IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i22p14749-d967418.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring Environmental Resilience Using Q-Methods: A Malaysian Perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Hisham Tariq

    (School of Science, Engineering & Environment, University of Salford, Salford M5 4WT, UK)

  • Chaminda Pathirage

    (School of Architecture and Built Environment, University of Wolverhampton, Wolverhampton WV1 1LY, UK)

  • Terrence Fernando

    (School of Science, Engineering & Environment, University of Salford, Salford M5 4WT, UK)

  • Noralfishah Sulaiman

    (KANZU Research, Resilient Built Environment (RBE), Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, Johor 86400, Malaysia)

  • Umber Nazir

    (KANZU Research, Resilient Built Environment (RBE), Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, Johor 86400, Malaysia)

  • Siti Kursiah Kamalia Abdul Latib

    (KANZU Research, Resilient Built Environment (RBE), Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, Johor 86400, Malaysia)

  • Haidaliza Masram

    (KANZU Research, Resilient Built Environment (RBE), Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, Johor 86400, Malaysia)

Abstract

Communities increasingly need tools that can help them assess the environmental risks they face to understand better their capacities in mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery. Environmental resilience (ER) is a crucial feature of community resilience that is not adequately covered in the literature. This paper proposes an inclusive, participatory approach to achieve stakeholder engagement on the definitions, objectives, and indicators for measuring ER at the community level. This study uses a 5-step approach utilising Q-methods to contextualise a resilience index for Environmental Resilience (ER). An initial set of 57 indicators from 13 frameworks from the literature was reduced to 25 by combining the indicators of similar type, format and terminology. A total of 10 participants from two groups (academics and practitioners) took part in the interviews and Q-sort workshops in Malaysia in this study. Both stakeholder groups identified Ecosystem monitoring as one of the most critical indicators to understand ER, closely followed by rapid damage assessments and an effective communication system. The exercise also revealed marked differences between them regarding the importance of fair access to basic needs and services for citizens, a priority for academics, and the value of building green infrastructure, a priority for practitioners, with the most significant difference between the two groups on the importance of measuring the natural defences of a community. The Environmental Resilience Capacity Assessment Tool (ER-CAT), proposed in this paper, can be used by local governments and communities for engagement, discussion and consensus building to select the resilience indicators that are most relevant to them in their contexts.

Suggested Citation

  • Hisham Tariq & Chaminda Pathirage & Terrence Fernando & Noralfishah Sulaiman & Umber Nazir & Siti Kursiah Kamalia Abdul Latib & Haidaliza Masram, 2022. "Measuring Environmental Resilience Using Q-Methods: A Malaysian Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-20, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:22:p:14749-:d:967418
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/22/14749/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/22/14749/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Serdar Çop & Victor Oluwafemi Olorunsola & Uju Violet Alola, 2021. "Achieving environmental sustainability through green transformational leadership policy: Can green team resilience help?," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(1), pages 671-682, January.
    2. Sunil Prashar & Rajib Shaw & Yukiko Takeuchi, 2012. "Assessing the resilience of Delhi to climate-related disasters: a comprehensive approach," 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. 64(2), pages 1609-1624, November.
    3. Barry, John & Proops, John, 1999. "Seeking sustainability discourses with Q methodology," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 337-345, March.
    4. Lindsey Jones, 2019. "Resilience isn't the same for all: Comparing subjective and objective approaches to resilience measurement," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 10(1), January.
    5. Martin Endress, 2015. "The Social Constructedness of Resilience," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 4(3), pages 1-13, July.
    6. Patricia Romero-Lankao & Daniel M. Gnatz & Olga Wilhelmi & Mary Hayden, 2016. "Urban Sustainability and Resilience: From Theory to Practice," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-19, November.
    7. Laura Siebeneck & Sudha Arlikatti & Simon Andrew, 2015. "Using provincial baseline indicators to model geographic variations of disaster resilience in Thailand," 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. 79(2), pages 955-975, November.
    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. Marcelo Luna & Luciano Barcellos-Paula, 2024. "Structured Equations to Assess the Socioeconomic and Business Factors Influencing the Financial Sustainability of Traditional Amazonian Chakra in the Ecuadorian Amazon," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(6), pages 1-17, March.

    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. Marta Suárez & Erik Gómez-Baggethun & Javier Benayas & Daniella Tilbury, 2016. "Towards an Urban Resilience Index: A Case Study in 50 Spanish Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-19, August.
    2. Jones, Lindsey & d'Errico, Marco, 2019. "Whose resilience matters? Like-for-like comparison of objective and subjective evaluations of resilience," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 1-1.
    3. Buckwell, Andrew & Fleming, Christopher & Muurmans, Maggie & Smart, James & Mackey, Brendan, 2020. "Revealing the dominant discourses of stakeholders towards natural resource management in Port Resolution, Vanuatu, using Q-method," 2020 Conference (64th), February 12-14, 2020, Perth, Western Australia 305231, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    4. Pilar Jiménez-Medina & Andrés Artal-Tur & Noelia Sánchez-Casado, 2021. "Tourism Business, Place Identity, Sustainable Development, and Urban Resilience: A Focus on the Sociocultural Dimension," International Regional Science Review, , vol. 44(1), pages 170-199, January.
    5. Ágnes Nemcsicsné Zsóka, 2007. "The role of organisational culture in the environmental awareness of companies," Journal of East European Management Studies, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, vol. 12(2), pages 109-131.
    6. Mohammad Mojtahedi & Sidney Newton & Jason Meding, 2017. "Predicting the resilience of transport infrastructure to a natural disaster using Cox’s proportional hazards regression model," 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. 85(2), pages 1119-1133, January.
    7. Mikhail Rogov & Céline Rozenblat, 2018. "Urban Resilience Discourse Analysis: Towards a Multi-Level Approach to Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-21, November.
    8. Elena Zepharovich & Michele Graziano Ceddia & Stephan Rist, 2020. "Land-Use Conflict in the Gran Chaco: Finding Common Ground through Use of the Q Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-16, September.
    9. Latvala, Terhi & Mandolesi, Serena & Nicholas, Phillipa & Zanoli, Raffaele, 2013. "Identifying Expectations for Innovations in Management Practices in Dairy Sector by Using Q Methodology," 2013 International European Forum, February 18-22, 2013, Innsbruck-Igls, Austria 164734, International European Forum on System Dynamics and Innovation in Food Networks.
    10. Yusuke Toyoda, 2021. "Survey paper: achievements and perspectives of community resilience approaches to societal systems," Asia-Pacific Journal of Regional Science, Springer, vol. 5(3), pages 705-756, October.
    11. Muhammad Asif, 2020. "Role of Energy Conservation and Management in the 4D Sustainable Energy Transition," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-3, November.
    12. Lu Liu & Yun Luo & Jingjing Pei & Huiquan Wang & Jixia Li & Ying Li, 2021. "Temporal and Spatial Differentiation in Urban Resilience and Its Influencing Factors in Henan Province," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-26, November.
    13. Nesibe Demir, 2024. "Necip Fazıl Kısakürek’in Hayatı ve şiirlerinde Kolektif ve Dirençli Umudun İnşası," Journal of Ibn Haldun Studies [İbn Haldun Çalışmaları Dergisi], Ibn Haldun University, vol. 9(2), pages 211-224, July.
    14. Davies, Ben B. & Hodge, Ian D., 2012. "Shifting environmental perspectives in agriculture: Repeated Q analysis and the stability of preference structures," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 51-57.
    15. Meiyan Gao & Zongmin Wang & Haibo Yang, 2022. "Review of Urban Flood Resilience: Insights from Scientometric and Systematic Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(14), pages 1-19, July.
    16. Arouri, Mohamed & Nguyen, Cuong & Youssef, Adel Ben, 2015. "Natural Disasters, Household Welfare, and Resilience: Evidence from Rural Vietnam," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 59-77.
    17. Jaung, Wanggi & Putzel, Louis & Bull, Gary Q. & Kozak, Robert & Markum,, 2016. "Certification of forest watershed services: A Q methodology analysis of opportunities and challenges in Lombok, Indonesia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 51-59.
    18. Greg Munno & Álvaro Salas Castro & Tina Nabatchi & Christian M. Freitag, 2022. "Four Perspectives on a Sustainable Future in Nosara, Costa Rica," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-23, December.
    19. S. S. Ganji & A. N. Ahangar & Samaneh Jamshidi Bandari, 2022. "Evaluation of vehicular emissions reduction strategies using a novel hybrid method integrating BWM, Q methodology and ER approach," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(10), pages 11576-11614, October.
    20. Jan, Muhammad Zain & Ullah, Kafait & Abbas, Faisal & Khalid, Hassan Abdullah & Bajwa, Tariq M., 2023. "Barriers to the adoption of social welfare measures in the electricity tariff structure of developing countries: A case of Pakistan," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).

    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:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:22:p:14749-:d:967418. 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.