Frontiers of Urban Resilience: Multi‐Hazard Risks and Nonlinear Recovery Pathways in a Conflict‐Exposed City

Nadiia Antonenko, Daria Malchykova and Ihor Pylypenko
Additional contact information
Nadiia Antonenko: Department of Information Technologies in Architecture, Kyiv National University of Construction and Architecture, Ukraine
Daria Malchykova: Department of Geography and Ecology, Kherson State University, Ukraine
Ihor Pylypenko: Department of Geography and Ecology, Kherson State University, Ukraine

Urban Planning, 2026, vol. 11

Abstract: This research advances understanding of urban resilience amid polycrisis by analysing how continuous military violence interacts with pre‐existing urban vulnerabilities. Using Kherson (Ukraine) as a critical case, the research offers a unique lens on urban responses to unprecedented short‐term and long‐term challenges. It shows how a city that experienced occupation, infrastructural collapse, and depopulation, in the face of constant instability and continuous attacks after liberation, reorganises its socio‐spatial systems and shapes its recovery trajectories. Drawing on spatial analysis of destruction, thematic mapping of socio‐demographic and logistical changes, and institutional capacity analysis, the study conceptualises recovery as a nonlinear dynamic process that unfolds through absorptive (stabilisation of key functions in partially populated areas), adaptive reorganisation of logistics and service networks, and transformative shifts in the most damaged areas, where conventional models of governance are no longer viable. By situating Kherson in a broader comparative debate, the study offers conclusions relevant to cities in zones of armed conflict, climate disasters, and large‐scale social upheaval. The trajectory of urban spatial development in such contexts is characterised by spatial heterogeneity, threshold conditions, and multi‐vector processes in which systemic loss, stabilisation, and adaptation occur simultaneously. The case of Kherson demonstrates that continuous military pressure limits traditional reconstruction and urban planning models. The future of cities in a multi‐crisis environment depends not only on reconstruction resources but also on rethinking recovery as a new model of socio‐spatial development, grounded in absorptive, adaptive, and transformative capacities, differentiated spatial strategies, and context‐sensitive governance.

Keywords: bifurcation; polycrisis; reconstruction; recovery; residential district; spatial analysis; sustainable development; urban planning; urban resilience; urbicide (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2026
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.cogitatiopress.com/urbanplanning/article/view/11551 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:cog:urbpla:v11:y:2026:a:11551

DOI: 10.17645/up.11551

Access Statistics for this article

Urban Planning is currently edited by Tiago Cardoso

More articles in Urban Planning from Cogitatio Press
Bibliographic data for series maintained by António Vieira () and IT Department ().