The Practice of Urban Resilience

Jha, Abhas K.; Miner, Todd W.; Stanton-Geddes, Zuzana

doi:10.1596/9780821388655_ch03

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The characterization of resilience under such a connotation is further divided into two categories: one is represented by the time required to recover to a given performance level or the degree of performance recovery within a given time [27,29,32]; the second can be calculated using an index system, with functions constructed based on a series of resilience factors [22,31,33]. Due to the different resilience evaluation dimensions in different studies, contingencies of the case areas, and availability of data, different index systems have been constructed, with common resilience evaluation dimensions being social, economic, and environmental dimensions, and so on [20,26,34,35]. For compound index evaluation, not only in urban resilience evaluation but also in other urban indexes, such as urban livability or urban sustainability, the most used weighting assigning method is the entropy method, which is favored for its objectivity [36][37][38].…”

Section: Literature Review 21 Urban Resiliencementioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing Urban Resilience from the Perspective of Scaling Law: Evidence from Chinese Cities

Shi

Guo

Zhu

et al. 2022

Land

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Urban resilience, as an emerging research focus in urban studies, is the capability of an urban system to adapt to the uncertainties and disturbances faced by modern cities. Numerical characterization of an urban system’s resilience can be performed with urban resilience indicators. Moreover, as cities evolve with intensive socio-economic interactions, the performances of urban indicators are heavily dependent on the scale of these interactions; these relationships are conceptualized as urban scaling laws. Therefore, this study explores the scaling patterns of urban resilience, analyzing the scaling relationship between different resilience indicators and urban population size, as well as the spatial–temporal evolutions of the scaling patterns. The empirical case is based on 267 prefectural-level cities in China. The results show resilience indicators demonstrate scaling patterns on both spatial and temporal scales. Moreover, the scale-adjusted metropolitan indicator (SAMI) differs from the commonly used per capita indicator. Therefore, the scale needs to be considered when assessing urban resilience performance. Findings in this study indicate that moderate scale enhances resilience, enriching urban resilience theorization and urban scaling laws application. The empirical results in the case study also provide a reference for future urban resilience planning and management.

show abstract