Towards a resilient community: A decision support framework for prioritizing stakeholders' interaction areas

Interactions among community stakeholders act as a buffer against disasters and present a way to build community resilience. Several decision support frameworks have been proposed in the literature to improve community resilience, but none focus on interactions among stakeholders. This paper presents a decision support framework to guide decision-makers in prioritizing areas of interaction based on their mutual impact. The framework is built on three components. The first involved conducting a literature review to identify areas of interaction among community stakeholders; resulting in identifying 27 factors that reflect the various interaction areas. The second was to implement a Delphi study to capture the dependency among the different areas. The third was to prioritize the identified areas of interaction through network analysis techniques to understand the propagating impacts of a change in one area on the others. The framework was applied to Spain, utilizing data provided by Spanish resilience experts. Our findings indicate a high degree of interdependence among all areas of interaction. Decentralization of the decision-making process and effective leading capabilities of emergency organizations have been identified as top priority areas. By utilizing this framework, decision-makers can systematically enhance interactions among diverse stakeholders, creating a roadmap to improve community resilience

Systematic approach to cyber resilience operationalization in SMEs

The constantly evolving cyber threat landscape is a latent problem for today’s companies. This is especially true for the Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs) because they have limited resources to face the threats but, as a group, represent an extensive payload for cybercriminals to exploit. Moreover, the traditional cybersecurity approach of protecting against known threats cannot withstand the rapidly evolving technologies and threats used by cybercriminals. This study claims that cyber resilience, a more holistic approach to cybersecurity, could help SMEs anticipate, detect, withstand, recover from and evolve after cyber incidents. However, to operationalize cyber resilience is not an easy task, and thus, the study presents a framework with a corresponding implementation order for SMEs that could help them implement cyber resilience practices. The framework is the result of using a variation of Design Science Research in which Grounded Theory was used to induce the most important actions required to implement cyber resilience and an iterative evaluation from experts to validate the actions and put them in a logical order. Therefore, this study proposes that the framework could benefit SME managers to understand cyber resilience, as well as help them start implementing it with concrete actions and an order dictated by the experience of experts. This could potentially ease cyber resilience implementation for SMEs by making them aware of what cyber resilience implies, which dimensions it includes and what actions can be implemented to increase their cyber resilience

International consensus definition of low anterior resection syndrome

Aim: Low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) is pragmatically defined as disordered bowel function after rectal resection leading to a detriment in quality of life. This broad characterization does not allow for precise estimates of prevalence. The LARS score was designed as a simple tool for clinical evaluation of LARS. Although the LARS score has good clinical utility, it may not capture all important aspects that patients may experience. The aim of this collaboration was to develop an international consensus definition of LARS that encompasses all aspects of the condition and is informed by all stakeholders. Method: This international patient–provider initiative used an online Delphi survey, regional patient consultation meetings, and an international consensus meeting. Three expert groups participated: patients, surgeons and other health professionals from five regions (Australasia, Denmark, Spain, Great Britain and Ireland, and North America) and in three languages (English, Spanish, and Danish). The primary outcome measured was the priorities for the definition of LARS. Results: Three hundred twenty-five participants (156 patients) registered. The response rates for successive rounds of the Delphi survey were 86%, 96% and 99%. Eighteen priorities emerged from the Delphi survey. Patient consultation and consensus meetings refined these priorities to eight symptoms and eight consequences that capture essential aspects of the syndrome. Sampling bias may have been present, in particular, in the patient panel because social media was used extensively in recruitment. There was also dominance of the surgical panel at the final consensus meeting despite attempts to mitigate this. Conclusion: This is the first definition of LARS developed with direct input from a large international patient panel. The involvement of patients in all phases has ensured that the definition presented encompasses the vital aspects of the patient experience of LARS. The novel separation of symptoms and consequences may enable greater sensitivity to detect changes in LARS over time and with intervention

International consensus definition of low anterior resection syndrome

Aim: Low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) is pragmatically defined as disordered bowel function after rectal resection leading to a detriment in quality of life. This broad characterization does not allow for precise estimates of prevalence. The LARS score was designed as a simple tool for clinical evaluation of LARS. Although the LARS score has good clinical utility, it may not capture all important aspects that patients may experience. The aim of this collaboration was to develop an international consensus definition of LARS that encompasses all aspects of the condition and is informed by all stakeholders. Method: This international patient–provider initiative used an online Delphi survey, regional patient consultation meetings, and an international consensus meeting. Three expert groups participated: patients, surgeons and other health professionals from five regions (Australasia, Denmark, Spain, Great Britain and Ireland, and North America) and in three languages (English, Spanish, and Danish). The primary outcome measured was the priorities for the definition of LARS. Results: Three hundred twenty-five participants (156 patients) registered. The response rates for successive rounds of the Delphi survey were 86%, 96% and 99%. Eighteen priorities emerged from the Delphi survey. Patient consultation and consensus meetings refined these priorities to eight symptoms and eight consequences that capture essential aspects of the syndrome. Sampling bias may have been present, in particular, in the patient panel because social media was used extensively in recruitment. There was also dominance of the surgical panel at the final consensus meeting despite attempts to mitigate this. Conclusion: This is the first definition of LARS developed with direct input from a large international patient panel. The involvement of patients in all phases has ensured that the definition presented encompasses the vital aspects of the patient experience of LARS. The novel separation of symptoms and consequences may enable greater sensitivity to detect changes in LARS over time and with intervention

Building City Resilience through Collaboration.

Nowadays, the majority of the world’s population lives in cities and, according to projections, this number will increase over the coming decades. Accelerated globalization has dramatically increased the complexity and perceived unpredictability of threats and hazards. As cities continue to grow and grapple with uncertainties, cities across the world face an increasing variety of challenges ranging from short-term disasters such as floods, droughts, and earthquakes, to long-term disasters such as climate change. In most cities, the approach to managing disasters has limited to top-down initiatives directed by disjointed departments and entities of the local government who adopted a reactive response to disasters. In this context, city stakeholders such as volunteer organizations, citizens, media, academic, educational and scientific entities, and private and public companies were informed without becoming actively involved in the resilience-building process. The capacity of a city to adapt to disasters requires a resilience approach that not only takes into consideration the contribution of each stakeholder independently but also tackles the functioning of a city in a comprehensive and holistic manner. The approach to building resilience focuses on the innate strengths of city stakeholders and the need to collaborate to maximize efforts and existing resources. Building city resilience therefore, requires analyzing the needs of the different city stakeholders and empowering them to take actions. Currently, however, frameworks that help governments to improve collaboration with city stakeholders in the resilience-building process remain undeveloped. Therefore, frameworks that help local governments to understand and assess how to engage stakeholders at the most appropriate time and in a manner that contributes to the resilience-building process need to be developed. The contribution of this research is the development of a stakeholder-collaboration maturity model. The stakeholder-collaboration maturity model defines five sequential maturity stages to help local governments to improve progressively the collaboration with city stakeholders in the resilience-building process. Each maturity stage indicates the stakeholders that need to be involved, the policies that need to be implemented, and the indicators that evaluate the implementation of the policies. The stakeholder-collaboration maturity model was developed as a result of an iterative process that included semi-structured interviews with representatives from six different cities committed to improving their level of city resilience. Furthermore, two case studies were carried out in two cities in order to implement the stakeholder-collaboration maturity model. These case studies aimed at gathering evidence of the evolution of the collaboration between the local government and city stakeholders and to validate the sequence of stages and policies presented in the maturity model. Moreover, the stakeholder-collaboration maturity model made it possible to assess the current maturity stage of the cities under study and to provide recommendations for improving collaboration with different city stakeholders

A framework for public private people partnership in the city resilience building process

Citizens in developed countries are increasingly aware of the fact that the entire responsibility of preventing, responding to and recovering from crises cannot fully fall on public entities and private companies. In fact, the role of the citizenry is increasingly powerful, and citizens are required to prepare for, respond to and recover from crises in the most effective manner. To that end, there is an emerging need to involve not only public entities and private companies but also citizens in the process of building a city’s resilience in order to understand the different perspectives on the same reality. Fostering the participation of citizens in the city’s resilience building process will also help to increase their awareness and commitment level in resilience related issues, eventually increasing the overall resilience level of the city. The aim of this research is to develop a framework that supports and guides the development process of public-private-people partnerships (4Ps) in the context of the city resilience-building process. The presented framework was developed as a result of an iterative process including a literature review, semi-structured interviews with representatives from six European cities that are currently investing resources to improve their cities’ resilience level among other methodologies. Moreover, the final version of the 4P framework was obtained after conducting a Delphi study. Finally, the 4P framework was validated conducting two case studies one in the city of Wellington, New Zealand and the other in San Sebastian, Spain. The framework is formed by three different components. A set of sixteen characteristics of effective 4Ps that have been classified into three dimensions, namely, stakeholder relationship, information flow and conflict resolution. Moreover, the framework describes three 4P evolution stages that describe the evolution of multi-stakeholder collaborations in order to achieve meaningful and long lasting 4Ps that provide support to any city’s resilience building process. Finally, the framework includes an implementation order that considering the 4P evolution stages establishes a priority order in the implementation of the characteristics what enables to ensure that available resources are invested in the most effective manner.Los ciudadanos de países desarrollados son cada vez más conscientes de que toda la responsabilidad de la prevenir, responder y recuperarse de las crisis no puede recaer en manos de entidades públicas y compañías privadas. De hecho, el rol de la ciudadanía es cada vez más importante y los ciudadanos son cada vez más imprescindibles a la hora de prepararse, responder y recuperarse de las crisis de la manera más efectiva posible. Es por eso que existe la necesidad de involucrar no solo a entidades públicas y compañías privadas, sino también fomentar la participación de las personas en el proceso de creación de resiliencia en ciudades para ser capaces de entender todas las diferentes perspectivas de una misma realidad. Incentivar la participación ciudadana en el proceso de creación de resiliencia en ciudades también ayuda a incrementar el nivel de concienciación y compromiso en temas relacionados con la resiliencia, haciendo que finalmente el nivel de resiliencia de la ciudad aumente. El objetivo de esta investigación es desarrollar un marco que apoye y guíe el proceso de desarrollo de colaboraciones público privada y de personas (4Ps) en el contexto de la creación de resiliencia en ciudades. El marco que se presenta ha sido desarrollado tras llevar a cabo un proceso iterativo que incluye, entre otras metodologías, una revisión bibliográfica, entrevistas semi-estructuradas con representantes de seis ciudades europeas que actualmente están invirtiendo recursos en aumentar su nivel de resiliencia. Además, se ha llevado a cabo un proceso Delphi para obtener la versión final del marco 4P. Finalmente, se llevaron a cabo dos casos de estudio, uno en Wellington (Nueva Zelanda) y otro en San Sebastian (España) para validar el marco 4P. El marco está compuesto por tres componentes. Una lista de 16 características de 4Ps efectivas que han sido clasificadas en tres dimensiones; relación entre agentes, flujo de información y resolución de conflictos. Además, el marco describe tres estados de evolución 4P que explican el proceso de transformación que experimentan las colaboraciones entre agentes hasta conseguir 4Ps relevantes, que perduren en el tiempo y que apoyen el proceso de creación de resiliencia en ciudades. Finalmente, el marco incluye un orden de implementación que establece un orden de prioridad para implementar de características considerando las peculiaridades de los estados de evolución 4P y de esta manera asegurar que los recursos disponibles para desarrollar estas colaboraciones se utilizan de la manera más efectiva

Towards a resilient community: A decision support framework for prioritizing stakeholders' interaction areas

Interactions among community stakeholders act as a buffer against disasters and present a way to build community resilience. Several decision support frameworks have been proposed in the literature to improve community resilience, but none focus on interactions among stakeholders. This paper presents a decision support framework to guide decision-makers in prioritizing areas of interaction based on their mutual impact. The framework is built on three components. The first involved conducting a literature review to identify areas of interaction among community stakeholders; resulting in identifying 27 factors that reflect the various interaction areas. The second was to implement a Delphi study to capture the dependency among the different areas. The third was to prioritize the identified areas of interaction through network analysis techniques to understand the propagating impacts of a change in one area on the others. The framework was applied to Spain, utilizing data provided by Spanish resilience experts. Our findings indicate a high degree of interdependence among all areas of interaction. Decentralization of the decision-making process and effective leading capabilities of emergency organizations have been identified as top priority areas. By utilizing this framework, decision-makers can systematically enhance interactions among diverse stakeholders, creating a roadmap to improve community resilience

Guide for climate-resilient cities: An urban critical infrastructures approach

Climate change (CC) is one of the most challenging issues ever faced, as it affects every system worldwide at any scale. Urban areas are not an exception. Extreme weather-related events have seriously affected urban areas in recent years, and they have a significant impact on the welfare of people. According to UN projections, by 2050 more than 68% of the world’s population could be concentrated in urban areas. Additionally, daily life in urban areas is highly dependent on certain critical services and products provided by critical infrastructures (CIs). Therefore, it is especially relevant to understand how CC affects urban CIs in order to develop mechanisms to improve their capacity to handle crises derived from CC. In this context, resilience-based strategies provide a holistic approach, considering both predictable and unpredictable threats. This paper proposes a guide for assessing and enhancing the resilience level of cities against CC, considering urban CIs as key agents in improving the city’s capacity to face and recover from CC-related crises. The guide was developed through a co-creation process in which two cities in the Basque Country (Spain) worked together with CI providers and other relevant stakeholders in the resilience-building process. The resulting guide is to be used by city stakeholders at a strategic level, providing them with: (1) a qualitative assessment of the city’s current resilience level in the CC context; (2) better knowledge about urban CI sectors, their interdependency relationships and the chain of impacts due to cascading effects in the short, medium and in the long term and; (3) a set of policies that enhance city resilience

A framework for public-private-people partnerships in the city resilience-building process

Citizens living in cities where public entities are committed to the development of city resilience are increasingly aware that the entire responsibility for preventing, responding to and recovering from crises cannot fully fall on public entities and private companies. In fact, citizens are more and more required to prepare for, respond to and recover from crises. To that end, there is an emerging need to involve not only public entities and private companies but also citizens in the process of building a city’s resilience in order to understand the different perspectives on the same reality. This research paper is based on a systematic literature review to develop a framework that defines and describes the successful characteristics of public-private-people partnerships (4Ps) in the city resilience-building process. The framework revolves around two criteria for classification: the dimension of the characteristics (stakeholder relationship, information flow and conflict resolution), and the attributes of the partnership. A preliminary list of relationships among the characteristics found in the literature is also presented. The aim throughout is to define which characteristics need to be developed in order to better ensure successful cooperation among the three main stakeholders: public entities, private companies and citizens

Coming to Action: operationalizing city resilience

There is an urgent need to build city resilience in order to face upcoming foreseen and unforeseen disasters more holistically, economically and collaboratively. Population trends mean that people are moving to urban areas and the traditional approach to crisis management is becoming obsolete as it is no longer able to deal with the new challenges that are emerging such as social dynamics or climate change. In this context, there are numerous studies and strategies that define how to build city resilience and consequently sustainable cities. However, decision-makers have trouble putting the knowledge in the studies and strategies into practice, as they find this information to be too abstract or far from their daily activities. More practical tools are needed to facilitate the operationalization of city resilience and familiarize decision makers with the concept. To that end, this paper presents both a qualitative and quantitative toolkit that enables decision makers to study, understand and train themselves to operationalize city resilience properly. This toolkit is composed of two complementary tools, namely the Resilience Maturity Model (RMM) and a serious game called City Resilience Dynamics (CRD). The paper also discusses the key points that led to a useful, trustworthy and flexible toolkit that decision-makers can use in building city resilience