Resilience: New Utopia or New Tyranny? Reflection about the Potentials and Limits of the Concept of Resilience in Relation to Vulnerability Reduction Programmes

Abstract

Summary Resilience is becoming influential in development and vulnerability reduction sectors such as social protection, disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation. Policy makers, donors and international development agencies are now increasingly referring to the term. In that context, the objective of this paper was to assess in a critical manner the advantages and limits of resilience. While the review highlights some positive elements –in particular the ability of the term to foster integrated approach across sectors– it also shows that resilience has important limitations. In particular it is not a pro‐poor concept, and the objective of poverty reduction cannot simply be substituted by resilience building.

Resilience, integrated development and family planning: building long-term solutions

“…7 Such donors include the UK Department for International Development (DFID), World Bank, United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction, World Food Programme, Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation, US Agency for International Development (USAID), and the former AusAID. 3 This is not just a reflection of donor whimsincreasingly resilience is being treated as a development approach that encourages long-term planning of all kinds.…”

“…These principles include focusing on social justice and equity; encouraging adaptive and continual learning; building effective governance mechanisms and institutions; making interventions specific to the local context; promoting local and national ownership; and fostering strategic and long-term engagement with key stakeholders, including community members and leaders. 1,3,[8][9][10] In addition, there are three operating principles that, in my estimation, are strongly associated with building resilience but are not always observed in other approaches. The first is what I call the inter-relatedness of systems.…”

“…* In building resilience, there must be a focus on the interconnectivity of ecological and human systems so as to emphasize that shocks occur in multiple spheres and across various scales. 3 These shocks are likely to increase, for example, when the physical effects of climate change are geographically concentrated, leading to overlapping risks at the local level. At the same time, they require responses at different spatial and temporal levels of the response systemi.e.…”

“…1 Today, we are witnessing an expanding interest in the concept of resilience and its application from the international development and climate change communities. [1][2][3][4][5] The Rockefeller Foundation, for example, is interested in systems-related ways of building resilience:…”

“…(p. 3) 6 But what does resilience mean, in practical terms, and what can be done to cultivate it? This article: 1) examines the meaning of resilience as a component of responding to and overcoming disasters and stresses; 2) gives examples of how development programmes are supporting countries and communities to plan for disasters, adapt to the consequences and transform their policies and programmes; 3) discusses some key resilience principles; 4) gives examples of how family planning has been integrated into environment and development programmes successfully in support of resilience; and 5) describes how these programmes have succeeded in diversifying livelihoods, bolstering community engagement and resilience, building new governance structures, and positioning women as agents of change.…”