Resilience and Disaster Response and Recovery

  1. Alexander (2013, p.2714) argues “resilience has a bright future ahead of it as an explanatory concept in various allied fields that deal with environmental extremes. However, its success in this respect will depend on not overworking it or expecting that it can provide more insight and greater modeling capacity than it is capable of furnishing.” In the context of DRR, do you agree with this statement? Provide reasons for why/why not.

 

Resilience is not a panacea for all the challenges facing DRR. Resilience may be misinterpreted to mean robustness: simply sustaining functions despite challenges, whilst true resilience is “The intrinsic ability of a system to adjust its functioning prior to, during, or following changes and disturbances, so that it can sustain required operations under both expected and unexpected conditions.” (Hollnagel et al, 2006) Rather than treat resilience as a model, we must treat resilience as an activity, and make clear the distinction between active resilience and passive robustness. 

 

The scholar Nassim Taleb, in his book “Antifragile” notoriously misinterpreted resilience: “Antifragility is beyond resilience or robustness. The resilient resists shocks and stays the same; the antifragile gets better.” (Taleb, 2013) It is clearly an easily misinterpreted and misunderstood concept.

 

Additionally, as Cretney (2014) argues, there is a danger that resilience can become a tool for the perpetuation of inequalities and injustices. We must question for whom resilience is being built and who benefits from it most.

 

  1. Given the range of vulnerabilities associated with New Orleans and Hurricane Katrina (2005), as outlined by Laska and Morrow (2006), suggest THREE disaster preparedness measures or initiatives that could serve to reduce some of these vulnerabilities.

 

Applying the concept of multi-layer safety (MLS) by Esteban et al, we can highlight three disaster preparedness elements that may have served to reduce some of the vulnerabilities highlighted by Laska and Morrow (2006) are:

 

  1. Primary layer: Hurricane Katrina highlighted the importance of adequate infrastructure in reducing both the likelihood and the severity of flooding. This includes improved infrastructure, such as stronger levees and better drainage systems, to reduce the likelihood of future floods.
  2. Secondary layer: During Hurricane Katrina, communication between emergency responders, local officials, and the public was limited, leading to confusion and delays in response. These gaps in emergency response planning demonstrated the need for effective early warning systems. The appropriate measures include developing a comprehensive early warning system and up to date evacuation plans.
  3. The Tertiary layer regards recovery and restoration after a disaster. In the case of Hurricane Katrina, better involvement of the local community in planning for a disaster, and responding to it afterwards would improve the effectiveness of recovery programmes. 

 

  1. Given the many and varied critiques and limitations of the resilience concept (e.g. as presented in Cretney 2014), why do you think resilience persists as a central element and goal of DRR strategies?

 

Resilience is about what a system can do — including its capacity: 

 

  • to anticipate — seeing developing signs of trouble ahead to begin to adapt early and reduce the risk of decompensation 
  • to synchronize —  adjusting how different roles at different levels coordinate their activities to keep pace with tempo of events and reduce the risk of working at cross purposes 
  • to be ready to respond — developing deployable and mobilizable response capabilities in advance of surprises and reduce the risk of brittleness 
  • for proactive learning — learning about brittleness and sources of resilient performance before major collapses or accidents occur by studying how surprises are caught and resolved 

 

(From Woods, 2018.) As Woods states, resilience is a verb. There are many aspects of resilience, but the key point of adapting and improving is vital. DRR is an active process, it is a verb, just like resilience. DRR exists to serve people, and the adaptable element of resilience is people: it is only people who can adapt, learn, and improve (Geraghty, 2020), which is why resilience persists as a central tenet of DRR.

 

References:

 

Cretney, R. 2014. Resilience for whom? Emerging critical geographies of socio-ecological resilience. Geography Compass, 8 (9): 627–40.

 

Esteban, M. et al (2013). Recent tsunamis events and preparedness: Development of Tsunami Awareness in Indonesia, Chile and Japan, International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction. Elsevier. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221242091300037X (Accessed: February 16, 2023).

 

Resilience Engineering and DevOps – A Deeper Dive | Tom Geraghty (2020). Available at: https://tomgeraghty.co.uk/index.php/resilience-engineering-and-devops/ (Accessed: 16 February 2023).

 

Hollnagel, E., Woods, D. D. & Leveson, N. C. (Eds.) (2006). Resilience engineering: Concepts and precepts. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.

 

Laska, S., and Morrow, B. H. (2006). Social vulnerabilities and Hurricane Katrina: an unnatural disaster in New Orleans. Marine technology society journal, 40(4), 16-26.

 

Taleb, Nassim Nicholas. 2013. Antifragile. Harlow, England: Penguin Books.

 

Woods, D.D., 2018. Resilience is a verb. Domains of resilience for complex interconnected systems., p.167.

 

Spread the love