Resilience in disaster research: three versions
Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › fagfællebedømt
Standard
Resilience in disaster research : three versions. / Dahlberg, Rasmus; Johannessen-Henry, Christine Tind; Raju, Emmanuel; Tulsiani, Suhella.
I: Civil Engineering and Environmental Systems, Bind 32, Nr. 1-2, 09.04.2015, s. 44-54.Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › fagfællebedømt
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Resilience in disaster research
T2 - three versions
AU - Dahlberg, Rasmus
AU - Johannessen-Henry, Christine Tind
AU - Raju, Emmanuel
AU - Tulsiani, Suhella
PY - 2015/4/9
Y1 - 2015/4/9
N2 - This paper explores the concept of resilience in disaster management settings in modern society. The diversity and relatedness of ‘resilience’ as a concept and as a process are reflected in its presentation through three ‘versions’: (i) pastoral care and the role of the church for victims of disaster trauma, (ii) federal policy and the US Critical Infrastructure Plan, and (iii) the building of resilient communities for disaster risk reduction practices. The three versions aim to offer characteristic expressions of resilience, as increasingly evident in current disaster literature. In presenting resilience through the lens of these three versions, the article highlights the complexity in using resilience as an all-encompassing word. The article also suggests the need for understanding the nexuses between risk, vulnerability, and policy for the future of resilience discourse.
AB - This paper explores the concept of resilience in disaster management settings in modern society. The diversity and relatedness of ‘resilience’ as a concept and as a process are reflected in its presentation through three ‘versions’: (i) pastoral care and the role of the church for victims of disaster trauma, (ii) federal policy and the US Critical Infrastructure Plan, and (iii) the building of resilient communities for disaster risk reduction practices. The three versions aim to offer characteristic expressions of resilience, as increasingly evident in current disaster literature. In presenting resilience through the lens of these three versions, the article highlights the complexity in using resilience as an all-encompassing word. The article also suggests the need for understanding the nexuses between risk, vulnerability, and policy for the future of resilience discourse.
KW - Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences
KW - Resilience
KW - emergency response
KW - critical infrastructure
KW - pastoral care
KW - trauma
KW - vulnerability
KW - Hyogo framework of action
KW - disaster risk reduction
M3 - Journal article
VL - 32
SP - 44
EP - 54
JO - Civil Engineering and Environmental Systems
JF - Civil Engineering and Environmental Systems
SN - 1028-6608
IS - 1-2
ER -
ID: 135271820