Disentangling Wicked Problems: A Reflexive Approach Towards Resilience Governance

Duijnhoven, Hanneke; Neef, Martijn

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-21106-0_5

Cited by 7 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Disasters that occur at city level determine also transboundary effects that request collaborative approaches [23] to mitigate disaster risks, to create capacity and resilient culture [24][25][26][27][28] to coordinate emergency responses and provide recovery actions [29,30].…”

Section: Framing Cities In the Era Of Complexity And Vulnerability To Disaster Risk A Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Making a Step Forward Towards Urban Resilience. The Contribution of Digital Innovation

Vermiglio

Kudo

Zarone

2020

Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Starting from 'wicked problem' theory as the landmark for framing disaster events in terms of policy issue for city governments, this paper highlights the contribution provided by Big Data analytics and digital innovation in dealing with disaster risks. The research aims at answering the following question: what is the role that 'smart technologies' play in strengthening urban resilience to disaster risks?To answer the question, the study devotes attention to some applications of data analytics for enhancing cities resilience towards disaster risk reduction.Exploiting the transformative power of digital innovation for the enhancement of city 'smartness' could be a valuable path for boosting urban resilience facing 'wicked problems. However, it is debatable whether cities can effectively overcome these problems without a clear understanding of the need to merge smartness and resilience in a broad policy framework and to apply these principles into consistent operational disaster risk reduction plans.

show abstract

Section: Framing Cities In the Era Of Complexity And Vulnerability To Disaster Risk A Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Making a Step Forward Towards Urban Resilience. The Contribution of Digital Innovation

Vermiglio

Kudo

Zarone

2020

Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Second, the article considers a reflexive logic of evaluation, which gained increasing traction over the past 20 to 30 years. Linearly advancing public welfare had been demonstrated to have unintended (negative) side-effects, thereby disclosing the complex and uncertain interdependencies of ecological, social, economic, political, and institutional processes that modernist approaches are arguably poorly equipped to understand (Duijnhoven and Neef, 2016). Drawing on social-constructivist epistemologies (pluralism, relativism, pragmatism), reflexive logic builds on the premise that scientific knowledge is not produced in isolation, but is deeply intertwined with cultural understandings of socio-economic and socio-ecological relations (Jasanoff, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How to normalize reflexive evaluation? Navigating between legitimacy and integrity

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While hybrid evaluation practices are increasingly common, many Western countries continue to favor modernist evaluation logics focused on performance management—hampering the normalization of reflexive logics revolving around system change. We use Normalization Process Theory to analyze the work evaluators from a policy assessment agency undertook to accomplish the alignment between the prevailing and proposed logics guiding evaluation practice, while implementing a reflexive evaluation approach. Ad hoc alignment strategies and insufficient investment in mutual sense-making regarding reflexive evaluation hindered normalization. We conclude that alignment requires developing reflexive evaluation legitimacy in the context of application and guarding reflexive evaluation integrity, while contextual structures and cultures and reflexive evaluation components are being negotiated. Elasticity (of contextual structures and cultures) and plasticity (of reflexive evaluation components) are introduced as helpful concepts to further understand how reflexive evaluation practices can become normalized. We reflect on the use of Normalization Process Theory for studying the normalization of reflexive evaluation.

show abstract

“…Whilst this understanding of resilience also includes the ability to persist disturbances, it emphasises that change is ever-present and often unpredictable due to the systems' dynamic environment caused by human-ecosystem interactions (Sinclair et al, 2014;Duijnhoven & Neef, 2016;Folke, 2016;Darnhofer, 2021A). A resilient system can deal with the unexpected by learning from the changing circumstances, or by adjusting or fundamentally changing its different components to ensure it can function in the future (Darnhofer, 2014;Folke, 2016;Walker, 2020).…”

Section: Conceptualising the Resilience Of Farming Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, farming systems may want to adapt or change due to the increasing unpredictability of shocks and stresses, the acknowledged negative social and environmental impacts of certain farming practices, and the societal pressure to change these practices. By including change as an integral part of resilience, resilience thinking offers a conceptual lens that accepts that change is omnipresent, often unpredictable, and might ask of complex systems to keep their options open (Holling, 1973;Sinclair et al, 2014;Duijnhoven & Neef, 2016;Folke, 2016).…”

Section: Conceptualising the Resilience Of Farming Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, Darnhofer (2014) highlights that managing a farm's resilience also includes being capable of dealing with uncertainties through learning and adjusting responses to changing circumstances, and to fundamentally change components of farming systems when these prove dysfunctional. By including change as integral parts of resilience, resilience thinking offers a conceptual lens that accepts that change is omnipresent and often unpredictable in complex systems (Sinclair et al, 2014;Duijnhoven & Neef, 2016;Folke, 2016).…”

Section: Resilience and Farming Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Bouncing back or moving forward? : Analysing resilience and agricultural policies in the European Union

Buitenhuis¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The resilience of European farming systems is increasingly being put under pressure due to social, economic, and environmental challenges. These challenges make it difficult for farming systems to maintain delivering their public and private goods. Scholars and practitioners therefore call for strengthening farming systems' resilience through EU agricultural policy. However, research to understand the link between resilience and public policies has remained scarce. This dissertation aims to expand the scientific knowledge on how EU agricultural policies, especially the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), influence farming systems' resilience, consisting of three capacities: robustness, adaptability, and transformability. The central research question of this dissertation is: How does EU agricultural policy shape the resilience of European farming systems? The research in this dissertation was guided by four sub-questions: (1) how do policy goals and instruments of the CAP 2013 reform, and its implementation in the Netherlands, support or constrain the resilience of a Dutch farming system?; (2) how do actors at the farming-system level experience the influence of policies on the resilience of farming system cases in Flanders, the Netherlands, Poland, Spain, and the UK?; (3) how is the concept of resilience framed in the CAP post-2020 reform process and which policy actors and stakeholders deploy these frames?; and (4) what policy recommendations on how to improve the capability of the CAP to support the resilience of farming systems in the EU are preferred by stakeholders and policymakers? This dissertation concludes that EU agricultural policy, headed by the CAP, largely puts forth a one-sided way to strengthen resilience and, therefore, shapes the resilience of European farming systems with uneven and adverse effects. The policy is focused on ensuring that farming systems can bounce back to a familiar situation after short-term shocks by resorting to familiar and conventional policy interventions, which are often insufficient to support adaptability or

show abstract

Disentangling Wicked Problems: A Reflexive Approach Towards Resilience Governance

Cited by 7 publications

References 22 publications

Making a Step Forward Towards Urban Resilience. The Contribution of Digital Innovation

Making a Step Forward Towards Urban Resilience. The Contribution of Digital Innovation

How to normalize reflexive evaluation? Navigating between legitimacy and integrity

Bouncing back or moving forward? : Analysing resilience and agricultural policies in the European Union

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About