Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40455272›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental management2025

Technological and Biological Systems' Resilience: Observations and Learnings.

Lindsay Robertson, Alan Bond

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental management, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Lindsay RobertsonMassey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand. Lindsay@tech-vantage.com.ORCID 0000-0001-9479-5251
Alan BondUniversity of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3809-5805

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Technological systems have become progressively more complex, indispensable and ubiquitous, as has the inevitability of failures. These appreciations have generated increased interest in resilience. At present, the resilience of technological systems is highly dependent on ad-hoc and abstract problem solving provided by humans, and specifically their agency to repair damage: such dependence will inevitably become less practical as technological systems become more complex, and are impractical even now for systems that are inaccessible to humans. Biological systems, by contrast, typically demonstrate truly spectacular resilience, evidenced by the capability to self-repair deterioration and injury over millennia. Definitions of resilience commonly assemble multiple concepts describing the achievement of 'resilience' and the means by which this is achieved. Breaking down these concepts as they are applied to biological and technological systems allows useful analysis of the concepts that inhibit or promote resilience in technological systems. This paper attempts to learn from resilience processes as these are applied within biological systems, in order to clarify understanding of the basis for resilience of current and future technological systems. We propose that principles demonstrated to achieve high levels of resilience in biological system, can increase the resilience of technological systems.

Indexed as

Conservation of Natural ResourcesTechnologyHumans

Identifiers

PMID40455272
PMCPMC12228586

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.