Community Resilience to Climate Change: Theory, Research and Practice

69 power to critical systems, building community ties, providing areas of refuge, developing emergency management plans, planning for long-term monitoring and maintenance, and system redundancy are not hazard-specific and can be applied to improve the overall resilience of a building. Table 3. Hazards addressed in climate change resilience documents for buildings. Eight tools (BOSTON, NYC, FORTIFIED COMMERCIAL, FORTIFIED HOME, and REDi) were identified as hazard specific. Building strategies were developed to improve a building’s resilience to a defined hazard including seismic activity, rising sea levels, flooding, hurricanes, severe storms, winter storms, and heatwaves. The remaining documents were general resilience guidance documents that incorporated strategies to address a range of climate change hazards either directly or indirectly. Table 3 above illustrates that flooding, heatwaves, severe storms, and hurricanes encompassed the focus of most climate change resilience tool in the building sector. Other hazards such as air and water quality, drought, wildfires, and pest infestation were not as extensively covered. This pattern is consistent with literature in which current climate change efforts are concentrated on visible hazards or hazards that have resulted in extensive physical and economical damage [34]. 3.2. Resilience Approach To examine the resilience academic domains adopted within each tool, a total of 724 resilience strategies for the building sector were coded based on the intended outcome of that strategy as explained in the previous section. All documents were also coded based on the overall approach to climate change resilience they described. It is important to note that some resilience strategies may fall under more than one resilience academic domain. For example, elevating a building on piles can be considered as an engineering and disaster risk reduction approach to resilience. Similarly, extreme heat awareness can be categorized as a disaster risk reduction and social sciences approach. Based on the coding results, Figure 1 illustrates the variability of resilience approaches. The figure highlights the representation of the four academic domains of climate change resilience. While some of the documents may have addressed the importance of a conducting