复原力 "的局限:关系、矛盾和再利用

Jonathan S. Davies, Tania Arrieta
{"title":"复原力 \"的局限:关系、矛盾和再利用","authors":"Jonathan S. Davies, Tania Arrieta","doi":"10.1002/wcc.911","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The concept of “resilience” is ubiquitous in global governance, extending from climate and ecological issues to practically all spheres of human endeavor. However, post‐pandemic discourses suggest that the concept may no longer be capable of synthesizing diverse and diverging geopolitical interests into common policy goals. Responding to what we see as an emerging “crisis of resilience,” we reconsider the utility of the concept and advance “irresilience” as its critical relational “other.” We argue that to make resilience meaningful in a “polycrisis,” it is necessary to think about it dialectically and consider how it is undermined by the very actors that evangelize it.This article is categorized under:<jats:list list-type=\"simple\"> <jats:list-item>International Policy Framework &gt; Policy and Governance</jats:list-item> <jats:list-item>Climate, History, Society, Culture &gt; Disciplinary Perspectives</jats:list-item> <jats:list-item>The Social Status of Climate Change Knowledge &gt; Knowledge and Practice</jats:list-item> <jats:list-item>Climate and Development &gt; Sustainability and Human Well‐Being</jats:list-item> </jats:list>","PeriodicalId":501019,"journal":{"name":"WIREs Climate Change","volume":"74 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The limits of “resilience”: Relationalities, contradictions, and re‐appropriations\",\"authors\":\"Jonathan S. Davies, Tania Arrieta\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/wcc.911\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The concept of “resilience” is ubiquitous in global governance, extending from climate and ecological issues to practically all spheres of human endeavor. However, post‐pandemic discourses suggest that the concept may no longer be capable of synthesizing diverse and diverging geopolitical interests into common policy goals. Responding to what we see as an emerging “crisis of resilience,” we reconsider the utility of the concept and advance “irresilience” as its critical relational “other.” We argue that to make resilience meaningful in a “polycrisis,” it is necessary to think about it dialectically and consider how it is undermined by the very actors that evangelize it.This article is categorized under:<jats:list list-type=\\\"simple\\\"> <jats:list-item>International Policy Framework &gt; Policy and Governance</jats:list-item> <jats:list-item>Climate, History, Society, Culture &gt; Disciplinary Perspectives</jats:list-item> <jats:list-item>The Social Status of Climate Change Knowledge &gt; Knowledge and Practice</jats:list-item> <jats:list-item>Climate and Development &gt; Sustainability and Human Well‐Being</jats:list-item> </jats:list>\",\"PeriodicalId\":501019,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"WIREs Climate Change\",\"volume\":\"74 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"WIREs Climate Change\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.911\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"WIREs Climate Change","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.911","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在全球治理中,"复原力 "的概念无处不在,从气候和生态问题延伸到人类努力的几乎所有领域。然而,"后大流行病 "的论述表明,这一概念可能不再能够将各种不同的地缘政治利益整合为共同的政策目标。为了应对我们认为正在出现的 "复原力危机",我们重新考虑了这一概念的效用,并提出 "不可复原性 "作为其关键的关系 "他者"。我们认为,要使复原力在 "多重危机 "中具有意义,就必须对其进行辩证思考,并考虑它是如何被宣扬它的行为者所破坏的:国际政策框架> 政策与治理 气候、历史、社会、文化> 学科视角 气候变化知识的社会地位> 知识与实践 气候与发展> 可持续性与人类福祉
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The limits of “resilience”: Relationalities, contradictions, and re‐appropriations
The concept of “resilience” is ubiquitous in global governance, extending from climate and ecological issues to practically all spheres of human endeavor. However, post‐pandemic discourses suggest that the concept may no longer be capable of synthesizing diverse and diverging geopolitical interests into common policy goals. Responding to what we see as an emerging “crisis of resilience,” we reconsider the utility of the concept and advance “irresilience” as its critical relational “other.” We argue that to make resilience meaningful in a “polycrisis,” it is necessary to think about it dialectically and consider how it is undermined by the very actors that evangelize it.This article is categorized under: International Policy Framework > Policy and Governance Climate, History, Society, Culture > Disciplinary Perspectives The Social Status of Climate Change Knowledge > Knowledge and Practice Climate and Development > Sustainability and Human Well‐Being
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信