IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v121y2016icp98-107.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does resilience have a culture? Ecocultures and the politics of knowledge production

Author

Listed:
  • Arora-Jonsson, Seema

Abstract

Culture, that for long had been a neglected concept in resilience thinking, has gained prominence in recent times, especially in the notion of ecocultures/ecocultural resilience to be achieved through transdisciplinary projects. In this paper, I conceptualize the relation of science with society and culture that resilience scholars propose as part of a larger agenda of the integration of science with different knowledge and epistemologies. In order to understand how resilience thinking relates to culture, I investigate the culture of resilience itself. Using the lens of cultural and science studies, I go back to the history and context of resilience and transdisciplinarity, examine some of the central tools and concepts in resilience thinking and its entanglements in the politics of the past and present. In light of the discussion, I argue that we need to ‘situate’ rather than ‘integrate’ our knowledge production. This entails not only recognizing our own culture but also being open to different ways of knowing and to be able to transgress resilience. Moving away from integration and embracing ambivalence and humility can open up to experimental practices and ‘trading places’ in order to engage with nature and others justly.

Suggested Citation

  • Arora-Jonsson, Seema, 2016. "Does resilience have a culture? Ecocultures and the politics of knowledge production," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 98-107.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:121:y:2016:i:c:p:98-107
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.11.020
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800915004632
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.11.020?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jahn, Thomas & Bergmann, Matthias & Keil, Florian, 2012. "Transdisciplinarity: Between mainstreaming and marginalization," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 1-10.
    2. Sheila Jasanoff, 2007. "Technologies of humility," Nature, Nature, vol. 450(7166), pages 33-33, November.
    3. Strunz, Sebastian, 2012. "Is conceptual vagueness an asset? Arguments from philosophy of science applied to the concept of resilience," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 112-118.
    4. Sonja Deppisch & Sanin Hasibovic, 2013. "Social-ecological resilience thinking as a bridging concept in transdisciplinary research on climate-change adaptation," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 67(1), pages 117-127, May.
    5. Hirsch Hadorn, Gertrude & Bradley, David & Pohl, Christian & Rist, Stephan & Wiesmann, Urs, 2006. "Implications of transdisciplinarity for sustainability research," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 119-128, November.
    6. Brandt, Patric & Ernst, Anna & Gralla, Fabienne & Luederitz, Christopher & Lang, Daniel J. & Newig, Jens & Reinert, Florian & Abson, David J. & von Wehrden, Henrik, 2013. "A review of transdisciplinary research in sustainability science," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 1-15.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Veldhuizen, Caroline, 2021. "Conceptualising the foundations of sustainability focused innovation policy: From constructivism to holism," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    2. Dessie Elizabeth, 2018. "Applying resilience thinking to ‘ordinary’ cities: A theoretical inquiry," Bulletin of Geography. Socio-economic Series, Sciendo, vol. 40(40), pages 57-67, June.
    3. González, Nidia Catherine & Kröger, Markus, 2020. "The potential of Amazon indigenous agroforestry practices and ontologies for rethinking global forest governance," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    4. Susanne Moser & Sara Meerow & James Arnott & Emily Jack-Scott, 2019. "The turbulent world of resilience: interpretations and themes for transdisciplinary dialogue," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 153(1), pages 21-40, March.
    5. Kiss, Tibor & Kiss, Viktor Miklos, 2018. "Ecology-related resilience in urban planning – A complex approach for Pécs (Hungary)," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 160-170.
    6. Lars Bomhauer-Beins & Corinna de Guttry & Beate M. W. Ratter, 2019. "When Culture Materializes: Societal Dynamics in Resilience of Social-Ecological Systems in the Case of Conch Management on Abaco, The Bahamas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-17, February.
    7. Forsyth, Tim, 2018. "Is resilience to climate change socially inclusive? Investigating theories of change processes in Myanmar," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 13-26.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Evelien de Hoop, 2020. "More Democratic Sustainability Governance through Participatory Knowledge Production? A Framework and Systematic Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-30, July.
    2. Schmidt, Laura & Falk, Thomas & Siegmund-Schultze, Marianna & Spangenberg, Joachim H., 2020. "The Objectives of Stakeholder Involvement in Transdisciplinary Research. A Conceptual Framework for a Reflective and Reflexive Practise," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    3. Troullaki, Katerina & Rozakis, Stelios & Kostakis, Vasilis, 2021. "Bridging barriers in sustainability research: Α review from sustainability science to life cycle sustainability assessment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    4. Ana Guzmán Ruiz & Meredith Dobbie & Rebekah Brown, 2017. "Insights and future directions of transdisciplinary practice in the urban water sector," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 7(2), pages 251-263, June.
    5. Marina Knickel & Karlheinz Knickel & Francesca Galli & Damian Maye & Johannes S. C. Wiskerke, 2019. "Towards a Reflexive Framework for Fostering Co—Learning and Improvement of Transdisciplinary Collaboration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-22, November.
    6. Jana Zscheischler & Sebastian Rogga & Maria Busse, 2017. "The Adoption and Implementation of Transdisciplinary Research in the Field of Land-Use Science—A Comparative Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-20, October.
    7. Hoffmann, Sabine & Pohl, Christian & Hering, Janet G., 2017. "Exploring transdisciplinary integration within a large research program: Empirical lessons from four thematic synthesis processes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 678-692.
    8. Siebenhüner, Bernd, 2018. "Conflicts in Transdisciplinary Research: Reviewing Literature and Analysing a Case of Climate Adaptation in Northwestern Germany," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 117-127.
    9. Spangenberg, Joachim H. & Görg, Christoph & Settele, Josef, 2015. "Stakeholder involvement in ESS research and governance: Between conceptual ambition and practical experiences – risks, challenges and tested tools," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 201-211.
    10. Stefan Liehr & Julia Röhrig & Marion Mehring & Thomas Kluge, 2017. "How the Social-Ecological Systems Concept Can Guide Transdisciplinary Research and Implementation: Addressing Water Challenges in Central Northern Namibia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-19, June.
    11. Nicolás Ruiz, Néstor & Suárez Alonso, María Luisa & Vidal-Abarca, María Rosario, 2021. "Contributions of dry rivers to human well-being: A global review for future research," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    12. Juerges, Nataly & Jahn, Stephanie, 2020. "German forest management stakeholders at the science-society interface: Their views on problem definition, knowledge production and research utilization," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    13. Lundgren, Jakob, 2022. "Unity through disunity: Strengths, values, and tensions in the disciplinary discourse of ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    14. Hubeau, Marianne & Marchand, Fleur & Coteur, Ine & Mondelaers, Koen & Debruyne, Lies & Van Huylenbroeck, Guido, 2017. "A new agri-food systems sustainability approach to identify shared transformation pathways towards sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 52-63.
    15. Zeigermann, Ulrike & Böcher, Michael, 2020. "Challenges for bridging the gap between knowledge and governance in sustainability policy – The case of OECD ‘Focal Points’ for Policy Coherence for Development," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    16. Melissa Robson-Williams & Bruce Small & Roger Robson-Williams & Nick Kirk, 2021. "Handrails through the Swamp? A Pilot to Test the Integration and Implementation Science Framework in Complex Real-World Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-23, May.
    17. Ioan G. Pop & Sebastian Văduva & Mihai-Florin Talpoș, 2017. "Energetic Sustainability and the Environment: A Transdisciplinary, Economic–Ecological Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-12, May.
    18. Flurina Schneider & Zarina Patel & Katsia Paulavets & Tobias Buser & Jacqueline Kado & Stefanie Burkhart, 2023. "Fostering transdisciplinary research for sustainability in the Global South: Pathways to impact for funding programmes," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-11, December.
    19. Carbajo, Ruth & Cabeza, Luisa F., 2018. "Renewable energy research and technologies through responsible research and innovation looking glass: Reflexions, theoretical approaches and contemporary discourses," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 792-808.
    20. Stephanie Jahn & Jens Newig & Daniel J. Lang & Judith Kahle & Matthias Bergmann, 2022. "Demarcating transdisciplinary research in sustainability science—Five clusters of research modes based on evidence from 59 research projects," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(2), pages 343-357, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:121:y:2016:i:c:p:98-107. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.