Measuring social resilience: Trade-offs, challenges and opportunities for indicator models in transforming societies
Measuring social resilience: Trade-offs, challenges and opportunities for indicator models in transforming societies
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.ijdrr.2020.101799
复制
发表时间：
2020-12-01
影响因子：
5
通讯作者：
Doorn, Neelke
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Copeland, Samantha;Comes, Tina;Doorn, Neelke
社会复原力比复原力的任何其他方面都更能引起身份或持久性与变革之间的内在紧张关系。一个社区是由组成它的人组成的，还是由他们共享的地理或物质基础设施组成的？由于突然的灾难或随着时间的推移，社区的复原力如何？在本文中，我们探讨了这种紧张局势对如何开发和使用社会弹性指标的影响。首先，我们仔细审视了我们的复原力概念和指标的使用相互作用的方式，提出了几点。首先，我们如何识别一个社区并构建其弹性传达了特定的弹性概念，这反过来又对社区本身产生了规范性影响。部分原因是，很难把握这些社区内部和社区本身的重要适应和变革行动。此外，衡量和比较社区的复原力，以及沿着选择、汇总和比较指标值的量化方面，确保了关于如何使用指标的决定具有规范性的分量。通过这种探索，我们确定了一些规范的影响，在指标设计和应用的选择。最后，我们提出了一些建议，以更大的透明度和责任感来对待那些我们希望衡量其社会复原力以改善的社区。
More than any other facet of resilience, social resilience raises the inherent tension within the concept between identity or persistence, and transformation. Is a community the people who make it up, or the geography or physical infrastructure they share? What about the resilience of communities that transform, as a result of a sudden disaster or over time? In this paper, we explore the impact of this tension on how social resilience indicators can be developed and used. Beginning with a close look at the ways in which our concepts of resilience and our use of indicators interact, several points are raised. First, that how we identify a community and frame its resilience conveys particular conceptualisations of resilience, which in turn have normative implications for the communities themselves. In part, this is because of the difficulty in capturing important adaptations and transformative actions within and by those communities. Further, measuring and comparing the resilience of communities, and aspects of quantification that go along with selecting, aggregating and comparing indicator values, ensure that the decisions made about how indicators ought to be used carry normative weight. Through this exploration, we identify several normative implications of choices in indicator design and application. We conclude with recommendations for moving forward with greater transparency and responsibility toward those communities whose social resilience we hope to measure in order to improve.