Votre recherche

Abstract Resilience has become a cornerstone for risk management and disaster reduction. However, it has evolved extensively both etymologically and conceptually in time and across scientific disciplines. The concept has been (re)shaped by the evolution of research and practice efforts. Considered the opposite of vulnerability for a long time, resilience was first defined as the ability to resist, bounce back, cope with, and recover quickly from the impacts of hazards. To avoid the possible return to conditions of vulnerability and exposure to hazards, the notions of post-disaster development, transformation, and adaptation (build back better) and anticipation, innovation, and proactivity (bounce forward) were then integrated. Today, resilience is characterized by a multitude of components and several classifications. We present a selection of 25 components used to define resilience, and an interesting linkage emerges between these components and the dimensions of risk management (prevention, preparedness, response, and recovery), offering a perspective to strengthen resilience through the development of capacities. Despite its potential, resilience is subject to challenges regarding its operationalization, effectiveness, measurement, credibility, equity, and even its nature. Nevertheless, it offers applicability and opportunities for local communities as well as an interdisciplinary look at global challenges.

Abstract The analysis across spatial, temporal and governance scales shows an inequitable distribution of risk across Canada’s Metro Vancouver region. For First Nation communities in this region, this risk is rooted in the colonial history of land dispossession. This article makes a contribution by expanding our understanding of historic creation of riskscapes and a discussion of its implications as a multiscale governance issue that persists across space and time. This article also situates the impacts of projected sea level rise on Indigenous communities in the context of regional, provincial and federal settler-colonial flood risk management regime.

ABSTRACT Large-scale disasters can disproportionately impact different population groups, causing prominent disparity and inequality, especially for the vulnerable and marginalized. Here, we investigate the resilience of human mobility under the disturbance of the unprecedented ‘720’ Zhengzhou flood in China in 2021 using records of 1.32 billion mobile phone signaling generated by 4.35 million people. We find that although pluvial floods can trigger mobility reductions, the overall structural dynamics of mobility networks remain relatively stable. We also find that the low levels of mobility resilience in female, adolescent and older adult groups are mainly due to their insufficient capabilities to maintain business-as-usual travel frequency during the flood. Most importantly, we reveal three types of counter-intuitive, yet widely existing, resilience patterns of human mobility (namely, ‘reverse bathtub’, ‘ever-increasing’ and ‘ever-decreasing’ patterns), and demonstrate a universal mechanism of disaster-avoidance response by further corroborating that those abnormal resilience patterns are not associated with people’s gender or age. In view of the common association between travel behaviors and travelers’ socio-demographic characteristics, our findings provide a caveat for scholars when disclosing disparities in human travel behaviors during flood-induced emergencies.

Flood risk management requires to comprehensively assess how policy strategies may affect individuals and communities. However, policy development and implementation often downplay or even increase social inequality. Analysis of the social and societal implications of strategies and implementation projects to manage flood hazards is still in its infancy. To close this gap, this chapter critically questions the roles of social justice and their political implications for flood risk management with regard to resilience. The chapter discusses and argues how different theoretical concepts as well as different perspectives on justice (e.g. social, environmental and climate justice) and resilience in flood risk management are related. There is a strong need to have a broader and more in-depth discussion about the role of justice in the current resilience debate. Finally, the chapter presents the outline of a future research agenda.

Government employees, municipal officials, and communities in South Africa have grappled with post-apartheid environmental challenges, such as floods, droughts, severe storms, and wildfires. These disasters are a result of both natural and human activities. The government implemented different policies and strategies after 1994 to address these issues. While acknowledging some success in managing these disasters with the current adaptive measures, the frequency and intensity of disasters have increased, causing significant damage to life and property, particularly among the vulnerable population. This paper uses qualitative and quantitative data collection approaches to explore possible systematic and structural weaknesses in addressing post-disaster situations in South Africa. Floods appear to be the most frequent natural disaster in South Africa. The paper uncovered the fact that disaster management is a multi-sectoral and multidisciplinary field. Although various institutional arrangements exist, they do not seem appropriate for assisting vulnerable groups. While officials have made some progress in implementing post-disaster projects, challenges still hinder sustainability. Furthermore, regrettably, despite the level of success in addressing disasters, most measures have failed to achieve the intended results for a variety of reasons. The consolidated long-term measures suggested by the participants yielded a proposed ‘South African Floods Post-Disaster Checklist or Model’, which was non-existent in South Africa. By implementing more effective and efficient post-disaster measures, the proposed tool can help policymakers and strategic partners standardise post-disaster resilience and adaptive capacity in various sectors’ sustainability contexts.

Abstract Watershed resilience is the ability of a watershed to maintain its characteristic system state while concurrently resisting, adapting to, and reorganizing after hydrological (for example, drought, flooding) or biogeochemical (for example, excessive nutrient) disturbances. Vulnerable waters include non-floodplain wetlands and headwater streams, abundant watershed components representing the most distal extent of the freshwater aquatic network. Vulnerable waters are hydrologically dynamic and biogeochemically reactive aquatic systems, storing, processing, and releasing water and entrained (that is, dissolved and particulate) materials along expanding and contracting aquatic networks. The hydrological and biogeochemical functions emerging from these processes affect the magnitude, frequency, timing, duration, storage, and rate of change of material and energy fluxes among watershed components and to downstream waters, thereby maintaining watershed states and imparting watershed resilience. We present here a conceptual framework for understanding how vulnerable waters confer watershed resilience. We demonstrate how individual and cumulative vulnerable-water modifications (for example, reduced extent, altered connectivity) affect watershed-scale hydrological and biogeochemical disturbance response and recovery, which decreases watershed resilience and can trigger transitions across thresholds to alternative watershed states (for example, states conducive to increased flood frequency or nutrient concentrations). We subsequently describe how resilient watersheds require spatial heterogeneity and temporal variability in hydrological and biogeochemical interactions between terrestrial systems and down-gradient waters, which necessitates attention to the conservation and restoration of vulnerable waters and their downstream connectivity gradients. To conclude, we provide actionable principles for resilient watersheds and articulate research needs to further watershed resilience science and vulnerable-water management.

This study integrates Land Change Modeling with the Plan Integration for Resilience Scorecard™ methodology to assess coastal communities’ preparedness for uncertain future urban growth and flood hazards. Findings indicate that, under static climate conditions, the network of plans in Tampa is well prepared across all urban growth scenarios, but less so in the face of a changing climate. Specifically, scenario outputs that consider climate change suggest the need for more resilient growth to reduce flood vulnerability compared with the current land use plan. Notably, some existing policies are likely to lead to counterproductive outcomes in a future with more extensive flooding.

La résilience, cette capacité d’une ville ou d’un environnement à maintenir sa structure, à s’organiser, apprendre et s’adapter aux chocs et stress, participe au mouvement de responsabilisation accrue du citoyen dans la protection contre les risques naturels. Si les inondations sont un phénomène récurrent à Montréal depuis la création même de la ville, les citoyens n’y sont encore que peu préparés comme le démontre l’ampleur des dommages causés par les inondations du printemps de 2017. Depuis le début du 21e siècle, les agences internationales et les États cherchent à sensibiliser le citoyen afin de susciter une action de sa part. On suppose alors que le citoyen informé aura ainsi une perception accrue des risques, conduisant au comportement de protection. Ce lien entre information, perception et comportement n’est pourtant pas évident. En réalité, la littérature montre que le comportement dépend d’une multiplicité de facteurs tels que l’expérience, la fréquence du risque ainsi qu’une évaluation par la personne de l’efficacité des mesures de protection, de leur coût face à une évaluation de la probabilité de la menace. Le mémoire vise à répondre à la question de recherche suivante : comment inciter les individus à adopter des mesures de protection contre les inondations à Montréal ? Une enquête auprès de 237 citoyens de quatre secteurs de l’agglomération touchés par les inondations printanières de 2017 met en lumière un ensemble d’obstacles à l’adoption des mesures de protection contre les inondations aujourd’hui analysés grâce au Protective Action Decision Model de Lindell et Perry (2012). Ainsi, dans le cas de Montréal, le manque d’action relève à la fois d’un manque d’information et de connaissances sur les origines du risque et les mesures de prévention, de la perception d’inefficacité des mesures comme la trousse 72 heures, d’une perception d’incapacité à mettre en place soi-même les mesures de prévention, et d’un coût important en ressources de ces dernières. Le dernier élément est l’incertitude de ce type de risque et l’incapacité à prévoir avec précision le prochain événement de crue, qui, combiné à un sentiment de responsabilité élevé des autorités à assurer la protection, implique un manque d’urgence à agir. Face à ces constats et après une étude du cas de la Nouvelle Orléans aux États-Unis, une réflexion est proposée sur les moyens à mettre en place pour inciter les citoyens à adopter ces mesures, comprenant sensibilisation mais aussi des moyens coercitifs et incitatifs.