IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v13y2024i6p758-d1403830.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Digital and Culture: Towards More Resilient Urban Community Governance

Author

Listed:
  • Hongxun Xiang

    (School of Public Administration, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610065, China)

  • Xia Heng

    (School of Public Administration, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610065, China)

  • Boleng Zhai

    (School of Public Administration, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610065, China)

  • Lichen Yang

    (School of Public Administration, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610065, China)

Abstract

Urban communities are characterized by significant population size, high density, and strong mobility. While we might enjoy the dividends of rapid modernization, there are nonetheless variable and frequent public crises that occur. Modernization’s problems are gradually emerging, and the traditional risk prevention logic that relies on administrative “rigidity” has begun to be widely challenged. Traditional urban communities depend on institutional, structural, and spatial aspects to improve community resilience. Because big data has become popular, attention has begun to be paid to digital empowerment and community resilience. However, the emergence of problems such as “digital paradox” and “digital ethics” in the digital realm itself has prompted calls for cultural resilience to continue to rise. Therefore, urgently needed resolutions are required to questions regarding the resilience of traditional communities, the construction of digital and cultural resilience, the relationship between digital and cultural resilience, and the manner in which cultural resilience is coordinated to solve the problem of digital resilience. A quantitative analysis of 350 questionnaires from five urban communities found that these communities’ institutional, spatial, and structural dimensions are the driving factors for improving resilience. In contrast, the cultural and digital dimensions are constraints. Therefore, the question of how to coordinate the cultural and digital factors represented by traditional and modern societies in order to compensate for the shortcomings in resilience construction is that which future urban communities must consider. The authors of this study believe that digital empowerment is needed to open up the “first mile” of resilient communities, that cultural empowerment is required to break down the “blocks in the middle” of resilient communities, and that digital and cultural coupling is needed to link the “last mile” of resilient communities. One must use culture to compensate for the shortcomings of digital resilience and digital to pay for the failures of cultural resilience before one can move towards more resilient urban community governance.

Suggested Citation

  • Hongxun Xiang & Xia Heng & Boleng Zhai & Lichen Yang, 2024. "Digital and Culture: Towards More Resilient Urban Community Governance," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-18, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:6:p:758-:d:1403830
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/6/758/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/6/758/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Firas Gerges & Hani Nassif & Xiaolong Geng & Holly A. Michael & Michel C. Boufadel, 2022. "GIS-based approach for evaluating a community intrinsic resilience index," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 111(2), pages 1271-1299, March.
    2. Ibrahim Abaker Targio Hashem & Raja Sher Afgun Usmani & Mubarak S. Almutairi & Ashraf Osman Ibrahim & Abubakar Zakari & Faiz Alotaibi & Saadat Mehmood Alhashmi & Haruna Chiroma, 2023. "Urban Computing for Sustainable Smart Cities: Recent Advances, Taxonomy, and Open Research Challenges," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-32, February.
    3. Edward Gu & Lantian Li, 2020. "Crippled community governance and suppressed scientific/professional communities: a critical assessment of failed early warning for the COVID-19 outbreak in China," Journal of Chinese Governance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(2), pages 160-177, April.
    4. Hongxun Xiang & Xunhua Wang & Yue Wang & Yang Yang & Can Yang & Xinyi Huang & Yangfan Bu & Menglong Wang, 2023. "What Is the Rational Choice of Community Governance Policy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-15, January.
    5. Anna Bozza & Domenico Asprone & Gaetano Manfredi, 2015. "Developing an integrated framework to quantify resilience of urban systems against disasters," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 78(3), pages 1729-1748, September.
    6. Vaidya, Omkarprasad S. & Kumar, Sushil, 2006. "Analytic hierarchy process: An overview of applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 169(1), pages 1-29, February.
    7. Thomas L. Saaty, 1994. "How to Make a Decision: The Analytic Hierarchy Process," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 24(6), pages 19-43, December.
    8. Saaty, Thomas L., 1990. "How to make a decision: The analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 9-26, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Zakariye Mohamed Said & Serdar Dindar, 2024. "Key Challenges and Strategies in the Evaluation of Sustainable Urban Regeneration Projects: Insights from a Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(22), pages 1-30, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ivan Ligardo-Herrera & Tomás Gómez-Navarro & Hannia Gonzalez-Urango, 2019. "Application of the ANP to the prioritization of project stakeholders in the context of responsible research and innovation," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 27(3), pages 679-701, September.
    2. Mehmet Yüksel, 2019. "A Model Proposal for the Evaluation of Chemistry Education in the Context of Learning Environment," Asian Journal of Education and Training, Asian Online Journal Publishing Group, vol. 5(3), pages 488-494.
    3. Murat Ayar & Alper Dalkiran & Utku Kale & András Nagy & Tahir Hikmet Karakoc, 2021. "Investigation of the Substitutability of Rubber Compounds with Environmentally Friendly Materials," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-14, May.
    4. Jochen Wulf, 2020. "Development of an AHP hierarchy for managing omnichannel capabilities: a design science research approach," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 13(1), pages 39-68, April.
    5. Sushil, 2019. "Efficient interpretive ranking process incorporating implicit and transitive dominance relationships," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 283(1), pages 1489-1516, December.
    6. Madjid Tavana & Mariya Sodenkamp & Leena Suhl, 2010. "A soft multi-criteria decision analysis model with application to the European Union enlargement," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 181(1), pages 393-421, December.
    7. Wenshuai Wu & Gang Kou, 2016. "A group consensus model for evaluating real estate investment alternatives," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 2(1), pages 1-10, December.
    8. Lucie Lidinska & Josef Jablonsky, 2018. "AHP model for performance evaluation of employees in a Czech management consulting company," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 26(1), pages 239-258, March.
    9. Carayannis, Elias G. & Goletsis, Yorgos & Grigoroudis, Evangelos, 2018. "Composite innovation metrics: MCDA and the Quadruple Innovation Helix framework," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 4-17.
    10. Rimvydas Labanauskis & Aurelija Kasparavičiūtė & Vida Davidavičienė & Dovilė Deltuvienė, 2018. "Towards quality assurance of the study process using the Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Method," Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, VsI Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Center, vol. 6(2), pages 799-819, December.
    11. M Tavana & M A Sodenkamp, 2010. "A fuzzy multi-criteria decision analysis model for advanced technology assessment at Kennedy Space Center," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 61(10), pages 1459-1470, October.
    12. Ormerod, Richard J. & Ulrich, Werner, 2013. "Operational research and ethics: A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 228(2), pages 291-307.
    13. Jongseok Seo & Lidziya Lysiankova & Young-Seok Ock & Dongphil Chun, 2017. "Priorities of Coworking Space Operation Based on Comparison of the Hosts and Users’ Perspectives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-10, August.
    14. Mirza Sikalo & Almira Arnaut-Berilo & Adela Delalic, 2023. "A Combined AHP-PROMETHEE Approach for Portfolio Performance Comparison," IJFS, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-15, March.
    15. Scholz, Michael & Pfeiffer, Jella & Rothlauf, Franz, 2017. "Using PageRank for non-personalized default rankings in dynamic markets," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 260(1), pages 388-401.
    16. R. Jothi Basu & Nachiappan Subramanian & Angappa Gunasekaran & P. L. K. Palaniappan, 2017. "Influence of non-price and environmental sustainability factors on truckload procurement process," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 250(2), pages 363-388, March.
    17. Ashraf Abdelkarim & Mohamed Hssan Hassan Abdelhafez & Khaled Elkhayat & Mohammad Alshenaifi & Sultan Alfraidi & Ali Aldersoni & Ghazy Albaqawy & Amer Aldamaty & Ayman Ragab, 2024. "Spatial Suitability Index for Sustainable Urban Development in Desert Hinterland Using a Geographical-Information-System-Based Multicriteria Decision-Making Approach," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-37, July.
    18. Gerda Ana Melnik-Leroy & Gintautas Dzemyda, 2021. "How to Influence the Results of MCDM?—Evidence of the Impact of Cognitive Biases," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-25, January.
    19. Kadriye Burcu Yavuz Kumlu & Şule Tüdeş, 2019. "Determination of earthquake-risky areas in Yalova City Center (Marmara region, Turkey) using GIS-based multicriteria decision-making techniques (analytical hierarchy process and technique for order pr," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 96(3), pages 999-1018, April.
    20. Haddad, M. & Sanders, D. & Tewkesbury, G., 2020. "Selecting a discrete multiple criteria decision making method for Boeing to rank four global market regions," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 1-15.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:6:p:758-:d:1403830. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.