ArticlePloS one2024
Construction and application of economic resilience evaluation model for megacities.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Economic resilience provides a new perspective for megacities to achieve sustainable development when facing multiple shocks, and its accurate evaluation is an essential prerequisite for optimizing urban governance. There are currently no generally accepted methods for empirical evaluation or measuring economic resilience, and the present study aims to contribute to in both the research field and methodology. The present study sets dimensions and indicators based on economic resilience's theoretical and empirical research and used Decision Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL) and Interactive Structural Modeling (ISM) methods to exclude the effect indicators and divide the indicator hierarchy, respectively. Subsequently, the present study conducts model validation using Chinese megacities as a case study. The game theory weighting method, which combines the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and Entropy methods, is used to calculate indicator weights, and the VIKOR (VIseKriterijumska Optimizacija i KOmpromisno Resenje) method is used to evaluate and compare economic resilience of megacities. The research findings indicate that the evaluation model constructed in the present study included 15 indicators (after excluding three effect indicators) divided into four levels. After merging the levels, they correspond to three dimensions: resistance, recoverability, and adaptability. In addition, using Chinese megacities as a case study, the evaluation results found that Beijing, Shanghai, and Shenzhen have high economic resilience, Tianjin and Guangzhou have moderate economic resilience, Chengdu has low economic resilience, and Chongqing has the lowest economic resilience. This result is consistent with previous studies and verifies the model's effectiveness. The present study also found that megacities with lower levels of economic resilience exhibit a more significant upward trend, as well as the highest and higher proportion of economic resilience in Chinese megacities depending on time passes, indicating that megacities' economic resilience is weakening. The evaluation result obtained in the present study is more specific, precise, and focused on depicting the distribution differences and development trends of economic resilience at the urban level.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.