Osei-Kyei, R; Ampratwum, G; Komac, U and Narbaev, T (2025) Critical analysis of the emerging flood disaster resilience assessment indicators. International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, 16(3), pp. 417-436. ISSN 1759-5908
Abstract
Purpose: The world is reeling from the effects of climate change with increased extreme precipitation. Flooding is amongst the most recurring and devastating natural hazards, impacting human lives and causing severe economic damage. This paper aims to conduct a systematic review to critically analyse the most reported and emerging flood disaster resilience indicators. Design/methodology/approach: A total of 35 papers were selected through a systematic process using both Web of Science and Scopus databases. The selected literature was subjected to a thorough thematic content analysis. Findings: From the review, 77 emerging flood disaster resilience assessment indicators were identified. Furthermore, based on the individual meanings and relationships of the derived indicators, they were further categorized into six groups, namely, physical, institutional, social, psychological, ecology and economic. More also, it was identified that most of the selected publications have used objective resilience measurement approaches as opposed to subjective resilience measurement approaches. Originality/value: The generated list of flood disaster resilience indicators will provide insights into the capacities which can be improved to enhance the overall resilience to flood disasters in communities.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | disaster; flooding; resilience indicators; systematic review; urban areas |
| Index terms: | content analysis, publication, meaning, urban area, resilience indicator, systematic literature review, methodology, database, disaster resilience, climate change, flooding, precipitation, natural hazard, science, ecology |
| Subjects: | climate science, environmental science, research methods, specialized education, data analysis and analytics, urban form and morphology, research evaluation and metrics, research dissemination and communication, sociology, environmental hazards, data management, risk assessment |
| Topics: | Education, Research Practice, Urban Studies, Risk Management, Information Management, Digital Applications, Sustainability |
| 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