General concept of re-framing urban resilience

Gromek, Paweł

doi:10.5604/01.3001.0014.84

Artykuł - szczegóły

Tytuł artykułu

General concept of re-framing urban resilience

Autorzy

Gromek Paweł

Treść / Zawartość

Pełne teksty:

Pobierz

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.5604/01.3001.0014.84

Warianty tytułu

Ogólna koncepcja nowego ujęcia odporności miejskiej

Języki publikacji

Abstrakty

Urban resilience has a significant influence on human safety and security around the world. As the vast majority of the 21st century population lives in a hazard-networked reality, urban resilience remains under pressure of multiple factors which force a need to re-frame it. The research objective is to outline a general concept for re-framing of urban resilience with respect to gaps to be found in theory and practice of urban resilience. The methodology bases on a wide-designed literature review of international base of scientific papers. Theoretical and practical descriptions of the urban resilience problem allow to identify serious gaps that need to be taken into account. They can be transformed into requirements and ideas for new frames of urban resilience. The new framework stems from the state-of-art and, additionally, allows for the identified gaps. For those reasons, it is worthwhile to consider those frames in future investigations and in research dedicated to resilience, urban resilience, disaster risk reduction, disaster management and crisis management.

Odporność miejska ma znaczący wpływ na bezpieczeństwo ludzi na całym świecie. Ponieważ zdecydowana większość populacji XXI w. żyje w sieci zagrożeń, odporność miejska znajduje się pod presją wielu czynników, które wymuszają konieczność jej zmian. Celem badań jest zarysowanie ogólnej koncepcji ponownego określenia odporności miejskiej z uwzględnieniem właściwych luk w teorii i praktyce. Metodyka opiera się na szeroko zakrojonym przeglądzie literatury z międzynarodowych baz prac naukowych. Teoretyczne i praktyczne opisy problemu odporności miejskiej pozwalają na zidentyfikowanie poważnych luk, które należy wziąć pod uwagę. Można je przekształcić w wymagania i pomysły na nowe ramy odporności miejskiej. Nowe ramy wynikają z aktualnego stanu wiedzy i dodatkowo uwzględniają zidentyfikowane luki. Z tych powodów warto je rozważyć w przyszłych dochodzeniach i badaniach dotyczących odporności, odporności miast, ograniczania ryzyka katastrof, zarządzania katastrofami i zarządzania kryzysowego.

Słowa kluczowe

resilience urban resilience city resilience disaster risk reduction

odporność odporność miejska odporność miasta redukcja ryzyka katastrof

Wydawca

Szkoła Główna Służby Pożarniczej

Czasopismo

Zeszyty Naukowe SGSP / Szkoła Główna Służby Pożarniczej

Rocznik

2021

Tom

Nr 77 (tom 1)

Strony

95--116

Opis fizyczny

Bibliogr. 75 poz., tab.

Twórcy

autor

Gromek Paweł

The Main School of Fire Service

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0997-5069

Bibliografia

1. Dantas-Torres, F. 2015. Climate change, biodiversity, ticks and tick-borne diseases: The butterfly effect. International Journal for Parasitology: Parasites and Wildlife, 4, 452–461.
2. Zuccaro, G., De Gregorio, D., & Leone, M.F. 2018. Theoretical model for cascading effects analyses. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 30, 199–215.
3. Girgin, S., Necci, A., & Krausmann, E. 2019. Dealing with cascading multi-hazard risks in national risk assessment: The case of Natech accidents. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 35.
4. Wang, W., Yang, S., Hu, F., Stanley, H.E., He, Sh., & Shi, M. 2018. An approach for cascading effects within critical infrastructure systems. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 510(C), 164–177.
5. Zaidi, R.Z. 2018. Beyond the Sendai indicators: Application of a cascading risk lens for the improvement of loss data indicators for slow-onset hazards and smallscale disasters. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 30, 306–314. 6. UNESA 2018. World Urbanization Prospects. United Nations. New York. (Available at https://population.un.org/wup/Download/).
7. OECD 2018. OECD Regions and Cities at a Glance 2018. OECD Publishing. Paris. (Available at https://doi.org/10.1787/reg_cit_glance-2018-en).
8. Gimenez, R., Labaka, L., & Hernantes, J. 2017. A maturity model for the involvement of stakeholders in the city resilience building process. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 121, 7–16.
9. Jones, E.C., & Faas, A.J. (Eds.) 2017. Social Network Analysis of Disaster Response, Recovery, and Adaptation. Elsevier. 2017.
10. Therrien, M-Ch. 1995. Interorganizational networks and decision making in technological disasters. Safety Science, 20, 101–113.
11. Madurowicz, M. 2017. How to ask about the continuity of a city? A gloss on the broader thesis. Prace i Studia Geograficzne, 62, 7–30.
12. Stumpp, E. M. 2013. New in town? On resilience and “Resilient Cities”. Cities, 32, 164–166.
13. Parvin G.A., Surjan, A., Atta-ur-Rahman, & Shaw, R. 2016. Urban Risk, City Government, and Resilience. In R. Shaw, Atta-ur-Rahman, A. Surjan, & G. A. Parvin (Eds.). Urban Disasters and Resilience in Asia (pp. 21–34). Elsevier.
14. Spaans, M., & Waterhout, B. 2017. Building up resilience in cities worldwide–Rotterdam as participant in the 100 resilient cities programme. Cities, 61, 109–116.
15. Hernantes, J., Maraña, P., Gimenez, R., Sarriegi, J.M., & Labaka, L. 2019. Towards resilient cities: A maturity model for operationalizing resilience. Cities, 84, 96–103.
16. Coaffee, J. 2008. Risk, resilience, and environmentally sustainable cities. Energy Policy, 36, 4633– 4638.
17. Martin, Ch.J., Evans, J., & Karvonen, A. 2018. Smart and sustainable? Five tensions in the visions and practices of the smart-sustainable city in Europe and North America. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 133, 269–278.
18. Bibri, S.E., & Krogstie, J. 2017. Smart sustainable cities of the future: An extensive interdisciplinary literature review. Sustainable Cities and Society, 31, 183–212.
19. Fatorić, S., & Chelleri, L. 2012. Vulnerability to the effects of climate change and adaptation: The case of the Spanish Ebro Delta. Ocean & Coastal Management, 60, 1–10.
20. Vitalii, S., Khorram-Manesh, A., & Nyberg., L. 2017. Disaster cycle and management. In A. Khorram-Manesh (Ed.). Handbook of Disaster and Emergency Management (pp. 24–25). Gothenburg. University of Gothenburg.
21. Clutter, S.L., Ash, K.D., & Emrich, Ch.T. 2014. The geographies of community disaster resilience. Global Environmental Change, 29, 65–77.
22. Sherrieb, K., Norris, F.H., & Galea, S. 2010. Measuring Capacities for Community Resilience. Social Indicators Research, 99, 227–247.
23. Norris, F.H., Stevens, S.P., Pfefferbaum, B., Wyche, K.F., & Pfefferbaum, R.L., 2008. Community resilience as a metaphor, theory, set of capacities, and strategy for disaster readiness. American Journal of Community Psychology, 41, 127–150.
24. Aldrich, D.P. 2012. Building Resilience: Social Capital in Post-Disaster Recovery. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
25. Miles, S.B., & Chang, S.E. 2011. ResilUS: A Community Based Disaster Resilience Model. Cartography and Geographic Information Science, 38, 36–51.
26. Flynn, S.E. 2007. The Edge of Disaster: Rebuilding a Resilient Nation. Random House, New York.
27. Rose, A. 2007. Economic resilience to natural and man-made disasters: Multidisciplinary origins and contextual dimensions. Environmental Hazards, 7, 383–398.
28. Tierney, K. 2012. Disaster Governance: Social, Political, and Economic Dimensions. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 37, 341–363. (Available at https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-020911-095618).
29. Gall, M., Cutter, S.L., & Nguyen, K. 2014. Governance in Disaster Risk Management. IRDR AIRDR Publication No. 3. Beijing: Integrated Research on Disaster Risk. (Available at http://www.irdrinternational.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/ AIRDR-Project-Report-No.-3.pdf).
30. Merry, H. 2018. Population increase and the smart city. (Available at https: //www.ibm.com/blogs/internet-of-things/increased-population-smart-city/).
31. Campanella, T.J. 2006. Making resilient cities: Some axioms of urban resilience. 2006 Xi’an International Conference of Architecture and Technology, Proceedings, 67–70.
32. Olazabal, M., Chelleri, L., & Waters, L.L. 2012. Why urban resilience? In: L. Chelleri, M. Olazabal (Eds.). Multidisciplinary perspectives on urban resilience. A workshop report (p. 11). Basque Centre for Climate Change, Bilbao.
33. Pelling, M. 2003. The Vulnerability of Cities: Social Resilience and Natural Disaster. Earthscan, London.
34. Vale, L.J., Campanella, T.J. (Eds.) 2004. The Resilient City: How Modern Cities Recover from Disaster. Oxford University Press, New York.
35. Holling, C.S. (1971). Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 4, 1–23.
36. Ribeiro, P.J.G., & Pena Jardim Gonçalve, L.A. 2019. Urban resilience: A conceptual framework. Sustainable Cities and Society, 50, 1–11.
37. Chelleri, L. 2012. From the «Resilient City» to Urban Resilience. A review essay on understanding and integrating the resilience perspective for urban systems. Documents d’Anàlisi Geogràfica, 58, 287–306.
38. Zaidi, R. Z., & Pelling, M. 2013. Institutionally configured risk: Assessing urban resilience and disaster risk reduction to heat wave risk in London. Urban Studies, 52(7), 1218-1233.
39. Zhang, X., & Li, H. 2018. Urban resilience and urban sustainability: What we know and what do not know?. Cities, 72, 141–148.
40. Therrien, M.-Ch., Jutras, M., & Usher, S. 2019. Including quality in Social network analysis to foster dialogue in urban resilience and adaptation policies. Environmental Science and Policy, 93, 1–10.
41. Goldbeck, N., Angeloudis, P., & Ochieng, W.Y. 2019. Resilience assessment for interdependent urban infrastructure systems using dynamic network flow models. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 188, 62–79.
42. Meerow, S., Newell, J.P., & Stults, M. 2016. Defining urban resilience: A review. Landscape and Urban Planning, 147, 38–49.
43. Sharifi, A. 2019. Resilient urban forms: A review of literature on streets and street networks. Building Environment, 147, 171–187.
44. Chmutina, K., Bosher, L., Coaffee, J., & Rowlands, R. 2014. Towards integrated security and resilience framework: a tool for decision-makers. Procedia Economics and Finance, 18, 25–32.
45. Sharifi, A., & Yamagata, Y. 2014. Resilient urban planning: Major principles and criteria. Energy Procedia, 61, 1491–1495.
46. Cavallo, A., & Ireland, V. 2014. Preparing for complex interdependent risks: A System of Systems approach to building disaster resilience. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 9, 181–193.
47. UNISDR (2012). Making Cities Resilient Report 2012. My city is getting ready! A global snapshot of how local governments reduce disaster risk. (Available at https://www.unisdr.org/files/28240_rcreport.pdf).
48. Sellberg, M.M., Ryan, P., Borgstrom, S.T, Norstrom, A.V., & Peterson, G.D. 2018. From resilience thinking to Resilience Planning: Lessons from practice. Journal of Environmental Management, 217, 906–918.
49. Penadés, M. C., Núñez, A.G., & Canós, J.S. 2017. From planning to resilience: The role (and value) of the emergency plan. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 121, 17–30.
50. Keenan, J.M. 2018. Types and forms of resilience in local planning in the u.s.: Who does what? Environmental Science and Policy, 88, 116–123.
51. ISO 22301 2012. Societal security – Business continuity management systems – Requirements.
52. ISO 37122 2019. Sustainable cities and communities – Indicators for smart cities.
53. ISO 14001 2015. Environmental management systems – Requirements with guidance for use.
54. ISO 45001 2018. Occupational health and safety management systems – Requirements with guidance for use.
55. Pizzo, B. 2015. Problematizing resilience: Implications for planning theory and practice. Cities, 43, 133–140.
56. Ainuddin, S., & Routray, J.K. 2012. Earthquake hazards and community resilience in Baluchistan. Natural Hazards, 63, 909–937.
57. Cutter, S.L., Burton, C.G., & Emrich, C.T. 2010. Disaster resilience indicators for benchmarking baseline conditions. JHSEM – Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, 7(1). (Available at http://www.bepress.com/ jhsem/vol7/iss1/51).
58. Prashar, S., Shaw, R., & Takeuchi, Y. 2012. Assessing the resilience of Delhi to climate-related disasters: A comprehensive approach. Natural Hazards, 64, 1609–1624.
59. Colliera, M.J., Nedović-Budić, Z., Aerts, J., Connop, S., Foley, D., Foley, K., Newport, D., McQuaid, S., Slaev, A., & Verburg, P. 2013. Transitioning to resilience and sustainability in urban communities. Cities, 32, 521–528.
60. Kelman, I. 2018. Connecting theories of cascading disasters and disaster diplomacy. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 30, 172–179.
61. Sharifi, A. 2019. Resilient urban forms: A macro-scale analysis. Cities, 85, 1–14.
62. Alexander, D. 2018. A magnitude scale for cascading disasters. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 30, 180–185.
63. Pescaroli, G., & Alexander, D. 2015. A definition of cascading disasters and cascading effects: Going beyond the “toppling dominos” metaphor. Planet@Risk, 3, 58–67.
64. Sharifi, A. 2016. A critical review of selected tools for assessing community resilience. Ecological Indicators, 69, 629–647.
65. Polsky, C., Neff, R., & Yarnal, B. 2007. Building comparable global change vulnerability assessments: The vulnerability scoping diagram. Global Environmental Change, 17, 472–485.
66. Hearn Morrow, B. 2008. Community resilience: A social justice perspective. CARRI Research Report, 4. (Available at http://www.resilientus.org/wp-content/ uploads/2013/03/FINAL_MORROW_9-25-08_1223482348.pdf).
67. Watson, J.E.M., Iwamura, T., & Butt, N. 2013. Mapping vulnerability and conservation adaptation strategies under climate change. Nature Climate Change, 3(11), 989–994.
68. McCarthy, J.J., Canziani, O.F., Leary, N.A., Dokken, D.J., White, K.S. (Eds.) 2001. Climate Change 2001: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
69. Dickson, E., Baker, J.L., Hoornweg, D., & Tiwari, A. 2012. URBAN RISK ASSESSMENTS Understanding Disaster and Climate Risk in Cities. International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank, Washington.
70. Johansen, I. 2018. Scenario modelling with morphological analysis. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 126, 116–125.
71. Rehak, D., Senovsky, P., Hromada, M., & Lovecek, T. 2019. Complex approach to assessing resilience of critical infrastructure elements. International Journal of Critical Infrastructure Protection, 25, 125–138.
72. Gromek, P. 2015. Fundamentals of decision theory. In the direction of safety and security (orig. Elementy teorii decyzji. W kierunku bezpieczeństwa). The Main School of Fire Service, Warsaw.
73. Rinaldi, S.M., Peerenboom, J.P. & Kelly, T.K. 2001. Identifying, understanding, and analyzing critical infrastructure interdependencies. IEEE Control Systems Magazine, 21(6), 11–25.
74. Ercoskun, O., & Ozuduru, B. 2014. Urban resilience and main streets in Ankara. International Development Planning Review, 36(3), 313–336.
75. Gunduz, C., Oner, A.C., & Knox, P.L. 2016. Social Resilience in Aegean Slow Cities: Slow City Seferihisar. Universal Journal of Management, 4(4), 211–222.

Uwagi

Opracowanie rekordu ze środków MNiSW, umowa Nr 461252 w ramach programu "Społeczna odpowiedzialność nauki" - moduł: Popularyzacja nauki i promocja sportu (2021).

Typ dokumentu

Bibliografia

Identyfikator YADDA

bwmeta1.element.baztech-d8633711-11ac-4a67-9efe-d4c99f0f6b5f