This paper reviews the development and adaptations of the BRIC (Baseline Resilience Indicators for Communities) method for measuring local community resilience to disasters, grounded in the DROP (Disaster Resilience of Place) theoretical framework. The point of departure is the analysis of the DROP framework, which defines resilience as a dynamic process conditioned by pre-existing social, economic, institutional, and infrastructural conditions, as well as their interaction with natural systems. The first part of the paper discusses the theoretical value of this framework, as well as the practical challenges of its application arising from the limited availability of reliable data and the lack of standardized methodological approaches. The second part of the paper presents a detailed analysis of the development of resilience dimensions in contemporary literature, including socio-demographic structure, well-being and social capital, economic stability, institutional capacities, infrastructure, geographical and spatial characteristics, cooperation, and risk analysis. Through a comparative approach, it is shown that, although differently labeled, these indicators essentially converge on the same conceptual cores and reveal developmental discontinuities relative to the original DROP framework and the initial BRIC method. The central part of the paper examines the evolution of the BRIC method and its adaptations across different national contexts, including analyses of indicator applications in Norway, England, Nepal, Hungary, and Australia. Particular attention is paid to the role of the OECD methodological guidelines in indicator selection, with an emphasis on their frequent partial implementation, especially in areas related to handling missing data, reliability testing, and sensitivity analyses. In conclusion, the paper demonstrates that the BRIC method possesses high conceptual potential and broad applicability; however, without deeper contextual adaptation, stricter methodological discipline, and the integration of spatial and local approaches, its validity and operational usefulness in community resilience planning may remain limited.
Dalibor Milenković
Scientific-Professional Society for Disaster Risk Management, Dimitrija Tucovića 121, 11040 Belgrade, Serbia
Author
Vladimir Cvetković
Department of Disaster Management and Environmental Security, Faculty of Security Studies, University of Belgrade, Gospodara Vucica 50, 11040 Belgrade, Serbia; Safety and Disaster Studies, Chair of Thermal Processing Technology, Department of Environmental and Energy Process Engineering, Montanuniversitaet, Leoben, Austria; Scientific-Professional Society for Disaster Risk Management, Dimitrija Tucovića 121, 11040 Belgrade, Serbia.
Author
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3450-0658
Hatidža Beriša
Military Academy, University of Defence, Veljka Lukića Kurjaka, 11042 Belgrade, Serbia
Author
Vladimir Jakovljević
Department of Disaster Management and Environmental Security, Faculty of Security Studies, University of Belgrade, Gospodara Vucica 50, 11040 Belgrade, Serbia
Author
Jasmina Gačić
Department of Disaster Management and Environmental Security, Faculty of Security Studies, University of Belgrade, Gospodara Vucica 50, 11040 Belgrade, Serbia
Author
Vanja Cvetković
Scientific-Professional Society for Disaster Risk Management, Dimitrija Tucovića 121, 11040 Belgrade, Serbia
Author
DOI: https://doi.org/10.66050/2tmggc50
Keywords: community resilience, BRIC method, DROP framework, resilience indicators, adaptation of the BRIC method, resilience measurement methodology
https://internationaljournalofdisasterriskmanagement.com/index.php/Vol1/article/view/174
