|
A Systematic Review of the Application of Composite Index in Measuring Urban Resilience
|
Esfandiar Zebardast *  , Seyede Sedighe Rouhani |
| Tehran University , zebardst@ut.ac.ir |
|
|
Abstract: (60 Views) |
In parallel with the increasing frequency of disasters in urban areas worldwide, attention to "urban resilience" as a mechanism for cities to cope with these disruptions has grown significantly. However, the implementation and measurement of urban resilience in cities face substantial challenges. Among the methods for assessing urban resilience, the use of composite index has gained considerable traction over the past two decades due to their numerical nature, transparent construction process, and capacity for spatial-temporal comparisons.
Accordingly, this study, based on a systematic review of 80 selected studies from the WoS and Scopus citation databases, examines the multi-step process of constructing composite index for assessing urban resilience.
Data analysis was conducted using a four-dimensional analytical framework (contextual characteristics, theoretical and applied foundations, methodological components, and content components) through thematic coding.
The findings reveal that, from the perspective of theoretical and applied foundations, the vast majority of indicators (92.5%) are designed based on existing frameworks, predominantly adopting a capital-oriented approach (62.5%) and with diagnostic objectives (70%). From a methodological perspective, most composite indexs have been developed based on static (92.5%), intrinsic (61.25%), ex-ante (83.75%), and top-down (72.5%) approaches. A deductive-hierarchical structural design (77.5%) forms the basis for organizing most of the reviewed indicators, with approximately 90% of composite indexes used for spatial comparison, clustering, and ranking of studied areas. Cross-validation and external validation steps were observed in only 35% and 27.5% of the studies, respectively. Additionally, 76% of the studies neglected robustness and uncertainty analyses.
From a content perspective, there is no consensus-based framework regarding the number and type of components constituting composite indicators. The number of variables used is highly diverse (868 variables), posing significant challenges to establishing a standardized framework for measuring urban resilience.
Gaps in the application of composite indicators for measuring urban resilience can be categorized into two broad groups: intrinsic and procedural. Intrinsic challenges include unavoidable interdisciplinary issues which stem from the nature and origin of composite indicators. Procedural shortcomings, however, arise from a lack of real disaster data, the high cost and time required for field data collection, ethical and governance challenges, conflicts between local community perspectives, the complexity of complementary methods versus the simplicity and accessibility of secondary data, and the absence of a consensus framework for selecting components of urban resilience composite indicators. In this regard, incorporating considerations related to validity assessment, identifying sources of sensitivity and uncertainty, and employing participatory methods in selecting contextually relevant components can enhance the reliability of urban resilience measurements. |
|
| Keywords: Urban Resilience, Measurement, Composite Index, Systematic Review |
|
|
|
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
عمران و شهرسازی
Received: 2025/09/30 | Accepted: 2025/11/8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Send email to the article author |
|
|
|
| Add your comments about this article |
|
|
|
