Background: Urban resilience scholarship is undergoing a fundamental paradigm shift, moving beyond anthropocentric frameworks that position human welfare as the sole measure of success and technology as a neutral instrument. Conventional resilience models remain anchored in anthropocentric assumptions that treat non-human ecological agents and artificial intelligence (AI) as passive instruments rather than co-constitutive participants in urban adaptive capacity. In this conceptual paper, I advance the theoretical understanding of post-anthropocentric co-resilience by reconceptualizing cities as hybrid assemblages where humans, non-human species, ecological processes, and AI function as interconnected agents within a unified system. Drawing on a synthesis of Social-Ecological-Technological Systems (SETS) theory, complexity science, posthumanist philosophy, and emerging scholarship on algorithmic governance, I developed a novel Triadic Co-Resilience Framework that identifies three mutually constitutive dimensions of urban adaptive capacity: biophysical, sociotechnical, and cybernetic. Methods: A thematic literature synthesis was conducted across Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar, covering publications from 2015 to 2024. Sources were selected through systematic searching and citation tracking, with inclusion criteria requiring direct engagement with at least two of the three framework dimensions. Thirty-seven sources were retained for detailed coding and thematic analysis, organized around four analytic themes: Paradigm shifts, distributed agency, ethics and governance, and systemic fragility. Results: The analysis revealed that conventional resilience approaches systematically underestimate the contributions and vulnerabilities introduced by non-human actors, particularly as AI systems assume increasingly autonomous roles in urban sensing, decision-making, and resource allocation. Rather than enhancing resilience uniformly, AI integration can amplify systemic fragility when divorced from ecological and ethical co-resilience principles. I identified a paradox of artificial resilience, in which AI integration can simultaneously enhance and undermine urban adaptive capacity depending on whether ecological and ethical co-resilience principles are maintained. Conclusions: In this paper, I articulate a prioritized research agenda focused on operationalizing distributed agency, developing systemic accountability mechanisms for hybrid systems, and integrating multispecies justice into urban governance. Key priorities include empirical case studies in diverse urban contexts (including cities in the Global South with limited technological infrastructure), experimental governance pilots, and the development of measurable co-resilience indicators. This work contributes to sustainability science by providing conceptual tools for designing urban systems that can adapt, transform, and thrive as genuinely collaborative human-nonhuman-artificial endeavors.
Citation: Babu George. Post-anthropocentric sustainable urban resilience: Reframing cities as human-nonhuman-artificial co-resilient systems[J]. Urban Resilience and Sustainability, 2026, 4(1): 64-85. doi: 10.3934/urs.2026005
Background: Urban resilience scholarship is undergoing a fundamental paradigm shift, moving beyond anthropocentric frameworks that position human welfare as the sole measure of success and technology as a neutral instrument. Conventional resilience models remain anchored in anthropocentric assumptions that treat non-human ecological agents and artificial intelligence (AI) as passive instruments rather than co-constitutive participants in urban adaptive capacity. In this conceptual paper, I advance the theoretical understanding of post-anthropocentric co-resilience by reconceptualizing cities as hybrid assemblages where humans, non-human species, ecological processes, and AI function as interconnected agents within a unified system. Drawing on a synthesis of Social-Ecological-Technological Systems (SETS) theory, complexity science, posthumanist philosophy, and emerging scholarship on algorithmic governance, I developed a novel Triadic Co-Resilience Framework that identifies three mutually constitutive dimensions of urban adaptive capacity: biophysical, sociotechnical, and cybernetic. Methods: A thematic literature synthesis was conducted across Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar, covering publications from 2015 to 2024. Sources were selected through systematic searching and citation tracking, with inclusion criteria requiring direct engagement with at least two of the three framework dimensions. Thirty-seven sources were retained for detailed coding and thematic analysis, organized around four analytic themes: Paradigm shifts, distributed agency, ethics and governance, and systemic fragility. Results: The analysis revealed that conventional resilience approaches systematically underestimate the contributions and vulnerabilities introduced by non-human actors, particularly as AI systems assume increasingly autonomous roles in urban sensing, decision-making, and resource allocation. Rather than enhancing resilience uniformly, AI integration can amplify systemic fragility when divorced from ecological and ethical co-resilience principles. I identified a paradox of artificial resilience, in which AI integration can simultaneously enhance and undermine urban adaptive capacity depending on whether ecological and ethical co-resilience principles are maintained. Conclusions: In this paper, I articulate a prioritized research agenda focused on operationalizing distributed agency, developing systemic accountability mechanisms for hybrid systems, and integrating multispecies justice into urban governance. Key priorities include empirical case studies in diverse urban contexts (including cities in the Global South with limited technological infrastructure), experimental governance pilots, and the development of measurable co-resilience indicators. This work contributes to sustainability science by providing conceptual tools for designing urban systems that can adapt, transform, and thrive as genuinely collaborative human-nonhuman-artificial endeavors.
| [1] |
Sharifi A (2023) Resilience of urban social-ecological-technological systems (SETS): A review. Sustain Cities Soc 99: 104910. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2023.104910 doi: 10.1016/j.scs.2023.104910
|
| [2] |
Meerow S, Newell JP, Stults M (2016) Defining urban resilience: A review. Landscape Urban Plann 147: 38–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2015.11.011 doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2015.11.011
|
| [3] |
Shi Y, Zhai G, Xu L, et al. (2021) Assessment methods of urban system resilience: From the perspective of complex adaptive system theory. Cities 112: 103141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2021.103141 doi: 10.1016/j.cities.2021.103141
|
| [4] |
Datola G (2023) Implementing urban resilience in urban planning: A comprehensive framework for urban resilience evaluation. Sustain Cities Soc 98: 104821. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2023.104821 doi: 10.1016/j.scs.2023.104821
|
| [5] |
Sharifi A, Khavarian-Garmsir AR (2020) The COVID-19 pandemic: Impacts on cities and major lessons for urban planning, design, and management. Sci Total Environ 749: 142391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.142391 doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.142391
|
| [6] |
Sharifi A (2020) Urban resilience assessment: Mapping knowledge structure and trends. Sustainability 12: 5918. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12155918 doi: 10.3390/su12155918
|
| [7] |
Kapucu N, Ge Y, Rott E, et al. (2024) Urban resilience: Multidimensional perspectives, challenges and prospects for future research. Urban Governance 4: 162–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ugj.2024.09.003 doi: 10.1016/j.ugj.2024.09.003
|
| [8] |
Asadzadeh A, Khavarian-Garmsir AR, Sharifi A, et al. (2022) Transformative resilience: An overview of its structure, evolution, and trends. Sustainability 14: 15267. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142215267 doi: 10.3390/su142215267
|
| [9] |
Zhang X, Li H (2018) Urban resilience and urban sustainability: What we know and what do not know? Cities 72: 141–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2017.08.009 doi: 10.1016/j.cities.2017.08.009
|
| [10] |
Liu HY, Jay M, Chen X (2021) The role of nature-based solutions for improving environmental quality, health and well-being. Sustainability 13: 10950. https://doi.org/10.3390/su131910950 doi: 10.3390/su131910950
|
| [11] |
Wang H, Liu Z, Zhou Y (2023) Assessing urban resilience in China from the perspective of socioeconomic and ecological sustainability. Environ Impact Assess Rev 102: 107163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2023.107163 doi: 10.1016/j.eiar.2023.107163
|
| [12] |
Amirzadeh M, Sobhaninia S, Sharifi A (2022) Urban resilience: A vague or an evolutionary concept? Sustain Cities Soc 81: 103853. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2022.103853 doi: 10.1016/j.scs.2022.103853
|
| [13] |
Buyukozkan G, Ilıcak O, Feyzioglu O (2022) A review of urban resilience literature. Sustain Cities Soc 77: 103579. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2021.103579 doi: 10.1016/j.scs.2021.103579
|
| [14] |
Nishant R, Kennedy M, Corbett J (2020) Artificial intelligence for sustainability: Challenges, opportunities, and a research agenda. Int J Inf Manage 53: 102104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102104 doi: 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102104
|
| [15] |
Therias A, Rafiee A (2023) City digital twins for urban resilience. Int J Digital Earth 16: 4164–4190. https://doi.org/10.1080/17538947.2023.2264827 doi: 10.1080/17538947.2023.2264827
|
| [16] |
Anwar MR, Sakti LD (2024) Integrating artificial intelligence and environmental science for sustainable urban planning. IAIC Trans Sustain Digit 5: 179–191. https://doi.org/10.34306/itsdi.v5i2.666 doi: 10.34306/itsdi.v5i2.666
|
| [17] |
Sharifi A (2020) Co-benefits and synergies between urban climate change mitigation and adaptation measures: A literature review. Sci Total Environ 750: 141642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.141642 doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.141642
|
| [18] |
Okonta DE, Vukovic V (2024) Smart cities software applications for sustainability and resilience. Heliyon 10: e32654. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e32654 doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e32654
|
| [19] |
Allam Z, Sharifi A, Bibri S E, et al. (2022) The metaverse as a virtual form of smart cities: Opportunities and challenges for environmental, economic, and social sustainability in urban futures. Smart Cities 5: 771–801. https://doi.org/10.3390/smartcities5030040 doi: 10.3390/smartcities5030040
|
| [20] |
Masnavi MR, Gharai F, Hajibandeh M (2018) Exploring urban resilience thinking for its application in urban planning: A review of literature. Int J Environ Sci Technol 16: 567–582. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-018-1860-2 doi: 10.1007/s13762-018-1860-2
|
| [21] |
Ungar M (2018) Systemic resilience: Principles and processes for a science of change in contexts of adversity. Ecol Soc 23: 34. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-10385-230434 doi: 10.5751/ES-10385-230434
|
| [22] |
Croce S, Vettorato D (2021) Urban surface uses for climate resilient and sustainable cities: A catalogue of solutions. Sustain Cities Soc 75: 103313. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2021.103313 doi: 10.1016/j.scs.2021.103313
|
| [23] |
Kirimtat A, Krejcar O, Kertesz A, et al. (2020) Future trends and current state of smart city concepts: A survey. IEEE Access 8: 86448–86467. https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2020.2992441 doi: 10.1109/access.2020.2992441
|
| [24] | Gómez-Baggethun E, Gren Å, Barton DN, et al. (2021) Urban ecosystem services, In: Urbanization, Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services: Challenges and Opportunities: A Global Assessment, Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 175–251. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7088-1_11 |
| [25] |
Albino V, Berardi U, Dangelico RM (2015) Smart cities: Definitions, dimensions, performance, and initiatives. J Urban Technol 22: 3–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/10630732.2014.942092 doi: 10.1080/10630732.2014.942092
|
| [26] | George B, Williams A, Henthorne T, et al. (2026) Beyond automation: AGI's impact on strategy, sustainability, and the changing nature of work, In: Transformative Cloud Computing, IoT and Extended Reality: Applications for Smart Cities, Education, Healthcare, Industry and Business, Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland, 29–51. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-032-03554-7_2 |
| [27] |
Blay-Palmer A, Santini G, Halliday J, et al. (2021) City region food systems: Building resilience to COVID-19 and other shocks. Sustainability 13: 1325. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13031325 doi: 10.3390/su13031325
|
| [28] |
Wolfram M, Frantzeskaki N (2016) Cities and systemic change for sustainability: Prevailing epistemologies and an emerging research agenda. Sustainability 8: 144. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8020144 doi: 10.3390/su8020144
|
| [29] |
Bittencourt JCN, Costa DG, Portugal P, et al. (2024) A survey on adaptive smart urban systems. IEEE Access 12: 102826–102850. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3433381 doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3433381
|
| [30] |
Huang G, Li D, Zhu X, et al. (2021) Influencing factors and their influencing mechanisms on urban resilience in China. Sustain Cities Soc 74: 103210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2021.103210 doi: 10.1016/j.scs.2021.103210
|
| [31] |
Hong G, Liu S, Liu W, et al. (2024) Nonlinear trade-off relationship and critical threshold between ecosystem services and climate resilience for sustainable urban development. Sustain Cities Soc 103: 105253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2024.105253 doi: 10.1016/j.scs.2024.105253
|
| [32] |
Feng X, Zeng F, Loo BPY, et al. (2024) The evolution of urban ecological resilience: An evaluation framework based on vulnerability, sensitivity and self-organization. Sustain Cities Soc 116: 105933. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2024.105933 doi: 10.1016/j.scs.2024.105933
|
| [33] |
Singh S, Sharma PK, Yoon B, et al. (2020) Convergence of blockchain and artificial intelligence in IoT network for the sustainable smart city. Sustain Cities Soc 63: 102364. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2020.102364 doi: 10.1016/j.scs.2020.102364
|
| [34] |
Lin C, Chen R, Wang B, et al. (2024) Evaluating resilience and enhancing strategies for old urban communities amidst epidemic challenges. Habitat Int 153: 103187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2024.103187 doi: 10.1016/j.habitatint.2024.103187
|
| [35] |
Alahi MEE, Sukkuea A, Tina FW, et al. (2023) Integration of IoT-enabled technologies and artificial intelligence (AI) for smart city scenario: Recent advancements and future trends. Sensors 23: 5206. https://doi.org/10.3390/s23115206 doi: 10.3390/s23115206
|
| [36] |
Agboola OP, Tunay M (2023) Urban resilience in the digital age: The influence of information-communication technology for sustainability. J Cleaner Prod 428: 139304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.139304 doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.139304
|
| [37] |
Ye X, Du J, Han Y, et al. (2022) Developing human-centered urban digital twins for community infrastructure resilience: A research agenda. J Plan Lit 38: 187–199. https://doi.org/10.1177/08854122221137861 doi: 10.1177/08854122221137861
|
| [38] |
Cousins JJ (2021) Justice in nature-based solutions: Research and pathways. Ecol Econ 180: 106874. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2020.106874 doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2020.106874
|
| [39] |
Bibri SE, Krogstie J (2017) Smart sustainable cities of the future: An extensive interdisciplinary literature review. Sustain Cities Soc 31: 183–212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2017.02.016 doi: 10.1016/j.scs.2017.02.016
|
| [40] |
George B (2025) Blockchain-based land tenure systems: A conceptual model for using decentralized technologies in managing land rights and ownership disputes. Land Manage Util 1: 32–48. https://doi.org/10.54963/lmu.v1i2.1527 doi: 10.54963/lmu.v1i2.1527
|
| [41] |
Chaitanya AV, Swain SK, George B (2026) Managing economic leakages for building resilient and sustainable tourism destination performance. Tourism 74: 22–44. https://doi.org/10.37741/t.74.1.2 doi: 10.37741/t.74.1.2
|
| [42] |
George B, Ravola M (2024) Cultivating sustainable health in the rural Mississippi: A need study for green economic developmental initiatives through the SNAP-Ed program. New Countryside 3: 1–21. https://doi.org/10.55121/nc.v3i2.176 doi: 10.55121/nc.v3i2.176
|
| [43] |
Markose N, Vazhakkatte Tazhathethil B, George B (2022) Sustainability initiatives for green tourism development: The case of Wayanad, India. J Risk Financ Manage 15: 52. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm15020052 doi: 10.3390/jrfm15020052
|
| [44] |
Dushkova D, Ivlieva O (2024) Empowering communities to act for a change: A review of the community empowerment programs towards sustainability and resilience. Sustainability 16: 8700. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16198700 doi: 10.3390/su16198700
|
| [45] |
Allan M, Rajabifard A, Foliente G (2024) Climate resilient urban regeneration and SDG 11—stakeholders' view on pathways and digital infrastructures. Int J Digital Earth 17: 2385076. https://doi.org/10.1080/17538947.2024.2385076 doi: 10.1080/17538947.2024.2385076
|
| [46] |
Chen H, Zhou R, Chen H, et al. (2022) Static and dynamic resilience assessment for sustainable urban transportation systems: A case study of Xi'an, China. J Cleaner Prod 368: 133237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.133237 doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.133237
|
| [47] |
Shamsipour A, Jahanshahi S, Mousavi SS, et al. (2024) Assessing and mapping urban ecological resilience using the loss-gain approach: A case study of Tehran, Iran. Sustain Cities Soc 103: 105252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2024.105252 doi: 10.1016/j.scs.2024.105252
|
| [48] |
Sharifi A (2019) Resilient urban forms: A macro-scale analysis. Cities 85: 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2018.11.023 doi: 10.1016/j.cities.2018.11.023
|
| [49] |
Chelleri L, Schuetze T, Salvati L (2015) Integrating resilience with urban sustainability in neglected neighborhoods: Challenges and opportunities of transitioning to decentralized water management in Mexico City. Habitat Int 48: 122–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2015.03.016 doi: 10.1016/j.habitatint.2015.03.016
|
| [50] |
Singhania O, Swain SK, George B (2022) Interdependence and complementarity between rural development and rural tourism: A bibliometric analysis. Rural Soc 31: 15–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/10371656.2022.2062198 doi: 10.1080/10371656.2022.2062198
|
Babu George. Post-anthropocentric sustainable urban resilience: Reframing cities as human-nonhuman-artificial co-resilient systems[J]. Urban Resilience and Sustainability, 2026, 4(1): 64-85. doi: 10.3934/urs.2026005
DownLoad: