Abstract

Resilience is increasing rapidly as a framework to understand and manage coupled human–natural systems. Yet the concept of resilience is rarely quantified. Here we quantify system resilience by operationalizing the notion of system tightness. Multiple resilience frameworks recognize the strong relationship between system tightness and resilience, though they differ on the directionality of that relationship. Thus, by measuring the system tightness we ultimately measure urban economic resilience, with the added benefit of empirically determining the directionality of the relationship between tightness and resilience. We then assess how well this measure predicts the response of urban economies to the recent so-called Great Recession. Results show that cities with lower tightness (higher resilience) fared better during the recession with respect to several economic productivity measures. However, in the absence of shocks, those with higher tightness (lower resilience) exhibit superior economic performance. Thus, a tradeoff between efficiency and resilience is nicely reflected in the empirical data. Although this study deals with economic shocks, quantitative metrics based on its methodology may help anticipate a city’s response to shocks more generally, such as natural disasters, climate change, social unrest or significant policy shifts.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number15010
JournalPalgrave Communications
Volume1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2015

Fingerprint

labor force
interdependence
resilience
Economics
Shock
economics
Climate Change
Disasters
recession
Labor force
Interdependence
Urban economics
Resilience
Labor
natural disaster
climate change
productivity
efficiency
economy
methodology

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Social Sciences(all)
  • Arts and Humanities(all)
  • Economics, Econometrics and Finance(all)
  • Psychology(all)

Cite this

Quantifying urban economic resilience through labour force interdependence. / Shutters, Shade; Muneepeerakul, Rachata; Lobo, Jose.

In: Palgrave Communications, Vol. 1, 15010, 01.01.2015.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{3c244cd389a742a780b4d85b34ab2017,
title = "Quantifying urban economic resilience through labour force interdependence",
abstract = "Resilience is increasing rapidly as a framework to understand and manage coupled human–natural systems. Yet the concept of resilience is rarely quantified. Here we quantify system resilience by operationalizing the notion of system tightness. Multiple resilience frameworks recognize the strong relationship between system tightness and resilience, though they differ on the directionality of that relationship. Thus, by measuring the system tightness we ultimately measure urban economic resilience, with the added benefit of empirically determining the directionality of the relationship between tightness and resilience. We then assess how well this measure predicts the response of urban economies to the recent so-called Great Recession. Results show that cities with lower tightness (higher resilience) fared better during the recession with respect to several economic productivity measures. However, in the absence of shocks, those with higher tightness (lower resilience) exhibit superior economic performance. Thus, a tradeoff between efficiency and resilience is nicely reflected in the empirical data. Although this study deals with economic shocks, quantitative metrics based on its methodology may help anticipate a city’s response to shocks more generally, such as natural disasters, climate change, social unrest or significant policy shifts.",
author = "Shade Shutters and Rachata Muneepeerakul and Jose Lobo",
year = "2015",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1057/palcomms.2015.10",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "1",
journal = "Palgrave Communications",
issn = "2055-1045",
publisher = "Palgrave Macmillan Ltd.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Quantifying urban economic resilience through labour force interdependence

AU - Shutters, Shade

AU - Muneepeerakul, Rachata

AU - Lobo, Jose

PY - 2015/1/1

Y1 - 2015/1/1

N2 - Resilience is increasing rapidly as a framework to understand and manage coupled human–natural systems. Yet the concept of resilience is rarely quantified. Here we quantify system resilience by operationalizing the notion of system tightness. Multiple resilience frameworks recognize the strong relationship between system tightness and resilience, though they differ on the directionality of that relationship. Thus, by measuring the system tightness we ultimately measure urban economic resilience, with the added benefit of empirically determining the directionality of the relationship between tightness and resilience. We then assess how well this measure predicts the response of urban economies to the recent so-called Great Recession. Results show that cities with lower tightness (higher resilience) fared better during the recession with respect to several economic productivity measures. However, in the absence of shocks, those with higher tightness (lower resilience) exhibit superior economic performance. Thus, a tradeoff between efficiency and resilience is nicely reflected in the empirical data. Although this study deals with economic shocks, quantitative metrics based on its methodology may help anticipate a city’s response to shocks more generally, such as natural disasters, climate change, social unrest or significant policy shifts.

AB - Resilience is increasing rapidly as a framework to understand and manage coupled human–natural systems. Yet the concept of resilience is rarely quantified. Here we quantify system resilience by operationalizing the notion of system tightness. Multiple resilience frameworks recognize the strong relationship between system tightness and resilience, though they differ on the directionality of that relationship. Thus, by measuring the system tightness we ultimately measure urban economic resilience, with the added benefit of empirically determining the directionality of the relationship between tightness and resilience. We then assess how well this measure predicts the response of urban economies to the recent so-called Great Recession. Results show that cities with lower tightness (higher resilience) fared better during the recession with respect to several economic productivity measures. However, in the absence of shocks, those with higher tightness (lower resilience) exhibit superior economic performance. Thus, a tradeoff between efficiency and resilience is nicely reflected in the empirical data. Although this study deals with economic shocks, quantitative metrics based on its methodology may help anticipate a city’s response to shocks more generally, such as natural disasters, climate change, social unrest or significant policy shifts.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85053114263&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85053114263&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1057/palcomms.2015.10

DO - 10.1057/palcomms.2015.10

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85053114263

VL - 1

JO - Palgrave Communications

JF - Palgrave Communications

SN - 2055-1045

M1 - 15010

ER -