Community Resilience to Climate Change: Theory, Research and Practice

66 within the built assets, to withstand, recover from, andmitigate for, the impacts of extreme natural hazards and human induced threats” [25]. Indeed, the use of resilience as a concept for buildings has been rapidly growing. Much work has been directed towards examining the climate resilience of cities and communities, or urban resilience (see for example [26,27,28,29,30]). However, understanding how resilience is conceptualized within the building sector and how it is translated into practice by building professionals remains unclear and therefore is the focus of this paper. 1.3. Objective of Paper Approaches to climate change resiliency are varied and grounded in multiple academic domains. For example, in their examination of community resilience definitions, the Community and Regional Resilience Institute listed 46 definitions of resilience [31]. Meerow et al. found 25 definitions for urban resilience [32], while Manyena found 12 definitions of resilience [33]. The variability in definitions is a reflection of current literature on resilience that argues its malleable nature as a concept challenges the development of coherent, consistent, and holistic definitions [4]. However, to date, there have been few efforts to examine how the building sector approaches climate change resiliency. To address this gap, this paper examines eighteen climate change resilience documents providing guidance to the building sector. The primary objective is to better understand the current approaches and limitations to climate change resiliency efforts in the building sector. Accordingly, we compare conceptualization of resilience in the building sector through a content analysis of recent resilience documents for the building sector in the United States. Specifically, the paper addresses the following research questions: (1) How do existing resilience guidance documents in the building sector address and incorporate different academic domains of resilience? (2) Does the building sector employ a bouncing-back or bouncing-forward approach to climate change resilience? Based on the literature review, we hypothesized that themajority of resilience efforts in the building sector are shaped by the engineering and disaster risk reduction academic domains, thus employing a bouncing-back approach to climate change resilience. 2. MATERIALS & METHODS To examine how the building sector conceptualizes resilience we analyzed climate change resilience documents developed for building professionals in the United States. To identify relevant documents, we screened resilience initiatives, programs and frameworks that directly addressed the resilience of buildings. These included general guidance documents, resilience standards, and building design and construction strategies that could be utilized by stakeholders within the building sector such as architects, building managers and operators, homeowners, building users, and neighborhoods and community organizations. A total of eighteen resilience documents for buildings were identified. Table 1 provides a brief description of each tool. Table 1. Description of climate change resilience documents for building professionals.