The status quo for infrastructure and community preparedness for climate disasters is not adequate for the intensifying climate-hazard landscape in many contexts, and this deficiency can be exacerbated by ineffective public involvement practices. Negotiated resilience is an emerging concept that acknowledges the evolving nature of resilience goals and the relationship between community engagement and climate-resilience outcomes. This study aims to enhance negotiated resilience outcomes for transportation agencies in the U.S. by codeveloping, with transportation practitioners, practical tools integrating disaster management capabilities (i.e., preparedness, rapidity, flexibility) with authentic public involvement practices. To achieve this objective, the study develops a capability maturity model (CMM) with indicators that transportation agencies may use to benchmark the effectiveness of negotiated resilience practices in achieving disaster preparedness in transportation systems. Additionally, this study develops a self-assessment tool that maps to the various capabilities in the CMM. Based on four rounds of targeted transportation expert interviews, the Negotiated Resilience Capability Maturity Model (NR-CMM) and tool are refined to reflect stakeholder feedback across multiple types of transportation agencies. The NR-CMM and self-assessment tool offer a practical method for state and local departments of transportation, metropolitan planning organizations, and other transportation agencies to assess their effectiveness across multiple areas affecting disruption absorption and community preparedness, including stakeholder involvement, internal and external education efforts, and disaster management.
WallemacqP.BelowR.McCleanD.Economic Losses, Poverty & Disasters: 1998-2017. United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction, Switzerland, 2018.
2.
NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI). U.S. Billion-Dollar Weather and Climate Disasters. 2024. https://www.doi.org/10.25921/stkw-7w73
3.
WoodallB.Amekudzi-KennedyA.InchausteM. O.SundararajanS.MedinaA.SmithS.PoppK.Institutional Resilience and Disaster Governance: How Countries Respond to Black Swan Events. Progress in Disaster Science, Vol. 22, 2024, p. 100329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pdisas.2024.100329.
Amekudzi-KennedyA.SinghP.WilliamsE.CuadraM.AshuriB.WoodallB.GarrettA.TennakoonM.ClarkR.DheerajA.Developing Transportation Resilience Adaptively to Climate Change. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2024. 2678: 835–848.
7.
GonçalvesL.RibeiroP.Resilience of Urban Transportation Systems. Concept, Characteristics, and Methods. Journal of Transport Geography, Vol. 85, 2020, p. 102727. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2020.102727.
8.
EsmalianA.YuanF.RajputA. A.FarahmandH.DongS.LiQ.GaoX., et al. Operationalizing Resilience Practices in Transportation Infrastructure Planning and Project Development. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, Vol. 104, 2022, p. 103214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2022.103214.
9.
ZiervogelG.PellingM.CartwrightA.ChuE.DeshpandeT.HarrisL.HyamsK., et al. Inserting Rights and Justice into Urban Resilience: A Focus on Everyday Risk. Environment and Urbanization, Vol. 29, No. 1, 2017, pp. 123–138. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956247816686905.
10.
ZhouY.WangJ.YangH.Resilience of Transportation Systems: Concepts and Comprehensive Review. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, Vol. 20, No. 12, 2019, pp. 4262–4276. https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2018.2883766.
11.
WangJ. Y.“Resilience Thinking” in Transport Planning. Civil Engineering and Environmental Systems, Vol. 32, No. 1–2, 2015, pp. 180–191. https://doi.org/10.1080/10286608.2015.1014810.
12.
SunW.BocchiniP.DavisonB. D.Resilience Metrics and Measurement Methods for Transportation Infrastructure: The State of the Art. Sustainable and Resilient Infrastructure, Vol. 5, No. 3, 2020, pp. 168–199. https://doi.org/10.1080/23789689.2018.1448663.
13.
Amoaning-YanksonS.Amekudzi-KennedyA.Transportation System Resilience: Opportunities to Expand from Principally Technical to Sociotechnical Approaches. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2017. 2604: 28–36.
Machado-LeónJ. L.GoodchildA.Review of Performance Metrics for Community-Based Planning for Resilience of the Transportation System. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2017. 2604: 44–53.
16.
BénéC.NewshamA.DaviesM.UlrichsM.Godfrey-WoodR.Resilience, Poverty and Development. Journal of International Development, Vol. 26, No. 5, 2014, pp. 598–623. https://doi.org/10.1002/jid.2992.
17.
ChuE.AnguelovskiI.RobertsD.Climate Adaptation as Strategic Urbanism: Assessing Opportunities and Uncertainties for Equity and Inclusive Development in Cities. Cities, Vol. 60, 2017, pp. 378–387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2016.10.016.
FainsteinS.Resilience and Justice. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Vol. 39, No. 1, 2015, pp. 157–167. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.12186.
20.
ArnsteinS. R.A Ladder of Citizen Participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, Vol. 35, No. 4, 1969, pp. 216–224. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944366908977225.
21.
GrossardtT.BaileyK.Justice and the Arnstein Gap. In Transportation Planning and Public Participation (GrossardtT.BaileyK., eds.), Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2018, pp. 27–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-812956-2.00002-5.
22.
Federal Highway Administration and Office of Planning, Environment, and, Realty (FHWA). Vulnerability Assessment and Adaptation Framework FHWA-HEP-18-020, 3rd ed.U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, D.C., 2017.
23.
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM-1). Mainstreaming System Resilience Concepts into Transportation Agencies: A Guide. The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C., 2021.
24.
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM-2). Investing in Transportation Resilience: A Framework for Informed Choices. The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C., 2021.
25.
SchiefelbuschM.Citizens’ Involvement and the Representation of Passenger Interests in Public Transport: Dimensions of a Long-Neglected Area of Transport Planning and Policy with Case Studies from Germany. Transport Reviews, Vol. 25, No. 3, 2005, pp. 261–282. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144164042000335904.
26.
CascettaE.PagliaraF.Public Engagement for Planning and Designing Transportation Systems. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 87, 2013, pp. 103–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.10.597.
27.
KarnerA.MarcantonioR. A.Achieving Transportation Equity: Meaningful Public Involvement to Meet the Needs of Underserved Communities. Public Works Management & Policy, Vol. 23, No. 2, 2018, pp. 105–126. https://doi.org/10.1177/1087724X17738792.
28.
InnesJ. E.BooherD. E.Reframing Public Participation: Strategies for the 21st Century. Planning Theory & Practice, Vol. 5, No. 4, 2004, pp. 419–436. https://doi.org/10.1080/1464935042000293170.
29.
TownsendR. M.“Eligible to Be Heard” in Transportation Planning. Journal of Applied Communication Research, Vol. 49, No. 1, 2021, pp. 3–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/00909882.2020.1849768.
30.
McAndrewsC.MarcusJ.The Politics of Collective Public Participation in Transportation Decision-Making. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Vol. 78, 2015, pp. 537–550. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2015.06.014.
31.
MacatuladE.BiljeckiF.Continuing from the Sendai Framework Midterm: Opportunities for Urban Digital Twins in Disaster Risk Management. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, Vol. 102, 2024, p. 104310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2024.104310.
32.
WeilantS.StrongA.MillerB.Incorporating Resilience into Transportation Planning and Assessment. No. RR-3038-TRB. RAND, Santa Monica, CA, 2019.
33.
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Communication with Vulnerable Populations: A Transportation and Emergency Management Toolkit. The National Academies Press, Washington, D. C., 2011. https://doi.org/10.17226/22845.
34.
MeyerM. D.MillerE. J.Urban Transportation Planning: A Decision-Oriented Approach. McGraw-Hill, New York, NY, 2001.
35.
HooverJ.Post-Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act Public Involvement. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 1994, pp. 48–52. 1463.
36.
United States Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT). Promising Practices for Meaningful Public Involvement in Transportation Decision-Making. 2023. https://www.transportation.gov/public-involvement.
KhistyC. J.Citizen Involvement in the Transportation Planning Process: What Is and What Ought to be. Journal of Advanced Transportation, Vol. 34, No. 1, 2000, pp. 125–142. https://doi.org/10.1002/atr.5670340107.
39.
LinovskiO.BakerD. M.Community-Designed Participation: Lessons for Equitable Engagement in Transportation Planning. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2023. 2677: 172–181.
40.
StichB.EagleK.Planning to Include the Public: Transportation Policy Implementation with Effective Citizen Involvement. Public Works Management & Policy, Vol. 9, No. 4, 2005, pp. 319–340. https://doi.org/10.1177/1087724X05275672.
41.
KarnerA.LondonJ.RowangouldD.ManaughK.From Transportation Equity to Transportation Justice: Within, Through, and Beyond the State. Journal of Planning Literature, Vol. 35, No. 4, 2020, pp. 440–459. https://doi.org/10.1177/0885412220927691.
42.
LohC. G.KimR.Are We Planning for Equity? Equity Goals and Recommendations in Local Comprehensive Plans. Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol. 87, No. 2, 2020, pp. 181–196. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944363.2020.1829498.
43.
YarbroughC.Smith-ColinJ.Different Journeys, Same Struggle: Practitioner Experiences in Environmental Justice Policy, Assessment, and Decision-Making. Transportation, Vol. 52, 2025, pp. 871–893.
SethiM.SharmaR.MohapatraS.MittalS.How to Tackle Complexity in Urban Climate Resilience? Negotiating Climate Science, Adaptation and Multi-Level Governance in India. PLoS One, Vol. 16, No. 7. 2021, E0253904. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0253904.
47.
FitzgibbonsJ.MitchellC. L.Inclusive Resilience: Examining a Case Study of Equity-Centred Strategic Planning in Toronto, Canada. Cities, Vol. 108, 2021, p. 102997. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2020.102997.
48.
FinkK.FinewoodM. H.MolnarL.Framing Pier 55: Negotiated Resilience and Contested Waterfronts. Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Vol. 9, 2019, pp. 364–370. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-018-0531-4.
49.
Advancing Standards Transforming Markets. Standard Guide for Developing Cost-Effective Community Resilience Strategies. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2021. https://store.astm.org/e3130-21.html.
50.
Advancing Standards Transforming Markets. Standard Guide for Community Resilience Planning for Buildings and Infrastructure. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2022. https://store.astm.org/e3350-22.html.
51.
Advancing Standards Transforming Markets. Standard Guide for Climate Resiliency Planning and Strategy. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2021. https://store.astm.org/e3032-22.html.
52.
Advancing Standards Transforming Markets. Standard Guide for General Principles of Resilience. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2021. https://store.astm.org/e3341-23a.html.
NolanR. L.Managing the Computer Resource: A Stage Hypothesis. Communications of the ACM, Vol. 16, No. 7, 1973, pp. 399–405.
56.
PaulkM. C.CurtisB.ChrissisM. B.WeberC. V.Capability Maturity Model, Version 1.1. IEEE Software, Vol. 10, No. 4, 1993, pp. 18–27. https://doi.org/10.1109/52.219617.
57.
WeberC.LaymanB.Measurement Maturity and the CMM: How Measurement Practices Evolve as Processes Mature. Software Quality Professional, Vol. 4, No. 3, 2002, p. 6.
58.
SinghP.Amekudzi-KennedyA.KassaH.Performance Dashboard Tool to Visualize Adaptive Resilience Maturity of Transportation Agencies. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2022. 2676: 324–339.
59.
National Research Council. Business Case and Communications Strategies for State DOT Resilience Efforts. The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C., 2023. https://doi.org/10.17226/27426.
60.
JordanS. W.IveyS.LevyM.LipinskiM.PalazoloP.WaldronB.Complete Streets: A New Capability Maturity Model. Journal of Urban Planning and Development, Vol. 148, No. 1, 2022, p. 04021071. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)UP.1943-5444.0000812.
