129 / 140
HOW TO PREPARE FOR AN UNCERTAIN FUTURE 127
several governments and the United Nations have introduced the concept of
resilience as a disaster preparedness strategy to enable countries to improve their
ability to handle crises through their societies and to enhance empowerment in line
with sustainable development (Comfort, Boin and Demchak, 2010; Manyena, 2006).
The definition and content of the concept of resilience has been contested, but
the essential characteristic of a resilient system is its ability to adjust its functioning
so it can succeed in different situations. According to the resilience engineering
perspective, this implies four main aspects or dimensions; knowing what to do,
knowing what to look for, knowing what to expect, and knowing what has happened
(Hollnagel, Woods and Leveson, 2007; Woods, Leveson and Hollnagel, 2012).
First, resilience is knowing what to do in critical situations. This means
responsible parties should not only know what their responsibilities are in a crisis,
but also their real capacities. It also means knowing what resources are not available,
and the limits that represents. The tasks and responsibility for dealing with natural
disasters are often discussed in relation to public and private parties on different
levels. However, the role of private citizens is often neglected in the planning
process. The public’s reactions in crises are generally not characterised by panic,
helplessness and looting; most citizens act rationally and help their fellow citizens
in a crisis (Tierney, Bevc and Kuligowski, 2006). Bystanders are the ones who are
there when a crisis occurs, and they are therefore the ones who actually rescue
people, as exemplified by the Longyearbyen avalanche on Svalbard in December
2015. This means citizens should be educated by also having access to updated
knowledge, and they should be seen as a resource in a crisis. Most of the
municipalities in Norway are not located in large city areas, and people in these
country areas have traditionally been accustomed to helping each other in crises
caused by natural disasters.
Second, resilience is also to know what to look for. This means not only
monitoring vulnerabilities in local communities, but also keeping an eye on natural
disasters that are happening in other parts of Norway or Europe. This implies that
risk analysis and emergency plans continuously need to be updated and should
always incorporate the latest knowledge concerning vulnerabilities and threats.
Third, resilience is knowing what to expect. This means anticipating future
developments in natural disasters caused by climate change. To develop emergency
plans that work for the endless array of complex scenarios that could unfold is neither
desirable nor possible. Consequently, capacity building is important in order to
achieve resilience. In addition to capacity building, it is also important to be able to
envisage a wide range of possible scenarios including black swan events. To gain
resilience, municipalities should envisage all three types of black swan event
described in this article. These skills can be utilised to envisage different scenarios,
including complex and non-plausible events. This means being
open
to the future,
not trying to predict a predetermined future, but exploring how the future might
evolve in different ways.
Fourth, resilience is also to know what has happened, meaning people can
learn from experience not only about natural disasters that have taken place in the