Vulnerability, resilience and ‘systemic interest’: a connectivity approach

Tools

Cardinale, Ivano. 2022. Vulnerability, resilience and ‘systemic interest’: a connectivity approach. Networks and Spatial Economics, 22(3), pp. 691-707. ISSN 1566-113X [Article]

Preview

Text
Cardinale - Vulnerability, resilience and systemic interest.pdf - Accepted Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial.
Download (229kB) | Preview

Preview

Text
Cardinale2019_Article_VulnerabilityResilienceAndSyst.pdf - Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.
Download (372kB) | Preview

Official URL: https://www.doi.org/10.1007/s11067-019-09462-9

Abstract or Description

This paper analyzes the socio-economic dimension of vulnerability and resilience from the viewpoint of connectivity. While no consensus has yet emerged on the definitions of vulnerability and resilience or on their relationship, it has been recognized that both have an important normative dimension, in that whether a system is considered vulnerable or resilient depends on the interests of the stakeholders involved. The paper proposes a dimension of resilience and vulnerability that is likely to be shared across a significant spectrum of stakeholders. To do so, the paper analyses connectivity within social-ecological systems from a “Structural Political Economy” viewpoint. A key concept in this regard is “systemic interest”, which is defined as the interest of stakeholders to keep viable the system of connections within which they act. Systemic interest has desirable properties to conceptualize the normative dimension of vulnerability and resilience and leads to problematize their link with connectivity. In fact, it raises the question of what features of connectivity can be expected to lead to systemic interest, and how this impinges on vulnerability and resilience in different contexts. On the one hand, one might expect that a more interconnected system is more vulnerable to shocks, which propagate more easily throughout the system. On the other hand, such system might have a stronger systemic interest, so that a shock would trigger stakeholders’ reaction to counteract its effects and avoid systemic consequences. The paper points to the institutional conditions that might make either outcome more likely in any given context.

Item Type:

Article

Identification Number (DOI):

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11067-019-09462-9