IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v12y2023i6p1182-d1163415.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparative Resilience Evaluation—Case Study for Six Cities in China, Europe, and the Americas

Author

Listed:
  • Bruno Oliveira

    (Advancing Systems Analysis, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, A-2361 Laxenburg, Austria)

  • Brian D. Fath

    (Advancing Systems Analysis, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, A-2361 Laxenburg, Austria
    Department of Biological Sciences, Towson University, Towson, MD 21252, USA
    Department of Environmental Studies, Masaryk University, 601 77 Brno, Czech Republic)

Abstract

The historical development of the urban realm has brought marvelous benefits to humankind, which has profited from the infrastructure, services, and social networks provided by cities. Nonetheless, considering current and future risks, understanding how cities can absorb impacts and reorganize their structure while keeping their identities is fundamental and timely. In other words, understanding how to promote resilience is crucial. This study developed a comparative urban resilience index (CURI) formed by 29 indicators and applied it to case studies in Europe, China, and the Americas (Malmö, Vienna, Beijing, Shanghai, Baltimore, and São Paulo). An innovative identity dimension was built to embrace the cultural traits of studied cities. Results point to a systemic property of CURI when comparing cities in both timeframes (2000 and 2020). In addition, two groups were formed: Malmö, Beijing, and Baltimore increased their resilience due to higher performance in at least two dimensions; Shanghai, Vienna, and São Paulo decreased their resilience due to lower performance in at least three dimensions. Ranking the data in terms of the benchmark promoted a quick understanding of which city is the “best in class” for each dimension, creating a clear way forward for other cities to follow.

Suggested Citation

  • Bruno Oliveira & Brian D. Fath, 2023. "Comparative Resilience Evaluation—Case Study for Six Cities in China, Europe, and the Americas," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-15, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:12:y:2023:i:6:p:1182-:d:1163415
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/6/1182/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/6/1182/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marta Suárez & Erik Gómez-Baggethun & Javier Benayas & Daniella Tilbury, 2016. "Towards an Urban Resilience Index: A Case Study in 50 Spanish Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-19, August.
    2. Dietz, Simon & Neumayer, Eric, 2007. "Weak and strong sustainability in the SEEA: Concepts and measurement," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(4), pages 617-626, March.
    3. Victor Ginsburgh & David Throsby, 2006. "Handbook of the economics of art and culture," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/1673, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    4. Xin Fu & Xinhao Wang, 2018. "Developing an integrative urban resilience capacity index for plan making," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 38(3), pages 367-378, September.
    5. Marta Bottero & Giulia Datola & Elena De Angelis, 2020. "A System Dynamics Model and Analytic Network Process: An Integrated Approach to Investigate Urban Resilience," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-26, July.
    6. Yuhan Shao & Eckart Lange & Kevin Thwaites & Zhenying Xue & Xinyu Xu, 2020. "Understanding Landscape Identity in the Context of Rapid Urban Change in China," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-18, August.
    7. Rizzo, Ilde & Throsby, David, 2006. "Cultural Heritage: Economic Analysis and Public Policy," Handbook of the Economics of Art and Culture, in: V.A. Ginsburgh & D. Throsby (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Art and Culture, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 28, pages 983-1016, Elsevier.
    8. V.A. Ginsburgh & D. Throsby (ed.), 2006. "Handbook of the Economics of Art and Culture," Handbook of the Economics of Art and Culture, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 1, December.
    9. Shuduo Zhou & Jin Xu & Xiaochen Ma & Beibei Yuan & Xiaoyun Liu & Hai Fang & Qingyue Meng, 2020. "How Can One Strengthen a Tiered Healthcare System through Health System Reform? Lessons Learnt from Beijing, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(21), pages 1-14, October.
    10. Luz Maria Ortega-Villa & Judith Ley-Garcia, 2018. "Analysis of Cultural Indicators: A Comparison of Their Conceptual Basis and Dimensions," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 137(2), pages 413-439, June.
    11. Gassner, Andreas & Lederer, Jakob & Kanitschar, Georg & Ossberger, Markus & Fellner, Johann, 2018. "Extended ecological footprint for different modes of urban public transport: The case of Vienna, Austria," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 85-99.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sittichok Plaiphum & Roengchai Tansuchat, 2023. "Cultural Capital of Sea Salt Farming in Ban Laem District of Phetchaburi Province as per the Globally Important Agricultural Heritage Systems (GIAHS)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-27, August.
    2. Bertacchini, Enrico & Dalle Nogare, Chiara, 2014. "Public provision vs. outsourcing of cultural services: Evidence from Italian cities," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 168-182.
    3. Victor Ginsburgh & Olivier Gergaud, 2013. "Measuring the effect of cultural events with special emphasis on music festivals," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/152437, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    4. David Throsby, 2011. "Cultural Capital," Chapters, in: Ruth Towse (ed.), A Handbook of Cultural Economics, Second Edition, chapter 20, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. Bruno S. Frey & Paolo Pamini, 2009. "World Heritage: Where Are We? An Empirical Analysis," CREMA Working Paper Series 2009-31, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    6. Olivier Gergaud & Victor Ginsburgh, 2017. "Measuring the Economic Effects of Events Using Google Trends," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/277406, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    7. Mihaela IACOB & Felicia ALEXANDRU & Meral KAGITCI & Georgiana Camelia CRETAN & Filip IORGULESCU, 2011. "Evaluation Of Cultural Heritage – From The Epistemological Precautions To Pragmatic Approaches," International Conference Modern Approaches in Organisational Management and Economy, Faculty of Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 5(1), pages 218-223, November.
    8. Enrico Bertacchini & Federico Revelli, 2021. "Kalòs kai agathòs? government quality and cultural heritage in the regions of Europe," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 67(2), pages 513-539, October.
    9. David Throsby, 2010. "Measuring the Economic and Cultural Values of Historic Heritage Places," Environmental Economics Research Hub Research Reports 1085, Environmental Economics Research Hub, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    10. Christian Barrère, 2016. "Cultural heritages: From official to informal [Patrimoines culturels : des patrimoines officiels aux patrimoines informels]," Post-Print hal-02569029, HAL.
    11. Bruno S. Frey & Paolo Pamini, 2009. "Making World Heritage Truly Global: The Culture Certificate Scheme," CREMA Working Paper Series 2009-13, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    12. Agnese Amato & Maria Andreoli & Massimo Rovai, 2021. "Adaptive Reuse of a Historic Building by Introducing New Functions: A Scenario Evaluation Based on Participatory MCA Applied to a Former Carthusian Monastery in Tuscany, Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-22, February.
    13. Yan Zhang, 2012. "Towards an Institutional Approach of Self-governance on Cultural Heritage," Chapters, in: Enrico Bertacchini & Giangiacomo Bravo & Massimo Marrelli & Walter Santagata (ed.), Cultural Commons, chapter 8, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    14. Patrizia Riganti, 2022. "Embedding Effects in Contingent Valuation Applications to Cultural Capital: Does the Nature of the Goods Matter?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-17, May.
    15. Maija Halonen-Aktawijuka & Evanjelos Parfilis, 2022. "Who Should Own the Past?," Bristol Economics Discussion Papers 22/758, School of Economics, University of Bristol, UK.
    16. Victor Martínez-de-Albéniz & Ana Valdivia, 2019. "Measuring and Exploiting the Impact of Exhibition Scheduling on Museum Attendance," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 21(4), pages 761-779, October.
    17. Roberto Cellini & Tiziana Cuccia, 2013. "Museum and monument attendance and tourism flow: a time series analysis approach," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(24), pages 3473-3482, August.
    18. Francisco Alcalá & Miguel González‐Maestre, 2012. "Artistic Creation and Intellectual Property: A Professional Career Approach," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(3), pages 633-672, September.
    19. Bruno S. Frey & Paolo Pamini & Lasse Steiner, 2011. "What Determines The World Heritage List? An Econometric Analysis," CREMA Working Paper Series 2011-01, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    20. Rubinstein Alexander, 2013. "Studying “Sponsored Goods” in Cultural Sector. Econometric Model of Baumol’s Disease," Creative and Knowledge Society, Sciendo, vol. 3(1), pages 28-48, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:12:y:2023:i:6:p:1182-:d:1163415. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.