The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Measuring Improvements in the Disaster Resilience of Communities
Abstract
This paper demonstrates the concept of disaster resilience through the development and application of quantitative measures. As the idea of building disaster‐resilient communities gains acceptance, new methods are needed that go beyond estimating monetary losses and that address the complex, multiple dimensions of resilience. These dimensions include technical, organizational, social, and economic facets. This paper first proposes resilience measures that relate expected losses in future disasters to a community's seismic performance objectives. It then demonstrates these measures in a case study of the Memphis, Tennessee, water delivery system. An existing earthquake loss estimation model provides a starting point for quantifying resilience. The analysis compares two seismic retrofit strategies and finds that only one improves community resilience over the status quo. However, it does not raise resilience to an adequate degree. The exercise demonstrates that the resilience framework can be valuable for guiding mitigation and preparedness efforts. However, to fully implement the concept, new research on resilience is needed that goes beyond loss estimation modeling.
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
A Framework to Quantitatively Assess and Enhance the Seismic Resilience of Communities
Bruneau, M., Chang, S. E., Eguchi, R. T., Lee, G. C., O'Rourke, T. D., Reinhorn, A. M., Shinozuka, M., Tierney, K., Wallace, W. A., & von Winterfeldt, D. (2003) · Earthquake Spectra · doi:10.1193/1.1623497 · Cited by 5,440
Self-citationDisasters by Design: A Reassessment of Natural Hazards in the United States
Mileti, D. S. (1999) · Cited by 2,072
Rose, A., Benavides, J., Chang, S. E., Szczesniak, P., & Lim, D. (1997) · Journal of Regional Science · doi:10.1111/0022-4146.00063 · Cited by 299
Self-citationRecurrence rates and probability estimates for the New Madrid Seismic Zone
Johnston, A. C., & Nava, S. J. (1985) · Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · doi:10.1029/jb090ib08p06737 · Cited by 143
Kim, T. J., Ham, H., & Boyce, D. E. (2002) · Papers of the Regional Science Association · doi:10.1111/j.1435-5597.2002.tb01231.x · Cited by 112
Cited by
A review of definitions and measures of system resilience
Hosseini, S., Barker, K., & Ramirez-Marquez, J. E. (2016) · Reliability Engineering & System Safety · doi:10.1016/j.ress.2015.08.006 · Cited by 1,892
Supply chain risk and resilience: theory building through structured experiments and simulation
Macdonald, J. R., Zobel, C. W., Melnyk, S. A., & Griffis, S. E. (2018) · International Journal of Production Research · doi:10.1080/00207543.2017.1421787 · Cited by 214
At the nexus of fire, water and society
Martin, D. A. (2016) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2015.0172 · Cited by 106
Resilience of Energy Infrastructure and Services: Modeling, Data Analytics, and Metrics
Ji, C., Wei, Y., & Poor, H. V. (2017) · Proceedings of the IEEE · doi:10.1109/jproc.2017.2698262 · Cited by 91
Ogie, R. I., Holderness, T., Dunn, S., & Turpin, E. (2018) · Computers, Environment and Urban Systems · doi:10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2017.11.004 · Cited by 66
Metadata
- Authors
- Chang, S. E., & Shinozuka, M.
- Venue
- Earthquake Spectra
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2004-08
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 739-755
- ISSN
- 1944-8201 (ISSN-L)
- 8755-2930
- OpenAlex
- W2161477551
- Cited by
- 678
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 14.49
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Measuring Improvements in the Disaster Resilience of Communities. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1193/1.1775796
- The paper
- Chang, S. E., & Shinozuka, M. (2004). Measuring Improvements in the Disaster Resilience of Communities. Earthquake Spectra. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1775796
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.