Analysis of the impact of dynamic economic resilience on post-disaster recovery “secondary shock” and sustainable improvement of system performance

•The composition structure of the disaster economic resilience theory has been further developed and quantitatively verified.•The correction effect of the resilience on the economic fluctuations (secondary shock) that occurred during the recovery process has been quantitatively evaluated.•The sustainable improvement of the economic system’s performance by the resilience at the end of the post-disaster recovery process has been quantitatively evaluated.•Results can provide a multi-dimensional optimization plan for improving the efficiency of post-disaster recovery and reconstruction management. Quantitative measuring disaster resilience especially dynamic economic resilience (DER) belongs to a frontier research in the past decades, which can effectively improve post-disaster economic recovery effects, reducing post-disaster loss. However, DER focuses more on the overall shape changes of recovery path, two features that commonly appear in the dynamic change process of recovery curve are also worth evaluating separately: the “secondary shock” caused by adverse factors during the recovery process and sustainable improvement of economic output at the end of recovery. Therefore, we adopt a dynamic input–output model that integrates capital damage and affected people and apply it to an extreme flood in 2016, Wuhan City, China, building the relationship between 7 recovery actions (rescue funds) and changes of two features, analyzing the impact of resilience on the dynamic recovery path features through 6 characteristic variables constructed in this paper. Results show that (1) economic resilience increases from no to actual action, the dropping rate caused by “secondary shock” decreases 30.4%, and Wuhan’s economic output has achieved an improvement in sustainability of 0.088% compared to the pre-disaster level, which contributes permanently to reducing vulnerability to future disasters. (2) only 21.81% (compared to the actual scenario) of the rescue funds is needed to support 30% reduction action plus 0.02% sustainable improvement. But to support the 50% recovery action, 78.92% of the rescue funds is needed. This paper aims to provide a new perspective for the refined dynamic assessment of resilience and to prove the role of resilience in promoting short-term post-disaster recovery and long-term sustainable development.