12.07.2015 Views

Report - PEER - University of California, Berkeley

Report - PEER - University of California, Berkeley

Report - PEER - University of California, Berkeley

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

SEISMIC RESILIENCE OF COMMUNITIES — CONCEPTUALIZATIONAND OPERATIONALIZATIONMichel BRUNEAU 1 and Andrei REINHORN 2ABSTRACTA conceptual framework which defines the seismic resilience <strong>of</strong> communities and quantitativemeasures <strong>of</strong> resilience in a manner that can be useful for a coordinated research effort focusingon enhancing this resilience is one <strong>of</strong> the main themes at the Multidisciplinary Center forEarthquake Engineering Research (MCEER). This framework relies on the complementarymeasures <strong>of</strong> resilience: “Reduced failure probabilities”, “Reduced consequences from failures”,and “Reduced time to recovery”. The framework also includes quantitative measures <strong>of</strong> the“ends” <strong>of</strong> robustness and rapidity, and the “means” <strong>of</strong> resourcefulness and redundancy. Theultimate objective <strong>of</strong> this work is to make the concepts that are presented here adaptable for theanalysis <strong>of</strong> various critical infrastructure elements (both as individual systems and asinterrelated sets <strong>of</strong> systems) exposed to both natural and man made disasters.Keywords: Performance; Resilience; Recovery; Redundancy; Socio-economic.1. INTRODUCTIONAs part <strong>of</strong> the conceptualization <strong>of</strong> a framework to enhance the seismic resilience <strong>of</strong>communities (Bruneau et al. 2003), seismic resilience has been defined as the ability<strong>of</strong> a system to reduce the chances <strong>of</strong> a shock, to absorb a shock if it occurs (abruptreduction <strong>of</strong> performance) and to recover quickly after a shock (re-establish normalperformance), as described in Bruneau et al. (2003). More specifically, a resilientsystem is one that shows:1. Reduced failure probabilities,2. Reduced consequences from failures, in terms <strong>of</strong> lives lost, damage, andnegative economic and social consequences,3. Reduced time to recovery (restoration <strong>of</strong> a specific system or set <strong>of</strong> systemsto their “normal” level <strong>of</strong> performance)A broad measure <strong>of</strong> resilience that captures these key features can be expressed,in general terms, by the concepts illustrated in Figure 1, based on the notion that a1 Director Multidisciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering Research and Pr<strong>of</strong>essor Department <strong>of</strong>Civil, Structural, and Environmental Engineering (CSEE) , <strong>University</strong> at Buffalo, State <strong>University</strong> <strong>of</strong> NewYork, Buffalo, NY, 142602 Clifford Furnas Pr<strong>of</strong>essor CSEE, <strong>University</strong> at Buffalo, State <strong>University</strong> <strong>of</strong> New York, Buffalo, NY, 14260161

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!