Fostering Community Resilience by Tom Lansford Jack Covarrubias Justin Miller

Author:Tom Lansford, Jack Covarrubias, Justin Miller [Tom Lansford, Jack Covarrubias, Justin Miller]
Language: eng
Format: epub
Tags: Social Science, Disasters & Disaster Relief
ISBN: 9781317133834
Google: MHsGDAAAQBAJ
Publisher: Routledge
Published: 2016-04-22T06:02:24+00:00

Institutional Framework

In measuring community resiliency, including political resilience, it is important to determine the specific factors that can be quantified and universally applied. For example, while two of the three pilot cities of the CARRI project are prone to Atlantic hurricanes, Memphis is not. However, this should not detract from the goal of identifying the factors of resiliency that can be applied to all communities regardless of the type of disaster. Additionally, a goal is to apply the factors of, and the lessons from, resiliency to areas that are considered more vulnerable to man-made disasters, such as New York City or Washington, DC. Quantifying resiliency is not an easy task but it is the undertaking of the CARRI project and its research teams. An important step in defining, measuring and facilitating resiliency is institutionalizing the process as much as possible so that it can be applied across a broad-spectrum of communities and disasters.

An institutional framework for political resilience focuses on the role of government institutions and concentrates on two key roles. The first is facilitating and implementing preparedness in all sectors. Warren Edwards, CARRI director, stated:

preparedness underlies all resilience functions. One needs to prepare to prevent, prepare to protect, prepare to respond and prepare to recover. Creating a capacity to address all of these areas in a coherent manner builds resilience in a system or in an organization.6

Building resilience into a system is the end goal of institutionalizing the concept. One will note that at the core of Edwards’ statement is preparedness at all levels and stages. Citizens may become too confident that government at different levels, local, state and federal, can provide the immediate response or answers in a time of crisis.

Leadership is critically important, but political leadership is not always enough. In an essay in the edited volume, Seeds of Disaster, Roots of Response, Philip E. Auerswald and his coauthors point out that central to recovery is “sustained commitments carried out through effective leadership.”7 However, they also note that:

[b]y ‘leadership’ we do not mean the political image of a charismatic individual able to mobilize action through sheer force of personality…Rather we mean the assumption of responsibility and accountability by individuals with sufficient authority over resources and decision to effectively address catastrophic events.8

In many cases corporations, NGOs and even private groups have greater resources and capabilities to address specific issues of recovery. Government, or “public policy leadership” is most effective when dealing with or deciding the inevitable “trade-offs between collective and private interests”—those difficult decisions that need the political legitimacy of elected officials in order to ensure acceptance or buy-in from the community.9

While the government is an integral component of recovery, it is not adequately equipped to guide or oversee all aspects of the long-term recovery of a community. This is especially true of federal agencies that are less able to take advantage of informal network and community social systems. Instead, it is important to underscore that the entire community plays a critical role in the long-term recovery effort.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.