Theoretical introduction: Building inclusive and resilient societies in the face of multiple crises
Building resilient societies in the face of increasing global challenges requires the development of several key capacities that collectively contribute to societies that can better withstand, respond to, and recover from diverse shocks and stresses. We have specifically chosen to look at how adaptive, collaborative, and inclusive capacity can enhance resilience-building within society. Below, we explain these three capacities and on how they contribute to resilient societies. Additionally, we reflect on how this process is influenced by institutional barriers—formal, institutional structures that prevent or slow capacity-building efforts to respond to adversities—and effective enablers, which are institutional or individual structures/actions that foster collaboration and support capacity-building among actors involved during times of adversity. Together, these aspects form what we call the BASICS for Resilience.
Adaptive Capacity
We define adaptive capacity as the ability to respond to adversity by showing flexibility and being able to adjust to new conditions. Individuals or societies with high adaptive capacity can anticipate changes, reduce vulnerability, and minimize the impact of adverse events. Adaptive capacity is rooted in flexibility, learning, and innovation:
Flexibility
Flexibility involves the implementation of policies that can be revised based on new information or changing conditions. For instance, urban planning that integrates climate projections can help cities adapt to future environmental changes.
Learning
Learning requires the continuous effort of individuals and communities to acquire new skills necessary for adapting to new circumstances. Lifelong learning programs and vocational training can prepare the workforce for evolving economic landscapes.
Innovation
Innovation plays a crucial role in enhancing adaptive capacity. Leveraging technology to develop innovative solutions, such as early warning systems for natural disasters, advanced healthcare technologies, and smart agriculture practices, helps communities prepare for and respond to emergencies.
Institutional barriers can impede adaptive capacity. For example, rigid bureaucratic processes can halt flexibility and make it impossible to adapt policy to changing conditions. Moreover, a lack of funding for training or research can create an environment in which both learning and innovation are minimized. Effective enablers, including streamlined regulatory frameworks and incentives for research and development, are essential to overcome these barriers. Moreover, engaging local communities in planning and decision-making processes ensures that adaptive measures are culturally appropriate and context-specific. Local knowledge can provide valuable insights into effective adaptation strategies.
Collaborative Capacity
We define collaborative capacity as the ability to respond to adversity by collectively addressing and resolving associated problems. This capacity emphasizes the importance of cooperation and coordination among various stakeholders, including government agencies, the private sector, civil society, and communities. Effective collaboration leads to better resource utilization, shared responsibilities, and enhanced problem-solving. Collaborative capacity is influenced amongst others by communication lines, coordination across stakeholder levels, and transparency:
Communication
Communication lines are crucial for collaboration, with both the quantity and quality of communication affecting collaborative capacity-building. For example, in natural disasters, high-quality communication, such as clear and regular updates among emergency services, ensures coordinated efforts, while a high quantity of communication lines, like using both social media and emergency hotlines, ensures that information reaches all community members even if one channel fails.
Coordination
Coordination across stakeholder levels ensures effective collaboration. For example, coordination among different levels of government—local, regional, and national—ensures cohesive policies and actions, especially in managing large-scale crises that require integrated responses.
Transparency
Transparency is key to fostering any type of collaboration, including the communication lines and coordination as described above. Transparent information sharing builds trust and facilitates timely decision-making. Transparency in government actions and policies encourages public participation and cooperation.
Institutional barriers such as siloed operations and lack of coordination among agencies can hinder collaborative efforts. Moreover, failure to incorporate community networks that foster mutual support and resource sharing can be a strong barrier for collaborative capacity. Effective enablers include creating interagency task forces and fostering a culture of collaboration through joint training and exercises. Establishing clear roles and responsibilities, along with mechanisms for accountability, ensures that collaborative efforts are effective and sustained.
Inclusive Capacity
We define inclusive capacity as the ability to respond to adversity by considering input of all involved actors as well as adhering to inclusive principles. Inclusive capacity ensures that all members of society, particularly marginalized and vulnerable groups, are considered and integrated into resilience-building efforts. Inclusivity promotes equity, social justice, and comprehensive development. We have defined empathy and representation as important elements in fostering inclusive capacity:
Empathy
Empathy enhances inclusive capacity by fostering understanding and respect for diverse perspectives and experiences. It encourages inclusive decision-making, ensuring marginalized voices are heard and considered. By valuing everyone’s input, empathy helps create policies and practices that address the needs of all community members, promoting social equity and cohesion.
Representation
Representation works to incorporate diverse voices in decision-making processes, leading to more equitable and effective policies. Representation of minorities and marginalized groups in leadership positions fosters inclusivity for example. Actively involving communities in planning and implementing resilience initiatives ensures that interventions are relevant and beneficial, building a sense of ownership and commitment among community members.
Institutional barriers to inclusivity include discriminatory practices and lack of access to decision-making platforms for marginalized groups. Lack of representation in leadership positions also halts progressivity and forms a barrier for the inclusion of marginalized groups within the organization or community. Effective enablers involve policy reforms to promote equity, along with programs that build the capacity of marginalized communities to engage in resilience-building processes. Empowering these communities through education, advocacy, and leadership training ensures their meaningful participation and contribution.
Integrating Capacities for Resilient Societies
Capacity building through training and development strengthens the ability of individuals and institutions to contribute to building resilient societies. Meanwhile, it is important to consider the interplay between adaptive, collaborative, and inclusive capacities. These capacities are interdependent and mutually reinforcing. For example, inclusive policies can enhance community participation, which in turn supports adaptive strategies by integrating diverse perspectives and solutions. By understanding how different capacities interact, policymakers and practitioners can design more effective resilience strategies. Cross-sectoral planning that incorporates adaptive, collaborative, and inclusive dimensions ensures comprehensive resilience-building. For instance, urban development plans that consider environmental sustainability, social equity, and economic viability can better withstand and adapt to emerging risks and diverse community needs. Therefore, it is essential that stakeholders invest in leadership, collaboration, and technical skills preparing their communities to face diverse challenges. Sufficient resources are to be allocated to support such adaptive, collaborative, and inclusive initiatives.
Course Agenda
We have introduced you to the theoretical grounding of the BASICS project and explored the concepts of resilience-building through the lens of various key capacities. For the remainder of the course, we will delve into the three sub-projects of the BASICS research, each focusing on the critical role of resilience-building for different societal areas and its unique group of stakeholders: refugees, long-term care employees, and social entrepreneurs. By examining these areas, we aim to provide a holistic understanding of capacity-building for resilience across different contexts and populations. After every project description, we will conclude with a discussion assignment designed to encourage you to actively engage with the material. The remainder of the course looks as follows:
Undocumented youth & resilience
On Day 2, we begin with Sub-Project 1, focusing on undocumented youth and their remarkable resilience. The day starts with an article introduction that sets the stage for our exploration of the resilience of undocumented youth participating in higher education. We will watch a short video that brings to life the struggles and triumphs of refugees, highlighting their capacity to adapt and thrive despite adversity. Following the video, an in-depth article will provide a comprehensive analysis of experiences of undocumented youth in higher education, the resilient coping strategies they use to cope with challenges, and the implications for institutional transformation needed to create more inclusive institutions. The day concludes with a discussion session with several questions encouraging participants to engage deeply with the material.
Long-term care facilities & organizational healing
Day 3 focuses on Sub-Project 3, exploring resilience in long-term care settings after the COVID-19 pandemic. Unlike earlier work with a COVID-19 centered research focus, which emphasizes the pandemic’s immediate impacts and responses, this day’s content shifts towards understanding the aftermath, highlighting the pathways to healing and recovery. The day begins with an introduction on building capacity for resilience in long-term care. This is followed by an article that will discuss organizational healing as a long-term strategy for recovery, resilience, and growth. An accompanying photo exhibition will showcase how long-term care facility staff have navigated the challenges of the crisis and moved towards healing. Finally, a discussion session will encourage participants to reflect and share their insights on these themes.
Social enterprises and collaboration
On our final day, Day 4, we explore Sub-Project 2, which focuses on social enterprises and their role in fostering community resilience. The day will begin with an introductory article to frame our understanding of how social enterprises contribute to resilient societies. A short video will provide tangible examples of successful social enterprises. The main article will offer an in-depth look at the strategies these enterprises use to build resilience, supported by empirical data and success stories. The course will end with a discussion session and a final article summarizing the key takeaways from the entire course. Participants will then complete a final test consisting of 15 multiple-choice questions to assess their understanding of the course material.
This course aims to equip you with a deep and nuanced understanding of capacity-building for resilience across various sectors and communities. By the end, you will have gained valuable insights and practical knowledge on how to build and support resilient systems. The course ends with a final test consisting of 15 multiple-choice questions to assess their understanding of the course material.