Urban mobility infrastructure preservation and resilience: an agenda-setting study of cross-domain interdependencies

Urban mobility infrastructure preservation and resilience are not determined by any single sector but emerge from interdependencies across infrastructure, social, and institutional systems. This agenda-setting study is, to our knowledge, among the earlier reviews to treat urban mobility infrastructure resilience as an emergent, cross-domain property rather than a transport- or hazard-specific attribute. We synthesise 123 Q1 studies (2015–2025) in a PRISMA-guided, top-down evidence study, using a cross-system extraction schema to unify (i) a five-pathway taxonomy of interdependencies (Physical, Informational/cyber-physical, Behavioural/spatial, Economic/financial, Institutional/governance), (ii) Engineering / Adaptive / Transformative (E/A/T) mechanism classes that shape infrastructure preservation, and (iii) equity outcomes (exposure, access, agency) within a decision-oriented, PESTLE-informed frame. Findings show recurrent cascades linking transport–energy–ICT, built environment–health–social, and governance–finance–legal systems that shape the performance and preservation of mobility infrastructure under stress and during planned works. Governance capacity, policy timing, and data-sharing authority are recurrent influences on both recovery performance and distributional effects, and equity consistently functions as a system requirement. We identify quantitative regularities that suggest candidate benchmark families (e.g. recovery-time parameters T₉₀ / Trec , percolation-style network criticality patterns; not pooled owing to indicator heterogeneity), alongside gaps in causal identification, metric harmonisation, and Global South coverage. Across stress types, resilience measures follow a recurring three-phase sequence: immediate stabilisation and redundancy (Engineering), functional and behavioural reallocation (Adaptive), and codified structural or governance reconfiguration (Transformative). When transformative changes are formalised (e.g. permanent right-of-way reform, dual-restoration protocols, resilience-linked finance), they may be interpreted as transformative resilience with antifragile potential , that is, durable capability gains beyond pre-shock baselines without externalising risk. We conclude with an agenda-setting, practitioner-facing portfolio heuristic and a minimum indicator kit (recovery time, criticality thresholds, equity metrics) to support infrastructure preservation planning, cross-system investment appraisal, and equity-sensitive monitoring.