Matzenberger, J; Hargreaves, N; Raha, D and Dias, P (2015) A novel approach to assess resilience of energy systems. International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, 6(2), pp. 168-181. ISSN 1759-5916
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to outline different notions of the term resilience used in scientific disciplines and consequently explore how the concept can be applied to energy systems. The concept of resilience has emerged recently in scientific discourse. The major questions to be addressed are: Which definitions and underlying concepts of resilience are used in the scientific literature? How can resilience be defined with respect to energy systems and which underlying principles can be identified? Design/methodology/approach – Building on this understanding, characteristics of the resilience concept used in various contexts are described and a methodology for selection of an indicator set for an energy resilience assessment is presented. The methodology for a resilience assessment outlined in this paper requires definition and clustering of a set of indicators describing a resilient system. It contributes to understanding system properties and supports the theory of how to improve system resilience. Findings – It is argued that resilience can be defined as a function of vulnerability and adaptability, therefore increasing adaptability or reducing vulnerability can cause higher system resilience. Further attributes, determinants and properties of resilient systems to guide indicator selection and classification are suggested. Originality/value – Definitions of resilience, vulnerability and adaptability are very much interlinked. A novel framework is proposed to foster the understanding of the interlinkage between these three terms and to cluster indicators to assess energy system resilience.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | adaptability; assessment; complex systems; energy system; resilience; vulnerability |
| Index terms: | determinant, scientific discipline, clustering, energy system, complex system, methodology, adaptability, vulnerability |
| Subjects: | energy systems, data science, risk assessment, user focus, research management, systems engineering, environmental hazards, research methods |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Risk Management, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Design Practice, Digital Applications |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here