Urban Resilience And Sustainability

University Town and Resilience

The role of universities in fostering urban resilience is becoming a promising new dimension. Oxford University is crucial in advancing urban resilience through interdisciplinary research, global collaborations, and educational initiatives. The Oxford Network for the Future of Cities, housed within the Institute for Science, Innovation, and Society, examines how cities adapt to pressing social, economic, and environmental challenges, particularly climate change and rapid urbanisation. The Environmental Change Institute conducts extensive research on climate risks affecting urban areas, such as rising sea levels and extreme weather, informing policies that enhance sustainability and infrastructure resilience. Meanwhile, the Oxford Martin School focuses on sustainable urban development and disaster risk management, exploring strategies to mitigate economic shocks, environmental stress, and social inequalities. Oxford collaborates with the Global Centre on Adaptation to accelerate climate adaptation efforts, integrating nature-based solutions and infrastructure improvements into urban planning. Complementing its research and policy contributions, Oxford provides educational programs in urban studies, planning, and sustainability, equipping future leaders with the skills to tackle worldwide urban resilience challenges.

Oxford’s case reflects a broader shift in academia, where universities are increasingly recognised as hubs of research and education and as key institutions in fostering urban resilience. At the beginning of the XXI century, scholars have widened their scope from focusing on technology transfer and commercialisation to investigating universities' role as anchors of resilience-building capacity, shaping the human, intellectual, and social capital essential for sustainable urban growth (Florida, 1999). Wolman et al. (2017) examined the relationship between urban economic resilience and various contributing factors, including the presence of research universities. The econometric analysis of 361 U.S. metropolitan areas from 1970 to 2014 found that each additional research university doubles a city’s likelihood of recovering from an economic shock within a given year. Faoziyah (2022) argued that university-driven community empowerment fosters long-term self-reliance, reducing dependency on government aid. Creswell’s (2009) empirical study highlights that the absence of university involvement often undermines the effectiveness of government-run empowerment programs because universities provide expertise, training, and social engagement, thereby strengthening poverty alleviation strategies and enhancing community resilience to economic shocks.

Universities' role could be especially valuable in strengthening the resilience of small depriving towns, where economic decline and demographic shifts necessitate innovative, knowledge-driven adaptation strategies. The study by Ljubenović et al. (2020) stressed the importance of innovative governance, local cooperation, and strategic use of endogenous resources to create viable long-term development alternatives in small post-socialist shrinking towns, particularly in Eastern and Central Europe. They examined how towns experiencing economic decline, depopulation, and urban shrinkage have adapted by leveraging local resources and social capital. The main findings highlight that resilience in small towns is not merely about returning to a previous state but involves transformation through adaptive strategies. The case studies revealed that towns adopting creative strategy—such as cultural tourism, community-driven urban renewal, and ecological sustainability—could establish new development paths. These strategies leveraged local cultural assets, community engagement, and sustainable energy projects to mitigate population decline and economic stagnation.

Disaster Risk Assessment (DDR) and the Use of GIS

Collaboration between local governments and universities is crucial in enhancing urban resilience by integrating risk-informed planning into urban development strategies. Universities serve as knowledge hubs, researching climate adaptation, disaster risk reduction, and resilient infrastructure, which local governments can leverage for evidence-based policymaking. Municipalities can develop risk-sensitive urban plans by incorporating academic expertise informed by the latest research and best practices. Additionally, universities contribute to participatory urban planning efforts, ensuring that vulnerable populations are considered and that resilience strategies align with equitable and sustainable development goals. The University of Southampton, through projects like PREFUS and DECCMA, has contributed to understanding the resilience of rice-dependent communities by using remote sensing and socio-economic data to predict storm impacts and support adaptation planning. The PREFUS project identified areas where rice croplands are more resilient to storms, enabling better agricultural planning to protect livelihoods and food security. Meanwhile, the DECCMA project, in collaboration with UNESCO, evaluated community resilience in the Mahanadi delta, providing empirical evidence and operational frameworks for disaster risk reduction.

Following the devastating 1999 Marmara earthquakes, Istanbul faced an urgent need to assess and mitigate seismic risks. Universities were critical in earthquake risk assessment, vulnerability analysis, and preparedness planning, collaborating with government institutions and international organisations. Boğaziçi University, Istanbul University and Istanbul Technical University, in partnership with the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality and the Japan International Cooperation Agency, conducted detailed seismic hazard and structural vulnerability assessments. The studies identified that many of Istanbul’s buildings lacked earthquake-resistant design, putting thousands of lives at risk. Utilising advanced probabilistic and deterministic models, researchers from Boğaziçi University, alongside experts from the American Red Cross and the United States Geological Survey, projected earthquake probabilities and estimated casualties based on various risk scenarios. Additionally, universities supported the development of the Istanbul Earthquake Master Plan, an initiative led by Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality in collaboration with four Turkish universities, to create strategies for urban retrofitting, emergency response, and public awareness campaigns. Through these efforts, academic institutions contributed to evidence-based policymaking, capacity-building, and risk mitigation strategies, ensuring that Istanbul's resilience to future earthquakes is rooted in scientific knowledge and risk-informed urban planning.

Geoinformation System (GIS) - Based Decision-Support Systems

Universities have started to play a critical role in equipping local decision-makers with GIS-based decision-support systems, leveraging remote sensing and hazard mapping to enhance early warning systems and strengthen disaster mitigation efforts. Peking University applies GIS technologies in China’s rapid urbanisation projects, improving disaster response frameworks. Grenoble Alpes University focuses on Alpine climate risks. The University of Oxford researchers investigate flood risk modelling through its Environmental Change Institute, helping cities develop proactive mitigation strategies. Stanford University’s Urban Resilience Initiative uses GIS-based modelling to analyse seismic risks in California, providing data for emergency response planning. MIT’s Urban Risk Lab develops digital tools for mapping flood-prone areas and designing predictive analytics for disaster management. Harvard University’s Center for Geographic Analysis integrates GIS applications for urban heat mapping and flood resilience planning in Boston. In collaboration with the U.S. Department of Energy’s Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory, Princeton University has developed AI-driven flood prediction models for storm preparedness. Caltech’s Seismological Laboratory enhances earthquake resilience through real-time ground motion monitoring and the ShakeAlert system. Universities are at the forefront of advancing urban resilience by providing cutting-edge GIS-based tools and research that enable local decision-makers to better understand and mitigate risks, ultimately fostering more adaptive and sustainable urban environments.

GIS-based decision-support systems have become essential disaster preparedness and response tools, enabling more effective risk assessment and crisis management. Johnson (2003) developed a GIS Emergency Management System (GEMS) at the University of Redlands to enhance evacuation planning based on population density, identifying high-risk areas such as lecture halls and dormitories to optimise emergency response. The study emphasises the flexibility of GIS-based solutions, suggesting that similar applications could support emergency preparedness efforts in other communities, universities, or disaster-prone areas. Researchers at the University of Turin’s GeoSITLab developed and piloted SRG2, a mobile GIS application, to support early-warning and damage-assessment efforts for Hurricane Mitch, the Zambezi flood, landslides in Italy’s Aosta Valley, and seismic hazards in the NW Alps (Giardino et al., 2012). By coupling remote-sensing analytics with field training for local responders, the university demonstrated how academic innovation can directly strengthen multi-hazard preparedness and humanitarian relief. At the University of Turin’s GeoSITLab, developed and piloted SRG2 (stands for “Support to Geological / Geomorphological Surveys”), a mobile GIS tool, to support early-warning and damage-assessment efforts for Hurricane Mitch and Zambezi Flood, landslide mapping in Italy’s Aosta Valley, and seismic risk analysis in the NW Alps. By coupling remote-sensing analytics with field training for local responders, the university demonstrated how academic innovation can directly strengthen multi-hazard preparedness and humanitarian relief.

Universities are becoming key drivers of disaster risk reduction (DRR) by advancing scientific research, developing innovative technologies, and informing policy decisions. Izumi et al. (2019) investigated how science and technology can enhance DRR strategies and surveyed academia, government, NGOs, and the private sector to assess which DRR innovations are most impactful. The study found that community-based DRR emerged as the most favoured innovation, underscoring the significance of local participation and bottom-up approaches in disaster resilience. The research highlights that universities play a central role in DRR by generating research, developing new technologies, and shaping evidence-based policies. However, their impact remains limited unless scientific knowledge is effectively communicated and co-produced to influence decision-making. Therefore, strengthening collaboration between universities and local stakeholders is essential to translating scientific advancements into practical, community-driven resilience strategies.

Partnerships for Capacity Match

International experience demonstrates that universities can play a transformative role in strengthening the resilience of their hosting cities and towns. However, university transformation is only successful when other local institutions are capable of collaborating and evolving alongside the university. Even the most well-equipped universities may struggle to drive meaningful change alone if there is a lack of adequate commitment, partnership and engagement from local community partners.

The capacity of a region to effectively absorb and utilise knowledge generated by universities plays a crucial role in shaping its economic resilience and long-term growth. Florida (1999, p.71) emphasised that the region’s ability to absorb and utilise university-generated knowledge, or “regional absorptive capacity”, is critical. Collaborative initiatives involving universities, local governments, and private industry can increase such capacity and amplify the impact of university-generated knowledge on economic resilience. Seattle’s transition into a global tech hub, driven by Microsoft and supported by local universities, exemplifies how such synergy enables regions to recover rapidly from downturns (Wolman et al., 2017, p. 116). These examples underscore the vital role of collaboration with local governments and private industry in strengthening the absorptive capacity of a town or region.

Existing research often emphasises the university's contributions to community engagements but overlooks the reciprocal capabilities communities require to participate in the co-production of knowledge and development outcomes successfully. Drawing from strategic management and innovation systems literature, they introduced a model that explores how communities can build capabilities to utilise university knowledge for their development needs, emphasising the mutual value of engagement for both universities and communities (Petersen et al., 2022). By introducing the concept of “dynamic interactive capabilities” for communities, the authors expand the framework traditionally applied to firms and universities, highlighting the need for a co-evolved, mutually beneficial approach to university-community partnerships (Figure 1). The university's transformational power grows when universities and community partners can reflect, adapt, and reshape their intentions and actions beyond established institutional settings and technologies, with agency distributed through the newly created structures (Garud et al., 2007).

Figure 1. Community dynamic interactive capabilities framework. Source: Petersen et al., 2022, p. 897.

As shown in Figure 1, resource-poor communities and universities can create transformative partnerships when their distinct knowledge assets are deliberately aligned. Communities hold tacit “know-who” and market-specific “know-what,” while universities contribute scientific “know-why.” Effective engagement emerges when gaps are bridged through mentoring, incubation, and participatory projects. Four actor roles drive this process: skilled leaders who mobilise networks, community engagement champions who seize opportunities, NGOs/CBOs that translate research into practice, and intermediaries that coordinate actors - though intermediaries can also inhibit collaboration if motivated by politics. Institutional factors (local norms, trust, and rules) either support or block knowledge sharing, making a coordinated engagement strategy—ideally led by a neutral public intermediary—essential. Internal forums and town-hall meetings enable collective sense-making; external structures such as university hubs, service-learning, local procurement links, and community advisory committees provide repeated interactions that build social capital and circulate “know-how.” Alignment between university practices and local institutions is thus the critical pre-condition for resilient, mutually beneficial partnerships.

Capacity Change

Strengthening urban resilience requires innovative research and capacity change within local institutions to implement resilience strategies effectively. In this context, in partnership with local governments, universities offer joint training programs, certification courses, and continuing education initiatives to equip municipal officials, urban planners, and construction professionals with risk-sensitive development and retrofitting techniques. This ensures that building codes and climate-responsive regulations are effectively implemented and enforced. By supporting local governments, certified NGOs, and professional associations, universities play a vital role in strengthening urban resilience through knowledge transfer, skill development, and technical expertise, fostering long-term disaster mitigation and sustainable urban growth.

Cornell University (USA), the Institute for Advanced Studies of the University of Pavia (Italy), and the German Research Centre for Geosciences have contributed by developing risk assessment tools, providing technical expertise, and conducting resilience measurement studies to better understand community vulnerabilities in Chile, Ecuador, Peru, and Uruguay. Universities have also facilitated training programs for local stakeholders, including government authorities, to enhance their ability to implement disaster risk reduction methods. Moreover, they have promoted regional cooperation by building academic and professional networks, ensuring that knowledge and best practices in disaster resilience are shared across borders. By leveraging scientific research and advanced methodologies, universities have empowered communities with data-driven decision-making tools to reduce disaster risks and adapt to changing environmental conditions.

Universities and research organisations have also played a key role in strengthening disaster resilience in Batticaloa, Sri Lanka, by providing research support, training programs, and technical expertise to local disaster management efforts. Following the 2004 tsunami, Sri Lanka established the Disaster Management Centre and the District Disaster Management Coordinating Unit, which collaborates with universities to conduct workshops and training events for local officials, emergency responders, and community members. Universities have contributed by developing disaster management curricula, supporting early warning systems, and conducting risk assessments that help inform district and village-level disaster management plans. Their research has also supported livelihood development programs and community-led resilience initiatives, ensuring that disaster response strategies are tailored to local needs. Through partnerships with government agencies such as the National Building Research Organization and the Meteorological Department, universities have helped integrate scientific data into practical disaster mitigation policies. Universities are enhancing local preparedness, response coordination, and long-term resilience-building efforts in Batticaloa by fostering capacity-building and knowledge dissemination.

Critical Infrastructure

By fostering collaboration between academia, policymakers, and industry, universities help develop urban infrastructure to a new “critical” level, ensuring it is more adaptive, inclusive, resilient and sustainable. Critical infrastructure has become a focal point in research, policy, and political discourse due to growing concerns about its vulnerability to various threats, including the risk of terrorist attacks, disruptions caused by natural and human-induced disasters, and the increasing recognition of infrastructure interdependencies within complex urban systems. Steele et al. (2017) argue that critical infrastructure integrates human and environmental considerations and does not solely focus on infrastructure as a physical or economic asset. For example, in cities like Melbourne, water infrastructure serves multiple functions—ensuring access to clean drinking water for all communities, maintaining ecological flows in rivers and wetlands, and integrating Indigenous water rights and management practices. The definition of water infrastructure as “critical” in this case is limited to economic or security concerns but considers its role in human well-being, climate resilience, and environmental protection.

As infrastructure systems face increasing environmental, social, and technological pressures, university-led research and innovation play a key role in shaping policies and solutions that transcend traditional economic and security concerns. Universities actively participate in climate adaptation, contributing through innovations in infrastructure monitoring, policy guidance on climate resilience, and advancements in renewable energy integration, strengthening urban sustainability and energy security. The University of Cambridge’s Centre for Smart Infrastructure develops sensor-based monitoring systems for ageing urban infrastructure. Imperial College London’s Grantham Institute advises the UK government on infrastructure policies addressing climate adaptation. The University of Oxford collaborates with UK policymakers on adaptive infrastructure for climate variability and energy grid resilience. Princeton University’s Andlinger Center for Energy and the Environment studies the integration of renewable energy into urban grids.

Universities integrate research and collaborations in applying AI, sustainable mobility, and disaster-resistant technologies to enhance energy grids, transportation systems, and built environment resilience, strengthening cities against climate and seismic risks. MIT’s Sustainable Urbanization Lab works on AI-driven smart city infrastructure, focusing on resilient energy grids and transportation efficiency. Tsinghua University supports China’s smart city projects, integrating AI into urban transport systems. The University of Toronto collaborates with municipal authorities to improve Toronto’s transit resilience. The Technical University of Munich leads sustainable mobility and resilient transport network research. Stanford University partners with the City of San Francisco to enhance transportation networks and earthquake-resistant buildings. ETH Zurich’s Future Cities Laboratory designs green and resilient building technologies.[1] The University of Tokyo develops earthquake-proof housing prototypes.

Universities play a crucial role in providing accessible green spaces, and the study highlights the broader implications of campus environments on community health. The study by Lee at el. (2024) examined the relationship between green infrastructure and community health in three university towns in Texas, focusing on how campus green spaces influence campus users' physical and mental well-being (visitors to campus). The researchers used spatial error models, integrating data from SafeGraph mobility records, Landsat 8 satellite imagery, and CDC health status data to analyse the impact of green infrastructure on campus users' health. The findings suggest that green infrastructure significantly benefits mental and physical health. Increasing tree canopy coverage could be an effective strategy to enhance well-being, contributing to the public health of town residents and students.

Analysis of Interview Results

Concept of university town

Most interviewers understand the concept of a university town as a dynamic and multifaceted partnership between an academic institution and its surrounding community. Across all responses, university town development is consistently described as:

A partnership between the university and the surrounding community — most emphasise mutual benefit, shared growth, and co-creation.
Economically and culturally transformative — development is framed as a driver of local economic vitality, a hub for cultural exchange, and a space for education-led regeneration.
Strongly tied to place — there’s repeated mention of the mountain community context and the unique geographical and cultural setting.

A clear consensus emerges that university town development is not merely the presence of a university in each location, but the creation of a mutually beneficial ecosystem where education, research, and local life intersect. As one contributor noted: ‘UCA has positioned itself as a catalyst for urban and rural regeneration’. Another stressed the importance of connection: ‘The university should not become isolated and alienated from the community’. All agree that: 'University town development means… people should have a sense of belonging to the community where they live and work'. The framing of the development of a university town as an ongoing, strategic process rather than a one-time project requires the UCA management to strategically focus on strengthening the University Town Development division's expert capacity to create and sustain mutually beneficial partnerships between academics and the town community.

A recurring theme is the transformative potential of partnerships between universities and the town community. Participants consistently emphasise the mutual relationship, mentioning that the university serves as both an economic driver and a cultural catalyst. For some, the university town is seen as a hub that stimulates local businesses, creates employment opportunities, and attracts investment, placing the most significant importance on economic development. Others stress cultural enrichment, seeing the university town as a space for diversity, creativity, and community life. Only a smaller number mentioned primary focus on education and research, presenting the town as an extension of the academic mission. This signals the current gap in how the town could benefit from increased access to knowledge, research, and training, as well as how the university may be turned into a living laboratory for applied learning and community engagement.

References to mountain communities highlight the role of place in shaping development priorities. Here, university town development encompasses not only economic growth but also environmental stewardship, land use planning, and preservation of local traditions. Some definitions focus on specific, tangible activities—such as sustainable agriculture or infrastructure improvements—while others adopt a broader, more conceptual framing, describing the town as a shared social and intellectual space. Whether viewed through an economic, cultural, environmental or educational lens, the UCA staff's interpretation of the concept of university town reflects a deep belief in the potential of higher education to shape not only minds but also the places and futures of town residents. The data present the university town as a place of intentional integration, where the boundaries between academic and community life are blurred in pursuit of shared progress in strengthening mountain towns’ economic resilience.

University Impact

The perception of the university’s impact is diverse, including both tangible and intangible changes, reflecting several key areas of town development:

Investment in urban infrastructure
Knowledge extension by providing educational opportunities
Research for local development
Students’ engagement
Community engagement

From the moment the remote mountain towns of Khorog, Naryn, and Tekeli were selected as host locations for an international university, the trajectory of their development began to shift. The construction of facilities for the SPCE schools and UCA campuses marked the first significant investment in brand-new, high-quality urban infrastructure that meets high international standards. Interviewers consistently described the university’s campus and facilities as a showcase of excellence, as it sets a new benchmark for design, quality, and ambition in the town. The university’s investments in urban infrastructure were followed by improvements to public parks, pedestrian areas, and shared urban spaces, reshaping the town’s safety, accessibility, and aesthetic appeal. Lighting upgrades and street renovations enhanced mobility, safety, and the overall appearance of the town, making it more welcoming for both residents, students and town visitors. Investments have included large-scale tree planting and the creation of green spaces. As one participant recounted: ‘We planted 2,100 trees around the campus… now this place has become green and pleasant’. These visible town transformations driven by the UCA investments in urban infrastructure attracted attention from other development aid agencies and national governments, which began directing their development funding to these towns.

Most respondents state that the university’s influence on education refers to the SPCE’s role in expanding access to high-quality learning, with programs tailored to local needs. As one staff member explained, “We developed over 600 different types of courses, tailored to the needs of the community”. A participant reflected on the results: “People started to remain in the community and not move away, because they saw opportunities here.” The university has supported local schools: “We worked with local schools… held competitions, invited students to visit our campus, and showed them what’s possible.” A faculty member proudly stated, “We have established geology laboratories in Khorog… focused on geology, hydrology, IT and economics”, aligning academic resources with regional development priorities. Over time, these capacity-building efforts have expanded beyond residents and students to include local decision-makers such as civil servants. Initiatives like the NURP illustrate how UCA’s expertise can directly contribute to better urban management by supplying municipal leaders with modern tools such as GIS mapping, evidence-based and strategic planning. However, respondents noted UCA could further increase the capacity of existing small businesses to grow, diversify, and strengthen the local economy. There is a need to find better paths for guiding UCA graduates into local leadership positions, ensuring a pipeline of skilled professionals in town planning, infrastructure development, and public administration.

Some participants noted that UCA has recently begun to place more emphasis on research with direct local impact and to involve community members in its cultural and social activities. Cultural events, workshops, and public lectures have brought together residents, faculty, and students, fostered social cohesion and offered spaces for dialogue and exchange. For many, these experiences create a stronger sense of identity and belonging. One participant reflected on the practical focus of research: “We have some brilliant academics… they’re also deeply connected to solving the problems of the region.” Examples of ongoing studies with local value around agriculture range from improving crop yields to managing natural resources. Still, more should be done to ensure that the created knowledge is translated into practice to benefit town development. Interviewees stressed that while participation in events is valuable, interaction between residents and the university community could be more collaborative and sustained. Rather than only inviting residents to attend cultural programs or public talks, there is an opportunity to involve them from the earliest stages — jointly planning, designing, and implementing both research initiatives and community projects. A significant gap remains in fully harnessing the potential of research to address the most pressing local development challenges. The university’s research could be more localised, tackling local development issues such as environmental management and economic diversification.

Many respondents highlight the way the university equips students with both hard and soft skills relevant to regional needs. Capacity-building investments — such as improved curricula and better-trained faculty — are seen as essential to producing capable graduates. Exchange programs and campus events foster intercultural understanding and open-mindedness. As one person noted, “When you hear people wanting access to our resources, you feel proud… it means we have something worth sharing.” Students are active participants in environmental and social initiatives. One example comes from a student-led recycling effort: ‘We hand all of this in for recycling and exchange it for new stationery supplies’. Students engage in research that directly addresses local issues, fulfilling the institution’s vision as a “research university… [where] students are engaged in inquiry from early on”. However, some respondents point out gaps in student readiness: “They don’t think they have got enough research experience — this needs to start earlier.” While the university’s engagement model is strong, some participants expressed concern that students still lack early exposure to research and practical work. Strengthening these pathways requires planning specific capacity building and students’ engagement to increase their inputs in shaping the future of town communities.

The university’s stakeholder engagement extends beyond town borders. As one administrator explained: ‘We engaged with public universities in Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Pakistan and Afghanistan to strengthen higher education in these mountain-based institutions, to ensure that such educational development also contributes to the socio-economic advancement of the surrounding mountain communities.’ Trust-building emerges as a recurring theme. Partnerships with municipal authorities and community leaders are described as increasingly strong. However, participants also identified areas for improvement, particularly in follow-up and sustained engagement. One interviewee suggested: ‘We need to… hold those meetings through which we strengthen our coordination and accountability.’ As one participant described: ‘We work closely with local self-government… giving them a role in decision-making and implementation.’ Several participants emphasised the importance of stakeholders contributing resources — whether land, infrastructure, or expertise — to reinforce a sense of joint responsibility: ‘We need close collaboration with local authorities… it creates a sense of ownership when they invest as well.’ This can be summed up in a remark: ‘We are always open to cooperation… but no one should think it will happen without mutual benefit.’ The interviews portray stakeholder engagement as a cornerstone of university town development, requiring a deliberate effort to foster more horizontal collaboration. This involves engaging municipal authorities, local entrepreneurs, educators, and civil society as equal partners, making the town development process more inclusive and adaptive.

Future Vision of University Town Development

Interviews reveal a shared vision on the value of the university as a knowledge institution to shape town residents' vision, lifestyle, and behaviour. One respondent summed this up: ‘There’s a life, an energy that comes with establishing a university in a small town — it changes how people think about their future.’ There is an expectation that the university will continue to lead in attracting investment and resources for urban development. A participant advised: ‘Start with some projects… which will bring resources into the town and demonstrate the growth potential.’ Respondents emphasised the importance of aligning UCA’s development agenda with local development aspirations, highlighting the need for collaboration and a shared vision to sustain progress. A few participants stressed that the transformation should start early, with investment in educational pathways that begin well before university. As one said, ‘I would advise starting with kindergartens… to show that education is a value.’ This reflects a long-term approach where the entire local education ecosystem aligns with the university’s presence. One respondent envisioned: ‘In 10–15 years, Naryn could become like a US university town where the university shapes the identity of the town.’ This includes creating spaces and events that make the university a central part of everyday life for residents and visitors.

The most comprehensive visions combine education, community services, and social activities into an integrated model. As one participant summarised: ‘Integrated education-service-community development is the way to create a real university town.’ This means that learning, living, and leisure are seamlessly interconnected, enhancing both the student and resident experience. A strong emphasis was placed on designing towns that encourage community interaction and shared experiences. As one participant described, “Green spaces… people come together, discuss, share ideas — this is what makes a university town vibrant.” Such spaces are seen as critical to building both a welcoming environment and a sense of intellectual and cultural exchange. The vision also incorporates economic development, with universities acting as hubs for tourism and business. One participant recalled: ‘There was a plan for touristic infrastructure… to make the town more attractive to visitors and students alike.’ Achieving envisioned transformation requires careful planning, investment in both physical and social infrastructure, and an ongoing commitment to aligning university and community priorities.

The interviews reveal that resilience planning is increasingly recognised as a critical component of the university’s role in strengthening hosting towns. Several respondents emphasised the importance of resilient infrastructure. One participant noted with pride: ‘Our SPCE building… models of that are being replicated for future construction to withstand natural disasters.’ This emphasis on structural safety not only protects students and staff but also sets a standard for the wider community. As one suggested: ‘It should not be that difficult… to get engagement from our researchers in forecasting and mitigation work.’ There is a belief that UCA could emulate global best practices, learning from institutions that lead in disaster preparedness. As one participant put it: ‘We must work more closely with emergency response services and learn from best practices like US universities, which lead in disaster preparedness.’ Participants mentioned renewable energy systems, waste management, and eco-friendly practices as part of the preparedness agenda. As one staff member highlighted: ‘We have solar stations… this helps us save energy and be more independent.’ Real-life crises have underscored the urgency of this work: “Heavy rain… about 60 houses were damaged… lack of preparedness made the recovery longer and more costly.” These events serve as reminders that resilience is not only about planning but also about rapid, coordinated action. However, one academic shared a frustration: ‘Sometimes we are not allowed to research certain environmental risks — yet we have the expertise that could help.’ This reflects a need for stronger collaboration between the university, local government, and emergency agencies.

References

Abdul-Rahman, M. (2022). A community resilience assessment framework for university towns.

Abdul-Rahman, M., Alade, W., & Anwer, S. (2023). A Composite Resilience Index (CRI) for Developing Resilience and Sustainability in University Towns. Sustainability, 15(4), 3057.

Breznitz, S. M. (2014). The fountain of knowledge: The role of universities in economic development. Stanford University Press.

Brundenius, C., Lundvall, B. Å., & Sutz, J. (2009). The role of universities in innovation systems in developing countries: developmental university systems–empirical, analytical and normative perspectives. In Handbook of innovation systems and developing countries. Edward Elgar Publishing.

Darko, R., & Halseth, G. (2023). Mobilizing through local agency to support place-based economic transition: A case study of Tumbler Ridge, BC. The Extractive Industries and Society, 15, 101313.

Eesley, C. E., & Miller, W. F. (2018). Impact: Stanford University’s economic impact via innovation and entrepreneurship. Foundations and Trends in Entrepreneurship, 14(2), 130–278. https://doi.org/10.1561/0300000074

Faoziah, S. (2022). The Role of Universities in Increasing Social and Economic Resilience through the Community Empowerment Program in Cirebon City. International Journal of Science and Society (IJSOC), 4(3), 513-541.

Florida, R. (1999). The role of the university: leveraging talent, not technology.” Issues in Science and Technology 15, no. 4.

Fritsch, M., & Slavtchev, V. (2007). Universities and innovation in space. Industry and innovation, 14(2), 201-218.

Garud, R., Hardy, C., and Maguire, S. (2007) ‘Institutional Entrepreneurship as Embedded Agency: An Introduction to the Special Issue’, Organization Studies, 28: 957–69.

Giardino, M., Perotti, L., Lanfranco, M., & Perrone, G. (2012). GIS and geomatics for disaster management and emergency relief: a proactive response to natural hazards. Applied Geomatics, 4, 33-46.

Hershberg, E., Nabeshima, K., & Yusuf, S. (2007). Opening the ivory tower to business: University–industry linkages and the development of knowledge-intensive clusters in Asian cities. World development, 35(6), 931-940.

Iammarino, S., & Marinelli, E. (2015). Education–Job (mis)match and interregional migration: Italian university graduates' transition to work. Regional Studies, 49(5), 866–882

Izumi, T., Shaw, R., Djalante, R., Ishiwatari, M., & Komino, T. (2019). Disaster risk reduction and innovations. Progress in Disaster Science, 2, 100033.

Johnson, K. (2003). GIS emergency management for the University of Redlands. In ESRI international user conference.

Lee, R. J., Xu, Z., Newman, G., Lee, C., Song, Y., Sohn, W., ... & Ding, Y. (2024). Green infrastructure and community health: Exploring the characteristics of campus users in three university towns in Texas. Cities & Health, 1-14.

Ljubenović, M., Bogdanović-Protić, I., Mitković, P., Igić, M., & Đekić, J. (2020). Building resilience through creative strategies in small post-socialist shrinking towns. ICUP2020, 205.

Petersen, I. H., Kruss, G., & van Rheede, N. (2022). Strengthening the university third mission through building community capabilities alongside university capabilities. Science and Public Policy, 49(6), 890-904.

Roberts, E. B., & Eesley, C. E. (2011). Entrepreneurial impact: The role of MIT. Foundations and Trends® in Entrepreneurship, 7(1–2), 1–149. https://doi.org/10.1561/0300000030

Steele, W., Hussey, K., & Dovers, S. (2017). What’s critical about critical infrastructure?. Urban Policy and Research, 35(1), 74-86.

Wolman, H., Wial, H., Clair, T. S., & Hill, E. (2017). Coping with adversity: Regional economic resilience and public policy. Cornell University Press.