ISO/TR 22370:2020
(Main)Security and resilience — Urban resilience — Framework and principles
Security and resilience — Urban resilience — Framework and principles
This document describes a framework and principles that are coherent with the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, including the New Urban Agenda, Paris Agreement and Sendai Framework, that can be applied to enhance urban resilience. This document proposes the use of metrics and models as the framework upon which to structure urban resilience to assist local authorities and other urban stakeholder's efforts to build more resilient human settlements. This document is primarily intended for use by organizations with responsibility for urban governance. However, it is equally applicable to all types and sizes of organizations that represent the community of stakeholders noted above, and in particular those organizations that have a role in urban planning, development and management processes in urban areas around the world.
Titre manque
General Information
Standards Content (Sample)
TECHNICAL ISO/TR
REPORT 22370
First edition
2020-03
Security and resilience — Urban
resilience — Framework and
principles
Reference number
©
ISO 2020
© ISO 2020
All rights reserved. Unless otherwise specified, or required in the context of its implementation, no part of this publication may
be reproduced or utilized otherwise in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, or posting
on the internet or an intranet, without prior written permission. Permission can be requested from either ISO at the address
below or ISO’s member body in the country of the requester.
ISO copyright office
CP 401 • Ch. de Blandonnet 8
CH-1214 Vernier, Geneva
Phone: +41 22 749 01 11
Fax: +41 22 749 09 47
Email: copyright@iso.org
Website: www.iso.org
Published in Switzerland
ii © ISO 2020 – All rights reserved
Contents Page
Foreword .iv
Introduction .v
1 Scope . 1
2 Normative references . 1
3 Terms and definitions . 1
4 Principles for building urban resilience . 5
5 Characteristics of urban resilience . 6
6 Framework for urban resilience . 7
6.1 General . 7
6.2 Urban System Model . 9
6.3 Data — Urban Context and Urban Performance .10
6.3.1 General.10
6.3.2 Urban Context .10
6.3.3 Urban Performance .10
6.3.4 Elements of an urban system .11
6.4 Analytical lenses .12
6.4.1 General.12
6.4.2 Key analytical functions of the Who lens — Local government and
stakeholders (LGS) .13
6.4.3 Key analytical functions of the Why lens — Shocks, stresses and
challenges (SSC) .14
6.4.4 Key analytical functions of the How lens — Policies, plans and initiatives (PPI) .15
7 Actions for Resilience (A4R) .15
8 Assessment of relevant International Standards and frameworks .16
8.1 General .16
8.2 Identified gaps .16
9 Conclusion and suggestion for future standardization work .17
Annex A (informative) Data — Urban Context .19
Annex B (informative) Data — Urban Performance .20
Annex C (informative) The Who lens — Local government and stakeholders (LGS) .21
Annex D (informative) The Why lens — Shocks, stresses and challenges (SSC) .22
Annex E (informative) Plausible types and sub-types of shocks affecting urban resilience .23
Annex F (informative) The How lens — Policies, plans and initiatives (PPI) .25
Annex G (informative) Key and cross-cutting issues providing additional layers of
information on specific topics .26
Bibliography .28
Foreword
ISO (the International Organization for Standardization) is a worldwide federation of national standards
bodies (ISO member bodies). The work of preparing International Standards is normally carried out
through ISO technical committees. Each member body interested in a subject for which a technical
committee has been established has the right to be represented on that committee. International
organizations, governmental and non-governmental, in liaison with ISO, also take part in the work.
ISO collaborates closely with the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) on all matters of
electrotechnical standardization.
The procedures used to develop this document and those intended for its further maintenance are
described in the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 1. In particular, the different approval criteria needed for the
different types of ISO documents should be noted. This document was drafted in accordance with the
editorial rules of the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2 (see www .iso .org/ directives).
Attention is drawn to the possibility that some of the elements of this document may be the subject of
patent rights. ISO shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all such patent rights. Details of
any patent rights identified during the development of the document will be in the Introduction and/or
on the ISO list of patent declarations received (see www .iso .org/ patents).
Any trade name used in this document is information given for the convenience of users and does not
constitute an endorsement.
For an explanation of the voluntary nature of standards, the meaning of ISO specific terms and
expressions related to conformity assessment, as well as information about ISO’s adherence to the
World Trade Organization (WTO) principles in the Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) see www .iso .org/
iso/ foreword .html.
This document was prepared by Technical Committee ISO/TC 292, Security and resilience.
Any feedback or questions on this document should be directed to the user’s national standards body. A
complete listing of these bodies can be found at www .iso .org/ members .html.
iv © ISO 2020 – All rights reserved
Introduction
The justification for a global set of standards for achieving urban resilience is clear: urban areas, the
engines of economic growth, are projected to provide the living and work environment for two-thirds
of the global population of close to 10 billion by 2050. Urban disasters have an increasingly costly local,
regional, national and global socio-economic impact. For example, disaster events in the past decade
alone have claimed over a million lives, affected more than 2,5 billion people and caused over $1 trillion
in economic loss.
By engaging all stakeholders in resilience efforts, urban areas have the ability to harness
transformational change and improve the lives of their inhabitants. This has been acknowledged by
the global community as an essential aspect of the United Nations (UN) 2030 Agenda for Sustainable
1)
Development through agreements such as the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), New Urban
2) 3) 4)
Agenda , Paris Agreement and Sendai Framework. However, urban areas tend to lack the capacity
to operationalize these alone and fully harness change. One approach to addressing this and ensuring
implementation of the 2030 Agenda is through holistic and multi-stakeholder resilience-building.
Resilience offers a crucial meeting point among different yet essentially similar paradigms in urban
development. Enhancing resilience can reduce risks by increasing capacities, and addressing
vulnerabilities, thereby supporting effective and forward-thinking responses. Building urban resilience
seeks the betterment of people, specifically those in vulnerable situations in urban areas.
The proposed framework for urban resilience presented in this document was developed in response
to demand arising from urban areas in all parts of the world for support to make them safer and more
resilient to all manner of hazards, risks, weaknesses and vulnerabilities. It was developed to provide
local governments and relevant stakeholders with analytical tools to measure urban resilience and
develop relevant actions.
The framework aims to transform urban areas into better places to live by improving capacities to
prepare, respond and recover from all potential shocks, stresses and challenges, leading the area
towards resilience. The framework views urban resilience as a hub for transversal aspects including
risk reduction, sustainability, development and governance. It achieves this by understanding and
measuring resilience, in any human settlement in any circumstance or context. Furthermore, the
framework provides an approach for building resilience baselines (or “profiles”), prepares guidelines in
the use of the diagnostic and action-planning tools, and advises on constant real-time monitoring.
The early stages of development of this framework involved extensive testing and modelling in urban
areas all over the world, and the refinement and improvement of data acquisition, use and application.
The approach is to establish a building resilience baseline (or profile), based on metrics that can evaluate
the various dimensions of urban resilience and capture the system’s weaknesses, vulnerabilities and
strengths. Then to develop concrete and prioritized actions to address risk and build-in resilience. The
framework follows a multi-sectorial, multi-shocks and stresses, and multi-scales approach, built on the
understanding that urban areas function as urban systems, integrated and interdependent, regardless
of their size, culture, location, economy and/or political environment.
1) In 2015, countries adopted the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and its 17 Sustainable Development
Goals (SDGs).
2) The New Urban Agenda was adopted at the United Nations Conference on Housing and Sustainable Urban
Development (Habitat III) in Quito, Ecuador, on 20 October 2016. It was endorsed by the United Nations General
Assembly at its sixty-eighth plenary meeting of the seventy-first session on 23 December 2016. The New Urban
Agenda represents a shared vision for a better and more sustainable future. If well-planned and well-managed,
urbanization can be a powerful tool for sustainable development for both developing and developed countries.
3) The Paris Agreement is a global landmark agreement, signed in December 2015, for combating climate change
effects. Its central aim is to strengthen the global response to the threat of climate change.
4) The Sendai Framework was adopted by UN Member States on 18 March 2015 at the Third UN World Conference
on Disaster Risk Reduction in Sendai City, Miyagi Prefecture, Japan. The framework for 2015–2030 was developed
to better assist governments, at the national and local levels, in addressing disaster risk reduction and resilience-
building.
The implementation process for the framework is shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1 — Implementation process
vi © ISO 2020 – All rights reserved
TECHNICAL REPORT ISO/TR 22370:2020(E)
Security and resilience — Urban resilience — Framework
and principles
1 Scope
This document describes a framework and principles that are coherent with the 2030 Agenda for
Sustainable Development, including the New Urban Agenda, Paris Agreement and Sendai Framework,
that can be applied to enhance urban resilience. This document proposes the use of metrics and models
as the framework upon which to structure urban resilience to assist local authorities and other urban
stakeholder’s efforts to build more resilient human settlements.
This document is primarily intended for use by organizations with responsibility for urban governance.
However, it is equally applicable to all types and sizes of organizations that represent the community
of stakeholders noted above, and in particular those organizations that have a role in urban planning,
development and management processes in urban areas around the world.
2 Normative references
The following documents are referred to in the text in such a way that some or all of their content
constitutes requirements of this document. For dated references, only the edition cited applies. For
undated references, the latest edition of the referenced document (including any amendments) applies.
ISO 22300, Security and resilience — Vocabulary
3 Terms and definitions
For the purposes of this document, the terms and definitions given in ISO 22300 and the following apply.
ISO and IEC maintain terminological databases for use in standardization at the following addresses:
— ISO Online browsing platform: available at https:// www .iso .org/ obp
— IEC Electropedia: available at http:// www .electropedia .org/
3.1
access
ability of the rights-holders to use or benefit of a certain service or product
Note 1 to entry: Restrictions can be caused by distance to the source (e.g. water supply network does not reach a
certain neighbourhood) or unaffordability (e.g. service is too costly for a certain household or group of people),
among other reasons.
3.2
basic social services
set of services delivered in education, health and social areas, as a means to fulfil basic needs
3.3
biodiversity
variability among living organisms from all sources including, land, marine and other aquatic
ecosystems (3.13) and the ecological complexes of which the organisms are part
Note 1 to entry: This includes diversity within species, between species and of ecosystems. Biodiversity is thus
not only the sum of all ecosystems, species and genetic material, but rather represents the variability within and
among them.
Note 2 to entry: Biodiversity can also be referred to as “biological diversity”.
[SOURCE: Chan L. et al., 2014, adapted]
3.4
challenge
contextual or environmental change that has the potential to impact upon the ability and capacity of an
urban system (3.27) to address emerging risks and opportunities
3.5
civil society
wide range of individuals, groups of people, networks, movements, associations and organizations that
manifest and advocate for the interests of their members and others
Note 1 to entry: It can be based on philanthropic, cultural, religious, environmental or political values and
convictions.
Note 2 to entry: This definition excludes for-profit companies and businesses, academia and all government-
dependent entities.
3.6
civil society organization
CSO
formal association in which society voluntarily organizes around shared interests
Note 1 to entry: It includes political, cultural, environmental and faith-based organizations, as well as non-profit
and nongovernmental organizations.
Note 2 to entry: CSOs are institutionalized organizations, bearing some form of legal status, that represent
particular groups of society and are involved in service delivery.
3.7
coverage
capacity of the duty-bearer (3.11) to provide a service or product
Note 1 to entry: It can be influenced by financial capacity, geospatial setting, and the normative and institutional
frameworks.
3.8
critical facility
physical structure, network or other asset that provide services that are essential to the social and
economic functioning of a community or society
[SOURCE: UNISDR, 2017, modified — The term “critical facility” has replaced “critical infrastructure”.]
3.9
decentralized authority
local authorities, distinct from the state’s administrative authorities, that have a degree of self-
government, elaborated in the framework of the law, with their own powers, resources and capacities
to meet responsibilities, and with legitimacy underpinned by representative, elected local democratic
structures that determine how power is exercised and that make local authorities accountable to
citizens in their jurisdiction
[SOURCE: UCLG, GOLD I, 2008, adapted]
3.10
disaster risk reduction
policy aimed at preventing new and reducing existing disaster risk and managing residual risk, all of
which contribute to strengthening resilience (3.19) and therefore to the achievement of sustainable
development
[SOURCE: UNISDR, 2017, modified — “policy” has replaced “Disaster risk reduction is”.]
2 © ISO 2020 – All rights reserved
3.11
duty-bearer
individual who has a particular obligation or responsibility to respect, promote and realize human
rights (3.15), and to abstain from human rights violations
Note 1 to entry: The term is most commonly used to refer to State actors, but non-State actors can also be
considered as duty-bearers.
Note 2 to entry: Depending on the context, individuals (e.g. parents), local organizations, private companies, aid
donors and international institutions can also be duty-bearers.
[SOURCE: UNICEF]
3.12
economic diversity
extent to which economic activity of a given defined geography is distributed among a number of
categories such as industries, sectors, skill levels and employment levels
3.13
ecosystem
dynamic complex of plant, animal, and micro-organism communities and their non-living environment
(e.g. soil, air, sunlight) interacting as a functioning unit of nature
Note 1 to entry: Everything that lives in an ecosystem is dependent on the other species and elements that are
also part of that ecological community.
[SOURCE: ISO 14055-1:2017, 3.1.1, modified — “(e.g. soil, air, sunlight) interacting as a functioning unit
of nature” has replaced “interacting as a functional unit” and Note 1 to entry has been added.]
3.14
ecosystem services
benefit people obtain from ecosystems (3.13)
Note 1 to entry: These include: provisioning services such as food, water, timber and fibre; regulating services
that affect the climate, floods, disease, waste generation and water quality; cultural services that provide
recreational, aesthetic and spiritual benefits; and supporting services such as soil formation, photosynthesis and
nutrient cycling.
[SOURCE: ISO 14055-1:2017, 3.1.2, modified — Note 1 to entry has been revised and expanded.]
3.15
human rights
rights inherent to all human beings, whatever their nationality, place of residence, sex, national or
ethnic origin, colour, religion, language or any other status
Note 1 to entry: People are all equally entitled to their human rights without discrimination.
Note 2 to entry: Human rights are: interrelated, universal and inalienable; interdependent and indivisible; equal
and non-discriminatory; and both rights and obligations.
3.16
investment
allocation of resources to achieve defined objectives and other benefits
Note 1 to entry: Investment takes two main forms: direct spending on buildings, machinery and similar assets;
and indirect spending on financial securities such as bonds and shares.
[SOURCE: ISO/IEC 38500:2015, 2.13, modified — Note 1 to entry has been added.]
3.17
land tenure
relationship, whether legally or customarily defined, among people, as individuals or groups, with
respect to land, determining how land is used, possessed, sold or in other ways disposed
3.18
participation
informed process of engagement with stakeholders, where key groups actively participate in defining
the process and content of policy making
3.19
resilience
ability to absorb and adapt in a changing environment
Note 1 to entry: In the context of urban resilience (3.26) the ability to absorb and adapt to a changing environment
is determined by the collective capacity to anticipate, prepare and respond to threats and opportunities by each
individual component of an urban system (3.27).
[SOURCE: ISO 22300:2018, 3.192, modified — Note 1 to entry has been added.]
3.20
risk mitigation
lessening or minimizing of the adverse impacts of a hazardous event
[SOURCE: UNISDR, 2017, modified — The term “risk mitigation” has replaced “mitigation”.]
3.21
shock
uncertain, abrupt or long-onset event, that has potential to impact upon the purpose or objectives of an
urban system (3.27)
3.22
social protection
preventing, managing and overcoming situations that adversely affect people’s well-being
Note 1 to entry: It consists of policies and programmes designed to reduce poverty and vulnerability by
promoting efficient labour markets, diminishing people’s exposure to risks, and enhancing their capacity to
manage economic and social risks, such as unemployment, exclusion, sickness, disability and old age.
[SOURCE: UNRISD, 2010, modified — Note 1 to entry has been added.]
3.23
stress
chronic and ongoing dynamic pressure originated within an urban system (3.27), with the potential for
cumulative impacts on the ability and capacity of the system to achieve its objectives
3.24
urban agglomeration
physical structure and composition of an urban area or continuity of large urban clusters where the
built-up zone or population density of an extended city or town area or central place and any suburbs
are linked by continuous, connected urban development
3.25
urban open area
vacant areas, public or private, within urban boundaries
Note 1 to entry: Urban open areas are all fringe open spaces and captured open spaces associated within the
scope and parameters of the urban system (3.27).
Note 2 to entry: State parks, national parks or open areas in the countryside outside the parameters of the urban
area are not considered as urban open areas in this document.
4 © ISO 2020 – All rights reserved
3.26
urban resilience
ability of any urban system (3.27), with its inhabitants, in a changing environment, to anticipate,
prepare, respond to and absorb shocks (3.21), positively adapt and transform in the face of stresses
(3.23) and challenges (3.4), while facilitating inclusive and sustainable development
Note 1 to entry: A more resilient urban system is characterized by its ability to continue through disruption
in the short-to-medium term, combined with a capacity to reduce pressures and adapt to changes, risks and
opportunities. Urban resilience, therefore, is dependent upon the ability of an urban systems not just to deal with
shocks, but also with chronic stresses and challenges.
Note 2 to entry: Urban resilience is dependent upon the individual and collective resilience (3.19) of the
separate components of a complex urban system. Although a city, town or community within an urban area can
individually demonstrate enhanced resilience within its respective boundaries, urban resilience encompasses
the broader geographic scope of urban agglomeration (3.24). Resilience of an urban system is measured by the
capacity for resilience of each individual system component and dependent upon the resilience of the weakest
performer among the urban agglomeration within the system scope.
Note 3 to entry: In order to assess, plan and act accordingly in the face of shocks, stresses and challenges, an urban
system’s capability for resilience should be measured and analysed through qualitative and quantitative data.
3.27
urban system
human settlement, integrated and complex set of system components, characterised by universal and
interdependent dimensions: physical, functional, organizational and spatial; comprised of people,
processes and assets managed through effective governance mechanisms
Note 1 to entry: Being dynamic, the composition and elements of an urban system changes with time.
Note 2 to entry: Every urban area has characteristics of an urban system, regardless of its size, culture, location,
economy and/or political environment.
Note 3 to entry: Characterized as urban systems, urban areas have the objectives of managing the complex
interactions and interdependencies among its multiple components, with the purpose of fulfilling a variety of
functionalities including social, economic, cultural and environmental.
3.28
vulnerable group
individuals who share one or several characteristics that make them more susceptible to social
exclusion and marginalization, have limited opportunities or income, and/or are exposed to a higher
risk of suffering abuse (physical, sexual, psychological or financial)
Note 1 to entry: This can include children without parental care, poor people, alone and dependent elderly people,
ethnic minorities, people with disabilities, people living in marginalized communities, and other categories (HIV/
AIDS, addictions, deprivation of liberty, homeless, LGBTI, victims of domestic violence, trafficking, refugees and
immigrants).
4 Principles for building urban resilience
4.1 Principle 1: Dynamic nature of urban resilience
Resilience is not a condition but a state that cannot be sustained unless the system evolves, transforms
and adapts to current and future circumstances and changes. Therefore, building resilience requires the
implementation of context-specific and flexible plans and actions that can be adjusted to the dynamic
nature of risk and resilience.
4.2 Principle 2: Systemic approach
Recognizing that urban areas are comprised of systems interconnected through complex networks and
that changes in one part have the potential to propagate through the whole network, building resilience
requires a broad and holistic approach that takes into account these interdependencies when the urban
system is exposed to disturbances.
4.3 Principle 3: Promote participation in planning and governance
A resilient system ensures the preservation of life, limitation of injury and enhancement of the
prosperity of its inhabitants by promoting inclusiveness and fostering the comprehensive and
meaningful participation of all, particularly those in vulnerable situations, in planning and various
governance processes. Such an approach can ensure a sense of ownership, thus achieving the successful
implementation of plans and actions.
4.4 Principle 4: Multi-stakeholder engagement
A resilient system should ensure the continuity of governance, economy, commerce and other
functions, and flows upon which its inhabitants rely. This necessitates promoting open communication
and facilitating integrative collaborations between a broad array of stakeholders ranging from public
entities, the private sector, civil society organizations and academia to all inhabitants.
4.5 Principle 5: Strive towards development goals
Resilience building should drive towards, safeguard and sustain development goals. Approaches to
resilience should ensure that efforts to reduce risk and alleviate certain vulnerabilities do not generate
or increase others. It must guarantee that human rights are fulfilled, respected and protected under
any circumstances.
5 Characteristics of urban resilience
5.1 The following characteristics articulate urban resilience through describing WHAT comprises
being resilient (by being persistent, adaptable and inclusive) and the process of HOW these can be
achieved through being integrated, reflexive and transformative. See Figure 2 for the characteristics of
urban resilience.
Figure 2 — Characteristics of urban resilience
6 © ISO 2020 – All rights reserved
5.2 Persistent: Capable of withstanding disturbances while protecting people, assets and processes
by building robustness and encouraging redundancy.
NOTE 1 Involves anticipating impacts in order to prepare for current and future shocks and stresses.
NOTE 2 It incorporates coping mechanisms, spare capacity and backups to maintain and restore systems,
ensuring reliability during and after a disruption.
5.3 Adaptable: Pursuing flexibility to absorb, adjust and evolve in the face of changing circumstances,
while dynamically responding by turning change into opportunity.
NOTE 1 Adaptability considers not only foreseeable risks, but also accepts current and future uncertainty.
NOTE 2 Adaptability goes beyond redundancy by diversifying its systems and establishing alternatives.
NOTE 3 Adaptability involves the capacity to re-purpose human, financial and physical capital.
5.4 Inclusive: Centred on people and striving towards social inclusion, cohesion and participation,
while protecting each person, particularly those in vulnerable situations, from any negative impact.
NOTE 1 Inclusivity recognizes that people in vulnerable situations are among the most affected by hazards.
NOTE 2 Inclusivity promotes equality, equity and fulfilment of human rights, and fosters comprehensive and
meaningful participation in all governance processes.
5.5 Integrated: Enabling transdisciplinary collaborations by recognizing that urban resilience is
composed of and influenced by indivisible, interdependent and interacting systems.
NOTE 1 Integration combines and aligns many perspectives to ensure input is holistic, coherent and mutually
supportive towards a common cause.
NOTE 2 Integration encourages open communication and facilitates strategic coordination.
NOTE 3 Integration supports the collective functioning of the urban area and guarantees far reaching, positive
and durable change.
5.6 Reflexive: Learning from its continuously changing systems and contexts to systematically update
and improve its structures.
NOTE 1 Involves awareness that past trends have shaped current urban processes yet appreciates its potential
to transform through shocks and stresses over time.
NOTE 2 Reflexive involves conveying the capacity to learn from knowledge, past experiences and new
information by installing mechanisms to iteratively examine progress.
5.7 Transformative: Actively striving to generate positive change by fostering ingenuity and pursuing
forward-looking and innovative solutions.
NOTE 1 Transformation involves seeking alleviation from untenable circumstances that over time create a
system no longer prone to negative impacts.
NOTE 2 A transformative urban area is focused and goal-oriented towards a shared vision of its resilience.
6 Framework for urban resilience
6.1 General
The proposed framework for urban resilience provides a transversal diagnosis and pathway towards
resilience-based sustainable urban development. To this end, it adopts multiple analytical lenses
through which information covering the entire urban system is mapped, analysed and inter-related,
leading to an in-depth picture and thereby providing a baseline for the development of concrete and
prioritized actions to address risk and build-in resilience.
The framework is built around four overlapping phases: Data, Analysis, Diagnosis and Actions. While
the first, Data, is concerned with gathering all information relevant to the Urban Context and Urban
Performance, the second phase, Analysis, is where information is grouped and interrelated as per each
of the three main lenses:
— the Who lens: local government and stakeholders (LGS);
— the Why lens: shocks, stresses and challenges (SSC);
— the How lens: policies, plans and initiatives (PPI).
The three analytical lenses, together with information on the urban system’s performance, lead to the
formulation of the third phase, Diagnosis.
The framework of urban resilience is shown in Figure 3.
Figure 3 — Framework of urban resilience
The Actions phase, through the Actions for Resilience (A4R) tool, is where a roadmap is co-created
with the local government and other relevant stakeholders, based on the Diagnosis phase and potential
scenarios of development, to initiate positive change through verifiable evidence about shocks, stresses
and challenges.
8 © ISO 2020 – All rights reserved
Through this framework for urban resilience, three scenarios of the urban system can be built and used
to improve its resilience:
a) The Current Scenario is generated from the analysis of the Urban Context and Urban Performance,
through which the shocks, stresses and challenges faced are illustrated, the role of the local
government and stakeholders are mapped, and the interconnections and impacts of these are
evaluated.
b) The Trend Scenario is built upon the current scenario as it follows the trajectory of existing policies,
plans and initiatives. It aims to assess if there are ongoing actions that tackle the issues identified
in the current scenario and reveal existing gaps. From this assessment, the A4R recommendations
can be formulated.
c) The Resilient and Sustainable Development (R&SD) Scenario is the last scenario built based on the
trend scenario and modified by the A4R recommendations. It gives a realistic idea of a possible
transformation taking into consideration prioritization, management and capacities of the
implementing actors: the local government and other relevant stakeholders.
Central to this framework is the Urban System Model. The rationale behind the Urban System Model and
how this is employed within the proposed framework for urban resilience in explained in detail in 6.2.
6.2 Urban System Model
Urban areas function as complex, interdependent and integrated social-ecological systems, comprised of
people, assets and processes, and managed through effective urban governance mechanisms. An urban
system refers to the process of connectivity, interaction, operation and organization of components
within an urban area regardless of its size, culture, location, economy and/or political environment.
Urban areas can successfully respond to the impacts of economic, social, political or natural events
[7]
when viewed as systems in their entirety, connected both within and beyond their boundaries .
Recognizing this complexity and interconnectedness, the urban system model aims at systematically
gathering data, analysing information and formulating a diagnosis through which strengths as well as
weaknesses are captured when exposed to shocks, stresses or challenges.
The methodology for operationalizing the urban system model is to assess the resiliency of human
settlements through the analysis of five dynamic and interdependent dimensions, listed and explained
as follows.
— Spatial: All human settlements are geographically distributed somewhere on the planet. This
dimension is critical for addressing risk/hazard/vulnerability/(dis)continuity as a result of
the deficient spatial distribution of people, assets and functions within the local, functional/
metropolitan area.
— Physical: All constructed features comprise the physical dimension regardless of typology, quantity
or qualitative state.
— Functional: All human settlements exist for a reason, and functions include the processes, flows,
and governance present in all human settlements.
— Organizational: This dimension refers to the associations of people where the smallest “unit” is the
individual, and the typology of “organization” includes everything from community to corporate or
government institutions.
— Time: Urban areas are not static; they undergo constant evolution.
Furthermore, to systematically collect data on the urban context and assess performance in terms
of resilience, the framework uses these dimensions as a means for determining which indicators and
metrics should be adopted. The framework also deploys these dimensions as filters by which a number
of shocks, stresses and challenges are prioritized, based on how significant they are in relation to some
or all of the system’s dimensions combined.
The Urban System Model is shown in Figure 4. Each phase of this framework is further explained in 6.3.
Figure 4 — Urban System Model
6.3 Data — Urban Context and Urban Performance
6.3.1 General
Centred around people, assets and processes (the key constituents of the Urban System Model), this
phase of the framework gathers two complementary types of data: Urban Context (see 6.3.2) and Urban
Performance (see 6.3.3).
6.3.2 Urban Context
Urban Context is where the overall picture is provided by gathering contextual information on
various topics that give a unique identity. It explores the development narrative through its historical
background and its spatial, social, economic and cultural context. It introduces the administrative
structure, characteristics and strategies, highlighting those related to resilience, and describes the
inhabitants through their composition, characteristics and dynamics.
Urban context allows the subsequent part, Urban Performance, to be attuned to current realities,
tailoring questions and prompting deeper inquiries. This contextual information is also used for
diagnosis and actions as it provides an idea of the shocks, stresses and challenges faced, including those
attributed to climate change, and explores the risk reduction measures in place, such as the ones related
to mitigation, preparedness and emergency response.
The key analytical functions of Urban Context are shown in Annex A.
6.3.3 Urban Performance
Urban Performance includes all the elements and their associated components that frame the urban
area, from a close-up in the built environment to the broader scale of the ecology, supply chain and
logistics, basic infrastructure and mobility. It further identifies the public services provided by the
municipality and other levels of government, and the mechanism and institutions promoting social
inclusion and protection, as well as analysing the aspects of economy relevant to the local context.
10 © ISO 2020 – All rights reserved
Urban Performance is an in-depth, indicators-based approach of assessing the urban system. It is
focused on collecting objective data, information and knowledge, localized through the Urban Context.
It considers all aspects and attributes that shape the urban area (people, processes and assets) and
further assesses the interconnections between them.
Every component, water supply, land tenure, etc., has a set of specific indicators linked to the
dimensions of the Urban System Model. These indicators are dedicated to the assessment and definition
of the system’s performance (e.g. coverage as physical and spatial dimensions, continuity of operations
as functional dimension), and the identification of key stakeholders and policies, plans and initiatives.
Urban Performance allows identification of the key functions of local governments and stakeholders
in developing and consolidating the resilience that will be detailed and structured through the Who
lens (local governments and stakeholders). Furthermore, it provides a comprehensive understanding
of strengths and weaknesses in the urban system and evidence for future decision-making regarding
resilience-building.
Urban Performance looks into eight main elements deemed as constituents of the urban system. These
elements are shown in Annex B and explained in detail in 6.3.4.
6.3.4 Elements of an urban system
6.3.4.1 Built environment: Assesses the evolution, composition and robustness of the urban built-up
area by analysing the urban area in four layers. Urban form, the first layer, provides an overall view on
the growth patterns and how this is translated in the urban built-up and urban open areas. Land tenure,
together with housing, addresses the right to shelter that is secure, accessible, affordable, and adequately
built and located. The fourth layer assesses the physical built quality of assets and critical facilities that
provide essential services to the urban area and its inhabitants. This comprehensive analysis of the built
environment can reveal important issues such as informality, insecurity of tenure and inefficiencies
in land use, themselves stresses in the urban system that can further exacerbate the impacts of other
threats.
6.3.4.2 Supply chain and logistics: Deals with how essential non-human resources are accessed,
distributed and managed. It focuses on the diversity, availability and consumption of food, water and
energy resources, and assesses the critical entry and distribution points for general materials and goods.
Lack of these resources, due to reasons ranging from changes in natural processes to overconsumption
and inadequacies in means of delivery, can severely cripple the urban system and increase vulnerabilities.
Furthermore, this element is a crucial connection to humanitarian affairs as it assesses the availability of
resources in crisis situations and the existing capacities and strategies to utilize these.
6.3.4.3 Basic infrastructure: This addresses existing and future issues in delivering a resilient
urban environment, presented by increasing urbanization, population growth and climate change, and
supports equitable, inclusive and sustainable development. Resilient urban areas shou
...
Questions, Comments and Discussion
Ask us and Technical Secretary will try to provide an answer. You can facilitate discussion about the standard in here.
Loading comments...