Agency, Capacity, and Resilience to Environmental Change: Lessons from Human Development, Well-Being, and Disasters

Brown, Katrina; Westaway, Elizabeth

doi:10.1146/annurev-environ-052610-092905

Cited by 527 publications

(392 citation statements)

References 86 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

349

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Transition management (Grin and Schot 2010), adaptive management and collective action (Olsson et al 2006;Folke et al 2010;Ernstson 2011), consensus building through visioning (Beddoe et al 2009), and social learning are common approaches to deliberate transformation. Such concepts highlight the fundamental role of agency (Nelson et al 2007;Brown and Westaway 2011;Pelling 2011;O'Brien 2012), and identify types of key agents such as innovators (e.g., Westley et al 2011) and leaders (Olsson et al 2006). Concepts of deliberate transformation also open up a ground for scientists to directly engage with change processes, which is discussed in ''Concepts of transformation and research approaches'' section.…”

Section: Seat Of Causality and Social Consciousnessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Societal transformation in response to global environmental change: A review of emerging concepts

Feola

2014

Ambio

487

352

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study of societal transformation in response to environmental change has become established, yet little consensus exists regarding the conceptual basis of transformation. This paper aims to provide structure to the dialog on transformation, and to reflect on the challenges of social research in this area. Concepts of transformation are identified through a literature review, and examined using four analytical criteria. It is found that the term 'transformation' is frequently used merely as a metaphor. When transformation is not used as a metaphor, eight concepts are most frequently employed. They differ with respect to (i) system conceptualization, (ii) notions of social consciousness (deliberate/emergent), and (iii) outcome (prescriptive/descriptive). Problem-based research tends to adopt concepts of deliberate transformation with prescriptive outcome, while concepts of emergent transformation with no prescriptive outcome tend to inform descriptive-analytical research. Dialog around the complementarities of different concepts and their empirical testing are priorities for future research.

show abstract

Section: Seat Of Causality and Social Consciousnessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Societal transformation in response to global environmental change: A review of emerging concepts

Feola

2014

Ambio

487

352

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The role of place attachment has not typically been examined in the biosecurity domain, as either a precursor to protective decision-making or as an emotional factor in the event of a biosecurity emergency. However, we can learn from other domains that the impact of displacement after an emotional event can be significant and could go so far as to impair resilience in some instances (Lane and Robinson 2009;Brown and Westaway 2011). Other researchers argue that place attachment could also facilitate resilience and increase the likelihood that a community could rebuild after a disaster (Manzo and Perkins 2006;Miles 2015).…”

Section: Emotion Stress and Attachmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychological influences on biosecurity control and farmer decision-making. A review

Mankad

2016

Agron. Sustain. Dev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is an increase of biosecurity threats in agriculture because greater urbanisation and movement of humans means that pests migrate more easily than ever before. Poor management of biosecurity risks can lead to threats to human health, animal health and food or material production. Quality assurance programs and guidelines for best management practices exist in the plant and animal farming sector. However, there is scarce knowledge on individual decision-making relevant to biosecurity, motivation to implement protective behaviours and human adherence to biosecurity practices. Indeed, people have often long-term habits that are resistant to behaviour change initiatives. These conservative habits limit the effectiveness of risk management interventions and attention to new information that contradicts existing attitudes and beliefs. This paper reviews the potential influences of psychological, social and cognitive factors on biosecurity-related behaviour and management practices. The major aspects covered in this review are as follows: (1) underlying attitudes to biosecurity risk and perceived vulnerability to a biosecurity threat, (2) the influence of social incentives and social norms on individual behaviour, (3) motivational drivers and the notion of threat perception in engaging in protective behaviour, (4) consideration of emotional and cognitive biases in assessing risk and (5) the influence of pre-existing antecedents of decision-making beyond personal factors, such as context and policy within which decisions must be made. This review makes the critical point that human adoption and adherence to biosecurity practices is influenced by psychosocial factors and is an area of urgent research and policy consideration. An exploratory model is presented for future research and on-the-ground considerations, incorporating psychosocial influences on decisionmaking and potential mediating factors.

show abstract

“…Despite the difficulty of assessing many of these factors, they are nonetheless crucial to household and community resilience. Current assessments and conceptualisations of resilience seldom capture these more subjective elements (Brown and Westaway 2011). Factoring them into evaluative frameworks is therefore key to gaining a more holistic understanding of resilience, particularly at the household and community levels.…”

Section: Rationale and Foundation Of A Subjective Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A number of climate change adaptation studies have explored subjective elements at the individual and household-levels (Adger et al 2009;Brown and Westaway 2011;O'Brien 2009;Nguyen and James 2013). For example, Grothmann and Patt's (2005) conceptual framework seeks to understand 'perceived adaptive capacity' based on sub-components of perceived adaptation efficacy, perceived self-efficacy and perceived adaptation costs.…”

Section: Learning From Subjective Indicators In Related Disciplinesmentioning

confidence: 99%

‘Subjective resilience’: using perceptions to quantify household resilience to climate extremes and disasters

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How should we measure a household's resilience to climate extremes, climate change or other evolving threats? As resilience gathers momentum on the international stage, interest in this question continues to grow. So far, efforts to measure resilience have largely focused on the use of 'objective' frameworks and methods of indicator selection. These typically depend on a range of observable socio-economic variables, such as levels of income, the extent of a household's social capital or its access to social safety nets. Yet while objective methods have their uses, they suffer from well-documented weaknesses. This paper advocates for the use of an alternative but complementary method: the measurement of 'subjective' resilience at the household level. The concept of subjective resilience stems from the premise that people have an understanding of the factors that contribute to their ability to anticipate, buffer and adapt to disturbance and change. Subjective household resilience therefore relates to an individual's cognitive and affective self-evaluation of their household's capabilities and capacities in responding to risk. We discuss the advantages and limitations of measuring subjective household resilience and highlight its relationships with other concepts such as perceived adaptive capacity, subjective well-being and psychological resilience. We then put forward different options for the design and delivery of survey questions on subjective household resilience. While the approach we describe is focused at the household level, we show how it has the potential to be aggregated to inform sub-national or national resilience metrics and indicators. Lastly, we highlight how subjective methods of resilience assessment could be used to improve policy and decision-making. Above all, we argue that, alongside traditional objective measures and indicators, efforts to measure resilience should take into account subjective aspects of household resilience in order to ensure a more holistic understanding of resilience to climate extremes and disasters.

show abstract

Agency, Capacity, and Resilience to Environmental Change: Lessons from Human Development, Well-Being, and Disasters

Cited by 527 publications

References 86 publications

Societal transformation in response to global environmental change: A review of emerging concepts

Societal transformation in response to global environmental change: A review of emerging concepts

Psychological influences on biosecurity control and farmer decision-making. A review

‘Subjective resilience’: using perceptions to quantify household resilience to climate extremes and disasters

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About