Search results

The purpose of this study is to analyse the reliability of Build Back Better slogan in the context of post-disaster housing reconstruction in developing countries, at enhancing disaster-resilience of housing and its occupants in the long term from socio-ecological systems resilience perspective.

A predominantly qualitative methodology and multi-disciplinary case study methodology is adopted to compare long-term outcomes of two post-disaster housing reconstruction interventions: post-2008 Bihar Kosi River floods in India and post-2010 Mentawai earthquake and tsunami in Indonesia.

Out of the nine generalizable findings, two of the most significant findings include giving freedom of choice or human capabilities to the disaster survivors and sustaining capacity development during and beyond the completion of housing reconstruction. These two processes play a significant role in linking reconstruction to resilience in the long term, especially of those living at- risk and poverty.

This paper further advances the current scholarship on overarching long-term impacts of housing reconstruction efforts, based on longitudinal and empirical studies in India and Indonesia. While these findings represent a snapshot of diverse and complex disaster experiences in the developing-world context, the comparison offers insight into how to turn the rhetoric surrounding “owner-driven” or “built back better” into long-term resilience outcomes.

The language of resilience is increasingly used by International organizations that seek to respond to contemporary social, economic, and environmental crises. This paper focuses on the World Bank’s World Development Reports, and its uses of resilience. By deploying a quantitative critical discourse analysis, this paper shows how in the recent years resilience has gained traction within the Bank’s discourse. It further analyses the evolution of the genre, the style, and the ideational content of the Bank’s discourse related to resilience. Resilience is now depicted as something that can be built and not just observed. Furthermore, it is increasingly reified in these reports and ascribed to a whole gamut of entities. The ontological indistinction of resilience reinforces its fit with contemporary neoliberal governance.

Post-disaster reconstruction poses a double-edged sword to its implementers as it demands addressing survivors’ need for speed as well as meeting the growing expectation to trigger resilience. While an owner-driven housing reconstruction (ODHR), inter-disciplinary and long-term approach has been promoted internationally; however, there is limited research focussed on the long-term impacts (>10 years after a disaster) of ODHR. Furthermore, there is no one accepted framework for practitioners to guide through the process of ODHR projects to carve pathways for disaster resilience. The purpose of this paper is to assimilate findings—contingent and generalisable—into a novel framework for future change in practice.

This paper deployed a mixed methods methodology with a comparative case study research method. Two case study projects were from the Indian state of Gujarat, 13 years after the 2001 earthquake and the other two from Bihar, 6 years since the 2008 Kosi river floods. Due to multi-disciplinary nature of research, empirical data collection relied on a mix of social sciences methods including 80 semi-structured interviews, and architectural research methods including the visual analysis of photographs and sketches. Three sample groups of agency members, beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries were purposively selected. Thematic content analysis was used for the data analysis.

The paper provides empirical insights on how ODHR projects in Indian states of Gujarat and Bihar succeeded at enhancing disaster resilience of communities. It suggests that the civil society organisations acted as “enablers” at four stages: envisioning strategically based on systemic understanding, building soft assets including community trust and dignity for social mobilisation prior to, proposing minor modifications to construction technology for its multi-hazard safety as well as cultural relevance, and sustaining capacity building efforts beyond reconstruction completion or beyond one project life-cycle.

The author of this paper cautions that the spiral framework needs further development to make it flexibility and customisable to suit the specifics of a particular context.

The implications of the findings discussed in this paper are primarily for practitioners involved in disaster recovery and development sector. Since prevailing models or frameworks neither incorporate multi-disciplinary approach (demanded by socio-ecological systems resilience concept), nor represent project scale, a novel, four-pronged framework for ODHR has been proposed in this paper for strategic success. The framework has been illustrated in spiral and tabular forms, and has been kept abstract to provide practitioners the much-needed flexibility for adapting it to suit the specifics of a particular context.

Resilience in agri-food supply chains (AFSCs) is an area of significant importance due to growing supply chain volatility. While the majority of research exploring supply chain resilience has originated from a supply chain management perspective, many other disciplines (such as environmental systems science and the social sciences) have also explored the topic. As complex social, economic and environmental constructs, the priority of resilience in AFSCs goes far beyond the company specific focus of supply chain management works and would conceivably benefit from including more diverse academic disciplines. However, this is hindered by inconsistencies in terminology and the conceptual components of resilience across different disciplines. The purpose of this study is to use a systematic literature review to identify which multidisciplinary aspects of resilience are applicable to AFSCs and to generate a novel AFSC resilience framework.

This paper uses a structured and multidisciplinary review of 137 articles in the resilience literature followed by critical analysis and synthesis of findings to generate new knowledge in the form of a novel AFSC resilience framework.

Findings indicate that the complexity of AFSCs and subsequent exposure to almost constant external interference means that disruptions cannot be seen as a one-off event; thus, resilience must concern the ability to not only maintain core function but also adapt to changing conditions.

A number of resilience elements can be used to enhance resilience, but their selection and implementation must be carefully matched to relevant phases of disruption and assessed on their broader supply chain impacts. In particular, the focus must be on overall impact on the ability of the supply chain as a whole to provide food security rather than to boost individual company performance.

The research novelty lies in the utilisation of wider understandings of resilience from various research fields to propose a rigorous and food-specific resilience framework with end consumer food security as its main focus.

The purpose of this paper is to outline the complex challenges organisations must address in order to respond and recover from disruptive events, and highlight the important perspectives within the growing narrative of resilience, from and operations and strategic management perspective.

Using an approach that involves the critique of relevant and latest literature, this paper looks to identify the challenges in developing resilience at an organisational level.

The outcome of this paper establishes a set of propositions to guide the development of organisational-level resilience as well as future research. These propositions highlight the features of both active and passive resilience, and identify key considerations for organisations.

These propositions highlight the features of both active and passive resilience, and identify key considerations for organisations. Through recognising these propositions, organisations may be better placed to address the impacts of disruptive events.

The purpose of this paper is to broadly explore the contributions of supply chain proficiency in relation to sustainable enterprise excellence, resilience and robustness (SEER2).

A pre-existing SEER2 model, referred to as the Springboard to SEER2, is put under the microscope to determine specific interactions of supply chain proficiency with six key areas of the Springboard: triple top-line strategy and governance; strategy execution via policies, processes and partnerships; financial and marketplace performance and impact; sustainability performance and impact; human ecology and capital performance and impact; and social-ecological and general innovation and continuous improvement performance and impact.

Supply chain proficiency is integral to attainment of SEER2. As such, supply chain proficiency must be thoughtfully and strategically approached, with success critical to enterprise contribution to mitigation or solution of wicked global challenges ranging from climate change, to food insecurity, to societal conflict.

This paper reveals in depth the centrality of supply chain proficiency to SEER2, suggesting that such models as those behind America's Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award and the European Quality Award might be enhanced by more deeply considering supply chain contributions to business and performance excellence. Supply chains are at present peripheral to such models, thereby providing essentially isolated views of enterprises in an age where supply chain collaboration is increasingly the norm.

The Benchmark Resilience tool (BRT-53) is an organisational-level resilience quantification methodology that assesses behavioural traits and perceptions linked to the organisation's ability to plan for, respond to and recover from emergencies and crises. The purpose of this paper is to show the development and validation of a short version of the BRT-53.

Items were drawn from the BRT-53 to create two short-form versions of the tool using two different methods for comparative purposes. The first method involves the selection of items based on the 13 theoretical constructs used in the development of the original tool. This shortened index is called the BRT-13A. The second method derived 13 items from the theoretical constructs using statistical correlations of the items within each construct. This shortened index is called the BRT-13B. The scores from each short-form index were computed into overall resilience scores that were then compared with the overall resilience scores generated from the BRT-53.

The results of these comparisons found that both the BRT-13A and BRT-13B produced valid and reliably similar results to the BRT-53. The BRT-13B proved to be slightly more valid and reliable than the BRT-13A and is recommended over the BRT-53.

The BRT-13B short-form version allows for the quantification of organisational resilience while significantly decreasing the likelihood of survey fatigue and low response rates with very little sacrifice to survey validity or reliability.

The purpose of this paper is to integrate resilience, robustness, and resplendence (R 3) with sustainable enterprise excellence (SEE) and social-ecological innovation (SEI) that assist firms to progress toward continuously relevant performance proceeding from continuously responsible strategy, behavior, and other actions.

Sustainable enterprise excellence, resilience, robustness, and resplendence (SEER3) model and the associated means of SEER 3 maturity assessment are introduced to explain the organizational concept.

SEER3 balances the complementary and competing interests of key stakeholder segments, including society and the natural environment and increases the likelihood of superior and sustainable competitive positioning and hence long-term enterprise success that is defined by continuously relevant and responsible governance, strategy, actions, and performance consistent with high-level organizational R3.

This paper adapts the established principles from physics to characterize enterprise R3 to come up with SEE model.

This paper aims to investigate the educational benefits and challenges of introducing natural science students to on-campus and off-campus sustainability research projects as an approach to education for sustainability.

The course “Science and Sustainability” at the University of Leuven is a stand-alone course that aims at providing master students in the natural sciences, education for (the benefit of) sustainability action. It was launched in 2016-2017 and has been running for two years now. The first year focused on getting students acquire a similar level of knowledge in sustainability, while, on a higher level, the experiential learning phase (project work) was supported with specific reflection assignments. In the second year, more specific attention was directed toward allowing students to get acquainted with systems thinking and deal with inter- and transdisciplinary issues by approaching problems from a multi-stakeholder view. Insight in the impact and the appreciation of the setup of the course was obtained from a series of questionnaires offered to all participating students at the beginning, about midway, and again at the end of the course.

Analysis of the students’ self-reported sustainability competence development shows a clear positive impact for almost all students who participated. A clear relation between the observed change and the students’ self-rating and attitude at the start, as well as with their discipline, is observed.

Information is gained on a number of factors of importance to impact the students’ attitude toward action for sustainability, and how this can be further improved.