Weaving equity into infrastructure resilience research: a decadal review and future directions

Natalie Coleman, Xiangpeng Li, Tina Comes, Ali Mostafavi
{"title":"Weaving equity into infrastructure resilience research: a decadal review and future directions","authors":"Natalie Coleman, Xiangpeng Li, Tina Comes, Ali Mostafavi","doi":"10.1038/s44304-024-00022-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Infrastructure resilience plays an important role in mitigating the negative impacts of natural hazards by ensuring the continued accessibility and availability of resources. Increasingly, equity is recognized as essential for infrastructure resilience. Yet, after about a decade of research on equity in infrastructure resilience, what is missing is a systematic overview of the state of the art and a research agenda across different infrastructures and hazards. To address this gap, this paper presents a systematic review of equity literature on infrastructure resilience in relation to natural hazard events. In our systematic review of 99 studies, we followed an 8-dimensional assessment framework that recognizes 4 equity definitions including distributional-demographic, distributional-spatial, procedural, and capacity equity. Significant findings show that (1) the majority of studies found were located in the US, (2) interest in equity in infrastructure resilience has been exponentially rising, (3) most data collection methods used descriptive and open-data, particularly with none of the non-US studies using human mobility data, (4) limited quantitative studies used non-linear analysis such as agent-based modeling and gravity networks, (5) distributional equity is mostly studied through disruptions in power, water, and transportation caused by flooding and tropical cyclones, and (6) other equity aspects, such as procedural equity, remain understudied. We propose that future research directions could quantify the social costs of infrastructure resilience and advocate a better integration of equity into resilience decision-making. This study fills a critical gap in how equity considerations can be integrated into infrastructure resilience against natural hazards, providing a comprehensive overview of the field and developing future research directions to enhance societal outcomes during and after disasters. As such, this paper is meant to inform and inspire researchers, engineers, and community leaders to understand the equity implications of their work and to embed equity at the heart of infrastructure resilience plans.","PeriodicalId":501712,"journal":{"name":"npj Natural Hazards","volume":" ","pages":"1-19"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s44304-024-00022-x.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"npj Natural Hazards","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s44304-024-00022-x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Infrastructure resilience plays an important role in mitigating the negative impacts of natural hazards by ensuring the continued accessibility and availability of resources. Increasingly, equity is recognized as essential for infrastructure resilience. Yet, after about a decade of research on equity in infrastructure resilience, what is missing is a systematic overview of the state of the art and a research agenda across different infrastructures and hazards. To address this gap, this paper presents a systematic review of equity literature on infrastructure resilience in relation to natural hazard events. In our systematic review of 99 studies, we followed an 8-dimensional assessment framework that recognizes 4 equity definitions including distributional-demographic, distributional-spatial, procedural, and capacity equity. Significant findings show that (1) the majority of studies found were located in the US, (2) interest in equity in infrastructure resilience has been exponentially rising, (3) most data collection methods used descriptive and open-data, particularly with none of the non-US studies using human mobility data, (4) limited quantitative studies used non-linear analysis such as agent-based modeling and gravity networks, (5) distributional equity is mostly studied through disruptions in power, water, and transportation caused by flooding and tropical cyclones, and (6) other equity aspects, such as procedural equity, remain understudied. We propose that future research directions could quantify the social costs of infrastructure resilience and advocate a better integration of equity into resilience decision-making. This study fills a critical gap in how equity considerations can be integrated into infrastructure resilience against natural hazards, providing a comprehensive overview of the field and developing future research directions to enhance societal outcomes during and after disasters. As such, this paper is meant to inform and inspire researchers, engineers, and community leaders to understand the equity implications of their work and to embed equity at the heart of infrastructure resilience plans.

Abstract Image

将公平纳入基础设施复原力研究:十年回顾与未来方向
基础设施的抗灾能力通过确保资源的持续可用性和可用性,在减轻自然灾害的负面影响方面发挥着重要作用。人们日益认识到,公平对于基础设施的抗灾能力至关重要。然而,在对基础设施抗灾能力中的公平性进行了大约十年的研究之后,目前缺少的是对不同基础设施和灾害的研究现状和研究议程的系统性概述。为了填补这一空白,本文对与自然灾害事件相关的基础设施抗灾能力方面的公平性文献进行了系统回顾。在对 99 项研究的系统性综述中,我们采用了一个 8 维评估框架,该框架承认 4 种公平定义,包括分配-人口、分配-空间、程序和能力公平。重要发现包括:(1)大部分研究都在美国进行;(2)对基础设施抗灾能力公平性的关注度呈指数上升趋势;(3)大部分数据收集方法都使用了描述性和开放数据,尤其是非美国的研究都没有使用人员流动数据、(4) 有限的定量研究使用了非线性分析方法,如基于代理的建模和重力网络;(5) 主要通过洪水和热带气旋造成的电力、水和交通中断来研究分配公平;(6) 其他公平方面,如程序公平,仍然没有得到充分研究。我们建议,未来的研究方向可以量化基础设施复原力的社会成本,并倡导将公平更好地融入复原力决策中。本研究填补了如何将公平因素纳入基础设施抵御自然灾害方面的重要空白,提供了对该领域的全面概述,并制定了未来的研究方向,以提高灾中和灾后的社会成果。因此,本文旨在为研究人员、工程师和社区领袖提供信息和启发,使他们了解其工作对公平的影响,并将公平纳入基础设施抗灾计划的核心。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信