T1.5: Resilience Refugees & Integration

The central theme of this session was the importance of social resilience in the framework of urban resilience. Social capital paving a way for social resilience is one of the most important aspects of holistic urban resilience.

Studies show that the current wave of migration has been the first biggest wave of mass migration since the Second World War (OECD, 21017), and that calls for new systems (tangible and intangible) of integration. Hence there is currently a need to bring refugee integration mechanisms to the forefront to be studied and tackled. The authors of the papers below have used case studies from various parts of the world, global north and south, to elaborate how integration policies are imperative for social capital and thereby leading to social resilience.

This sessions highlights the importance of social capital and emphasis on a renewal of integration frameworks world-wide to facilitate welcoming urban environments for people fleeing climate change and war. Although each presentation aimed to bring about social resilience, their approaches were unique. One propagated the use of technology, the other, studying urban landscapes and using that as a tool, and another using the theoretical framework of the right to the city and asset acclamation for eliminating poverty traps.

Proposed scenarios for the use of Social Resilience Digital Tools in the assessment of refugees’ integration process in the Greek cities
Eleni Oureilidou, Konstantinos Ioannidis

Oureilidou proposes using digital platforms for urban placemaking to facilitate the integration of refugees in Greek cities. She uses theoretical backgrounds of smart cities, urban & social resilience, urban informatics & urban big data, urban commons & digital tools, Greek cities & on-going refugee crisis as a preamble to her proposal. She intends to use participatory platforms and technologies as indicators of cultural symbiosis. Oureilidou claims the main problems experienced by Athens & Thessaloniki are unprecedented urban expansion combined with the growing pressure of becoming a global city. With the financial crisis Greece is experiencing, the added “burden” of refugee integration wasn’t given a priority and there is a gap in the current approaches by the government to facilitate successful integration processes. She argues that by integrating, networking and creating social capital, the Greek cities will achieve social resilience. Her approach although seems pragmatic, might leave poorer sections of the community out from interacting with technology. An interesting point she brought up was that, the collection of urban data can explain urban patterns, processes and urban engagement/ civic participation. And using this urban data, the proposals for placemaking could be streamlined to facilitate bottom up urban making. The process she wants to use first collect data using social media platforms and sensor systems installed in the city, creating social capital. Then organising activities to assess the needs of the citizens and refugees alike (including vulnerable populations – the how, was not elaborated upon). Using the data from the needs assessment, online applications would facilitate bottom up initiatives of placemaking (market, playgrounds, etc) thereby resulting in the indicators of cultural symbiosis, hence, long-term social resilience.

Landscape, community, and resilience: migration and inclusive cities
Maria Trovato, Katherine Dunster

As landscape architects, their aim was to find the path to shared landscapes. They mainly looked at cultural resilience and how refugees appropriated the built environment in their own way. The authors of this paper wanted to explore and compare cultural appropriation in two contexts by the same group of people. Vancouver was of stark contrast in how the government and the citizens actually invested time, energy and monetarily in refugees by sponsoring them, setting up welcome centres, and helping opening small businesses. The government had a framework of integration for the migration that would take place to support their integration into society. Small Syrian and Turkish businesses started popping up around the neighbourhood, there were graffiti (although informal, nevertheless heart-warming) with ’refugees are welcome here’ signs.

In Vancouver and Beirut, the built environment is used as a tool for placemaking in their own way, however the context allows them to. Could this placemaking lead to cultural resilience and hence contribute to building community resilience for disaster risk reduction?

The arguments to these approaches could be highly contextual. These initiatives seem effective if implemented by governing agencies, as in the example of Vancouver. These top-down initiatives encourage more citizens to be accommodating of migrants. Another important thing to note was that Vancouver is essentially a migrant city, compared to Beirut; so how we expect these two populations to receive refugees the same way? It would have been interesting to know how Beirut could learn from Vancouver or vice versa. 

Resilience of urban refugees in Dar es Salaam
Maria Trovato, Katherine Dunster

Through her research, Aisling intends to tackle the resilience of the urban poor communities (of refugees as well as Tanzanians) in Dar es Salaam through asset accumulation to strengthen them against the shocks and stresses of disasters and ultimately relieve them of poverty. Aisling uses the theoretical framework of right to the city authors such as David Harvey, Peter Marcuse, Henri Lefebvre and theories by Jeffery Sachs and Caroline Moser of how asset accumulation could be a way out of the poverty trap. She stipulates that resilience needs to be looked at the household and municipal level in order to achieve urban resilience and that the poorest communities need to be looked at because of the level of social disparity in Dar es Salaam. She heavily condoned the Tanzanian government, instigating that their lack of vision has led to its current piecemeal and uncoordinated approach towards urban development thus propagating poverty and poor integration of urban refugees. She gives an example of the government’s lack of investment into its public transport infrastructure that led to children from poorer and remote areas needing to drop out of schools, then taking up street vending jobs, perpetuating them further into poverty. To summarise, she proposed to tackle urban resilience through a) to look into needs assessment at household and municipal level; b) household asset accumulation; c) long term vision of urban development.

T4.4b: Panel on Culture and Resilience

The special session on “Culture and Resilience” focused on the research and papers developed under the INCA project, a decision support framework for improving cross-border area resilience to disasters.

The objective of the INCA project by authors from MINES ParisTech, Paris-Dauphine University and Karlsruhe Institute of Technology and funded by ANR (Agence Nationale de la Recherche) and DFG (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, the German Research Foundation) is to contribute to the understanding and the enhancing of the cross-border area resilience with regard to the risk of disasters with conceptual and empirical research and the development and experiment of a decision-support system taking into account the cultural dimension. On a different note, the last intervention highlighted the relevance of the local-specific interpretation of urban way of life to contribute in redefining the model of a resilient urban system.

The session highlighted the critical roles that communities have within urban sustainability transition. The first three talks, framed within the same project, revolved around the idea that in order to increase their response capacity in the event of disasters, communities need to work together to avoid breaks in “the resilience chain” and overcome the challenges that cultural differences might bring. The final talk illustrated the tensions between the global agenda and the economic targets and the specific-local needs and cultural identity fighting to survive the gentrification.

Impact of culture on urban resilience: exercising inter-organizational collaboration through scenarios.
Louise Lemyre, Eric Rigaud

The session started with the joint presentation by Eric Rigaud from MINES Paristech and Louise Lemyre from University of Ottawa on the impact of the viability of culture on resilience within the French-German project INCA dedicated to study borderland resilience and to try to develop technological methodological solutions to understand it. Resilience is associated with non-linearity and complexity and on the potential of supplies of a situation that individual organizations and territory have to recover from. But the most important thing of resilience on the territory is that its activation is based on the network of different organizations (public private, citizens, civil society) that at one moment or another have to decide, act, communicate, collaborate, cooperate. One of the viabilities of the dynamic of this network is culture. Culture has been defined, studied by anthropologists to understand how the collective adapt to their ecological safety and how they will adopt some rules in order to be able to communicate and collaborate. And also to understand how they decide to take action or how they cooperate.

Mrs Lemyre, continues explaining that diversity exists in the national identities, but also in the disciplinary background as well as the organizational cultures in terms of the way that decisions are being made. When organizations work together, in terms of their governance, sometimes they coordinate to share information but for more requiring problems they will have to cooperate and share some resources but yet keeping their identities and their decision making. For resilience, where you need to transform and find new solutions, you need to collaborate and for that you need a new scheme and a new way to interact. Resilience is about problems that are so big that one organization could not solve on their own, there is always certain parts of expertise that is missing.

A Multi-Agent System to Improve Resilience of Critical Infrastructure in Cross-Border Disasters
Miriam Klein, Farnaz Mahdavian, Marcus Wiens, Frank Schultmann

Ms Klein’s presentation outlines the scope for an agent-based simulation of cross-border cooperation in the case of a power blackout. To achieve a high resilience, it is important to overcome language and culture barriers and to fasten the information and capacity exchange. Cross-border communication and cooperation in crisis management present a high potential to analyze different trajectories of a crisis and to find strategies for fast and efficient reactions. 

The simulation shows the dynamic evolution of the crisis where the failure of critical infrastructure together with people behavior directly affects the responding capacity of the health system. Using an event-based perspective, it is possible to identify the initial cause or first order effects of failures making it possible to propose appropriate preventive measures. A second type of analysis refers to the interoperability of authorities. It can be analyzed how communication and coordination among actors of different nationalities can be improved such that delays in information flows are minimized. The project comprises behavioral studies, expert interviews and workshops, which lead to a deeper understanding of the character of a cross-border area. The project aims to strengthen the resilience of the border region by finding a strategy for the optimal intervention to avoid cascading effects in critical infrastructure and to minimize delays in information flows.

Considering Inter-organizational breaks when implementing resilience
Nour Kanan, Anouck Adrot

Kanaan and Adrot presentation talks about the issue of inter-organizational breaks. Urban resilience is the capacity of the city to revamp from destruction. Cross-border urban areas present a double challenge. Analyzing a cross-border coordination failure between France and Italy in 1999 in the Mont Blanc tunnel fire, their research focuses in studying inter-organizational breaks that might occur in disaster situations understanding those as the phenomena of social difficulties characterized by amplification of conflicts between responders in situations of crisis and erosion of social needs between the same responders than can threaten the response to the crisis. When resiliency occurs in a regional level, governance shall anticipate and avoid critical situations. The theoretical gap focuses also in the link between resilience and culture, on the lack of understanding of the nature of culture while assessing crisis management situations. They propose a multi-layered approach and analytical framing of resilience and culture. Resilience is not only about individual is not only about organizations is something that materializes and is embodied in a multi-layer holistic view of culture. They identify 4 layers: cognitive, operational, managerial and structural.

The Actualization of local-specific Urban Culture: The Case of Traditional Street Markets in Jakarta.
Regina Suryadjaja, Miya Irawati, Jo Santoso

To conclude the session, Jo Santoso talks about the problem between the functional city as a human settlement and as part of a global system. People that talk about globalization are only thinking about integrating the city in the global economic system but many people are not aware that this process of integration has an impact in the entire social ecological system of the city. Through the globalization the relation between cities in one country is changing, each city is trying more to find their own way to integrate, to be a part of the global system and have less interest in the connection with the neighbor cities. Through globalization, cities are changing their relation to the hinterland: the city will tend to take more advantage to benefit from the globalization instead of thinking how to strengthen their relation with the hinterland. On the other hand, the relation between the urban areas within the same city is changing as well through globalization system. Mr. Santoso presents a case study using the local-specific markets role in the city of Jakarta and how these can help overcome the impact of urbanization and how they present a conflicting situation with globalization. Jakarta has a different cultural system and globalization is threatening that culture. Santoso displays several pictures and description about the local-specific market and praises the cultural aspects of these Indonesian jewels.

T4.4a: Panel on Commons & Values Beyond Urban

In the era of climate change a lot has been discussed regarding urban resilience. This is considered to be a desirable state that refers to the ability of an urban system to rapidly return to its normal state of functions after a shock or disturbance.

In the session ‘Commons & Values Beyond Urban’ the attention shifted at community resilience as a component of urban resilience. The main points that were discussed were how communities can be more self-relied and build assets that they help them being less vulnerable. Resilience in most of the cases of this session was discussed more as a metaphor and as an entry point to start thinking for more equitable societies rather than as a strategy to be implemented.

In the presentations of this session has been discussed how urban policies that are supposed to help communities being more resilient often superficially adopt the term and end doing business as usual that often create new exclusions and inequalities. It is important to ask if resilience interventions benefit the most vulnerable segments of societies. Thus, there’s a need of reframing resilience through a more substantial engagement with a term and though making it the status quo in the formal planning system. Moreover, it is important to get values into urban planning that go beyond merely growth, expansion, and money discussions and rethink the relationship to civic infrastructures and pursue for more participatory societies.

The Value of Collective and Individual Assets in Building Urban Community Resilience
Wijitbusaba Marome, Diane Archer, Boonanan Natakun, Nuttavikhom Phanthuwongpakdee

The first presentation of this session had the title ‘The value of collective and individual assets in building urban community resilience’ and was focusing on marginalized communities in Bangkok, Thailand. The presentation focuses on the main risks that three marginalized communities face in Bangkok, i.e. floods, droughts, and economic crisis as a result of them. Official response mechanisms are not localized, so they might fail to help these vulnerable communities. Thus, it is examined the development of collective-self help adaptation strategies. The main challenges to overcome are the lack of long term planning and the dependence on external help. In order to overcome these challenges, the presentation proposes the use of a toolkit for the creation of collective assets such as public spaces and saving mechanisms that will help communities being more resilient.

Rethinking Urban Commons in the Age of Transductive Territorial Production: A Study on Relational Networks in Rapidly Growing Asian and Australasian Cities.
Manfredo Manfredini

The second presentation had the title  ‘Rethinking urban commons in the age of transductive territorial production: a study on relational networks in rapidly growing Asian and Australasian cities’ and focuses on the changing public space in Auckland New Zealand. Resilience in this presentation was related to repetition and redundancy and therefore it was used as a metaphor and not something that could be implemented as a strategy. The main point of the presentation was that the public space change has been transforming through new technologies, social media, and hegemonic regimes into tele-, quasi-, and/or pseudo-public space. These spatial concepts refer to spatial typologies such as malls, privatized public space, and digital public space. These new paradigms of public space are based on consumption and can be highly exclusive leading to inequalities within the society.

Influence of grassroots initiatives on forming urban resilience within communities
Frank Othengrafen, Lena Greinke, Filip Śnieg

The third presentation was titled ‘Influence of grassroots initiatives on forming urban resilience within communities’ and was a comparative study of grassroots movements in Thessaloniki, Greece, and Hanover, Germany. Both cities have similarities in terms of size of the population and the importance of social movements for the production of urban space. However, the motivations and the partnerships of these grassroots initiatives have been different for each case. In Thessaloniki, the examined grassroots initiatives have been created after the 2011 Greek financial crisis as coping mechanisms, i.e. out of necessity. Moreover, these initiatives have been quasi-informal and developed in a legal grey zone. In the case of Hanover, social movements are usually in partnership with the municipality and occurred to deal with environmental issues and to pursue more affordable housing. The main challenge for both cases is that grassroots movements were too focused on the district level and the question was how to scale them up.

Assessing Community Resilience of Rural Villages supported by the Korean Authoritarian Regime
Chung Ho Kim

The fourth presentation of this session was titled ‘Assessing community resilience of rural villages supported by the Korean authoritarian regime’ and examines the South Korean New Village Movement (KNVM) as a form of demographic resilience. In the context of South Korea, rapid urbanization has been seen as a threat that should be controlled and thus they started implementing the KNVM, a rural development program, as a reaction to the rapid urbanization. But KNVM could also be considered as a way to urbanize rural land. The main themes of this program were: built environment transformation, population changes, and resource management changes. There have been different plans associated with this program such as the Korean family plan of 1972-1981 and the Korean deforestation plan of 1973-1978. The final socio-ecological assessment of the program revealed that KNVM was a large-scale, top-down implementation that decreased diversity, increased complexity in urban and rural management, and was inconsistent on its temporal and spatial dimensions.

In Pursuit of Urban Resilience
Laura Beckwith

The final presentation of this session had title ‘In pursuit of urban resilience’ and was referring to resilience and inclusion in Phnom Penh, Cambodia. The research objective was to examine how marginalized communities mobilize their own resources in order to be resilient by themselves. The research was focused on an informal settlement in the peri-urban zone of the Phnom Penh. For the inhabitants of this settlement education of their children in urban schools has been a big priority. Since their area has a very limited road network, they created a road with collected trash, the ‘trash road’, in order to improve their connectivity with the city area. This can be seen as a tactic of the inhabitants of the informal settlement to be included in the city.

T3.4: Resilience and Mobility

Cities are complex ecosystems that present both, challenges and opportunities to the environment and its population. Resilience in this sense can be seen as a way of persistence, transition, and transformation of the urban area that when it comes to mobility, as it can support the growing population rather than neglecting its social justice or unsustainable development.

In this session, the concept of urban resilience discussed is aligned to what Chelleri, Waters, & Olazabal (2015) describe: “ (…) the framework of urban resilience should be related to wider sustainability challenges, including i) climate change and natural hazard threats, ii) unsustainable urban metabolism patterns and iii) increasing social inequalities in cities. (Chelleri, Waters, & Olazabal, p. 1, 2015). The second point raised -unsustainable urban metabolism patterns- is of particular importance when referred to mobility, as it influences directly the other two points raised. Said in other words, the way we choose -or not- to move and design mobility networks in the city affects our lives in different ways, as we depend more in car infrastructures: from generating less permeable surfaces (streets) that put our environment and lives at risk, to the way they create social and economic imbalances and produce health vulnerability. 

From different perspectives, the four presenters tackled this issues at two different scales of intervention: first two speakers talked about solutions in a micro scale (local scale), while the last two speakers focused on macro solutions (global scale of cities). This is vital when talking about resilience, as explained in Chelleri, Waters, & Olazabal (2015) and Meerow (2016), since interventions need to address multi-scales and temporal aspects -be it from the urban level to the neighborhood level- that create resilience by parts, as a comprehensive kind of resilience that incorporates the sustainability challenges. We need to address resilience towards mobility by designing a more integrated and inclusive approach, not only by improving technology but also changing behaviors. Synergies need to be improved between resilience and sustainability as the SDG11 aims to do, but still in a very theoretical way.

Secondly, as discussed in these presentations, it is important to highlight the fact that nowadays we do not lack of resilience strategies but we do lack a comprehensive vision, since most of the times there is a winner and a loser related to resilience. How many times are people left behind? How is it that the power relationships always affect this? Why is it that the usage of apps to share cars –which is a good thing for sustainability- leaves behind other parts of the population that do not have access to cell phones? “Responding to these sustainability challenges requires, we argue, an integrated framework for urban resilience that incorporates sustainability, and deals with cross-scale implications (trade-offs) among systems, capacities, vulnerabilities and time periods.” (Chelleri, Waters, & Olazabal, p. 1, 2015). We need a more cohesive vision that enables us to change the environment so as to facilitate things to population, not to fragment it. Maybe citizen science can help to mitigate this, since it is becoming more popular and is creating citizen empowerment towards a balanced resilience.   

The resilient cycle network. The case study of Montesilvano
Antonio Alberto Clemente

Montesilvano’s prevention towards floods caused by intense rains is still unsolved, as the sewage system keeps overflowing. This brings critical socio, economic, and environmental consequences that are aggravated during summer when the city becomes a sea side attraction. Despite the fact that the only response to floods is provided by Civil Protection and firemen, nothing is done to prevent it. Clemente introduces the Slow mobility and soil project –created by the Research Convention between the Department of Architecture of Pescara and the Municipality of Montesilvano- as a cycle network project that can solve this issue. He explains numerous successful examples of it, as: Boston, Melbourne, Philadelphia and Copenhagen. In the case of Montesilvano, the main aim is to “Transform water from a potential risk element to a strategic resource for the resilience of the urban system, working on the hypothesis that the cycling network has to contribute to become collection and management of rainwater.” It is about living with water, but there is a need to change practices in all sectors (technical, imperative social, economic and political).

This presents new challenges to Montesilvano city. First, as the research has proved that not in all sectors of the city this can be implemented and it implicates a lot of economic investment. And second, as this is a new field of research in this context, that aims to improve the relationship between resilience, adaptive capacity and its building infrastructures. However, worldwide this has already been researched and implemented positively as it decreases the pressure in existing sewage systems (by using prefabricated channels) and reusing this water for irrigation and evaporation.

Analyzing transit-based heat exposure and behaviors to enhance urban climate adaptation and mitigation strategies in the southwest USA
Yuliya Dzyuban, David Hondula, Charles Redman, Ariane Middel

Phoenix, Arizona presents extreme weather conditions, as the temperature rises over 38 °C for more than 110 days per year. This fact is vital when studying how people flow in this city, as the most vulnerable population towards this climate are the ones using the public system since the average time spent exposed to the heat is 21min per journey and public transport use is unequally distributed in the city. This brings negative consequences for sustainability and resilience goals that need to be addressed in the Phoenix transportation 2050 policy, as people feel more reluctant to use public transport when the infrastructure is not meeting their needs.

Dzyuban identified a gap that needs to be addressed specifically in this policy, but also globally in the resilience field. She acknowledges the importance on researching the psychological, physiological and physical perception of environmental variables (Nikolopoulou & Steemers, 2003; Rupp, Vásquez, & Lamberts, 2015). By the analysis of these three perceptions, people are able to adapt to the environment to minimize discomfort. In the case of Phoenix, thermal discomfort in the bus stops is the main issue when it comes to public transport. Therefore, the research goes through the environmental variables that affect physiological comfort and examine psychological perceptions of heat in way people use the different typologies of bus stops. Several methodologies such as observation and interviews reveal how important the design to achieve thermal comfort is. Some of the findings are related to the materials used (such as steel benches that get hot easily…but, what to prioritize? Vandalism or climate comfort?), the aesthetics (how they look), and the importance of incorporating natural features into the bus stop so that public transport is used frequently.

Resilience and mobility demand. Towards a redefinition of urban polycentricity. Madrid Urban Area analysis, 1996-2004-2014
Gonzalo Sánchez-Toscano, Agustín Hernández Aja

Sánchez-Toscano starts by explaining the definition of resilience he is going to refer to: “The ability of groups and communities to cope with external stresses and disturbances as a result of social, political and environmental changes” (Adger, 2000). Under this conceptual framework, he identifies stresses such as disruptive events and slow-burn events (Coafee & Lee, 2016) that enabled him to focus his work on resilience related to energy consumption and resource scarcity. Nowadays fossil fuel scarcity is explained by the demand for mobility in urban areas combined with the price of fossil fuels rising, which leads to oil vulnerability. Taking into account this, we can recognize that oil vulnerability is not aligned with the definition of resilience presented in the beginning. We cannot have resilient areas if depend on oil, and these are related to functional structures: a decrease in energy consumption, mobility demand, oil vulnerability, and long-distance flow leads to resilience.

In his research, Sánchez-Toscano examines how monocentric structure (classic) and polycentric structure (less resilient) work differently. He identifies that there is a need to redefine polycentrism from a resilience perspective in order to generate a balance of flows between different parts of urban areas.  Policentricity for resilience is based on shorter distance flows (as internal moves are generated). This is explained by the case of Madrid and its evolution 1996-2004-2014 by mapping and graphing the results given by CRTM surveys. To do this, he uses two indicators: the IMI (inner mobility index) and OMI (outer mobility index) that display how in some cases the structure resulted successful for resilience while in others not.   

In conclusion, this idea of polycentrism for resilience should be integrated into urban policies so as to reduce mobility demand in the urban area. In this way, districts and municipalities can work as sub-centers, which decentralize the classic structure and avoid long-distance dependencies in order to become more resilient.

Reframing Urban and Transport Planning: High Stakes for Our Health
Carolyn Daher, Mark Nieuwenhuijsen

We are facing a stage in human life in which most human activities are developed in urban areas. This has direct impacts on the way we live, as 23% of deaths in the world are caused by environmental factors. In this way, Daher sustains that heath is both: a prerequisite to and an indicator of sustainable and resilient urban development and she recognizes that there is a gap between planning interventions and the factors that cause diseases (which come from outside the health sector).

Under this idea, health can be a driver of design. This is why The Urban Planning Environment and Health Initiative was created by ISGlobal, as an organizational model that translates and applies rigorous scientific evidence, tools and indicators to promote sustainable and healthy urban development. Examining the case of Barcelona, Daher explains how evidence can be translated to promote healthy cities, and particularly how mobility can lead to air pollution, noise pollution, less green spaces and sedentary lifestyle if not planned correctly.

Some of the challenges identified in this research are timing, responsibilities, and competencies, funding, aligning political and research cycles, the role of academia, understanding governance mechanisms, and the influence on the usage of private cars. Nevertheless, this research presents itself as a starting point that enables us to generate scenarios with tools (health evidence) in order to create shifts in urban and transport planning. In many cases, health comes last over economic factors when planning, and this needs to change.

T2.4: Panel on Co-Producing Urban Resilience to Extreme Events

In this special panel the Sustainable Research Network (URExSRN) discusses their concept of urban resilience through positive future approach.

Instead of looking from single perspective of dystopian scenarios URExSRN focuses on generating new scenarios, social-ecological-technological strategies and transformative pathways, by using the knowledge collected from different histories, geographies and experiences of people to support sustainable urban governance programs and planning processes. Case studies in 9 cities set light to compare and evaluate sustainable future visions in case of extreme events such as coastal flood, urban flood, heat, drought with the help of infrastructure, data, maps, models created by Urban System Labs.

Positive futures
David Iwaniec, Marta Berbes, Elizabeth Cook, Melissa Davidson, Nancy Grimm, Timon McPhearson, Tischa Muñoz-Erickson

First presentation of Sustainable Research Network presented by David Iwaniec gives the conceptual framing of works and explains their research agenda. The team challenges ill-defined, interconnected, wicked problems of urban governance and planning in the case of extreme events, failing infrastructure, excessive use of motor vehicles, pollution, resource scarcity, increasing surface temperature. The presenter reframes resilience implementations by focusing on positive futures concept and criticizing the dominant discourse of dystopian future scenario from single perspective. David Iwaniec mentions that the problems of today are the products of solutions of the past and correction of these solutions and being solution oriented rather than problem based would lead us to positive futures. The aim of the study is increasing human well-being and environmental quality at the same time by understanding different histories of different places and different people and addressing challenges, drivers, consequences, impacts of changes. He explores multiple, diverse pathways of transformative interventions, different combinations of social-ecological-technological strategies and the interactions between strategies, scales and scenarios for a positive future. The study researches multiple scales such as global, city, municipal, neighborhood and community visions and question how they interact, support each other and how they conflict. The work focuses on finding a balance between plausible, desirable futures and business as usual state to reach sustainable urban governance structures through understanding, what is the combination of worldviews, values, cultures, and choices by understanding unintended consequences as well as intended consequences with equal attention.               

A social- ecological-technical systems approach to understanding urban complexity and building climate resilience
Nancy Grimm, Marta Berbés Blasquez, Mikhail Chester, Elizabeth Cook, Peter Groffman, David Iwaniec, Timon McPhearson, Thaddeus Miller, Tischa Muñoz-Erickson, Charles Redman

Nancy Grimm presents a social-ecological-technological systems (SETS) approach to understanding urban complexity and resilience. The challenge the presenter focuses on is infrastructure failures in the case of extreme events which are results of climate change, to transform cities to resilient cities, into resilient systems. She defines infrastructure as fundamental components of cities and shows the points how infrastructure makes the cities vulnerable to extreme events. SETS approach aims to integrate multiple perspectives, different types of expertise and trans-disciplinary ways to provide more resilient solutions for protection against extreme events. The presenter explains the dynamic system and continuous cycle of capital inputs of SETS resulting in service provision, ecosystem services and jobs created and final result outcomes as persistence, adaptation, transformation, ecological changes and the changes on people. First case study is from San Juan, a conceptualization of ecosystem services of SETS infrastructure in the case of flooding in an open canal area left to fill in. The main question she asks in this case, how to rebuild resilience in disadvantaged, poor community but avoid gentrification? It is a community involvement to think about the solution together to find effective, affordable, technologically advanced solution by participation in a more just environment. Second case study is “Safe-to-Fail and Green Infrastructure”, which focuses on uncertainty of extreme events to understand managing the consequences rather than lowering the probability of failure.  She claims that pre-planned, controlled failure gives the opportunity to minor consequences. Third case study is in Hermosillo, Mexico focuses on future projections in the case of vulnerability to flooding. The study is on mapping exposure and assessing aspects of social vulnerability, infrastructure vulnerability, ecological vulnerability and showing the combined risk.

Co-development of positive visions for future urban sustainability and resilience
Elizabeth Cook, Marta Berbes, Melissa Davidson, Nancy Grimm, David Iwaniec, Timon McPhearson, Tischa Muñoz-Erickson

Elizabeth Cook presents co-development of positive future visions for urban sustainability and resilience with comparisons and different future scenarios in different cities like Valdivia-Chile, Hermosillo-Mexico, Phoenix-Arizona US, Baltimore-Maryland US. Her work focuses more on thinking of visions and scenarios rather than challenge a problem. She criticizes the approach when we are asking the questions “What is? What could be?” rather than “What should be?” to understand the problematic situations. Her work tries to illustrate future visions of diverse cities by asking different stakeholders what are their future visions. As a result she finds lots of diversity, differences and similarities. With a participatory co-development workshop aiming to understand resilience, equity and transformative potential she works on scenarios to explore alternative, positive futures. The workshop asks people, “How can we start to minimize the sustainability and resilience gap between plausible and desirable futures?” Workshop outputs such as comparison of scenarios, narratives, timelines, strategies lead to get a research agenda and explore trade-offs of resilience equity sustainability qualitative assessment (RESQ), land use, land cover change and future visualizations. She gives an example of Phoenix, Arizona with different visions such as mountain to river, just green enough, connected and mobile, cool desert city and equity district, dealing with different issues in the city. She explains RESQ and quantitative assessments looking at water security by using heat model in a drought scenario. Her study aims linking these visions to future actions for potential trade-offs and using these visions to support new and existing initiatives, supporting, planning and decision making through development of sustainability plans of cities with innovative solutions.

Designing anticipatory knowledge for resilient and sustainable urban futures
Tischa A. Muñoz-Erickson, Elizabeth Cook, Mathieu Feagan, Robert Hobbins, David Iwaniec, Clark Miller, Thaddeus Miller

Tischa Munoz Erickson first asks the questions “How we think about them? How we approach them from SETS perspective? How we co-produce with different stakeholders? What are the challenges involved?” while designing different scenarios for positive futures. By asking these questions she points the limits of the approaches of existing governance systems to exhibit anticipatory capacities. The presenter stresses the importance of being a step ahead to know what is coming and to be able to use knowledge systems efficiently without privileging knowledge over other. In order to do that the team focuses on studying knowledge systems, how we develop data and produce knowledge. The example of Valdivia, Chile gives insight of URE x Governance Survey with participation of 43 governance organizations to analyze risks and explore long-term futures. At the same time survey aims to find out what knowledge counts with the experiences of people and with different methods to collect data. The result shows 13 forward-looking agencies taking the path of risk reduction, mitigation, adaptation, resilience and transformation. The study looks for the capacities and tools and practices used by central actors for the co-creation of future visions and pathways with long-term, alternative approaches.

Modelling urban futures: Resilience thinking in practice
Timon McPhearson
  • Urban systems futures modeling
  • Stakeholders, Current plans > Micro simulations of Heat, Urban Flood, Coastal Flood,   Population > Model outputs
  • Maps, timelines – qualitative and quantitative data
  • How they are connected? , How we can use them?
  • Modelling Urban Heat – data > process > output
  • Modelling Urban Flood – hazard > risk
  • How CA Model works? – Matrix of micro modules
  • Case study – Land cover – CA Model
  • Historical data – historical changes – feasible transition – 10m scale resolution
  • Patterns of identity and behavior
  • Combination of elements – longer-term future
  • To give opportunity for transformative change
  • Governance – how is the pathway?
  • Calibration phase – behavioral analysis – historical, probability
  • Case study – San Juan – Food & Energy Security Scenario
  • Restrictions and relocations
  • Example: Reduce urban extensions by increasing the amount of mangroves
  • Reduce urban extensions for agricultural area
  • Assessing social connection, mobility connection, coastal flood resilience
  • Achieve multiple goals

T4.3: Networks for Resilience

“Networks for Resilience” session had diverse and yet somehow similar discussions and findings. They all examined the community’s behavioral patterns in the face of their adversities, whether it being a sudden shock or more of long term stress.

Overall, they all defined resilience in the metaphorical sense through deeper understanding of the societal and cultural components. The first examined the transnational networks and how it supported communities overcome their challenges. The second presentation, provided toolkits that prepared communities to analyse disaster risks. The next one, studied how socio-spatial urban planning strategies can strengthen social cohesion as a long term approach for building community resilience. The following presentation, conducted a comparative study to understand the role of identity in building resilient neighborhoods. The later presentation investigated the grassroots initiatives produced by social movement to create resilient rivers against floods and to generally improve their public spaces. In the final presentation, it showcased how building capacity through collaborative workshops and community participations can improve neighborhoods.

The session provided deep and rich insights of the various types of community networks and their strategies in coping with crisis and everydays risks. In terms of solid urban resilience framework, Mateus presentation examined how grassroot communities initiatives used green infrastructure for enhancing the riverside as a mitigation strategy against flooding. He combined the metaphorical component of resilience with the ecosystem service strategies. Therefore, I found it to be the most successful in responding to the conference message of how to reframe resilience implementation. All the other presentations, examined the more social aspect of resilience and tries to understand the complex systems embedded within its vulnerable communities and their collective capacity to cope, adapt and sometimes maintain or transform their situation when experiencing disturbing challenges and threats of their livelihoods.

Translocal networking as a cornerstone for community resilience: Activities by the Asian Coalition for Housing Right
Ley Asrid

For the first presentation, Astrid shared her perspective on the role of trans-local networking of communities and what role does it play for the understanding of community resilience through studying the activities of the Asian Coalition for housing rights. 

She began the presentation by defining community resilience reciting other authors and references. Her understanding of community resilience is mainly derived from the social resilience definition which is “coping, adapting and transformative capacities for facing multiple shocks and stresses (Keck and Sakdapolrak 2013, McIan et al 2014, Saja et al 2018)”. In addition, she mentions how community resilience stresses the capacities and resources of collective actors from the social resilience framework by Saja et al 2018. Then she provides a couple of limitations which are overlooking the framing of community and overlooking the threats of maladaptation. Then she moves forward to the translocality defining it as globally organized communities that are better prepared to face events, stresses and shocks. It is more relevant to migrant communities, and social practice is usually from below and above. She also mentions one limitation of translocality where the urban poor communities might have limited capacities to organize transnationally. 

After providing her conceptual frameworks of her studies, Astrid expands further through her research in Thailand. She discussed mainly three research projects. The first is the housing for the poor for the local action to global networks and how the community created peer to peer exchange networks of mutual support and leaning. Her research aimed to understand how far transnational networks has an impact on those communities undergoing negotiations with their local governments. The second example she provides is the Banbua Canal Community where the community organised themselves to upgrade the canals and make way for future flooding using the ACHR participatory process. The third example looking into how ACHR network operate during the shock of Indian Ocean Tsunami 2004. 

Finally she reflects on community resilience by concluding that translocal networks focuses on networking beyond rebuilding, organising prior crisis, avoiding overburdening local communities, and acting as a complementary strategy. 

Measuring Informal Urban Settlements’ Pathway to Resilience Building
Nadia Cruz

In the second presentation, Cruz introduces GOAL and its toolkit ARC-D that basically guides communities within informal urban settlements build resilience. She begins with defining resilience as how GOAL understands resilience as the capacity of communities to anticipate, absorb, then adapt, and finally transform the shocks and stresses. She also mentions that GOAL resilience outcomes (positive and negative)  are produced through asking of what? to what? through what (capacities)?

Moving forward, she reveals the “Analysis of the Resilience of Communities to Disaster” toolkit. The ARC-D toolkit or guidelines was generated from the “Good practices research report” by John Twigg which incorporates 167 main characteristics of resilience to disasters. The toolkit has been applied around 11 countries facing disasters. According to Cruz, the toolkit is comprised of Questionnaire , an online platform to collect information (CommCare), and a methodological Guide. Then she explains that the toolkit measures 30 components of four thematic topics: a) understanding disaster risk b) strengthening governance to manage disaster risk c) reducing vulnerability d) enhancing disaster preparedness to “Build Back Better” recovery. 

The case study chosen to explain the implementation of the toolkit is located in an informal urban settlement in Tegucigalpa, Honduras. They applied the toolkit in three neighborhood with high risk. After measuring the situation, the results used to inform 4 key socio-economic systems: neighborhood landslides early warning system, system provision and maintenance of neighborhood drainage, market system for the provision of basic food supply through neighborhood stores, social housing maret system. As for the conclusion, GOAL reflects on community resilience by highlighting the importance of connecting people to socioeconomic systems to reduce vulnerability. Lastly, community resilience building efforts can be connected to the informal urban settlement through context specific analysis.

Social Cohesion in a multi-ethnic urban neighborhood - Strengthening community resilience through urban planning
Tim Lukas, Bo Tackenberg

Lukas and Tackenberg presented their research Resilience through Social Cohesion (ResOrt). The objective of their research is to develop an integrated set of recommendations for organisations on how aspects of social cohesion (as essential resilience factors) can be included in their strategy development and how can social cohesion be strengthened. Their research questioned “what role does social cohesion play in the work of civil protection organisations and local authorities in coping with crisis, disasters and social upheavals?” Furthermore, their research examined which socio spatial conditions and cooperative organization can strengthen social cohesions.  Moving on, they explained their methodology where they investigated through written-proposal population survey, lost-letter-experiments, social area analysis, expert interviews and workshops, and finally guided interviews with residents. Through their methodology, they established a theoretical model of community resilience that describes social cohesion in everyday life. The components of social cohesion are reciprocity, participation, canon of values and norms, social trust and social networks. Then they narrowed it down into social cohesion in multi ethnic societies, and mentioned some of the negative outcomes of ethnic diversity in communities. They highlighted how public space promotes social cohesion because its a shared space that enables exchange daily, however, these encounters can also reinforce prejudices resulting from ethnic diversity. Therefore, they emphasis the important role of urban planning for multi ethnic societies (festivals, markets, social activities).

They concluded by restating the importance of public space and urban planning in promoting social cohesion as community resilience is a long-term approach to be considered before the emergence of disasters. They also mention that community resilience can be strengthened through knowledge exchange between different organisation. 

Making Neighborhoods Resilient: The Social Construction of Identity
Leandro Madrazo, Ángel Martín Cojo, Mario Hernández

Leandro presented their research project known as “PROHABIT”. The research studied the bonds that exist between people and the places they inhabit, as well as their resistance against new plans produced by the administration. The research objective was to analyse the impact of urban transformation on three neighborhoods, and to understand the process of creating a collective identity linked to place with the participation of professionals and citizens. Basically, conducting a multidimensional analysis investigating both the built environment and lived environment. He further explains their methodology of the process of collecting information through both inductive and deductive investigations. The process conducted were interviews, observations, documentation, and participation. Then they structured the information into the following categories: Themes, Questions, Facts, Evidences, Places, Concepts. He then expanded  to describe one key product they created that allowed great information sharing and mapping. This product is an online platform called “Prohabit Mapper”. This online platform is free and open to the public, and allows their participation and exchange of information. 

Moving on, he reflected on the social construction of an identity and how it relates to Resilience. He recites the definition as Resilience related to how a system changes but still retain its core functions, structures, feedback and identity. He also reflects on the social cultural perspective where the identity of the urban system is applied through permanence. Then he explains the dilemma of identity, torn between permanence and change, where identity is preserved but continuously reinterpreted and updated. The conducted a comparative case study in three neighborhoods in Barcelona (Plus Ultra, Vallcarca, Trinitat Nova), studying the social construction of the neighborhoods’ identities. In Trinitat and Plus Ultra, they resisted new plans to preserve their identity. Where Vallcarca, the new generations re-appropriated and re-interpreted the memories to strengthen the resilience of the place. In conclusion, All three neighborhoods constructed the identity of the place to resist future delineation plans, therefore identity became instrumental for their resilience.

Possibilities for Resilient Grassroots Urban Planning: strategies used by a neighborhood movement in Belo Horizonte, Brazil
Mateus Lira da Matta Machado

Mateus started his presentation by providing some reflections on resilience and in particular trying to understand resilient communities as the byproduct of inequalities challenges. He describes how environmental and spatial injustice are causing uneven distribution of resources and therefore, a pathway to exposure to more risks. Therefore, he examines the rise of (resilient) grassroots urban planning through urban social movements since the state is not neutral in its position. 

The methodology used to study the grassroots social movements is through conducting interviews with the local leaders and communities activist. His case study is located in Belo Horizonte, his hometown in Brazil, in particular, analysing the rivers and its environmental and spatial injustices. The rivers are surrounded by low income neighborhoods who face negligence, sewage and waste dumping, and occasional flooding affect house. He mentions that the state is only involved when in emergency solutions but not long term solutions. Then he studied the grassroot initiatives in Ribeiro de Abreu neighborhoods, in the periphery of the city. The community pushed for a partnership with the state demanding a better neighborhood through basic improvements and more sustainable solutions of its rivers waterfronts. The partnership with the state created three positive outcomes: sense of citizenship, integration of different sectors, and affecting how municipality operates. The social movement claimed for creation of public spaces and parks around the river. After the relocation of some of the families from the risk areas of flooding, the state stopped the project, and communities continued collectively through constructing self built public spaces in the emptied area in the events in the weekends. He highlights how this social movement improved the self esteem of the local and enhanced thee sense of ownership. He mentions both challenges, the internal (community difference) and external (dependency on government) the community endured. 

In his conclusion, he stated that building grassroots resilience is from three aspects , first expanding beyond the limits of the neighborhoods and understanding the water basin as a system, combining self-led initiatives with partnership with the state, and claiming for spatial and environmental justice. He explains how social movements are integral stakeholders for building resilience in cities, the present new imaginaries and more sustainable solutions for the cities, and they also propose new political arrangements such as institutionalizing participation. Therefore, they have to be  supported, mapped, registered and analysed. 

Resignification of degraded public spaces in Guanajuato and in Bordeaux: citizen re-appropriation in the frame of intensive workshops developed by the University of Guanajuato (UG) and the superior national school of architecture and landscape of Bordeaux (ensapBx)
Carlos Gotlieb

In the final presentation of this session, Gotlieb presented the collaborative work made in Guanajuato and Bordeuax as part of the Academic Cooperation Agreement. The workshops objectives is first to establish close collaboration with local and regional authorities, which led to signing decentralized cooperation contracts where university partners act as a mediators. Second, to offer students the opportunity to participate in a real project scenarios and hands on experience. The urban projects of the workshops aims to mainly change the local community perceptions of their public space and to support their re-appropriation of their publics space as ways to enforce identity and community ties. He also mentions that resilience is seen through the capacity of an obsolete territory to generate strong social bonds during spatial conceptions with university, institutional actors and inhabitants. He presented two workshops, the first workshop was help in Santuario in 2015-2016 with the title of Metropolitan identity and citizen ownership. The workshop included an analysis and recognition of the site with the participation of the residents. Also, it incorporated meetings with technicians and key local actors. The main aim of the project was to analyse elements that produced local neighborhood identity. The workshop resulted with proposals for public spaces appropriation of H Galeana Street, and the proposals and jury reviews were held in the same street. The main finding of the workshop is that workshops can act as detonator of neighborhood activities. 

In the second workshop titled Between City and Nature was  located in Martignas 2016-2017. The workshop consisted of field visit with technicians from the city and meeting with the municipal team to exam site problems. The aim of the workshop was to push the student to develop actions and presentations to the authorities and residents. Also, for the students to debate their proposals with the local community for their feedbacks. He ended the presentation by showcasing a video documenting their experience. 

T3.3: Urban Resilience Morphology and Space

The session “Urban Morphology and space” provided diverse case studies applied around the world, in terms of small and medium scale intervention that could impact, in some way, the urban resilience processes.

In order to reframe urban resilience, the interventions within the session were focused on how urban design and architecture itself, had been in constant change in order to adapt to the new challenges. The diverse contexts and approaches on urban morphology presented during the session, clearly shows the need to adapt cities and its conditions to the new challenges.

From system ecology to urban morphology: towards a theory of urban form resilience
Alessandra Feliciotti, Ombretta Romice, Sergio Porta

The first presentation by Alessandra Feliciotti “From system ecology to urban morphology: towards a theory of urban form resilience” started describing how the urban form is perceived as a plastic and adaptive process, since cities have been consequence of a constant change.   New meanings, functions and structures respond to the pressure of change. The concept of resilience has been utilized in different contexts to understand processes related to: natural, social, economic eco-system and urban system. Understanding Resilience from the urban aspect, the city is seen as a device with  plastic capacities to adapt. The capacity of places and their form to adapt to new requirements and progressively redirect their trajectory, coevolving with their context.

For the purpose of understanding in a deeper form the urban resilience, it is required to provide an appropriate theoretical framework from which to derive fundamental qualities contributing to the resilience of places, as well as specific assessment tools for addressing properties of urban forms related to resilience. She considers important to integrate the knowledge generated on urban form, to the discourse of urban resilience. System ecology and urban morphology, both share common interest in  physical space, patterns and how change takes place.

System ecology concept was incorporated starting in 2001 by the heuristic theory of chance,  understood as an adaptive cycle that involves time. In the other hand, the concept of urban morphology is linked to the burgage cycle, were phases are involved as part of its process. By overlapping this two different concepts there are certain similarities found, and where the concept of panarchy, also appears. Urban Morphology has a compositional hierarchy but at the same time, there is also a temporal aspect involved. Not all components change simultaneously, changes occur according to the scale, for example block structures, streets, etc. The dualism between small and large, fast and slow, conservative and innovative inherent in the Panarchy, is at the very core of  evolutionary resilience. Also complex systems are resilient, because they appear to resist change or change slowly despite the interchange and evolution of individual components and the relationships between these components.

As a conclusion, Alessandra considers the urban form a complex an adaptive system embedded in a web of complex, non-linear, emergent relations with all other systems. Different components and different scales integrate the system. Urban transformations, starting from the interior of a building, its skin (facade), to a bloc transformation or an urban regeneration project. 

Urban form Resilience Urban Design Practice: Masterplanning for Change
Ombretta Romice, Sergio Porta, Alessandra Feliciotti

Adding a complementary part to the previous session, Sergio Porta introduced the Master Planning for Change, an evidence based approach to place making, with a brief video to showcase what placemaking is about. He considers that an urban system consists of multiple components, co- dependant and inter-  dependent and together they provide a holistic view. These consist of a physical, institutional and human systems.  To illustrate again, the complexity of an urban system, Sergio presented a second video that reviled how flexible and changing could a building be during a period of time. He believes that in order to understand the urban morphology, it is convenient to juxtapose the urban capacities: diversity, redundancy, modularity, connectivity and efficiency with the different layers of the urban scale: sanctuary areas, streets, blocks, streets.

He makes reference to the three important redevelopment periods: The First occurred during 1800- 1890, the second from 1950-1970 and the third started in 1990 until now. After this, he  was focused into a particular zone in London to illustrate how also urban uses are being in constant change as part of the process. After going through 900 different case studies, for a better understanding of urban morphology, he had developed 207 indicators of urban form to conclude with the following: It is fundamental to integrate the component of evolution while designing in an urban scale, diversity and unity can lead to a certain beauty in terms of place making.

Implementing the New Urban Agenda: a platform of Sustainable Urban Design Interventions (IDUS) in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC)
Margarita Greene, Rodrigo Mora, Maria Augusta Hermida, Circe Monteiro, Amado Villarreal, Patricio Pinto, Camilo Arriagada, Geraldine Herrmann, Jorge Inzulza, Elizabeth Wagemann

The third presentation was given by Margarita Greene, she developed the topic “A platform of sustainable urban design in Latin America and the Caribbean. Margarita is part of CEDEUS, a multidisciplinary network of researchers focused on urban sustainability in Latin America and the Caribbean, where the main propose is the exchange and construction of links between different stakeholders, aiming to orient every intervention to public policies. 

Their main lines of action were organized in 6: Social cohesion an equality (livable cities), urban frameworks, spatial development, urban economy urban ecology and environmental and urban housing and basic services. Taking advantage of the innovative inside of Latin America, they decided to develop a book to showcase different urban projects that could fit in the framework that was previously established. Sharing sustainable interventions at urban level has developed what they called, an Atlas of urban cases. For this, they have decided to establish 4 main pillars: socio- cultural, economic, environmental and politic which have developed a new concept: sustainability as a process through which past and future communities flourish harmoniously. A new concept emerged out of the research: Sustainable urban development intervention (IDUS), that refers to different scale interventions (local, city and metropolitan/regional) and at the same time, where the conditions of replicability can be also addressed.

Margarita presented three specific case studies, included in the Atlas, where the three different urban scales are mentioned. The first referred to the local scale, Plaza de Bolsillo Santa Isabel  (pocket plaza), which takes place in Santiago de Chile. This small size intervention had to do with the  community involvement. The second was Mapocho Pedaleable, also refers to an urban intervention in Santiago in a medium city scale. At last, Parque Capibarible in Recife, Brazil which refers to the metropolitan scale. The contribution of sharing good practices and validated projects through a platform could putting together the thinkers and the doors in order to avoid the gap between the public sector and the academy in order to develop public policies.

Urban waterways in Bangkok - A spatial resilience approach towards a more amphibiously-sustainable living space
Benjamin Casper

Benjamin Casper addressed the session from a particular case study in Bangkok Urban Waterways in Bangkok -Living with Water from the point of view of spatial resilience and  urban morphology and how this case study could approach a framework. Since the water level is in a constant fluctuation the city has been adapting certain strategies aiming to transform the waterscape in Bangkok to a more sustainable amphibious living space. Benjamin stated his research by analyzing the jurisdictional and institutional framework and at the same time trying to understand the properties of urban morphology that could be applied to this case: Adoption of space, typology, diversity, capacity, topology, configuration, Complementarity, Flexibility, Variability, Modularity and Connectivity. 

He considers important to shift from planning cities according to “safety conditions” to planning cities according to their “failure systems”, in order to understand where areas of lower resilience are and implement adequate urban/gray infrastructure, and also to provide space to nature to transform the city. 

Space production by migrants in urban villages in China: the case of Beijing
Shiyu Yang

Shiyu Yang approached urban morphology from a different perspective, showcasing a particular situation related to floating population in Beijing. Space production by migrants in urban villages: the case study of Beijing, a comparison study between Shigezhuang Village and Dongxindian Village. This was the last presentation of the session, where some of the main challenges for migrant and floating population were addressed: lack of access to public services, housing, direct economic displacement, among others. As a conclusion for this session, she mentioned that urban interventions should not only go in the direction of providing affordable adequate housing but enabling migrants with a formal job market. She also noted that in order to improve migrants’ resilience, a minimum amount of tenure security should be ensured. 

T2.3: Resilience Integrated Strategies and Cities

The major framework of the presentations in this session was mainly based on the 100 Resilient Cities approach by the Rockefeller Foundation. The 100 RC framework has also introduced a City Resilience Index, which included a set of 12 goals and 52 indicators when it was developed together with ARUP  in 2013.

Three of the presentations shared more about urban governance (Melbourne and Thessaloniki and Central America). Two presentations shared more about implementation process (flooding and insurance). In an integrative manner towards the discussion in city resilience, further research shall be emphasis on the following topics: 

  1. In what way, the pre-existing governance and planning experience or new experiment can be either be translated into the framework of urban resilience, or be put into longitudinal studies for observation and studies in Global North cities;
  2. Adaptation pathway approach in climate resilience can be better quantified into a meaningful sets of numbers and figures, or even infographics and put to evaluation;
  3. How governance planning and institutional co-operations can be improved;
  4. How the small grants program is then eventually connected to international funding bodies and global investors and insurers in Global South cities.
The Resilient Melbourne Experiment: mobilising transitions in urban resilience governance and planning?
Susie Moloney

This paper examined the topic of Melbourne’s experiment in urban resilience governance and planning in 2016. The author also highlighted the process of Melbourne in setting up 100 RC strategies initially involving a bottom-up collaborative approach with voluntary participants of 32 local governments and other organizations. Framing and purposes were set forth together by the governments and organizations. The author presented the strong enabling conditions in Melbourne include: strong democratic governance and institutional setting, the cities were framing urban resilience beyond short-term risk reduction initiatives. The author addressed the prospects for mobilizing urban resilience in governance and planning, including addressing and reframing pre-existing condition, recognizing vulnerable populations, bottom-up local government collaborations, and partnerships…etc, which many of them already happening for long, there is a need to translate it into a resilience framework.

Resilience thinking transforming urban governance: The case of Thessaloniki, Greece
Vangelis Pitidis, Jon Coaffee,Joao Porto de Albuquerque

The author first identified challenges in government and planning, as transformation is constrained by custom and practice. The authors asked how do institutional inheritance shapes future possibilities, how innovative ideas can be incorporate, and also take an active role to transform the mainstream practice in planning and governance.

The authors discussed the key goals of Thessaloniki to achieve climate resilience. The goals were: shaping a thriving and sustainable city, co-create an inclusive city, build a dynamic urban economy, re-discover the city’s relationship with the sea. As simple as a slogan, the reality is that resilience is about a process, not outcomes. The pathway to resilience practice in Thessaloniki also took a lesson that they had to get the right people around the same table and building effective partnerships. Coaffee, suggested that it shall involve a mutual and accountable network of civic institutions, agencies, and individual citizens working in partnership. A common goal and common strategies is needed. In the case of Thessaloniki, the author pointed out the city had a need to seek more longitudinal studies to better understand how resilience practice can become mainstream.

Applying the adaptation pathway approach to increase resilience to flooding: experiences and outlook from the city of Bilbao
Maddalen Mendizabal, Saioa Zorita, Nieves Peña, Efren Feliu

The author framed Bilbao’s city’s challenges in its adaptation pathway approach to flooding. The author pointed out the adaptation pathway approach had already shown insights in dealing with other climate issues such as urban heat. The key discussion was, in a quantifying manner, how to reduce flood impacts on transport, by reducing flooded areas and increasing the soil permeability.

The classical approach, usually, focuses on “what if climate changes in a scenario of flooding”. However, the adaptation approach, focuses on ‘how much’ flooding the city can cope with. Focusing on the transport system, the author discussed the case of Bilbao, with numerical figures with rainfall alert minimum amount, soil infiltration capacity, and traffic road pavement covering. The results are a selection of the best alternative options for climate flooding risk management presented, including reducing soil pavement and lowering the minimum amount for rainfall alert.

Planning in Central America in the 21st century: possibilities and limitations for resilience implementation
Carlos Ferrufino

The authors discussed different approaches to promote urban resilience and its implications for planning governance at the multinational, national, and metropolitan levels. The study of Central American planning cases permits to identify four tensions which are relevant for the discussion of the linkages between resilience implementation, planning, and governance.

The first tensions is, despite official discourses, numerous contradictions persist with ongoing strategic economic ventures and large infrastructure projects. There is incomplete coordination between environmental and economic ministries. Second, new issues incorporated into national and metropolitan development plans, such as gender equality, human rights, and civil society participation pose diverse implementation challenges for traditional planning organizations and professionals. Third, the conservative legal frameworks had become a limit for achievement, as legal disputes around private property and plan implementation continue. Finally, numerous stakeholders such as multilateral organizations, local governments, private investors, and grassroots organizations have not been fully involved in planning processes preventing multiple interests to be considered in the decision-making process.

The author finally put forth an unanswered question as to how effective planning on governance and institution co-operations can be improved in Central America.

Innovative financial mechanisms and stakeholders involvement for climate resilience implementation in Himalayan cities
Ramiz Khan

The authors addressed the challenges of climate change and gave a project examples on water scarcity, drainage and solid waste management in Himalayan. The project is based in three cities in the Indian Himalayan region (Shimla, Kurseong, Gangtok) and their resilience strategy formulation using ICLEI ACCCRN Process (IAP) toolkit.

Shimla and Kurseong brought forth water supply systems as one of the most fragile urban systems. Whereas, Gangtok recognized the essential need to adopt a proper Solid Waste Management system, especially to avoid clogging of open drains and natural streams in order to reduce the threat of landslide incidences that result in infrastructural, financial and human loss. The key process of laying the path is critical in getting an active stakeholder engagement.

This case demonstrated an innovative financing mechanism by linking the projects with the Small Grants Fund to create success stories which can further be upscale through convergence with existing federal government schemes. The further unasked questions that underlined this topic, were made on how the small grants are then eventually connected to international funding bodies and global investors, as global investors also tend to seek low-risk projects to insure and execute.

T4.2: The politics of resilience & gentrification

In the politics of resilience and gentrification, the presentations focused on the use of urban resilience as a metaphor for framing their arguments. The predominant focus was around the social networks that were at risk or how more resilient urban environments would benefit social-ecological systems.

Urban resilience in this context was used as an indicator to judge gentrification and a guiding principle to measure positive cultural variability of urban environments. Gentrification due to the implementation of resilience strategies and its effects are common themes, seeking to bring to light the importance of a resilient social basis to the city.

The presentations within this topic session questioned the impact of current urban resilience policy in cities; that are incomplete and oversea the social importance in urban resilience. That pre-existing social networks need to be maintained and bolstered and that gentrification, due to over-technical resolution of resilience strategy, is leading to an erosion of fundamental societal systems in cities. A re-framing then of resilience of all the topics align with the conference reframing that resilience should seek to address the increasing social inequalities in cities. They all seek to re-address and give meaning to the vulnerable in society; that the ‘vulnerable’ form a constituent part in the social-economic systems that make a city resilient. Here then, key to all these presentations was to reframe urban resilience to recognize the qualities found in ‘vulnerability’ and that resilience definitions are often over-simplified in their social framing.

Delving into the politics of resilience: the role of social resilience cells and their alliances in the co-implementation of housing plans. The case study of HousingNOLA.
Angeliki Paidakaki, Hans Leinfelder, Constanza Parra, Pieter Van den Broek

The first presentation used SRC (social resilience cells) to analyze resilience politics in relation to post-disaster housing. Its aims were to analyze the efficacy of SRC in the implementation of post-disaster housing plans, i.e how stakeholder engagement is managed and how SRC’s can become part of local policy to ensure Council members embrace it and to outlive any political cycle. It argued that SRC’s need to become stronger at a state level as local states don’t have the power to apply their own policies. It argued that sustainable development is still relevant, and how sustainability and resilience can be aligned. The key to the study in understanding the relevance of SRC was to ensure pressure is applied to governance to ensure the coproduction of recovery plans that treat all affected areas and people in an equitable way. They hold a unique position in multi-level governance structures and are able to engage with housing plans and policy to ensure political cycles do not interfere with disaster recovery plans. Additionally, the presentation argued that there are literary voids in coproduction and the distribution of power in housing planning in disaster recovery settings.

Linking the gentrification of traditional retail markets and the resilience of centres of commerce
Pedro Guimaraes

This presentation argued that the gentrification of retail spaces is causing retail spaces, such as traditional markets to become less resilient. An erosion of these traditional retail spaces due to gentrification and tourism is resulting an erosion of traditional commerce for local residents. Therefore the presentation argued that gentrification not only degrades retail resilience but the social systems of place. The case study of Campo de Ourique was used to demonstrate how the touristic draw of a traditional market place is a causality of its gentrification. This presentation used gentrification metaphorically to describe a system that is harmed by gentrification. It didn’t seek to idealize how urban resilience may provide traditional marketplaces with a process of bouncing back and forward. Rather it seemed to take a conservative viewpoint that these marketplaces need to remain intact in order for them to be resilient. It argued it’s the social importance of these markets, creating a social place for commerce and encounters, where social bonds are formed through diverse means. It sees the old retail markets as assets not to be changed. In this presentation the argument is framed around the resilience towards an impending gentrification. The resilience framework was used as an indicator to disseminate when the market has become gentrified

Don’t Blame it on the Sunshine! An Exploration of the Spatial Distribution of Heat Injustice Across Two Antwerp City Districts
Sarah Feder, Manon Burbidge, Shudi Yan, Tibbe Smith Larsen

The focus of the argument within this presentation was of heat injustice, that the most vulnerable are often subject to hotter urban environments. In used green spaces as a case point to contend the most marginalized have less access to these spaces; that help mediate climatic conditions in cities. Rather than arguing for a form of resilience per-say, the presenter used their example to demonstrate a positive effect or bonus of urban resilience thinking. Here then it is using resilience to leverage their argument for a more equitable form of green space in cities. Key to the argument is environmental injustice and the joint process of neo-liberal planning and social exclusion. It seeks to provide model for a resident participation to map heat injustice in urban environments to inform more equitable planning policy in the urban environments. Through this equitable participatory urban model, the presentation aligned with urban resilience thinking in that a city to be resilient need to function in multiple scales.

Gentrification-resilient cities. Urban livability and anti-gentrification requirements for improving cities and social life
Alessandro Plaisant, Alice Sulas

The critique in this presentation was around gentrification eroding cities (in this case Barcelona’s) urban resilience. The goal is to realign policies towards more sustainable model. It used resilience as an indicator toward gentrified areas of the city; ones which could then be intervened in with anti-gentrification measures to re-enhance the social resilience of the areas. Again here, alike with the presentation of retail resilience, the argument is that gentrification erodes unique social qualities of place. However, the presentation provided a framework to bounce forward and create more resilient neighborhoods, eradicating and building back better for future stability of urban communities. The argument provided an operational framework for resilience in assigning key drivers to move towards more resilient cities. Here as with other presentation the argument was of social innovation playing a key role and anti-gentrification as a measure for more equitable urban environments. The argument here is for resilience to gentrification, again though measuring the positive social factors that can be built reintroduced into planning policy not only to fight gentrification but intern provide more resilient urban spaces.

Uneven (green) landscapes of resilience and protection: Climate gentrification in urban climate adaptation
Galia Shokry, Isabelle Anguelovski, James Connolly

This presentation intended to disseminate whether green and resilience mechanisms meet the needs and protect the most marginalized of societies. Here urban resilience is critiqued, seeking to understand its limitations in meeting these needs. It also raises the debate around climate gentrification; that green and resilient interventions lead to gentrification in areas. The argument was to reframe resilience research; or rather highlight the potential harm that investment in certain green infrastructures can bring by enhancing inequalities in society. Again within this presentation was a reframing that considered the impacts of marginalized people in society due to gentrification arguing that the policy emphasis on green infrastructure as a strategy to create more urban resilience is eroding the social fabric of cities. Here then a re-framing aligned with fostering more bottom-up resilience building strategies can be seen. The research questions whether ‘green-infrastructures’ could further exacerbate the plight vulnerable communities through displacement due to gentrification and create cities for the privileged. Additionally, it critiqued the use of green infrastructures as a place-making tool, questioning its approach as part of a holistic urban resilience strategy.

T3.2: Planning & Critical Infrastructure

During the session, and in-between the presentations of different case-studies around the world, the main themes evoked were innovation for smart cities, theoretical framework principles for ecology, a transformation towards resilient urban governance, open-data gathering, and urban energy transition. 

In this session of Urban Design and management of Infrastructures and Services, the sub-topic specifically focussed on Planning and critical Infrastructures. The goal was to tackle different ways of regarding planning and critical infrastructures by going beyond conventional urban governance. The speakers delivered examples of guidelines addressing design components for urban planning and management to minimize urban vulnerability. The session referred to Urban Resilience by looking at very specific cases of alternative planning and critical infrastructure that differs from conventional urban governance towards a resilient thinking referring to guiding principles from the existing literature. Therefore, the speakers tried to fill the gaps in terms of frameworks and integrated guidelines assessing resilient planning and critical infrastructure strategies. Hence, the topics were heavily backed up by resilience literature although the need of restructuring the existing frameworks was pointed out during the final debate. Indeed, it was mentioned that resilience thinking does not necessarily need to be changed but more transformed as the urban society itself evolves as new technologies appear. 

Tianjin Future Science City: A Chinese Flexible Planning Experience for Industry New Town
Bin Ge, Jiming Yu, Yan Chen

The first speaker, Bin Ge, as representer of the Archiland International Cooperation, presented a conceptual framework for Futur Science City planning. Giving the example of a Chinese city, Tianjin, the idea is to profit from innovation in order to expand planning towards smart development as opposed to intensive urban expansion development which is a main issue in today’s Chinese cities. Hence, resilience is seen as a way to respond to the uncertain future of development that has been regarded as one main challenge in modern planning. Bin Ge is responding to the Chinese critical urban planning agenda of the last 30 years with a conceptual smart city framework which takes into consideration public transportation systems, infrastructure networks, ecological corridors, open spaces and public services. The design scheme is a modulated grid of 1km by 1km with a strict planning guideline which embraces uncertainty thanks to variable development contents located inside the grid. To conclude, one of the main challenges stated by the author is to look into the integration of this kind of framework inside of the larger scale of planning administration in order to keep a coherence in the resilience assessment for the feasibility of his elastic design planning. 

Emerging practices for mainstreaming resilient critical urban infrastructure governance
Philipp Ulbrich, Jon Coaffee, João Porto de Albuquerque

Speakers Ulbrich and Coaffee from the University of Warwick, tackled various resilience framework literature in order to present a reframing proposition that deal with resilient urban governance. According to them, the concept of resilience is often oversimplified when it is in fact an inherently complex process. The supposedly flexible and adaptable model is not a predicted science and therefore, scholars and practitioners have to move towards mixed methods. Their analyses focus on complementarity frames of the SDG11 and CRI monitoring at local and urban scale. The goal is to link urban governance to a reframed Resilience Multiple that influence the spatial intersecting between horizontal, vertical and spatial scheme in order to reduce inequalities. Both speakers want to point out the benefits of local context and knowledge and how the participation of new stakeholders brings more resilient solutions. The aim is to emphasize on the process of resilience rather than on the final product. In their opinion, a new framework would take more time and resources than the existing one but it is necessary for better outcomes. Finally, their proposal is a framework that analyses the adaptative transformations of governance processes through changes in network, in discourses and in evaluation practices. 

A theoretical framework for building the risk-resilience of basic infrastructures and services using Open Data
Mahsa Moghadas, Alexander Fekete, Asad Asadzadeh, Theo Kötter

Mahsa Moghadas, is a PHD student from Iran who is focussing on a case study dealing with Disaster Risk Reduction in Tehran, Iran. She is more precisely interested in adapting critical infrastructures and services facing threats from climate change and natural hazards. Her studies brought her to improve preparedness through the use of Open Data as a ressource for planning. The speaker is stating the weak preparedness of Tehran, existing data from the government with a lack of accessibility, poor DRR management, bad critical infrastructure and basic services and WASH responses. Moghadas is persuaded that a resilient system would benefit from the Sendai Framework focused on Data Readiness Review. Moghadas is stating the need of linking local policies with critical infrastructures with a resilient framework that not only prevent from disaster risk but also brings social inclusion and avoid social trust gaps. She presents a proactive model that values critical infrastructures as being essentials to DRR. During her study, she analyzed the different levels of resilience between various urban district of the city of Tehran to show its strengths and weaknesses. She separated critical types of infrastructure into the physical infrastructure, the social infrastructure and the institutional infrastructure. 

Rusty dinosaurs or phoenix from the ashes? Investigating the role of urban utility companies for the resilience of socio-technical energy systems in transition.
Susan Mühlemeier, Romano Wyss, Claudia Binder

Susan Mühlemeier has presented urban energy transition as a socio-technical transition for urban energy system resilience. More precisely, she focus on very local solutions in Germany and Switzerland such as Urban Utility Companies which are owned by the city, therefore, they are public firms. Here, energy systems play a crucial role in the critical infrastructures which needs to follow the trend of change, such as the transition to renewable energies. By proposing a new reframing system, Susan state that different stakeholders are bringing new ideas that are directly affecting the system and changing the traditional regime. This critical infrastructure has the particularity of responding to resilience by remaining functional and providing public services by taking into account social and technical innovations and opportunities. Urban Utility Companies needs to be stable and flexible in transition in order to answer the public demand and hence the model focus on two core principles of resilience: diversity and connectivity. The goal is to implement technological diversity locally, bring local knowledge and solutions, connect politics and the energy industry with all citizens and infrastructures thanks to a direct democratic control and a local long-term infrastructure management that supports the societal change.