An administrative system's capacity to take effective action can be undermined by the uncertain and rapidly changing conditions that are often generated by disruptive events. Resilience has been identified as the most practical approach to overcoming this administrative problem. Resilience has multiple definitions, one of which is "[t]he capacity of a system, community or society potentially exposed to hazards to adapt, by resisting or changing in order to reach and maintain an acceptable level of functioning and structure. This is determined by the degree to which the social system is capable of organizing itself to increase this capacity for learning from past disasters for better future protection and to improve risk reduction measures" (International Strategy for Disaster Reduction 2005, p. 4). This study argues that, in contrast to conventional administrative systems, resilient administrative systems have the capacity to successfully respond to disruptive events because they possess the organizational stability to maintain the effectiveness of the community in which it operates and the organizational flexibility needed to adapt to uncertain and rapidly changing conditions.This study advances a framework for administrative resilience, which can be used to evaluate the resilience of administrative systems. Through the use of a nested case study that employed a mixed-methods design, the framework was used to investigate the administrative response system that operated in Indonesia after the Great Sumatran Earthquake and Tsunami of 26 December 2004. The study generated a number of findings. First, the system was a system of sub-systems, and the organizations that operated in the domestic sub-system possessed extremely low levels of resilience. The consequence was that the domestic sub-system could not formulate an effective response to the constraints present in the post-tsunami environment. Second, it was the inclusion of the organizations in the international sub-system, which brought with them high levels of resources, technology and experience, as well as the interactions exchanged between international and domestic organizations, which improved the resilience of the overall administrative system. These findings indicate that policy makers can promote the development of administrative resilience through the development and implementation of sociotechnical infrastructures that facilitate administrative action
