On the rationale of resilience in the domain of safety: A literature review
(2015) In Reliability Engineering & System Safety 141. p.131-141- Abstract
- Resilience is becoming a prevalent agenda in safety research and organisational practice. In this study we examine how the peer-reviewed safety science literature (a) formulates the rationale behind the study of resilience; (b) constructs resilience as a scientific object; and (c) constructs and locates the resilient subject. The results suggest that resilience engineering scholars typically motivate the need for their studies by referring to the inherent complexities of modern socio-technical systems; complexities that make these systems inherently risky. The object of resilience then becomes the capacity to adapt to such emerging risks in order to guarantee the success of the inherently risky system. In the material reviewed, the subject... (More)
- Resilience is becoming a prevalent agenda in safety research and organisational practice. In this study we examine how the peer-reviewed safety science literature (a) formulates the rationale behind the study of resilience; (b) constructs resilience as a scientific object; and (c) constructs and locates the resilient subject. The results suggest that resilience engineering scholars typically motivate the need for their studies by referring to the inherent complexities of modern socio-technical systems; complexities that make these systems inherently risky. The object of resilience then becomes the capacity to adapt to such emerging risks in order to guarantee the success of the inherently risky system. In the material reviewed, the subject of resilience is typically the individual, either at the sharp end or at higher managerial levels. The individual is called-upon to adapt in the face of risk to secure the continuous performance of the system. Based on the results from how resilience has been introduced in safety sciences we raise three ethical questions for the field to address: (1) should resilience be seen as people thriving despite of, or because of, risk?; (2) should resilience theory form a basis for moral judgement?; and finally (3) how much should resilience be approached as a trait of the individual? (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/5267944
- author
- Bergström, Johan LU ; van-Winsen, Roel LU and Henriqson, Eder
- organization
- publishing date
- 2015
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- High reliability theory, Normal accidents, Accident prevention, Resilience engineering, Resilience
- in
- Reliability Engineering & System Safety
- volume
- 141
- pages
- 131 - 141
- publisher
- Elsevier
- external identifiers
-
- wos:000357145200014
- scopus:84937846845
- ISSN
- 0951-8320
- DOI
- 10.1016/j.ress.2015.03.008
- project
- Samhällelig Resiliens: En internationell diskursanalys
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- ee5ba069-faec-4c1f-8c7e-a0012e226fff (old id 5267944)
- alternative location
- http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0951832015000666
- date added to LUP
- 2016-04-01 10:01:27
- date last changed
- 2023-01-17 07:41:47
@article{ee5ba069-faec-4c1f-8c7e-a0012e226fff,
abstract = {{Resilience is becoming a prevalent agenda in safety research and organisational practice. In this study we examine how the peer-reviewed safety science literature (a) formulates the rationale behind the study of resilience; (b) constructs resilience as a scientific object; and (c) constructs and locates the resilient subject. The results suggest that resilience engineering scholars typically motivate the need for their studies by referring to the inherent complexities of modern socio-technical systems; complexities that make these systems inherently risky. The object of resilience then becomes the capacity to adapt to such emerging risks in order to guarantee the success of the inherently risky system. In the material reviewed, the subject of resilience is typically the individual, either at the sharp end or at higher managerial levels. The individual is called-upon to adapt in the face of risk to secure the continuous performance of the system. Based on the results from how resilience has been introduced in safety sciences we raise three ethical questions for the field to address: (1) should resilience be seen as people thriving despite of, or because of, risk?; (2) should resilience theory form a basis for moral judgement?; and finally (3) how much should resilience be approached as a trait of the individual?}},
author = {{Bergström, Johan and van-Winsen, Roel and Henriqson, Eder}},
issn = {{0951-8320}},
keywords = {{High reliability theory; Normal accidents; Accident prevention; Resilience engineering; Resilience}},
language = {{eng}},
pages = {{131--141}},
publisher = {{Elsevier}},
series = {{Reliability Engineering & System Safety}},
title = {{On the rationale of resilience in the domain of safety: A literature review}},
url = {{https://lup.lub.lu.se/search/files/1490005/5274715.pdf}},
doi = {{10.1016/j.ress.2015.03.008}},
volume = {{141}},
year = {{2015}},
}