4.7 Article

Urban resilience and urban sustainability: What we know and what do not know?

Journal

CITIES
Volume 72, Issue -, Pages 141-148

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.cities.2017.08.009

Keywords

Urban resilience; Urban sustainability; CiteSpace

Categories

Funding

  1. State Key Laboratory of Earth Surface Processes and Resource Ecology, Beijing Normal University
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [71673232]
  3. Tongji University Sustainable Development and New-Type Urbanization Think Tank
  4. CityU Internal Funds for PRC Grants (MFPRC) [9680195]
  5. Research Grant Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative region, China [CityU 11271716, CityU 21209715]
  6. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2017T100434]
  7. [DXB-ZKQN-2016-009]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The past literatures have studied both 'urban resilience (UR)' and 'urban sustainability (US)' in terms of the dual character - vulnerability and pertinacity - of cities. However, there is a large overlap between the meaning of resilience and sustainability, which threatens to weaken both concepts. In this study, we discuss the difference between urban resilience (UR) and urban sustainability (US) from three aspects of research trends, research scale and research clusters. CiteSpace 4.0.R5 is used for co-citation analysis, visualizing co-citation networks and research clusters. UR and US studies contrast in not only their different theoretical bases, but also even more in their empirical work. A conceptual framework is proposed to define the difference between UR and US, and four kinds of urban development are examined based on the framework. We indicate that rational urban development can be achieved only when it is both resilient and sustainable, and conclude that urban planners, policymakers and researchers should pay equal attention to both UR and US before decision-making.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available