ArticlePDF Available

Resilience thinking: A bibliometric analysis of socio-ecological research

Authors:
  • NSW Department of Planning and Environment; University of Saskachewan

Abstract and Figures

Resilience thinking is a rising topic in environmental sciences and sustainability discourse. In this paper, a bibliometric method is used to analyse the trends in resilience research in the contexts of ecological, economic, social, and integrated socio-ecological systems. Based on 919 cited publications in English which appeared between 1973 and 2011, the analysis covers the following issues: general statistical description, influential journal outlets and top cited articles, geographic distribution of resilience publications and covered case studies, national importance of resilience researchers and leading research organisations by country. The findings show that resilience thinking continues to dominate environmental sciences and has experienced a dramatic increase since its introduction in 1973. More recently, new interest has emerged for broadening the scope and applying the concept to socio-economic systems and sustainability science. The paper also shows that resilience research overall is dominated by USA, Australia, UK and Sweden, and makes the case for the need to expand this work further in the urgent need for practically oriented solutions that would help arrest further ecological deterioration.
Content may be subject to copyright.
Resilience thinking: a bibliometric analysis
of socio-ecological research
Li Xu Dora Marinova
Received: 19 December 2012 / Published online: 3 February 2013
Akade
´miai Kiado
´, Budapest, Hungary 2013
Abstract Resilience thinking is a rising topic in environmental sciences and sustain-
ability discourse. In this paper, a bibliometric method is used to analyse the trends in
resilience research in the contexts of ecological, economic, social, and integrated socio-
ecological systems. Based on 919 cited publications in English which appeared between
1973 and 2011, the analysis covers the following issues: general statistical description,
influential journal outlets and top cited articles, geographic distribution of resilience
publications and covered case studies, national importance of resilience researchers and
leading research organisations by country. The findings show that resilience thinking
continues to dominate environmental sciences and has experienced a dramatic increase
since its introduction in 1973. More recently, new interest has emerged for broadening the
scope and applying the concept to socio-economic systems and sustainability science. The
paper also shows that resilience research overall is dominated by USA, Australia, UK and
Sweden, and makes the case for the need to expand this work further in the urgent need for
practically oriented solutions that would help arrest further ecological deterioration.
Keywords Bibliometrics Sustainability Resilience Socio-ecological systems
Introduction
The concept of resilience was firstly introduced by Holling (1973) in an ecological context.
He defined 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 popula-
tions or state variablesand it is concerned with persistence or probabilities of extinction’
(Holling 1973, p. 14). In recent decades, resilience thinking has been increasingly
L. Xu D. Marinova (&)
Curtin University Sustainability Policy (CUSP) Institute, Curtin University, Perth, WA, Australia
e-mail: D.Marinova@curtin.edu.au
L. Xu
e-mail: lixucusp@gmail.com
123
Scientometrics (2013) 96:911–927
DOI 10.1007/s11192-013-0957-0
permeating sustainability debates in the context of social-ecological systems and the
impact human activities have on the planet’s physical environment. According to the
Resilience Alliance, an interdisciplinary network of scientists and practitioners established
in 1999, resilience in social-ecological systems has three defining characteristics: ‘‘the
amount of change the system can undergo and still retain the same controls on function and
structure, the degree to which the system is capable of self-organisation, and the ability to
build and increase the capacity for learning and adaptation’’ (Resilience Alliance 2002,
n.p.). Resilience has also been identified as one of the most influential concepts in sus-
tainability research (Quental and Lourenc¸o 2012).
The prevailing perspectives on sustainability and natural resources management focus
on how to achieve stability, manage effectively and control change and economic growth
(Adger et al. 2005; Folke 2003,2006). However, this is not enough in a constantly
changing globe and further research needs to allow for multidisciplinarity (McMichael
et al. 2003), interdisciplinarity (Bjurstro
¨m and Polk 2011) and transdisciplinarity (Mari-
nova and McGrath 2005; Burns and Weaver 2008) in order to better understand any
occurring transformations. Jappe (2007) describes this as mutual task dependence of all
scientific fields. Resilience as a new concept and way to look at the world was introduced
in order to analyse how complex systems are adapting to climate change and human
disturbance. Many argue that resilience thinking for social-ecological systems will be the
optimal way to enhance the likelihood of sustainability in the uncertain future (Walker
et al. 2004; Adger et al. 2005; Folke 2006).
The main purpose of this study is to identify trends in resilience research using a
bibliometric analysis. In particular, we identify the prevailing patterns of influence resil-
ience research has in different contexts and the geographical distribution of this research
output. The paper consists of four sections as follows. Section ‘‘Methodology and data’’
describes the bibliometric analysis (procedures) used in the study, including data source,
applied keywords, types of publications and limitations to data collection. Statistical
analysis, ranking and distribution mapping of the resilience research outcomes are pre-
sented in Sect. ‘Results and discussion’. The last section contains concluding remarks
about the outcomes from this analysis.
Methodology and data
The study is based entirely on bibliographic desk-based research conducted in July–August
2012. It uses data sources available to almost all academic institutions in western countries.
As the aim is to analyse the impact and importance of resilience research, we opted to
investigate only publications that have been cited (instead of providing a general
description of all resilience publications irrespective as to how valuable they have been to
other researchers). The main imperative that triggered this choice are the concerns of the
scientific community associated with climate change and the need to see fast considerable
real changes in order to address the deteriorating state of the planet. Despite the many
questions and valid points raised around the use of citation analysis (MacRoberts and
MacRoberts 1996), the fact remains that cited research is a valid indicator for the influence
of any work, at least on other researchers (Cole and Cole 1972). Small’s (2004) study
identifies interest, novelty, utility and significance—all linked to research importance, as
interrelated reasons stated by academic authors for their research to be cited.
Analysing only numbers of cited publications, rather than the actual number of cites
they have attracted on the other hand, helps deal with problems associated with citation
912 Scientometrics (2013) 96:911–927
123
counts, such as biased over-citing, citing of a well-recognised body of literature, socio-
psychologically motivated reasons to increase cites, different citation rates across disci-
plines as well as institutional and self-citations. More information about the methodology
of the study is presented below.
Data sources
The data in this study was retrieved from three widely used databases, namely:
(1) Google Scholar—a freely available web-based tool in operation since 2006 that
allows search for scholarly literature across disciplines and sources, including theses,
books, papers and abstracts (Google Scholar 2012);
(2) Web of Science—an academic citation indexing and search service of Thompson
Reuters’ Web of Knowledge (formerly operated by the Institute for Scientific
Information, ISI) launched in 2002 which claims to be ‘‘today’s premier research
platform for information in the sciences, social sciences, arts, and humanities’
(Thompson Reuters 2012, n.p.) and covers journals, conference papers, websites,
patents and chemical structures; and
(3) Scopus—launched by SciVerse in 2004 to facilitate library searches around the world
with an easy access to ‘‘the world’s largest abstract and citation database of peer-
reviewed literature’’ (Elsevier 2012, n.p.) covering journals, trade publications, book
series and conference papers.
The period of examination spans from 1973 to 2011, i.e. from the year when resilience
was first introduced to the most recent year. The data from these different databases is
analysed but also compared between the three sources with the aim to identify the general
trends in resilience research. According to Aguillo (2012), Google Scholar provides the
largest coverage of sources. Its free-of-charge availability also makes it accessible to all
researchers, including outside the western academic system. These are the reasons why we
opted to use Google Scholar to further analyse the geographical distribution of research
outputs related to resilience.
Keywords used
In order to identify resilience related publications, we applied keyword searches within the
titles, keywords and abstracts of the various research outputs. The keywords used to search for
such publications are mainly associated with the word ‘‘resilience’’ and also include
the following combinations ‘‘ecological resilience’’, ‘‘economic resilience’’, ‘‘social resil-
ience’’, ‘‘resilience and sustainability’’, ‘‘resilience and sustainable development’’, ‘‘resil-
ience and social-ecological systems’’, ‘‘social-ecological resilience’’, ‘‘resilience and
environment’’, ‘‘resilience and natural resources’’ and ‘‘resilience and assessment’’. The
targeted coverage was intended to provide insights not only about ecological resilience but
also how the concept relates to sustainability and the integration of its social, economic and
environmental tenants.
References selected
The publications selected in our study are those cited journal articles, books, conference
papers, working papers, comments, theses and reports that list the word ‘‘resilience’’ in the
title or as their keyword. In addition, if ‘‘resilience’’ does not appear in any of the above,
Scientometrics (2013) 96:911–927 913
123
we included the publication in the dataset only if ‘‘resilience’’ appears at least three times
in the abstract. In other words, we have applied a very strict and generally limiting way of
categorising a publication’s belonging to our sample in order to accurately reflect the
penetration of resilience thinking in academic research. A less restrictive approach would
probably have expanded the size of the sample but would have raised questions as to how
reliable any claims are.
Limitation of the data selection
It should be acknowledged that some limitations exist in the dataset used for this analysis.
The publications counted in the study include only those containing ‘‘resilience’’ either in
their title, keywords or abstract whilst publications based on possible synonyms, such as
stability, adaptability, resistance, reliability and robustness, or antonyms, such as vulner-
ability, susceptibility and defencelessness, are excluded. Also, the selected publications
include only documents in English which have been cited by other publications in English,
and non-English publications were not considered.
Thus the publications counted in this paper do not include all publications in resilience
research. The existing publications and research outcomes no doubt overweigh what we
could find and access in this study. There are certainly other scholarly papers that are
making their contribution to this area, particularly in languages such as Chinese, German,
Spanish and French and this study is not trying to undermine the work done by these
researchers. Any limitations should be seen as a deficiency in the current web-based data
search engines rather than a deliberative decision by the authors. It will be interesting to
compare the results from this study with any further work as the capacity of search tools
expands.
Results and discussion
The analysis in this section is organised around five research directions. The first one is
general statistics which describe the total number of cited publications on resilience and the
particular context that has been the focus of this resilience research. In addition, we
compare the data obtained from Google Scholar, Scopus and the Web of Science to
illustrate the total trend in resilience thinking. Journal output and paper citation analyses of
resilience publications represent the second research direction. The third direction engages
with the spatial geographical distribution of the studies and particular case studies repre-
sented in the cited resilience publications. This is followed by an analysis of the national
affiliations of the publications’ authors and how different countries around the world are
represented in resilience research. The last aspect shows the leading research institutes in
the top 15 productive countries in the area of resilience.
General statistics
Resilience thinking has come a long way since its 1973 inception with the number of
publications steadily on the increase. The annual numbers of cited publications for the
1973–2011 period are shown on Fig. 1. In total 919, 939 and 942 cited publications were
found through the respective databases of Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science. It
is interesting to observe that contrary to popular believes and earlier studies (e.g. Yang and
Meho 2006), the largest amount of resilience publications are captured by the Web of
914 Scientometrics (2013) 96:911–927
123
Science which is the most academically oriented database. In other words, there are many
highly specialised scholarly publications that target the scientific community and are not
necessarily captured by the more popular Google Scholar and Scopus search engines. On
the other hand, the discrepancy between the three databases is relatively low, at around
2 %. Most importantly, the overall trend and fluctuations appear to be very similar, irre-
spective as to which database is used. Hence, resilience research is very well represented
by any of the three databases which does not seem to be the case in other research areas,
such as for example medicine Falagas et al. (2007) or social sciences (Harzing 2012).
In addition to resilience publications (right vertical axis), Fig. 1also shows the total
number of cited publications for all research fields (left vertical axis) for the 1973–2011
period. Against the overall consistently increasing trend in total research outputs, resilience
publications show a significant surge in relatively recent years. This indicates that resil-
ience is becoming a robust research field.
The number of cited resilience publications reached a peak in 2010; however they seem
to constantly fluctuate around a strong upwards trend and 2011 may just be one of these
fluctuations, rather than a significant drop. Between 1973 and 1999, there was a stable
increase in resilience publications, but this was followed by a very strong increase between
1999 and 2005 and an even further sharp increase since 2005. The study by Janssen et al.
(2006, p. 10) already provided reliable evidence that the area of resilience has experienced
‘a major and still continuing increase in the number of published papers’’ (Janssen et al.
2006, p. 10). It is also encouraging to see the increasing trends in the uptake of these
research findings as expressed in citations. The dramatic increase since 1999 in the number
of cited publications has partly benefitted from the establishment of the outstanding global
Resilience Alliance network with its academic journal Ecology and Society (Janssen et al.
2006) as well as from the increased interest in global environmental changes during 1990s.
Activities on the global political arena since 2005, such as the release of the Millennium
Ecosystem Assessment Reports in 2005, the Stern Review in 2006, the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)’s 4th Assessment Report in 2007, as well as the
continuing regular international climate change meetings and negotiations, all stimulated
researcher interest in resilience.
Figure 2breaks down the Google Scholar data to provide a more detailed overview of
the specific areas of interest of resilience research as it relates to ecological (Eco-R),
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
0
500000
1000000
1500000
2000000
2500000
1973
1975
1977
1979
1981
1983
1985
1987
1989
1991
1993
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
2005
2007
2009
2011
Number of publications
Total research Google
Scopus Web of Science
Fig. 1 Annual numbers of cited research publications in Web of Science and resilience publications in
Scopus, Google Scholar and Web of Science, 1973–2011
Scientometrics (2013) 96:911–927 915
123
economic (Econ-R) and social systems (Soci-R) as well as to an integrated sustainability
(Sust-R) approach. This original categorisation was done arbitrarily based on the research
topics of the papers. Although we are not aware of any other similar classification, almost
all resilience publications explicitly state their area of interest which varies vastly from
conceptualisation to more narrowly oriented ecological, economic or social analysis. For
instance, studies which are focused on conceptual development, such as ‘‘Resilience,
adaptability and transformability in social-ecological systems’’ (Walker et al. 2004) and on
ecological systems such as ‘‘Regime shifts and ecosystem services in Swedish coastal soft
bottom habitats: when resilience is undesirable’’ (Troell et al. 2005) were classified as Eco-
R; studies which stated economic perspectives, such as ‘‘Resilience in the dynamics of
economy-environment systems’’ (Perrings 1998), or which concentrate on economic
resilience, such as ‘‘Economic resilience to natural and man-made disasters: multidisci-
plinary origins and contextual dimensions’’ (Rose 2007) were categorised as Econ-R;
research which mainly discusses resilience from social perspectives, such as ‘‘Social and
ecological resilience: are they related?’’ (Adger 2000), was categorised as Soci-R; while
those studies which discuss resilience in terms of sustainability, such as ‘‘Resilience and
sustainable development: building adaptive capacity in a world of transformations’’ (Folke
et al. 2002), or in the context of integrated social, economic and ecological systems, such
as ‘‘Incorporating resilience in the assessment of inclusive wealth: an example from South
East Australia’’ (Walker et al. 2010) were classified as Sust-R.
The total number of 919 cited publications includes journal articles (661 or 71.9 %),
books (63 or 6.9 %), conference papers (61 or 6.6 %), working papers (54 or 5.9 %), book
chapters (41 or 4.5 %), reports (23 or 2.5 %), theses (9 or 1.0 %), and short comments (7 or
0.8 %).
The number of studies embracing resilience thinking in relation to ecological, economic
and social resilience as well as in the context of integrated sustainability has been steadily
growing since its emergence with a clear further increase since 1995. The majority of cited
publications focus on ecological systems while social resilience has also grown signifi-
cantly and resilience in relation to economic systems is still in the explorative stage. This
situation largely differs from the area of sustainability research where economics (mainly
through ecological economics) has been largely overrepresented (Quental and Lourenc¸o
2012). The number of cited publications that explore an integrated sustainability approach
has also grown but it is still a very low share of all resilience output. With human induced
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
Number of publications
Sust-R Soci-R Econ-R Eco-R
Fig. 2 Resilience research in different contexts Note Sust-R—resilience thinking in the context of
sustainability, Scoi-R—resilience thinking for social systems, Econ-R—resilience thinking for economic
systems, Eco-R—resilience thinking for ecological systems
916 Scientometrics (2013) 96:911–927
123
climate change and other environmental problems, it is important to have the right per-
spective on any resilience research but we are yet to see more prominence of the integrated
sustainability resilience research.
Resilience thinking for economic systems is a very important case and there needs to be
a strong warning that such research can only be beneficial if it is based on interdisci-
plinarity. As the main external factor affecting the health of the planet’s ecosystems,
acceleration of human activities across the globe makes it difficult to continue to separate
any ecological, social and economic impacts and ‘‘try to explain them independently, even
for analytical purposes’’ (Folke et al. 2010, n.p.). Another warning is that while in isola-
tion, socially and ecologically resilient systems have a very high probability to also be
sustainable, a solely economically resilient system can be extremely detrimental to sus-
tainability. In other words, we can learn how to efficiently and effectively destroy the
environmental and social foundations of human life. Assessing and evaluating sustain-
ability in the context of complex systems in a transforming world requires a shift in
thinking and perspective (Ludwig et al. 2001) and resilience thinking seems to have started
to deliver some changes but there is still a long way ahead.
Journal output and cited paper statistics
This part answers questions, such as: which journal is the most popular in the realm of
resilience research, which articles are highly cited on the topic of resilience thinking, who
has produced those articles and where have they been published. Hence the analysis here
examines only the 661 cited journal articles according to Google Scholar. They have been
published in 269 academic journals and Table 1lists the top 10 journals in which they have
appeared. The top journal with 85 cited papers in the area of resilience thinking is Ecology
and Society (which replaced Conservation Ecology in 2004). This journal published by the
Resilience Alliance is relatively new but has proven a strong outlet for resilience research.
With a very significant drop in the number of articles cited, this is followed by Global
Environmental Change (16 articles) and Ecosystems (15 articles).
We further looked at the actual number of Google Scholar citations that each cited
resilience article has attracted. Table 2presents the top 10 journal articles with the most
citations and their authors, citation times, year of publishing, title of the journals and the
context of the papers. It is not surprising that the top cited article is the original paper by
Holling (1973) which for the first time introduced resilience thinking to ecological systems.
The most prominent contributor in the area is Folke who comes from Sweden and is the
author or co-author of the six of the top 10 cited journal articles. Similarly, Holling
(Canada), Carpenter (USA) and Walker (Australia) have also achieved excellent recog-
nition with their names appearing as authors or co-authors of five of the top 10 papers. This
indicates that resilience thinking has produced a list of very noticeable and influential
researchers and thinkers who have contributed to the shaping of ideas and research
directions in this field. Furthermore, seven of the top ten cited articles are in the area of
ecological systems with a strong interest in theory development. The economic context is
represented with one article and so are the social and integrated sustainability approaches.
Overall, it appears that since its inception the focus on the ecology continues to dominate
resilience research. This has enabled it to produce a strong body of environmental findings
but this knowledge still needs to be integrated with the socio-economic aspects of human
presence on Earth.
Scientometrics (2013) 96:911–927 917
123
Table 1 Top 10 journals with the largest number of articles (1973–2011)
Rank Journal Year of first publication No. of articles
1 Ecology and society (formerly conservation ecology) 2000 85
2 Global environmental change 1990 16
3 Ecosystems 1998 15
4 Ambio 1972 13
5 Ecological economics 1989 12
Ecology 1920
6 Environmental education research 1995 11
Water resources research 1965
7 Environment and development economics 1996 10
Natural hazards 1988
8 Environmental hazards 2007 9
9 Climatic change 1977 8
Coral reefs 1984
Ecological applications 1991
10 American naturalist 1972 7
Ecological modelling 1978
Ecological monographs 1972
Ecology letters 1998
Human ecology 1972
Table 2 Top 10 articles with most citations (1973–2011)
Rank Title Years Author (s) No. of
citations
Journal Context
1 Resilience and
stability of
ecological systems
1973 Holling, C. S. 4,216 Annual review
of ecology and
systematics
T-E
2 Catastrophic shifts in
ecosystems
2001 Scheffer, M., Carpenter,
S., Foley, J.A., Folke,
C. and Walker,B.
2,348 Nature T-E
3 Economic growth,
carrying capacity,
and the
environment
1995 Arrow, K., Bolin, B.,
Costanza, R., Dasgupta,
P., Folke, C., Holling,
C. S., Jansson, B.,
Levin, S., Maler, K.,
Perrings, C. and
Pimentel, D.
1,538 Science ECO
4 Climate change,
human impacts,
and the resilience
of coral reefs
2003 Hughes, T. P., Baird, A.
H., Bellwood, D. R.,
Card, M., Connolly, S.
R., Folke, C., Grosberg,
R., Hoegh-Guldberg,
O., Jackson, J., Kleypas,
J., Lough, J. M.,
Marshall, P., Nystrom,
M., Palumbi, S. R.,
Pandolfi, J. M., Rosen,
B. and Roughgarden, J.
1,437 Science T-E
918 Scientometrics (2013) 96:911–927
123
Spatial distribution
In this part, we explore the geographical distribution of the 919 cited Google Scholar
publications on the topic of resilience to analyse how much output has been generated in
different countries, and which areas throughout the world have been used as case studies.
Country performance in resilience research is represented through a mapping approach
where the authors’ affiliations in the publications were used as the criterion to locate the
place of their origin. Publications were counted more than once if they had authors from
more than one country. For instance, a paper with authors from USA and UK is counted
twice—once for each country irrespective as to how many authors are form USA and UK
as the main interest is to highlight the geographic spread of resilience thinking throughout
the world (see Fig. 3). The most productive country in this respect is USA with 389 cited
publications followed by Australia, UK, Sweden and Canada with 162, 135, 95 and 91
publications, respectively. Very few and even no authors come from Central Asia, the
Middle East, North and Middle-West Africa. The spatial geographic distribution indicates
the dominance of western researchers. Despite the evidence of China’s growing
Table 2 continued
Rank Title Years Author (s) No. of
citations
Journal Context
5 Resilience,
adaptability and
transformability in
social-ecological
systems
2004 Walker, B., Holling, C.
S., Carpenter, S. and
Kinzig, A.
975 Ecology and
society
T-E
6 Resilience and
sustainable
development:
building adaptive
capacity in a world
of transformations
2002 Folke, C., Carpenter, S.,
Elmqvist, T.,
Gunderson, L., Holling,
C. S. and Walker, B.
940 Ambio I–S
7 Regime shifts,
resilience, and
biodiversity in
ecosystem
management
2004 Folke, C., Carpenter, S.,
Walker, B., Scheffer,
M., Elmqvist, T.,
Gunderson, L. and
Holling, C. S.
902 Annual review
of ecology
evolution and
systematics
T-E
8 Resilience: the
emergence of a
perspective for
social-ecological
systems analyses
2006 Folke, C. 888 Global
environmental
change
T-E
9 Social and ecological
resilience: are they
related?
2000 Adger, W. N. 856 Progress in
human
geography
SOC
10 From Metaphor to
Measurement:
Resilience of What
to What?
2001 Carpenter, S., Walker, B.,
Anderies, J. M. and
Abel, N.
834 Ecosystems T-E
Note T-E, ECO, SOC and I-S represent respectively that the research was conducted in the context of
ecological systems or focused on theoretical studies, economic systems, social systems, and integrated
ecological, social and economic systems or sustainability in terms of resilience
Scientometrics (2013) 96:911–927 919
123
contribution to the global scholarly knowledge (Veugelers 2010), resilience thinking is yet
to make its mark in influencing Chinese researchers as far as their publications in English
are concerned.
Figure 4shows the areas which have been used as case studies in the cited publications
on resilience thinking throughout the world. There are about 646 case studies within the
919 Google Scholar cited publications, which include 164 in North America (25.4 %), 141
in Europe (21.8 %), 104 in Oceania (16.1 %), 89 in Africa (13.8 %), 57 in South Asia
Fig. 3 Distribution of publications by country
Fig. 4 Distribution of case areas covered in resilience publications
920 Scientometrics (2013) 96:911–927
123
(8.8 %), 38 in South America (5.9 %), 18 in Middle America (2.8 %), 15 in East Asia
(2.3 %), 11 in West Asia (1.7 %), 5 in the Arctic (0.8 %) and 4 in Middle Asia (0.6 %).
This is a more balanced geographic spread but large areas of Central and West Africa, the
Middle East, Central Asia and Eastern Europe continue to be underrepresented. In terms of
specific countries, the largest number of case studies, namely 123, have been carried out in
USA, followed by Australia—85, Canada—40 and UK—26. It is interesting to note that
Japan—one of the largest countries on earth in terms of population and the size of its
economy, has not yet generated any case study for resilience research.
The spatial analysis demonstrates that USA, Australia, UK and Sweden are the schol-
arly leading countries in the realm of resilience research in social-ecological systems. The
USA is both the most productive country and with the largest number of case areas,
followed by Australia. However, not many studies have been undertaken in other large
countries such as Russia, China or India. As resilience thinking seems to be an important, if
not the main approach in adapting to climate change and human disturbances issues with
the objective of sustainability in a highly uncertain future (Walker et al. 2004; Adger et al.
2005; Folke 2006), more research is urgently needed. In particular, China and India which
are currently experiencing high economic growth and already have large populations, are
being ecologically threatened with serious environmental issues and resilience thinking
may prove a useful way to re-examine such development. It may well be the case that
Chinese researchers have resilience related publications in Chinese or other than English
languages, which this research does not capture. Nevertheless, in order to respond to the
urgent need for practically-oriented scholarly research, it is important to be able to easily
communicate results, findings and exchange scientific ideas as well as understand the
experiences of other countries. For the time being, English publications remain the main
medium to achieve this.
Intensity of resilience research
This part examines the intensity of resilience research as represented by the share of
resilience researchers within total researchers by country. This is indicative of the popu-
larity of resilience thinking in the research arena of the various countries. Furthermore, the
dominant resilience context is presented through the percentage of resilience researchers
working respectively on ecological, economic, social and integrated systems (see Table 3).
The two African countries of Lesotho and Ghana appear to be at the top of the list
according to resilience research intensity, however they both have relatively small numbers
Table 3 Numbers and shares of researchers with cited resilience publications (1973–2011)
Country No. of researchers
in resilience
Share in total
researchers (%)
Percentage of resilience researchers
in different contexts (%)
T-E ECO SOC I-S
USA 605 0.43 63.31 4.79 16.69 15.37
Australia 246 2.57 58.94 6.10 23.58 11.38
UK 218 0.93 57.80 6.42 22.48 13.30
Canada 99 0.65 57.58 2.02 25.25 15.15
Sweden 88 1.78 45.45 15.91 15.91 22.73
Netherlands 62 1.12 53.23 11.29 22.58 12.90
Scientometrics (2013) 96:911–927 921
123
Table 3 continued
Country No. of researchers
in resilience
Share in total
researchers (%)
Percentage of resilience researchers
in different contexts (%)
T-E ECO SOC I-S
France 58 0.25 79.31 5.17 12.07 3.45
Germany 53 0.16 54.72 9.43 16.98 18.87
Spain 33 0.24 66.67 0 15.15 18.18
China 29 0.02 68.97 10.34 20.69 0
Switzerland 29 1.13 62.07 6.90 17.24 13.79
New Zealand 29 1.33 55.17 3.45 37.93 3.45
Italy 21 0.20 38.10 19.05 23.81 19.05
South Africa 21 1.07 38.10 4.76 42.86 14.29
Norway 18 0.68 50.00 27.78 16.67 5.56
Japan 17 0.03 35.29 0 47.06 17.65
India 16 0.10 31.25 18.75 31.25 18.75
Denmark 15 0.42 60.00 6.67 20.00 13.33
Israel 14 N/a 91.00 0 0 9.00
Austria 13 0.36 15.38 23.08 23.08 38.46
Brazil 12 0.09 83.33 8.33 8.33 0
Columbia 11 1.48 0 0 0 100.00
Sudan 11 N/a 9.00 0 54.56 36.36
Mexico 10 0.23 60.00 0 10.00 30.00
Finland 10 0.24 70.00 10.00 0 20.00
Portugal 9 0.20 44.44 22.22 33.33 0
Greece 8 0.36 75.00 0 12.50 12.50
Solomon Islands 7 N/a 100.00 0 0 0
Malaysia 6 0.58 100.00 0 0 0
Argentina 6 0.14 50.00 0 33.33 16.67
Hungary 6 0.28 0 16.67 83.33 0
Kenya 6 2.65 66.67 0 16.67 0
Poland 5 0.08 80.00 0 20.00 0
Chile 4 0.66 25.00 0 75.00 0
Singapore 4 0.13 75.00 0 25.00 0
Zimbabwe 4 N/a 50.00 0 50.00 0
Philippines 3 0.41 66.67 0 33.33 0
Indonesia 3 0.14 66.67 0 33.33 0
Nigeria 3 0.49 33.33 66.67 0 0
Russia 3 0.01 33.33 0 33.33 33.33
Romania 3 0.15 100.00 0 0 0
Ghana 3 7.23 0 0 0 100
Syria 3 N/a 100.00 0 0 0
Nepal 2 1.24 0 0 50.00 50.00
Senegal 2 0.42 100.00 0 0 0
Panama 2 4.88 100 0 0 0
Belgium 2 0.05 50.00 0 0 50.00
922 Scientometrics (2013) 96:911–927
123
of researchers and the respective 1 and 3 cited resilience publications have drastically
increased the share of researchers in this area to respectively 21.6 per thousand and 7.2 per
thousand. Among the remaining countries, resilience research is most popular in Australia
and Sweden with about 2.6 and 1.8 per thousand researchers with cited publications in this
area. The majority of researchers in most countries focus on resilience thinking in eco-
logical systems and theoretical analysis. Among the countries with more than 10 cited
resilience researchers, social resilience is dominant in South Africa and Japan, there is no
country where economic resilience has attracted the highest interest and the integrated
systems or sustainability approach is prevalent only in Columbia (where 100 % of the
studies fall in this category) and Austria.
Table 3 continued
Country No. of researchers
in resilience
Share in total
researchers (%)
Percentage of resilience researchers
in different contexts (%)
T-E ECO SOC I-S
Egypt 2 0.06 50.00 0 50.00 0
South Korea 2 0.01 100.00 0 0 0
Iceland 2 0.74 100.00 0 0 0
Cuba 2 0.41 100.00 0 0 0
Slovenia 2 0.26 100.00 0 0 0
Slovakia 2 0.13 0 0 0 100.00
Pakistan 1 0.04 0 0 100.00 0
Mozambique 1 2.67 0 0 100.00 0
Peru 1 0.19 100.00 0 0 0
Sri Lanka 1 0.20 100.00 0 0 0
Bolivia 1 0.70 0 0 100.00 0
Venezuela 1 0.19 0 0 0 100.00
Costa Rica 1 0.64 100.00 0 0 0
Vietnam 1 0.10 0 0 0 100.00
Thailand 1 0.05 0 0 0 100.00
Lesotho 1 21.65 0 0 0 100.00
Ethiopia 1 0.27 0 100.00 0 0
Mali 1 1.71 100.00 0 0 0
Bangladesh 1 N/a 100.00 0 0 0
Belize 1 N/a 100.00 0 0 0
Bhutan 1 N/a 100.00 0 0 0
Fiji 1 N/a 100.00 0 0 0
Guam 1 N/a 100.00 0 0 0
Notes 1. The source of data for research numbers is UNESCO’s database (http://www.uis.unesco.org/
Pages/default.aspx?SPSLanguage=EN)
2. T-E, ECO, SOC and I-S represent respectively that the research was conducted in the context of
ecological systems or mainly on theoretical studies, economic systems, social systems and integrated
ecological, social and economic systems or sustainability in terms of resilience
3. N/a—information not available
Scientometrics (2013) 96:911–927 923
123
Overall, the geographic distribution of resilience thinking appears to indicate that
despite very small numbers, this research is highly important for two categories of
countries: (1) African (Lesotho, Mozambique, Ghana, Kenya, Mali and South Africa), a
couple of Latin American (Panama and Columbia) countries and Nepal, all of which are
aspiring to improve the living standards of their people; and (2) strong western type small
economies (Australia, Sweden, the Netherlands, Switzerland and New Zealand) which
have already achieved higher living standards. It is a warning sign to see that resilience
research communicated in English is yet to increase its importance for the world’s largest
and emerging economies, such as US, Japan, Germany, France, China, India, Brazil and
Russia.
Research organisations
This final part looks at which research institutes or universities are leaders among the top
15 most productive resilience research countries (see Table 4). The research organisation
with the largest number of author affiliations in the cited resilience papers is considered to
Table 4 Leading institutes in top 15 most productive countries (1973–2011)
Rank Country Publications
involved
Most productive institute
Name Number Percentage
(%)
1 USA 389 University of California 40 10.3
2 Australia 162 Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial
Research Organisation (CSIRO)
52 32.1
3 UK 135 University of East Anglia 19 14.1
4 Sweden 95 Stockholm University 56 58.9
5 Canada 91 University of Manitoba 17 18.7
6 Germany 36 University of Kiel 6 16.7
7 Netherlands 35 Wageningen University 13 37.1
8 France 25 Laboratoire Ecologie 3 12.0
9 South
Africa
21 University of Cape Town 6 28.6
10 New
Zealand
17 University of Otago 6 35.3
11 Switzerland 16 Swiss Federal Institute for Environmental
Science and Technology
5 31.3
12 Spain 15 Autonomous University of Barcelona 4 26.7
13 Norway
Austria
13 University of Oslo 7 53.8
University of Natural Resources and
Applied Life Sciences
5 38.5
14 Italy 12 University of Lecce 4 33.3
15 India 11 Indian Institute of Technology, Institute for
Social and Economic Change
7 63.6
Notes Because of multiple authorship the number of publications is higher than the total number of Google
Scholar cited publications (919). Publications are counted more than once if their authors affiliate with more
than one country (see main text for further explanation)
924 Scientometrics (2013) 96:911–927
123
be the leading institution for the respective country. Figure 5shows the respective national
shares that the leading resilience research institution holds.
The USA is overall the most productive country in resilience research, but its top
institution—University of California, is responsible for 10 % of the total research output in
this area. This indicates that there is not a lot of concentration and resilience thinking has
penetrated a larger number of American research organisations. The situation is very
similar for the other larger developed economies, namely UK, Germany and France as well
as for Canada where the shares of the respective leading organisations are below 20 %. By
comparison, the situation in India, Sweden and Norway is very different—the leading
Institute for Social and Economic Change, Stockholm University and University of Oslo
are respectively responsible for 64, 59 and 54 % of total national resilience output. In the
remaining countries, the leading research organisations account for around a third of all
cited resilience publications.
Conclusion
This paper examined the trends of resilience research using a bibliometric approach based
on 919 cited English publications from 1973 to 2011 identified through Google Scholar.
The analysis of resilience thinking shows that this area experienced a dramatic increase
since it was introduced for ecological systems in 1973. This increasing trend substantially
speeded up since 1999 with the establishment of the global Resilience Alliance network,
which also publishes Ecology and Society—the top and most influential journal in this area,
responsible for the largest number of cited resilience papers. Although the bulk of the
research in resilience is conducted for ecological systems, there is an increasing interest in
socio-economic systems and even more importantly, in integrated socio-ecological systems
which facilitates sustainability research. How to incorporate resilience thinking to respond
10.3
32.1
14.1
58.9
18.7
16.7
37.1
12
28.6
35.3
31.3
26.7
53.8
38.5
33.3
63.6
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
University of California (USA)
CSIRO (Australia)
University of East Anglia (UK)
Stockholm University
(Sweden)
University of Manitoba
(Canada)
University of Kiel (Germany)
Wageningen University
(Netherland)
Lab Ecologie (France)
University of Cape Town
(South Africa)
University of Otago (New
Zealand)
Federal Institute for
Environmental Science and
Technology (Switzerlan)
Autonomous University of
Barcelona (Spain)
University of Oslo (Norway)
University of Natural
Resources and Applied Life
Sciences (Austria)
University of Lecce (Italy)
Institute for Social and
Economic Chande (India)
percentage of leading research organisation in total country's publications
Fig. 5 Percentage of the leading resilience research organisation for the top 15 countries
Scientometrics (2013) 96:911–927 925
123
to sustainability challenges in the constantly changing world highly influenced by human
activities, should be the main research direction of this area.
The paper also shows that resilience research is dominated in size by USA, Australia,
UK and Sweden. In absolute numbers, USA is the most productive country in terms of
resilience output; however, its importance is much higher for relatively smaller western
economies, such as Australia and Sweden. Similarly, the case study areas covered in the
cited publications demonstrate more attention to the parts of the world from where resil-
ience research originates with many important areas attracting very little attention. Con-
sequently, there is need for urgent practically-oriented scholarly research to concentrate on
those particular regions where environmental issues have been seriously on the rise, such
as in China.
Given the English language limitation of the study, it may be the case that there are
other resilience publications, not captured by this analysis. Nevertheless, communication in
English of environmental and sustainability concerns as well as resilience thinking remains
highly important for the development of ideas and measures of adaptation to any future
uncertain disturbances across the globe.
Acknowledgments We would like to thank Dr. Roman Trubka and Cole Hendrigan for their assistance
with GIS mapping and helpful suggestions. The second author also acknowledges the financial assistance by
the Australian Research Council. We are also thankful to the Journal’s Editor and referees for helpful and
constructive comments which improved the quality of the paper.
References
Adger, W. N. (2000). Social and ecological resilience: Are they related? Progress in Human Geography,
24(3), 347–364.
Adger, N. W., Hughes, T. P., Folke, C., Carpenter, S. R., & Rockstro
¨m, J. (2005). Social-ecological
resilience to coastal disasters. Science, 309, 1036–1039.
Aguillo, I. F. (2012). Is Google Scholar useful for bibliometrics? A webometric analysis. Scientometrics, 91,
343–351.
Bjurstro
¨m, A., & Polk, M. (2011). Climate change and interdisciplinarity: A co-citation analysis of IPCC
Third Assessment Report. Scientometrics, 87, 525–550.
Burns, M., & Weaver, A. (Eds.). (2008). Exploring sustainability science: A Southern African perspective.
Stellenbosch: Sun Press.
Cole, J. R., & Cole, S. (1972). The Ortega hypothesis. Science,178, 368–375. Retrieved Dec 18 2012.
Online access: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/178/4059/368.full.pdf.
Elsevier (2012). SciVerse open to accelerate science: About Scopus. Retrieved Dec 17 2012. Online access:
http://www.info.sciverse.com/scopus/about.
Falagas, M. E., Pitsouni, E. I., Malietzis, G. A., & Pappas, G. (2007). Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web
of Science, and Google Scholar: Strengths and weaknesses. The FASEB Journal, 22(2), 338–342.
doi:10.1096/fj.07-9492LSF.
Folke, C. (2003). Freshwater for resilience: A shift in thinking. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal
Society, 358, 2027–2036. Online access: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss4/art20/.
Folke, C. (2006). Resilience: The emergence of a perspective for social-ecological systems analyses. Global
Environmental Change, 16, 253–267.
Folke, C., Carpenter, S., Elmqvist, T., Gunderson, L., Holling, C. S., & Walker, B. (2002). Resilience and
sustainable development: Building adaptive capacity in a world of transformations. Ambio, 31(5),
437–440.
Folke, C., Carpenter, S. R., Walker, B. H., Scheffer, M., Chapin, T., & Rockstro
¨m, J. (2010). Resilience
thinking: Integrating resilience, adaptability and transformability. Ecology and Society, 15(4), 20.
Google Scholar (n.d.). Stand on the shoulders of giants. Retrieved Dec 17 2012. Online access: http://
scholar.google.com.au/intl/en/scholar/about.html.
Harzing, A.-W. (2012). Document categories in the ISI Web of Knowledge: Misunderstanding the social
sciences?. Scientometrics. doi: 10.1007/s11192-012-0738-1.
926 Scientometrics (2013) 96:911–927
123
Holling, C. S. (1973). Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annual Review of Ecology Systematics,
4, 1–23.
Janssen, M. A., Schoon, M. L., Ke, W., & Bo
¨rner, K. (2006). Scholarly networks on resilience, vulnerability
and adaptation within the human dimensions of global environmental change. Global Environmental
Change, 16, 240–252.
Jappe, A. (2007). Explaining international collaboration in global environmental change research.
Scientometrics, 71(3), 367–390.
Ludwig, D., Mangel, M., & Haddad, B. (2001). Ecology, conservation and public policy. Annual Review of
Ecology and Systematics, 32, 481–517.
MacRoberts, M. H., & MacRoberts, B. R. (1996). Problems of citation analysis. Scientometrics, 36(3),
435–444.
Marinova, D., & McGrath, N. (2005). Transdisciplinarity in teaching and learning sustainability. In G.
Banse, I. Hronszky, & G. Nelson (Eds.), Rationality in an uncertain world (pp. 275–285). Berlin:
Edition Sigma.
McMichael, A. J., Butler, C. D., & Folke, C. (2003). New visions for addressing sustainability. Science, 302,
1919–1920.
Perrings, C. (1998). Resilience in the dynamics of economy-environment systems. Environmental &
Resource Economics, 11(3), 503–520.
Quental, N., & Lourenc¸ o, J. M. (2012). References, authors, journals and scientific disciplines underlying
the sustainable development literature: A citation analysis. Scientometrics, 90, 361–381.
Resilience Alliance (2002). Resilience. Retrieved Dec 17 2912. Online access: http://www.resalliance.org/
index.php/resilience.
Rose, A. (2007). Economic resilience to natural and man-made disasters: Multidisciplinary origins and
contextual dimensions. Environmental Hazards, 7(4), 383–398.
Small, H. (2004). Why authors think their papers are highly cited. Scientometrics, 60(3), 305–316.
Thompson Reuters (2012) Web of knowledge. Retrieved Dec 17 2012. Online access: http://wokinfo.com/.
Troell, M., Pihl, L., Ro
¨nnba
¨ck, P., Wennhage, H., So
¨derqvist, T., & Kautsky, N. (2005). Regime shifts and
ecosystem services in Swedish coastal soft bottom habitats: When resilience is undesirable. Ecology
and Society, 10(1), 30. Online access: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol10/iss1/art30/.
Veugelers, R. (2010). Towards a multipolar science world: Trends and impact. Scientometrics, 82(2),
439–456.
Walker, B., Holling, C. S., Carpenter, S. R., & Kinzig, A. (2004). Resilience, adaptability and transform-
ability in social-ecological systems. Ecology and Society, 9(2), 5. Online access: http://www.
ecologyandsociety.org/vol9/iss2/art5/.
Walker, B., Pearson, L., Harris, M., Maler, K., Li, C., Biggs, R., & Baynes, T. (2010). Incorporating
resilience in the assessment of inclusive wealth: An example from South East Australia. Environmental
and Resource Economics, 45, 183–202.
Yang, K., & Meho, L. I. (2006). Citation analysis: A comparison of Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of
Science. In 69th Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science and Technology
(ASIST), Austin, USA. Retrieved Dec 18 2012. Online access: http://eprints.rclis.org/bitstream/10760/
8605/1/Yang_citation.pdf.
Scientometrics (2013) 96:911–927 927
123
... Community resilience refers to the ability of a community under a negative influence to withstand shocks, adapt quickly and achieve transformation when faced with unexpected shocks. In the new century, new ideas and techniques have been incorporated into community resilience research, but the understanding of this scientific issue remains controversial (Xu & Marinova, 2013). Is community resilience a metaphor, a capability, or a governance model? ...
Article
Full-text available
The occurrence of ‘black swan’ and ‘grey rhino’ events is creating new risks for communities, and building resilient communities has become a global consensus. Using the Bibliometrix tool, we collected 3146 articles published from 2000 to 2022 to explore research hotspots, change trends and future directions in community resilience. The results show that community resilience study exhibited an exponential development pattern, with periods of sluggish rise (2000–2009) and rapid growth (2010–2019). From 2020 to 2022, the average annual number of articles spiked to 484 due to the outbreak of COVID‐19. Scholars from the United States, China and the United Kingdom are the main contributors in this field, but the research locations are gradually shifting from the United States to the European and Asian countries. Hot topics related to community resilience include conceptual discernment, assessment frameworks, influencing factors and enhancement strategies. In the future, more attention should be given to the localization of theories, soft power elements and special groups. We developed a community resilience cycle framework that integrates the latest conceptual statement of community resilience and the evolution of trajectories of system disturbance stages.
... For example, the shift towards sustainable urban transitions (D12) (Mendizabal et al. 2018;Keough and Ghitter 2020;Ortiz-Moya et al. 2021;Keith et al. 2023), low-carbon energy transitions (D8) (Shahani et al. 2022;Vogler and Kump 2023;Laakso et al. 2023), and transformative responses to climate change (D4) (Hölscher et al. 2019;Priebe et al. 2022;Vandepitte 2023) reflect responses to changing social-environmental challenges. During different stages of SustSci research, the research topics that received significant attention, such as resilience thinking (B8) (Xu and Marinova 2013;Wong-Parodi et al. 2014;Xu et al. 2015;Luthe and Wyss 2015), ecosystem services assessment (B12) (Braat 2012;Hashimoto et al. 2015;Beumer and Martens 2015), and transformative change (Deutsch et al. 2023;Priebe et al. 2022;Naito et al. 2022) have reshaped research agendas by offering novel perspectives and approaches to sustainability challenges. ...
Article
Full-text available
Exploring the trends of sustainability science research is vital for advancing our understanding of creating a more sustainable and resilient future for our planet and society. This overview article explores a segment of the sustainability science research landscape from 2006 to 2023 by examining articles published in the Sustainability Science journal. The initial step involved categorizing articles into four distinct periods, each representing a phase in the journal and field’s evolution. The changing research topics and their interconnectedness were investigated by involving natural language processing, non-negative matrix factorization topic modeling, and Jaccard similarity analysis in Python. The study reveals shifting emphases over these periods: 2006–2010 focused on human–environment links; 2011–2015 shifted to practical solutions, such as climate adaptation; 2016–2020 focused on the integration of transdisciplinary knowledge, SDGs, and sustainability transitions; and 2021–2023 centered on transformative changes in sustainability. Based on the Sustainability Science journal publications, the field has evolved from foundational principles to current priorities such as transdisciplinary approaches, deep sustainability transformations, bioeconomy, and intergenerational narratives. The evolving landscape responds to environmental, societal, cultural, and technological changes. While the Sustainability Science journal has played an essential role, there remains potential to further concentrate on emerging topics and transformative methodologies. This study offers valuable insights into propelling sustainability science forward to address global challenges and pave the way for a sustainable and equitable future.
... In this study, the graphical web interface Biblioshiny, based on Bibliometrix 3.0 (URL-1), is used within the R software and RStudio environment to create knowledge maps. R software is noted as a dynamically writable and interpretable programming language for statistics and data analysis (Diez-Vial & Montoro-Sanchez, 2017;Donoho, 2021;Khan et al., 2016;Xu & Marinova, 2013). ...
Article
Full-text available
The global trends related to the concept of Metaverse in architecture have significantly expanded in recent years, thanks to the increasing number of scientific publications. Systematically examining the literature on this topic and identifying research trends and potential directions provides comprehensive data maps, thus charting a roadmap for researchers interested in working in this field. In this context, the research aims to identify the trends and tendencies of the concept of the Metaverse in the scientific literature over time at the primary analysis levels, such as countries, institutions, resources, articles, authors, and research topics. The research conducted with this aim involves a dynamic, visual, and systematic examination of the academic literature on academic publishing using data accessed without year limitations from the Web of Science Core Collection-Citation database. In the research conducted without year limitations, a sample comprising 334 articles published/planned to be published between 2005 and 2024 is analyzed. The bibliometrix R-Tool was used to enhance the analysis, and metadata was obtained from the WoS database. This analysis analyzed publications, citations, and information sources, including the most published journals, the most used keywords, the most cited and leading articles, the most cited academics, and the most contributing institutions and countries. In conclusion, this study aims to define the profile of international academic publishing in the field of the Metaverse, present its development, identify research fronts, detect emerging trends, and uncover the working themes and trends in the Metaverse specific to architecture. This study describes the profile of international academic publishing on the metaverse, presents its development, identifies research frontiers, identifies emerging trends, and reveals metaverse study themes and trends in architecture. As a result, education, virtual perception of space, building operation and maintenance, building evacuation, BIM (Building Information Modeling), cultural heritage, physical environment, built environment/planning, smart home, design and creativity, universal design/accessibility, sustainability, smart city/GIS, urban transportation systems, and in-use evaluation are identified as themes that have been studied in relation to the metaverse concept in architecture and design disciplines.
... The study of resilience of social systems was mostly inspired and developed by social ecology. This approach was already popular for analysing the consequences of climate change and environmental disaster in ecological systems and communities, but the advent of the financial crisis extended its scope to economic crisis and social systems (Xu and Marinov, 2013). ...
Article
Full-text available
Using a theoretical approach founded on resilience studies, this article presents a comparative analysis of the reconfiguration of labour relations in Portugal, Poland and Ireland during the financial crisis. It proposes a critical understanding of social resilience that captures not only the organisation of the system that emerges post-crisis but also its underlying dynamic power relations, the rule and institutional arrangement systems as well as the redistribution of resources. Moreover, it argues that the crisis created an opportunity for the convergence and liberalisation of labour market models across Europe.
... Another aspect of the discussion is the ecological-social approach, which, in addition to emphasizing environmental issues, also emphasizes the social environment and considers resilience in the cohesion of the human society with ecosystem services and resources for social sustainability. It aims to use the models and methods used for ecological resilience in social issues as well [20][21][22][23][24][25][26]57 . However, this approach also faces a serious challenge. ...
Article
Full-text available
Local community resilience has been a solution to reduce human and natural origin damages for several decades in global studies. Various studies have addressed different aspects of resilience. However, using the results of this research to create local community resilience has always faced limitations. In fact, the neglected role of political economy in these studies has caused the application of policies and strategies resulting from these studies to face challenge to create local communities’ resilience. Therefore, the aim of this research is to evaluate how political economy affects the resilience of local communities. The research method is mixed and qualitative analysis was used to analyze the impact of political economy on resilience and quantitative analysis was used to measure the extent of resilience. The research has investigated the impact of political economy on the aspects of resilience and measured the extent of resilience from economic, social, institutional, environmental, and physical aspects by selecting the central part of Zanjan. The results of the research show that political economy has caused the lack of role-playing of local communities in resilience creation. In fact, policy-making influenced by political economy has led to the formation of a rent economy, a top-down and centralized management system, and this was the main obstacle in creating resilient local communities directly and indirectly through the reduction of the role of local institutions, spatial segregation, housing rent, reduction of social capital, increasing greenhouse gases and poverty. Therefore, we need a transition from the current institutional environment take steps towards evolution, dynamism, and institutional transformation to create local communities’ resilience in order to create a resilient local society.
... • Promote dynamic resilience principles in industrial ecology • Facilitate interdisciplinary collaboration and advance resilience scholarship Socio-ecology [7,61] • Analyze the resilience-related research trends of ecological, economic, social, and integrated socioecological systems ...
Article
Full-text available
This study analyzed the historical development of resilience with respect to multidisciplinary aspects using association rule mining (ARM). ARM is a rule-based machine-learning approach tailored to identify validated relations among multiple variables in a large dataset. This study collected author keywords from all resilience-related literature in the Web of Science database and examined the changes in validated resilience-related topics using ARM. We found that resilience-related research tends to diversify and expand over time. Although topics and their academic fields related to engineering and complex adaptive systems were prominent in the early 2000s, psychosocial resilience and social-ecological resilience have received significant attention in recent years. The increasing interest in resilience-related topics linked to psychological and ecological factors, as well as social system components, can be attributed to the impact of a series of complex and global events that occurred in the late 2000s. Recently, resilience has been conceived as a way of thinking, perspective, or paradigm to address emergent complexity and uncertainty with vague concepts. Resilience is increasingly being regarded as a boundary spanner that promotes communication and collaboration among stakeholders who share different interests and scientific knowledge.
Article
Full-text available
It is vital to understand resilience as it applies to the field of climate change and disaster. The concept of resilience has drawn the interest of climate scientists and psychologists who want to better understand how we can improve individual's and society's resilience in the face of a quickly worsening climate as a result of man-made climate change. Resilience is defined as a process, ability, or outcome of successful adaptation to the environment, despite dangerous or adverse conditions. The objective of this study is to run review research through contemporary studies to summarize the cumulative documents in the area of resilience and climate change to investigate the contributing factors to climate change resilience. A search was carried out on the Web of Science, Google Scholar, and PubMed. A set of keywords was used, followed by filtering main keywords, resulting in a review of 70 articles. The results demonstrated that resilience was the main target of various researchers on climate change globally. Moreover, results indicate various waves of resilience and components of resilience including exposure, susceptibility, and capacity to cope with environmental issues. Besides that, this research revealed coping strategies on climate change and factors that have been correlated with climate change resilience (e.g., psychological, social, and family and community factors). In conclusion, resilience has been identified as a core concept in both the mitigation of climate change and climate change disasters, as well as the capacity to cope with these when they occur. Future research should focus on identifying core features of climate change specific resilience so that vulnerable populations can be identified and useful policies implemented to protect them. These results serve as a source of reference for future research.
Preprint
Full-text available
Local community resilience has been a solution to reduce human and natural origin damages for several decades in global studies. Various studies have addressed different aspects of resilience. However, the concept of resilience, especially in developing countries such as Iran, which has a rent-based economy and relies on oil, needs attention to other dimensions of resilience. In these countries, the institutional environment is highly influenced by political economy, and political economy affects all aspects of planning and governance systems. This study evaluates the resilience of the central region of Zanjan in terms of institutional environment, physical structure, and residents' perspectives. The method of research is mixed. Qualitative analysis was evaluated for institutional environment. It is also quantitative analysis was investigated to measure physical vulnerability and resilience. The results show that the resilience situation is relatively low. The policy-making influenced by political economy, in addition to increasing social and physical damages in this region, leads to the formation of rent housing, a decrease in social capital, an increase in poverty, and ultimately a decrease in the resilience of the central region of Zanjan. Therefore, to create resilience, we need to transition from the current institutional environment and take steps towards institutional evolution and development.
Article
Full-text available
Resilience thinking addresses the dynamics and development of complex social–ecological systems (SES). Three aspects are central: resilience, adaptability and transformability. These aspects interrelate across multiple scales. Resilience in this context is the capacity of a SES to continually change and adapt yet remain within critical thresholds. Adaptability is part of resilience. It represents the capacity to adjust responses to changing external drivers and internal processes and thereby allow for development along the current trajectory (stability domain). Transformability is the capacity to cross thresholds into new development trajectories. Transformational change at smaller scales enables resilience at larger scales. The capacity to transform at smaller scales draws on resilience from multiple scales, making use of crises as windows of opportunity for novelty and innovation, and recombining sources of experience and knowledge to navigate social–ecological transitions. Society must seriously consider ways to foster resilience of smaller more manageable SESs that contribute to Earth System resilience and to explore options for deliberate transformation of SESs that threaten Earth System resilience.
Article
Full-text available
Thomson Reuter’s ISI Web of Knowledge (or ISI for short) is used in the majority of benchmarking analyses and bibliometric research projects. Therefore, it is important to be aware of the limitations of data provided by ISI. This article deals with a limitation that disproportionally affects the Social Sciences: ISI’s misclassification of journal articles containing original research into the “review” or “proceedings paper” category. I report on a comprehensive, 11 year analysis, of document categories for 27 journals in nine Social Science and Science disciplines. I show that although ISI’s “proceedings paper” and “review” classifications seem to work fairly well in the Sciences, they illustrate a profound misunderstanding of research and publication practices in the Social Sciences.
Article
Full-text available
Ecosystems can undergo regime shifts where they suddenly change from one state into another. This can have important implications for formulation of management strategies, if system characteristics develop that are undesirable from a human perspective, and that have a high resistance to restoration efforts. This paper identifies some of the ecological and economic consequences of increased abundance of filamentous algae on shallow soft bottoms along the Swedish west coast. It is suggested that a successive increase in the sediment nutrient pool has undermined the resilience of these shallow systems. After the regime shift has occurred, self-generation properties evolve keeping the system locked in a high- density algae state. The structural and functional characteristics of the new system state differ significantly from the original one, resulting in less valuable ecosystem goods and services generated for society. In Sweden, loss of value results from the reduced capacity for mitigating further coastal eutrophication, reduced habitat quality for commercial fishery species, and the loss of aesthetic and recreational values.
Article
Full-text available
This article defines social resilience as the ability of groups or communities to cope with external stresses and disturbances as a result of social, political and environmental change. This definition highlights social resilience in relation to the concept of ecological resilience which is a characteristic of ecosystems to maintain themselves in the face of disturbance. There is a clear link between social and ecological resilience, particularly for social groups or communities that are dependent on ecological and environmental resources for their livelihoods. But it is not clear whether resilient ecosystems enable resilient communities in such situations. This article examines whether resilience is a useful characteristic for describing the social and economic situation of social groups and explores potential links between social resilience and ecological resilience. The origins of this interdisciplinary study in human ecology, ecological economics and rural sociology are reviewed, and a study of the impacts of ecological change on a resourcedependent community in contemporary coastal Vietnam in terms of the resilience of its institutions is outlined.
Article
The concept of resilience has evolved considerably since Holling's (1973) seminal paper. Different interpretations of what is meant by resilience, however, cause confusion. Resilience of a system needs to be considered in terms of the attributes that govern the system's dynamics. Three related attributes of social-ecological systems (SESs) determine their future trajectories: resilience, adaptability, and transformability. Resilience (the capacity of a system to absorb disturbance and reorganize while undergoing change so as to still retain essentially the same function, structure, identity, and feedbacks) has four components-latitude, resistance, precariousness, and panarchy-most readily portrayed using the metaphor of a stability landscape. Adaptability is the capacity of actors in the system to influence resilience (in a SES, essentially to manage it). There are four general ways in which this can be done, corresponding to the four aspects of resilience. Transformability is the capacity to create a fundamentally new system when ecological, economic, or social structures make the existing system untenable. The implications of this interpretation of SES dynamics for sustainability science include changing the focus from seeking optimal states and the determinants of maximum sustainable yield (the MSY paradigm), to resilience analysis, adaptive resource management, and adaptive governance.
Article
Without Abstract
Article
THIS REVIEW EXPLORES BOTH ECOLOGICAL THEORY AND THE BEHAVIOR OF NATURAL SYSTEMS TO SEE IF DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES OF THEIR BEHAVIOR CAN YIELD DIFFERENT INSIGHTS THAT ARE USEFUL FOR BOTH THEORY AND PRACTICE. THE RESILIENCE AND STABILITY VIEWPOINTS OF THE BEHAVIOR OF ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS CAN YIELD VERY DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO THE MANAGEMENT OF RESOURCES. THE STABILITY VIEW EMPHASIZES THE EQUILIBRIUM, THE MAINTENANCE OF A PREDICTABLE WORLD, AND THE HARVESTING OF NATURE'S EXCESS PRODUCTION WITH AS LITTLE FLUCTUATION AS POSSIBLE. THE RESILIENCE VIEW EMPHASIZES DOMAINS OF ATTRACTION AND THE NEED FOR PERSISTENCE. BUT EXTINCTION IS NOT PURELY A RANDOM EVENT: IT RESULTS FROM THE INTERACTION OF RANDOM EVENTS WITH THOSE DETERMINISTIC FORCES THAT DEFINE THE SHAPE, SIZE AND CHARACTERISTICS OF THE DOMAIN OF ATTRACTION. THE VERY APPROACH, THEREFORE, THAT ASSURES A STABLE MAXIMUM SUSTAINED YIELD OF A RENEWABLE RESOURCE, MIGHT SO CHANGE THESE CONDITIONS THAT THE RESILIENCE IS LOST OR IS REDUCED SO THAT A CHANCE AND RARE EVENT THAT PREVIOUSLY COULD BE ABSORBED CAN TRIGGER A SUDDEN DRAMATIC CHANGE AND LOSS OF STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY OF THE SYSTEM. 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. THE RESILIENCE FRAMEWORK DOES NOT REQUIRE A PRECISE CAPACITY TO PREDICT THE FUTURE BUT ONLY A QUALITATIVE CAPACITY TO DEVISE SYSTEMS THAT CAN ABSORB AND ACCOMMODATE FUTURE EVENTS IN WHATEVER UNEXPECTED FORM THEY MAY TAKE.
Article
Let us consider, then, some general conclusions that may be drawn from the findings reported in this study. The data allow us to question the view stated by Ortega, Florey, and others that large numbers of average scientists contribute substantially to the advance of science through their research. It seems, rather, that a relatively small number of physicists produce work that becomes the base for future discoveries in physics. We have found that even papers of relatively minor significance have used to a disproportionate degree the work of the eminent scientists. Although the conclusions of this paper may be reasonably clear, the implications of these data for the structure of scientific activity, at least in physics, need careful consideration.