Case study reveals gaps in disaster risk reduction and highlights the role of anticipatory measures in urban planning.
Strategic planning for urban resilience in Brazil requires the integration of disaster risk reduction actions, climate change adaptation, anticipatory measures, and participatory governance into municipal development. This study analyzes the implementation of the Making Cities Resilient 2030 (MCR2030) initiative in Brazil, focusing on the methodological adaptation of its self-assessment tools to the national context and on strengthening the institutional capacity of municipalities. An applied research methodology was adopted, based on a case study and a qualitative descriptive approach, with emphasis on the experience of the municipality of Franco da Rocha (SP). In this context, tools such as the Quick Risk Estimation Tool (QRE), the Disaster Resilience Scorecard for Cities, and the Public Health System Resilience Scorecard were systematically applied, with extensive participation of municipal technical agencies, academia, and civil society. Key findings highlight the identification of gaps in public health and continuity of critical services, the need to expand intersectoral integration, and the strengthening of collaborative governance. The experience demonstrated that applying the tools requires coordinated action across different sectors of local government and access to organized and updated data, reinforcing the importance of constructing intersectoral management dashboards for continuous and integrated monitoring of resilience capacities. When connected to emerging technologies (IoT, AI, and Big Data), these dashboards enhance predictive risk analysis, real-time monitoring, and evidence-based decision-making. The study concludes that prioritizing anticipatory measures, creating integrated data structures, and institutionalizing resilience within urban planning are essential for consolidating safer, more inclusive, and better-adapted territories in the face of contemporary climate challenges.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Santos et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: