Exploring the Role of Planning in Urban Resilience Enhancement—An Irish Perspective

  • Aoife DoyleEmail author
  • William Hynes
  • Stephen M. Purcell
  • Maria Rochford
Part of the The Urban Book Series book series (UBS)


Over the past two decades the concept of ‘resilience’, and more specifically ‘urban resilience’, has gained increasing attention within urban planning research, policy and practice. However, the pursuit of resilience encounters a series of grounded challenges for urban planning practitioners and associated stakeholders. Among the most commonly cited challenges is the ‘fuzzy’ nature of the resilience concept or its lack of conceptual clarity. Indeed ‘resilience’ has been employed in a range of diverse fields in varying ways. As such, there are increasing scholarly calls for a more thorough understanding of the term’s migration into, and impact upon, planning practice. This chapter explores this critical question through an Irish lens, outlining the key challenges involved in ‘translating’ the concept from theory to practice. Specifically, this chapter focuses on the role of planning in urban resilience enhancement in the Irish context, with particular attention on large scale infrastructure projects (both critical and non-critical). In doing so, lessons are drawn from the findings of two large EU funded research projects, including INTACT and HARMONISE, both funded under the EU Seventh Framework Programme.


Urban resilience Urban planning Ireland Governance 


  1. Adger N (2000) Social and ecological resilience: are they related? Prog Hum Geogr 24(3):347–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alexander DE (2013) Resilience and disaster risk reduction: an etymological journey. Nat Hazards and Earth Syst Sci 33(11):2707–2716CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Carpenter SR, Westley F, Turner G (2005) Surrogates for resilience of social–ecological systems. Ecosystems 8(8):941–944CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Coaffee J (2013) Rescaling and responsibilising the politics of Urban resilience: from national security to local place‐making. Politics 33Google Scholar
  5. Coaffee J, Clarke J (2015) On securing the generational challenge of urban resilience. Town Plann Rev 86(3)Google Scholar
  6. Davoudi S, Shaw K, Haider LJ, Quinlan AE, Peterson GD, Wilkinson C, Fünfgeld H, McEvoy D, Porter L, Davoudi S (2012) Resilience: a bridging concept or a dead end? “Reframing” Resilience: challenges for planning theory and practice interacting traps: resilience assessment of a pasture management system in northern afghanistan urban resilience: what does it mean in planning practice? resilience as a useful concept for climate change adaptation? The politics of resilience for planning: a cautionary note. Plann Theory Practice 13:299–333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Department of the Taoiseach (2016) Draft national risk assessment 2016—overview of strategic risks [online] Available at:
  8. Eraydin A (2013) Resilience thinking for planning. In: Eraydin A, Tasan-Kok T (eds) Resilience thinking in urban planning. Springer, Dordrecht, the Netheands, pp 17–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Eraydin A and Tasan-Kok T (2013) Resilience thinking in urban planning. SpringerGoogle Scholar
  10. HARMONISE D1.1 (2013) Thematic findings report on state of current practice and state of the art. Unpublished deliverable from EU F7 funded project HARMONISEGoogle Scholar
  11. HARMONISE D1.3 (2013) ‘Action Plan of Report on Strategies and Actions Beyond the State of the Art’ Unpublished deliverable from EU FP7 funded project HARMONISEGoogle Scholar
  12. Holling CS (1973) Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 4:17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Holling CS (1996) Engineering resilience versus ecological resilience. In: Schulze PC (ed) Engineering within ecological constraints. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, pp 31–44Google Scholar
  14. INTACT D5.3 (2016) ‘Irish Case Study’ Unpublished deliverable from EU FP7 funded project INTACTGoogle Scholar
  15. Jacobs J (1961) The death and life of great American cities. Vintage Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  16. Johnson CL, Priest SJ (2008) Flood risk management in England: a changing landscape of risk responsibility? Int J Water Resour Dev 24(4):513–525CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Majoor S (2015) Resilient practices: a paradox-oriented approach for large-scale development projects. Town Plann Rev 86(3):257–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Marcuse P (2004) The threat of terrorism and the right to the city. Fordham Urban Law J 32(4):101–119Google Scholar
  19. Meijerink S, Dicke W (2008) Shifts in the public-private divide in flood management. Int J Water Resour Dev 24(4):499–512CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Nemeth J and Hollander J (2010) Security zones and New York city's shrinking public space. Int J Urban Regional 34(1):20–34Google Scholar
  21. Newman O (1972) Defensible space: crime prevention through urban design. Macmillan, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  22. Pimm SL (1991) The balance of nature? ecological issues in the conservation of species and communities. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  23. Rinaldi M, Peerenboom JP, Kelly TK (2001) Identifying, understanding and analysing critical infrastructure interdependencies. IEEE Control Syst 21:11–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Savitch HV (2015) Cities in a time of terror. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  25. The Guardian (2015) Storm Desmond: body found in river in Kendal. The Guardian News, available at: Accessed 01/12/16
  26. United Nations (2012) World urbanization prospects: the 2011 revision United Nations, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  27. White I, and O’Hare P (2014) From rhetoric to reality: which resilience, why resilience, and whose resilience in spatial planning? Environ Plann C Gov Policy 32:934–950Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Aoife Doyle
    • 1
    Email author
  • William Hynes
    • 1
  • Stephen M. Purcell
    • 1
  • Maria Rochford
    • 1
  1. 1.Future Analytics ConsultingDublinRepublic of Ireland

Personalised recommendations