Cited by 198Infrastructure Resilience and Vulnerability AnalysisDisaster Management and ResilienceEarthquake and Disaster Impact Studies

A multidisciplinary definition and evaluation of resilience: The role of social justice in defining resilience

Open access
Doorn, Neelke, Gardoni, Paolo, Murphy, Colleen·2019·Sustainable and Resilient Infrastructure

Abstract

This paper aims to explore how insights from the philosophical and social science literature can be incorporated into the definition of resilient infrastructure so that considerations of social justice can be accounted for and addressed more adequately. Building on the view that engineering ultimately aims to promote societal well-being, this paper argues that human well-being depends on (1) the resilience of the physical infrastructure and (2) the socioeconomic context, both of which in turn affect (i) how the impact and recovery of the physical infrastructure translates into societal impact and recovery and (ii) the ability of individuals to recover/adapt independently from the recovery of the physical infrastructure. The paper suggests that a capability approach may be a suitable framework for providing content to the formal concept of resilience as a capability approach is especially suitable for expressing non-tangible damage that might be caused by natural hazards and disasters.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/23789689.2018.1428162

Cites

77 of 77 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Our empirical data raised organizational- and system-level ethical issues, many of which could be mapped either to the US Institute of Medicine's six dimensions of quality or to more recent work on organizational and system resilience and sustainability.

    “Finally, our empirical data raised organizational- and system-level ethical issues, many of which could be mapped either to the US Institute of Medicine's (94) six dimensions of quality—safety, efficiency, patient-centeredness, timeliness, effectiveness, and equity—or to more recent work on organizational and system resilience—for which redundancy may be needed to help weather stress—and”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

6 of the 83 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 13

  1. Gardoni, P., & Murphy, C. (2017). Society-based design: Developing sustainable and resilient communities. Sustainable and Resilient Infrastructure (under review).
  2. Gardoni, P., Murphy, C., Rowell, A., (Eds.) (2016). Societal Risk Management of Natural Hazards. Springer.
  3. Graschew, G., Roelofs, T. A., Rakowsky, S., & Schlag, M. (2009) Engineering for health in OP 2000. In J. Vandersloten, P. Verdonck, M. Nyssen & J. Haueisen (Eds.), 4th European Conference of the International Federation for Medical and Biological Engineering. 871-874.
  4. Gunderson, L., Holling, C., Peterson, G., & Pritchard, L. (2001). Resilience. London: Wiley.
  5. Doorn, N. (in press). The role of resilience in engineering. In D. M. Michelfelder & N. Doorn. Handbook of Philosophy of Engineering. Routledge.
  6. In Y. Li & R. Padhye (Eds.), Textile Bioengineering and Informatics Symposium Proceedings, 2016. (Vols 1 and 2. pp. 959-970).
  7. Gardoni, P., & Murphy, C. (2010). Gauging the societal impacts of natural disasters using a capabilities-based approach. Disasters, 34(3), 619-636.
  8. Porter, L., & Davoudi, S. (2012). The politics of resilience for planning: A cautionary note. Planning Theory & Practice, 13(2), 329-333. doi:10.1080/14649357.2012.677124 · DOI
  9. Rose, A. (2017). Broader dimensions of economic resilience. Chapter 5. Defining and measuring economic resilience from a societal, environmental and security perspective (pp. 41- 48). Singapore: Springer Singapore.
  10. Sharma, N., Tabandeh, A., & Gardoni, P. (2018). Resilience analysis: A mathematical formulation to model resilience of engineering systems. Sustainable and Resilient Infrastructure (under review).
  11. Tabandeh, A., Gardoni, P., Murphy, C., & Myers, C., (2017). A dynamic bayesian network for capability-based risk and resilience analysis. Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Structural Safety & Reliability (ICOSSAR 2017), TU Wien, Vienna (Austria).
  12. Leach, M. (2008). Re-framing resilience: A symposium report [STEPS Working Paper 13]. Brighton: STEPS Centre.
  13. Murphy, C., Gardoni, P., & McKim, R. (Eds.). (in press). Climate change and its impact: Risks and inequalities. Dordrecht: Springer.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Doorn, N., Gardoni, P., & Murphy, C.
Affiliations
  • Delft University of Technology (NL)
  • University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US)
Corresponding author
Doorn, Neelke
Venue
Sustainable and Resilient Infrastructure
Published
2018-04-05
Volume
4
Issue
3
Pages
112-123
ISSN
  • 2378-9689 (ISSN-L)
  • 2378-9697
OpenAlex
W2795712666
Cited by
198
References
83
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 34 · 2021: 46 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 2
FWCI
17.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Sustainable and Resilient Infrastructure (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Research Repository (Delft University of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • National Institute of Standards and Technology (70NANB15H044)
  • Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (016-144-071)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Civil and Structural Engineering › Infrastructure Resilience and Vulnerability Analysis
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Disaster Management and Resilience
  • Social Sciences › Transportation › Earthquake and Disaster Impact Studies
Keywords
infrastructure resilience, social justice, capability approach, human well-being, socioeconomic context, disaster recovery, natural hazards, social impact

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