Social capital is considered important for resilience across social levels, including communities, yet insights are scattered across disciplines. This meta-synthesis of 187 studies examines conceptual and empirical understandings of how social capital relates to resilience, identifying implications for community resilience and climate change practice. Different conceptualisations are highlighted, yet also limited focus on underlying dimensions of social capital and proactive types of resilience for engaging with the complex climate change challenge. Empirical insights show that structural and socio-cultural aspects of social capital, multiple other factors and formal actors are all important for shaping the role of social capital for guiding resilience outcomes. Thus, finding ways to work with these different elements is important. Greater attention on how and why outcomes emerge, interactions between factors, approaches of formal actors and different socio-cultural dimensions will advance understandings about how to nurture social capital for resilience in the context of climate change.

Hydro-hazards are increasing in frequency due to climate change which has inspired a cultural change in Flood Risk Management (FRM). Uncertainty associated with climate change has resulted in a shift towards flood resilience as it helps deal with unexpected climatic perturbations that impact extreme flows. The concept of resilience has increased in popularity, leading to a multitude of definitions, measurements and applications. This paper systematically reviews the FRM literature to provide clarity on the differing perspectives of resilience and how they influence successful implementation of the concept. Our analysis assesses where FRM is positioned within three pre-defined interdisciplinary understandings of resilience. The polysemic nature of resilience has produced a multitude of different perspectives that prevent successful operationalisation. Resilience is interdisciplinary; therefore it requires integration between top-down and bottom-up FRM approaches, as well as a more holistic approach to the interdependence between temporal and spatial scales.

Network analysis is a useful tool to analyse the interactions and structure of graphs that represent the relationships among entities, such as sectors within an urban system. Connecting entities in this way is vital in understanding the complexity of the modern world, and how to navigate these complexities during an event. However, the field of network analysis has grown rapidly since the 1970s to produce a vast array of available metrics that describe different graph properties. This diversity allows network analysis to be applied across myriad research domains and contexts, however widespread applications have produced polysemic metrics. Challenges arise in identifying which method of network analysis to adopt, which metrics to choose, and how many are suitable. This paper undertakes a structured review of literature to provide clarity on raison d’etre behind metric selection and suggests a way forward for applied network analysis. It is essential that future studies explicitly report the rationale behind metric choice and describe how the mathematics relates to target concepts and themes. An exploratory metric analysis is an important step in identifying the most important metrics and understanding redundant ones. Finally, where applicable, one should select an optimal number of metrics that describe the network both locally and globally, so as to understand the interactions and structure as holistically as possible.

To add to the engineer’s toolkit for the twenty-first century challenges, we demonstrate a novel systems model for understanding urban impacts. The model captures interdependencies between different interconnected systems (or sectors, e.g. recreational services or public healthcare) in cities, from the tangible (e.g. resources such as roads) to the more intangible (e.g. outcomes such as the sustainable economy). The model is hazard-agnostic in that it can be modified to capture the impacts of different shocks on tangible parts of the system and how these cascade through to more abstract and high-level city tasks and outcomes. This paper demonstrates three hypothetical scenarios (a flood, drought, and pandemic) and their impacts on a generic UK city. Using the network analysis, impacts can be tracked and interpreted to help prioritise requirements for resilience-building. We propose this new tool be taken up and tested by others working to address global challenges such as the Sustainable Development Goals and grappling with the interconnectedness of urban systems.

Climate change will mean cities are exposed to more frequent short‐term shocks such as floods. City‐scale resilience is achieved by understanding how these shocks interact with longer‐term stressors (e.g., social inequality). The Urban Systems Abstraction Hierarchy (USAH) has been developed for this purpose. In this paper, Glasgow (UK) is used as a case study application, to demonstrate how resilience theory can be operationalized through the application of the USAH. Results demonstrate how the USAH can quantify interdependencies between tangible physical entities in the city and intangible outcomes that monitor city stressors, and specifically how these outcomes change in response to a 1:200‐year fluvial flood return period in Glasgow. Resilience concepts such as multifunctionality, redundancy and diversity are applied to interpret the results and their implications for longer‐term resilience in Glasgow. The findings from the application of the USAH show that the outcome Social equality and equity is influential for longer‐term resilience in Glasgow, whilst Reliable communications and mobility is an important outcome for flood resilience.

1. The UK government has advocated the adoption of systems thinking across the policy agenda, notably in environment (Department for Environmental & Rural Affairs [DEFRA], 2019, 2022; Government Of...