The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A critical review of selected tools for assessing community resilience
Open accessAbstract
The concept of resilience is increasingly used in academic and policy circles. To operationalize this concept and reduce the ambiguities surrounding it, since the turn of the century, various resilience assessment methodologies have been introduced. This paper provides a critical review of 36 selected community resilience assessment tools. These tools have been developed by a variety of entities, including national and local organizations, international donor organizations, and academic researchers. First, an overview of the selected tools is presented. This overview analysis shows that while some commonalities exist, there are also considerable differences between the tools. Next, based on literature review, an analytical framework is developed that identifies six criteria for evaluating performance of resilience assessment tools. These are, namely, addressing multiple dimensions of resilience, accounting for cross-scale relationships, capturing temporal dynamism, addressing uncertainties, employing participatory approaches, and developing action plans. Results show that limited success has been achieved in addressing these criteria. In terms of comprehensiveness, the environmental dimension has received relatively less attention in spite of its significance for building community resilience. Further improvements are needed to account for dynamics over time and across space. More attention to employing iterative processes that involve scenario-based planning is needed to better address challenges associated with uncertainties. Results also show that more attention needs to be paid to stakeholder participation in developing assessment tools. The paper concludes by highlighting several other areas of weakness that need to be addressed and discussing major challenges that still remain.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Community Resilience as a Metaphor, Theory, Set of Capacities, and Strategy for Disaster Readiness
Norris, F. H., Stevens, S. P., Pfefferbaum, B., Wyche, K. F., & Pfefferbaum, R. L. (2008) · American Journal of Community Psychology · doi:10.1007/s10464-007-9156-6 · Cited by 5,476
Principles and criteria for assessing urban energy resilience: a literature review
Sharifi, A., & Yamagata, Y. (2016) · Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2016.03.028 · Cited by 592
Self-citationCommunity Resilience Interventions: Participatory, Assessment-Based, Action-Oriented Processes
Pfefferbaum, B., Pfefferbaum, R. L., & Van Horn, R. L. (2015) · American Behavioral Scientist · doi:10.1177/0002764214550298 · Cited by 150
Cited by
A critical review of selected smart city assessment tools and indicator sets
Sharifi, A. (2019) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.06.172 · Cited by 312
Self-citationResilience of urban social-ecological-technological systems (SETS): A review
Sharifi, A. (2023) · Sustainable Cities and Society · doi:10.1016/j.scs.2023.104910 · Cited by 270
Self-citationAssessing social resilience of flood-vulnerable communities in Ayeyarwady Delta, Myanmar
Lwin, K. K., Pal, I., Shrestha, S., & Warnitchai, P. (2020) · International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction · doi:10.1016/j.ijdrr.2020.101745 · Cited by 74
Song, J., Pandey, R., Dong, G., Sharifi, A., & Subedi, B. P. (2022) · Sustainable Cities and Society · doi:10.1016/j.scs.2022.103698 · Cited by 53
Self-citationSullivan, D., Schmitt, H. J., Calloway, E. E., Clausen, W., Tucker, P., Rayman, J., & Gerhardstein, B. (2021) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.113877 · Cited by 31
Metadata
- Authors
- Sharifi, A.
- Venue
- Ecological Indicators
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2016-10
- Volume
- 69
- Pages
- 629-647
- ISSN
- 1470-160X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2394951807
- Cited by
- 642
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 96.23
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A critical review of selected tools for assessing community resilience. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.05.023
- The paper
- Sharifi, A. (2016). A critical review of selected tools for assessing community resilience. Ecological Indicators. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.05.023
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.