In EDS ansehen

Resilience and loss mitigation: An empirical study from China.

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Titel: Resilience and loss mitigation: An empirical study from China.
Autoren: Tan, Ling1 (AUTHOR), Wu, Xianhua2 (AUTHOR) 185390@shmtu.edu.cn, Guo, Ji2 (AUTHOR)
Quelle: Risk Analysis: An International Journal. Oct2025, Vol. 45 Issue 10, p3315-3330. 16p.
Schlagwörter: *DISASTERS, *ECONOMIC impact, *FIELD research, DISASTER resilience, POLICY analysis, PSYCHOLOGICAL resilience, COMPUTABLE general equilibrium models
Geografische Kategorien: CHINA, BEIJING (China)
Abstract: The importance of resilience in mitigating the impacts of disasters has gained increasing recognition, yet quantitative analyses assessing its effectiveness in reducing losses remain limited. This paper introduces a novel approach to integrate resilience into a computable general equilibrium (CGE) model to quantitatively assess its role in loss mitigation. First, a conventional CGE model is employed to evaluate economic losses caused by disasters without considering resilience, establishing a baseline analysis of disaster impacts. Next, the economic impacts of disasters are reassessed after incorporating resilience into the production module by adjusting elasticity parameters. By comparing the baseline scenario with the resilience‐enhanced model, the extent and effectiveness of resilience in reducing disaster losses could be evaluated. To validate the approach, the extreme rainfall event in Beijing on July 21, 2012, is used as a case study. The results show that incorporating resilience leads to a significant reduction in economic losses. Specifically, the losses of total output are reduced from $29.10 billion to $20.98 billion, corresponding to a reduction in the loss rate from 3.88% to 2.80%. Furthermore, recovery rates vary across industrial sectors, with wholesale and retail trade, and services recovering most quickly, while sectors such as the production and supply of electricity, gas, water, and manufacturing exhibit slower recovery rates. This research provides valuable insights into disaster resilience assessment. The findings have practical implications for policymakers and agencies involved to carry out the development of resilience strategies and post‐disaster management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Risk Analysis: An International Journal is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Datenbank: Business Source Index
Beschreibung
Abstract:The importance of resilience in mitigating the impacts of disasters has gained increasing recognition, yet quantitative analyses assessing its effectiveness in reducing losses remain limited. This paper introduces a novel approach to integrate resilience into a computable general equilibrium (CGE) model to quantitatively assess its role in loss mitigation. First, a conventional CGE model is employed to evaluate economic losses caused by disasters without considering resilience, establishing a baseline analysis of disaster impacts. Next, the economic impacts of disasters are reassessed after incorporating resilience into the production module by adjusting elasticity parameters. By comparing the baseline scenario with the resilience‐enhanced model, the extent and effectiveness of resilience in reducing disaster losses could be evaluated. To validate the approach, the extreme rainfall event in Beijing on July 21, 2012, is used as a case study. The results show that incorporating resilience leads to a significant reduction in economic losses. Specifically, the losses of total output are reduced from $29.10 billion to $20.98 billion, corresponding to a reduction in the loss rate from 3.88% to 2.80%. Furthermore, recovery rates vary across industrial sectors, with wholesale and retail trade, and services recovering most quickly, while sectors such as the production and supply of electricity, gas, water, and manufacturing exhibit slower recovery rates. This research provides valuable insights into disaster resilience assessment. The findings have practical implications for policymakers and agencies involved to carry out the development of resilience strategies and post‐disaster management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:02724332
DOI:10.1111/risa.70082