Resilience, Hardship and Social Conditions

Hulya Dagdeviren; Matthew Donoghue; Markus Promberger

doi:10.1017/S004727941500032X

Resilience, Hardship and Social Conditions

Hulya Dagdeviren, Matthew Donoghue, Markus Promberger

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

41 Citations (Scopus)

159 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

This paper provides a critical assessment of the term ‘resilience’ – and its highly agent-centric conceptualisation – when applied to how individuals and households respond to hardship. We provide an argument for social conditions to be embedded into the framework of resilience analysis. Drawing on two different perspectives in social theory, namely the structure-agent nexus and path dependency, we aim to demonstrate that the concept of resilience, if understood in isolation from the social conditions within which it may or may not arise, can result in a number of problems. This includes misidentification of resilience, ideological exploitation of the term and inability to explain intermittence in resilience.

Original language	English
Article number	1
Pages (from-to)	1-20
Number of pages	20
Journal	Journal of Social Policy
Volume	45
Issue number	1
Early online date	21 Jul 2015
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1017/S004727941500032X
Publication status	Published - 1 Jan 2016

Keywords

resilience, poverty, hardship, social conditions, structure, agency, path dependence

Access to Document

10.1017/S004727941500032X

JSP_article_2015Accepted author manuscript, 593 KB

Cite this

@article{2354efb394d44a68af58bbb6ce086157,

title = "Resilience, Hardship and Social Conditions",

abstract = "This paper provides a critical assessment of the term {\textquoteleft}resilience{\textquoteright} – and its highly agent-centric conceptualisation – when applied to how individuals and households respond to hardship. We provide an argument for social conditions to be embedded into the framework of resilience analysis. Drawing on two different perspectives in social theory, namely the structure-agent nexus and path dependency, we aim to demonstrate that the concept of resilience, if understood in isolation from the social conditions within which it may or may not arise, can result in a number of problems. This includes misidentification of resilience, ideological exploitation of the term and inability to explain intermittence in resilience.",

keywords = "resilience, poverty, hardship, social conditions, structure, agency, path dependence",

author = "Hulya Dagdeviren and Matthew Donoghue and Markus Promberger",

note = "This document is the Accepted Manuscript version of the following article: Hulya Dagdeviren, Matthew Donoghue, and Markus Promberger, {\textquoteleft}Resilience, Hardship and Social Conditions{\textquoteright}, Journal of Social Policy, Vol. 45 (1), pp. 1-20, first published online 21 July 2015. The final, published version is available online at DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S004727941500032X {\textcopyright} 2015 Cambridge University Press. ",

year = "2016",

month = jan,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1017/S004727941500032X",

language = "English",

volume = "45",

pages = "1--20",

journal = "Journal of Social Policy",

issn = "0047-2794",

publisher = "Cambridge University Press",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Resilience, Hardship and Social Conditions

AU - Dagdeviren, Hulya

AU - Donoghue, Matthew

AU - Promberger, Markus

N1 - This document is the Accepted Manuscript version of the following article: Hulya Dagdeviren, Matthew Donoghue, and Markus Promberger, ‘Resilience, Hardship and Social Conditions’, Journal of Social Policy, Vol. 45 (1), pp. 1-20, first published online 21 July 2015. The final, published version is available online at DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S004727941500032X © 2015 Cambridge University Press.

PY - 2016/1/1

Y1 - 2016/1/1

N2 - This paper provides a critical assessment of the term ‘resilience’ – and its highly agent-centric conceptualisation – when applied to how individuals and households respond to hardship. We provide an argument for social conditions to be embedded into the framework of resilience analysis. Drawing on two different perspectives in social theory, namely the structure-agent nexus and path dependency, we aim to demonstrate that the concept of resilience, if understood in isolation from the social conditions within which it may or may not arise, can result in a number of problems. This includes misidentification of resilience, ideological exploitation of the term and inability to explain intermittence in resilience.

AB - This paper provides a critical assessment of the term ‘resilience’ – and its highly agent-centric conceptualisation – when applied to how individuals and households respond to hardship. We provide an argument for social conditions to be embedded into the framework of resilience analysis. Drawing on two different perspectives in social theory, namely the structure-agent nexus and path dependency, we aim to demonstrate that the concept of resilience, if understood in isolation from the social conditions within which it may or may not arise, can result in a number of problems. This includes misidentification of resilience, ideological exploitation of the term and inability to explain intermittence in resilience.

KW - resilience, poverty, hardship, social conditions, structure, agency, path dependence

U2 - 10.1017/S004727941500032X

DO - 10.1017/S004727941500032X

M3 - Article

SN - 0047-2794

VL - 45

SP - 1

EP - 20

JO - Journal of Social Policy

JF - Journal of Social Policy

IS - 1

M1 - 1

ER -

Resilience, Hardship and Social Conditions

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this