• Events

Making resilience practical, tangible and relevant at the GEC

Post by

Last month the Institution of Civil Engineers hosted the Global Engineering Congress (GEC) in London. Bringing together over 1,000 people from across the globe, the GEC’s focus this year was how the engineering community can help the UN to deliver its Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

In front of an audience with global expertise, the Resilience Shift hosted a technical workshop considering how to make resilience tangible, practical and relevant.

We kicked off with a series of presentations. Opening with Juliet Mian, Technical Director at the Resilience Shift who provided an overview of the Resilience Shift – read more about the programme here.

George Beane of Arup’s International Development team then showcased the WaterShare tool that Arup and the City Water Resilience Framework project has been developing for resilient water governance – read more in George’s recent blog here.

Savina Carluccio, Resilience Shift Project Lead, then concluded the presentations by introducing our value-based approach and how it will help us to improve critical infrastructure resilience. Recognising that we can no longer just deliver amazing infrastructure projects, but that we also need to deliver value to end-users. Something that clearly resonates with the delivery of the SDGs.

A value-based approach recognises that there are multiple stakeholders engaged in critical infrastructure, whether they are involved in delivering a new piece of infrastructure, operating and maintaining an existing system, or thinking about the ability of a community to continue to function following a flood event. Each of these has a different value chain, but in each case, there should be a benefit (value) to all stakeholders in enhancing resilience, as well as the ultimate benefit to society. This resilience value represents the golden thread that cuts across all stakeholders in the value chain.







Engaging the audience using an online polling app we asked whether our value-based approach, using the example of a infrastructure lifecycle value chain, was relevant to them. Most attendees agreed that it is. While some told us that they would like to learn more about it. It will therefore be important for us to continue to get the value-based approach across clearly as we move forward. Furthermore, many told us that finance and procurement represented the biggest gaps in the infrastructure resilience value chain.

The workshop concluded with a panel discussion. Chaired by Savina Carluccio, the panel included Kristen MacAskill of Cambridge University, John White of 100 Resilient Cities, and Juliet Mian.

Below are some of the highlights from our lively and engaging discussion:

– When selling resilience, don’t lead with resilience – use common language and provide people with outcomes that are meaningful.

– People have capacity to solve their own problems – people and communities can do great things and we should look to solve problems with people rather than for them. A case study in Oman of flood gates failing was identified, where engineers manually fixed flood gates, showing how the most resilient part of a system can be people knowing what to do.

– Need for innovation – some argued that there isn’t enough space to be creative, and that many are focused on project delivery.

– Countries will have different resilience priorities – highlighting that there will likely be different priorities in developing vs developed countries. One participant stated that it can for example be difficult to get a Mayor in a developing country to implement a cool innovative resilience project when they have been trying to get a bus route for 10 years.

– Resilience isn’t just about strengthening – or the prevention of bad things happening for that matter. You can do the same things in a different way, and build a business case that highlights the secondary and tertiary benefits. This is especially important in countries where finances are constrained. There are also opportunities to arrive at a solution that you never thought you would have at the start e.g. Paris and use of school playing fields for water retention during storm events which has led to the availability of social space.

– Stories of resilience in practice are as important as theory – and numerous examples were shared by the audience and the panel members. We’ve recently seen such stories in a study on the impacts of natural hazards on US natural gas infrastructure.

– We need to educate and inspire future generations – it was stated that we need to talk about the wider context and systems view rather than our traditional siloed approach to individual subject learning. Furthermore, it was argued that engineers need to take a holistic approach to engineering going forward.

– Tools and approaches – recognising that a barrier to their implementation is their visibility and an understanding of how they can contribute to improving the resilience of our infrastructure.

Look out for an upcoming blog on the overall thoughts from the GEC – to make sure you don’t miss it, you can sign up to our blog here.


Categories: Community Events

Using and developing tools to build resilience

Post by

Last week saw us head to Washington DC for the first of our innovative workshops to explore the practical implications of using and developing tools to build resilience in critical infrastructure.

Hosted by 100 Resilient Cities, the workshop was attended by a range of private and non-profit tool developers, alongside tool users and influencers. There was a focus on how tools for building more resilient infrastructure can support the overall resilience strategy for cities.

The day’s first session considered the perspectives of those in demand of tools to help them implement resilience in their projects. Speakers included representatives from Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Colombia, Salvador, and the US. Each speaker brought their own particular challenges, with procurement, siloed thinking, knowledge of assets, stakeholder engagement and valuing resilience coming out as key issues.

The afternoon session offered a chance for developers to share their tools and for users to ask about the value they deliver, creating a dialogue where barriers to adoption were discussed. Tools included:

– CAT-I (Capacity Assessment Tool for Infrastructure) developed by UNOPS.

– EDGE$ developed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, US Department of Commerce.

– Resilience Atlas developed by Conservation International.

Resilience Value Realisation developed by ValueLab.

– Thinkhazard! developed by the Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery (GFDRR).

To conclude the days activities, Savina Carluccio and Igor Linkov provided an overview of the platform that the Resilience Shift is looking to develop which will help to connect tools and approaches with end-users. This resulted in a lively debate with the audience, where our value-chain approach was considered a useful way to approach the challenge of connecting tools with the right individuals. But it was also recognised that disciplines could be another entry point.

Several attendees stated that they often have to adapt tools to work in the local environment that they are operating in. Many times, the problem with tools is that they talk a different language and were designed for different geographies. Therefore, it can be difficult to translate the local challenges. Others suggested that tools are always under development and feedback from users would be important.

There was a dichotomy among attendees of whether developing a platform showcasing tools  should be the primary focus for the Resilience Shift. Some suggested that our focus should be acting as a facilitator to put tools in the hands of end-users, and create a community of practice by leveraging off other established platforms and institutions. While others argued that a repository that provides a crowd-sourced tool rating could provide efficiencies in tool selection. This is something we’ve taken away with us to consider!

We’re planning on running further workshops in the near future. If you are a tool developer or end-user then we’d love to hear from you to see how you might get involved.

Categories: Events

Introducing WaterShare – promoting collaborative water governance

Post by

A new digital resilient water governance tool, WaterShare, was introduced at the Global Engineering Congress 2018 through a presentation by George Beane from the City Water Resilience Framework. It is being developed by the Resilience Shift and the City Water Resilience Framework in partnership with SIWI and OECD. You can read George’s slides here or read the feature below which explains more about the development of the tool, the related work and plans for next year. 

Water governance is complicated, and especially complicated for cities. Natural hydrologic cycles do not fit neatly into administrative boundaries, and this makes governance quite complicated.

We know all this, because over the past year we’ve worked closely with eight cities around the world – Cape Town, Mexico City, Miami, Amman, Thessaloniki, Manchester, Rotterdam and Hull. We’ve talked with over 700 participants during 10 workshops, and 38 structured interviews.

Throughout this process, it has become apparent how critical the role of governance is in building resilience and has raised many questions about how relationships, between government, the private sector and civil society, foster resilience?

To better understand governance, the City Water Resilience Framework has worked closely with the Resilience Shift and partnered with the Stockholm International Water Institute and the OECD, who are both international leaders in this field.

Throughout this engagement we’ve heard a number of things that inform how we think about building resilience. Specifically related to water governance, over and over we hear that there is a real need for collaboration, for sharing information across departments, between levels of government and between critical sectors.

We know that the climate is changing. We also know that the world’s population is growing and, simultaneously becoming more urbanized. The combined consequence of these three facts, is that risk is increasingly concentrated in cities and will become even more so over the next century.

For instance, in the United Kingdom, we can expect an increase in urban flooding, which will affect growing numbers of people. The way flooding plays out in the UK is very different than Manila. The resources available to address these challenges, the appropriateness of potential solutions, these things vary according to context. As do the hazards that will be confronted in each place. For instance: flooding in Manila and the UK. Drought in Cape Town. Water pollution in Mexico City. The list goes on. And, of course cities confront multiple shocks and stresses, often at the same time.

Further complicating this is the fact that cities are themselves made up of complex systems that interact with other systems. So, water infrastructure relies on energy infrastructure. Energy is the obvious one, but water is tied to transportation systems, waste management, public health, policing, telecommunications, etc

The question of collaborative governance is one key challenge we’ve identified. Together with our partners we have been developing a tool to help address this particular challenge.

Our Resilient Water Governance tool, which is called WaterShare, is a digital, desk-top based application. It allows users to answer the questions

  • What are the natural and man-made elements that make up the water system?
  • How do these interact with each other?
  • And which actors are involved?”

It does this by helping users map out all the elements of their urban water system – how a lake is connected to a water plant, which supplies water to a certain part of the city, for example.

Each box on the screen represents some asset in the system – a river or a treatment plant or an end user. The lines show connections between these assets.

You can customize the tool for your city, adding the particular features that are relevant to you. For example, coastal defences might be relevant to Rotterdam but obviously wouldn’t be for landlocked Mexico City.

The user can also see which assets will likely be affected by different stresses or shocks. You can interrogate each individual asset. Where is major piece of infrastructure located? Who owns it? And see which stakeholders are involved in managing these and in what capacity.

This last piece is critical because it speaks most directly the role of governance in determining the health of a system. Are there roles that need to be filled that aren’t? Are there too many organizations involved in one particular role?


You can map relationships between actors with the lines and boxes showing all the stakeholders involved in the water system.

The thicker lines refer to stronger relationships. i.e. where there are organizations involved in the same asset or connected in the system. And you can select for one of those organizations to see how it relates to the rest.

The power of this is the potential to reveal latent relationships, to show where there is overlap in the remit of different organizations but perhaps these organizations are not actually speaking with each other

We’ve followed three guiding principles to inform the process of building solutions to help our city partners.

  • First tools must be practical, meaning, they need to be low cost in terms of time and resources and technological sophistication. If not, users will find something that’s more convenient and they’ll use that instead, or they’ll just go back to what they were doing before.
  • Second, tools need to be flexible, meaning whether we’re talking about London or Manila, the tool has to provide insights to users., there’s a danger of going too far here; too much flexibility could mean that we – meaning the project partners — give up our own perspective about what we believe actually drives resilience.
  • Finally, tools should be multi-sectoral. Meaning, they can be used by government, private sector, academia. We have worked closely with government, but this is not our only audience, and in some cities, it may not even be the right actor to push for resilience. It’s critical that the tool can be adopted by anyone who wants to use it.


This work – not just the tool itself, but the broader project of defining and building resilience – has itself really embraced a collaborative approach, not only with our project partners, Arup, The Resilience Shift, SIWI, OECD but also with the cities themselves.

Having close partnerships has been absolutely fundamental to this work. And we have and continue to see this as an iterative process, a process of co-learning, testing and refining.

We are happy to work with new partners and collaborators and to share our experiences building this tool. You can contact us via [email protected]

Other outputs will be derived from this work including the eight Cities Reports to be published later this year. From the next stages planned for 2019 we’ll be building on the model of the City Resilience Index, with the development of a water resilience Framework Assessment Tool being developed as part of the City Water Resilience Framework.

A beta version of WaterShare is planned to be ready for testing next year.

Categories: Events News

Building resilience means making room for failure – APAN 2018

Post by

Belinda HewittGuest blogger, Belinda Hewitt is a Senior Consultant with Arup International Development who is currently based in Manila supporting the Asian Development Bank (ADB)’s Urban Climate Change Resilience Trust Fund (UCCRTF). She attended the 6th Asia-Pacific Climate Change Adaptation (APAN) forum in Manila and writes for us about her experience.

Last week I joined around one thousand others to share lessons and experiences on ‘enabling resilience for all’ at the 6th Asia-Pacific Climate Change Adaptation forum in Manila. As APAN kicked off, only a few hundred kilometres away the northern Philippines provinces had begun a long journey towards recovery following the severe impacts of last month’s Super Typhoon Mangkhut.

Since the beginning of 2018 alone Asia Pacific has experienced seven Super Typhoons, a series of major earthquakes and a devastating tsunami. Last month’s IPCC Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 °C is a sobering warning of the impacts yet to come, particularly for those of us who live in the world’s most disaster prone region.

The critical role which infrastructure can play in supporting, protecting, or undermining human life and wellbeing is obvious in Manila’s dense, sprawling cityscape. The growing infrastructure deficit certainly makes my commute a nightmare, but the real impacts are felt by the city’s most poor and vulnerable. Lack of infrastructure and basic services is a chronic stress which affects health, restricts livelihoods, and undermines efforts to rise out of poverty. At worst the built environment can itself pose a severe hazard. The collapse of a hydroelectric dam construction project in Laos in July this year, likely due to human error, caused widespread disruption, loss of life and left over 6,000 people displaced.

Many important lessons were shared at APAN this year. One message that resounds strongly in the wake of Mangkhut and other extreme events is how some form of failure can be inevitable under extreme conditions, and we must step up our efforts to anticipate, plan and design with failure in mind.

Dr Juliet Mian, Technical Director of the Resilience Shift, has been leading research on the impact of digital transformation on infrastructure systems. During a plenary on Climate Smart Cities Juliet highlighted how smart systems can inform and build resilience, but tend to be complex and tightly coupled – and therefore “have the potential to cause fragility and vulnerability”.

This can lead to cascading impacts, where one small failure has unpredictable and far-reaching (sometimes global) consequences. Infrastructure owners, designers and operators must make conscious efforts to ‘balance resilience with the benefits of digital systems.’ For example, by providing low technology back-up systems and working across sector silos to identify, prevent, and plan for potential failure.

Mark Fletcher, Arup’s Global Water Leader, gave a keynote address for APAN’s Industry and Built Environment stream, co-hosted by Arup and the Asian Development Bank. He emphasised “how important it is to look at a basin-wide approach to water resilience sharing the work Arup is doing with the Rockefeller Foundation on development of the City Water Resilience Framework and with the Resilience Shift on the Water Governance tool with pilot global cities including Cape Town, Miami, Amman, Mexico, Thessaloniki, Hull, Rotterdam, and Manchester.”

He also highlighted “the need for developing organisational coping strategies, critical resources and supply chain arrangements to reduce loss of life and minimise damage for when infrastructure robustness has fallen short either through design exceedance or failure.”

As a built environment practitioner, I share the drive to ensure our critical infrastructure systems are planned, designed and constructed to withstand the most severe impacts. Knowledge and technology to achieve this is improving over time, but struggling to keep pace with the growing impacts and uncertainty of climate change, urban growth, and digital transformation. A report I co-authored with Lloyd’s of London last year highlights how  we must step up our efforts to find practical solutions which accommodate potential failure. This includes designing systems which fail ‘safe’ with minimal damage and loss of life, while ensuring plans and resources in place expedite recovery.

These messages are not new, but often overlooked. They are particularly important in the world’s most fragile lower-income countries, where finance and resources for ‘future-proofing’ are most scarce.

In northern Luzon, early reports suggest lessons from the deadly impacts of Typhoon Fengshen (2008) and Super Typhoon Haiyan (2013) may have informed better preparedness, evacuation and recovery efforts which reduced damage and loss of life. Though it often comes at too high a cost, failure provides us an important opportunity to transform the way we plan, design, and manage infrastructure systems to ensure a more resilient future for all.

Categories: Events

Helping to deliver the SDGs at the Global Engineering Congress

Post by

Our activities at the Resilience Shift are helping to deliver the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals. We are achieving this by fostering a programme of global change that will lead to a safer and better world through resilient infrastructure.

October’s Global Engineering Congress, held this year at the Institution of Civil Engineers in London, has the UN SDGs at its core. The congress wants to understand how the engineering community can help to promote sustainable and resilient practices through their work.

We’re delighted to not only be attending the congress’s five days of lively debate, but also contributing to the event. See the programme.

We kick off with a workshop on Thursday 25 October between 10.30-12.00, where we will show how we can work towards ‘Making resilience practical, tangible and relevant’.

The session will introduce the critical infrastructure value chain, and highlight the diverse range of stakeholders. We’ll give insight into our project on tools and approaches that are available for valuing resilience. We’ll also demonstrate a resilience tool developed for the water sector. Coupled with a lively online poll, panel and Q&A session, to incorporate the wealth of expertise at the conference, it should be an interesting event.

On the same day, our technical director, Juliet Mian will be participating in a panel session at 16.00. The panel will approach the question of ‘Maximising the application of sustainability solutions in an interconnected world’. Juliet will sit alongside Mark Enzer, CTO at Mott MacDonald.

We look forward to seeing some of you there! Remember, you can follow the debate, wherever you are, using #GlobalEngineeringCongress or #SDGs; and don’t forget to follow us on LinkedIn or Twitter.

Categories: Events

Shifting major project practices to safeguard society’s critical services

Post by

What can major projects do to shift their practices? See the report and presentation from Will Goode at the Major Projects Association Annual Conference 2018.

This year’s MPA Conference highlights included Lord Heseltine stressing the importance of a strong pipeline of projects, allowing some to fail and, accepting that, then replacing the failures with new projects and supporting those that succeed. This sounds similar to the 4Ex model that the Resilience Shift has adopted to guide the development of our portfolio of projects over time – see our ideas pipeline.

Claire Durkin from The Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) spoke of the importance of UK companies and UK government communicating and working together to address global challenges and global opportunities. There was also a stimulating discussion on the use of professional institutions to communicate news and ideas from research to the practitioner community.

Dr Anita Sengupta (pictured above right) talked about her involvement in start-up Virgin Hyperloop One who have built the world’s first hyperloop test track in the Nevada desert. She also highlighted the importance of flexibility and modularity being built in to prepare for the unexpected. All characteristics of resilient systems.

Will Goode’s workshop session explored the link between major projects and critical infrastructure resilience and how we might shift major project practices to safeguard society’s critical services.

His introduction explained how the Resilience Shift is trying to shift the focus of professionals from infrastructure assets to systems, the challenges of efficiency versus resilience and the importance of resilient systems continuing to deliver critical services in the face of unexpected shocks and stresses.

We define the Resilience Shift as a global initiative to catalyse resilience within and between critical infrastructure sectors and fittingly, Dr Martin Barnes CBE, Former Executive Director of the Major Projects Association also used that term when defining the nature of major projects:

“Major projects are so complex that they require cross-disciplinary collaboration of the highest order – within and between companies and cultures – before they can be implemented successfully.”

The link between resilience and major projects is clear. In one way or another, MPA members contribute to the delivery and successful operation of critical infrastructure systems every day, and we know these systems will be subject to unexpected shocks and stresses.

At the Resilience Shift, we believe that an awareness and understanding of the tools and approaches that can make a resilient approach more practical/tangible/relevant, might be a good thing for all those involved with major projects. Wherever their decisions and actions contribute to the project lifecycle they will have the opportunity to add ‘resilience value‘.

30 MPA Conference delegates participated in an exercise to identify potential drivers of change that might impact major programmes in the short, medium and long term. Participants then committed to a variety of immediate and long term actions to increase resilience in response and captured in an informal wallchart grid.





You can read Will’s presentation here.



Categories: Events

Increasing resilience when delivering major projects

Post by

Will Goode, Programme Manager of the Resilience Shift, is presenting a session at the Major Projects Association Annual Conference 2018, taking place over 19 and 20 September 2018. Will explains the questions he will be exploring.

In their own words the Major Projects Association is a membership association for organisations engaged in the delivery and the development of major projects, programmes and portfolios. Membership comprises organisations engaged in a wide variety of commercial and public enterprises. They operate in a wide variety of fields including: manufacturing, construction, defence, transportation, IT, government departments, consultancies and law, as well as those engaged in the academic study of major projects.

The desire from members is to hone their skills; to improve best practice; and to investigate innovative solutions for the many problems encountered during major projects, programmes and portfolios.

I first encountered the Major Projects Association while I was working on the HS2 project and took part in their course ‘The Challenge of Major Projects’.

The course was excellent. I was introduced to new perspectives of an industry that I thought I had a good handle on, hearing from a variety of major project professionals and stakeholders including HM Treasury, delivery partners, infrastructure clients, civil servants, management consultants, lawyers and more. All of whom view and understand major projects slightly differently, or put another way, get different types of value from major projects at different points in their value chain.

My big takeaway from the course was the insight that I gained from a brief introduction to the Project Initiation Routemap. This is a tool developed between government and the private sector. It aims to improve the initiation phases of the major projects, primarily in the UK and the highest level messages of which are: assess complexity, assess capability, plan enhancements then deliver enhancements.

I’m delighted to have been invited to speak at this year’s MPA Annual Conference about the link between major projects and critical infrastructure resilience. We’ll be exploring; what can we do at the various stages of major projects to increase resilience, both for the project itself, but most importantly for the asset or system that the project is focussed on delivering? What do we need to consider to be able to do this? and why should we bother at all?

I look forward to exploring these questions with the same variety of people that broadened my horizons on the challenge of Major Projects course a few years ago.

Categories: Events

Resilience Shift Debate – the value of resilience – what is it worth and why?

Post by

“If resilience had any real economic and societal value, then decision makers would be implementing it already”

At the Resilience Shift, our aim is a safer and better world through resilient infrastructure. This debate and audience Q&A, at the Global Knowledge Exchange event on 22 August 2018, posed this challenging question in a lively and opinionated discussion.

The views and opinions raised as part of this classic debating format do not represent the panel’s own views or those of any associated organisations.

Chaired by Dr Mark Fletcher, Global Water Leader, Arup, the panel included (pictured from left to right):

  • Trevor Bishop, Director of Strategy and Planning, OFWAT
  • Juliet Mian, Technical Director, Resilience Shift
  • Fred Boltz, CEO Resolute Development Solutions, and Chair, City Water Resilience Framework
  • Dr Mark Fletcher, Global Water Leader, Arup
  • Ruth Boumphrey, Director of Research, Lloyd’s Register Foundation
  • Cayley Green, Senior Resilience Analyst, City of Cape Town
  • Diego Juan Rodriguez, Senior Water Resources Management Specialist, World Bank

The full debate:

The audience Q&A

Categories: Events

Learning from others with Imperial College’s Industry Showcase

Post by
(c) Imperial College - Campus Shots R1 - 20 - 08 -2013

(c) Imperial College

The Resilience Shift is constantly trying to learn from those at the forefront of thinking related to resilience, which is why I  recently went to the Imperial College London Centre for Systems Engineering and Innovation Industry Showcase event, on 7 September 2018.

The theme was “Infrastructure interdependencies in London – how to overcome complexity to drive productivity and enable sustainable urban growth?”.

Dr David Hancock from Infrastructure Projects Authority spoke about transforming construction and made an interesting comparison between change and transformation which resonated with the Resilience Shift way of thinking. He pointed out that change is incremental and fixes the past, whereas transformation is radical and creates the future. It is this radical transformation that is required to shift resilience from theory to practice.

A series of burst presentations gave a flavour of the research carried out at the Centre, ranging from research on emergency evacuation operations management in large, complex public occupancy buildings (Georgia Bateman) to systems engineering applications for water management (Dr Ana Mijic).

A second keynote came from Dame Judith Hackitt, who is the author of the landmark “Independent Review of Building Regulations and Fire Safety”. She gave an overview of her report and some key insights including the fact that no one has been looking at the regulations for high rise buildings as a system therefore there was no understanding of conflicts in the system or where the weaknesses and gaps were. Other industries, such as chemical engineering, have been using systems approaches for many years and if this knowledge is shared across disciplines change can be accelerated.

Finally, Dame Hackitt was joined on a panel by a variety of speakers from across construction industry in London including Mark Farmer (Cast Consultancy), Jaimie Johnston (Bryden Wood), Adam Locke (Laing O’Rourke) and Peter Vale (Tideway). They discussed how to simplify processes to cope with infrastructure interdependencies an in this positive discussion many solutions were put forward.

Most importantly, as echoed throughout the day, the common theme was of the need to get people out of their silos and working together.

With thanks to the team at Imperial for an inspiring day.

Categories: Events Knowledge

Showcasing the latest advances in thinking and practice

Post by

The Resilience Shift hosted a special showcase of advances in thinking and practice.

The session, Project Showcase on Water Resilience Design and Execution: the State of the Art, featured advances in resilience and complex systems theory, hydrosystems engineering, urban systems planning, and water governance and human dimensions of water management.

We asked leading water resilience scientists and practitioners to present their current work on water systems resilience design for urban systems, basins, and transboundary water sources.

The moderated, interactive session featured advances in planning and decision support tools, resilience diagnosis and design approaches, and applied work in representative cities and basins of Africa, the Middle East, Europe, and the Americas.

We also previewed scientific research forming a special issue of the journal Water Security:Water is the Master Variable: Solving for Resilience in the Modern Era“.  This will be published this autumn.

Partners in the showcase include Arup, the Global Water Partnership, Resolute Development Solutions, SIWI, the University of Massachusetts-Amherst, the World Bank, and the World Economic Forum.

The photo illustrating this article is by the artist Edward Burtynsky. Examples of his photographic work of water landscapes recently featured in a curated exhibition at Arup.


16:00-16:10 Water Resilience Design and Execution: the State of the Art
Dr. Fred Boltz, Resolute Development Solutions and the Resilience Shift

16:10-16:22 City-Source Interdependencies and Water Resilience: Mexico City and the Valley of Mexico
Sarah Freeman, University of Massachusetts, Amherst

16:22-16:34 Urban Systems Planning through a Water Lens: the City Water Resilience Framework
Alexa Bruce, ARUP

16:34-16:46 City Water Resilience in Practice
Dr. Gisela Kaiser, City of Cape Town, South Africa

16:46-16:58 Designing for Resilience in Transboundary Waters
Anjali Lohani, Global Water Partnership

16:58-17:10 Decision Support Tools and Technologies for Urban Water Resilience
Glen Low, Earth Genome and World Economic Forum 4IR Urban Water Initiative

17:10-17:30 Interactive Discussion with the Audience: Practicing the State of the Art


Update: Fred Boltz speaking at the event today.

Categories: Events

  • Sign up

  • Recent Posts