From contesting to conversing about resilience: kickstarting measurement in complex research environments

Findings ways to benchmark and monitor is critical to making progress towards greater resilience to natural hazards. The cross-sector and often heavily contested nature of the resilience endeavour pose many practical and theoretical challenges when attempting to operationalize resilience into tangib...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Natural hazards (Dordrecht) 2019-06, Vol.97 (2), p.935-947
Main Authors: Ivory, Vivienne C., Stevenson, Joanne R.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Civil Engineering
Collaboration
Decision making
Disaster management
Disaster risk
Disruption
Earth and Environmental Science
Earth Sciences
Emergency preparedness
Environmental Management
Geophysics/Geodesy
Geotechnical Engineering & Applied Earth Sciences
Hazards
Heuristic
Hydrogeology
Innovation
Measurement
Natural Hazards
Original Paper
Problem solving
Resilience
Risk management
Risk reduction
Transparency (optical)
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Findings ways to benchmark and monitor is critical to making progress towards greater resilience to natural hazards. The cross-sector and often heavily contested nature of the resilience endeavour pose many practical and theoretical challenges when attempting to operationalize resilience into tangible indicators. Those invested in the measurement challenge must negotiate what is meant by resilience as well as make practical decisions where often there is no clear way forward. Heuristics, or short cuts to decision-making, are one way of negotiating situations with complex and/or incomplete information. This paper reports on the development and use of a heuristic device to support decisions and conversations about the measurement of resilience. The Kickstart 2 Measurement (K2M) tool provides resilience researchers and stakeholders with a structured process to work through six measurement questions on the following: the purpose of measurement; the data availability and quality; the focus of the indicator (who, what, where); the spatial and temporal scales; the disaster risk reduction phase; and the nature of disruption. The application of the tool to real-world examples showed the K2M tool (1) helped facilitate a pragmatic yet theoretically robust approach (2) helps provide transparency around compromises and prioritization, (3) brings multiple perspectives to the fore, and (4) prompts innovation to address high-priority gaps. The K2M tool can act as a bridge between theory, data, and practice to prompt pragmatic robust measurement solutions to and foster greater collaboration and cohesion across the resilience sector.
ISSN:0921-030X
1573-0840
DOI:10.1007/s11069-019-03667-4