Disaster resilienceÌý²¹²Ô»å recovery have been studied from a variety of perspectives including sociology, policy implementation, decision-making, engineering, geography and urban planning. For this reason, there is a wide range of definitions of resilienceÌý²¹²Ô»å recovery, and determining appropriate indicators of recoveryand resilience is a challenge for both researchers and practitioners. We begin this paper with a discussion of the varying definitions of recovery, vulnerability and resilienceÌý²¹²Ô»å how they have been utilized in each field. In order to assess what indicators can be used to measure both resilienceÌý²¹²Ô»å recovery, we performed an in-depth content analysis on definitions and indicators from existing literature. We analyzed articles from 2000 to 2010 in four disaster-focused journals that include perspectives of engineers, social scientists, practitioners and economists. Articles were selected by a keyword search and analyzed for resilienceÌý²¹²Ô»å recovery indicators using an emergent coding scheme. We classified the indicators of community resilience into infrastructure, social, babyÖ±²¥app and institutional categories. Recovery indicators were categorized as social, babyÖ±²¥app, environmental and infrastructure. Researchers can use these results for future studies of causal factors and recovery indicators. Similarly, practitioners will be able to have a condensed opinion of experts in the field of disaster recoveryand planning.


Jordan, E.Ìý²¹²Ô»å Javernick-Will, A.Ìý(2012).Ìý"." Construction Research Congress. West Lafayette, IN. Best Paper Award