|
|
DISCUSSION No. 137 • FSN Forum digest No. 1294
|
|
|
Beyond “temporal” resilience: results that withstand the test of time
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dear Members,
The discussion
Beyond ‘temporal’ resilience”: results that withstand the test of time has come to a close, and we would like to share with you the latest comments received and the closing remarks of Walter Mwasaa,
facilitator of the discussion.
In his message, Walter acknowledges the value of your contributions, and we would like to join him in thanking all contributors
for making this such a rich exchange.
Besides the question of whether or not a minimum timeframe exists in which people or a system should remain resilient
in order to actually qualify as “resilient”, many other aspects of resilience measurement and assessment and of resilience building in general were discussed.
A summary of the outcomes of this discussion will be made available soon. For a full overview of the discussion please
refer to the
webpage, where you can also download the
proceedings document.
We look forward to our further exchanges!
Your FSN Forum team
|
|
|
|
Walter Mwasaa, facilitator of the discussion
|
What a wealth of contributions!
I may not have a model for resilience in the light of time and uncertainties, but nonetheless I feel that my universe
of what resilience entails has drastically expanded! Terminology such as “bounce-forward”, a metaphorical illustration of the need to achieve transformational change and not just bounce back to pre-shock state, is probably one of the most compelling concepts.
|

|
The discussion delved into using available modelling of weather and predictable changes so that communities can be better
prepared for shocks and stressors. The concept of geo-spatial considerations came out strongly –‘how big should we bite’ in resilience building.
The complexity of shocks, dwindling resources, the fatigue caused by limited success, the ever present evolving gender
and demographic differences and how the divergence impacts resilience building. In rural and closely knit communities, the societal set-up and how that is being affected by social and geopolitical determinants, market and climate factors were brought to the
forefront. In preventing that shocks result in impact to a point of no-return, the pressing need to identify the breaking points at which resilience gains and or ‘critical’ thresholds may be crossed as if to provide an umbrella to all these concepts the simple
underlying question – what resilience capacities are we trying to build and their relevance to the shocks and stressors at hand.
One other contribution that resonated quite strongly with me was the whole issue of time as factor not just in terms of
overall period for a complete analysis but a closer look at intervals between shocks, large and small as they vary and how that plays into critical seasonal or recurrent and predictable events such as rain, conflict and flu seasons.
Lastly, the impact on policy and planning was given focus, it underlines the need for impact and success especially when
governments are prioritizing limited resources.
I come out of this wiser and in the search for an effective model for determining enduring resilience outcomes in increasingly
uncertain contexts, the factors to be considered have been fleshed out. I wish all of you the best in your resilience building work and look forward to a future discussion in which we will have covered more ground scientifically, and, more importantly, in
the communities and populations, our individual and collective effort target.
Thank you all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CONTRIBUTIONS RECEIVED
|
|
Joy
Muller, Switzerland
|
|
Joy argues that in order to adequately support communities and to enable them to confront large-scale shocks and stressors,
cross-disciplinary joint programming is needed. In addition, she shares an article on experiences of the Red Cross Red Crescent regarding addressing drought and climate change in the Horn of Africa.
Read
the contribution
|
|
|
Stefan
Pasti, The Community Peacebuilding and Cultural Sustainability (CPCS) Initiative, USA
|
|
Stefan focuses on the question of what kind of human habitat deserves the most attention in creating habitats with long-term
resilience, and distinguishes between megacities and medium- to small-sized cities. He points out that megacities are generally the primary focus in creating carbon-neutral economies, and that they are mainly seen as a foundation for ecologically sustainable
habitats. However, Stefan argues that if we want to build long-term resilience into human habitats, one should mainly focus on medium- to small-sized cities. He also shares a statement he wrote on these topics.
Read
the contribution
|
|
|
Lemma
Belay Ababu, Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation, Ethiopia
|
|
According to Lemma, the type of disaster, the type of livelihood and the means of production determine the timeframe
of community resilience. He illustrates this by using an example of the drylands of the Horn of Africa, where droughts, conflict, land degradation and inadequate policies have eroded the resilience of pastoralists. Another important aspect to be considered
vis-à-vis the timeframe of community resilience concerns early warning information, which is currently often timely available to communities, but is difficult for people to understand.
Read
the contribution
|
|
|
Mike
Jones, Swedish Biodiversity Centre, Sweden
|
|
In his first contribution, Mike argues that the term ‘resilience’ is often rather loosely used to convey a general idea
about being able to recover from a disaster or being more adaptable to climate change. This might work for general discussions, but a more focused understanding is needed for formulating food security policies. Mike then introduces a more precise definition
of ‘resilience’ and shares a number of publications in which also definitions of other related concepts can be found.
In his second contribution, Mike shares a policy brief on resilience in social-ecological systems, which includes three
case studies from Africa. One of the aspects the studies address concerns national government policies that support the emergence of adaptive capacity.
Read
the first contribution
Read
the second contribution
|
|
|
|