Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Risk and Resilience

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Environment and Society

Part of the book series: Palgrave Studies in Environmental Sociology and Policy ((PASTESP))

Abstract

The concepts of risk and resilience have spread to the environmental social sciences and many other disciplines. Nevertheless, the relationship between the concepts often remains ambiguous. This chapter charts the recent developments of the concepts in technical risk assessment and resilience engineering and examines how the environmental social sciences have enriched the understanding of risk and resilience. The technical and social sciences have had different understandings of risk. However, recent developments in technical risk assessment have opened for cross-fertilization between the social sciences and technical risk analysis. This cross-fertilization enhances an in-depth understanding of risks and resilience. It is argued herein that it is fruitful to see the concepts as complementary and to exploit both of them in analyses of the environment and society.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Althaus, C. E. (2005). A Disciplinary Perspective on the Epistemological Status of Risk. Risk Analysis, 25(3), 567–588.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aven, T. (2014). Risks, Surprises and Black Swans. Fundamental Ideas and Concepts in Risk Assessment and Risk Management. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aven, T. (2017). How Some Types of Risk Assessments Can Support Resilience Analysis and Management. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 167, 536–543.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aven, T., & Krohn, B. S. (2014). A New Perspective on How to Understand, Assess and Manage Risk and the Unforeseen. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 121, 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aven, T., & Renn, O. (2010). Risk Management and Governance. Concepts, Guidelines and Applications. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aven, T., & Zio, E. (2014). Foundational Issues in Risk Assessment and Risk Management. Risk Analysis, 34(7), 1164–1172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baldwin, R., Cave, M., & Lodge, M. (2012). Understanding Regulation (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, U. (1986). Risikogesellschaft. Auf dem Weg in eine andere Moderne. Frankfurt/M: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, U. (1992). Risk Society. Towards a New Modernity. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein, B. L. (1996). Against the Gods: The Remarkable Story of Risk. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birkland, T. A., & Waterman, S. (2009). The Politics and Policy Challenges of Disaster Resilience. In C. P. Nemeth, E. Hollnagel, & S. Dekker (Eds.), Resilience Engineering Perspectives: Preparation and Restoration (Vol. 2, pp. 15–38). Surrey: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, K., & Westway, E. (2011). Agency, Capacity and Resilience to Environmental Changes: Lessons from Human Development, Well-being and Disasters. The Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 36, 321–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chapin, F., III, Folke, D., & Kofinas, G. P. (2009). A Framework for Understanding Change. In F. S. Chapin III, G. P. Kofinas, & C. Folke (Eds.), Principles of Ecosystem Stewardship. Resilience-Based Natural Resource Management in a Changing World (pp. 3–28). New York: Springer Science + Business Media.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Davoudi, S. (2012). Resilience: A Bridging Concept or a Dead End? Planning Theory & Practice, 13(2), 299–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dekker, S., Cilliers, P., & Hofmeyr, J. H. (2011). The Complexity of Failure: Implications of Complexity Theory for Safety Investigations. Safety Science, 49(6), 939–945.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Douglas, M. (1992). Risk and Blame: Essays in Cultural Theory. London and New York: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Duckett, D., Wynne, B., Christley, R. M., Heathwaite, A. L., Mort, M., Austin, Z., Wastling, J. M., Latham, S. M., Alcock, R., & Haygarth, P. (2015). Can Policy Be Risk-Based? The Cultural Theory of Risk and the Case of Livestock Disease Containment. Sociologia Ruralis, 55(4), 379–399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fiksel, J. (2017). Sustainability and Resilience: Toward a Systems Approach. Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy, 2(2), 14–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Folke, C. (2016). Resilience (Republished). Ecology and Society, 21(4), 44. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-09088-210444

  • Giddens, A. (1999). Runaway World: How Globalisation Is Reshaping Our Lives. London: Profile Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gross, M. (2016). Risk as Zombie Category: Ulrich Beck’s Unfinished Project of the Non-Knowledge Society. Security Dialogue, 47(5), 386–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansson, S. O. (2009). A Philosophical Perspective on Risk. In R. E. Löfstedt & Å. Boholm (Eds.), Risk (pp. 43–52). London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holling, C. S. (1973). Resilience and Stability of Ecological Systems. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 4, 1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hollnagel, E. (2009). The Four Cornerstones of Resilience. In Nemeth, C. P., Hollnagel, E., & Dekker, S. (Eds.), Resilience Engineering Perspectives. Vol. 2. Preparation and Restoration (pp. 117–133). Surrey: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hollnagel, E., Woods, D. D., & Leveson, N. G. (2006). Resilience Engineering: Concepts and Precepts. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hollnagel, E., Pariès, J., Woods, D. D., & Wreathall, J. (2011). Resilience Engineering in Practice. A Guidebook. Ashgate Studies in Resilience Engineering. Surrey: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, S., & Garrick, B. J. (1981). On the Quantitative Definition of Risk. Risk Analysis, 1, 11–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindley, D. V. (2006). Understanding Uncertainty. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Linkov, I., Fox-Lent, C., Keisler, J., Della-Sala, S., & Siweke, J. (2014). Plagued by Problems. Resilience Lessons from Venice. Environment, Systems, Decision, 34, 378–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linnerooth-Bayer, J., & Wahlström, B. (1991). Applications of Probabilistic Risk Assessments: The Selection of Appropriate Tools. Risk Analysis, 11(2), 239–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Löfstedt, R. E., & Boholm, Å. (2009). The Earthscan Reader on Risk. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • McLaughlin, P., & Dietz, T. (2008). Structure, Agency and Environment: Toward and Integrated Perspective on Vulnerability. Global Environmental Change, 18, 99–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norris, F., Stevens, S., Pfefferbaum, B., Wyche, K., & Pfefferbaum, R. (2008). Community Resilience as a Metaphor, Theory, Et of Capacities, and Strategy for Disaster Readiness. American Journal of Community Psychology., 41, 127–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nowotny, H. (2014). Engaging with the Political Imaginaries of Science: Near Misses and Future Targets. Public Understanding of Science, 23(1), 16–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olofsson, A., Öhman, S., & Nygren, K. G. (2016). An Intersectional Risk Approach for Environmental Sociology. Environmental Sociology, 2(4), 346–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pizzo, B. (2015). Problematizing Resilience: Implications for Planning Theory and Practice. Cities, 43, 133–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Redman, C. L. (2014). Should Sustainability and Resilience be Combined or Remain Distinct Pursuits? Ecology and Society, 19(2), 37. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol19/iss2/art37/.

  • Reith, G. (2009). Uncertain Times: The Notion of ‘Risk’ and the Development of Modernity. In R. E. Löfstedt & Å. Boholm (Eds.), Risk (pp. 53–68). London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renn, O. (2008). Risk Governance. Coping with Uncertainty in a Complex World. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarewitz, D. (2004). How Science Make Environmental Controversies Worse. Environmental Science and Policy, 7, 385–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B. & Lichtenstein S. (1980). Facts and Fears. Understanding Perceived Risk. In Schwing, R. C and Albers, W.A. Jr. Societal Risk Assessment. How Safe Is Safe Enough? General Motors Research Laboratories. Proceedings of the General Motors Symposium on Societal Risk Assessment, held in Warren, Michigan, October, 7–9, 1979. Pp. 181–216.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • SRA. (2015). Glossary Society for Risk Analysis. Retrieved May 28, 2016, from www.sra.com/resources.

  • Stoop, J. (2011). No Facts, No Glory. In E. Hollnagel, J. Pariès, D. D. Woods, & J. Wreathall (Eds.), Resilience Engineering in Practice. A Guidebook. Studien in Resilience Engineering (pp. 199–217). Surrey: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsoukas, H., & Vladimirou, E. (2001). What Is Organizational Knowledge? Journal of Management Studies, 38(7), 973–993.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, J., & Cooper, M. (2011). Genalogies of Resilience. From Systems Ecology to the Political Economy of Crisis Adaptation. Security Dialogue, 14(2).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, B., & Salt, D. (2006). Social-Ecological Resilience: Sustaining Ecosystems and People in Changing World. Washington, DC: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. E., & Suthcliffe, K. M. (2007). Managing the Unexpected Resilient Performance in an Age of Uncertainty. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson, C. (2011). Social-Ecological Resilience: Insights and Issues for Planning Theory. Planning Theory, 11(2), 148–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wynne, B. (1996). May the Sheep Safely Graze? In S. Lash, B. Szerszynsky, & B. Wynne (Eds.), Risk, Environment and Modernity. Towards a New Ecology. London: Sage Publication Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Technical Research Centre of Finland (VTT), Espoo, Finland

    Marja Ylönen

Authors
  1. Marja Ylönen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marja Ylönen .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Humanities Education and Social Sciences, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden

    Magnus Boström

  2. Department of Resource Economics and Environmental Sociology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada

    Debra J. Davidson

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Ylönen, M. (2018). Risk and Resilience. In: Boström, M., Davidson, D. (eds) Environment and Society. Palgrave Studies in Environmental Sociology and Policy. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76415-3_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76415-3_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-76414-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-76415-3

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation