Characterising rural resilience in Aotearoa-New Zealand: a systematic review

Abstract

The concept of ‘resilience’ has recently gained traction in a range of contexts. Its various interpretations and framings are now used to examine a variety of issues, particularly relating to the human dimensions of global change. This can pose challenges to scholars, practitioners, and policy-makers seeking to develop focused research programmes, design targeted interventions, and communicate across disciplinary boundaries. The concept of resilience is widely used in Aotearoa-New Zealand, where it informs both government policy and research programmes. Resilience is particularly relevant in this small developed nation, which is heavily reliant on primary production in rural areas and affected by a range of geological and climatic hazards. To understand the range and extent of application of resilience in the rural context, we use systematic review methods to identify, characterise, and synthesise this knowledge base. Currently, research applying the concept of resilience in the rural context is limited in areal extent, largely quantitative in nature, and led by a small number of researchers. There is limited evidence of collaboration. Research has focused on a small number of hazards, failing to capture the diversity of risks and hazards in addition to their impacts. The results of our analysis and methodology offer important insights for meta-analyses of risk and hazard scholarship. The findings provide a baseline to track the future progress and effectiveness of resilience interventions and help inform current and future research priorities targeting persistent vulnerabilities in rural New Zealand and elsewhere.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Notes

  1. 1.

    Note that rurality can be defined in a number of different ways—population density, political boundaries, or reliance on sources of primary production (e.g. McIntosh et al. 2008). For the purposes of this systematic review, the Statistics New Zealand (2014) classification was particularly apt, in that it uses residential and workplace addresses to demarcate a range of categories that reflect the diverse social characteristics of those currently living across the New Zealand urban–rural spectrum.

  2. 2.

    The initial search conducted on 19 December 2016 produced 2263 results. Databases were monitored for relevant additions until 27 March 2017. Five potentially relevant studies were added during this time for a total of 2268 records. Three of those were added to the systematic review.

  3. 3.

    The * search operator finds all words beginning with the preceding letters. ‘Zealand*’ thus also returns results for ‘New Zealander(s).’ ‘Resilien*’ returns results for resilience, resiliency, and resilient.

References

  1. Alexander DE (2013) Resilience and disaster risk reduction: an etymological journey. Nat Haz Earth Sys 13:2707–2716. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-13-2707-2013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Basher R (2008) Disaster impacts: implications and policy responses. Soc Res 75:937–954

    Google Scholar 

  3. Beaglehole B, Bell C, Frampton C, Moor S (2017) The impact of the Canterbury earthquakes on successful school leaving for adolescents. Aust NZ J Publ Heal 41:70–73. https://doi.org/10.1111/1753-6405.12625

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Berman R, Quinn C, Paavola J (2012) The role of institutions in the transformation of coping capacity to sustainable adaptive capacity. Environ Dev 2:86–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envdev.2012.03.017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Berrang-Ford L, Pearce T, Ford JD (2015) Systematic review approaches for climate change adaptation research. Reg Environ Chang 15:755–769. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-014-0708-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bilotta GS, Milner AM, Boyd I (2014) On the use of systematic reviews to inform environmental policies. Environ Sci Pol 42:67–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2014.05.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Brisbois MC, de Loë RC (2016) Power in collaborative approaches to governance for water: a systematic review. Soc Natur Resour 29:775–790. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2015.1080339

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Britt E, Dorahy M, Carter J, Hoggath P, Coates A, Meyer M, Naswall K (2011) Promoting recovery and building resilience for individuals and communities. New Zeal J Psychol 40:76–78

    Google Scholar 

  9. Brown C, Seville E, Vargo J (2017) Efficacy of insurance for organisational disaster recovery: case study of the 2010 and 2011 Canterbury earthquakes. Disasters 41:388–408. https://doi.org/10.1111/disa.12201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Brown C, Stevenson J, Giovinazzi S, Seville E, Vargo J (2015) Factors influencing impacts on and recovery trends of organisations: evidence from the 2010/2011 Canterbury earthquakes. Int J Disast Risk Re 14:56–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2014.11.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Brown K (2014) Global environmental change I: a social turn for resilience? Prog Hum Geog 38:107–117. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132513498837

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Brown K, Westaway E (2011) Agency, capacity, and resilience to environmental change: lessons from human development, well-being, and disasters. Annu Rev Environ Resour 36:321–342. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-052610-092905

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Bunce A, Ford J (2015) How is adaptation, resilience, and vulnerability research engaging with gender? Environ Res Lett 10:123003. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/10/12/123003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Burton RJF, Peoples S (2014) Market liberalisation and drought in New Zealand: a case of ‘double exposure’ for dryland sheep farmers? J Rural Stud 33:82–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2013.11.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Cashman KV, Cronin SJ (2008) Welcoming a monster to the world: myths, oral tradition, and modern societal response to volcanic disasters. J Volcanol Geoth Res 176:407–418. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2008.01.040

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Collaboration for Environmental Evidence (2013) Guidelines for Systematic Review and Evidence Synthesis in Environmental Management. Version 4.2. www.environmentalevidence.org/Documents/Guidelines/Guidelines.4.2.pdf

  17. Cook CN, Possingham HP, Fuller RA (2013) Contribution of systematic reviews to management decisions. Conserv Biol 27:902–915. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Cooper-Cabell N (2016) Mind the gap: post earthquake community wellbeing? Aotearoa New Zeal Soc Work 25:27–34. https://doi.org/10.11157/anzswj-vol25iss2id78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Cowan L, Kaine G, Wright V (2013) The role of strategic and tactical flexibility in managing input variability on farms. Syst Res 30:470–494. https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.2137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Cradock-Henry N, Mortimer C (2013) Operationalising resilience in dairy agroecosystems. Ministry for primary industries, Wellington, NZ

  21. Cradock-Henry NA (2017) New Zealand kiwifruit growers’ vulnerability to climate and other stressors. Reg Environ Chang 17:245–259. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-016-1000-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Cradock-Henry NA, Frame B, Preston BL, Reisinger A, Rothman DS (2018) Dynamic adaptive pathways in downscaled climate change scenarios. Clim Chang:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-018-2270-7

  23. Dantas A, Seville E (2006) Organisational issues in implementing an information sharing framework: lessons from the Matata flooding events in New Zealand. J Conting Crisis Man 14:38–52. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5973.2006.00479.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Darnhofer I, Fairweather J, Moller H (2010) Assessing a farm’s sustainability: insights from resilience thinking. Int J Agri Sustain 8:186–198. https://doi.org/10.3763/ijas.2010.0480

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Nelson DR (2011) Adaptation and resilience: responding to a changing climate. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Clim Chang 2:113–120. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Dess HM (2006) Database reviews and reports: Scopus. Issues Sci Technol Librariansh. https://doi.org/10.5062/F4X0650T

  27. Elms D (2015) Improving community resilience to natural events. Civ Eng Environ Syst 32:77–89. https://doi.org/10.1080/10286608.2015.1011626

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Espiner S, Becken S (2014) Tourist towns on the edge: conceptualising vulnerability and resilience in a protected area tourism system. J Sustain Tour 22:646–665. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2013.855222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Espiner S, Orchiston C, Higham J (2017) Resilience and sustainability: a complementary relationship? Towards a practical conceptual model for the sustainability–resilience nexus in tourism. J Sustain Tour 0:1–16. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2017.1281929, 25

  30. Fawcett D, Pearce T, Ford JD, Archer L (2017) Operationalizing longitudinal approaches to climate change vulnerability assessment. Glob Environ Chang 45:79–88

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Finnis KK, Johnston DM, Ronan KR, White JD (2010) Hazard perceptions and preparedness of Taranaki youth. Disaster Prev Manag 19:175–184. https://doi.org/10.1108/09653561011037986

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Ford JD, Berrang-Ford L, Paterson J (2011) A systematic review of observed climate change adaptation in developed nations. Clim Chang 106:327–336. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0045-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Ford JD, Pearce T (2010) What we know, do not know, and need to know about climate change vulnerability in the western Canadian Arctic: a systematic literature review. Environ Res Lett 5:014008. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/5/1/014008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Giupponi C, Biscaro C (2015) Vulnerabilities—bibliometric analysis and literature review of evolving concepts. Environ Res Lett 10:123002. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/10/12/123002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Glavovic BC, Saunders WSA, Becker JS (2010) Land-use planning for natural hazards in New Zealand: the setting, barriers, ‘burning issues’ and priority actions. Nat Hazards 54:679–706. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-009-9494-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Green S, Higgins JPT (2008) Preparing a Cochrane review. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (eds) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Wiley-Blackwell, Chichester, England, pp 11–30

    Google Scholar 

  37. Haddaway NR, Pullin AS (2014) The policy role of systematic reviews: past, present and future. Springer Sci Rev 2:179–183. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40362-014-0023-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Harrington LJ, Rosier S, Dean SM, Stuart S, Rosier A (2014) The role of anthropogenic climate change in the 2013 drought over North Island, New Zealand. Explaining extremes of 2013 from a climate perspective. Special Supplement of the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 95:S45–S48

    Google Scholar 

  39. Hayward BM (2013) Rethinking resilience: reflections on the earthquakes in Christchurch, New Zealand, 2010 and 2011. Ecol Soc 18. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-05947-180437

  40. Huggins TJ, Hill SR, Peace R, Johnston DM (2015) Assessing displays for supporting strategic emergency management. Disaster Prev Manag 24:635–650. https://doi.org/10.1108/DPM-05-2015-0100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Hunt L (2015) The challenge of economic growth for sustainable production landscapes. Sustain Sci 10:219–230. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-014-0276-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. IFRC (2014) New Zealand country case study report: how law and regulation support disaster risk reduction. International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, Geneva, Switzerland

    Google Scholar 

  43. Insurance Council of New Zealand (2017) Cost of disaster events in New Zealand. In: Cost of disaster events in New Zealand. http://www.icnz.org.nz/statistics-data/cost-of-disaster-events-in-new-zealand/. Accessed 16 May 2017

  44. Jakes PJ, Langer ER (2012) The adaptive capacity of New Zealand communities to wildfire. Int J Wildland Fire 21:764. https://doi.org/10.1071/WF11086

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Janssen MA, Schoon ML, Ke W, Börner K (2006) Scholarly networks on resilience, vulnerability and adaptation within the human dimensions of global environmental change. Glob Environ Chang 16:240–252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.04.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Janssen M (2007) An update on the scholarly networks on resilience, vulnerability, and adaptation within the human dimensions of global environmental change. Ecol Soc 12. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-02099-120209

  47. Johnston D, Becker J, Paton D (2012) Multi-agency community engagement during disaster recovery: lessons from two New Zealand earthquake events. Disaster Prev Manag 21:252–268. https://doi.org/10.1108/09653561211220034

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Jurgilevich A, Räsänen A, Groundstroem F, Juhola S (2017) A systematic review of dynamics in climate risk and vulnerability assessments. Environ Res Lett 12:013002. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa5508

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Kachali H, Stevenson JR, Whitman Z, Seville E, Vargo J, Wilson T (2012) Organisational resilience and recovery for Canterbury organisations after the 4 September 2010 earthquake. Australas J Disaster Trauma Stud:11–19

  50. Kalaugher E, Bornman JF, Clark A, Beukes P (2013) An integrated biophysical and socio-economic framework for analysis of climate change adaptation strategies: the case of a New Zealand dairy farming system. Environ Modelling Softw 39:176–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2012.03.018

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Kelly S, Smith W (2012) Marginality, adaptation and farming in the New Zealand high country. J Alp Res 100:1–10. https://doi.org/10.4000/rga.1711

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Kelman I, Gaillard JC, Lewis J, Mercer J (2016) Learning from the history of disaster vulnerability and resilience research and practice for climate change. Nat Hazards 82:129–143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-016-2294-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Kenny G (2011) Adaptation in agriculture: lessons for resilience from eastern regions of New Zealand. Clim Chang 106:441–462. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-010-9948-9

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. King DN (2015) Tsunami hazard, assessment and risk in Aotearoa–New Zealand: a systematic review AD 1868–2012. Earth-Sci Rev 145:25–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2015.02.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Lawrence J, Reisinger A, Mullan B, Jackson B (2013) Exploring climate change uncertainties to support adaptive management of changing flood-risk. Environ Sci Pol 33:133–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2013.05.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Leichenko R, O’Brien K (2008) Environmental change and globalization: double exposures. Oxford University Press, New York, USA

    Google Scholar 

  57. Leonard GS, Johnston DM, Paton D, Christianson A, Becker J, Keys H (2008) Developing effective warning systems: ongoing research at Ruapehu volcano, New Zealand. J Volcanol Geoth Res 172:199–215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2007.12.008

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Leonard GS, Stewart C, Wilson TM, Procter JN, Scott BJ, Keys HJ, Jolly GE, Wardman JB, Cronin SJ, McBride SK (2014) Integrating multidisciplinary science, modelling and impact data into evolving, syn-event volcanic hazard mapping and communication: a case study from the 2012 Tongariro eruption crisis, New Zealand. J Volcanol Geoth Res 286:208–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2014.08.018

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Lwasa S (2014) A systematic review of research on climate change adaptation policy and practice in Africa and South Asia deltas. Reg Environ Chang 15:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-014-0715-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Mamula-Seadon L, McLean I (2015) Response and early recovery following 4 September 2010 and 22 February 2011 Canterbury earthquakes: societal resilience and the role of governance. Int J Disast Risk Re 14:82–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2015.01.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Marshall NA (2011) Assessing resource dependency on the rangelands as a measure of climate sensitivity. Soc Nat Res 24:1105–1115. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2010.509856

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Marshall NA, Dowd A-M, Fleming A, Gambley C, Howden M, Jakku E, Larsen C, Marshall PA, Moon K, Park S, Thorburn PJ (2013a) Transformational capacity in Australian peanut farmers for better climate adaptation. Agron Sustain Dev 34:583–591. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-013-0186-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Marshall NA, Tobin RC, Marshall PA, Gooch M, Hobday AJ (2013b) Social vulnerability of marine resource users to extreme weather events. Ecosystems 16:797–809. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-013-9651-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. McCubbin S, Smit B, Pearce T (2015) Where does climate fit? Vulnerability to climate change in the context of multiple stressors in Funafuti, Tuvalu. Global Environ Chang 30:43–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.10.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. McDowell G, Stephenson E, Ford J (2014) Adaptation to climate change in glaciated mountain regions. Clim Chang 126:77–91. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-014-1215-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. McEvoy D, Fünfgeld H, Bosomworth K (2013) Resilience and climate change adaptation: the importance of framing. Plan Prac Res 28:280–293. https://doi.org/10.1080/02697459.2013.787710

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. McIntosh A, Stayner R, Carrington K (2008) Resilience in rural communities literature review. University of New England – Centre for Applied Research in Social Science, Armidale, Australia

    Google Scholar 

  68. McKim L (2016) Climate change impacts and implications for New Zealand to 2100: a systematic review of recent research. NZ Climate Change Research Institute, Wellington, NZ

  69. McManus S, Seville E, Vargo J, Brunsdon D (2008) Facilitated process for improving organizational resilience. Nat Hazards Rev 9:81–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Meijerink S, Stiller S (2013) What kind of leadership do we need for climate adaptation?: a framework for analyzing leadership objectives, functions, and tasks in climate change adaptation. Environ Plann C Gov Policy 31:240–256. https://doi.org/10.1068/c11129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Miller F, Osbahr H, Boyd E, Thomalla F, Bharwani S, Ziervogel G, Walker B, Birkmann J, van der Leeuw S, Rockström J, Hinkel J, Downing T, Folke C, Nelson D (2010) Resilience and vulnerability: complementary or conflicting concepts?. Ecol Soc doi: https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-03378-150311, 15

  72. Miller M, Paton D, Johnston D (1999) Community vulnerability to volcanic hazard consequences. Disast Prev Manag 8:255–260. https://doi.org/10.1108/09653569910283888

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Milojev P, Osborne D, Sibley CG (2014) Personality resilience following a natural disaster. Soc Psychol Pers Sci 5:760–768. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550614528545

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Ministry of Business, Innovation & Employment (2015) National statement of science investment 2015–2025. MBIE, Wellington, NZ

    Google Scholar 

  75. Mitchell A, Glavovic BC, Hutchinson B, MacDonald G, Roberts M, Goodland J (2010) Community-based civil defence emergency management planning in Northland, New Zealand. Australas J Disaster Trauma Stud 2010:1–10

  76. Monge JJ, Parker WJ, Richardson JW (2016) Integrating forest ecosystem services into the farming landscape: a stochastic economic assessment. J Environ Manag 174:87–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.01.030

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. New Zealand Treasury (2016) New Zealand economic and financial overview 2016. The Treasury, Wellington, NZ

    Google Scholar 

  78. Nettle R, Ayre M, Beilin R, Waller S, Turner L, Hall A, Irvine L, Taylor G (2015) Empowering farmers for increased resilience in uncertain times. Anim Prod Sci 55:843–855

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Officials’ Committee for Domestic and External Security Coordination (2007) National hazardscape report. Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, Wellington, NZ

  80. Olsson L, Jerneck A, Thoren H, Persson J, O’Byrne D (2015) Why resilience is unappealing to social science: theoretical and empirical investigations of the scientific use of resilience. Sci Adv 1:e1400217. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1400217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Orchiston C (2013) Tourism business preparedness, resilience and disaster planning in a region of high seismic risk: the case of the Southern Alps, New Zealand. Curr Issues Tour 16:477–494. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2012.741115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Orchiston C, Manuel C, Coomer M, Becker J, Johnston D (2013) The 2009 New Zealand West Coast ShakeOut: improving earthquake preparedness in a region of high seismic risk. Australas J Disaster Trauma Stud 2013:56–61

  83. Paton D, Millar M, Johnston D (2001) Community resilience to volcanic hazard consequences. Nat Hazards 24:157–169. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011882106373

    Article  Google Scholar 

  84. Patterson MG, McDonald GW, Golubiewski NE, Forgie VE, Jollands NA (2006) Climate change impacts on regional development and sustainability: an analysis of New Zealand regions. In: Ruth M (ed) Smart growth and climate change: regional development, infrastructure and adaptation. Edward Elgar, Northampton, MA, USA, pp 82–108

    Google Scholar 

  85. Phibbs S, Kenney C, Solomon M (2015) Ngā Mōwaho: an analysis of Māori responses to the Christchurch earthquakes. Kōtuitui: New Zealand Journal of Social Sciences Online 10:72–82. https://doi.org/10.1080/1177083X.2015.1066401

    Article  Google Scholar 

  86. Plummer R, de Loë R, Armitage D (2012) A systematic review of water vulnerability assessment tools. Water Resour Manag 26:4327–4346. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-012-0147-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. Pomeroy A (2015) Resilience of family farming 1984–2014: case studies from two sheep/beef hill country districts of New Zealand. NZ Geog 71:146–158. https://doi.org/10.1111/nzg.12106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  88. Pullin AS, Stewart GB (2006) Guidelines for systematic review in conservation and environmental management. Conserv Biol 20:1647–1656. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00485.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  89. Rodriguez D, Sadras VO (2011) Opportunities from integrative approaches in farming systems design. Field Crop Res 124:137–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2011.05.022

    Article  Google Scholar 

  90. Rotimi JOB, Wilkinson S (2014) Improving environmental management legislation to facilitate post-disaster reconstruction. Int J Dis Res in the Bu Env 5:23–37. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJDRBE-09-2011-0034

    Article  Google Scholar 

  91. Rouse HL, Bell RG, Lundquist CJ, Blackett PE, Hicks DM, King D-N (2016) Coastal adaptation to climate change in Aotearoa-New Zealand. New Zeal J Mar Fresh 51:1–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/00288330.2016.1185736

    Article  Google Scholar 

  92. Sampson K, Goodrich C (2005) “We’re Coasters, why should we move?”: community identity, place attachment and forestry closure in rural New Zealand. Sites: J Soc Anthropol Cult Stud 2:124–149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  93. Smith EF, Lieske SN, Keys N, Smith TF (2016) Rapid regional-scale assessments of socio-economic vulnerability to climate change. Environ Res Lett 11:034016. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/11/3/034016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  94. Smith W, Davies-Colley C, Mackay A, Bankoff G (2011) Social impact of the 2004 Manawatu floods and the ‘hollowing out’ of rural New Zealand. Disasters 35:540–553. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7717.2011.01228.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  95. Smit B, Wandel J (2006) Adaptation, adaptive capacity and vulnerability. Glob Environ Chang 16:282–292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.03.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  96. Stevenson JR, Becker J, Cradock-Henry N, Johal S, Johnston D, Seville E (2017) Economic and social reconnaissance: Kaikōura earthquake 2016. Bull NZ Soc Earthquake Eng 50:343–351

    Article  Google Scholar 

  97. Stewart EJ, Wilson J, Espiner S, Purdie H, Lemieux C, Dawson J (2016) Implications of climate change for glacier tourism. Tourism Geogr 18:377–398. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616688.2016.1198416

    Article  Google Scholar 

  98. Stroombergen A, Tait A, Patterson K, Renwick J (2006) The relationship between New Zealand’s climate, energy, and the economy to 2025. Kōtuitui. New Zeal J Soc Sci 1:139–160

    Google Scholar 

  99. Tanner T, Lewis D, Wrathall D, Bronen R, Cradock-Henry N, Huq S, Lawless C, Nawrotzki R, Prasad V, Rahman MA, Alaniz R, King K, McNamara K, Md N, Henly-Shepard S, Thomalla F (2015) Livelihood resilience in the face of climate change. Nature Clim Change 5:23–26. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2431

    Article  Google Scholar 

  100. Thompson MA, Owen S, Lindsay JM, Leonard GS, Cronin SJ (2017) Scientist and stakeholder perspectives of transdisciplinary research: early attitudes, expectations, and tensions. Environ Sci Pol 74:30–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2017.04.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  101. Thomson J, Seers K, Frampton C, Hider P, Moor S (2016) Sequential population study of the impact of earthquakes on the emotional and behavioural well-being of 4-year-olds in Canterbury, New Zealand. J Paediatr Child Health 52:18–24. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpc.12988

    Article  Google Scholar 

  102. Tipler KS, Tarrant RA, Johnston DM, Tuffin KF (2016) New Zealand ShakeOut exercise: lessons learned by schools. Disaster Prev Manag 25:550–563. https://doi.org/10.1108/DPM-01-2016-0018

    Article  Google Scholar 

  103. Turner II BL (2010) Vulnerability and resilience: coalescing or paralleling approaches for sustainability science? Global Environ Chang 20:570–576. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.07.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  104. United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR) (2009) 2009 UNISDR terminology on disaster risk reduction. UNISDR, Geneva, Switzerland

  105. Vallance S (2015) Disaster recovery as participation: lessons from the Shaky Isles. Nat Hazards 75:1287–1301. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-014-1361-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  106. Vogel C, Moser SC, Kasperson RE, Dabelko GD (2007) Linking vulnerability, adaptation, and resilience science to practice: pathways, players, and partnerships. Global Environ Chang 17:349–364. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2007.05.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  107. Welsh M (2014) Resilience and responsibility: governing uncertainty in a complex world. Geogr J 180:15–26. https://doi.org/10.1111/geoj.12012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  108. Whitman Z, Stevenson J, Kachali H, Seville E, Vargo J, Wilson T (2014) Organisational resilience following the Darfield earthquake of 2010. Disasters 38:148–177. https://doi.org/10.1111/disa.12036

    Article  Google Scholar 

  109. Whitman ZR, Wilson TM, Seville E, Vargo J, Stevenson JR, Kachali H, Cole J (2013) Rural organizational impacts, mitigation strategies, and resilience to the 2010 Darfield earthquake, New Zealand. Nat Hazards 69:1849–1875. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-013-0782-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  110. Wilson TM, Cole JW (2007) Potential impact of ash eruptions on dairy farms from a study of the effects on a farm in eastern Bay of Plenty, New Zealand: implications for hazard mitigation. Nat Hazards 43:103–128. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-007-9111-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  111. Wilson TM, Stewart C, Wardman JB, Wilson G, Johnston DM, Hill D, Hampton SJ, Villemure M, McBride S, Leonard G, Daly M, Deligne N, Roberts L (2014) Volcanic ashfall preparedness poster series: a collaborative process for reducing the vulnerability of critical infrastructure. J Appl Volcanol 3:10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13617-014-0010-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by the Resilience to Nature’s Challenges National Science Challenge (funded by the NZ Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment) as part of the Rural Co-Creation Laboratory. We would also like to thank Simon Horner from Manaaki Whenua-Landcare Research for his expert job designing the Fig. 6 infographic.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sam Spector.

Additional information

Editor: James D. Ford.

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(DOCX 38.1 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Spector, S., Cradock-Henry, N.A., Beaven, S. et al. Characterising rural resilience in Aotearoa-New Zealand: a systematic review. Reg Environ Change 19, 543–557 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-018-1418-3

Download citation

Keywords

  • Rural
  • Primary industries
  • Agriculture
  • Tourism
  • Hazards
  • Risks
  • Resilience
  • New Zealand