Resilience as Function of Space and Time

  • Igor Linkov
  • Benjamin D. Trump
Part of the Risk, Systems and Decisions book series (RSD)


As a term, resilience has centuries of use as a descriptor in fields as diverse as military operations, to psychology, to civil and environmental engineering. Its synonyms are vast and varied, ranging from insinuations of toughness to elasticity. While it pulls its roots from these early ideas, the modern application of resilience has centered upon analyzing how systems bounce back from disruption. This seems simple enough at first glance, yet as this book will discuss, the methodological application and analysis of how systems bounce back post-disruption can be quite challenging.


  1. Adger, W. N., Hughes, T. P., Folke, C., Carpenter, S. R., & Rockström, J. (2005). Social-ecological resilience to coastal disasters. Science, 309(5737), 1036–1039.Google Scholar
  2. Alberts, D. S. (2007). Agility, focus, and convergence: The future of command and control. Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Networks and Information Integration, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  3. Alberts, D. S., & Hayes, R. E. (2003a). Power to the edge: Command... control... in the information age. OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE WASHINGTON DC COMMAND AND CONTROL RESEARCH PROGRAM (CCRP).Google Scholar
  4. Alberts, D. S., & Hayes, R. E. (2006). Understanding command and control. Assistant Secretary of Defense (c3i/Command Control Research Program), Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  5. Aven, T. (2011). On some recent definitions and analysis frameworks for risk, vulnerability, and resilience. Risk Analysis, 31(4), 515–522.Google Scholar
  6. Aven, T., & Krohn, B. S. (2014). A new perspective on how to understand, assess and manage risk and the unforeseen. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 121, 1–10.Google Scholar
  7. Berghel, H. (2015). Cyber chutzpah: The Sony Hack and the celebration of hyperbole. Computer, 2, 77–80.Google Scholar
  8. Berkes, F., & Jolly, D. (2002). Adapting to climate change: Social-ecological resilience in a Canadian western Arctic community. Conservation Ecology, 5(2), 18.Google Scholar
  9. Berkes, F., & Ross, H. (2013). Community resilience: Toward an integrated approach. Society & Natural Resources, 26(1), 5–20.Google Scholar
  10. Björck, F., Henkel, M., Stirna, J., & Zdravkovic, J. (2015). Cyber resilience–fundamentals for a definition. In Á. Rocha, A. M. Correia, S. Costanzo, & L. P. Reis (Eds.), New contributions in information systems and technologies (pp. 311–316). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  11. Bruneau, M., Chang, S. E., Eguchi, R. T., Lee, G. C., O’Rourke, T. D., Reinhorn, A. M., et al. (2003). A framework to quantitatively assess and enhance the seismic resilience of communities. Earthquake Spectra, 19(4), 733–752.Google Scholar
  12. Cimellaro, G. P., Reinhorn, A. M., & Bruneau, M. (2010). Framework for analytical quantification of disaster resilience. Engineering structures, 32(11), 3639–3649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Collier, Z. A., & Linkov, I. (2014). Decision making for resilience within the context of network centric operations. Army Corps of Engineers Vicksburg MS Engineer Research and Development Center.Google Scholar
  14. Collier, Z., DiMase, D., Walters, S., Tehranipoor, M. M., Lambert, J. H., & Linkov, I. (2014). Cybersecurity standards: Managing risk and creating resilience. Computer, 47(9), 70–76.Google Scholar
  15. Cross, J. A. (2001). Megacities and small towns: Different perspectives on hazard vulnerability. Global Environmental Change Part B: Environmental Hazards, 3(2), 63–80.Google Scholar
  16. Crouse Quinn, S. (2008). Crisis and emergency risk communication in a pandemic: A model for building capacity and resilience of minority communities. Health Promotion Practice, 9(4_suppl), 18S–25S.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. DiMase, D., Collier, Z. A., Heffner, K., & Linkov, I. (2015). Systems engineering framework for cyber physical security and resilience. Environment Systems and Decisions, 35(2), 291–300.Google Scholar
  18. Ebi, K. L., & Semenza, J. C. (2008). Community-based adaptation to the health impacts of climate change. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 35(5), 501–507.Google Scholar
  19. Eisenberg, D. A., Linkov, I., Park, J., Bates, M. E., Fox-Lent, C., & Seager, T. P. (2014a). Resilience metrics: Lessons from military doctrines. Solution, 5(5), 76–87.Google Scholar
  20. Eisenberg, D. A., Park, J., Bates, M. E., Fox-Lent, C., Seager, T. P., & Linkov, I. (2014b). Resilience metrics: Lessons from military doctrines. Solutions, 5(5), 76–87.Google Scholar
  21. Fekete, A., Hufschmidt, G., & Kruse, S. (2014). Benefits and challenges of resilience and vulnerability for disaster risk management. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 5(1), 3–20.Google Scholar
  22. Garmestani, A. S., Allen, C. R., & Cabezas, H. (2008). Panarchy, adaptive management and governance: Policy options for building resilience. Nebraska Law Review, 87, 1036.Google Scholar
  23. Hayes, R. E. (2004). Network centric operations today between the promise and the practice. RUSI Defence Systems, 7(1).Google Scholar
  24. Holbrook, M. B. (2003). Adventures in complexity: An essay on dynamic open complex adaptive systems, butterfly effects, self-organizing order, coevolution, the ecological perspective, fitness landscapes, market spaces, emergent beauty at the edge of chaos, and all that jazz. Academy of Marketing Science Review, 2003, 1.Google Scholar
  25. Hsu, C. C., & Sandford, B. A. (2010). Delphi technique. In Encyclopedia of research design (pp. 344–347).Google Scholar
  26. Hughes, T. P., Bellwood, D. R., Folke, C., Steneck, R. S., & Wilson, J. (2005). New paradigms for supporting the resilience of marine ecosystems. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 20(7), 380–386.Google Scholar
  27. Hulett, D. T., Preston, J. Y., & CPA PMP. (2000). Garbage in, garbage out? Collect better data for your risk assessment. In Proceedings of the Project Management Institute Annual Seminars & Symposium (pp. 983–989).Google Scholar
  28. Jervis, R. (1998). System effects: Complexity in political and social life. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Karvetski, C. W., Lambert, J. H., Keisler, J. M., Sexauer, B., & Linkov, I. (2011). Climate change scenarios: Risk and impact analysis for Alaska coastal infrastructure. International Journal of Risk Assessment and Management, 15(2–3), 258–274.Google Scholar
  30. Kasperson, R. E., & Berberian, M. (2011a). Integrating science and policy: Vulnerability and resilience in global environmental change. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  31. Kasperson, R. E., & Berberian, M. (Eds.). (2011b). Integrating science and policy: Vulnerability and resilience inglobal environmental change (p. 457). London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
  32. Kaur, S., Sharma, S., & Singh, A. (2015). Cyber security: Attacks, implications and legitimations across the globe. International Journal of Computer Applications, 114(6), 21–23.Google Scholar
  33. Keisler, J. M., Collier, Z. A., Chu, E., Sinatra, N., & Linkov, I. (2014). Value of information analysis: The state of application. Environment Systems and Decisions, 34(1), 3–23.Google Scholar
  34. Kriebel, D., Tickner, J., Epstein, P., Lemons, J., Levins, R., Loechler, E. L., et al. (2001). The precautionary principle in environmental science. Environmental Health Perspectives, 109(9), 871.Google Scholar
  35. Linkov, I., Eisenberg, D. A., Bates, M. E., Chang, D., Convertino, M., Allen, J. H., ... & Seager, T. P. (2013). Measurable resilience for actionable policy.Google Scholar
  36. Linkov, I., Ames, M. R., Crouch, E. A., & Satterstrom, F. K. (2005). Uncertainty in octanol−water partition coefficient: Implications for risk assessment and remedial costs. Environmental Science & Technology, 39(18), 6917–6922.Google Scholar
  37. Linkov, I., Satterstrom, F. K., Kiker, G., Batchelor, C., Bridges, T., & Ferguson, E. (2006). From comparative risk assessment to multi-criteria decision analysis and adaptive management: Recent developments and applications. Environment International, 32(8), 1072–1093.Google Scholar
  38. Linkov, I., Eisenberg, D. A., Bates, M. E., Chang, D., Convertino, M., Allen, J. H., et al. (2013). Measurable resilience for actionable policy. Environmental Science and Technology, 47(18), 10108–10110.Google Scholar
  39. Linkov, I., Eisenberg, D. A., Plourde, K., Seager, T. P., Allen, J., & Kott, A. (2013b). Resilience metrics for cyber systems. Environment Systems and Decisions, 33(4), 471–476.Google Scholar
  40. Linkov, I., Trump, B. D., & Keisler, J. (2018a). Risk and resilience must be independently managed. Nature, 555(7694), 30–30.Google Scholar
  41. Linkov, I., Trump, B. D., Anklam, E., Berube, D., Boisseasu, P., Cummings, C., et al. (2018b). Comparative, collaborative, and integrative risk governance for emerging technologies. Environment Systems and Decisions, 38(2), 170–176.Google Scholar
  42. Linkov, I., Trump, B. D., Poinsatte-Jones, K., & Florin, M. V. (2018c). Governance strategies for a sustainable digital world. Sustainability, 10(2), 440.Google Scholar
  43. Lino, C. (2014). Cybersecurity in the federal government: Failing to maintain a secure cyber infrastructure. Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 41(1), 24–28.Google Scholar
  44. Longstaff, P. H. (2005). Security, resilience, and communication in unpredictable environments such as terrorism, natural disasters, and complex technology. Center for Information Policy Research, Harvard University.Google Scholar
  45. Marchese, D., & Linkov, I. (2017). Can you be smart and resilient at the same time? Environmental Science and Technology, 51(11), 5867–5868.Google Scholar
  46. Merz, B., Elmer, F., & Thieken, A. H. (2009). Significance of “high probability/low damage” versus “low probability/high damage” flood events. Natural Hazards and Earth System Science, 9(3), 1033–1046.Google Scholar
  47. Murray, P., & Michael, K. (2014). What are the downsides of the government storing metadata for up to 2 years? (pp. 5–30).Google Scholar
  48. National Academy of Sciences (NAS), & Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy. (2012). Disaster resilience: A national imperative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  49. National Research Council. (1983). Risk assessment in the federal government: Managing the process. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  50. O’Riordan, T. (1994). Interpreting the precautionary principle (Vol. 2). London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
  51. Origgi, G. (2014). Fear of principles? A cautious defense of the precautionary principle. Mind & Society, 13(2), 215–225.Google Scholar
  52. Osawa, J. (2011). As Sony counts hacking costs, analysts see billion-dollar repair bill. The Wall Street Journal.Google Scholar
  53. Pahl-Wostl, C. (2007). Transitions towards adaptive management of water facing climate and global change. Water Resources Management, 21(1), 49–62.Google Scholar
  54. Park, J., Seager, T. P., Rao, P. S. C., Convertino, M., & Linkov, I. (2013). Integrating risk and resilience approaches to catastrophe management in engineering systems. Risk Analysis, 33(3), 356–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Patriarca, R., Bergström, J., Di Gravio, G., & Costantino, F. (2018). Resilience engineering: Current status of the research and future challenges. Safety Science, 102, 79–100.Google Scholar
  56. PCSBI (President’s Commission on the Study of Bioethical Issues). (2010). New directions: The ethics of synthetic biology and emerging technologies. Washington, DC: President’s Commission on the Study of Bioethical Issues.Google Scholar
  57. Petrie, C., & Roth, V. (2015). How badly do you want privacy? IEEE Internet Computing, 2, 92–94.Google Scholar
  58. Roege, P. E., Collier, Z. A., Mancillas, J., McDonagh, J. A., & Linkov, I. (2014). Metrics for energy resilience. Energy Policy, 72, 249–256.Google Scholar
  59. Sandin, P. (1999). Dimensions of the precautionary principle. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal, 5(5), 889–907.Google Scholar
  60. Scheffer, M., Carpenter, S. R., Lenton, T. M., Bascompte, J., Brock, W., Dakos, V., et al. (2012). Anticipating critical transitions. Science, 338(6105), 344–348.Google Scholar
  61. Scholz, R. W., Blumer, Y. B., & Brand, F. S. (2012). Risk, vulnerability, robustness, and resilience from a decision-theoretic perspective. Journal of Risk Research, 15(3), 313–330.Google Scholar
  62. Sikula, N. R., Mancillas, J. W., Linkov, I., & McDonagh, J. A. (2015). Risk management is not enough: A conceptual model for resilience and adaptation-based vulnerability assessments. Environment Systems and Decisions, 35(2), 219–228.Google Scholar
  63. Walker, B., Holling, C. S., Carpenter, S. R., & Kinzig, A. (2004). Resilience, adaptability and transformability in social–ecological systems. Ecology and Society, 9(2), 5.Google Scholar
  64. Whiteside, K. H. (2006). Precautionary politics: Principle and practice in confronting environmental risk. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  65. Williams, P. A., & Manheke, R. J. (2010). Small business—A cyber resilience vulnerability. Chicago.Google Scholar
  66. Wood, M., Kovacs, D., Bostrom, A., Bridges, T., & Linkov, I. (2012). Flood risk management: US Army Corps of Engineers and layperson perceptions. Risk Analysis: An International Journal, 32(8), 1349–1368.Google Scholar
  67. Zhao, J. J., & Zhao, S. Y. (2010). Opportunities and threats: A security assessment of state e-government websites. Government Information Quarterly, 27(1), 49–56.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Igor Linkov
    • 1
  • Benjamin D. Trump
    • 1
  1. 1.US Army Corps of EngineersConcordUSA

Personalised recommendations