The word, ʻresilienceʼ has been common to use in terms of various risk management policies for decades. Governments, international organizations, and think tanks value resilience as the concept enabling people and communities to overcome crises and to be stronger than before. By reviewing previous studies, which are concerned with the concept of resilience, this paper examines the reason why the concept is frequently being referred to by various organizations. This paper also explores what kind of individual and community the governing practices, which hold up the concept of resilience, attempt to create.
The fact in the background of the surge of resilience is that, so-called complexity turn is becoming dominant in natural sciences and social theories. Complexity turn suggests that natural and social threats are to be actualized as non-linear emergence. That non-linearity brings radical uncertainty, which is different from statistical risk thinking, to the world. The discourse of resilience has been mobilized in the cause of governing complexity. Since prevention and prediction are unable to work out adequate responses to such non-linear complexity, resilience as the notion of crisis management attempts to make individuals and communities out of the woods by exposure and adaptation to adversities. Thus, previous studies criticized the notion as neo-liberal governmentality: the project replacing the responsibilities of government for risk management with the responsibilities of individuals and communities. However, as being observed in the UK’s Community Resilience Programme, resilience includes the new aspect of practices governing people through rehearsals.
View full abstract