Farzad Behtash - Conceptual models for disaster resilient communities

2,786 views
2,587 views

Published on

Farzad Behtash - Conceptual models for disaster resilient communities

Published in: Education
0 Comments
4 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
2,786
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
68
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
4
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Farzad Behtash - Conceptual models for disaster resilient communities

  1. 1. M.Reza.Farzad Behtash Faculty Member of Islamic Azad University - Bonab Branch PhD Candidate in Islamic Urbanism at Tabriz Islamic Art University [email_address] M.T.Pirbabaei PhD, Faculty Member of Tabriz Islamic Art University M.T.Aghababaei MS, Expert of HSE Research Group in Research & Planning Center of Tehran
  2. 2. Introduction: <ul><li>This article is a summary of research project. </li></ul><ul><li>We want to define a comprehensive pattern of resilient community for our country. </li></ul><ul><li>At this article: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Definition of resiliency </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Definition of vulnerability </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Models and frameworks of resilient communities </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Explain our suggested framework </li></ul></ul>
  3. 3. Why Resiliency <ul><li>A recent review of worldwide natural hazard losses during 2001 identified 700 natural disasters , resulting in 25,000 deaths , $36 billion in economic losses, and $11.5 billion in insured losses </li></ul><ul><li>Most of these losses occurred at locations where vulnerable urban settlements were developed near known hazard areas, such as floodplains , earthquake fault zones , and hurricane-prone Shorelines </li></ul>
  4. 4. Definition of Resiliency: <ul><li>According to Holling , “resilience determines the persistence of relationships within a system and is a measure of the ability of these systems to absorb change of state variable, driving variables, and parameters, and still persist”. </li></ul>
  5. 5. <ul><li>Louis Lebel (2001) “the potential of a particular configuration of a system to maintain its structure/function in the face of disturbance, and the ability of the system to re-organize following disturbance-driven change and measured by size of stability domain”. </li></ul>Definition of Resiliency:
  6. 6. <ul><li>Subcommittee on Disaster Reduction (SDR, 2005) “the capacity of a system, community, or society potentially exposed to hazards to adapt, by resisting or changing, in order to reach and maintain an acceptable level of functioning and structure. This is determined by the degree to which the social system is capable of organizing itself to increase its capacity for learning from past disasters for better future protection and to improve risk reduction measures.” </li></ul>Definition of Resiliency:
  7. 7. <ul><li>Vulnerability is the flip side of Resilience : when a social or ecological system loses resilience it becomes vulnerable to change that previously could be absorbed </li></ul><ul><li>Vulnerability is a function of the exposure (who or what is at risk) and the sensitivity of the system (the degree to which people and places can be harmed) </li></ul><ul><li>Vulnerability arises from the intersection of human systems , the built environment , and the natural environment . </li></ul>Definition of Vulnerability:
  8. 9. Status in Resilient Communities:
  9. 10. Frameworks and Models of Resiliency <ul><li>Community Resilience Model ( Center for Community Enterprise ) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>People, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Organization in the Community, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Resources in the Community, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Community Process. </li></ul></ul>
  10. 11. <ul><li>Resilience Alliance (CSIRO, Australia; Arizona State University, USA; Stockholm University, Sweden) has defined four factors: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Metabolic Flows </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Governance Networks </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Social Dynamics </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Built Environment </li></ul></ul>Frameworks and Models of Resiliency
  11. 13. <ul><li>Godschalk (2003) , characteristics of resilient systems: </li></ul><ul><li>Redundancy - systems designed with multiple nodes to ensure that failure of one component does not cause the entire system to fail </li></ul><ul><li>Diversity - multiple components or nodes versus a central node, to protect against a site specific threat </li></ul><ul><li>Efficiency - positive ratio of energy supplied to energy delivered by a dynamic system </li></ul><ul><li>Autonomy - capability to operate independent of outside control </li></ul><ul><li>Strength - power to resist a hazard force or attack </li></ul><ul><li>Interdependence - integrated system components to support each other </li></ul><ul><li>Adaptability - capacity to learn from experience and the flexibility to change </li></ul><ul><li>Collaboration - multiple opportunities and incentives for broad stakeholder participation </li></ul>Frameworks and Models of Resiliency
  12. 14. <ul><ul><li>Social Vulnerability; </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Build Environment and Infrastructure; </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Natural System and Exposure; </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Hazard Mitigation and Planning </li></ul></ul>Community and Regional Resilience Initiative (CARRI): Hazards and Vulnerability Research Institute Department of Geography University of South Carolina Frameworks and Models of Resiliency
  13. 15. Community and Regional Resilience Initiative (CARRI): Frameworks and Models of Resiliency
  14. 16. Proposal Frameworks:
  15. 17. Components Dimensions Social Race and ethnicity Age Social participation Behaviors Social capital Population, Gender NGOs Demographic Special needs Immigration Social security Household structure Socioeconomic status Flexibility Interest
  16. 18. Components Dimensions Economic Economic stability Continuity of business Supply chain Commercial capital Dynamic economic Employment and occupation Tourism Assets Economic security Housing
  17. 19. Components Dimensions Cultural Religion Ideas Values and principals Education Cultural capital Language Interoperable communications Cultural Independency Continuity of settlement Law obedient
  18. 20. Components Dimensions Physical Land use planning Building standards and codes Lifelines Critical Infrastructure Smart growth Local establishment and coherence Independency, sufficiency and efficiency of fabric Form, Space, Mass Physical structure Valuable fabric Primary core Redundancy Diversity Autonomy Adaptability Safety and strength Build technology Access to service Monuments and icons
  19. 21. Components Dimensions Political Legislation Political stability Continuity of government National and international stability Emergency management Response plan Hazard mitigation plan Comprehensive plan Recovery plan
  20. 22. Components Dimensions Geographical Climate Topography Environment capital Natural resources Special planning
  21. 23. Components Dimensions Environmental Water resources Pollution Erosion rates Flood zones Coastal areas Habitat loss
  22. 24. Components Dimensions Historical Preliminary core Formation elements Human capital Acceptance of experiences
  23. 25. Applied Conclusions: <ul><li>Defining & Developing indicators of different dimensions for measuring them </li></ul><ul><li>Implementing this framework for given communities </li></ul><ul><li>Determining which resilient dimension of community are powerful </li></ul><ul><li>Making Stranger the weak dimensions </li></ul>
  24. 26. <ul><li>Thank You for Your Attention </li></ul><ul><li>Dear audience can send </li></ul><ul><li>their questions to my Email: </li></ul><ul><li>[email_address] </li></ul>

×