Resilience-building interventions and their linkages to livelihood capitals and capacities: insights from community-based implementation across 19 flood-prone countries

Hyun, J.H. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6960-9277, Hochrainer-Stigler, S. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9929-8171, Velev, S., & Mechler, R. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2239-1578 (2026). Resilience-building interventions and their linkages to livelihood capitals and capacities: insights from community-based implementation across 19 flood-prone countries. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change 31 (4) e29. 10.1007/s11027-026-10294-5.

Preview

Text s11027-026-10294-5.pdf - Published Version Available under License Creative Commons Attribution. Download (1MB) | Preview

Abstract

Despite the growing literature on climate change adaptation across diverse academic fields, a significant research gap persists in the documented synthesis of concrete adaptation actions implemented on the ground. The current lack of synthesized documentation hinders effective learning across diverse contexts and limits the development of robust adaptation strategies, especially due to existing monitoring and evaluation frameworks that often rely on high-level, broad categorizations that obscure the true mechanisms of change. This paper directly addresses this under-explored area by analyzing community-level flood resilience interventions undertaken by the Zurich Flood Resilience Alliance (ZFRA) in 19 countries between 2019 and 2024. Employing a mixed-methods approach, we identify seven emergent intervention categories, encompassing infrastructure and physical improvements, community engagement and knowledge building, community flood resilience planning, community action groups, nature-based solutions, asset protection and diversification, and early warning systems. We examine these intervention categories in relation to the Sustainable Livelihoods Framework’s five capitals and the crucial resilience capacities of absorptive, adaptive, and transformative abilities. Our analysis demonstrates that interventions within the same broad category can have vastly different functionalities, impacting diverse capitals and contributing to varying resilience stocks (capital) and process (capacities) – suggesting a shift away from monitoring and evaluating interventions through broad, aggregated categorizations. This study underscores the importance of considering the interplay between different intervention types and the various dimensions of community resilience, offering valuable insights for practitioners and policymakers seeking to enhance the effectiveness of adaptation efforts and bridge the persistent gap between adaptation planning and tangible action on the ground.

Actions (login required)

View Item