When people ask us what we care about at Urban.Us, we usually mention get to “Resilience” last and then quickly move on.

It’s not that we care less about it, but more that it’s probably the hardest concept to get and generates the most blank stares and weird silences.

So it’s helpful when other people come up with great, clear definitions like this:

Resilience ensures that a city —or other entity—can continue to operate at its highest function on its best and its worst days. It’s a lever for unlocking greater economic development and business investment, as well as improved social services and more broadly shared prosperity.

Read more about Resilient Cities from the Rockefeller Foundation.

One Comment

Andrew Frey
September 2, 2014 12:24 pm

a good clarification. i would add two points: 1) current discussion of “resilience” seems to skip over why we need to be resilient in the first place, i.e. the sprawling pattern of development that causes GHG emission (which is the most important thing we need to change to achieve resilience), and 2) we can aspire to something even better than the definition of “resilience” above (which is a very good one), and that is “anti-fragility”, suggested by articles such as: http://www.newgeography.com/content/002941-localism-as-an-anti-depressant

Leave a Reply