![]() It discusses how Fordist programs attempted to address a wide range of risks, of an economic nature or otherwise, confronting individuals and communities, only to be reined in by the ongoing neoliberal transition. Another is the adoption of priorities consistent with the economic sphere, which value risk over prudence and short-termism over long-range perspectives.ģ The paper attributes a limited resilience potential to the very nature of capitalism. One is an inevitable limitation of the sums it can direct to resilience initiatives. As the state is the foremost agent of resilience, there are major implications to the fact that its policy agenda derives to such an extent from the private economy. The paper explores how economic dynamics imprint the state by influencing its priorities and determining the resources at its disposal. While it is true, as much of the resilience literature suggests, that the promotion of resilience is essential to the safety of individuals and communities, the influence of the prevailing societal environment on the nature and impacts of resilience must also be acknowledged.Ģ This paper proposes a political economy of resilience, which connects presently dominant economic tendencies with the rise of neo-liberal governance. ![]() Top of pageġ This paper is a response to the insufficient attention much of the literature on resilience gives to the political and economic circumstances impinging on the capacity to deploy urban resilience strategies (as acknowledged by Newman et al., 2007 Rogers, 2012). The paper closes with an examination of realistic means of enhancing resilience in the present neoliberal context. The experience of shrinking cities points to the dual impact of their contracting economies: direct threats to the wellbeing and survival of their residents, and a depletion of the intervention capacity of agencies responsible for different aspects of urban resilience. A discussion of the shrinking city phenomenon demonstrates that economic hazards, against which most resilience measures are helpless, represent a peril that is more common than, and often at least as destructive as, the disasters targeted by mainstream resilience approaches. Concurrently, combined effects of neoliberal societal arrangements and economic globalisation exacerbate economic risks to which individuals and communities are exposed. A form of resilience focussing narrowly on natural and human-caused disasters replaces broader responses to risks, which address economic and personal hardship. ![]() The paper argues that creative destruction at the heart of capitalist dynamics, along with risk-prone features of neoliberalism, impedes wide-ranging resilience.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |