ABSTRACT. My aim is to conceptualize power using social science theory and to demonstrate why and how the concept of power can complement resilience studies and other analyses of social-ecological interaction. Social power as a scientific concept refers to the ability to influence both conduct and context. These two dimensions of power (conduct and context) can be observed by differentiating between various sources of power, including, for example, technology or mental power. The relevance of the conceptualization of power presented here is illustrated with the example of fire as a source of social-ecological power. I conclude by discussing how attention to power can help to address issues of social justice and responsibility in social-ecological interactions.Key Words: fire domestication; power; resilience; social responsibility; social-ecological interactions; sociology INTRODUCTION Social scientists from diverse disciplines have argued that resilience approaches need to account better for how power relations shape social-ecological interactions, and vice versa, if the objective is to understand social dynamics (Nadasdy 2007, Hornborg 2009, Meadowcroft 2009, Davidson 2010, Smith and Stirling 2010, Brown and Westaway 2011, Pelling and Manuel-Navarrete 2011, Watts 2011, Béné et al. 2012, Cote and Nightingale 2012, Hatt 2013. For example, in this journal, Voß and Bornemann (2011:15, 20, respectively) find that resilience studies are "depoliticized" and disregard "nasty politics", and Smith and Stirling (2010) urge resilience scholars to analyze power explicitly.