Pub Date : 2019-01-25DOI: 10.4337/9781786439376.00020
Ashley E. Cryan, B. Helmuth, S. Scyphers
Often implemented in the context of coastal resilience and in response to sea-level rise, urban shorelines are being armored at ever-increasing rates on coastlines worldwide. Engineered structures (that is, seawalls, bulkheads and revetments) are designed to mitigate risks from flooding and storm surge. While shoreline armoring can serve as an effective means of protecting people, property and infrastructure from damage, engineered ‘gray’ solutions often have unintended and cascading negative consequences to coupled human–natural ecosystems, including the coastal communities they are designed to benefit. For instance, gray infrastructure can actively degrade the marine environment by reducing habitat heterogeneity and biodiversity, which significantly dampens the plethora of ecosystem services humans receive from healthy coastal habitats. In some cases, the unintended negative consequences of shoreline armoring can be more severe in magnitude than the problems they are designed to solve.
{"title":"Ecological design for urban coastal resilience","authors":"Ashley E. Cryan, B. Helmuth, S. Scyphers","doi":"10.4337/9781786439376.00020","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781786439376.00020","url":null,"abstract":"Often implemented in the context of coastal resilience and in response to sea-level rise, urban shorelines are being armored at ever-increasing rates on coastlines worldwide. Engineered structures (that is, seawalls, bulkheads and revetments) are designed to mitigate risks from flooding and storm surge. While shoreline armoring can serve as an effective means of protecting people, property and infrastructure from damage, engineered ‘gray’ solutions often have unintended and cascading negative consequences to coupled human–natural ecosystems, including the coastal communities they are designed to benefit. For instance, gray infrastructure can actively degrade the marine environment by reducing habitat heterogeneity and biodiversity, which significantly dampens the plethora of ecosystem services humans receive from healthy coastal habitats. In some cases, the unintended negative consequences of shoreline armoring can be more severe in magnitude than the problems they are designed to solve.","PeriodicalId":245948,"journal":{"name":"Handbook on Resilience of Socio-Technical Systems","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129363079","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-01-25DOI: 10.4337/9781786439376.00019
N. Dormady, A. Rose, Heather Rosoff, Alfredo Roa-Henriquez
The chapter provides a methodology for measuring the cost-effectiveness of resilience to disasters. Whereas the vast majority of extant literature in the resilience field focuses on regional and community resilience, this work extends prior work by the authors on microeconomic (that is, firm-level) resilience and its measurement. Firm-level resilience actions, or tactics, are identified and described within an established economic resilience framework. A survey-based approach is presented with an explicit application to businesses impacted by Superstorm Sandy in the New York and New Jersey coastal areas. A small sample demonstration of resilience cost-effectiveness results is presented in the form of statistical cost curves. The chapter concludes with a discussion of both methodological and public policy applications of the approach.
{"title":"Estimating the cost-effectiveness of resilience to disasters: survey instrument design and refinement of primary data","authors":"N. Dormady, A. Rose, Heather Rosoff, Alfredo Roa-Henriquez","doi":"10.4337/9781786439376.00019","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781786439376.00019","url":null,"abstract":"The chapter provides a methodology for measuring the cost-effectiveness of resilience to disasters. Whereas the vast majority of extant literature in the resilience field focuses on regional and community resilience, this work extends prior work by the authors on microeconomic (that is, firm-level) resilience and its measurement. Firm-level resilience actions, or tactics, are identified and described within an established economic resilience framework. A survey-based approach is presented with an explicit application to businesses impacted by Superstorm Sandy in the New York and New Jersey coastal areas. A small sample demonstration of resilience cost-effectiveness results is presented in the form of statistical cost curves. The chapter concludes with a discussion of both methodological and public policy applications of the approach.","PeriodicalId":245948,"journal":{"name":"Handbook on Resilience of Socio-Technical Systems","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124482541","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-01-25DOI: 10.4337/9781786439376.00008
Hans Dieter Hellige
{"title":"The metaphorical processes in the history of the resilience notion and the rise of the ecosystem resilience theory","authors":"Hans Dieter Hellige","doi":"10.4337/9781786439376.00008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781786439376.00008","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":245948,"journal":{"name":"Handbook on Resilience of Socio-Technical Systems","volume":"41 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125543240","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-01-25DOI: 10.4337/9781786439376.00014
Benjamin D. Trump, Kelsey Poinsatte-Jones, Timothy F. Malloy, I. Linkov
{"title":"Resilience and risk governance: current discussion and future action","authors":"Benjamin D. Trump, Kelsey Poinsatte-Jones, Timothy F. Malloy, I. Linkov","doi":"10.4337/9781786439376.00014","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781786439376.00014","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":245948,"journal":{"name":"Handbook on Resilience of Socio-Technical Systems","volume":"2012 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131948287","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-01-25DOI: 10.4337/9781786439376.00015
S. Hiermaier, Benjamin Scharte, Kai Fischer
{"title":"Resilience Engineering: chances and challenges for a comprehensive concept","authors":"S. Hiermaier, Benjamin Scharte, Kai Fischer","doi":"10.4337/9781786439376.00015","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781786439376.00015","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":245948,"journal":{"name":"Handbook on Resilience of Socio-Technical Systems","volume":"24 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132607795","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-01-25DOI: 10.4337/9781786439376.00026
Eric Gordon
As interest grows in involving stakeholders in problem-solving around resilience strategies, the biggest hurdle is creating mechanisms through which people can meaningfully contribute. Organizations big and small are calling for increased participation and greater public engagement, but too often the response to this call is another community forum or online poll. While design thinking methods are becoming popular, and can provide useful strategies for simplifying complexity and focusing on outcomes, they often gloss over nuance of culture, power and experience. In this chapter, I advocate for the use of game design as a method of group ideation and problem-solving in the context of social resilience. Specifically, this approach asks participants to identify the ‘playable problem’, or the goal of the game whereby rules and mechanics can be designed to guide players through an experience. In transforming large wicked problems, like lack of community connectedness, into smaller ‘playable problems’, such as not having informal gathering spaces in the community, participants can imagine a balanced system where a player is seeking to forge connections with neighbors and comes up against obstacles in such a way that forces him or her to imagine new paths or tactics. I do not suggest that problems should be solved through game play; rather, through game-design thinking, participants can reframe civic issues around the experience of a player moving through a system. This chapter details the game-design thinking process and provides examples of its use in a youth advocacy project in India.
{"title":"Playable problems: game-design thinking for civic problem-solving","authors":"Eric Gordon","doi":"10.4337/9781786439376.00026","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781786439376.00026","url":null,"abstract":"As interest grows in involving stakeholders in problem-solving around resilience strategies, the biggest hurdle is creating mechanisms through which people can meaningfully contribute. Organizations big and small are calling for increased participation and greater public engagement, but too often the response to this call is another community forum or online poll. While design thinking methods are becoming popular, and can provide useful strategies for simplifying complexity and focusing on outcomes, they often gloss over nuance of culture, power and experience. In this chapter, I advocate for the use of game design as a method of group ideation and problem-solving in the context of social resilience. Specifically, this approach asks participants to identify the ‘playable problem’, or the goal of the game whereby rules and mechanics can be designed to guide players through an experience. In transforming large wicked problems, like lack of community connectedness, into smaller ‘playable problems’, such as not having informal gathering spaces in the community, participants can imagine a balanced system where a player is seeking to forge connections with neighbors and comes up against obstacles in such a way that forces him or her to imagine new paths or tactics. I do not suggest that problems should be solved through game play; rather, through game-design thinking, participants can reframe civic issues around the experience of a player moving through a system. This chapter details the game-design thinking process and provides examples of its use in a youth advocacy project in India.","PeriodicalId":245948,"journal":{"name":"Handbook on Resilience of Socio-Technical Systems","volume":"19 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130149616","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-01-25DOI: 10.4337/9781786439376.00025
S. Mirzaee, M. Ruth, D. Fannon
When the objective of managing socio-technical systems includes enhancing their long-term resilience and sustainability, the problem inhibits the characteristics of a complex adaptive system. In such cases, the decision makers (DMs) and modelers are both internal and integral parts of the system. Such systems involve many stakeholders who affect the decisions, and many others who will be affected by them. In such circumstances, a single objective function cannot be representative of everyone’s perspective. Also, lack of applicable data further complicates decision making. In this chapter we introduce multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) techniques and tools that can aid in the decision-making process shaping the behavior of socio-technical systems. We provide an introduction to the MCDM science and methods of application, discuss two open-source MCDM online tools, and present and solve a problem in the area of building design by using the methods introduced in this chapter.
{"title":"Reconciling diverse perspectives of decision makers on resilience and sustainability","authors":"S. Mirzaee, M. Ruth, D. Fannon","doi":"10.4337/9781786439376.00025","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781786439376.00025","url":null,"abstract":"When the objective of managing socio-technical systems includes enhancing their long-term resilience and sustainability, the problem inhibits the characteristics of a complex adaptive system. In such cases, the decision makers (DMs) and modelers are both internal and integral parts of the system. Such systems involve many stakeholders who affect the decisions, and many others who will be affected by them. In such circumstances, a single objective function cannot be representative of everyone’s perspective. Also, lack of applicable data further complicates decision making. In this chapter we introduce multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) techniques and tools that can aid in the decision-making process shaping the behavior of socio-technical systems. We provide an introduction to the MCDM science and methods of application, discuss two open-source MCDM online tools, and present and solve a problem in the area of building design by using the methods introduced in this chapter.","PeriodicalId":245948,"journal":{"name":"Handbook on Resilience of Socio-Technical Systems","volume":"24 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131915682","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-01-25DOI: 10.4337/9781786439376.00022
Hans Dieter Hellige
The concept of resilience in energy systems and the derived principle of resilient energy system design are prominent results of metaphorical thinking in technology. They combine two metaphorical processes: the transfer of biological/ecological system models to energy systems and the transfer of less vulnerable decentralized information/communication network architectures to power infrastructure networks. This chapter reconstructs the roots and the development steps of the concept of resilience in energy systems, starting in the alternative energy discourse in the early 1970s and ending in the first elaborated theory of resilient energy system design by Amory Lovins in 1982. The historical discourse analysis goes into detail about: • transfers of metaphors and guiding concepts in energy and communication infrastructure systems; • countercultural debates about small distributed, self-organized soft energy systems condensed in Schumacher’s principle of ‘appropriate technology’; • Lovins’s introduction of entropy law, thermal carrying capacity of the Earth, ecodisaster research and the ‘biological metaphor’ into the discourse stimulating the first resilient energy system design debate in late 1970s; • the first integration of the ‘energy internet’ metaphor into the resilience discourse: The ‘Power Systems 2000’ scenario of the Homeostatic Control Group; and, finally • the multidisciplinary synthesis of the resilient energy system design-debate: the distributed computing-inspired study Brittle Power by Lovins and Lovins. As a summary of the early history of the resilience debate in the energy sector, it can be concluded how stimulating the ecological resilience concept has been for this discourse, and analogies with bio-ecological systems do not suffice for the resilience assessment and design of energy systems. The theory of resilient socio-technological systems design therefore requires resilience concepts that are emancipated from natural analogies and that are based on metaphors corresponding with the specific principles, structures and social architecture of the technology in question.
{"title":"The reception of the resilience concept in the energy discourse, and genesis of the theory of resilient energy system design","authors":"Hans Dieter Hellige","doi":"10.4337/9781786439376.00022","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781786439376.00022","url":null,"abstract":"The concept of resilience in energy systems and the derived principle of resilient energy system design are prominent results of metaphorical thinking in technology. They combine two metaphorical processes: the transfer of biological/ecological system models to energy systems and the transfer of less vulnerable decentralized information/communication network architectures to power infrastructure networks. This chapter reconstructs the roots and the development steps of the concept of resilience in energy systems, starting in the alternative energy discourse in the early 1970s and ending in the first elaborated theory of resilient energy system design by Amory Lovins in 1982. The historical discourse analysis goes into detail about: • transfers of metaphors and guiding concepts in energy and communication infrastructure systems; • countercultural debates about small distributed, self-organized soft energy systems condensed in Schumacher’s principle of ‘appropriate technology’; • Lovins’s introduction of entropy law, thermal carrying capacity of the Earth, ecodisaster research and the ‘biological metaphor’ into the discourse stimulating the first resilient energy system design debate in late 1970s; • the first integration of the ‘energy internet’ metaphor into the resilience discourse: The ‘Power Systems 2000’ scenario of the Homeostatic Control Group; and, finally • the multidisciplinary synthesis of the resilient energy system design-debate: the distributed computing-inspired study Brittle Power by Lovins and Lovins. As a summary of the early history of the resilience debate in the energy sector, it can be concluded how stimulating the ecological resilience concept has been for this discourse, and analogies with bio-ecological systems do not suffice for the resilience assessment and design of energy systems. The theory of resilient socio-technological systems design therefore requires resilience concepts that are emancipated from natural analogies and that are based on metaphors corresponding with the specific principles, structures and social architecture of the technology in question.","PeriodicalId":245948,"journal":{"name":"Handbook on Resilience of Socio-Technical Systems","volume":"43 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134546957","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-01-25DOI: 10.4337/9781786439376.00009
D. Woods
{"title":"Essentials of resilience, revisited","authors":"D. Woods","doi":"10.4337/9781786439376.00009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781786439376.00009","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":245948,"journal":{"name":"Handbook on Resilience of Socio-Technical Systems","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133769131","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-01-25DOI: 10.4337/9781786439376.00006
M. Ruth, Stefan Goessling-Reisemann
In recent years the resilience concept has received considerable attention in a wide range of disciplines, from engineering and biology to the health and social sciences, business and policy, and beyond. With the different interests of these disciplines come important nuances in the way resilience is interpreted. Some of these nuances find their expressions in the various chapters of this Handbook and are illustrated through corresponding case examples and applications. Common to all is the notion that resilience – the ability to withstand or bounce back from some shock – is inherently a systems feature. What relevant system elements interact with each other, how these interactions manifest themselves through space and time and how they can be shaped through active intervention are all key issues in resilience research. However, resilience has become more than a systems feature to be observed and shaped. It is increasingly taking on normative values. Overall system resilience is typically perceived as desirable; ecosystems that quickly return to their structure and function and display high species diversity and richness after a drought or fire for example, infrastructures that continue to provide services during some seismic event, or societies that bounce back from an economic shock, all are preferred to those that do not retain or make it back to their original performance levels. However, depending on long-term goals, resilience may also hinder development. For example, many economies exhibit persistent power imbalances that present considerable inertia to change. The situation may manifest itself in the form of inequities in standards of living and seriously curtailed opportunities for a wide segment of the population – women and minorities underpaid for their labor, children exploited, rights of owners of land and other resources being disrespected. To the extent that the associated injustices further entrench and reinforce the mechanisms for unjust treatment, the system remains, undesirably, resilient to change. To ensure resilience sometimes requires that the performance of some part of the system is sacrificed. Typical engineering examples include fuses and circuit breakers, which are designed to absorb and shield the remainder of the system from excessive shock. On a larger scale, the shedding of parts of an electricity grid in order to stabilize operations for the rest of the grid is such an example. In the business and policy world, individuals are removed from their posts and entire units are abolished or reorganized to protect firms or governments from widespread collapse. Which subsystems to sacrifice, and when to do so, may not always be clear a priori, especially if the magnitude and duration of a shock to the system are not well known. Similarly, which system components and interconnections to strengthen, and how to do so, in anticipation of possible shocks is a challenge common to the management of natural, engineered and socia
{"title":"Introduction to resilience of socio-technical systems","authors":"M. Ruth, Stefan Goessling-Reisemann","doi":"10.4337/9781786439376.00006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781786439376.00006","url":null,"abstract":"In recent years the resilience concept has received considerable attention in a wide range of disciplines, from engineering and biology to the health and social sciences, business and policy, and beyond. With the different interests of these disciplines come important nuances in the way resilience is interpreted. Some of these nuances find their expressions in the various chapters of this Handbook and are illustrated through corresponding case examples and applications. Common to all is the notion that resilience – the ability to withstand or bounce back from some shock – is inherently a systems feature. What relevant system elements interact with each other, how these interactions manifest themselves through space and time and how they can be shaped through active intervention are all key issues in resilience research. However, resilience has become more than a systems feature to be observed and shaped. It is increasingly taking on normative values. Overall system resilience is typically perceived as desirable; ecosystems that quickly return to their structure and function and display high species diversity and richness after a drought or fire for example, infrastructures that continue to provide services during some seismic event, or societies that bounce back from an economic shock, all are preferred to those that do not retain or make it back to their original performance levels. However, depending on long-term goals, resilience may also hinder development. For example, many economies exhibit persistent power imbalances that present considerable inertia to change. The situation may manifest itself in the form of inequities in standards of living and seriously curtailed opportunities for a wide segment of the population – women and minorities underpaid for their labor, children exploited, rights of owners of land and other resources being disrespected. To the extent that the associated injustices further entrench and reinforce the mechanisms for unjust treatment, the system remains, undesirably, resilient to change. To ensure resilience sometimes requires that the performance of some part of the system is sacrificed. Typical engineering examples include fuses and circuit breakers, which are designed to absorb and shield the remainder of the system from excessive shock. On a larger scale, the shedding of parts of an electricity grid in order to stabilize operations for the rest of the grid is such an example. In the business and policy world, individuals are removed from their posts and entire units are abolished or reorganized to protect firms or governments from widespread collapse. Which subsystems to sacrifice, and when to do so, may not always be clear a priori, especially if the magnitude and duration of a shock to the system are not well known. Similarly, which system components and interconnections to strengthen, and how to do so, in anticipation of possible shocks is a challenge common to the management of natural, engineered and socia","PeriodicalId":245948,"journal":{"name":"Handbook on Resilience of Socio-Technical Systems","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130562500","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：