How do we study resilience? A systematic review

Author:

le Polain de Waroux Yann12ORCID,Carignan Marie‐Claude1ORCID,del Giorgio Olivia1ORCID,Díaz Leandro345ORCID,Enrico Lucas67ORCID,Jaureguiberry Pedro67ORCID,Lipoma María Lucrecia67ORCID,Mazzini Flavia89ORCID,Díaz Sandra67

Affiliation:

1. Department of Geography McGill University Montreal Quebec Canada

2. Institute for the Study of International Development (ISID) McGill University Montreal Quebec Canada

3. Departamento de Ciencias de la Atmósfera y los Océanos (DCAO), Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales Universidad de Buenos Aires Buenos Aires Argentina

4. Centro de Investigaciones del Mar y la Atmósfera (CIMA) CONICET—Universidad de Buenos Aires Buenos Aires Argentina

5. Instituto Franco‐Argentino de Estudios sobre el Clima y sus Impactos (IFAECI)—IRL 3351—CNRS‐CONICET‐IRD‐UBA Buenos Aires Argentina

6. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal (IMBIV) CONICET Córdoba Argentina

7. FCEFyN Universidad Nacional de Córdoba Córdoba Argentina

8. Instituto de Ecorregiones Andinas, CONICET Universidad Nacional de Jujuy San Salvador de Jujuy Jujuy Argentina

9. Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias, Centro de Estudios Territoriales Ambientales y Sociales Universidad Nacional de Jujuy San Salvador de Jujuy Jujuy Argentina

Abstract

Abstract The concept of resilience has gained immense popularity as a way to frame social and environmental challenges. However, its empirical operationalization and the integration of social and ecological dimensions continue to present difficulties. In this paper, we conduct a systematic review of existing empirical studies of resilience in social, ecological and social‐ecological systems (SESs) and examine how and to what extent these studies have achieved the operationalization of the concept of resilience. We evaluate the operationalization of resilience in 463 papers based on whether they define the system of interest and disturbances, whether they define resilience, whether they evaluate resilience, and for papers focusing on SESs, whether that evaluation integrates social and ecological dimensions. We find that 51% of empirical studies do not meet at least one of these operationalization criteria, and that even those that do often lack key features for effective operationalization, such as clear system boundaries and baseline state or an effective integration of social and ecological dimensions. Of the papers examining SESs and evaluating resilience, only 54% integrate social and ecological dimensions in that evaluation. Building on these findings, we propose some design guidelines for operationalizing future empirical studies of resilience. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

Publisher

Wiley

Reference98 articles.

1. Social and ecological resilience: are they related?

2. Economic growth, carrying capacity, and the environment

3. Alternative stable states in ecology

4. Bergamini N. Blasiak R. Eyzaguirre P. Ichikawa K. Mijatovic D. Nakao F. &Subramian S.(2013).Indicators of resilience in socio‐ecological production landscapes (SEPLs). UNU‐IAS policy report United Nations University Institute of Advanced Studies Yokohama.

5. Navigating Social-Ecological Systems

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3