Brenkert, A., Ibarraran, M. & Malone, E. (2008).

Climate Change Vulnerability and Resilience: Current Status and Trend for Mexico. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory: Richland, Washington. Resilience The ability of a region to respond to climate variations and natural events that result from climate change is given by its adaptation and coping capacity and its sensitivity.

Resilience has a robust history in ecology, beginning with Holling (1973); Folke (2006) describes the evolution of the term in ecology and in social-ecological systems analysis. The terms meaning has evolved over time. Originally meant a return to a previous state. A perturbation hit a system and (quickly or gradually) it went back to its original condition. Subsequent work, both on ecosystems and societies, has identified the potential for multiple equilibria and the possibility of successfully adapting to changed circumstances by developing a new state Includes both an element of recovery and an element of change. A positive concept; high scores are good and factors like air pollution and lack of education are negatives. IPCC definitions show (Parry et al. 2008, 880 and 882): Resilience: The ability of a social or ecological system to absorb disturbances while retaining the same basic structure and ways of functioning, the capacity for self-organization, and the capacity to adapt to stress and change. Vulnerability is the degree to which a system is susceptible to, and unable to cope with, adverse effects of climate change, including climate variability of extremes. Vulnerability is a function of the character, magnitude, and rate of climate change and variation to which a system is exposed, its sensitivity, and its adaptive capacity. Cunningham, W. & Cunningham, M. (2008). Principles of Environmental Science: Inquiry and Application. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Resilience refers to [t]he ability of a community or ecosystem to recover from disturbances (p. 390). Periodically, the environment experiences certain disturbances which would range from fires, floods, and the like which are considered to be normal parts of natural systems. When a combination of positive and negative feedbacks allow a system to recover from some external disturbance, [it can be said that] the system has resilience (p. 26).

Holling, C. (1973). Resilience and Stability of Ecological Systems. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 4, 1-23. Resilience is a measure of the persistence of systems and of their ability to absorb and disturbance and still maintain the same relationships between populations or state variables (p. 14). In this definition resilience is the property of the system and persistence or probability of extinction is the result. Stability, on the other hand, is the ability of a system to return to an equilibrium state after a temporary disturbance. The more rapidly it returns, and with the least

fluctuation, the more stable it is. In this definition stability is the property of the system and the degree of fluctuation around specific states the result (p. 17). A management approach based on resilience, on the other hand, would emphasize the need to keep options open, the need to view events in a regional rather than a local context, and the need to emphasize heterogeneity (p. 21).

Klein, R., Nicholls, R., & Thomalla, F. (2003). Resilience to natural hazards: How useful is this concept? Environmental Hazards, 5, 35-45. Resilience is widely seen as a desirable system property in environmental management (p. 1). Without wishing to speculate about the causes of some cities decline and other cities continu ed importance, it is clear that some cities havebeen more able than others to cope with and recover from external shocks. Some analysts would term this ability resilience (p. 1). The Resilience Alliance consistently refers to social ecological systems and denes their resilience by considering three distinct dimensions: o *the amount of disturbance a system can absorb and still remain within the same state or domain of attraction; o the degree to which the system is capable of self organisation; o the degree to which the system can build and increase the capacity for learning and adaptation (p. 40). Whilst resilience is widely seen as a desirable property of natural and social systems, including coastal megacities, the term has been used in a number of different ways. Based on the present knowledge, we conclude that the denition of resilience is best used to dene specic system attributes, namely: o *the amount of disturbance a system can absorb and still remain within the same state or domain of attraction; o the degree to which the system is capable of self organisation (pp. 42-43).

Lavell, A., M. Oppenheimer, C. Diop, J. Hess, R. Lempert, J. Li, R. Muir-Wood, and S. Myeong, 2012: Climate change: new dimensions in disaster risk, exposure, vulnerability, and resilience. In: Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation [Field, C.B., V. Barros, T.F. Stocker, D. Qin, D.J. Dokken, K.L. Ebi, M.D. Mastrandrea, K.J. Mach, G.-K. Plattner, S.K. Allen, M. Tignor, and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. A Special Report of Working Groups I and II of the Intergovernmental Panel on

Climate Change (IPCC). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, and New York, NY, USA, pp. 25-64. Resilience the ability of a system and its component parts to anticipate, absorb, accommodate, or recover from the effects of a potentially hazardous event in a timely and efficient manner, including through ensuring the preservation, restoration, or improvement of its essential basic structures and functions. Older conceptions as bouncing back, and its conceptual cousin, coping, have implicitly emphasized a return to a previous status quo or some other marginally acceptable level, such as surviving, as opposed to generating a cyclical process that leads to continually improving conditions, as in bouncing forward and/or eventually thriving (Davies, 1993; Manyena, 2006). Some definitions also include the idea of anticipation and improvement of essential basic structures and functions.

Levina, E. & Tirpak, D. (2006). Adaptation to Climate Change: Key Terms. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. OECD. Retrieved 23 April 2013 from http://www.oecd.org/environment/cc/36736773.pdf. Resilience: Amount of change a system can undergo without changing state. (IPCC, TAR, 2001) A tendency to maintain integrity when subject to disturbance. (UNDP, 2005) The ability of a system to recover from the effect of an extreme load that may have caused harm. (UKCIP, 2003) The capacity of a system, community or society potentially exposed to hazards to adapt, by resisting or changing in order to reach and maintain an acceptable level of functioning and structure which is determined by the degree to which the social system is capable of organizing itself to increase its capacity for learning from past disasters for better future protection and to improve risk reduction measures. (UN/ISDR, 2004) Refers to three conditions that enable social or ecological systems to bounce back after a shock. The conditions are: ability to self-organize, ability to buffer disturbance and capacity for learning and adapting (Tompkins E. et al. 2005) Best used to define two specific system attributes: (Klein et. al., 2004) 1. The amount of disturbance a system can absorb and still remain within the same state or domain of attraction; 2. The degree to which the system is capable of self-organisation.

Malone, E. (2009). Vulnerability and Resilience in the Face of Climate Change: Current Research and Needs for Population Information. Battelle: The Business of Innovation. Retrieved 23

April 2013 from content/uploads/2009/08/Malone_resilience.pdf Resilience

http://populationaction.org/wp-

the capacity of a social-ecological system both to withstand perturbations from, for instance, climate or economic shocks and to rebuild and renew itself afterwards (Stockholm Resilience Centre 2007b) a composite concept, incorporating environmental, social, economic, political, demographic, cultural, gender and psychological factors, in describing the capacity to recover and survive, to change and grow. When the term is used with an emphasis on society while also integrating environmental characteristics, it can be equated with adaptive capacity. Brooks and Adger (2005:168) provide an elaborated definition of adaptive capacity, which resonates with our definition of resilience: In practical terms, adaptive capacity is the ability to design and implement effective adaptation strategies, or to react to evolving hazards and stresses so as to reduce the likelihood of the occurrence and/or the magnitude of harmful outcomes resulting from climate-related hazards. The adaptation process requires the capacity to learn from previous experiences to cope with current climate, and to apply these lessons to cope with future climate, including surprises.

Key factors in strengthening resilience: strong institutions, cross-scale communication, political space for experimentation, social justice, and use of ecological knowledge. (Franklin and Downing, ND)

MacClune, K. & Optiz-Stapleton, S. (2012). Building Urban Resilience to Climate Change: What Works Where, and Why. Institute for Social and Environmental Transition-International. Resilience An ongoing, iterative process. Recognizes that vulnerability and climate risk are constantly evolving, as our cities and communitiesand the systems, agents and institutions within themevolve and interact

Miller, F., H. Osbahr, E. Boyd, F. Thomalla, S. Bharwani, G. Ziervogel, B. Walker, J. Birkmann, S. Van der Leeuw, J. Rockstrm, J. Hinkel, T. Downing, C. Folke, and D. Nelson (2010). Resilience and vulnerability: complementary or conflicting concepts?. Ecology and Society 15(3): 11. [online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss3/art11/ Resilience Often defined in terms of the ability of a system to absorb shocks, to avoid crossing a threshold into an alternate and possibly irreversible new state, and to regenerate after disturbance (Resilience Alliance 2009).

Three critical features: persistence, adaptability, and transformability

Gitz, V. & Maybeck, A. (N.D.) Risks, vulnerabilities and resilience in a context of climate change. Retrieced 23 April 2013 from http://www.fao.org/docrep/017/i3084e/i3084e03.pdf. Resilience Can be described as the capacity of systems, communities, households or individuals to prevent, mitigate or cope with risk, and recover from shocks. Puts a greater emphasis on the capacity of a system to recover and transform itself in the long term, to adapt to its changing environment, in a dynamic perspective.

Brand, F. & Jax, K. (2007). Focusing the Meaning(s) of Resilience: Resilience as a Descriptive Concept and a Boundary Object. Ecology and Society, 12 (1), 23. The following is a portion of the article detailing the evolution of the term resilience: Category I: Descriptive concept Sub-category Ia: Ecological science Class 1: Original ecological definition In his seminal paper, Holling (1973) defines resilience as a measure of the persistence of systems and of their ability to absorb change and disturbance and still maintain the same relationships between populations or state variables (Holling 1973:14). In this original-ecological meaning, resilience focuses on the persistence of populations or communities at the ecosystem level and corresponds to both the overall area and the height of the lowest point of a populations domain of attraction. A relative measure is a populations probability of extinction. Class 2: Extended ecological definition Subsequent work published from the late 1980s (Holling 1986, 1996, Walker 1999, Gunderson 2000, Gunderson and Holling 2002, Gunderson and Pritchard 2002, Walker et al. 2002, 2004) is strongly influenced by theory on complex adaptive systems (e.g., Levin 1998) including the cross-scale morphology of ecosystems (Holling 1992). According to the extended keystone hypothesis originally proposed by Holling (1992), the hierarchical structure of ecosystems is primarily regulated by a small set of plant, animal, and abiotic processes each operating over different scale ranges. Important changes in ecosystem dynamics can be understood by analyzing a few, typically no more than five, key variables (Walker et al. 2006). In this interpretation, the scientific focus is on the critical structure and processes of an ecosystem. Individual species can be replaced if the critical structure and key processes persist (Walker et al. 1999, Elmqvist et al. 2003, Nystrm 2006). In this extended-ecological meaning, resilience is defined as the magnitude of disturbance that can be absorbed before the system changes its structure by changing the variables and processes that control behaviour (Gunderson and Holling 2002:4) or the capacity of a system to experience shocks while retaining essentially the same function, structure, feedbacks, and therefore identity (Walker et al. 2006:2).

Class 2a: Three characteristics Some authors interpret the extended-ecological meaning as comprising three characteristics. Those are: (1) the amount of change a system can undergo and still remain within the same domain of attraction, i.e., to retain the same controls on structure and processes; (2) the degree to which the system is capable of self-organization; and (3) the degree to which the system expresses capacity for learning and adaptation (Carpenter et al. 2001, Walker et al. 2002, Folke 2006). Class 2b: Four aspects One line of research emphasizes the concept of alternative stable regimes (Scheffer and Carpenter 2003, Folke et al. 2004, Walker and Meyers 2004). Note that the term regime is preferred to avoid the static connotations of the term state and to describe the actual dynamic situation of a specified ecosystem (Scheffer and Carpenter 2003). Formally, alternative stable regimes exist within alternative basins of attraction (Walker et al. 2004). Four aspects of a basin of attraction are crucial. Those are: (1) latitude or the maximum amount the system can be changed before losing its ability to recover, e.g., the width of the basin; (2) resistance, which matches the ease or difficulty of changing the system, e.g., the topology of the basin; (3) precariousness, i.e., the current trajectory of the system and proximity to a limit or threshold; and (4) cross-scale relations, or how the above three aspects are influenced by the dynamics of the systems at scales above and below the scale of interest (Folke et al. 2004, Walker et al. 2004). Class 3: Systemic-heuristic definition Some scholars have worked on the presuppositions of the concept of resilience, which include a heuristic for the dynamics of productive, self-organized systems, the "panarchy." This metamodel (Cumming and Collier 2005) of ecosystem dynamics consists of four-phase adaptive cycles, i.e., r-, K-, -, and -phases, which occur on each level of a systems hierarchy. Against this background, resilience represents a quantitative property that changes throughout the adaptive cycle and principally occurs on each level of a systems hierarchy (Holling 2001, Gunderson and Holling 2002). Class 4: Operational definition To apply the concept of resilience to empirical cases, it is critical to specify resilience of "what to what" (Carpenter et al. 2001). This operational definition constitutes the first step to make resilience concrete. Further operational steps suggest focusing on the concept of identity and defining resilience as the ability of the system to maintain its identity in the face of internal change and external shocks and disturbances (Cumming et al. 2005). Sub-category Ib: Social sciences Class 5: Sociological definition Some scientists apply the concept of resilience to social systems. Social resilience is defined as the ability of groups or communities to cope with external stresses and disturbances as a result of social, political, and environmental change (Adger 2000:347). Class 6: Ecological-economical definition In addition, the concept of resilience is used to analyze economy-environment systems (e.g., Perrings and Walker 1997, Perrings and Stern 2000, Brock et al. 2002, Perrings 2006). Resilience matches the transition probability between states as a function of the consumption and production activities of

decision makers (Brock et al. 2002:273) or the ability of the system to withstand either market or environmental shocks without loosing the capacity to allocate resources efficiently (Perrings 2006:418). Category II: Hybrid concept Class 7: Ecosystem services-related definition In this hybrid sense, resilience corresponds to the underlying capacity of an ecosystem to maintain desirable ecosystem services in the face of human use and a fluctuating environment (Carpenter 2001, Folke et al. 2002). Studies focus on desirable ecosystem services of an ecological system, e.g., food production, water purification, or aesthetic enjoyment (MEA 2005). Class 8: Social-ecological system. Many scientists state that it is critical to apply the concept of resilience to coupled social-ecological systems, as it may be a fundamental error of environmental policy to separate the human system from the natural system and treat them as independent (e.g. Folke et al. 2002, Anderies et al. 2006, Walker et al. 2006). The nature-culture split is seen as arbitrary and artificial; humans are regarded as part of the ecosystem (Westley et al. 2002, Berkes et al. 2003). Class 8a: Social-ecological definition Social-ecological resilience is defined as the capacity of social-ecological systems to absorb recurrent disturbances (...) so as to retain essential structures, processes and feedbacks (Adger et al. 2005:1036). In this approach, a system analysis tends to incorporate specific values, e.g., cultural diversity or international aid. Consequently, there is an increase in the degree of normativity, i.e., resilience gets more and more desirable as such. Class 8b: Resilience approach Recently, resilience has been increasingly conceived as a perspective, as a way of thinking to analyze linked social-ecological systems (Folke 2006). No clear definition is suggested. Rather, resilience is conceived as a collection of ideas about how to interpret complex systems (Anderies et al. 2006). Category II: Normative concept Class 9: Metaphorical definition In a metaphoric interpretation, the concept of resilience means flexibility over the long term (Pickett et al. 2004:381) and is viewed as desirable as such. Class 10: Sustainability-related definition Resilience has been suggested as to be one of the guidelines for a conception of strong sustainability (Ott 2001, 2003, Ott and Dring 2004). Hereby the term refers to the maintenance of natural capital in the long-term in order to provide ecosystem services that provide instrumental as well as eudaemonistic values for human society. These ten definitions together represent the intension of the term resilience. Even though they are all related to the original, descriptive concept of resilience, as introduced by Holling (1973), the term has been transformed considerably. The conceptual development of resilience has been recently reviewed by

Folke (2006), who made a distinction between an early interpretation of resilience, which focuses on the robustness of systems to withstand shocks while maintaining function, i.e., ecosystem or ecological resilience, social resilience, and a subsequent interpretation, which refers more to the interplay of disturbance and reorganization within a system as well as to transformability, learning and innovation, i.e., social-ecological resilience. Although Folke (2006) points to the change in the specific meaning of resilience our own interpretation of the conceptual development of resilience highlights the distinct use of the concept of resilience within the spectrum of scientific disciplines. Thus, the subsequent sections contrast (a) a clearly specified concept of resilience that is merely used in ecology with (b) a vague and malleable concept of resilience that is used as a communication tool across different scientific disciplines and between science and practice.