首页> 外文期刊>Cities >Building urban and infrastructure resilience through connectivity: An institutional perspective on disaster risk management in Christchurch, New Zealand
【24h】

Building urban and infrastructure resilience through connectivity: An institutional perspective on disaster risk management in Christchurch, New Zealand

机译:通过连通性增强城市和基础设施的弹性:新西兰基督城的灾害风险管理的制度视角

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

The management of large-scale disasters in urban agglomerations often reveals fragmented governance structures. Accordingly, recent debates in the field of disaster risk management call for better coordination of agencies and actors across organisational and territorial boundaries, arguing that this would ultimately improve the resilience of urban areas. However, our analysis of the metropolitan area of Greater Christchurch, which experienced a series of devastating earthquakes in 2010/2011, shows that this conclusion inadequately acknowledges the uncertainties and institutional complexities in the governance of resilience. We show that debates on urban resilience can benefit from the concept of institutional connectivity - defined as institutionalised forms of vertical, horizontal or cross-territorial interaction - to systematically address these complexities. Our empirical results suggest that the efficacy of different forms of institutional connectivity depends on prevailing circumstances. Therefore, particular forms of connectivity should be prioritised on a case-by-case basis. Our empirical study reveals that enhancing institutional connectivity is a resource-intensive and contested process that might induce negative trade-offs. We contend that because institutions shape how different agencies and organisations interact, scholarly debates on urban resilience should put more emphasis on processes of institutional reform and stress the political dimension of institution building for urban resilience.
机译:城市群中大规模灾害的管理常常揭示出支离破碎的治理结构。因此,最近在灾害风险管理领域的辩论要求跨组织和地区边界的机构和参与者进行更好的协调,认为这将最终提高城市地区的弹性。但是,我们对2010/2011年经历了一系列毁灭性地震的大克赖斯特彻奇都会区的分析表明,该结论不足以确认韧性治理中的不确定性和体制复杂性。我们表明,关于城市弹性的辩论可以受益于制度连通性的概念(定义为纵向,横向或跨地区互动的制度化形式),可以系统地解决这些复杂性。我们的经验结果表明,不同形式的机构联系的效力取决于当前的情况。因此,应根据具体情况优先考虑特定形式的连接性。我们的实证研究表明,加强机构联系是一个资源密集且竞争激烈的过程,可能会导致负面的取舍。我们认为,由于制度决定着不同机构和组织之间的相互作用方式,有关城市弹性的学术辩论应更多地强调制度改革的过程,并强调城市弹性制度建设的政治层面。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Cities》 |2020年第3期|102573.1-102573.10|共10页
  • 作者

  • 作者单位

    Tech Univ Darmstadt Res Training Grp KRITIS Dolivostr 15 D-64293 Darmstadt Germany|Univ Utrecht Fac Geosci Dept Human Geog & Spatial Planning Princetonlaan 8a NL-3584 CB Utrecht Netherlands;

    Univ Utrecht Fac Geosci Dept Human Geog & Spatial Planning Princetonlaan 8a NL-3584 CB Utrecht Netherlands;

    Univ Utrecht Fac Geosci Copernicus Inst Sustainable Dev Princetonlaan 8a NL-3584 CB Utrecht Netherlands;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

    Urban resilience; Infrastructure resilience; Institutional connectivity; Disaster risk management;

    机译:城市弹性;基础设施弹性;机构连接;灾害风险管理;

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号