Analyzes recovery outcomes in land systems after the Palu earthquake, suggesting a multi-faceted resilience framework.
Post-disaster recovery is increasingly understood not as a simple return to pre-event conditions but as a dynamic reorganization of land systems, in which land cover and land use change (LCLUC) provides an operational signature of recovery trajectories. However, most existing assessments reduce recovery to a single dimension—typically vegetation greenness—which can conflate systems that differ fundamentally in their response behavior. This study develops a multi-index Recovery Resilience Index for Land Systems (RRI-LS) within Google Earth Engine and applies it to the catastrophic liquefaction zone of the 2018 Mw 7.5 Palu earthquake (Central Sulawesi, Indonesia). Combining Sentinel-2 spectral indices (NDVI, NDBI, BSI), Dynamic World land-cover labels, and a hybrid Top-of-Atmosphere/Surface-Reflectance baseline to overcome the sparse pre-event archive, we quantify three resilience dimensions—resistance, recovery, and stability—and classify recovery into qualitatively distinct pathways. The hybrid baseline is quantitatively validated: after removing a small systematic offset, the residual discrepancy between TOA- and SR-derived indices is 2.4–4.9 times smaller than the measured disturbance signal. Site-level analysis of the three principal liquefaction hotspots (Balaroa, Petobo, Jono-Oge) and a 1 km grid expansion (n = 962 cells) reveal that disturbance-affected areas did not converge on a single outcome but diverged into bounce-back, transformational, reconstructed (non-vegetated), and degraded pathways; a basin-wide re-run at 250 m (n = 14,157 cells) reproduced the same pathway hierarchy, confirming robustness to grid resolution. Initial disturbance intensity was a poor predictor of long-term recovery (R2 = 0.07, p < 0.001), underscoring that recovery is multidimensional and not reducible to a single shock variable. The emergence of a reconstructed, non-vegetated pathway—where bare-soil disturbance is resolved through built surfaces rather than re-greening—demonstrates that vegetation metrics alone are insufficient in human-dominated landscapes. The framework supports a land-system perspective in which recovery is conceptualized as the establishment of new functional equilibria.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lee et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: