{"_buckets": {"deposit": "84ee552e-3e86-4efb-8800-72758eccc8c0"}, "_deposit": {"created_by": 10, "id": "6584", "owners": [10], "pid": {"revision_id": 0, "type": "depid", "value": "6584"}, "status": "published"}, "_oai": {"id": "oai:nied-repo.bosai.go.jp:00006584", "sets": []}, "author_link": [], "item_10001_biblio_info_7": {"attribute_name": "書誌情報", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"bibliographicIssueDates": {"bibliographicIssueDate": "2024-03", "bibliographicIssueDateType": "Issued"}, "bibliographic_titles": [{"bibliographic_title": "Social Science Research Network", "bibliographic_titleLang": "en"}]}]}, "item_10001_description_5": {"attribute_name": "抄録", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"subitem_description": "Despite the increasing importance of disaster resilience assessments in regions, cities, and communities, most indicators have not been validated using empirical outcomes. The number of such validation studies is still limited but has been increasing in the past decade. This systematic review attempts to elucidate the findings of existing validation studies and discuss the issues to be addressed in future research. Prior to the review, multiple factors included in the concept of resilience were classified into 1) maintaining, 2) recovery, and 3) transformative capacity. These categories were then used to clarify which indicators were validated for which capacity, through which outcomes, in each validation study. Twenty-seven empirical studies were eligible for inclusion. The results demonstrate that some of these studies did not specify which capacity of resilience the validity of the indicators examined. Furthermore, no outcome variables for explicitly measuring transformative capacity were found in the selected studies, although this is highlighted as a growing concern in the context of climate change. Additionally, although the selected studies identified valid indicators in the expected direction, some indicators were statistically significant but contradictory to the expectations in several studies. The effects of local characteristics and contextual factors, dynamic interdependencies of resilience factors, and development of a data collection system should also be scrutinized and considered. Future studies should address these challenges to accumulate reliable knowledge of valid resilience indicators for policymakers and practitioners.", "subitem_description_language": "en", "subitem_description_type": "Other"}]}, "item_10001_relation_14": {"attribute_name": "DOI", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"subitem_relation_type_id": {"subitem_relation_type_id_text": "10.2139/ssrn.4721499"}}]}, "item_creator": {"attribute_name": "著者", "attribute_type": "creator", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"creatorNames": [{"creatorName": "Yuto Shiozaki", "creatorNameLang": "en"}]}, {"creatorNames": [{"creatorName": "Nagamatsu Shingo", "creatorNameLang": "en"}]}, {"creatorNames": [{"creatorName": "Keiichi Sato", "creatorNameLang": "en"}]}, {"creatorNames": [{"creatorName": "Yasmin Bhattacharya", "creatorNameLang": "en"}]}]}, "item_language": {"attribute_name": "言語", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"subitem_language": "eng"}]}, "item_title": "A Systematic Literature Review of Empirical Validation of Disaster Resilience Indicators", "item_titles": {"attribute_name": "タイトル", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"subitem_title": "A Systematic Literature Review of Empirical Validation of Disaster Resilience Indicators", "subitem_title_language": "en"}]}, "item_type_id": "40001", "owner": "10", "path": ["1670839190650"], "permalink_uri": "https://nied-repo.bosai.go.jp/records/6584", "pubdate": {"attribute_name": "PubDate", "attribute_value": "2024-04-15"}, "publish_date": "2024-04-15", "publish_status": "0", "recid": "6584", "relation": {}, "relation_version_is_last": true, "title": ["A Systematic Literature Review of Empirical Validation of Disaster Resilience Indicators"], "weko_shared_id": -1}