disaster risk management thesis

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

We're Hiring!
Help Center

ASSESSMENT OF THE IMPLEMENTATION ON THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE DISASTER PREPAREDNESS ACTIVITY OF THE DRRM IN THE MUNICIPALITY OF VALENCIA CITY, BUKIDNON, PHILIPPINES

Related Papers

IOER International Multidisciplinary Research Journal

IOER International Multidisciplinary Research Journal ( IIMRJ)

The Philippines is a disaster-prone spot in the Asian continent, which calls for proactive response vital in disaster mitigation and adaptation. For a program to be successful, it must involve the citizens from the national to the barangay level. This descriptive study investigated the perceptions of community residents of San Francisco, Iriga City, and Karuhatan, Valenzuela City, towards Disaster Risk Reduction and Management (DRRM) programs as proactive measures in promoting a culture of safety and community resilience in times of disaster or emergency. Thirty residents from each community answered a community survey. The responses underwent frequencies, and the percentage calculation. The study results showed a generally affirmative perception of both groups on the city-wide disaster preparedness campaign through DRRM programs. However, the community responses on four categories: (1) Disaster Legislation, (2) Vulnerability to Disaster, (3) Disaster or Emergency Awareness, and (4) Disaster or Emergency Preparedness were relatively high in the Iriga group, which indicated a relatively high level of involvement in DRRM programs and a high level of preparedness for disasters. The Valenzuela group turned out to be high in disaster legislation and moderate in the other three areas, which indicated a moderately high level of involvement and preparedness. Thus, more efforts were needed to increase community understanding and resiliency.

Journal of BIMP-EAGA Regional Development

Hennessy Debalocos

jhune baxani

Natural disasters like typhoons and earthquakes are now frequently occurring in the country. The Philippine government had increased its efforts to implement the disaster risk reduction management (DRRM) program as its answer to the frequent occurrence. This paper gives an overview of the Awareness and Disaster Preparedness of the Barangay Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Committees (BDRRMCs) of Laur, Nueva Ecija, Philippines. It focused on the flood and landslide-prone barangays of Laur, Nueva Ecija. The study used the Goal Model of Organizational Theory to measure the awareness of BDRRMCs. The awareness of BDRRMCs was measured against the goals and objectives of Republic Act 10121 also known as Philippines Disaster Risk Reduction and Management (DRRM) Act. The study used as a research tool the Checklist of Disaster Preparedness divided into four thematic areas namely; a) Disaster Prevention and Mitigation, b) Disaster Preparedness, c) Disaster Response, and d) Disaster Rehabilitation and Recovery. The study showed the need for periodic evaluation of the effectiveness of Barangay Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Committees (DRRMCs) and to set the standard of performance not only for the purpose of policy evaluation but also for measuring community involvement in disaster risk reduction. Results showed that BDRRMCs will be most effective if they are performing their functions and as prescribed by law, they should give priorities to all thematic areas, especially prevention and mitigation, and disaster preparedness to achieve the goals and objectives of RA 10121.

International Journal of Research Publications

Shelley Abenoja

jessela merciful

Jevilyn Pas-iwen-Madalang

Disasters occur all around the world, with varying degrees of impact and severity. By implementing risk reduction strategies, communities can become less vulnerable to the effects of disasters. In the Philippines, RA 10121 created the Barangay Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Committee (BDRRMC), but still lacks resiliency. Triangulation method was utilized in the research to evaluate the BDRRMC's level of implementation and challenges using a reliability-and validity-tested questionnaire to the respondents from the high-risk barangays in Baguio City, Philippines. Based on the results of the weighted mean Section 12, RA 10121 is being implemented in the barangay level. Singlefactor ANOVA results showed that length of service and age are two key attributes that shows significant difference based on the p-value result. In terms of challenges encountered, despite help from the local government unit, it is constrained by inefficient mobilization and dispatch of rescue teams during disaster response which is basically rooted from lack of manpower and cooperation in disaster management. To summarize, there is a need for planning and effective budget allocation with enhanced community engagement to improve the implementation of the law's provisions and achieve its goal of developing safer and resilient communities.

JPAIR Multidisciplinary Research

Marife M Napallaton

As reported in the early days of November 2013, more than 6,000 people died, millions of people were displaced and affected in the central part of the Philippines which were hit by Typhoon Yolanda which would enter into historical records and the minds of people in the Philippines. Thus, every individual must be aware of the importance of knowing the nature of this disaster. This study aimed to determine the natural and man-made disasters that occurred and was experienced by the elementary schools’ faculty, staff, and the LDRRMC personnel of the selected areas of Leon B. Postigo, Godod, Salug, Liloy, Gutalac, Kalawit, Tampilisan and, Lebanon, Zamboanga del Norte. The level of preparedness and participation of these municipalities are at risk by the Local Disaster Risk Reduction, and Management plans were determined as prescribed by the R.A.10121. Respondents considered by random sampling were from the local government units, particularly the faculty and staff of the elementary schoo...

International Journal of Social Science and Economic Invention

Disasters in the Philippines serve as great vanguards defying all existing social divisions and stratifications, influencing all, and uniting communities across boundaries in order to prepare and prevent it. This study focused on the Community Based Disaster Management in selected barangays of Cabanatuan City. The main problem of the study is to determine the effectiveness of Community Based Disaster Management. The respondents of the study were 100 residents and was conducted at ten (10) selected barangays of Cabanatuan City namely: Aduas Centro, Aduas Norte, Aduas Sur, Isla, Sumacab Este, Sumacab Norte, Sumacab Sur, Pagas, Kapitan Pepe, and Valdifuente. The researcher used descriptive method of research. The findings of the study were: early delivery of warning that affects the alertness of the residents had been confirmed effective by the most of the respondents; the prevention and minimizing the impact of natural disasters made by the barangay were properly prepared and necessary actions were taken properly. In terms of conducting short term recovery, there is a sufficient supply of relief goods that helped the respondents to recover faster and the rescue team conducts their job without further delay.

Rina Arcigal

INTRODUCTION A research involving the Assessment of the Implementation of Disaster Risk Reduction Management (DRRM) functions and services provided by the council of Santa Cruz, Laguna is described in this paper. The descriptive method of research was employed in this study to gather the necessary data and information on the disaster risk reduction management and services. Input variables on the functions included are as follows: Research and Planning, Administration and Training, Operation and Warning. While on the service being offered by Local Government Units (LGU) was Early Warning System, Search and Rescue, Relief Operation, Evacuation, Health Services, Transportation Services, Security Services, Emergency Management, and Fire Protection. The goal of the researcher that the determining disaster implementation and the level of perception of the community of Santa Cruz, Laguna on the functions and responsibilities of LGU are approaches that help to attain the goal and objectives...

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ADVANCED RESEARCH AND PUBLICATIONS

Natural disasters vary in impact and severity, but resilient communities can mitigate their impact. In the Philippines, RA 10121 established Barangay Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Committee (BDRRMC), but its full potential has yet to be realized. The study is divided into two phases to determine the BDRRMC's capability in high-risk barangays in Baguio City, Philippines. The first quantitative phase-descriptive design uses a reliability-and-validity-tested questionnaire administered to 145 respondents that was chosen via total enumeration. According to a single-factor ANOVA, the BDRRMC has an overall weighted mean capability of 3.25, which means a very high capability in disaster management. Moreover, under the communication construct, the p-value for a length of service was 0.05, and the p-value for age was 0.03, indicating a statistically significant difference that suggests these variables affect DRRM capabilit y. Because of this, a qualitative phase-case study was followed up to explain the quantitative result.Further, splitting the 12 participants chosen through homogeneous sampling into two groups based on the low and high weighted mean. Using a theme-by-theme joint display to integrate the data, with themes from group 1 promoting encourage awareness, prioritization, and increased coordination, while themes from Group 2 include compliance issues , budget issues and constituent support. The findings result in expansion as fit of integration because of the identified challenges in local disaster management. Therefore, DRRM officers are competent, but a lack of funding and support from constituents limits their effectiveness during disaster operations, resulting in a reactive rather than proactive approach.

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

Information

Author Services

Initiatives

You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.

All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .

Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.

Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.

Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.

Original Submission Date Received: .

Active Journals
Find a Journal
Journal Proposal
Proceedings Series
For Authors
For Reviewers
For Editors
For Librarians
For Publishers
For Societies
For Conference Organizers
Open Access Policy
Institutional Open Access Program
Special Issues Guidelines
Editorial Process
Research and Publication Ethics
Article Processing Charges
Testimonials
Preprints.org
SciProfiles
Encyclopedia

Article Menu

Subscribe SciFeed
Recommended Articles
Google Scholar
on Google Scholar
Table of Contents

Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.

Please let us know what you think of our products and services.

Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.

JSmol Viewer

Design and disaster resilience: toward a role for design in disaster mitigation and recovery.

1. Introduction

2. why design, 3. disaster-resilient design.

An analysis of the overall capacity, functioning, and relationships of the various components and systems that support communities, business, and industry
Integrating new development projects within the limits of natural systems
The planning and design of development and redevelopment patterns
The design and patterns of open space
The design of neighborhood and commercial districts
Individual and building group design, including location, configuration, and coherence with building code and climate-change imperatives
The location, design, and service capacity of community facilities and public infrastructure
Design to facilitate emergency management functions, including egress and access, the location, safety, and capacity of emergency shelters used and staging areas
Utilizing maintenance and rehabilitation management as important tools for climate-change mitigation and adaptation (p. 157).
Architects have practical mind- and skill-sets which are of significant value in disaster mitigation and recovery, including the interdisciplinary understanding of science, engineering, technology, and materials; a spatial perspective on systems and patterns; creative problem-solving; planning, organizing, scheduling, and managing of—and working with—economic, social, emergency, legal, and governmental constraints.
The spatial awareness, aesthetic, and design skills that good architects bring to projects, the ability to create beauty—and perhaps in the most unlikely environments—do add real value to psychologically distressed and demoralized individuals and communities. This may not be a high priority in the immediate aftermath of a disaster, when the overwhelming need is simply to provide emergency shelter for thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of displaced people. However, it is certainly very relevant in the transitional and permanent stages of rebuilding and resettlement.
The poor, marginalized, and the distressed deserve the benefits of good architecture equally, if not more so, than the privileged few who can afford the aesthetic and functional benefits of commercial design practices. As Shigeru Ban said in his acceptance speech for the Pritzker Prize in 2014, ‘ Architects are not building temporary housing because we are too busy building for the privileged people…. I’m not saying I’m against building monuments, but I’m thinking we can work more for the public’ .
There are no universal, one-size-fits-all solutions in resilient design. The most successful schemes, in terms of both their affordability and their benefits, are those built around intensive, sustained consultation with local people; the use, as far as humanly possible, of local materials and construction systems; and the employment of local people—often in situations where there is no other employment available—in the construction process.
Design education has not served the field of disaster-resilient design well. None of the 15 architects interviewed by Charlesworth (2014) [ 17 ] had encountered the concepts and practices of public-interest design (Adendroth and Bell 2019) [ 31 ], humanitarian architecture (Zuckerman Jacobson and Ban 2014) [ 32 ], or any related fields. Indeed, they often lamented that the kind of professional attitudes and ambitions that were encouraged during their training mitigated against a view of architecture as a community service akin to public health or human rights law in medical and legal education. Instead, they came to the field of design and disasters as the result of personal and family values and career aspirations to expand their sometimes-limited disciplinary backgrounds.

… inevitably edits down the social context of any project: rushed site visits, often abstract briefs with no clear user or client to engage with, and compressed timescales all mitigate against development of the skills required for socially engaged architecture. In addition, the standardized diet of juries, long nights, and isolation from other disciplines further consolidates the de-socialization of architecture students as they are admitted into the rituals of the tribe. A move towards a more socially engaged practice therefore needs a distinct shift in the processes, projects, and ethos of architectural education.

4. Learning for Disaster-Resilient Design

The importance of critical reflection on design for disasters and displacement as the ‘new normal’
The desirability (or otherwise) of a competency framework for curriculum development in the field of design for disaster mitigation and recovery
The practice of designing for a much wider range of clients than in commercial architecture, many of which are marginalized and may have few resources
The ethical and political dimensions of design as a break with traditional ‘modernist’ practice in the profession
The importance of teaching ethics in design education
The challenge of teaching the values and skills underlying socially engaged co-design practices
The value of integrating teaching and learning with research—co-produced, evidence-based practice
Pedagogical challenges such as integrating conceptual knowledge of key issues through field-based studies and simulations.
Integrating systems thinking and design thinking as pedagogical and professional tools.
The value of developing transferable, 21st-century skills and predispositions suitable for employability in the disaster and humanitarian fields, especially for working with vulnerable people living under hardship.

5. Climate Change, Design, and Development Study, Hội An, Vietnam

Synthesizing knowledge from a variety of scientific and community-based sources on climate change, and the links between climate change and disasters
Evaluating key strategies of climate-change adaptation and disaster-risk reduction, and their differences and convergences
Interpreting and analyzing the implications of climate change and disasters for the built environment, in parts of the Asia–Pacific region, from diverse perspectives and sectoral linkages
Working effectively with others in a field-based situation and demonstrating social, intercultural, and environmental awareness
Communicating using diverse formats and strategies to engage with a range of stakeholders.

6. Conclusions

International, government, and community agencies are struggling to implement effective strategies for disaster-risk reduction and for planning long-term recovery after disasters. The central challenge these agencies face is the development of policies and practices for reducing the vulnerabilities that prevent communities from becoming more disaster-resilient. Design can be seen as a critical bridge in planning for disaster mitigation and recovery.
There is a practice–theory gap between the community-led processes needed for long-term recovery and the product-delivery culture that characterizes many shelter and settlement programs. The result is often a ‘one size fits all’ approach to housing, with insufficient attention paid to the aspirations of the people most affected and the infrastructure needed.
The skills of experienced system and design thinkers, such as architects, urban planners, and landscape architects), are seldom employed in the disaster-risk-management field, despite their demonstrated capacity to work with communities and to develop integrated spatial responses to guide both disaster-risk reduction and long-term rebuilding after a disaster. Developing design solutions at housing and settlement scales, e.g., preparing house designs and community master plans, is the core competency of architecture. However, this expertise has been neglected and the number of built-environment professionals such as architects equipped to respond in such situations is still very low.
While there is an innate conservatism in most design degrees in terms of dealing with critical social challenges and crises, specialized masters degrees incorporating disaster-resilient design are emerging, and are training the next generation of disaster, humanitarian, and development professionals.
The paper has outlined the contributions of design as a disciplinary and operational tool to deal with many of the social, environmental, and economic crises now being faced. However, a reorientation of design education is needed so that it addresses core disaster-risk-management concepts, such as vulnerability, urban resilience, climate-change adaptation, risk-based design, and scenario and community planning. Otherwise, it will not achieve its potential value in enhancing disaster resilience.

Author Contributions

Institutional review board statement, informed consent statement, conflicts of interest.

Munich Re. Relevant Natural Catastrophe Loss Events Worldwide 2019. 2020. Available online: https://www.munichre.com/en/company/media-relations/media-information-and-corporate-news/media-information/2020/causing-billions-in-losses-dominate-nat-cat-picture-2019.html (accessed on 2 August 2020).
IDMC (Internal Disaster Monitoring Centre). Global Report on Internal Displacement 2020 ; IDMC, 2020; Available online: https://www.internal-displacement.org/global-report/grid2020/ (accessed on 2 August 2020).
IDMC (Internal Disaster Monitoring Centre). Assessing the Impacts of Climate Change on Flood Displacement Risk ; IDMC, 2020; Available online: https://www.internal-displacement.org/publications/assessing-the-impacts-of-climate-change-on-flood-displacement-risk (accessed on 2 August 2020).
Cadman, E. Insurance Industry Calls for Action to Mitigate Climate Risk as Australia Bushfires Widen ; Bloomberg News: New York, NY, USA, 2020; Available online: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-01-08/deadly-australia-fires-spur-calls-to-mitigate-disaster-risk (accessed on 9 February 2020).
Bojic, D.; Baas, S.; Wolf, J. Governance Challenges for Disaster Risk Reduction and Climate Change Adaptation ; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2019. [ Google Scholar ]
Geis, D. By design: The disaster resistant and quality-of-life community. Nat. Disaster Rev. 2000 , 1 , 150–160. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Aldunce, P.; Beilin, R.; Handmer, J.; Howden, M. Framing disaster resilience. The implications of the diverse conceptualisations of “bouncing back”. Disaster Prev. Manag. 2014 , 23 , 252–270. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Alexander, D.E. Resilience and disaster risk reduction: An etymological journey. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 2013 , 13 , 2707–2716. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
Fisher, T. Designing to Avoid Disaster: The Nature of Fractal-Critical Design ; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2013. [ Google Scholar ]
Gonzalez-Mathiesen, C.; March, A. Establishing Design Principles for Wildfire Resilient Urban Planning. Plan. Pract. Res. 2018 , 33 , 97–119. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Smith, T.; Choy, D.L. Adapting Australian coastal regions to climate change: A case study of South East Queensland. In Climate Change and the Coast: Building Resilient Communities ; Glavovic, B., Kelly, M., Kay, R., Travers, A., Eds.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2015; pp. 269–284. [ Google Scholar ]
Charlesworth, E.; Ahmed, I. Sustainable Housing Reconstruction: Designing Resilient Housing after Natural Disasters ; Routledge: London, UK, 2015. [ Google Scholar ]
Keenan, J. Seeking an interoperability of disaster resilience and transformative adaptation in humanitarian design. Int. J. Disaster Resil. Built Environ. 2018 , 9 , 145–152. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Lee, A. Design by Resilience ; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2020. [ Google Scholar ]
Buchanan, R. Wicked problems in design thinking. Des. Issues 1992 , 8 , 5–21. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Johnson, T. ‘Design Thinking’ Is Changing the Way We Approach Problems. 13 January 2016. Available online: http://www.universityaffairs.ca/features/feature-article/design-thinking-changing-way-approach-problems (accessed on 12 February 2022).
Charlesworth, E. Humanitarian Architecture: 15 Stories of Architects Working after Disasters ; Routledge: London, UK, 2014. [ Google Scholar ]
Elliot-Ortega, J. Urban Design as Problem Solving: Design Thinking in the Rebuild by Design Resiliency Competition. Master’s Thesis, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA, 2010. Available online: https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/98931 (accessed on 26 July 2020).
Shaw, R.; Rahman, A.; Surjan, A.; Parvin, G. (Eds.) Urban Disasters and Resilience in Asia ; Butterworth-Heinemann/Elsevier: Oxford, UK, 2016. [ Google Scholar ]
American Society of Landscape Architects. Resilient Design ; American Society of Landscape Architects: Washington, DC, USA, 2020; Available online: https://www.asla.org/resilientdesign.aspx (accessed on 9 August 2020).
Sanderson, D.; Jayden, J.; Leis, L. (Eds.) Urban Disaster Resilience ; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2016. [ Google Scholar ]
Alexander, D. The game changes: ‘Disaster Prevention and Management’ after a quarter of a century. Disaster Prev. Manag. Int. J. 2016 , 25 , 261–274. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Boer, L.; Donovan, J.; Buur, J. Challenging industry conceptions with provotypes. CoDesign 2013 , 9 , 73–89. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
Vandenbroeck, P. Working with Wicked Problem ; King Baudouin Foundation: Brussels, Belgium, 2012; Available online: https://www.kbs-frb.be/en/Virtual-Library/2012/303257 (accessed on 5 July 2015).
Davis, I. Shelter after Disaster , 2nd ed.; Oxford Polytechnic Press: Oxford, UK, 1978; Available online: https://www.ifrc.org/Global/Documents/Secretariat/201506/Shelter_After_Disaster_2nd_Edition.pdf (accessed on 18 November 2018).
Daly, P.; Feener, R. (Eds.) Rebuilding Asia Following Natural Disasters: Approaches to Reconstruction in the Asia-Pacific Region ; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2016. [ Google Scholar ]
UNHCR. Global Trends: Forced Displacement in 2019 ; UNHCR: Geneva, Switzerland, 2020; Available online: https://www.unhcr.org/globaltrends2019/ (accessed on 2 August 2020).
Wilson, A. Resilience as Means of Mitigating Climate Change 2014. Available online: https://www.resilientdesign.org/resilience-as-means-of-mitigating-climate-change/ (accessed on 17 August 2020).
Resilient Design Institute (nd). What Is Resilience? Available online: https://www.resilientdesign.org/defining-resilient-design (accessed on 20 July 2020).
Evans, G. Launch of Humanitarian Architecture ; Australian Institute of Architects, Victorian Chapter: Melbourne, Australia, 12 August 2014; Available online: https://www.gevans.org/speeches/speech549.html (accessed on 29 July 2020).
Adendroth, L.; Bell, B. Public Interest Design Education Guidebook: Curricula, Strategies, and SEED Academic Case Studies ; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2019. [ Google Scholar ]
Zuckerman Jacobson, H.; Ban, S. Shigeru Ban: Humanitarian Architecture ; Distributed Art Publishers: New York, NY, USA, 2014. [ Google Scholar ]
Awan, N.; Schneider, T.; Till, J. Spatial Agency: Other Ways of Doing Architecture ; Routledge: London, UK, 2011. [ Google Scholar ]
Till, J. Architecture after Architecture ; Routledge: London, UK, 2020; Available online: http://www.jeremytill.net/read/130/architecture-after-architecture (accessed on 2 August 2020).
Bristol, G. The last architect. In Proceedings of the Silpakorn Architectural Discourse 3rd Mini-Symposium, Bangkok, Thailand, 18–19 March 2004; Available online: https://www.academia.edu/7732516/The_Last_Architect (accessed on 9 July 2018).
Griffiths, R. Knowledge production and the research-teaching nexus: The case of the built environment disciplines. Stud. High. Educ. 2004 , 29 , 709–726. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Lloyd-Jones, T. Mind the Gap! Post-Disaster Reconstruction and the Transition from Humanitarian Relief ; RICS: London, UK, 2006; Available online: https://www.preventionweb.net/publications/view/9080 (accessed on 24 July 2020).
Lloyd-Jones, T.; Kalra, R.; Mulyawa, B.; Theis, M.; Wakely, P.; Payne, G.; Hal, N. The Built Professions in Disaster Risk Reduction and Response: A Guide for Humanitarian Agencies ; MLC Press, University of Westminster: London, UK, 2009; Available online: https://www.ifrc.org/PageFiles/95743/B.a.07.Built%20Environment%20Professions%20in%20DRR%20and%20ResponseGuide%20for%20humanitarian%20agencies_DFDN%20and%20RICS.pdf (accessed on 24 July 2020).
Owen, D.; Dumashie, D. Built Environment Professional’s Contribution to Major Disaster Management. In Proceedings of the FIG Working Week, Hong Kong, China, 13–17 May 2007; Available online: https://www.fig.net/resources/proceedings/fig_proceedings/fig2007/papers/ts_1h/ts01h_03_owen_dumashie_1531.pdf (accessed on 17 July 2020).
Cage, C.; Hingorani, D.; Jopling, S.; Parke, E. Building relevance: Post-disaster shelter and the role of the building professional. In Proceedings of the Background Paper for Conference of the Centre for Development and Emergency Practice (CENDEP) ; Oxford Brookes University: Oxford, UK, 18 September 2009. [ Google Scholar ]
Wang, T. A new paradigm for design studio education. Int. J. Art Des. Educ. 2010 , 20 , 173–183. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Thurairajah, N.; Palliyaguru, R.; Williams, A. Incorporating disaster management perspective into built environment undergraduate curriculum. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Building Resilience, Kandalama, Sri Lanka, 20–22 July 2011; Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/333131988 (accessed on 31 July 2020).
Acar, E.; Yalçınkaya, F. Integrating disaster management perspective into architectural design education at undergraduate level—A case example from Turkey. In Proceedings of the 5th World Construction Symposium 2016, Colombo, Sri Lanka, 29–31 July 2016; pp. 284–293. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/303988576 (accessed on 28 March 2020).
Till, J. Foreword. In The Routledge Companion to Architecture and Social Engagement ; Karim, F., Ed.; Routledge: London, UK, 2018; Volume xxvi–xxviii. [ Google Scholar ]

Click here to enlarge figure

Phases in the Study	Learning Activities	Pedagogical Principles
1. Site familiarization
2.Consultations and workshops with key local experts and stakeholders
3.Field investigations and data analysis
4.Design and planning
5. Presentation and reporting

MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

Charlesworth, E.; Fien, J. Design and Disaster Resilience: Toward a Role for Design in Disaster Mitigation and Recovery. Architecture 2022 , 2 , 292-306. https://doi.org/10.3390/architecture2020017

Charlesworth E, Fien J. Design and Disaster Resilience: Toward a Role for Design in Disaster Mitigation and Recovery. Architecture . 2022; 2(2):292-306. https://doi.org/10.3390/architecture2020017

Charlesworth, Esther, and John Fien. 2022. "Design and Disaster Resilience: Toward a Role for Design in Disaster Mitigation and Recovery" Architecture 2, no. 2: 292-306. https://doi.org/10.3390/architecture2020017

Article Metrics

Article access statistics, further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals

Handuraw Home
01. CAPSU Electronic Theses and Dissertations
Masters Theses

Disaster risk reduction management engagement towards strengthening institutional resiliency

Thesis Adviser

Committee chair, committee members.

Recommended Citation

Degree discipline, degree name, degree level, collections.

Masters Theses [11]

The following license files are associated with this item:

Creative Commons

EXTERNAL LINKS DISCLAIMER

This link is being provided as a convenience and for informational purposes only. Capiz State University bears no responsibility for the accuracy, legality or content of the external site or for that of subsequent links. Contact the external site for answers to questions regarding its content.

If you come across any external links that don't work, we would be grateful if you could report them to the repository administrators .

Click DOWNLOAD to open/view the file.

Disaster Risk Resilience: Conceptual Evolution, Key Issues, and Opportunities

Open access
Published: 21 June 2022
Volume 13 , pages 330–341, ( 2022 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

Marie-Hélène Graveline 1 &
Daniel Germain 1 , 2

17k Accesses

27 Citations

7 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Resilience has become a cornerstone for risk management and disaster reduction. However, it has evolved extensively both etymologically and conceptually in time and across scientific disciplines. The concept has been (re)shaped by the evolution of research and practice efforts. Considered the opposite of vulnerability for a long time, resilience was first defined as the ability to resist, bounce back, cope with, and recover quickly from the impacts of hazards. To avoid the possible return to conditions of vulnerability and exposure to hazards, the notions of post-disaster development, transformation, and adaptation (build back better) and anticipation, innovation, and proactivity (bounce forward) were then integrated. Today, resilience is characterized by a multitude of components and several classifications. We present a selection of 25 components used to define resilience, and an interesting linkage emerges between these components and the dimensions of risk management (prevention, preparedness, response, and recovery), offering a perspective to strengthen resilience through the development of capacities. Despite its potential, resilience is subject to challenges regarding its operationalization, effectiveness, measurement, credibility, equity, and even its nature. Nevertheless, it offers applicability and opportunities for local communities as well as an interdisciplinary look at global challenges.

Resilience and Disasters

Disaster Risk Reduction and Resilience: Practices and Challenges in Asia Pacific

Resilience for Disaster Management: Opportunities and Challenges

Explore related subjects.

Artificial Intelligence

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

1 Introduction

Over the last two decades, the interest in the concept of resilience has grown significantly in the scientific community. Over the past 20 years, more than 30,000 articles with the term resilience in the title or keywords have been indexed in the SCOPUS database. In 2017 alone, more than 200 papers were published on resilience in the field of risk and disaster management—a sevenfold increase from 10 years earlier ( n = 30 in 2008) (Demiroz and Haase 2019 ). Through this explosion of interest, the concept of resilience has evolved greatly and has been widely discussed within the scientific community. The purpose of this review is to present the conceptual evolution of resilience in the risk and disaster management field while highlighting its principal components, major issues, and best opportunities.

2 Etymology and History of the Resilience Concept

The term resilience has a long and diverse history. Alexander ( 2013 ) and O’Brien and O’Keefe ( 2013 ) traced the history of the use of the term as well as its etymological evolution through the major eras. Its exact origin is unclear, but resilience is thought to come from the Latin resilire , resilio meaning “to leap” (Manyena et al. 2011 ; Alexander 2013 ). Both terms were used by Seneca the Elder, Ovid, Cicero, and Livy in their works in classical antiquity to mean leaping, jumping, or bouncing. In the Western Middle Ages and then in Modern Times, the term resiler was used in Middle French to express the action of retracting, and the term resile was used in England to express the fact of retracting, returning to an old position, resisting. The first known scientific use of the term resilience was in 1625 by Sir Francis Bacon, an English attorney general, in the Sylva Sylvarum , a collection of writings on natural history. The first known definition of the word comes from the Glossographia published from 1618 to 1679. Its author, Thomas Blount, gave it a double meaning: to bounce and to go back on one’s word. From 1839 onwards, the term resilience was associated with the ability (strength) to recover from adversity. At the end of the nineteenth century a prominent Scottish engineer, William J.M. Rankine, used the term in the field of mechanics to designate the strength (resistance) and ductility (ability to be stretched without breaking) of steel beams. As early as 1950, the concept began to be used in ecology and psychology, two fields in which it would become very important. The ecologist Holling ( 1973 ) later conceptualized resilience as a measure of an ecosystem’s ability to absorb disturbances and persist without changing its fundamental structure. In the late 1990s, the concept migrated from natural ecology to human ecology because of economists and geographers. In the field of risk and disaster management, the concept of resilience started to be used in the 1970s but gained importance especially from the end of the twentieth century and after 2010 (Demiroz and Haase 2019 ).

The broad evolution of the concept of resilience can be explained by its journey in time across various disciplines. Widely used, its meaning evolved as it has gained importance in fields such as ecology, psychology, engineering, social sciences, and so on (Alexander 2013 ; O’Brien and O’Keefe 2013 ). The major definitions from several fields and disciplines are presented in Table 1 . Although there is currently no real consensus on the definition of resilience in risk and disaster management, the definition of the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR 2021 ), formerly UNISDR, is probably the one most recognized.

3 Conceptual Evolution of the Term Resilience in Risk and Disaster Management

Over the past two decades, the concept of resilience has been highlighted by the evolution of research and practice efforts in the field of risk and disaster management. These efforts have long been oriented towards post-disaster response and recovery (Cronstedt 2002 ; Cutter et al. 2014 ), rather than pre-event initiatives such as prevention and preparedness (Hyunjung 2018 ). Subsequently, divergent approaches from natural and social sciences have focused either on the hazard itself, or on vulnerability. All these approaches aimed at making communities more resilient to hazards by reducing the hazard itself (frequency, intensity, and so on) or by working on the vulnerability factors of communities (sensitivity, exposure, and so forth). Although these approaches have contributed greatly to disaster risk reduction (DRR), as well as to sustainable community development, they are still considered as part of a reactive framework (Hyunjung 2018 ). According to many (for example, Innocenti and Albrito 2011 ), a more progressive and proactive approach to risk reduction is needed and the risk paradigm should no longer focus solely on reducing vulnerability, but also on building resilience (McEntire et al. 2002 ; Cutter et al. 2008 ; Olwig 2012 ; Twigg 2015 ; Williams and Shepherd 2016 ). It is in this context that current efforts are increasingly oriented towards risk reduction that focuses on building and strengthening resilience, including the valorization of positive factors such as local capacities and social capital (Hyunjung 2018 ).

The United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UNISDR) established as the second strategic goal of the Hyogo Framework for Action 2005−2015:

[…] the development and strengthening of institutions, mechanisms and capacities at all levels, in particular at the community level, that can systematically contribute to building resilience to hazards (UNISDR 2005 , p. 4).

The concept of resilience then gained importance until it was used 60 times in the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015−2030. The Sendai Framework makes it its third priority for action: “Investing in disaster risk reduction for resilience” (UNISDR 2015 , p. 14). The explosion of interest in resilience over the last decade has thus contributed to the evolution of the concept and the development of different visions, or even schools of thought, of resilience in the field of risk and disaster.

Resilience and vulnerability have long been considered as opposing, interdependent, or correlated concepts. Some refer to resilience as the inverse of vulnerability (Twigg 2007 ). Thus, increasing resilience would reduce vulnerability and vice versa (Chisty et al. 2021 ). Resilience and vulnerability have also been considered by others to be subcomponents, subconcepts, or attributes of each other (Turner et al. 2003 ). Many, however, consider them to be subcomponents of the concept of risk (Cutter et al. 2008 ; Aven 2011 ) since one (vulnerability) consists of factors that increase risk and the other (resilience) consists of factors that reduce risk. In this sense, a good understanding of vulnerability is the starting point for building resilience (Alexander 2013 ), and resilience is now “deployed as a strategy to overcome the vulnerability of communities in the wake of natural disasters” (McDonnell 2020 , p. 56). However, while all these thoughts on the conceptual positioning of resilience in relation to vulnerability have their accuracy, they rather represent simplistic translations of the complex and multidimensional character of these two concepts. In the end, it appears that resilience has evolved into an independent concept, albeit one that is related to, and interconnected with, vulnerability.

From ecology and engineering, resilience was characterized as the ability to resist, bounce back, cope with, and recover quickly from the impacts of hazards (Mileti 1999 ; Alexander 2013 ). Linked to a rather reactive risk strategy, the focus is on the resistance of infrastructures and systems and the speed of return to the initial pre-disaster state (bounce-back). Resilience is thus visualized as an elastic band that can stretch without breaking (ductility) and return to its original shape without deforming. This perspective of resilience thus induces a return to the pre-disaster conditions of the system or community without thinking, without regard to their evaluation, making it possible to return to the conditions of vulnerability that may have caused the hazard or exacerbated its impacts (Paton and Johnston 2017 ).

To address this challenge, the notion of “build back better” and “bounce forward” has been developed within risk management and has contributed to the integration of post-disaster development, transformation, and adaptation capacities within resilience (Kennedy et al. 2008 ; Manyena et al. 2011 ; Béné et al. 2012 ). Disaster is then seen as an opportunity to improve, change, and thus adapt (Paton 2006 ). From this point of view, resilience represents “the intrinsic capacity of a system, community or society predisposed to a shock or stress to bounce forward and adapt in order to survive by changing its non-essential attributes and rebuilding itself” (Manyena et al. 2011 , p. 419). At the heart of this conception of resilience is a well-known mechanism of human development: experiential learning (Manyena et al. 2011 ). Particular emphasis is placed on the reporting of events, as they feed into the processes of reflection, learning, and feedback necessary to build on lessons learned. This perspective on resilience also opens the door to planning and action over longer time horizons. However, in the context of risks and disasters, this conception of resilience remains reactive.

Recently, the meaning associated with the expression “bounce forward” seems to have shifted to a new one, more focused on proactivity. This new conceptual input idealizes resilience as the ability to leap beyond risk rather than bounce back. Greater importance is then given to the capacities of anticipation, innovation, and adaptability to uncertainties (Rubim and Borges 2017 ). Until recently, resilience was divided into three main visions and objectives: (1) to reduce impacts and consequences; (2) to reduce recovery time; and (3) to reduce future vulnerabilities (Koliou et al. 2020 ). This new perspective opens the door to a fourth vision: that of reducing the impact of uncertainties. Moreover, this representation favors the development and the reinforcement of resilience without having undergone a prior shock.

Ultimately, through its various phases of conceptual evolution, resilience is now defined by its three complementary dimensions: bounce back, build back better, and bounce forward. This combination of meanings makes resilience a difficult concept to define in any straightforward way.

4 Key Components of Resilience

Resilience is made up of an assemblage of several components that have multiplied through its conceptual evolution. Whether it is through the analysis of an individual, a community, or a complex system, many have worked to deconstruct, structure, and order the properties of the concept. For Tierney and Bruneau ( 2007 ), resilience is composed of four main elements: robustness, redundancy, resourcefulness, and rapidity. According to Béné ( 2013 ), resilience relies instead on the synergy of three capabilities: absorption, adaptation, and transformation. For Chen et al. ( 2020 ), resilience to disasters can be summarized by three distinct capacities: the capacity to resist, adapt, and recover quickly. In a non-exhaustive way, Table 2 presents 25 components mentioned and frequently used to define resilience in the risk and disaster management literature.

When we observe the meaning of the listed components of resilience, they can be classified according to their conceptual dimension (Fig. 1 ). To facilitate operationalization, the components with similar meanings and processes can be gathered into groups of actions.

Components of resilience according to their conceptual dimensions

Looking at their nature, many of the components of resilience show an interesting fit with the actions, strategies, and time horizons of the four basic dimensions of risk management: prevention, preparedness, response, and recovery (Fig. 2 ). Some components of the “bounce forward” dimension apply to all dimensions of risk management such as innovation, flexibility, or autonomy, for example. While many see a conflict in the different conceptual views of resilience, we see it as a process that recognizes the gains of each of the major phases of the term’s evolution. Through this perspective, resilience would likely be strengthened at each stage of risk management using different capacities. Norris et al. ( 2008 ) presented a similar view of resilience as a set of attributes and capabilities in dynamic relationship.

Conceptual evolution of resilience according to risk management dimensions

5 Community Resilience

Within the field of risk and disaster management, building resilience is often community-oriented due to the importance of the local scale. Hazards generally occur locally and many of the most effective tools for reducing exposure are found at this scale. The impacts of disasters are felt immediately and intensely at the local level and local actors are the first responders. It is also at the local level that the core functions of environmental management and regulatory governance are concentrated and where governments and communities best engage and work together (UNDRR 2019 ). Because each community is composed of a complex and dynamic assemblage of social, economic, and natural environments (Meng et al. 2018 ), it is the ideal entity to develop or strengthen a resilience that is unique to that community and that will act effectively to manage the risks. Furthermore, to adequately represent the diversity within the vulnerable groups of a community, it is important to pay attention to its intersectional characteristics (Chisty et al. 2021 ).

According to Norris et al. ( 2008 ), the emergence of community resilience would be based on a variety of adaptive capacities grouped into four broad networked sets: economic development, social capital, information and communication, and community competence. These capabilities are characterized by dynamic attributes such as robustness, redundancy, and speed. Amobi et al. ( 2019 ) argued that community resilience is based on three key fundamentals: community leadership, social cohesion, and social connections. For Haase et al. ( 2021 ), community resilience is the result of six core capacities: human capital, physical capital, economic capital, social capital, institutional and environmental capital, and these encompass the 9 elements and 19 subelements proposed by Patel et al. ( 2017 ).

Among the many dimensions at the heart of community resilience are two fundamental notions: social learning and social capital. Social learning is defined as “a process of iterative reflection that occurs when we share our experiences, ideas and environments with others” (Keen et al. 2005 , p. 9). This concept is found, among others, at the basis of adaptive management (McEwen et al. 2018 ) and is a driver of social change. The concept of social capital has its roots in sociology but is now widely used in different fields (Chelihi et al. 2020 ). According to the sociologist Bourdieu ( 1986 , p. 247), social capital represents: “the aggregate of the actual or potential resources which are linked to possession of a durable network of more or less institutionalized relationships of mutual acquaintance and recognition.” It is then considered as a resource that is acquired and maintained individually (Chelihi et al. 2020 ). For others, social capital constitutes “resources and attributes of social organization (communities, regions, countries)” (Chelihi et al. 2020 , p. 9) and encompasses both links and networks, as well as norms and values shared by the community. Norris et al. ( 2008 ) considered social capital as a combination of social support, social embeddedness, organizational ties, leadership and sense of community.

Resilience building actions and interventions are mostly carried out at the community level (McDonnell 2020 ), often through a community-based approach. This type of approach is used in several areas, whether it is for DRR (community-based disaster risk reduction—CBDRR), management (community-based management—CBM), adaptation (community-based adaptation—CBA), or development (community-driven development) objectives. It represents “a community-led process, based on communities’ priorities, needs, knowledge, and capacities, which should empower people to plan for and cope with the impacts of climate change” (Reid et al. 2009 , p. 13), disaster risk, or sustainable development challenges. Based on the principle of inclusiveness, this approach places social aspects and the role of communities at the center of disaster risk management (Frankenberger et al. 2013 ). All members of the community are actively involved in decision making at all stages of the process (Shaw 2016 ), using participatory processes that mobilize a diversity of local actors and value local knowledge (Berkes 2007 ; Bahadur et al. 2013 ). The CBA is also based on the development of autonomy and self-organization of communities through capacity building of local actors. To enable communities to make the necessary transformations, this approach needs a decentralization of powers and the transfer of resources for effective risk management, local development, and environmental governance (Bahadur et al. 2013 ; UNDRR 2019 ; Davis et al. 2021 ). Proponents of this approach emphasize strengthening networks, connections, relationships, and social capital as well as improving community engagement and understanding (Mileti 1999 ; Gunderson and Folke 2005 ; Norris et al. 2008 ). It is also directly connected to the bottom-up management process whose activities can then be institutionalized (Shaw 2016 ). The UNDRR’s Local Risk Reduction and Resilience Strategy is a planning tool for local actors to integrate a DRR approach into local development and resilience building (UNDRR 2019 ).

6 Issues and Challenges

Resilience is a very promising concept for disaster risk management, but the lack of consensus on its definition is still a major challenge to its operationalization and assessment (Bollettino et al. 2017 ). To date, there is no unified approach to resilience, no single way to define it, measure it, or promote it to our communities (Demiroz and Haase 2019 ), which poses a challenge to its practical application. Because resilience is a complex, multi-dimensional and multi-scalar term, it brings several complications to its application. Its use implies a sharing of challenges and responsibilities between scales of intervention and practice and thus requires a multi-sectorial, multi-scalar, and inter-scalar approach (Bahadur et al. 2013 ; Bahadur and Pichon 2016 ). Some authors even consider the concept too imprecise to contribute significantly to DRR (Manyena 2006 ).

As an umbrella concept with many intangible factors, resilience is even more difficult to measure and model, further complicating the assessment of measures that claim to develop or strengthen it (Berkes and Ross 2013 ; Cutter 2016 ; Bollettino et al. 2017 ). While across the scientific community, a wide variety of approaches, frameworks, indices, and indicators have been developed to assess it (Ruszczyk 2019 ; Clark-Ginsberg et al. 2020 ), there is still little empirical data on the actual understanding and use of resilience by practitioners (Matyas and Pelling 2015 ). To date, it remains difficult to justify funding for resilience-based activities and to assess the results in a reliable and effective way for communities and investors.

There is also a lack of consensus on what resilience is. In the policy context, the concept is often used as an endpoint, an ideal to be achieved. In the sciences, resilience represents an attribute or a set of attributes, capacities, and conditions that can be developed, constructed, and measured (Reghezza-Zitt et al. 2012 ). For others, it should be considered as: “a complex of social processes that allow local communities to self-organize and enact positive collective action for community survival and wellbeing” (Imperiale and Vanclay 2016 , p. 207). In this sense, resilience represents a process or set of processes, rather than an endpoint, involving learning, anticipation, and improvement of basic structures, actors, and system functions (Norris et al. 2008 ; Mitchell and Harris 2012 ). From a utilitarian perspective, resilience can also be understood as both a process and an outcome (Matyas and Pelling 2015 ).

As a buzzword overused in political discourses since the twenty-first century (Mitchell and Harris 2012 ; Deeming et al. 2018 ), resilience has lost some of its meaning and credibility, especially for practitioners and citizens. Moreover, many believe that resilience, especially of communities, necessarily leads to better outcomes for all (Imperiale and Vanclay 2016 ; Patel et al. 2017 ) or is a positive indicator of development (McDonnell 2020 ). Yet the concept could be used to reinforce unethical practices or hegemonies or undesirable situations such as environmental degradation (Alexander 2013 ; MacKinnon and Derickson 2013 ), political marginalization of the vulnerable, poverty, or systemic corruption (Mochizuki et al. 2018 ). To address what some call the “dark side of resilience,” it is therefore important to pay particular attention to the power in communities so that the resilience of one group does not come at the expense of another group and that efforts to strengthen it do not contribute to perpetuating vulnerabilities (Matyas and Pelling 2015 ; McDonnell 2020 ). It is thus essential to practice critical resilience thinking through locality and marginality and to ask who benefits from resilience and who pays the cost, especially in the DRR, climate change adaption (CCA), human development, and spatial planning fields (Weichselgartner and Kelman 2015 ; Cutter 2016 ).

Furthermore, resilience has been associated with neoliberal perspectives and agendas (Cutter et al. 2013 ; MacKinnon and Derickson 2013 ) by encouraging the development of solutions for constant growth and competitive advantages for territories (Oliva and Lazzeretti 2017 ). From this perspective, resilience can be used as a moralizing discourse that, through the promotion of community autonomy, transfers the heavy responsibility of disaster management to individuals and communities without offering the necessary institutional support for its adequate management (Walker and Cooper 2011 ; Bankoff 2019 ; McDonnell 2020 ). Resilience approaches are generally conducted from an apolitical perspective. Yet, this desire for neutrality can lead to a narrow and one-dimensional resilience thinking that will keep addressing the symptoms rather than achieve the necessary structural transformations (Davis et al. 2021 ). In the end, all agree on the importance of developing and strengthening community resilience to disaster risks. However, the understanding of resilience is still too unclear to allow for adequate planning of practices on the one hand, and the development of tools and methodologies to address, engage, and strengthen local communities on the other hand (Hutter and Kuhlicke 2013 ; Mitchell 2013 ; Imperiale and Vanclay 2016 ).

7 Opportunities

Despite the challenges it imposes, resilience nevertheless offers a range of opportunities, including that of offering a holistic multi-hazard, even all-hazard, multi-scalar, and integrated approach (Berkes 2007 ; Bahadur and Pichon 2016 ). Resilience refers to the capacities of systems, communities, and societies, and these are applicable to different hazards and their dynamics, allowing for an integrative perspective (Ruszczyk 2019 ).

Then, the concept of resilience has great applicability. It can be applied to almost any phenomenon that involves a shock or stress (Alexander 2013 ). It offers an answer to the question: How do we prepare for the unknown? (Fekete et al. 2014 ). More concretely, resilience, as defined in the field of risk and disaster, applies to a broad spectrum of objects, in multiple practice settings, and at multiple spatial and temporal scales. With so many uses and possible applications, it is important to be clear about the parameters of resilience that are being analyzed and put into practice—especially, since there is no single recipe for building resilience, as it is intrinsically linked to the context of its object of analysis (Demiroz and Haase 2019 ). Thus, the resilience of a family in the context of a pandemic cannot be compared to the resilience of a regional road network in the context of a terrorist risk or to that of a municipality in the context of climate change.

Some consider resilience to be a multidisciplinary concept given its use in many disciplines (Upadhyay and Sa-ngiamwibool 2021 ). Characterized by a high degree of interdisciplinarity, it constitutes an effective frontier object that allows the bringing together of different political agendas, including those of the humanitarian and development fields (Matyas and Pelling 2015 ), and thus contributes to the development of transversal competences of actors at all levels. The imprecise nature of resilience and its conceptual flexibility can even benefit communication and knowledge exchange across disciplinary boundaries and between the fields of science, policy, and practice (Klein et al. 2003 ; Fekete et al. 2014 ; Weichselgartner and Kelman 2015 ; Deeming et al. 2018 ; Moser et al. 2019 ; Ruszczyk 2019 ). Resilience also allows for an interdisciplinary look at some global challenges that, until recently, were generally understood separately such as DRR, climate change adaptation, and sustainable development (MacAskill and Guthrie 2014 ; Weichselgartner and Kelman 2015 ; Bollettino et al. 2017 ). Through its evolution, the concept of resilience is moving away from its original definition from ecology, psychology, and the physical sciences and now offers greater interdisciplinarity among these three broad fields (Gero et al. 2011 ; Schipper et al. 2016 ; Kelman 2017 ; Ruszczyk 2019 ). This inherent interconnectedness contributes to the convergence of ideas but more importantly practices guided by the concept of resilience (Bahadur et al. 2013 ; Matyas and Pelling 2015 ; Mochizuki et al. 2018 ).

Adaptation has gained significant importance as a fundamental component of resilience, establishing an unmistakable conceptual bridge with the notion of climate change adaptation. The latter represents an “adjustment in natural or human systems in response to actual or expected climatic stimuli or their effects, which mitigates harm or exploits beneficial opportunities” (UNFCCC 2021 ). Adaptation can be incremental and “maintain the essence and integrity of a system or process at a given scale” (IPCC 2018 , p. 542) or transformational and change “the fundamental attributes of a social-ecological system in anticipation of climate change and its impacts” (IPCC 2018 , p. 542). Whether it is through hydro-climatic risk management or the development of climate resilience, there are many points of intersection between the two fields. Moreover, while risk management has long been associated with a rather short time horizon (Thomalla et al. 2006 ), the conceptual evolution of resilience towards adaptation and anticipation opens the door to longer-term planning, allowing a better linkage with climate change adaptation objectives. For Lama et al. ( 2017 ), adaptation and resilience have become complementary objectives to be achieved to reduce vulnerability. However, the relationship between these two concepts is not simple and certain aspects must be considered for risk and sustainable development to ensure that adaptation and resilience are developed and strengthened effectively. These include the importance of making explicit the values, goals, and aspirations that drive the process; the spatial and scalar delineation of the individuals, households, and communities involved and their relationships; and the precise definition of the time period involved (Lama et al. 2017 ).

Resilience is also intrinsically linked to sustainable development, whether through territorial planning activities, resource management, or vulnerability factors. Sustainable development constitutes “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (Imperatives 1987 , p. 14). Its process is based on the reconciliation of three basic elements, which are interdependent and all indispensable to the well-being of individuals and societies: economic growth, social inclusion, and environmental protection (United Nations 2021 ). Sustainable development calls for and promotes the following elements: concerted action; poverty eradication; sustainable, equitable, and inclusive economic growth; creation of opportunities for all; reduction of inequality; improvement of basic living conditions; equitable social development; inclusion; and integrated and sustainable management of natural resources (United Nations 2021 ). Resilience and sustainable development enjoy a mutually positive relationship. Sustainable development can contribute to economic development activities that consider hazards and help reduce rather than exacerbate risk. In turn, resilience helps protect development efforts and their sustainability. Furthermore, resilience is linked to environmental protection through nature-based solutions and the ecosystem-based approach. For Mabon ( 2019 ), post-disaster recovery is an opportunity to reflect on how nature-based solutions can help a community to rebound differently, to build back greener. The ecosystem-based approach is used both in the field of climate change adaptation (ecosystem-based adaptation—EbA) and in the field of disaster risk reduction (Eco-DRR), it gives a central role to ecosystems in adaptation and in disaster risk management. It consists of “the use of biodiversity and ecosystem services as part of an overall adapting strategy to help people adapt to the adverse effects of climate change” (UNDRR 2020 , p. 10). This approach thus refers to “the sustainable management, conservation and restoration of ecosystems to reduce disaster risk, with the aim to achieve sustainable and resilient development” (UNDRR 2020 , p. 10). The increasing importance of the principle of equity within the concept of resilience also contributes to bringing it closer to the objectives of sustainable development. According to Twigg ( 2007 ), the equitable distribution of wealth and assets and an equitable economy are essential to the development of community resilience. Thus, building community resilience should never be about maintaining the status quo, but rather about moving toward more equitable conditions (Cutter 2016 ; Amobi et al. 2019 ).

8 Conclusion

Resilience has undeniably become one of the big ideas of our time for dealing with uncertainty (Ruszczyk 2019 ). Beyond its catchy and all-encompassing nature, the concept is now being used as the basis for reflective decisions and concrete practices (Matyas and Pelling 2015 ), particularly by local communities. As discussions on resilience in the context of disaster risk, climate change, and sustainable development continue, its conceptualizations have yet to converge into a widely accepted framework (Mochizuki et al. 2018 ). Concerns and debates remain about its operationalization, effectiveness, and especially about the equity issues associated with it. The great conceptual evolution that resilience has undergone also raises questions. To what extent can a concept evolve, move away from its original meaning, without becoming distorted? Is resilience really the result of the evolution of efforts and the paradigm shift that disaster risk management has undergone in recent decades? Or has resilience reached its limit and are we seeing the emergence of a new, integrative concept?

Adger, W.N., T.P. Hughes, C. Folke, S.R. Carpenter, and J. Rockström. 2005. Social–ecological resilience to coastal disasters. Science 309(5737): 1036–1039.

Article Google Scholar

Aldunce, P., R. Beilin, J. Handmer, and M. Howden. 2014. Framing disaster resilience: The implications of the diverse conceptualisations of “bouncing back”. Disaster Prevention and Management 23(3): 252–270.

Alexander, D.E. 2013. Resilience and disaster risk reduction: An etymological journey. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences 13(11): 2707–2716.

Amobi, A., M. Lewis, A. Novais, and N. Alexander-Scott. 2019. ASTHO president’s challenge: Core principles for building community resilience. American Journal of Public Health 109(S4): S277–S278.

Aven, T. 2011. On some recent definitions and analysis frameworks for risk, vulnerability, and resilience. Risk Analysis 31(4): 515–522.

Bahadur, A., and F. Pichon. 2016. Analysis of resilience measurement frameworks and approaches. London: Overseas Development Institute (ODI).

Bahadur, A.V., M. Ibrahim, and T. Tanner. 2013. Characterising resilience: Unpacking the concept for tackling climate change and development. Climate and Development 5(1): 5–65.

Bankoff, G. 2019. Remaking the world in our own image: Vulnerability, resilience, and adaptation as historical discourses. Disasters 43(2): 221–239.

Béné, C. 2013. Towards a quantifiable measure of resilience. IDS Working Papers 2013(434): 1–27.

Béné, C., R.G. Wood, A. Newsham, and M. Davies. 2012. Resilience: New utopia or new tyranny? Reflection about the potentials and limits of the concept of resilience in relation to vulnerability reduction programmes. IDS Working Papers 2012(405): 1–61.

Berkes, F. 2007. Understanding uncertainty and reducing vulnerability: Lessons from resilience thinking. Natural Hazards 41(2): 283–295.

Berkes, F., and H. Ross. 2013. Community resilience: Toward an integrated approach. Society and Natural Resources 26(1): 5–20.

Bollettino, V., T. Alcayma, P. Dy, and P. Vinck. 2017. Introduction to socio-ecological resilience . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Google Scholar

Bourdieu, P. 1986. The forms of social capital. In Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education , ed. J. Richardson, 241–258. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.

Chelihi, M., J. Arnaud, J.-M. Normandin, and M.-C. Therrien. 2020. Social capital as an innovative vector of urban resilience: Detailed report ( Le capital social comme vecteur innovant de résilience urbaine: Rapport détaillé. Rapport de recherche ). Cité-ID LivingLab Gouvernance de la résilience urbaine. Montréal: École nationale d’administration publique (ENAP). https://cite-id.com/documents/le-cit%C3%A9-id-lance-son-rapport-le-capital-social-comme-vecteur-innovant-de-r%C3%A9silience-urbaine/Rapport_Capital_Social_et_R%C3%A9silience_Urbaine.pdf . Accessed 27 May 2022 (in French).

Chen, C., L. Xu, D. Zhao, T. Xu, and P. Lei. 2020. A new model for describing the urban resilience considering adaptability, resistance and recovery. Safety Science 128: Article 104756.

Chisty, M.A., S.E.A. Dola, N.A. Khan, and M.M. Rahman. 2021. Intersectionality, vulnerability and resilience: Why it is important to review the diversifications within groups at risk to achieve a resilient community. Continuity and Resilience Review 3(2): 119–131.

Clark-Ginsberg, A., B. McCaul, I. Bremaud, G. Caceres, D. Mpanje, S. Patel, and R. Patel. 2020. Practitioner approaches to measuring community resilience: The analysis of the resilience of communities to disasters toolkit. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 50: Article 101714.

Cronstedt, M. 2002. Prevention, preparedness, response, recovery an outdated concept? Australian Journal of Emergency Management 17(2): Article 10.

Cutter, S.L. 2016. Resilience to what? Resilience for whom?. The Geographical Journal 182(2): 110–113.

Cutter, S.L., J.A. Ahearn, B. Amadei, P. Crawford, E.A. Eide, G.E. Galloway Jr., M.F. Goodchild, and H.C. Kunreuther et al. 2013. Disaster resilience: A national imperative. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development 55(2): 25–29.

Cutter, S.L., K.D. Ash, and C.T. Emrich. 2014. The geographies of community disaster resilience. Global Environmental Change 29: 65–77.

Cutter, S.L., L. Barnes, M. Berry, C. Burton, E. Evans, E. Tate, and J. Webb. 2008. A place-based model for understanding community resilience to natural disasters. Global Environmental Change 18(4): 598–606.

Davis, S., L. Horlings, T. Van Dijk, and H. Rau. 2021. Towards representative resilience: The power of culture to foster local resource representation. Local Environment 26(12): 1564–1585.

Deeming, H., M. Fordham, C. Kuhlicke, L. Pedoth, S. Schneiderbauer, and C. Shreve, eds. 2018. In Framing community disaster resilience: Resources, capacities, learning, and action . Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Demiroz, F., and T.W. Haase. 2019. The concept of resilience: A bibliometric analysis of the emergency and disaster management literature. Local Government Studies 45(3): 308–327.

Fekete, A., G. Hufschmidt, and S. Kruse. 2014. Benefits and challenges of resilience and vulnerability for disaster risk management. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science 5(1): 3–20.

Frankenberger, T., M. Mueller, T. Spangler, and S. Alexander. 2013. Community resilience: Conceptual framework and measurement feed the future learning agenda . Rockville, MD: Westat.

Gero, A., K. Méheux, and D. Dominey-Howes. 2011. Integrating community based disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation: Examples from the Pacific. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences 11(1): 101–113.

Gunderson, L., and C. Folke. 2005. Resilience: Now more than ever . Ecology and Society 10(2): Article 22.

Haase, T.W., W.J. Wang, and A.D. Ross. 2021. The six capacities of community resilience: Evidence from three small Texas communities impacted by Hurricane Harvey. Natural Hazards 109(1): 1097–1118.

Holling, C.S. 1973. Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 4: 1–23.

Holling, C.S., and L.H. Gunderson. 2002. Panarchy: Understanding transformations in human and natural systems . Washington, DC: Island Press.

Hutter, G., and C. Kuhlicke. 2013. Resilience, talk and action: Exploring the meanings of resilience in the context of planning and institutions. Planning Practice and Research 28(3): 294–306.

Hyunjung, J. 2018. Linking risk reduction and community resilience . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Imperatives, S. 1987. Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our common future. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/5987our-common-future.pdf . Accessed 27 June 2021.

Imperiale, A.J., and F. Vanclay. 2016. Experiencing local community resilience in action: Learning from post-disaster communities. Journal of Rural Studies 47: 204–219.

Innocenti, D., and P. Albrito. 2011. Reducing the risks posed by natural hazards and climate change: The need for a participatory dialogue between the scientific community and policy makers. Environmental Science and Policy 14(7): 730–733.

IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). 2014. Annex II: Glossary. In Climate change 2014: Impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Part B: Regional aspects . Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, ed. V.R. Barros, C.B. Field, D.J. Dokken, M.D. Mastrandrea, K.J. Mach, et al., 1757–1776. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.

IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). 2018. Special report on global warming of 1.5 °C. Geneva: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Jeans, H., S. Thomas, and G. Castillo. 2016. The future is a choice: The Oxfam framework and guidance for resilient development . Oxford: Routledge.

Keen, M., V.A. Brown, and R. Dyball. 2005. Social learning in environmental management: Towards a sustainable future . Oxford: Routledge.

Kelman, I. 2017. Linking disaster risk reduction, climate change, and the sustainable development goals. Disaster Prevention and Management 26(3): 254–258.

Kennedy, J., J. Ashmore, E. Babister, and I. Kelman. 2008. The meaning of “build back better”: Evidence from post-tsunami Aceh and Sri Lanka. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management 16(1): 24–36.

Klein, R.J.T., R.J. Nicholls, and F. Thomalla. 2003. Resilience to natural hazards: How useful is this concept?. Global Environmental Change Part B: Environmental Hazards 5(1): 35–45.

Koliou, M., J.W. van de Lindt, T.P. McAllister, B.R. Ellingwood, M. Dillard, and H. Cutler. 2020. State of the research in community resilience: Progress and challenges. Sustainable and Resilient Infrastructure 5(3): 131–151.

Lama, P.D., P. Becker, and J. Bergström. 2017. Scrutinizing the relationship between adaptation and resilience: Longitudinal comparative case studies across shocks in two Nepalese villages. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 23: 193–203.

Mabon, L. 2019. Enhancing post-disaster resilience by “building back greener”: Evaluating the contribution of nature-based solutions to recovery planning in Futaba County, Fukushima Prefecture, Japan . Landscape and Urban Planning 187: Article 105118.

MacAskill, K., and P. Guthrie. 2014. Multiple interpretations of resilience in disaster risk management. Procedia Economics and Finance 18: 667–674.

MacKinnon, D., and K.D. Derickson. 2013. From resilience to resourcefulness: A critique of resilience policy and activism. Progress in Human Geography 37(2): 253–270.

Manyena, S.B. 2006. The concept of resilience revisited. Disasters 30(4): 434–450.

Manyena, S.B., G. O’Brien, P. O’Keefe, and J. Rose. 2011. Disaster resilience: A bounce back or bounce forward ability?. Local Environment: The International Journal of Justice and Sustainability 16(5): 417–424.

Matyas, D., and M. Pelling. 2015. Positioning resilience for 2015: The role of resistance, incremental adjustment and transformation in disaster risk management policy. Disasters 39(s1): s1–s18.

McDonnell, S. 2020. Other dark sides of resilience: Politics and power in community-based efforts to strengthen resilience. Anthropological Forum 30(1–2): 55–72.

McEntire, D.A., C. Fueller, C.W. Johnston, and R. Weber. 2002. A comparison of disaster paradigms: The search for a holistic policy guide. Public Administration Review 62(3): 267–281.

McEwen, L., A. Holmes, N. Quinn, and P. Cobbing. 2018. Learning for resilience: Developing community capital through flood action groups in urban flood risk settings with lower social capital. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 27: 329–342.

Meng, B., N. Li, and D. Fang. 2018. Attributes, challenges and future directions of community resilience. Frontiers Engineering 5(3): 307–323.

Mileti, D.S. 1999. Disasters by design: A reassessment of natural hazards in the United States . Washington, DC: Joseph Henry Press.

Mitchell, A. 2013. Risk and resilience: From good idea to good practice. In OECD Development Co-operation Working Papers . Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/5k3ttg4cxcbp-en .

Mitchell, T., and K. Harris. 2012. Resilience: A risk management approach. ODI background note . London: Overseas Development Institute.

Mochizuki, J., A. Keating, W. Liu, S. Hochrainer-Stigler, and R. Mechler. 2018. An overdue alignment of risk and resilience? A conceptual contribution to community resilience. Disasters 42(2): 361–391.

Moser, S., S. Meerow, J. Arnott, and E. Jack-Scott. 2019. The turbulent world of resilience: Interpretations and themes for transdisciplinary dialogue. Climatic Change 153(1): 21–40.

Norris, F.H., S.P. Stevens, B. Pfefferbaum, K.F. Wyches, and R.L. Pfefferbaum. 2008. Community resilience as a metaphor, theory, set of capacities, and strategy for disaster readiness. American Journal of Community Psychology 41(1–2): 127–150.

O’Brien, G., and P. O’Keefe. 2013. The concept of resilience. In Managing adaptation to climate risk—Beyond fragmented responses , ed. G. O’Brien, and P. O’Keefe, 118–147. London: Routledge.

Chapter Google Scholar

Oliva, S., and L. Lazzeretti. 2017. Adaptation, adaptability and resilience: The recovery of Kobe after the Great Hanshin Earthquake of 1995. European Planning Studies 25(1): 67–87.

Olwig, M.F. 2012. Multi-sited resilience: The mutual construction of “local” and “global” understandings and practices of adaptation and innovation. Applied Geography 33: 112–118.

Patel, S.S., M.B. Rogers, R. Amlôt, and G.J. Rubin. 2017. What do we mean by “community resilience”? A systematic literature review of how it is defined in the literature. PLoS Currents Disasters 9. https://doi.org/10.1371/currents.dis.db775aff25efc5ac4f0660ad9c9f7db2 .

Paton, D. 2006. Disaster resilience: Integrating individual, community, institutional and environmental perspectives. In Disaster resilience: An integrated approach , ed. D. Paton, and D. Johnston, 305–316. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas Publisher.

Paton, D., and D. Johnston. 2017. Disaster resilience: An integrated approach , 2nd edn. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas Publisher.

Reggiani, A., P. Nijkamp, and D. Lanzi. 2015. Transport resilience and vulnerability: The role of connectivity. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 81(C): 4–15.

Reghezza-Zitt, M., S. Rufat, G. Djament-Tran, A. Le Blanc, and S. Lhomme. 2012. What resilience is not: Uses and abuses. Cybergeo: European Journal of Geography . https://doi.org/10.4000/cybergeo.25554 .

Reid, H., M. Alam, R. Berger, T. Cannon, S. Huq, and A. Milligan. 2009. Community-based adaptation to climate change: An overview. In Community-based adaptation to climate change , Participatory Learning and Action (PLA) series, no. 60, ed. H. Reid, T. Cannon, R. Berger, M. Alam, and A. Milligan, 11−33. London: International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED).

Rogers, P. 2011. Development of resilient Australia: Enhancing the PPRR approach with anticipation, assessment and registration of risks . Australian Journal of Emergency Management 26(1): Article 54.

Rubim, I.C., and M.R.S. Borges. 2017. The resilience and its dimensions. In Proceedings of 14th International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management (ISCRAM) , 21–24 May 2017, Albi, France, 457–463.

Ruszczyk, H.A. 2019. Ambivalence towards discourse of disaster resilience. Disasters 43(4): 818–839.

Schipper, E.L.F., F. Thomalla, G. Vulturius, M. Davis, and K. Johnson. 2016. Linking disaster risk reduction, climate change and development. International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment 7(2): 216–228.

Shaw, R. 2016. Community-based disaster risk reduction . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Thomalla, F., T. Downing, E. Spanger-Siegfried, G. Han, and J. Rockström. 2006. Reducing hazard vulnerability: Towards a common approach between disaster risk reduction and climate adaptation. Disasters 30(1): 39–48.

Tierney, K., and M. Bruneau. 2007. Conceptualizing and measuring resilience: A key to disaster loss reduction. TR News 250: 14–17.

Turner, B.L., R.E. Kasperson, P.A. Matson, J.J. McCarthy, R.W. Corell, L. Christensen, N. Eckley, and J.X. Kasperson et al. 2003. A framework for vulnerability analysis in sustainability science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of USA 100(14): 8074–8079.

Twigg, J. 2007. Characteristics of a disaster-resilient community: A guidance note . London: Department for International Development (DFID).

Twigg, J. 2015. Disaster risk reduction. Good practice review 9 . London: Overseas Development Institute (ODI), Humanitarian Policy Group.

UNDRR (United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction). 2019. Words into Action guidelines: Implementation guide for local disaster risk reduction and resilience strategies . Geneva: UNDRR.

UNDRR (United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction). 2020. Ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction: Implementing nature-based solutions for resilience. Bangkok, Thailand: Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific, United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction.

UNDRR (United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction). 2021. Terminology. https://www.undrr.org/terminology . Accessed 18 April 2021.

UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change). 2021. Climate change glossary, acronyms and terms ( Lexique du changement climatique, acronymes et termes ). https://unfccc.int/fr/process-and-meetings/the-convention/lexique-du-changement-climatique-acronymes-et-termes#a . Accessed 18 April 2021 (in French).

UNISDR (United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction). 2005. Hyogo framework for action 2005–2015: Building the resilience of nations and communities to disasters. Extract from the final report of the World Conference on Disaster Reduction (A/CONF.206/6). Geneva: UNISDR.

UNISDR (United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction). 2015. Sendai framework for disaster risk reduction 2015–2030 . Geneva: UNISDR.

United Nations. 2021. Sustainable development goals. https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/fr/development-agenda/ . Accessed 27 June 2021.

Upadhyay, A., and A. Sa-ngiamwibool. 2021. A systematic literature review of community disaster resilience: Main and related research areas and agendas. Continuity and Resilience Review 3(2): 192–205.

Walker, B., C.S. Holling, S.R. Carpenter, and A. Kinzig. 2004. Resilience, adaptability and transformability in social–ecological systems . Ecology and Society 9(2): Article 5.

Walker, J., and M. Cooper. 2011. Genealogies of resilience: From systems ecology to the political economy of crisis adaptation. Security Dialogue 42(2): 143–160.

Weichselgartner, J., and I. Kelman. 2015. Geographies of resilience: Challenges and opportunities of a descriptive concept. Progress in Human Geography 39(3): 249–267.

Williams, T.A., and D.A. Shepherd. 2016. Building resilience or providing sustenance: Different paths of emergent ventures in the aftermath of the Haiti earthquake. Academy of Management Journal 59(6): 2069–2102.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Institut des Sciences de l’Environnement (ISE), Université du Québec à Montréal, Montréal, H3C 3P8, Canada

Marie-Hélène Graveline & Daniel Germain

Department of Geography, Université du Québec à Montréal, Montréal, H3C 3P8, Canada

Daniel Germain

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marie-Hélène Graveline .

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Graveline, MH., Germain, D. Disaster Risk Resilience: Conceptual Evolution, Key Issues, and Opportunities. Int J Disaster Risk Sci 13 , 330–341 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13753-022-00419-0

Download citation

Accepted : 14 May 2022

Published : 21 June 2022

Issue Date : June 2022

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s13753-022-00419-0

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Disaster risk
Sustainable development
Find a journal
Publish with us
Track your research

Bibliography
More Referencing guides Blog Automated transliteration Relevant bibliographies by topics
Automated transliteration
Relevant bibliographies by topics
Referencing guides

Risk, Crisis and Disaster Management MSc, by distance learning

2 - 2.5 years.

No business is risk free. No societies are immune from the impact of natural hazard and crisis. Drawing on risk, crisis, development and management theories, this degree explores effective management and mitigation measures and equips you with how to tackle real-world problems professionally.

Risk, Crisis and Disaster Management MSc, by distance learning , 2 - 2.5 years

Course information.

UK fee £13,250

International fee £13,250

Taught by School of Business

20% alumni discount
International student information

Admissions enquiries +44 (0)116 252 5281 Submit a course enquiry

Course enquiries +44 (0)116 252 5108 [email protected]

School of Business website

Course description

Global warming, climate change, environmental disasters, and terror threats present significant and growing threats to societies. Disasters, crises and risks cause social, economic, financial, natural and physical disruption that often most severely affect the poor and vulnerable. The ‘messiness’ that risks, crisis and disasters create requires complex solutions to mitigate impact. Being able to manage and mitigate these threats is now seen by the United Nations as a globally valuable skill, enshrined in their three frameworks - the Sustainable Development Goals (2015-2030) , the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (2015-2030) and the Paris Protocol (2015-2020) .

Identifying interconnections between these frameworks and putting them into practice to achieve sustainable outcomes in complex situations can be challenging for practitioners and responders. This highly inter-disciplinary degree aims to develop your confidence, as a frontline practitioner/responder, to improve practice, alleviate poverty, reduce systemic risk, and in so doing, assert leadership in this field.

Within your programme you'll undertake various methods of assessment individually such as reflective essays and reports and also work with peers to undertake compulsory group work such as article reviews and an emergency response plan.

In addition to learning the risk, crisis and disaster management theories that underpin the UN’s Frameworks, the course will provide you with the skills and confidence to plan and execute research and engage in global debates with confidence. To achieve this, you will be supported in developing skills in evaluating information critically, communicating ideas clearly, undertaking advanced conceptual analysis, using information sources effectively, reporting and interpreting research critically, and developing new approaches to problem-solving.

We have over 30 years experience of offering distance learning education that gives you the flexibility to fit your study around existing commitments and enhance your career prospects without having to leave employment, as well as the opportunity to build your global network.

With our programme you have the choice of completing your studies in two or two and a half years. In the standard two and half year model you will study all of the modules sequentially before moving onto your dissertation. In our accelerated two-year model you will study module one before studying modules two and three simultaneously, before going on to study to your fourth module and then your dissertation.

Entry requirements

A good honours degree in a relevant field (2:2 or above, from a recognised HE institution) or its equivalent or at least three years of work experience in a related field plus completion of a practice assignment.

English Language Requirements

IELTS 6.5 or equivalent. If your first language is not English, you may need to provide evidence of your English language ability .

International Qualifications

Find your country in this list to check equivalent qualifications, scholarships and additional requirements.

Fees and funding

Uk students, starting in october 2025 or april 2026.

MSc : £13,250

Find out more about how to pay and scholarships and funding. A Sanctuary Scholarship is available on this course for refugees/asylum seekers and their dependants.

Did you know you can apply for a Government Postgraduate Loan? Find out if you're eligible.

International Students

Find out more about how to pay and scholarships and funding. A Sanctuary Scholarship is available on this course for refugees/asylum seekers.

Accreditation

You can apply for GradIRM membership after you graduate, and if you have three or more years of relevant experience you can upgrade to Certified Membership.

This is a great opportunity for you to be part of the risk profession and community, as well as continuing with your lifelong learning.

Careers and employability

Our distance learning courses are designed to provide you with the skills and knowledge to understand recent developments in risk and emergency management, at a local, national and global level.

The programme attracts students who have careers in fields similar to risk, crisis, disaster management and development and look to this masters to enhance and develop skills to progress their professional and career development. The programme is designed to promote independent learning to help you manage your work life and studies.

A postgraduate distance learning qualification from the University of Leicester is career changing. It can be the springboard to promotion with your current employer, the platform to move into a new area or to simply become more effective in your current role.

Studying by distance learning has the benefit of allowing you to develop your career without having to leave employment. It also means that you can apply new knowledge and insights to your working life while you are still studying – many students choose to tackle work-related topics in their dissertations.

Professional Support

Our dedicated School of Business Careers Team will support you to develop both personally and professionally.

Working closely with the programme team, we aim to equip you with the tools and knowledge to maximise career progression and business impact.

Our career and professional development support includes:

Business-Focused Events

We work closely with business contacts to give you opportunities to interact with industry professionals and alumni and gain insights into a wide range of business areas including sector insights, leadership essentials and journeys along a variety of potential careers paths. Through events, including our Career Development Exhibition, Investment Conference and Management Conference, you will have the opportunity to network with business representatives at all levels from SMEs to large corporates. Previous organisations represented have included J P Morgan, Santander, Lloyds, GSK, Goldman Sachs, Boots, NatWest, DPD, British Gas, National Grid, Enterprise Rent-a-Car, Cummins, LinkedIn, Chartered Institute of Marketing, Ericsson and M&C Saatchi.

Career and Professional Development Resource

Our on-line resources contain a wealth of resources to inform and guide you at every stage of your career journey. There are links to available opportunities, upcoming careers and employability events, awards and competitions, together with recordings of careers sessions and seminars. A selection of interviews with industry professionals and University alumni provides a first-hand insight into a range of business sectors and career success stories. You will also find resources to support you in skills and career planning, including CV and application advice and interview tips.

Career Hub @ Brookfield

If you are ever visiting Leicester, our Career Hub @ Brookfield is open daily. The Hub provides an opportunity to talk about all things careers and employability-related and signpost you to available opportunities and further areas of support.

Business Start-up and Enterprise Support

We offer support if you are considering starting your own business, are in the early stages of business or how have an established business you wish to develop. Support includes events, online resources and our Entrepreneurs in Residence programme.

Lifelong Support

Our careers support to you is lifelong and continues even after you have completed your studies and we have welcomed you into our alumni community.

Our award winning University Careers and Employability Team is here to support you – by email, phone or skype – with advice on interviews, CVs, work experience and more. From registration to graduation and beyond, they are here to help you reach your professional goals.

Receive email updates

Course structure, core modules.

Theories of Risk, Crisis and Disasters
Disaster Risk Reduction and International Development
Managing Risk, Crisis and Disasters
Emergency Planning Management
Research Methods and Project (Risk, Crisis and Disaster Management)

Modules shown represent choices available to current students. The range of modules available and the content of any individual module may change in future years.

Why Leicester?

Our Risk, Crisis and Disaster Management course is accredited by the Institute of Risk Management (IRM). You'll gain exemptions for a professional qualification and apply for graduate membership of IRM.

You have the flexibility and choice to study an accelerated or standard route through the programme, choosing to complete your studies in two or two and a half years. Whichever route you choose the total course fee is the same and you can change your mind when you start the programme.

Our teaching is inspired by the findings from our cutting-edge research. Lecturing staff have a wide array of research interests ranging from international development and the securitisation of risk to flight-deck human factors and nuclear safety.

We are a signatory of the UN-backed Principles for Responsible Management Education (PRME) initiative through which we provide future leaders with the necessary insights and skills to reflect upon, critically analyse and provide leadership with regard to risk, crisis, disaster, and development management for sustainability.

Teaching and learning

You will be able to study by flexible learning through the use of video lectures, Collaborate software for seminars, discussion forums on Blackboard, Teams for meetings and email. You will have online access to materials to support each module, and you will also work with your fellow students.

You will receive support throughout the course from a group of dedicated support staff available through our virtual learning environment, Blackboard, and via email. You will be provided with a timetable and key study targets to enable effective time management. Tutors will always be available to you to discuss any aspects of your study either by phone or email.

In addition, module one opens with academic writing and language skills which will provide an introduction to studying online within higher education, and will prepare students who do not have a prior academic background to develop their academic writing skills.

You will be invited to attend our Leicester Masterclass held on campus at the University. This week-long programme of lectures, activities and workshops takes place every August/September and is open to students on any School of Business distance learning course at any point in their studies.

Each module on the programme lasts 24 weeks.

Distance Learning

The programme is flexible in its format with the materials provided in advance. The materials will utilise media to provide an enriched student experience. Therefore, it is essential that you have reliable, regular access to the internet (preferably with a broadband connection) in order to participate.

As a flexible distance learning student, you will have access to the University Library's electronic service, the Leicester Digital Library, which includes a large number of e-journals and e-books. You are also welcome to join campus-based activities (by prior arrangement) at any time.

If you live close to Leicester you can, of course, visit the Library and the School of Business facilities in person. For UK-based students who wish to use other libraries, we can issue you with a card which allows you to do so. This is a national scheme which allows distance learning students to borrow material from up to three other participating libraries.

All modules have more than one assessment component, allowing feedback on the first to be used to develop and enhance learning for subsequent assessment.

You will be assessed through a variety of methods including online multiple-choice tests, essays, briefs, incident reports, emergency response plans plus your proposal and dissertation. Some assessments will be individual and some will be group work.

Start date: 7 October 2024 Application deadline for October 2024 start: 16 September 2024

Start date: 7 April 2025 Application deadline for April 2025 start: 17 March 2025

Start date: 6 October 2025 Application deadline for October 2025 start: TBD

Start date: 6 April 2026 Application deadline for April 2026 start: TBD

Course	Qualification	Duration	Start Dates	Availability
Course Risk, Crisis and Disaster Management	Qualification MSc	Duration 2 years by distance learning	Start Dates February and October each year	Availability
Course Risk, Crisis and Disaster Management	Qualification MSc	Duration 2 years by distance learning	Start Dates February and October each year	Availability

Applying for

Where are you studying, when would you like to start, how would you like to study.

Oops there was an error.

You are now being forwarded to our online application system!

If you are not forwarded in 5 seconds, please click here or copy the link below in to your browser.

Title THE IMPLEMENTATION OF DISASTER RISK MANAGEMENT PROGRAM IN THE MUNICIPALITY OF BUGALLON: BASIS FOR INTERVENTION MEASURES

Thesis for: Master in Pu8blic Administration
This person is not on ResearchGate, or hasn't claimed this research yet.

Lyceum North Western University

Discover the world's research

25+ million members
160+ million publication pages
2.3+ billion citations
Recruit researchers
Join for free
Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up

IMAGES

(PDF) Assessment of the Disaster Risk Management Capability of Sub
Essay on Disaster Management
Essay Disaster Risk Reduction and Management
(PDF) The Case for a Theology of Disaster Risk Management
Disaster Risk Awareness and Preparedness: A Term Paper
National Disaster Risk Reduction Management Plan (NDRRMP) thematic

VIDEO

CBSE Handbook
Disaster Risk Management Commission Commissioner, Shiferaw Teklemariam’s Briefing
Scaling B2C Lending
CBSE Webinar on Disaster Risk Reduction for Classes 6 to 10 @cbseacademicunit
Disaster management institute || 3D walkthrough || archicad Twinmotion 3D rendering #twinmotion
Plans and Programs on Disaster Risk Reduction and Management

COMMENTS

Building Urban Resilience for Disaster Risk Management and Disaster
Abstract Disaster Risk Management (DRM) and Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) merged as systematic appro ches to reduce the impact of climate change on the built environment. However, post 2015 United Natio s (UN) disaster manag ment and emergency policies failed to capture the dynamics of hazards, exposure and vulnerability essential for buildi g ...
PDF Disaster Risk Reduction and Management in Metro Manila, Philippines
This thesis aims to assess the current disaster risk reduction and management (DRRM) frameworks present within the nation and National Capital Region (NCR), through a case study ... Key words: Disaster risk reduction and management, Philippines, Metro Manila, typhoons, tropical cyclones, loss and damage, transformation as liberation . ii ...
PDF Influence of Risk Governance on Disaster Risk Management in Communities
I declare that this thesis is my original work and has not been submitted elsewhere for examination, award of degree or publication. Where other people‟s work has been used, ... disaster risk management to a great extent in the organization. This is mostly attributed to: single-risk assessments in KRCS that determine the likelihood and ...
Assessment of The Implementation on The Effectiveness of The Disaster
The City Disaster Risk Reduction Management Council that was created by virtue of Republic Act No. 10121, otherwise known as the Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act of 2010, mandates the Cities/Municipalities to activate their CDRRMO/MDRRMC tasked to effectively implement the activities and the level of implementation and ...
PDF Vulnerability in the Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction Strategies
This thesis researches to which extent the concept of vulnerability is displayed and integrat-ed in Philippine disaster risk reduction (DRR) and disaster risk reduction management (DRRM). In a mixed-methods-analysis, including a quantitative analysis, content analysis and expert interviews, the approach to this case study is holistic. ...
Design and Disaster Resilience: Toward a Role for Design in Disaster
This paper examines how the discourses and practices of design can be applied to both mitigate the damaging impacts of (un-)natural disasters and guide resilient post-disaster recovery. Integrated with systems analysis, design can provide both an innovative window for understanding the complexities of disaster-risk reduction and recovery, as well as a conceptual bridge to new ways of building ...
PDF Disaster risk management and climate change adaptation in urban
Rivera, C. (2016). Disaster risk management and climate change adaptation in urban contexts: Integration and challenges. [Doctoral Thesis (compilation), Division of Risk Management and Societal Safety]. Lund University. Total number of authors: 1 General rights Unless other specific re-use rights are stated the following general rights apply:
PDF Building climate resilience as a tool to improve disaster risk
Abstract. Natural disasters have devastating effects on the communities where they impact, especially when it comes to developing countries since they have less capacity to cope with their consequences and, moreover, their economies usually rely on climate-sensitive sectors such as agriculture and fisheries. Taking as a case study two tropical ...
PDF 1 Participatory Development and Disaster Risk Reduction and Management
Participatory Development and Disaster Risk Reduction and Management in the Philippines: The Case of Albay Province Lauren M. Pongan A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of International Studies: Southeast Asia University of Washington 2015 Committee: Vicente Rafael Laurie Sears
Disaster risk reduction management engagement towards strengthening
The primary purpose of this study was to determine the Disaster Risk Reduction Management engagement towards strengthening institutional resiliency. There were 386 students and 235 faculty and staff of Capiz State University who were chosen as respondents. The descriptive method of research was used in the study employing an adopted and ...
Disaster Risk Management and Resilience: What Remains Untouched?
disaster risk management strategie s, and several res earch gaps are still ev ident in this field. Th e objective of this p aper is to perform a comprehen sive literatu re review on
(PDF) Disaster Risk Reduction Knowledge among local people in a
The scholarly papers focused on awareness of disaster and disaster risk reduction management in a highly urbanized city (Asio, 2021), universal banks (Cordevilla, & Caelian, 2020), children with ...
Assemblage theory and disaster risk management
In the 1970s and 1980s, disaster-focused researchers in the broad field of political ecology argued that, at the time of their writing, 'most risk research…and efforts at hazard reduction, have assumed a severity and geography of risk based primarily upon hazard agents' (Hewitt, 1992: 38).In response, they conducted research to illustrate that many of the disasters which were being ...
A review of themes in disaster resilience literature and international
Aitsi-Selmi et al. (Citation 2015) identifies this as a significant shift from response driven to a risk-management driven approach to disaster risk reduction, which sees five of the seven global targets in the Sendai Framework targeted towards building health resilience, focusing on reducing disaster mortality and disaster damage to health ...
Disaster Risk Resilience: Conceptual Evolution, Key Issues, and
Resilience has become a cornerstone for risk management and disaster reduction. However, it has evolved extensively both etymologically and conceptually in time and across scientific disciplines. The concept has been (re)shaped by the evolution of research and practice efforts. Considered the opposite of vulnerability for a long time, resilience was first defined as the ability to resist ...
PDF Natural Disaster Risk, Vulnerability and Resettlement: Relocation
This thesis examines contemporary challenges within "natural" disaster risk, vulnerability, resettlement and disaster management in Cameroon. Its empirical focus is on the experiences of the Lake Nyos and Lake Monoum gas disasters which occurred in the mid-
(PDF) Disaster Prevention and Management: A Critical ...
Disaster Prevention and Management: A Critical Review of The. Literature. Nazaruddin Ali Basyah *, Muhamm ad Syukri, Irham Fahmi, Ismail Ali, Zulf adhli Rusli, Elva Se sioria. Putri. 1 Department ...
Dissertations / Theses: 'Natural disaster risk management ...
Video (online) Consult the top 50 dissertations / theses for your research on the topic 'Natural disaster risk management.'. Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA ...
PDF Risk Management/ Risk Assessment MASTER'S THESIS
This thesis was carried out to fulfill the master's degree in Risk Management at the Faculty of Science and Technology, University of Stavanger. It would not have been possible without the support and encouragement from people around me. I wish to thank all the people whose assistance was a milestone in the completion of this project.
PDF Invited perspectives: A research agenda towards disaster risk
P. J. Ward et al.: A research agenda towards disaster risk management pathways 1489 cesses needed to reduce disaster risks across different spatial scales and sectors (Tozier de la Poterie and Baudoin, 2015). The developments outlined above have led to a growing understanding and body of research on disaster risk. The vast
Implementation of disaster risk reduction management of Visayas state
Disaster risk reduction and management apply whenever naturally caused disaster or calamity strikes. The reason for this management approach is to minimize injuries and mortalities (Corpuz, 2018).
PDF United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction
%PDF-1.6 %âãÏÓ 9042 0 obj > endobj xref 9042 28 0000000016 00000 n 0000004680 00000 n 0000004999 00000 n 0000005160 00000 n 0000005579 00000 n 0000005618 00000 n 0000005668 00000 n 0000005747 00000 n 0000006725 00000 n 0000007271 00000 n 0000007581 00000 n 0000007832 00000 n 0000008181 00000 n 0000008907 00000 n 0000009152 00000 n 0000011823 00000 n 0000040299 00000 n 0000040410 00000 n ...
Risk, Crisis and Disaster Management MSc, by distance learning
In addition to learning the risk, crisis and disaster management theories that underpin the UN's Frameworks, the course will provide you with the skills and confidence to plan and execute research and engage in global debates with confidence. ... online multiple-choice tests, essays, briefs, incident reports, emergency response plans plus ...
Title THE IMPLEMENTATION OF DISASTER RISK MANAGEMENT PROGRAM IN THE
Thesis for: Master in Pu8blic Administration; Authors: Dominick S Poblete. Dominick S Poblete. ... also known as the Philippines Disaster Risk Reduction and Management (DRRM) Act. The respondents ...