Finding Faults: Comparing Resilience Scorecards
| dc.contributor.advisor | Margerum, Richard | |
| dc.contributor.author | Corvello, Alexandra | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2021-05-05T20:11:41Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2021-05-05T20:11:41Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2019 | |
| dc.description | 36 pages | |
| dc.description.abstract | As the risks facing communities rapidly change, the need for assessing community-level resilience increases. Resilience is the ability to mitigate, prepare for, adapt to, recover, or avoid disruptive events (Cutter, 2016). To help communities accomplish the complicated and challenging task of anticipating future disruptions, communities have created resilience assessments to measure current resilience to future threats. There are three main types of resilience assessments: indices, toolkits, and scorecards. This report focuses on resilience scorecards because the distinction allows for better comparison among a single assessment type that does not have much research data. Overall validating the scorecards was difficult due to numerous differences in the scorecards, which were born from the unique processes the communities follow to create and use the scorecards. I examined five different scorecards: the UN Disaster Resilience Scorecard for Cities, Plan Integration for Resilience Scorecard, GEM Resilience Performance Scorecard, Resilient Communities Scorecard, and the Torrens Community Resilience Scorecard. The report compares the different scorecards against each other, and other resilience plans currently used to measure vulnerability within Oregon, which include Natural Hazard Mitigation Plans and the Oregon Resilience Plan. This content analysis was complemented by expert interviews and a focus group that addressed the feasibility and barriers to implementing a scorecard. The work helped advise a specific local non-profit, Cascadia Prepared, on their scorecard process to measure the state of Oregon’s vulnerability to the Cascadia Subduction Zone Earthquake. The report also is an informational tool for other communities to find easily accessible information on various resilience scorecards and information on the feasibility and issues surrounding the implementation process. | en_US |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/1794/26224 | |
| dc.language.iso | en_US | |
| dc.publisher | Department of Planning, Public Policy and Management, University of Oregon | |
| dc.rights | Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0-US | |
| dc.subject | Resilience | en_US |
| dc.subject | Hazards | en_US |
| dc.subject | Assessments | en_US |
| dc.subject | Resilience Scorecards | en_US |
| dc.title | Finding Faults: Comparing Resilience Scorecards | |
| dc.type | Terminal Project |