Mirella Estefania Salinas Romero

Este artículo propone un marco conceptual y metodológico para la evaluación sistemática de la resiliencia urbana transformadora en territorios latinoamericanos. A travésde una revisión bibliográfica y el análisis de cinco estudios de caso en México, Argentina, Perú, Colombia y Chile, se identifican cinco dimensiones clave: social, gobernanza, física, ambiental y económica. El estudio presenta una matriz comparativa de dimensiones que permite medir y comparar la resiliencia entre territorios con distintos niveles de vulnerabilidad y capacidad de adaptación. Los hallazgos subrayan el rol articulador de la dimensión social, la necesidad de enfoques participativos, y la importancia de la justicia territorial como base para políticas públicas resilientes e inclusivas.

Rapid urbanization and climate change have intensified flood risk and ecological degradation along urban riverfronts. Recent literature suggests that combining green and grey infrastructure can enhance resilience while delivering ecological and social co-benefits. This study analyzes and compares five riverfront projects in China and Spain, assessing how their tactic mixes operationalize three urban flood-resilience strategies—Resist, Delay, and Store/reuse—and how these mixes translate into ecological, social, and urban impacts. A six-phase framework was applied: (1) literature review; (2) case selection; (3) categorization of resilience strategies; (4) systematization and typification of tactics into green vs. grey infrastructure; (5) percentage analysis and qualitative matrices; and (6) comparative synthesis supported by an alluvial diagram. Across cases, Delay emerges as the structural backbone—via wetlands, terraces, vegetated buffers, and floodable spaces—while Resist is used selectively where exposure and erodibility require it. Store/reuse appears in targeted settings where operational capacity and water-quality standards enable circular use. The comparison highlights hybrid, safe-to-fail configurations that integrate public space, ecological restoration, and hydraulic performance. Effective urban riverfront resilience does not replace grey infrastructure but hybridizes it with nature-based solutions. Planning should prioritize Delay with green systems, add Resist where necessary, and enable Store/reuse when governance, operation and maintenance, and water quality permit, using iterative monitoring to adapt the green–grey mix over time.

Urban resilience has emerged as a critical paradigm for addressing the intertwined challenges of climate change, rapid urbanization, and social inequality, positioning green public spaces as catalysts for social, ecological, and institutional transformation. This article presents a systematic review conducted under the PRISMA 2020 guidelines, examining how collaborative and community participation influenced transformative urban resilience in green public spaces between 2021 and 2025. A total of 6179 records were initially identified across ScienceDirect and MDPI (last search: July 2025), of which 26 empirical studies met the inclusion criteria (peer-reviewed, empirical, published 2021–2025). Methodological rigor was strengthened through the application of the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT, 2018) and confidence in qualitative evidence was assessed using the GRADE-CERQual approach, enhancing transparency and reliability. Data extraction and synthesis followed a theoretical-methodological coding framework, allowing for the comparison of participatory strategies, typologies of green spaces, resilience dimensions, and applied instruments. The results show that multi-actor co-management, co-design, and community self-organization are the most frequent participatory strategies, while urban green infrastructure, pocket parks, and urban gardens constitute the predominant spatial contexts. Socio-ecological and social-participatory resilience emerged as dominant theoretical perspectives, with qualitative and mixed-methods designs prevailing across studies. Evidence synthesis through GRADE-CERQual identified seven key pathways—multi-actor co-management, Nature-based Solutions, community-based actions, social equity, cultural identity, institutional innovation, and planned densification—each contributing differently to resilience dimensions. Overall, the findings highlight that transformative resilience depends on deep, inclusive participatory processes, multi-level governance, and the integration of social, ecological, and cultural dimensions. Despite the heterogeneity of designs and unequal data adequacy, this review confirms that transformative urban resilience is a co-produced process grounded in community action, ecological sustainability, and collaborative governance. Strengthening underexplored areas—technological innovation, cultural resilience, and standardized methodological instruments—is essential for advancing comparative research and practice.

La presente investigación tiene como finalidad demostrar el nivel de calidad de una vivienda adecuada y las autoconstrucciones que han pasado por el proceso de consolidación en los asentamientos humanos e identificar una tipología de vivienda predominante para la evaluación de una calidad de vida. Esta búsqueda analizó un previo estudio del lugar, revisando conceptos y enfoques teóricos para el análisis correspondiente. Donde se registró dos variables; vivienda adecuada y autoconstrucción, bajo estas dos se estableció una correlación de independencia buscando el grado de nivel adecuado en la autoconstrucción consolidada de nuestro caso de estudio. Se trabajó con un muestreo de 6 familias del Asentamiento Humano 19 de mayo del distrito de Los Olivos ubicado en Lima Norte. Los resultados indican una deseada percepción de los criterios planteados en asesoría del diseño arquitectónico y espacial, con una diferencia significativa en diseño estructural y en diseño de especialidades; demostrando así una evaluación necesaria en dicha asesoría. En los demás criterios, demuestra en promedio óptimos resultados bajo los estándares adecuados de vivienda, pero señalar que existe un negativo en lo que refiere al entorno de las viviendas; una adecuación y oferta de actividades culturales que es necesario desarrollarlo para una calidad de vida. Finalmente, se hacen la recomendación de presentar una propuesta para evaluar la calidad de viviendas bajo el formato del cuestionario presentado y el desarrollo de una tipología con las características a considerar.