The limits of “resilience”: Relationalities, contradictions, and re-appropriations

0Citations
Citations of this article
5Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

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: 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.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Davies, J. S., & Arrieta, T. (2024). The limits of “resilience”: Relationalities, contradictions, and re-appropriations. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.911

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free