Resilience as a Unifying Concept
(2014) In International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 28(3). p.303-324- Abstract
- In sustainability research and elsewhere the notion of resilience is attracting growing interest and causing heated debate. Those focusing on resilience often emphasize its potential to bridge, integrate, and unify disciplines. This paper attempts to evaluate these claims. Resilience is investigated as it appears in several fields, including materials science, psychology, ecology, and sustainability science. It is argued that two different concepts of resilience are in play: one local, the other global. The former refers to the ability to return to some reference state after a disturbance, the latter the maintenance of some property during a disturbance. An implication of this analysis is that the various uses of the resilience concept are... (More)
- In sustainability research and elsewhere the notion of resilience is attracting growing interest and causing heated debate. Those focusing on resilience often emphasize its potential to bridge, integrate, and unify disciplines. This paper attempts to evaluate these claims. Resilience is investigated as it appears in several fields, including materials science, psychology, ecology, and sustainability science. It is argued that two different concepts of resilience are in play: one local, the other global. The former refers to the ability to return to some reference state after a disturbance, the latter the maintenance of some property during a disturbance. An implication of this analysis is that the various uses of the resilience concept are more closely related than has been previously been suggested. Furthermore it is argued that there is a preference towards using highly abstract versions of the concept. This explains the apparent context insensitivity of the concept but presents a problem to those hoping to establish a research programme based on it. From this we argue that the project of conceptual unification does not, on its own, imply a methodologically, or even theoretically, uni- fied empirical project. Studying resilience in the field—that is the actual structures and dynamics that determine the resilience of par- ticular systems—will involve deploying a range of different methods, tools, and techniques. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/4157709
- author
- Thorén, Henrik LU
- organization
- publishing date
- 2014
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- unification, interdisciplinarity, concepts, resilience, pluralism, sustainability science
- in
- International Studies in the Philosophy of Science
- volume
- 28
- issue
- 3
- pages
- 303 - 324
- publisher
- Taylor & Francis
- external identifiers
-
- wos:000346055600005
- scopus:84919833387
- ISSN
- 0269-8595
- DOI
- 10.1080/02698595.2014.953343
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- dbc67265-7c1f-409a-8b00-dff550d6c1ef (old id 4157709)
- alternative location
- http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02698595.2014.953343#.VItruYfby1w
- date added to LUP
- 2016-04-01 13:20:57
- date last changed
- 2022-03-06 05:20:50
@article{dbc67265-7c1f-409a-8b00-dff550d6c1ef,
abstract = {{In sustainability research and elsewhere the notion of resilience is attracting growing interest and causing heated debate. Those focusing on resilience often emphasize its potential to bridge, integrate, and unify disciplines. This paper attempts to evaluate these claims. Resilience is investigated as it appears in several fields, including materials science, psychology, ecology, and sustainability science. It is argued that two different concepts of resilience are in play: one local, the other global. The former refers to the ability to return to some reference state after a disturbance, the latter the maintenance of some property during a disturbance. An implication of this analysis is that the various uses of the resilience concept are more closely related than has been previously been suggested. Furthermore it is argued that there is a preference towards using highly abstract versions of the concept. This explains the apparent context insensitivity of the concept but presents a problem to those hoping to establish a research programme based on it. From this we argue that the project of conceptual unification does not, on its own, imply a methodologically, or even theoretically, uni- fied empirical project. Studying resilience in the field—that is the actual structures and dynamics that determine the resilience of par- ticular systems—will involve deploying a range of different methods, tools, and techniques.}},
author = {{Thorén, Henrik}},
issn = {{0269-8595}},
keywords = {{unification; interdisciplinarity; concepts; resilience; pluralism; sustainability science}},
language = {{eng}},
number = {{3}},
pages = {{303--324}},
publisher = {{Taylor & Francis}},
series = {{International Studies in the Philosophy of Science}},
title = {{Resilience as a Unifying Concept}},
url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02698595.2014.953343}},
doi = {{10.1080/02698595.2014.953343}},
volume = {{28}},
year = {{2014}},
}