Komendantova, N; Scolobig, A; Garcia-Aristizabal, A; Monfort, D and Fleming, K (2016) Multi-risk approach and urban resilience. International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, 7(2), pp. 114-132. ISSN 1759-5916
Abstract
Purpose: Urban resilience is becoming increasingly important due to increasing degree of urbanization and a combination of several factors affecting urban vulnerability. Urban resilience is also understood as a capacity of a system to prepare, respond and recover from multi-hazard threats. The purpose of multi-risk approach (MRA) is to take into consideration interdependencies between multiple risks, which can trigger a chain of natural and manmade events with different spatial and temporal scales. The purpose of this study is to understand correlation between multi-risk approach and urban resilience. Design/methodology/approach: To increase urban resilience, MRA should also include multi-risk governance, which is based on understanding how existing institutional and governance structures, individual judgments and communication of risk assessment results shape decision-making processes. Findings: This paper is based on extensive fieldwork in the test studies of Naples, Italy and Guadeloupe, France, the historical case study analysis and the stakeholders' interviews, workshops and focus groups discussions. Originality/value: Multi-risk is a relatively new field in science, only partially developed in social and geosciences. The originality of this research is in establishment of a link between MRA, including both assessment and governance, and urban resilience. In this paper, the authors take a holistic and systemic look at the MRA, including all stages of knowledge generation and decision-making. Both, knowledge generation and decision-making are reinforced by behavioural biases, different perceptions and institutional factors. Further on, the authors develop recommendations on how an MRA can contribute to urban resilience.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | disaster mitigation; governance; natural disasters; participatory approaches; resilience; risk analysis |
| Index terms: | science, natural disaster, France, interview, participatory approach, focus group, urban resilience, risk analysis, methodology, decision-making, bias, Italy, vulnerability, decision-making process, risk governance, knowledge generation, urbanization, Guadeloupe, case study, judgment, governance, becoming, workshop, risk assessment, disaster mitigation |
| Subjects: | Geography, financial risk, probability and distributions, research methods, philosophical process, environmental hazards, decision analysis, specialized education, dispute resolution, construction type, data collection methods, business, knowledge management, urban planning, sustainability and resilience |
| Topics: | Legal Issues, Digital Applications, Urban Studies, Education, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Cost Management, Construction Technology, Governance, Sustainability, Risk Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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