Resilience

No person or place is immune from disasters or disaster-related losses. Infectious disease outbreaks, acts of terrorism, social unrest, or financial disasters in addition to natural hazards can all lead to large-scale consequences for the nation and its communities. Communities and the nation thus face difficult fiscal, social, cultural, and environmental choices about the best ways to ensure basic security and quality of life against hazards, deliberate attacks, and disasters.

The impacts of natural disaster occurred in coastal area have pushed environmental damage and threatened its sustainability as well as the existence of community livelihood. Accelerating risks from coastal hazards add the disadvantages for communities living in coastal areas, especially those who are very dependent on natural resources. The objectives of the research are the research is intended to measure the resilience of coastal community through collective resilience assessment and bottom-up approach in community level.

In parallel with the observed greater frequency of natural disasters worldwide, there has been an ever-increasing interest in urban resilience and its assessment. Experience obtained in recent extreme events (in particular, earthquakes and floods) has revealed that both the level of preparedness and the response of affected cities were insufficiently high, whereas the recovery process was long and expensive.

Disaster resilience has become an important societal goal which captures the attention of academics and decision-makers from various disciplines and sectors. Developing tools or metrics for measuring and monitoring progress of resilience is a critical component that requires extensive research to achieve better understanding. However, different fields have different emphases and the knowledge gained from the various studies are scattered and fragmented.

Due to persistent and serious threats from natural disasters around the globe, many have turned to resilience and vulnerability research to guide disaster preparation, recovery, and adaptation decisions. In response, scholars and practitioners have put forth a variety of disaster indices, based on quantifiable metrics, to gauge levels of resilience and vulnerability. However, few indices are empirically validated using observed disaster impacts and, as a result, it is often unclear which index should be preferred for each decision at hand.

There is increasing policy and research interest in disaster resilience, yet the extant literature is still mired in definitional debates, epistemological orientations of researchers, and differences in basic approaches to measurement. As a consequence, there is little integration across domains and disciplines on community resilience assessment, its driving forces, and geographic variability.

The abundant research examining aspects of social-ecological resilience, vulnerability, and hazards and risk assessment has yielded insights into these concepts and suggested the importance of quantifying them. Quantifying resilience is complicated by several factors including the varying definitions of the term applied in the research, difficulties involved in selecting and aggregating indicators of resilience, and the lack of empirical validation for the indices derived.

This article uses a systemic perspective to identify and analyze the conceptual relations among vulnerability, resilience, and adaptive capacity within socio-ecological systems (SES). Since different intellectual traditions use the terms in different, sometimes incompatible, ways, they emerge as strongly related but unclear in the precise nature of their relationships. A set of diagnostic questions is proposed regarding the specification of the terms to develop a shared conceptual framework for the natural and social dimensions of global change.

How communities respond to and recover from damaging hazard events could be contextualized in terms of their disaster resilience. Although numerous efforts have sought to explain the determinants of disaster resilience, the ability to measure the concept is increasingly being seen as a key step toward disaster risk reduction. The development of standards that are meaningful for measuring resilience remains a challenge, however.

The landscape of disaster resilience indicators is littered with wide range of tools, scorecards, indices that purport to measure disaster resilience in some manner. This paper examines the existing qualitative and quantitative approaches to resilience assessment in order to delineate common concepts and variables. Twenty-seven different resilience assessment tools, indices, and scorecards were examined.