Abstract
A disaster resilience index aggregates numerous observed individual indicators into a numeric value, for the purpose of gauging various communities’ disparate disaster resilience capacities as part of decision-making in resilience management. There have been abundant studies on the creation of such indices, but only a few have sought to empirically validate individual indicators’ practical efficacy in explaining disaster-related outcomes. Therefore, this study performs such disaggregated empirical validation of nine disaster-resilience indicators’ efficacy at explaining two outcome measures: the resistant capacity and recovery capacity of households in Hong Kong. It reveals that certain indicators including education, income, and place attachment can be empirically valid, but that their explanatory power varies substantially across the two outcome measures. For instance, place attachment has divergent relationships with households’ resistant and recovery capacities. The robustness of the indicators’ explanatory power is also unequal, due to the disparate effect sizes of the outcome measures and the indicators’ interdependence. Based on these findings, we provide recommendations on indicator selection and index creation that should be useful to those seeking to create parsimonious and robust sets of indicators that are explanatory of the actual resilience capacities of local communities.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
