Translating disaster resilience: How values, world views and politics complicate interpretation and implementation

Abstract

Globalized climate change and ecological collapse discourses have created a universally relatable conceptual arena within which institutional actors’ debate, design and implement interventions to create ‘disaster resilient cities’ in the Global South. The implications of resilience ideologies and practices adopted from the Global North can have detrimental and counterproductive effects when translated into interventions in postcolonial countries like Pakistan. In this research paper, we use interviews and discourse analysis to underscore the techniques, rationalities, and framings mobilized by governmental and non-governmental actors in the name of ‘reducing risks’ and building ‘disaster resilience’. Within this arena, Pakistani institutional actors create, mimic, and adapt normative resilience trajectories influenced by international resilience standards that do not align, or worse, conflict with the spiritual, cultural, and postcolonial contexts and values of communities they engage with. Imposition of international resilience standards may result in disconnected top-down interventions that overlook the vulnerabilities of local communities deemed as ‘beneficiaries’ and misallocate funds in favor of ineffective projects and programmes, ultimately missing opportunities for meaningful change. While building upon existing urban resilience efforts in Pakistan is important, it is critical to recognize that merely pursuing resilience as an outcome is not enough. Fulfilling basic needs should take precedence over resilience efforts, particularly when the goal is not only the survival of local communities in the face of escalating climate and disaster risks but also their overall well-being.