risk factors 100, 159, 162, 430, 484; and municipal
435; physical infrastructure 385–386; seismic resilience 367, 368, 375, 375
11, 394–407, 395, 397, 403, 404; short-term risk frameworks 121, 300–301, 305
198, 199, 201, 305; societal 48, 50, 335, 482; risk governance 68, 300, 340
specific 5, 26, 27–28, 32, 198, 206; system risk information 59, 60, 63, 67, 91
39, 301, 302; transformative 282, 294; and risk management: earthquake 398, 399–400, 401,
transition 306–307; tsunami 325; urban 406, 407; flood 149–152, 150, 151, 152, 154,
ecological 123; urban economy 123; urban 438; in Metro Cebu 168; see also disaster risk
hazards 123; and vulnerabilities 111–113, management
112; see also adaptive resilience; ecological risk management frameworks 121, 300–301, 306
resilience; social resilience; urban resilience risk profiles 63, 64–65, 66, 340, 341
Resilience Alliance 28, 32, 36, 131 risk reduction: anticipatory 50; earthquake 398,
resilience assessments 200, 201, 202–205, 204, 399–401, 406, 407; individual 53; public 53;
210, 212 science of 54; see also disaster risk reduction
Resilience Cities 91, 95 risk trajectories 331, 332, 338, 346
resilience governance 480, 483 risk traps 10, 59, 60, 64, 68, 263, 267, 334, 338
resilience metrics 59–68, 61 risk wheel, disaster risk management 341
resilience spatial patterns 206 robustness 20, 200, 303, 304, 306, 385
resilience theory xxx–xxxi, 4, 39, 47, 54, 85, 122, roof gardens, as alternative urban green spaces
123, 484 411–427, 413, 414, 415, 415, 418, 419, 420, 421,
resilience thinking 11, 32; and future prospects for 422, 423, 424, 425
urban resilience 477, 482, 483, 484–485; and root causes 4, 23, 61, 63, 168, 270, 453, 484
planning discourses 36, 37, 38, 39, 41–42 rule of law 313, 316, 442n1
“resilience” turn 20, 333, 476 RUPP see Rural Urban Partnership Project
resilience-seeking practices 331–347, 337, 341, Rural Urban Partnership Project (RUPP) 266
342, 344 Rust Belt, American 174
498
Index
499
Index
Sponge City initiative 136, 137, 137, 138 Transportation and Logistics cluster 281, 285, 286,
start-up funding 293 287, 292
state legislation, and land banking 191 transportation infrastructure 71, 76, 117,
strategic action-planning 67, 340, 343, 345 131, 138
strategy-specific assessment, of trauma: ecosystem 185, 478; psychological see
vulnerabilities 120 psychological trauma
stress, mental 52, 413–416, 414, 415, 415 tsunamis 1, 371–373, 399, 445, 458; Chilean 321,
structural inequality 270 322–323, 325, 364, 365
Sub Saharan Africa, urban infrastructure gap in 2030 agenda (United Nations Agenda for
349–361, 355, 357 Sustainable Development) 197, 380
subarea plans 233, 234, 236, 237 typhoon Haima 1–2
SUBDERE see Regional Development
Undersecretaries Udaypur earthquake, Nepal (1988) 394, 395, 396
subdivision regulations 238 UHIs see Urban Heat Islands
suburban development 3–4, 230 UK Energy Research Centre (UKERC)
suburbanization 9, 173, 272, 303 302, 305
suburban–urban dynamics 174 UN Summit on Environment and Development
sudden shocks 38, 39, 476, 482 (1992) 19
Summit on Environment and Development UN World Commission on Environment and
(1992) 19 Development (WCED) 18
Survey of Underlying Risk Conditions 367, UNDP see United Nations Development
368, 369 Programme (UNDP)
survivors, disaster 219, 382, 386, 387, 389, 390, uneven development 315
391, 482 “unforeseen” disturbances 27
sustainability, urban see urban sustainability unintended consequences, of Iraq’s lack of a
sustainable cities 71, 270 climate change mitigation strategy 312
sustainable development 10, 158, 270, 320–326, UN-ISDR see United Nations International
485; and urban resilience 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 Strategy for Disaster Reduction
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 21, 270, UNISDR Making Cities Resilient campaign 18,
335, 380, 385, 485 63–64, 369, 458
Sustainable Livelihoods Framework 387, 392 United Nations Agenda for Sustainable
sustainable reconstruction plans (PRES) 369 Development (2030 agenda) 197, 380
sustainable urban development 19, 20, 349–361, United Nations Development Programme
355, 357 (UNDP) 266, 310–311, 312, 320, 337, 367,
system descriptions 29, 30, 31, 32 369, 370
system resilience 39, 301, 302 United Nations International Strategy for Disaster
systems governance 47 Reduction 18, 50, 132, 169, 321, 401, 458; and
data gaps and resilience metrics 62, 63–64; and
talent 7–8, 225, 282, 290, 293; and shrinking cities municipal resilience 369
176, 177, 178–180, 179, 180 universities 78; and adaptive resilience 176–181,
tax base 38, 42, 173, 193, 272, 288, 316; and land 177, 178, 179, 180
bank formation 184, 185 University of Notre Dame 290, 292–293
TDR see Transfer of development rights University of South Carolina 6, 102–106, 103, 104,
technological adaptive capacity 86 105, 106, 107
technological vulnerability 86–87 university-led development 178
Technological Vulnerability Index 88–90, 93 URA see Urban Renewal Agency
telecommunication systems 117 Urban Africa Risk Knowledge (Urban ARK)
temporary housing 324, 325 research project 60, 333
tenure, insecure 165, 167, 334, 483 urban blight 5, 8, 9, 39, 188, 188, 192; Latino
therapeutic community 219 revitalization as 243–258, 244, 248, 250
Third National Climate Assessment 118 urban climate adaptation plans 40–41
toilets, poor neighborhood 166 urban critical infrastructure see critical urban
Transfer of development rights (TDR) 238 infrastructure
transformative change 125, 333, 338–345, 341, urban decline 172, 184, 480
342, 344 urban development 59, 108, 131, 239, 321, 334,
transformative resilience 282, 294 407, 485; and climate change 143, 144, 148; and
transition, and resilience 306–307 land use planning 459, 461, 466, 467; and open
500
Index
space systems 72, 73; peri- 73; sustainable 18, urban sustainability 5, 17–23, 71, 123, 351; and
19, 20, 349–361, 355, 357; university-led 178; future prospects for urban resilience 476, 478,
and urban resilience 3–4, 5, 7, 9, 18, 19, 20; and 479, 483; and nature-based solutions 431,
urban water services 164–165 436, 437
urban ecological resilience 123 urban system boundaries 198, 202
urban ecology 71, 436 “urban turn”, of the sustainability debate 20,
urban economy resilience 123 333, 476
urban energy resilience 298, 302–304, 303 urban water services 158–169, 160, 161, 162, 163,
urban flooding, and sponge cities 7, 135–138, 166, 167, 358
135, 137 urbanization 42, 73, 164, 173, 238, 312, 458,
urban expansion 49, 323 476; and climate change 148, 151, 153; and
Urban Forest Strategy 431, 433–434, 434, 436, 437, extreme heat-related weather events 108, 109;
438, 439, 440 and natural hazards 396; in Nepal 395–396,
urban green spaces 411–427, 413, 414, 415, 415, 395, 407; and roof gardens 411, 413; and urban
418, 419, 420, 421, 422, 423, 424, 425 infrastructure gap 353, 354; and urban resilience
urban growth xxix, 48, 78, 118, 360, 430 in China 130, 131, 136, 140; and urban risk 331,
urban hazards resilience 123 333, 334
Urban Heat Islands (UHIs) 75, 97, 99, 109, 111, US Census tract level variables, used to construct
114, 229 SoVI 105
urban infrastructure see critical infrastructure; US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
infrastructure; green infrastructure; physical (CDC) 102, 113
infrastructure US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) 37,
urban infrastructure gap, Sub Saharan Africa 299, 301
349–361, 355, 357 US National Infrastructure Council 301, 302
urban infrastructure systems 117, 118, 302 US Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance 400
urban open space infrastructure 71, 75, 77, 78 US Third National Climate Assessment 118
urban open space systems 71–78 utility companies 350, 353, 354, 359
urban parks, restorative quality of 417–420, 418, utility infrastructure 71, 73
419, 420
urban political ecology 351, 353 Valparaíso mega fire, Chile (2014) 322,
urban poor see urban poverty 323–324, 364
urban population loss 172, 174, 175, 175, 176, 185 Vancouver Coastal Health Authority 447
urban poverty xxxi, 3, 10, 39, 100, 232, 266, violence, political 41, 313
285, 368; and climate resilience 310, 313, 315; Vision 2100, Norfolk,Virginia’s 234, 235, 238
and land use planning 458, 462; and urban volunteer engagement 217–218, 219–222
infrastructure gap 353, 354; and urban resilience volunteerism, disaster 217–225
481, 482; and urban risk 331, 332, 333, 335, 345, vulnerabilities: biophysical 86, 101, 101; climate
346; and urban water services 158, 165, 168, 169 change 121, 148, 313; disaster 147–148;
Urban Regeneration Plans for Inner Cities (PRU) ecological 86, 87; economic 41; hazard
325, 369 72; hazards-of-place model of 101; of
urban renewal 244, 245, 251, 252–253, 254, 255, infrastructure 86, 87, 118–124, 119–120, 120,
259, 432 127, 299, 301–302; place-based 101, 101,
Urban Renewal Agency 251 109, 111, 121; and resilience 111–113, 112;
urban resilience index systems 131–134, technological 6, 86–87, 88–90, 89, 90, 93;
133, 134 see also social vulnerabilities
urban resilience measurement 61, 63–64, 132, 134, vulnerability analysis 118, 120–121
134, 201, 211 vulnerability assessment 72, 85, 86, 95, 109,
urban risk 4, 47–54, 158, 331–347, 337, 341, 342, 111, 202
344; and data gaps and resilience metrics 59, 60, vulnerability indices 86–87, 106; see also Climate
62, 63; and gendered invisible urban resilience Justice Index; Ecological Vulnerability Index;
260, 268, 269 Social Vulnerability Index (SoVI); Technological
urban safety 19–20 Vulnerability Index
urban sanitation coverage challenge 358
urban security 20 WASH & RESCUE project 159
urban seismic resilience, in Nepal 11, 394–407, waste management 7, 59, 159, 162–164, 162,
395, 397, 403, 404 163, 166
urban shrinkage 42, 173, 174, 175–176, 478 wastewater treatment 117, 118
501
Index
water crisis, worldwide 158, 159, 160–165, 161, socio-ecological resilience 197, 210; and
162, 163, 168, 169 urban resilience 47–50, 54
water extraction 148 “wicked problem” 121, 126
water governance 158, 311 wildfire risk 232, 233, 236
water infrastructure gap 353 Winter Emergency Phase, of Chile earthquake and
water management 7, 125, 159, 160–165, 161, tsunami recovery 322
162, 163 women’s groups, in Nepal 260, 262, 263–266, 267,
water pollution 162, 165 268–269, 270
Water Research Centre (WRC) 167 women’s invisibility 268–269, 481
water resilience 144, 155n6, 159, 160, 162 Woodburn, Oregon 9, 243–258, 244, 248, 250
water resources 75, 151, 311, 349, 354, 360; and Woodburn Downtown Association (WDA) 246,
resilient urban water services 158, 159, 160, 249, 250, 253, 257
162–164, 163, 165, 167 World Commission on Environment and
water supply 117, 118, 119, 126, 138, 239, 304, Development (WCED) 18
312, 317, 478; in Kampala 349–361, 355, 357, World Seismic Safety Initiatives (WSSI) 398
358–361; in Metro Cebu 160, 162, 168 World Urban Forum (2012) 18
Water Transportation cluster 282 worldwide water crisis 158, 159, 160–165, 161,
WCED see UN World Commission on 162, 163, 168, 169
Environment and DevelopmentWDA see WRC see Water Research Centre
Woodburn Downtown Association WSSI see World Seismic Safety Initiatives
well-being 6, 11, 86, 124, 299, 310; and WUI Code see International Wildland–Urban
nature-based solutions 431, 433, 436, Interface Code
442n1; and open space systems 71, 72, 77;
and roof gardens 414, 415, 416, 417; and zoning 237, 238
502