Adaptation or paradigm shift? An interpretation of resilience through the lens of policy change

Abstract

Most literature on peacebuilding has been characterized by the intention to set resilience as an alternative to liberal peace or as a reproduction of it, thus conflating different types of policy development into a single dependent variable, whereby policy change happened or not. The central aim of the article is to clarify the type of change represented by the resilience approach. Evidence seems to show that resilience is an adaptation of the instruments and settings that leaves the overall goals of the policy unaltered. The second aim of the article is to suggest a move away from current monolithic interpretations, providing insights into how resilience can be saved from itself. The paper is not meant to provide exhaustive answers or indisputable empirical findings, but rather to shed light on the actual limitations of research in peacebuilding, and to provide some cues for future studies on how peace practice might change.