**6. Conclusions**

#### *6.1. Research Significance*

Enhancing urban resilience is critical for cities to withstand the rapidly changing world and potential disasters. This study compares the key elements of attentions for enhancing urban resilience among Singapore, Hong Kong and Hangzhou. The findings demonstrated that the three cities have varying elements of attentions in enhancing urban resilience despite many similarities. Singapore has taken the highest priority in the categories of *Green Building & Green Transportation*, *Community* and *Innovation* among the three cities. Hong Kong has taken the leading role in the categories of *Energy*, *Water*, *Material & Waste*, and *Environmental Planning* among the three cities. Hangzhou has taken the leading role only in the category of *Governance* among the three cities.

The findings demonstrated the similarity and difference between elements of attentions among the three cities, which are deeply rooted in the economic development and governance backgrounds. Therefore, we should be cautious when using a general framework or specific model derived from one case to conduct a comparative analysis of urban resilience. The localization of developing and measuring urban resilience is necessary while learning from international cases. Common key elements of attentions reminded the governmen<sup>t</sup> to learn from one another to find more useful measures to enhance urban resilience. Due attention should be paid to various elements of attentions generated based on the local conditions of each city. This research also provides a reference for other international comparisons.

#### *6.2. Limitations and Future Study*

Several limitations were observed in this paper. First, the findings were derived from data collected in 2015 and 2016. Although the comparison and uncovered reasons are worthwhile, progress has been made in the past five years around the world. Updated analysis and a comparison in the time series can be conducted to further deepen the understanding. In addition, the framework and elements of attentions for enhancing urban resilience should also be updated with socio-economic development and a deepened understanding of urban resilience. For example, COVID-19 provides a chance, and also new requirements, to comprehend urban resilience. Second, the sample size for analyzing the experts' opinions was limited. Therefore, the derived results may be more indicative than representative. It can provide certain references or implications when considering enhancing urban resilience in the case cities. Yet, it should be cautious to generalize the findings, which may not be suitable for this study. Future studies can consider increasing the sample size with support from some official channels when making plans for resilient cities. Third, this study investigated the elements of attentions for enhancing urban resilience with a top-down approach with an expert centric approach in the survey. The views of residents can be indirectly reflected by the planners and governmental officers, who are assumed to include public opinions before making planning or policies. Yet, the bottom-up approach to enhancing urban resilience is also important, which means that the direct views of the residents should be considered in such a condition. Future studies can be conducted to compare the differences in elements of attentions between the top-down

and bottom-up approaches. Fourth, the key elements of attentions were identified based on the comprehension of interviewees, which is partially subjective. As more and more cities formulate strategies for enhancing urban resilience, comparisons based on these official documents is an alternative and objective approach to identify the similarities and differences of elements of attentions. Last, the comparison is conducted only among three Asian cities. Future studies can be conducted to compare the key elements of attentions for enhancing urban resilience among cities with significantly different cultural and governance backgrounds. The comparison of large samples of different cities is also beneficial for explaining why different cities pay similar and various attentions when enhancing urban resilience.

**Author Contributions:** Conceptualization, M.C., Y.L. and Y.Z.; formal analysis, M.C., Y.L., Y.P., T.C. and Y.Z.; investigation, Y.L., Y.P. and T.C.; methodology, M.C. and Y.P.; software, Y.P.; validation, M.C., Y.L. and T.C.; writing—original draft, M.C., Y.L., Y.P. and Y.Z.; writing—review and editing, M.C., Y.L., Y.P. and T.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

**Funding:** The work described in this paper was jointly supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (52078374), the Shanghai Municipal Science and Technology Commission (19DZ1202803), the Urban Emergency Management Research Innovation Team of Zhejiang University of Finance and Economics, and the Innovation Research Team of Urban Governance and Public Policy of Zhejiang Province.

**Institutional Review Board Statement:** Not applicable.

**Informed Consent Statement:** Not applicable.

**Data Availability Statement:** Not applicable.

**Acknowledgments:** The authors would also thank the students for the efforts placed in collecting and compiling survey data for the initial analysis.

**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflict of interest.
