ABSTRACT. The concept of resilience continues to crescendo since the 1990s, touching on multiple fields with multiple interpretations and uses. Here, we start from its origins in systems ecology, framing the resilience concept explicitly in the adaptive cycle with the observation that resilient systems are ones that successfully navigate all stages of growth, development, collapse, and reorientation of this cycle. The model is explored in terms of the traps and pathologies that hinder this successful navigation, particularly when applied to socioeconomic organizations and decision-management situations. For example, for continuous function over the adaptive life cycle, a system needs activation energy or resources to grow, followed by adequate structure and complexity to maintain maturity. Implementation of crisis plans may avert collapse, but during catastrophe, the ability to improvise and re-orient will allow the system to emerge along a new cycle. We review the capacities, competencies, and cultures needed by these organizations, specifically, identifying that the needed resources are often cultivated in earlier stages, thus requiring consideration of the entire life cycle for success.
Despite its ambiguities, the concept of resilience is of critical importance to researchers, practitioners, and policy-makers in dealing with dynamic socio-ecological systems. In this paper, we critically examine the three empirical approaches of (i) panarchy; (ii) ecological information-based network analysis; and (iii) statistical evidence of resilience to three criteria determined for achieving a comprehensive understanding and application of this concept. These criteria are the ability: (1) to reflect a system's adaptability to shocks; (2) to integrate social and environmental dimensions; and (3) to evaluate system-level trade-offs. Our findings show that none of the three currently applied approaches are strong in handling all three criteria. Panarchy is strong in the first two criteria but has difficulty with normative trade-offs. The ecological information-based approach is strongest in evaluating trade-offs but relies on common dimensions that lead to over-simplifications in integrating the social and environmental dimensions. Statistical evidence provides suggestions that are simplest and easiest to act upon but are generally weak in all three criteria. This analysis confirms the value of these approaches in specific instances but also the need for further research in advancing empirical approaches to the concept of resilience.
Cultural Theory (CT) provides a framework for understanding how social dimensions shape cultural bias and social relations of individuals, including values, view of the natural world, policy preferences, and risk perceptions. The five resulting cultural solidarities are each associated with a “myth of nature”—a concept of nature that aligns with the worldview of each solidarity. When applied to the problem of climate protection policymaking, the relationships and beliefs outlined by CT can shed light on how members of the different cultural solidarities perceive their relationship to climate change and associated risk. This can be used to deduce what climate change management policies may be preferred or opposed by each group. The aim of this paper is to provide a review of how CT has been used in quantitative surveys of the social aspects of climate change policymaking, to assess the construct validity of these studies, and to identify ways for climate change protection policies to leverage the views of each of the cultural solidarities to develop clumsy solutions: policies that incorporate strengths from each of the cultural solidarities’ perspectives. Surveys that include measures of at least fatalism, hierarchism, individualism, and egalitarianism, their associated myths of nature as well as measures of climate change risk perceptions and policy preferences have the highest translation and predictive validity. These studies will be useful in helping environmental managers find clumsy solutions and develop resilient policy according to C.S. Holling’s adaptive cycle.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.