Natural Hazards

, Volume 60, Issue 3, pp 1267–1285 | Cite as

Vulnerability management by means of resilience

Original Paper


The article decodes and analyzes the standard functions of social and social-ecological systems when they manage their own vulnerability. The author acknowledges these as “Resilience functions” or “Operational Resilience”. For this purpose, she follows a “Vulnerability Actor” (V Actor)-based approach. V Actor is considered as a system faced with multiple hazards, carrying various vulnerability facets (physical, economic, institutional, etc.) and attempting to transform, transfer, rearrange them in time and space so as to achieve Actor’s own persistence. It is these processes of vulnerability re-arrangement that are identified by the author as Resilience functions and which change the vulnerability not only of the V Actor performing resilience but also others’. Performance of Resilience functions presupposes attraction and employment of resources by the Actor, not only own, current and inherent but also other resources to be found in spatial and temporal scales external to or beyond the Actor but which the Actor can appeal to. This attraction most probably leads to deprivation of others of the necessary resources for their persistence, recovery, etc. When somebody’ vulnerability is reduced sometimes somewhere, it is most probable that others elsewhere are encumbered with extra vulnerability, currently or in the future. Hence, what resilience can only do is vulnerability re-arrangement, re-setting and management. The proposed systemic approach is documented on current state of art regarding interactions between vulnerability and resilience to hazards and on empirical evidence from the international experience of responses to natural hazards.


Vulnerability to hazards Resilience Spatio-temporal change of vulnerability Vulnerability management Sustainability of socio-ecological systems Multi-hazard vulnerability assessment 



The work that is presented below is based on the work done and material produced in the framework of the European project “Enhancing Resilience of Communities and Territories Facing Natural and Na-tech Hazards” (ENSURE—Grant Agreement Number 212045). The project is financed by the European Commission under the 7th Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development, Area “Environment”, Activity 6.1 “Climate Change, Pollution and Risks”. This support is gratefully acknowledged. The beneficiaries (and contributing partners) of ENSURE project are: (1) BRGM, France, (2) University of Naples, Italy, (3) International Institute for Geo-information Science and Earth Observation, Netherlands, (4) University of Geneva, Switzerland, (5) Harokopio University of Athens, Greece, (6) Tel Aviv University, Israel, (7) Middlesex University United Kingdom, (8) T6 Ecosystems srl, Italy, (9) Politecnico di Milano, Italy, (10) Potsdam Institut fuer Klimafolgenforschung, Germany. Further information about the project can be found at


  1. Bankoff G, Frerks G, Hilhorst D (2004) Mapping vulnerability-disasters, development and people. Earthscan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  2. Blaikie P, Cannon T, Davis I, Wisner B (1994) At risk: natural hazards, people’s vulnerability and disasters. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  3. Boyle HG (2007) Living with vulnerability: livelihoods and human security in risky environments. Publication series of UNU-EHS, No6/2007. Bonn, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  4. Bruneau M, Chang SE, Eguchi RT, Lee GC, O’Rourke TD, Reinhorn AM, Shinozuka M, Tierney KT, Wallace WA, Winterfeldt D (2003) A framework to quantitatively assess and enhance the seismic resilience of communities. Earthq Spectra 19(4):733–752CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cannon T (2008) Reducing people’s vulnerability to natural hazards communities and resilience. Research paper no. 2008/34. UNU-WIDERGoogle Scholar
  6. Carpenter SR, Walker BH, Anderies JM, Abel N (2001) From metaphor to measurement. Resilience of what to what? Ecosystems 4:765–781CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Christoplos I (2003) Actors in risk. In: Pelling M (ed) Natural disasters and development in a globalizing world. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  8. Chuvarajan A, Martel I, Peterson C (2006) A strategic approach for sustainability and resilience planning within municipalities. Thesis submitted for completion of Master of Strategic Leadership towards Sustainability, Blekinge Institute of Technology, Karlskrona, SwedenGoogle Scholar
  9. Comfort LK (1994) Self organizing processes in disasters: a comparative study of response systems following the 1993 Marathwada, India and 1995 Hanshin, Japan earthquake. In: Koehler GA (ed) The conference proceedings “What disaster response management can learn from Chaos theory”, 1995Google Scholar
  10. Conway JA (1987) The properties of agroecosystems. Agric Syst 24:95–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cutter SL, Barmes L, Berry M, Burton C, Evans E, Tate E, Webb J (2008) A place-based model for understanding community resilience to natural disasters. Glob Environ Change 18:598–606CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Davis D (2005) Reverberations–Mexico city’s 1985 earthquake and the transformation of the capital. In: Vale LJ, Campanella TJ (eds) The resilient city. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  13. Dovers S, Handmer J (1992) Uncertainty, sustainability and change. Global Environ Change 2(4):262–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Folke C, Carpenter S, Elmqvist T, Gunderson L, Holling CS, Walker B, Bengtsson J, Berkes F, Colding J, Danell K, Falkenmark M, Gordon L, Kasperson R, Kautsky N, Kinzig A, Levin S, Maeler KG, Moberg F, Ohlsson L, Olsson P, Ostrom E, Reid W, Rockstroem J, Savenije H, Svedin U (2002) Resilience and sustainable development: building adaptive capacity in a world of transformations. Scientific background paper on resilience for The World Summit on Sustainable Development, on behalf of the Environmental Advisory Council to the Swedish GovernmentGoogle Scholar
  15. Folke C, Hahn T, Olsoon P, Norberg J (2005) Adaptive governance of socio-ecological systems. Annu Rev Environ Resour 30:441–473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Galderisi A et al. (2010) ENSURE Project (“Enhancing Resilience of Communities and Territories Facing Natural and Na-tech Hazards”—Grant Agreement Number 212045) (2009–2011) financed with the contribution of the European Commission, 7th Framework Programme (FP7). Deliverable 2.2, “Integration of different vulnerabilities vs. natural and na-tech hazards”.
  17. Gallopin GC, Funtowicz S, O’Connor M, Ravetz J (1989) Global impoverishment, sustainable development and the environment: a conceptual approach. ISSJ 121:375–397Google Scholar
  18. Handmer JW, Dovers SR (1996) A typology of resilience: rethinking institutions for sustainable development. Organ Environ 9:482–511CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. IPCC (2001) Climate change 2001—synthesis report—a contribution of working groups I, II, and III to the third assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. In: Watson RT et al. (eds) Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 398Google Scholar
  20. ISDR (2004) Living with risk: a global review of disaster reduction initiatives. United Nations PublicationsGoogle Scholar
  21. Kasperson JX, Kasperson RE (eds) (2001) Global environmental risk. United Nations University Press/Earthscan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  22. Klein N (2007) The shock doctrine—the rise of disaster capitalism. Alfred A. Knopf, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  23. Linley PA, Joseph S (2004) Positive change following trauma and adversity. A review. J Trauma Stress 17:11–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Manyena SB (2008) The concept of resilience revisited. Disasters 30(4):433–450Google Scholar
  25. Menoni S, Sapountzaki K et al. (2010) ENSURE Project (“Enhancing Resilience of Communities and Territories Facing Natural and Na-tech Hazards”—Grant Agreement Number 212045) (2009–2011) financed with the contribution of the European Commission, 7th Framework Programme (FP7). Deliverable 2.1.2, “Relation between systemic and physical vulnerability and relation between systemic, social, economic, institutional and territorial vulnerability”.
  26. Paton D (2008) Community resilience: integrating individual, community and societal perspective. In: Gow K, Paton D (eds) The phoenix of natural disasters: community resilience. Nova Science Publishers Inc, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  27. Sapountzaki K (2005) Coping with seismic vulnerability: small manufacturing firms in western Athens. Disasters 29(2):195–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sapountzaki K (2007) Social resilience to environmental risks: a mechanism of vulnerability transfer? Manag Environ Qual 18(3):274–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Sapountzaki K, Papachatzi A (2010) Private resilience responses against collective recovery interests: the case of mega-fires of August 2007, Ilia, Greece. In: Miller DS, Rivera JD (eds) Community disaster recovery and resiliency: global opportunities and challenges. Auerbach, pp 495–522Google Scholar
  30. Sapountzaki K, Wassehnoven L (2005) Consensus building and sustainability: some lessons from an adverse local experience in Greece. Environ Dev Sustain 7:433–452CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sapountzaki K et al. (2010) ENSURE Project (“Enhancing Resilience of Communities and Territories Facing Natural and Na-tech Hazards”—Grant Agreement Number 212045) (2009–2011) Financed with the contribution of the European Commission, 7th Framework Programme (FP7). Deliverable 3.1, “Analysis of vulnerability factors vs. time”.
  32. Stacey R, Griffin D, Shaw O (2000) Complexity and management: fad or radical challenge to systems thinking? Routledge, London and New YorkGoogle Scholar
  33. Villagran De Leon JC (2006) Vulnerability. A conceptual and methodological review. Publication Series of UNU-EHS. n.4/2006Google Scholar
  34. Waldrop M (1992) Complexity: the emerging science at the edge of order and chaos. Viking, LondonGoogle Scholar
  35. Wildavsky A (1988) Searching for safety. Transaction Books, New BrunswickGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Harokopion UniversityAthensGreece

Personalised recommendations