Resilience in disaster research: three versions

Rasmus Dahlberg; Christine Tind Johannessen-Henry; Emmanuel Raju; Suhella Tulsiani

Resilience in disaster research: three versions

Rasmus Dahlberg, Christine Tind Johannessen-Henry, Emmanuel Raju, Suhella Tulsiani

21 Citationer (Scopus)

Abstract

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.

Originalsprog	Engelsk
Tidsskrift	Civil Engineering and Environmental Systems
Vol/bind	32
Udgave nummer	1-2
Sider (fra-til)	44-54
Antal sider	11
ISSN	1028-6608
Status	Udgivet - 3 apr. 2015

Emneord

Det Sundhedsvidenskabelige Fakultet

Citationsformater

@article{3fe8638e5566475a8213a7dd668c6a30,

title = "Resilience in disaster research: three versions",

abstract = "This paper explores the concept of resilience in disaster management settings in modern society. The diversity and relatedness of {\textquoteleft}resilience{\textquoteright} as a concept and as a process are reflected in its presentation through three {\textquoteleft}versions{\textquoteright}: (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.",

keywords = "Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, Resilience, emergency response, critical infrastructure, pastoral care, trauma, vulnerability, Hyogo framework of action, disaster risk reduction",

author = "Rasmus Dahlberg and Johannessen-Henry, {Christine Tind} and Emmanuel Raju and Suhella Tulsiani",

year = "2015",

month = apr,

day = "3",

language = "English",

volume = "32",

pages = "44--54",

journal = "Civil Engineering and Environmental Systems",

issn = "1028-6608",

publisher = "Taylor & Francis",

number = "1-2",

}

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 - 2015/4/3

Y1 - 2015/4/3

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

SN - 1028-6608

VL - 32

SP - 44

EP - 54

JO - Civil Engineering and Environmental Systems

JF - Civil Engineering and Environmental Systems

IS - 1-2

ER -

Resilience in disaster research: three versions

Abstract

Emneord

Fingeraftryk

Citationsformater