“脆弱性和复原力地理学-关键探索”专区社论

IF 1.2 4区 地球科学 Q3 GEOGRAPHY Erde Pub Date : 2017-01-12 DOI:10.12854/ERDE-147-20
P. Sakdapolrak, B. Etzold
{"title":"“脆弱性和复原力地理学-关键探索”专区社论","authors":"P. Sakdapolrak, B. Etzold","doi":"10.12854/ERDE-147-20","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the past 30 years the concept of vulnerability has been an important paradigm in human geography and development studies. Vulnerability analyses have signi icantly enhanced our understanding of everyday life under conditions of poverty and food insecurity in the Global South and of people’s capacities to live with risks and natural hazards (Wisner et al. 2004; Bohle 2007c). A vulnerability perspective has also been adopted by practitioners and served as a guiding principle for policies and development interventions (e.g. IPCC 2015). In the last ten years, we have, however, witnessed a paradigm shift from vulnerability to resilience, a concept that has its roots in ecosystems science and psychology (Luthar 2003; Folke 2006). Some have argued that resilience and vulnerability are like two sides of a coin and are thus compatible (Miller et al. 2010). For many, resilience thinking seems to be more positive and promising. Others argue that the systems perspective of resilience thinking cannot fully capture the everyday life experiences of poverty, hunger and exploitation and people’s creative responses to crises, which stands at the centre of vulnerability research. Some have also argued that resilience thinking is largely apolitical and uncritical of power structures at different scales, and thus plead for an integration of social theories and politics in the concept (Bohle et al. 2009; Cannon and Müller-Mahn 2010; Keck and Sakdapolrak 2013). With this special section we would like to take stock of the debate and reconsider some of the basic conceptual questions in vulnerability and resilience research. What does the paradigm shift from vulnerability to resilience mean for doing research? What roles do social theories, political discourses and critical thinking play for each concept? Where is the geography in contemporary vulnerability and resilience research? And what is the role of human agency for vulnerability and resilience?","PeriodicalId":50505,"journal":{"name":"Erde","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Editorial to the special section \\\"Geographies of Vulnerability and Resilience – Critical Explorations\\\"\",\"authors\":\"P. Sakdapolrak, B. Etzold\",\"doi\":\"10.12854/ERDE-147-20\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In the past 30 years the concept of vulnerability has been an important paradigm in human geography and development studies. Vulnerability analyses have signi icantly enhanced our understanding of everyday life under conditions of poverty and food insecurity in the Global South and of people’s capacities to live with risks and natural hazards (Wisner et al. 2004; Bohle 2007c). A vulnerability perspective has also been adopted by practitioners and served as a guiding principle for policies and development interventions (e.g. IPCC 2015). In the last ten years, we have, however, witnessed a paradigm shift from vulnerability to resilience, a concept that has its roots in ecosystems science and psychology (Luthar 2003; Folke 2006). Some have argued that resilience and vulnerability are like two sides of a coin and are thus compatible (Miller et al. 2010). For many, resilience thinking seems to be more positive and promising. Others argue that the systems perspective of resilience thinking cannot fully capture the everyday life experiences of poverty, hunger and exploitation and people’s creative responses to crises, which stands at the centre of vulnerability research. Some have also argued that resilience thinking is largely apolitical and uncritical of power structures at different scales, and thus plead for an integration of social theories and politics in the concept (Bohle et al. 2009; Cannon and Müller-Mahn 2010; Keck and Sakdapolrak 2013). With this special section we would like to take stock of the debate and reconsider some of the basic conceptual questions in vulnerability and resilience research. What does the paradigm shift from vulnerability to resilience mean for doing research? What roles do social theories, political discourses and critical thinking play for each concept? Where is the geography in contemporary vulnerability and resilience research? And what is the role of human agency for vulnerability and resilience?\",\"PeriodicalId\":50505,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Erde\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-01-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Erde\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"89\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.12854/ERDE-147-20\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"地球科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"GEOGRAPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Erde","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12854/ERDE-147-20","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GEOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在过去的30年里,脆弱性的概念一直是人文地理学和发展研究的一个重要范式。脆弱性分析大大提高了我们对全球南方贫困和粮食不安全条件下的日常生活以及人们应对风险和自然灾害的能力的理解(Wisner等人,2004;Bohle 2007 c)。从业者也采用了脆弱性视角,并将其作为政策和发展干预措施的指导原则(例如IPCC 2015)。然而,在过去十年中,我们目睹了从脆弱性到恢复力的范式转变,这一概念源于生态系统科学和心理学(Luthar 2003;Folke 2006)。一些人认为,弹性和脆弱性就像硬币的两面,因此是兼容的(Miller et al. 2010)。对许多人来说,弹性思维似乎更积极、更有希望。另一些人则认为,弹性思维的系统视角不能完全捕捉到贫困、饥饿和剥削等日常生活经历,以及人们对危机的创造性反应,而这些正是脆弱性研究的核心。一些人还认为,弹性思维在很大程度上与政治无关,对不同规模的权力结构不加批判,因此呼吁将社会理论和政治整合到这个概念中(Bohle et al. 2009;Cannon and m ler- mahn 2010;Keck and Sakdapolrak 2013)。在这个特别的章节中,我们想对辩论进行盘点,并重新考虑脆弱性和恢复力研究中的一些基本概念问题。从脆弱到恢复的范式转变对研究意味着什么?社会理论、政治话语和批判性思维在每个概念中扮演什么角色?地理在当代脆弱性和复原力研究中的地位如何?人类在脆弱性和恢复力方面的作用是什么?
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Editorial to the special section "Geographies of Vulnerability and Resilience – Critical Explorations"
In the past 30 years the concept of vulnerability has been an important paradigm in human geography and development studies. Vulnerability analyses have signi icantly enhanced our understanding of everyday life under conditions of poverty and food insecurity in the Global South and of people’s capacities to live with risks and natural hazards (Wisner et al. 2004; Bohle 2007c). A vulnerability perspective has also been adopted by practitioners and served as a guiding principle for policies and development interventions (e.g. IPCC 2015). In the last ten years, we have, however, witnessed a paradigm shift from vulnerability to resilience, a concept that has its roots in ecosystems science and psychology (Luthar 2003; Folke 2006). Some have argued that resilience and vulnerability are like two sides of a coin and are thus compatible (Miller et al. 2010). For many, resilience thinking seems to be more positive and promising. Others argue that the systems perspective of resilience thinking cannot fully capture the everyday life experiences of poverty, hunger and exploitation and people’s creative responses to crises, which stands at the centre of vulnerability research. Some have also argued that resilience thinking is largely apolitical and uncritical of power structures at different scales, and thus plead for an integration of social theories and politics in the concept (Bohle et al. 2009; Cannon and Müller-Mahn 2010; Keck and Sakdapolrak 2013). With this special section we would like to take stock of the debate and reconsider some of the basic conceptual questions in vulnerability and resilience research. What does the paradigm shift from vulnerability to resilience mean for doing research? What roles do social theories, political discourses and critical thinking play for each concept? Where is the geography in contemporary vulnerability and resilience research? And what is the role of human agency for vulnerability and resilience?
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Erde
Erde GEOGRAPHY, PHYSICAL-GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
6.20%
发文量
0
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: DIE ERDE is a publication of the Geographical Society of Berlin DIE ERDE is a scientific journal in Geography, with four issues per year with about 100 pages each. It covers all aspects of geographical research, focusing on both earth system studies and regional contributions. DIE ERDE invites contributions from any subfield of both Physical and Human Geography as well as from neighbouring disciplines.
期刊最新文献
Places of well-being in a French region. Lyon residents and their preferences Brazilian government violates Indigenous rights: What could induce a change? Discursive representations of cities in northeast Germany Gender and mobility in the car-dependent urban society of Muscat/ Oman China’s Belt and Road rail freight transport corridors – the economic geography of underdevelopment
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1