4.7 Article

A pathway towards resilient cities: National resilience knowledge networks

期刊

CITIES
卷 136, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.cities.2023.104243

关键词

Resilience; Urban resilience; National resilience; Resilience network; Resilience collaboration; Resilience knowledge

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The establishment of a national resilience-knowledge network requires certain conditions, specific criteria for selecting suitable collaboration-partner cities, and appropriate mechanisms for knowledge transfer.
The development of networks for resilience-knowledge sharing and support is as a popular solution for building resilience in cities. Despite the benefits of knowledge sharing and collaboration for resilience building between cities on an international scale, there is a gap in the literature and practice regarding such networks at the national level. This research involves a survey of city authorities' perceptions of the benefits of the creation of a national knowledge-sharing network, their criteria for selecting resilience partners, and their preferred mecha-nisms for knowledge sharing and diffusion within the network. Using New Zealand (NZ) as a case study, the current exploratory sequential study implements an initial qualitative stage with selected NZ cities to determine initial criteria, followed by a nationwide quantitative survey to test these criteria. A final quantitative survey with international subject-matter experts was conducted for international transferability. The study revealed that establishing a national-level resilience-knowledge network requires general and supportive conditions, specific criteria for selecting suitable resilience collaboration-partner cities, and appropriate knowledge-transfer mech-anisms. The findings can be used to guide the development of national resilience-knowledge networks and are aimed at local governments, policymakers and analysts, resilience practitioners, and knowledge-network managers.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据