2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2021.102276
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Characteristics, dimensions and methods of current assessment for urban resilience to climate-related disasters: A systematic review of the literature

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
14
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
1
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 45 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 62 publications
0
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Concerns about UR against disasters have been highlighted over the past few decades and have led to several studies and systematic reviews. Nevertheless, what has been done so far has mostly concentrated on some kinds of disasters, like floods (McClymont et al , 2020), earthquakes (French et al , 2019), climate change (Hughes, 2015), climate-related disasters (Tong, 2021), climate change and natural hazards (Schipper and Langston, 2015), or some of the resilience dimensions, such as social (Saja et al , 2019; Ran et al , 2020), infrastructure (Faturechi and Miller-Hooks, 2015) and water infrastructure systems (Shin et al , 2018). No systematic review has focused on evaluating the state of resilience based on the type of settlement (informal settlements, the worn-out urban fabric, the central part of the city, coastal cities, comparative studies, small cities, medium cities, big cities and megacities), without limiting the study to a specific type of disaster or a specific dimension of resilience.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Concerns about UR against disasters have been highlighted over the past few decades and have led to several studies and systematic reviews. Nevertheless, what has been done so far has mostly concentrated on some kinds of disasters, like floods (McClymont et al , 2020), earthquakes (French et al , 2019), climate change (Hughes, 2015), climate-related disasters (Tong, 2021), climate change and natural hazards (Schipper and Langston, 2015), or some of the resilience dimensions, such as social (Saja et al , 2019; Ran et al , 2020), infrastructure (Faturechi and Miller-Hooks, 2015) and water infrastructure systems (Shin et al , 2018). No systematic review has focused on evaluating the state of resilience based on the type of settlement (informal settlements, the worn-out urban fabric, the central part of the city, coastal cities, comparative studies, small cities, medium cities, big cities and megacities), without limiting the study to a specific type of disaster or a specific dimension of resilience.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Many resilience assessment models have been developed based on the above two categories of methods, by assessing the risk of each component of the system or describing the process of disasters (Tong, 2021;Cheng et al, 2022). In addition, these models consider the factors that affect the system's ability to cope with risk, recover from it, and learn and innovate.…”
Section: A Brief Overview Of Current Resilience Assessment Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The community is the emergent property arising from complex interactions among several urban sub-systems such as facilities, population and infrastructures connecting them (e.g., transportation system, power system, communication network). Several resilience characteristics have been proposed by previous researchers to model resilience, ranging from the famous 4Rs (robustness, redundancy, resourcefulness, and rapidity) 24 to flexibility, efficiency, equality, and diversity 14,16,25,26 . Three criteria are set to select suitable resilience features: 1.…”
Section: Selection Of Resilience Characteristics and Urban Sub-systemsmentioning
confidence: 99%