Linkages in Boundaries for Resilient Societies Through Local to Global Levels: Roles of Resilience-Based Public Policy

  • Mika ShimizuEmail author
  • Allen L. Clark


While Chaps.  4 and  5 focused on cases where extreme disasters have impacted the lives of people and communities, the reality is that a modern risk society characterized by complexity and uncertainty (see Chap.  2) will continue to expose more communities to similar or more extreme disasters now and in the future. This chapter spotlights actions at different levels of societies for future with respect to incorporating components of resilience into systems and schemes of resilience-based public policy. Built on a systems view of “resilient societies,” the subsequent sections examine relevant systems and boundaries with cases/practices directly or indirectly related to resilience at (1) local, (2) national, (3) regional, and (4) global levels to elucidate their association with resilience-based public policy. Every section focuses on activities around boundaries in and outside of systems or structures. Based on the systems analysis which is founded on systems approaches (see Chap.  3), the conclusion provides the roles of resilience-based public policy for resilient societies with possibilities and challenges.


  1. Australian Climate Change Science Programme. (2015). Weather extreme and climate change. Accessed April 10, 2018.
  2. City of Melbourne. (2016). Resilient Melbourne. Accessed April 12, 2018.
  3. City of Melbourne. (2017). Annual report 2016–2017. Accessed on April 15, 2018.
  4. Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific. (ESCAP) (2017). Disaster resilience for sustainable development, Asia Pacific disaster report, economic and social commission for Asia and the Pacific, Bangkok, Thailand. Accessed April 20, 2018.
  5. European Commission (2015). EU resilience compendium: saving lives and livelihoods. Accessed April 5 , 2018.  
  6. European Commission. (2017). Joint communication to the European Parliament and the council: A strategic approach to resilience in the EU’s external action. Accessed April 20, 2018.
  7. Ferris, E., & Petz, D. (2013). In the neighborhood: The growing role of regional organizations in disaster risk management. The Brookings Instituion-London School of Economics Project on Internal Displacement. Accessed April 23, 2018.
  8. Hawaiʻi Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Commission. (2017).  Hawaii sea level rise vulnerability and adaptation report. Accessed April 24, 2018.
  9. Hunt, S. (2017). Implementing disaster resilience policy in the Australian Federation. Peer reviewed research proceedings from the Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC & AFAC conference. Sydney, September 4–6, 2017. Accessed April 2, 2018.
  10. Lavell, A., & Maskrey, A. (2014). The future of disaster risk management. Environmental Hazards, 13(4), 267–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. OECD. National policy frameworks on resilience in OECD countries. Accessed March 5, 2018.
  12. Shimizu, M. (2013). Resilience in disaster management and public policy: A case of study of the Tohoku Disaster. Risks, Hazards, & Crisis in Public Policy, 4(1), 40–59.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Kyoto UniversityKyotoJapan
  2. 2.East–West CenterHonoluluUSA

Personalised recommendations