A Resilience-Equity Framework for Post-Disaster Urban Redevelopment

Thesis Abstract

Post-disaster urban redevelopment often reproduces pre-existing inequalities and undermines long-term resilience when recovery processes are uncoordinated across social groups, sectors, and governance levels. This study addresses the need for an integrated resilience-equity approach that explicitly centers vulnerable populations in post-disaster urban redevelopment planning and implementation. The aim is to develop a theoretically grounded Resilience-Equity Framework (REF) that operationalizes equitable outcomes within resilience-building efforts and to test its applicability in real-world recovery settings. Specific objectives are to (i) synthesize concepts from resilience theory, just sustainability, and participatory planning to articulate an integrative REF, (ii) identify determinants of equitable recovery outcomes across housing, infrastructure, and livelihoods through mixed-method inquiry, (iii) develop a measurable REF with indicators and weights calibrated to local context, (iv) evaluate the framework through a comparative case study of two post-disaster cities experiencing contrasting governance and social equity conditions, and (v) provide policy and planning recommendations for implementing REF in urban redevelopment programs. The methodology employs a mixed-methods design anchored in critical realism and participatory theory. The study population comprises urban redevelopment actors, including city planners, housing agencies, community organizations, and residents affected by recent disasters in two metropolitan areas. A purposive sampling strategy targets at least 60 semi-structured interviews with stakeholders and 200 survey respondents representing diverse socio-economic and vulnerable groups, complemented by 30 key informant interviews with senior officials. Document analysis (recovery plans, zoning amendments, and budget documents) supplements primary data. Quantitative data will be analyzed using multivariate regression to identify drivers of equitable outcomes, structural equation modeling to test the relationships within the REF, and cluster analysis to classify communities by resilience-equity profiles. Qualitative data will be analyzed thematically using NVivo, with a framework approach to map empirical findings onto the REF indicators. The integrative model will be refined through triangulation, policy scenario simulations, and a stakeholder workshop to validate essential indicator weights. The REF comprises a core set of domains—resilience capacity, equity in access to housing and services, procedural justice, and livability of neighborhoods—operationalized through measurable indicators such as housing adequacy, access to critical infrastructure, participation in decision-making, and transitional employment opportunities. The study anticipates that incorporating equity-aware governance mechanisms, transparent budgeting, and inclusive reconstruction timelines will produce statistically significant improvements in both resilience indices and equity outcomes. Expected results include (i) identification of context-specific barriers to equitable recovery, (ii) a calibrated REF with a validated causal pathway linking governance processes to resilient and equitable redevelopment outcomes, and (iii) policy-ready guidelines and a decision-support toolkit for municipal planners. The study contributes to knowledge by bridging resilience and equity literatures within post-disaster urban planning, offering a replicable framework that translates theoretical constructs into actionable planning processes and performance metrics. It advances methodological integration by combining regression-based causal inference, structural equation modeling, thematic analysis, and stakeholder-informed weighting to validate a comprehensive REF. The findings are anticipated to demonstrate that equitable inclusion in planning processes and targeted investments in housing and infrastructure significantly enhance resilience outcomes for marginalized communities, while preserving overall urban vibrancy and fiscal viability. The study concludes with practical recommendations for municipalities, disaster agencies, and civil society organizations establish legally binding participatory mechanisms, adopt transparent post-disaster budgets framed around equity indicators, integrate REF into existing recovery plans, and implement monitoring systems that track progress across the resilience-equity spectrum. Limitations include potential context-specific transferability challenges and data sensitivity concerns; future research should test REF applicability across varied disaster typologies and governance contexts, and extend the framework to incorporate climate adaptation dynamics and long-term urban transformation.