Sun, C.; Zhao, X.; Wang, Q. and Dou, Q. (2026) A literature review of urban flood resilience evaluation: Current trends and future prospects. Building Research & Information, 54(6), pp. 801-822. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
In recent years, rising global flood frequency has made urban flood resilience evaluation urgent. However, existing reviews are outdated and lack a comprehensive synthesis of the latest research developments. Based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, this study analysed 220 publications published between 2015 and 2025. A comprehensive analysis was conducted across dimensions, including publication trends, keyword evolution, research scale, method, framework and evaluation indicators. Key findings include the following: (1) The number of publications in this field has been increasing annually, reaching a peak of 67 in 2025. (2) Research themes are gradually shifting from traditional disaster prevention and mitigation towards systematic urban flood resilience management. (3) Research scales encompass macro, meso and micro levels. Quantitative research methods accounted for the largest proportion at 53.6%, progressively integrating mixed methodologies. A multidimensional resilience evaluation framework has been established, incorporating social, ecological and technological dimensions. (4) Social resilience focuses on resident conditions, local economy and emergency organizations; ecological resilience emphasizes natural environment and flood disasters; technological resilience encompasses both infrastructure and disaster prevention technology. This study helps government administrators to better understand resilience and can serve as a reference for enhancing urban flood resilience.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | disaster management; flood disaster; literature review; resilience evaluation and planning; urban resilience |
| Index terms: | evaluation, local economy, publication, disaster management, dimension, literature review, disaster prevention, evolution, urban resilience, meta-analysis, mitigation, quantitative research, methodology, systematic literature review |
| Subjects: | environmental science, economic analysis, financial risk, research methods, research dissemination and communication, sustainability and resilience, health monitoring assessment and metrics, data analysis and analytics, research evaluation and metrics |
| Topics: | Urban Studies, Cost Management, Health and Safety, Business Strategy, Information Management, Research Practice, 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