长期危机中的社会保护和复原力

IF 1.2 Q3 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Carolina Holland-Szyp, Jeremy Lind
{"title":"长期危机中的社会保护和复原力","authors":"Carolina Holland-Szyp,&nbsp;Jeremy Lind","doi":"10.1111/issr.70000","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This article critically examines perspectives on social protection’s role in strengthening resilience capacities in protracted crises – contexts where conflict and displacement persist for five years or longer. These crises shape how stakeholders navigate their mandates to provide support, while influencing how affected communities seek to withstand, recover from, and adapt to ongoing shocks. International actors have promoted social protection as a means to strengthen absorptive, adaptive and transformative resilience capacities at household and community levels. While resilience has become a central concept in social protection policy and programming, much underlying evidence and assumptions stem from stable settings. Protracted crises introduce increased and distinct challenges, including conflict-related insecurity, disrupted public services, and legal uncertainty for displaced populations. Despite these difficulties, social protection for resilience-strengthening is still encouraged as an alternative to piecemeal humanitarian assistance. Drawing on global policy and research reports, and empirical evidence from a multi-country research programme, this article identifies four key limitations in approaches that aim to strengthen resilience through social protection in protracted crises. First, many approaches focus on supporting absorptive capacities. Second, there is often misalignment between the nature of interventions and the drivers of vulnerability. Third, current sectoral approaches work in silos. Finally, there is insufficient attention to local support mechanisms. By critically engaging with these limitations, this article contributes to debates on the relationship between social protection and resilience. It concludes by offering reflections on how aid actors can reconsider their approaches, advocating for strategies that are more collaborative, understanding of, and adapted to local contexts.</p>","PeriodicalId":44996,"journal":{"name":"International Social Security Review","volume":"78 2-3","pages":"173-190"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/issr.70000","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Social protection and resilience in protracted crises\",\"authors\":\"Carolina Holland-Szyp,&nbsp;Jeremy Lind\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/issr.70000\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>This article critically examines perspectives on social protection’s role in strengthening resilience capacities in protracted crises – contexts where conflict and displacement persist for five years or longer. These crises shape how stakeholders navigate their mandates to provide support, while influencing how affected communities seek to withstand, recover from, and adapt to ongoing shocks. International actors have promoted social protection as a means to strengthen absorptive, adaptive and transformative resilience capacities at household and community levels. While resilience has become a central concept in social protection policy and programming, much underlying evidence and assumptions stem from stable settings. Protracted crises introduce increased and distinct challenges, including conflict-related insecurity, disrupted public services, and legal uncertainty for displaced populations. Despite these difficulties, social protection for resilience-strengthening is still encouraged as an alternative to piecemeal humanitarian assistance. Drawing on global policy and research reports, and empirical evidence from a multi-country research programme, this article identifies four key limitations in approaches that aim to strengthen resilience through social protection in protracted crises. First, many approaches focus on supporting absorptive capacities. Second, there is often misalignment between the nature of interventions and the drivers of vulnerability. Third, current sectoral approaches work in silos. Finally, there is insufficient attention to local support mechanisms. By critically engaging with these limitations, this article contributes to debates on the relationship between social protection and resilience. It concludes by offering reflections on how aid actors can reconsider their approaches, advocating for strategies that are more collaborative, understanding of, and adapted to local contexts.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":44996,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Social Security Review\",\"volume\":\"78 2-3\",\"pages\":\"173-190\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/issr.70000\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Social Security Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/issr.70000\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Social Security Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/issr.70000","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文批判性地考察了社会保护在加强持久危机(冲突和流离失所持续五年或更长时间的情况)中复原能力方面的作用。这些危机决定了利益攸关方如何履行其提供支持的职责,同时影响了受影响社区如何抵御、恢复和适应持续的冲击。国际行为体促进了社会保护,将其作为加强家庭和社区吸收、适应和变革复原能力的手段。虽然复原力已成为社会保护政策和规划的核心概念,但许多基本证据和假设都来自稳定的环境。旷日持久的危机带来了更多和独特的挑战,包括与冲突有关的不安全,中断的公共服务以及流离失所人口的法律不确定性。尽管存在这些困难,加强复原力的社会保护仍被鼓励作为零敲碎打的人道主义援助的替代办法。根据全球政策和研究报告,以及来自一个多国研究项目的经验证据,本文确定了旨在通过长期危机中的社会保护加强复原力的方法存在的四个主要限制。首先,许多方法侧重于支持吸收能力。其次,干预措施的性质与脆弱性的驱动因素往往不一致。第三,目前的部门方法各自为政。最后,对地方支持机制的重视不够。通过批判性地探讨这些局限性,本文有助于讨论社会保护与复原力之间的关系。报告最后提出了援助行为体如何重新考虑其方法的思考,倡导更具协作性、理解并适应当地情况的战略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Social protection and resilience in protracted crises

This article critically examines perspectives on social protection’s role in strengthening resilience capacities in protracted crises – contexts where conflict and displacement persist for five years or longer. These crises shape how stakeholders navigate their mandates to provide support, while influencing how affected communities seek to withstand, recover from, and adapt to ongoing shocks. International actors have promoted social protection as a means to strengthen absorptive, adaptive and transformative resilience capacities at household and community levels. While resilience has become a central concept in social protection policy and programming, much underlying evidence and assumptions stem from stable settings. Protracted crises introduce increased and distinct challenges, including conflict-related insecurity, disrupted public services, and legal uncertainty for displaced populations. Despite these difficulties, social protection for resilience-strengthening is still encouraged as an alternative to piecemeal humanitarian assistance. Drawing on global policy and research reports, and empirical evidence from a multi-country research programme, this article identifies four key limitations in approaches that aim to strengthen resilience through social protection in protracted crises. First, many approaches focus on supporting absorptive capacities. Second, there is often misalignment between the nature of interventions and the drivers of vulnerability. Third, current sectoral approaches work in silos. Finally, there is insufficient attention to local support mechanisms. By critically engaging with these limitations, this article contributes to debates on the relationship between social protection and resilience. It concludes by offering reflections on how aid actors can reconsider their approaches, advocating for strategies that are more collaborative, understanding of, and adapted to local contexts.

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
International Social Security Review
International Social Security Review PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION-
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
8.30%
发文量
29
期刊介绍: The International Social Security Review, the world"s major international quarterly publication in the field of social security. First published in 1948, the journal appears in four language editions (English, French, German and Spanish). Articles by leading social security experts around the world present international comparisons and in-depth discussions of topical questions as well as studies of social security systems in different countries, and there is a regular, comprehensive round-up of the latest publications in its field.
×
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