Looking at resilience more broadly

Resilience needs to be expressed in operational terms that go beyond the kinds of definitions we’ve explored so far.

One key concern is whether individual governments can push ahead independently on the basis of what are considered to be common principles, without relying on a much more precise definition .

There is also a parallel need to reconcile some currently varying expectations about resilience. This includes expectations in both operational dynamics and core principles (including political and fiscal considerations) as understood by various sectors such as the public, private, academic, and the general public.

Your task

The question of how far governments and societal leaders should go in building and ensuring resilience is an important one.

Do you think that efforts by leaders to promote resilience in societies and nations should:

  • Reflect a desire to make a substantially better world where persistent risks of all types are drastically reduced and controlled but where members of that society are still able to probe and push boundaries that could potentially lead to increase risks?

Or:

  • Favour policies and programmes aimed at dramatically reducing the likelihood that any of the most damaging recurring disaster risks could ever arise even if by doing so could mean jeopardising opportunities for future progression?

Share this article:

This article is from the free online course:

Foundations in Resilience, Security and Emerging Technology

Coventry University