Abstract
Study/Objective: A review of ‘resilience’ definitions in the multidisciplinary disaster literature informs the ‘Chain of Resilience’ to strengthen communities across all phases of the disaster cycle.
Background: The global emphasis on increasing community capacity to meet the growing challenges of disaster threats be they natural, technological, environmental or manmade, gains momentum. The consequences of disasters provide the stimulus and momentum for building disaster resilience. During July 2013-June 2014 saw the fourth consecutive year where economic losses
exceeded $100 billon; 16,300 people died and 358 internationally reported disasters affected 113 million people. International and national standards and frameworks, such as the United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction; the United Kingdom Strategic National Framework on Community Resilience (2011); the United States Disaster Resilience: A national imperative (2012), and the Australian National Strategy for Disaster Resilience (2011)
underpin concepts to build community resilience to disasters. underpin concepts to build community resilience to disasters.
Methods: A recent review of community and disaster resilience in peer reviewed and selected grey literature identified multiple definitions.
Results: No consistent definition emerged from the review. ‘Resilience’ presents as a cross-disciplinary definitional conundrum for those working to build disaster resilience across all phases of the disaster cycle. Consequently, the conceptual ambiguity that produces the definitional conundrum inhibits
productive resilience building activities.
Conclusion: This paper offers a unique recommendation to build resilience across all phases of the disaster cycle by adopting and adapting the internationally recognised and community based Chain of Survival which has proved successful in improving outcomes from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Proposing a community-based Chain of Resilience holds enormous potential for providing a much needed pathway to creating a consistent resilience building approach across all phases of the disaster cycle while maintaining conceptual flexibility for situational differences.
Prehosp Disaster Med 2015;30(Suppl. 1):s144–s145
doi:10.1017/S1049023X15004033
Background: The global emphasis on increasing community capacity to meet the growing challenges of disaster threats be they natural, technological, environmental or manmade, gains momentum. The consequences of disasters provide the stimulus and momentum for building disaster resilience. During July 2013-June 2014 saw the fourth consecutive year where economic losses
exceeded $100 billon; 16,300 people died and 358 internationally reported disasters affected 113 million people. International and national standards and frameworks, such as the United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction; the United Kingdom Strategic National Framework on Community Resilience (2011); the United States Disaster Resilience: A national imperative (2012), and the Australian National Strategy for Disaster Resilience (2011)
underpin concepts to build community resilience to disasters. underpin concepts to build community resilience to disasters.
Methods: A recent review of community and disaster resilience in peer reviewed and selected grey literature identified multiple definitions.
Results: No consistent definition emerged from the review. ‘Resilience’ presents as a cross-disciplinary definitional conundrum for those working to build disaster resilience across all phases of the disaster cycle. Consequently, the conceptual ambiguity that produces the definitional conundrum inhibits
productive resilience building activities.
Conclusion: This paper offers a unique recommendation to build resilience across all phases of the disaster cycle by adopting and adapting the internationally recognised and community based Chain of Survival which has proved successful in improving outcomes from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Proposing a community-based Chain of Resilience holds enormous potential for providing a much needed pathway to creating a consistent resilience building approach across all phases of the disaster cycle while maintaining conceptual flexibility for situational differences.
Prehosp Disaster Med 2015;30(Suppl. 1):s144–s145
doi:10.1017/S1049023X15004033
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages | 144 |
| Number of pages | 145 |
| Publication status | Published - 2015 |