Tool development to measure the resilience of water supply systems in Tanzania: Economic dimension

Abstract

The world has experienced devastating disasters causing severe human life and economic losses, which is estimated to be 68.5% of the global economic losses between 2005 and 2017. Natural disasters are of great concern – they caused total damage of approximately $3.5 trillion during the past century – which is more than the global infrastructure development investment in 2014. Floods – exacerbated by climate change – are expected to cause more damages, and water supply infrastructures will continue to suffer if resilience is not improved. Measuring the economic changes affecting resilience would assist in developing risk reduction initiatives to minimise disaster losses. Such a measure is lacking for Tanzania water supply systems (WSSs). The current article applied three-stage processes – literature review, pre-assessment and Delphi technique – to develop a resilience tool to measure economic resilience for urban WSSs in Tanzania. Thematic and standard descriptive analyses were carried out during the study. Dynamism principle and three indicators – system investment proportionality, public–private partnership and cost recovery – emerged as principal components for the tool. The tool is expected to be useful during water authorities’ planning processes and budgeting in order to improve the overall WSSs resilience.

Navigating Climate Change Challenges through Smart Resilient Cities: A Comprehensive Assessment Framework

“…Ribeiro and Pena Jardim Gonçalves [29] summarized urban resilience as four fundamental pillars, namely, resistance, recovery, adaptation, and transformation, and five natural, economic, social, physical, and institutional dimensions based on a study of 83 scientific journals. In all cases, the resilience concept is defined based on some or all of the four disaster management stages-mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery [4]. Baghersad, Wilkinson [30] proposed a comprehensive bank of indicators to measure urban water resilience, aiding decision-making for water management and urban planning.…”

“…Most contemporary research on framework development, as noted by Sweya and Wilkinson [4], typically follows one of two approaches: bottom-up or top-down. Bottomup methodologies aim to involve communities or experts in the development of desired frameworks, yet they encounter challenges due to data unpredictability [65] and often yield non-generalizable results [66].…”

“…The term 'resilience' has gained prominence in academic and policymaking spheres, albeit with varied conceptualizations across different fields and stakeholder groups [3]. While resilience theories have roots dating back to the 1960s and early 1970s, their integration into urban planning and design is relatively recent, gaining momentum since 2002 [4,5]. Rising concerns regarding urban transformations, natural calamities, and future uncertainties such as economic fluctuations and climate change have propelled the ascendancy of urban resilience [6].…”