Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Resilience as Function of Space and Time

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Science and Practice of Resilience

Part of the book series: Risk, Systems and Decisions ((RSD))

Abstract

As a term, resilience has centuries of use as a descriptor in fields as diverse as military operations, to psychology, to civil and environmental engineering. Its synonyms are vast and varied, ranging from insinuations of toughness to elasticity. While it pulls its roots from these early ideas, the modern application of resilience has centered upon analyzing how systems bounce back from disruption. This seems simple enough at first glance, yet as this book will discuss, the methodological application and analysis of how systems bounce back post-disruption can be quite challenging.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Adger, W. N., Hughes, T. P., Folke, C., Carpenter, S. R., & Rockström, J. (2005). Social-ecological resilience to coastal disasters. Science, 309(5737), 1036–1039.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Alberts, D. S. (2007). Agility, focus, and convergence: The future of command and control. Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Networks and Information Integration, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alberts, D. S., & Hayes, R. E. (2003a). Power to the edge: Command... control... in the information age. OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE WASHINGTON DC COMMAND AND CONTROL RESEARCH PROGRAM (CCRP).

    Google Scholar 

  • Alberts, D. S., & Hayes, R. E. (2006). Understanding command and control. Assistant Secretary of Defense (c3i/Command Control Research Program), Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aven, T. (2011). On some recent definitions and analysis frameworks for risk, vulnerability, and resilience. Risk Analysis, 31(4), 515–522.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aven, T., & Krohn, B. S. (2014). A new perspective on how to understand, assess and manage risk and the unforeseen. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 121, 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berghel, H. (2015). Cyber chutzpah: The Sony Hack and the celebration of hyperbole. Computer, 2, 77–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berkes, F., & Jolly, D. (2002). Adapting to climate change: Social-ecological resilience in a Canadian western Arctic community. Conservation Ecology, 5(2), 18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berkes, F., & Ross, H. (2013). Community resilience: Toward an integrated approach. Society & Natural Resources, 26(1), 5–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Björck, F., Henkel, M., Stirna, J., & Zdravkovic, J. (2015). Cyber resilience–fundamentals for a definition. In Á. Rocha, A. M. Correia, S. Costanzo, & L. P. Reis (Eds.), New contributions in information systems and technologies (pp. 311–316). Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruneau, M., Chang, S. E., Eguchi, R. T., Lee, G. C., O’Rourke, T. D., Reinhorn, A. M., et al. (2003). A framework to quantitatively assess and enhance the seismic resilience of communities. Earthquake Spectra, 19(4), 733–752.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cimellaro, G. P., Reinhorn, A. M., & Bruneau, M. (2010). Framework for analytical quantification of disaster resilience. Engineering structures, 32(11), 3639–3649.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collier, Z. A., & Linkov, I. (2014). Decision making for resilience within the context of network centric operations. Army Corps of Engineers Vicksburg MS Engineer Research and Development Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collier, Z., DiMase, D., Walters, S., Tehranipoor, M. M., Lambert, J. H., & Linkov, I. (2014). Cybersecurity standards: Managing risk and creating resilience. Computer, 47(9), 70–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cross, J. A. (2001). Megacities and small towns: Different perspectives on hazard vulnerability. Global Environmental Change Part B: Environmental Hazards, 3(2), 63–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crouse Quinn, S. (2008). Crisis and emergency risk communication in a pandemic: A model for building capacity and resilience of minority communities. Health Promotion Practice, 9(4_suppl), 18S–25S.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DiMase, D., Collier, Z. A., Heffner, K., & Linkov, I. (2015). Systems engineering framework for cyber physical security and resilience. Environment Systems and Decisions, 35(2), 291–300.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ebi, K. L., & Semenza, J. C. (2008). Community-based adaptation to the health impacts of climate change. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 35(5), 501–507.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenberg, D. A., Linkov, I., Park, J., Bates, M. E., Fox-Lent, C., & Seager, T. P. (2014a). Resilience metrics: Lessons from military doctrines. Solution, 5(5), 76–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenberg, D. A., Park, J., Bates, M. E., Fox-Lent, C., Seager, T. P., & Linkov, I. (2014b). Resilience metrics: Lessons from military doctrines. Solutions, 5(5), 76–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fekete, A., Hufschmidt, G., & Kruse, S. (2014). Benefits and challenges of resilience and vulnerability for disaster risk management. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 5(1), 3–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garmestani, A. S., Allen, C. R., & Cabezas, H. (2008). Panarchy, adaptive management and governance: Policy options for building resilience. Nebraska Law Review, 87, 1036.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, R. E. (2004). Network centric operations today between the promise and the practice. RUSI Defence Systems, 7(1).

    Google Scholar 

  • Holbrook, M. B. (2003). Adventures in complexity: An essay on dynamic open complex adaptive systems, butterfly effects, self-organizing order, coevolution, the ecological perspective, fitness landscapes, market spaces, emergent beauty at the edge of chaos, and all that jazz. Academy of Marketing Science Review, 2003, 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hsu, C. C., & Sandford, B. A. (2010). Delphi technique. In Encyclopedia of research design (pp. 344–347).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, T. P., Bellwood, D. R., Folke, C., Steneck, R. S., & Wilson, J. (2005). New paradigms for supporting the resilience of marine ecosystems. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 20(7), 380–386.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hulett, D. T., Preston, J. Y., & CPA PMP. (2000). Garbage in, garbage out? Collect better data for your risk assessment. In Proceedings of the Project Management Institute Annual Seminars & Symposium (pp. 983–989).

    Google Scholar 

  • Jervis, R. (1998). System effects: Complexity in political and social life. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karvetski, C. W., Lambert, J. H., Keisler, J. M., Sexauer, B., & Linkov, I. (2011). Climate change scenarios: Risk and impact analysis for Alaska coastal infrastructure. International Journal of Risk Assessment and Management, 15(2–3), 258–274.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kasperson, R. E., & Berberian, M. (2011a). Integrating science and policy: Vulnerability and resilience in global environmental change. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kasperson, R. E., & Berberian, M. (Eds.). (2011b). Integrating science and policy: Vulnerability and resilience inglobal environmental change (p. 457). London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaur, S., Sharma, S., & Singh, A. (2015). Cyber security: Attacks, implications and legitimations across the globe. International Journal of Computer Applications, 114(6), 21–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keisler, J. M., Collier, Z. A., Chu, E., Sinatra, N., & Linkov, I. (2014). Value of information analysis: The state of application. Environment Systems and Decisions, 34(1), 3–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kriebel, D., Tickner, J., Epstein, P., Lemons, J., Levins, R., Loechler, E. L., et al. (2001). The precautionary principle in environmental science. Environmental Health Perspectives, 109(9), 871.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Linkov, I., Eisenberg, D. A., Bates, M. E., Chang, D., Convertino, M., Allen, J. H., ... & Seager, T. P. (2013). Measurable resilience for actionable policy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linkov, I., Ames, M. R., Crouch, E. A., & Satterstrom, F. K. (2005). Uncertainty in octanol−water partition coefficient: Implications for risk assessment and remedial costs. Environmental Science & Technology, 39(18), 6917–6922.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Linkov, I., Satterstrom, F. K., Kiker, G., Batchelor, C., Bridges, T., & Ferguson, E. (2006). From comparative risk assessment to multi-criteria decision analysis and adaptive management: Recent developments and applications. Environment International, 32(8), 1072–1093.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Linkov, I., Eisenberg, D. A., Bates, M. E., Chang, D., Convertino, M., Allen, J. H., et al. (2013). Measurable resilience for actionable policy. Environmental Science and Technology, 47(18), 10108–10110.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Linkov, I., Eisenberg, D. A., Plourde, K., Seager, T. P., Allen, J., & Kott, A. (2013b). Resilience metrics for cyber systems. Environment Systems and Decisions, 33(4), 471–476.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linkov, I., Trump, B. D., & Keisler, J. (2018a). Risk and resilience must be independently managed. Nature, 555(7694), 30–30.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Linkov, I., Trump, B. D., Anklam, E., Berube, D., Boisseasu, P., Cummings, C., et al. (2018b). Comparative, collaborative, and integrative risk governance for emerging technologies. Environment Systems and Decisions, 38(2), 170–176.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linkov, I., Trump, B. D., Poinsatte-Jones, K., & Florin, M. V. (2018c). Governance strategies for a sustainable digital world. Sustainability, 10(2), 440.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lino, C. (2014). Cybersecurity in the federal government: Failing to maintain a secure cyber infrastructure. Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 41(1), 24–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Longstaff, P. H. (2005). Security, resilience, and communication in unpredictable environments such as terrorism, natural disasters, and complex technology. Center for Information Policy Research, Harvard University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marchese, D., & Linkov, I. (2017). Can you be smart and resilient at the same time? Environmental Science and Technology, 51(11), 5867–5868.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Merz, B., Elmer, F., & Thieken, A. H. (2009). Significance of “high probability/low damage” versus “low probability/high damage” flood events. Natural Hazards and Earth System Science, 9(3), 1033–1046.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murray, P., & Michael, K. (2014). What are the downsides of the government storing metadata for up to 2 years? (pp. 5–30).

    Google Scholar 

  • National Academy of Sciences (NAS), & Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy. (2012). Disaster resilience: A national imperative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. (1983). Risk assessment in the federal government: Managing the process. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Riordan, T. (1994). Interpreting the precautionary principle (Vol. 2). London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Origgi, G. (2014). Fear of principles? A cautious defense of the precautionary principle. Mind & Society, 13(2), 215–225.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osawa, J. (2011). As Sony counts hacking costs, analysts see billion-dollar repair bill. The Wall Street Journal.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pahl-Wostl, C. (2007). Transitions towards adaptive management of water facing climate and global change. Water Resources Management, 21(1), 49–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Park, J., Seager, T. P., Rao, P. S. C., Convertino, M., & Linkov, I. (2013). Integrating risk and resilience approaches to catastrophe management in engineering systems. Risk Analysis, 33(3), 356–367.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Patriarca, R., Bergström, J., Di Gravio, G., & Costantino, F. (2018). Resilience engineering: Current status of the research and future challenges. Safety Science, 102, 79–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • PCSBI (President’s Commission on the Study of Bioethical Issues). (2010). New directions: The ethics of synthetic biology and emerging technologies. Washington, DC: President’s Commission on the Study of Bioethical Issues.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petrie, C., & Roth, V. (2015). How badly do you want privacy? IEEE Internet Computing, 2, 92–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roege, P. E., Collier, Z. A., Mancillas, J., McDonagh, J. A., & Linkov, I. (2014). Metrics for energy resilience. Energy Policy, 72, 249–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandin, P. (1999). Dimensions of the precautionary principle. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal, 5(5), 889–907.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scheffer, M., Carpenter, S. R., Lenton, T. M., Bascompte, J., Brock, W., Dakos, V., et al. (2012). Anticipating critical transitions. Science, 338(6105), 344–348.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Scholz, R. W., Blumer, Y. B., & Brand, F. S. (2012). Risk, vulnerability, robustness, and resilience from a decision-theoretic perspective. Journal of Risk Research, 15(3), 313–330.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sikula, N. R., Mancillas, J. W., Linkov, I., & McDonagh, J. A. (2015). Risk management is not enough: A conceptual model for resilience and adaptation-based vulnerability assessments. Environment Systems and Decisions, 35(2), 219–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, B., Holling, C. S., Carpenter, S. R., & Kinzig, A. (2004). Resilience, adaptability and transformability in social–ecological systems. Ecology and Society, 9(2), 5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whiteside, K. H. (2006). Precautionary politics: Principle and practice in confronting environmental risk. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, P. A., & Manheke, R. J. (2010). Small business—A cyber resilience vulnerability. Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood, M., Kovacs, D., Bostrom, A., Bridges, T., & Linkov, I. (2012). Flood risk management: US Army Corps of Engineers and layperson perceptions. Risk Analysis: An International Journal, 32(8), 1349–1368.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, J. J., & Zhao, S. Y. (2010). Opportunities and threats: A security assessment of state e-government websites. Government Information Quarterly, 27(1), 49–56.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. US Army Corps of Engineers, Concord, MA, USA

    Igor Linkov & Benjamin D. Trump

Authors
  1. Igor Linkov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Benjamin D. Trump
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Linkov, I., Trump, B.D. (2019). Resilience as Function of Space and Time. In: The Science and Practice of Resilience. Risk, Systems and Decisions. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-04565-4_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation