International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health | An Interview with the Author—Dr. Christine Camacho

Name: Dr. Christine Camacho
Affiliation: Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PL, UK
Interests: measurement of community resilience

“Adapting the Baseline Resilience Indicators for Communities (BRIC) Framework for England: Development of a Community Resilience Index”
by Christine Camacho, Roger T. Webb, Peter Bower and Luke Munford
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2024, 21(8), 1012; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph21081012

The following is an interview with Dr. Christine Camacho:

1. Congratulations on your recent publication! Could you start by introducing yourself and your current research to our readers?
Thank you! I work as a consultant in public health in the NHS in England and I’m also pursuing a Ph.D. with the Applied Research Collaboration in Greater Manchester, which is part of the NIHR infrastructure. I have done research focusing on various public health issues, from early child development to “deaths of despair”. In my latest research, which is featured in the paper we’re discussing, we developed a Community Resilience Index for England. It examines how different regions across the country are able to adapt to various shocks, such as the COVID-19 pandemic or economic hardships, and how robust these communities are in facing such challenges.

2. What aspects of this work are you most excited about right now?
One of the most exciting aspects is that this research provides the first-ever comprehensive look at resilience across England. It’s the first time we’ve been able to measure community resilience in such a systematic way. What’s particularly intriguing is the potential for local authorities and policymakers to use this index to identify the strengths and weaknesses of their communities. This data could inform interventions that help support these areas. Additionally, the timing of the study is significant, given that the UK government is currently conducting a resilience review, partly spurred by the COVID-19 inquiry. There are important questions being raised about how prepared we were going into the pandemic, and how we can better build resilience for future challenges.

3. What unexpected findings did you come across during your research?
One surprising finding was the strong regional variation in resilience scores. While we expected some differences due to known inequalities in the UK, the results highlighted a pronounced north–south divide, with the north of England showing lower resilience than the south. We also noticed that coastal areas tended to have lower resilience scores, which suggests specific vulnerabilities that might require tailored interventions. Another interesting result came from comparing resilience scores with deprivation levels. While we generally expected more deprived areas to have lower resilience, there were some outliers—mostly in London—where areas with high deprivation had unexpectedly high resilience. This led us to consider whether a “capital city effect” might be at play, where better infrastructure and economic resources could boost resilience even in more deprived neighborhoods.

4. What do you think is the innovation of this paper? How did you find innovation in writing the paper?
This paper was innovative in several ways. We adapted the Baseline Resilience Indicators for Communities (BRIC) model, originally developed in the US, and tailored it for the English context. We considered the types of hazards relevant to the UK, which are different from those in the southeastern US where BRIC was initially used. For example, instead of focusing on natural disasters like hurricanes, we looked at more chronic issues like the cost of living crisis, the war in Ukraine, and the effects of Brexit. Methodologically, we wanted our approach to be as evidence-based as possible, relying on a systematic review and using principal component analysis to define sub-indices and weight indicators. This rigorous methodology ensures the index is robust and reliable.

5. What do you hope that readers will gain from your paper?
I hope readers gain an understanding of how complex it is to measure community resilience—it’s not something you can measure directly. A composite index is a useful tool for capturing this complexity. We also want to encourage others to not shy away from tackling such difficult issues. While there are always strengths and weaknesses in any methodology, we’ve worked hard to ensure this index is robust. Another important point is that this research measures resilience at a single point in time, but we recognize that the resilience we observe today is shaped by historical events, like the deindustrialization of mining communities. Lastly, we’ve developed an interactive tool to make the data accessible for local authorities and others who want to explore resilience at a more granular level. I’ll share the link with you—it would be great to include it with the paper! (https://christine-l-camacho.github.io/CRI_England/)

6. Which research topics do you think will be of particular interest to the research community in the coming years?
Resilience is definitely going to remain a key area, particularly from a policy perspective. One potential direction is refining the Community Resilience Index to measure resilience at smaller geographical scales, like neighborhoods. We also see a lot of potential in involving communities more directly in this research. While we used national datasets for this study, having community participation could add valuable insights about what it’s like to live in certain areas. Another interesting possibility is to repeat this study over time, creating longitudinal data that can help us assess whether interventions actually improve resilience.

7. How did you hear about IJERPH? And what is your impression of your publishing experience with IJERPH?
I consulted with some colleagues and reviewed the journal's website, which seemed like a perfect fit for my research. My Ph.D. is in public health, and I was particularly drawn to this journal because it takes a broad view of public health. My work on community resilience aligns well with the journal's focus on the intersection between people, place, and social environments. Additionally, I was impressed by the journal's statistics, particularly the quick publication times, which is important for getting research out promptly. Overall, my experience was very positive; I found the peer review process and the support from the editorial team to be excellent and efficient.

8. We are an open access journal. How do you think open access impacts authors?
I believe open access is significant. I’m fortunate that my Ph.D. funding covers the costs of open access publishing. For research aimed at policymakers and community stakeholders—who might not have access to paid journals—making information widely accessible is crucial.