Skip to main content

Engineering meets institutions: an interdisciplinary approach to the management of resilience

Abstract

Resilience management stretches across the decoupled domains of community, corporate, and public governance. As a result, fostering resilience needs a governance structure that supports collective actions and integrates fragmented fields with different institutional frameworks. In this study, we carry out a review of three different perspectives on resilience -engineering, social, and organizational- in order to explore resilience management in the context of governance of infrastructure systems. We discuss the common practices to address resilience of engineering systems, the need and current trend for integration of institutions into these practices through formal (e.g., policies and regulations) as well as informal mechanisms (e.g., trust, norms, and shared cognitive structures). To illustrate our theorizing, we provide three illustrative case studies. The cases highlight the barriers and enablers across the three perspectives and highlight the inter-organizational context of management of resilience. We uncovered organizational dynamics such as the necessity of establishing critical functionality through organizational capacity for stakeholder engagement, the need for diverse organizations to address institutional complexity in management of resilience, and the importance of decoupling in aligning the outcomes of resilience management practices with policies. We suggest an agenda for future research on managing practices associated with management of resilience.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1

References

  1. Adger WN (2003) Social capital, collective action, and adaptation to climate change. Econ Geogr 79(4):387–404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Afroz S, Cramb R, Grunbuhel C (2016) Collective management of water resources in Coastal Bangladesh: formal and substantive approaches. Human Ecol 44(1):17–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10745-016-9809-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Aldrich DP (2008) Site fights: Divisive Facilities and Civil Society in Japan and the West. Cornell University Press, Ithaca

    Google Scholar 

  4. Aldrich DP (2012) Building resilience: social capital in post disaster recovery. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Book  Google Scholar 

  5. Aldrich DP, Meyer M (2015) Social capital and community resilience. Am Behav Sci 59:254–269

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Ariely D (2008) Predictably irrational. Harper Collins, New York, p 20

    Google Scholar 

  7. Ayyub BM (2014) Systems resilience for multihazard environments: definition, metrics, and valuation for decision making. Risk Anal 34(2):340–355

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Baggio JA, Brown K, Hellebrandt D (2015) Boundary object or bridging concept? A citation network analysis of resilience. Ecol Soc. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-07484-200202

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Barin Cruz L, Aguilar Delgado N, Leca B, Gond JP (2016) Institutional resilience in extreme operating environments: the role of institutional work. Bus Soc 55(7):970–1016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Biggs R, Schlüter M, Biggs D, Bohensky EL, BurnSilver S, Cundill G, Dakos V, Daw TM, Evans LS, Kotschy K, Leitch AM, Meek C, Quinlan A, Raudsepp-Hearne C, Robards MD, Schoon ML, Schultz L, West PC (2012) Toward principles for enhancing the resilience of ecosystem services. Annu Rev Environ Resour 37(1):421–448

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Bonstrom H, Corotis RB (2014) First-order reliability approach to quantify and improve building portfolio resilience. J Struct Eng 142(8):C4014001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Boxenbaum E, Jonsson S (2017) Isomorphism, diffusion and decoupling: concept evolution and theoretical challenges. In: Greenwood R, Oliver C, Lawrence T, Meyer R (eds) The SAGE handbook of organizational institutionalism 2nd ed. SAGE Publications, London, pp 77–101

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Bromley P, Powell WW (2012) From smoke and mirrors to walking the talk: decoupling in the contemporary world. Acad Manag Ann 6(1):483–530

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Bruneau M, Chang SE, Eguchi RT, Lee GC, O’Rourke TD, Reinhorn AM, von Winterfeldt D (2003) A framework to quantitatively assess and enhance the seismic resilience of communities. Earthq Spectra 19(4):733–752. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1623497

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Chan R, Schofer JL (2015) Measuring transportation system resilience: response of rail transit to weather disruptions. Nat Hazards Rev 17(1):05015004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Chang SE, McDaniels T, Fox J, Dhariwal R, Longstaff H (2014) Toward disaster-resilient cities: characterizing resilience of infrastructure systems with expert judgments. Risk Anal 34(3):416–434

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Choi J, Deshmukh A, Naderpajouh N, Hastak M (2017) Dynamic relationship between functional stress and strain capacity of post-disaster infrastructure. Nat Hazards 87(2):817–841

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Cifdaloz O, Regmi A, Anderies JM, Rodriguez AA (2010) Robustness, vulnerability, and adaptive capacity in small-scale social-ecological systems: the Pumpa Irrigation System in Nepal. Ecology Society 15(3):39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Cimellaro GP, Reinhorn AM, Bruneau M (2010) Framework for analytical quantification of disaster resilience. Eng Struct 32(11):3639–3649

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Cutter SL, Burton CG, Emrich CT (2010) Disaster resilience indicators for benchmarking baseline conditions. J Homel Secur Emerg Manage. https://doi.org/10.2202/1547-7355.1732

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Department of Disaster Management (2014) Disaster report 2013

  22. Dewey J (1938) Logic: the theory of inquiry. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York

    Google Scholar 

  23. Dietz T, Ostrom E, Stern PC (2003) The struggle to govern the commons. Science 302(5652):1907–1912

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Dimaggio PJ, Powell WW (1983) The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. Am Sociol Rev 48(2):147–160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Dupré J (1996) Against scientific imperialism. In: PSA 1994: Proceedings of the 1994 Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, Forbes M, Hull D, Burian RM (eds) 2:374–381. Philosophy of Science Association, East Lansing, MI

    Google Scholar 

  26. Folke C (2006) Resilience: the emergence of a perspective for social–ecological systems analyses. Global Environ Change 16(3):253–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Francis R, Bekera B (2014) A metric and frameworks for resilience analysis of engineered and infrastructure systems. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 121:90–103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Friedland R, Alford RR (1991) Bringing society back: symbols, practices, and institutional contradictions. In: Powell WW, DiMaggio PJ (eds) The new institutionalism in organizational analysis. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 232–266

    Google Scholar 

  29. Greenwood R, Oliver C, Suddaby R, Sahlin K (eds) (2008) The Sage handbook of organizational institutionalism. Sage, London

    Google Scholar 

  30. Greenwood R, Raynard M, Kodeih F, Micelotta ER, Lounsbury M (2011) Institutional complexity and organizational responses. Acad Manage Ann 5(1):317–371

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Haimes YY, Horowitz BM, Lambert JH, Santos JR, Lian C, Crowther KG (2005) Inoperability input-output model for interdependent infrastructure sectors. I: Theory and methodology. J Infrastruct Syst 11(2):67–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Hällgren M, Rouleau L, De Rond M (2017) A matter of life or death: how extreme context research matters for management and organization studies. Acad Manage Ann 12(1):111–153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Holling CS (1973) Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 4(1):1–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Hollnagel E, Woods DD (2006) Epilogue: resilience engineering precepts. Resilience engineering—concepts and precepts. Ashgate, Aldershot, pp 347–358

    Google Scholar 

  35. Homer-Dixon T, Walker B, Biggs R, Crepin A-S, Folke C, Lambin EF, Peterson GD, Rockström J, Scheffer M, Steffen W, Troell M (2015) Synchronous failure: the emerging causal architecture of global crisis. Ecol Soc 20(3):6. https://doi.org/10.5751/es-07681-200306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Hosseini S, Barker K, Ramirez-Marquez JE (2016) A review of definitions and measures of system resilience. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 145:47–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Ishtiaque A, Sangwan N, Yu DJ (2017) Robust-yet-fragile nature of partly engineered social-ecological systems: a case study of coastal Bangladesh. Ecol Soc. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-09186-220305

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Jackson S (2016) Principles for resilient design—a guide for understanding and implementing in IRGC resource guide on resilience. https://www.irgc.org/irgc-resource-guide-on-resilience/

  39. Kraatz M, Block E (2017) Institutional pluralism revisited. In: Greenwood R, Oliver C, Lawrence T, Meyer R (eds) The SAGE handbook of organizational institutionalism, 2nd edn. SAGE Publications, London, pp 532–557

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  40. Laudan L (1977) Progress and its problems: towards a theory of scientific growth. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  41. Lawrence TB, Zilber TB, Leca B (2013) Institutional work: current research, new directions and overlooked issues. Organ Stud 34:1023–1033

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Levenberg E, Miller-Hooks E, Asadabadi A, Faturechi R (2016) Resilience of networked infrastructure with evolving component conditions: pavement network application. J Comput Civ Eng. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CP.1943-5487.0000629

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Linkov I, Eisenberg D, Bates M, Chang D, Convertino M, Allen J, Flynn S, Seager T (2013) Measurable resilience for actionable policy. Environ Sci Technol 47:10108–10110

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Linkov I, Trump BD, Fox-Lent C (2016) Resilience: approaches to risk analysis and governance. In: Florin M-V, Linkov I (eds) IRGC resource guide on resilience. EPFL International Risk Governance Center (IRGC), Lausanne

    Google Scholar 

  45. March JG, Simon HA (1958) Organizations. Wiley, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  46. Markussen T, Putterman L, Tyran JR (2013) Self-organization for collective action: an experimental study of voting on sanction regimes. Rev Econ Stud 81(1):301–324

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Matinheikki J, Pesonen T, Artto K, Peltokorpi A (2017) New value creation in business networks: the role of collective action in constructing system-level goals. Ind Mark Manage 67:122–133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. McAllister T (2015) Research needs for developing a risk-informed methodology for community resilience. J Struct Eng 142(8):C4015008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. MCEER (2010) PEOPLES: a framework for defining and measuring disaster resilience. Working Paper, Multidisciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering Research (MCEER) of the State University of New York at Buffalo

  50. Meyer JW, Rowan B (1977) Institutionalized organizations: formal structure as myth and ceremony. Am J Sociol 83(2):340–363

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Mian J, Da Silva J, Kete N, Pritchard O, Borruel A, Goode X, W (2018) Critical infrastructure resilience: understanding the landscape. The resilience shift. Arup and Lloyd Register Foundation, London

    Google Scholar 

  52. Miles SB, Chang SE (2006) Modeling community recovery from earthquakes. Earthq Spectra 22(2):439–458

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. National Academy of Science (2012) Disaster resilience: a national imperative. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC. https://doi.org/10.17226/13457

    Book  Google Scholar 

  54. North DC (1991) Institutions. J Econ Perspect 5(1):97–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. 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(4):e1400217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Opdyke A, Javernick-Will A, Koschmann M (2017) Infrastructure hazard resilience trends: an analysis of 25 years of research. Nat Hazards 87(2):773–789

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Orr RJ, Scott WR (2008) Institutional exceptions on global projects: a process model. J Int Bus Stud 39(4):562–588

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Osnos E (2011. Letter from Fukushima: the fallout. The New Yorker, 46–61

  59. Ostrom E (1990) Governing the commons: the evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  60. Ostrom E (1998) A behavioral approach to the rational choice theory of collective action: presidential address. American Political Science Association 1997. Am Political Sci Rev 92(1):1–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Pant R, Barker K, Zobel CW (2014) Static and dynamic metrics of economic resilience for interdependent infrastructure and industry sectors. Reliab Eng Syst Safe 125:92–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Park J, Seager TP, Rao PSC, Convertino M, Linkov I (2013) Integrating risk and resilience approaches to catastrophe management in engineering systems. Risk Anal 33(3):356–367

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  63. Pérez I, Janssen MA, Anderies JM (2016) Food security in the face of climate change: adaptive capacity of small-scale social-ecological systems to environmental variability. Glob Environ Change 40:82–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Pimm SL (1984) The complexity and stability of ecosystems. Nature 307(5949):321–326

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Rad ZB, Jahromi AE (2014) A framework for resiliency assessment of power communication networks. Sci Iran Trans E Ind Eng 21(6):2399

    Google Scholar 

  66. Rebuild Japan Initiative Foundation (RJIF) (2015) Anatomy of the Yoshida Testimony. RJIF, Tokyo

    Google Scholar 

  67. Roberts J (2004) The modern firm: organizational design for performance and growth. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  68. Scott WR (2001) Institutions and organizations, 2nd edn. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  69. Suchman MC (1995) Managing legitimacy: strategic and institutional approaches. Acad Manage Rev 20(3):571–610

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Taleb NN (2012) Antifragile: how to live in a world we don’t understand, vol 3. Allen Lane, London

    Google Scholar 

  71. Thornton PH, Ocasio W (1999) Institutional logics and the historical contingency of power in organizations: executive succession in the higher education publishing industry, 1958–1990. Am J Sociol 105(3):801–843

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Thornton PH, Ocasio W, Lounsbury M (2012) The institutional logics perspective: a new approach to culture, structure, and process. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  73. Timmerman P (1981) Vulnerability, resilience and the collapse of society: a review of models and possible climatic applications. Environ Monogr. https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.3370010412

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Vale LJ (2014) The politics of resilient cities: whose resilience and whose city? Build Res Inf 42(2):191–201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Van der Vegt GS, Essens P, Wahlström M, George G (2015) Managing risk and resilience. Acad Manag J 58(4):971–980

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Walker BH, Salt D (2006) Resilience thinking: sustaining ecosystems and people in a changing world. Island Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  77. Weick KE (1993) The collapse of sensemaking in organizations: the Mann Gulch disaster. Adm Sci Q 38(4):628–652

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Yu DJ, Qubbaj MR, Muneepeerakul R, Anderies JM, Aggarwal RM (2015) Effect of infrastructure design on commons dilemmas in social—ecological system dynamics. Proc Natl Acad Sci 112(43):13207–13212

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  79. Yu DJ, Sangwan N, Sung K, Chen X, Merwade V (2017) Incorporating institutions and collective action into a sociohydrological model of flood resilience. Water Resour Res 53(2):1336–1353

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research is based in part upon work supported by the Resilience Shift whose focus is to do work, and support others to do work, that will shift the worldwide approach to resilience in practice. The authors also acknowledge the suggestions by Ms. Margaret Kurth. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Resilience Shift initiative.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nader Naderpajouh.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Naderpajouh, N., Yu, D.J., Aldrich, D.P. et al. Engineering meets institutions: an interdisciplinary approach to the management of resilience. Environ Syst Decis 38, 306–317 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-018-9704-7

Download citation

Keywords

  • Resilience
  • Collective action
  • Governance
  • Communities
  • Institutions
  • Infrastructure systems